Mike Gendron's "Our Lord's Victory Cry, "It is Finished!" Refuted

[Church_Militant]

**Our Lord’s Victory Cry, “It is Finished!” **

The night before the Lord Jesus Christ went to the cross He prayed to His Father that He had “finished the work you have given me to do” (John 17:4). When we consider all that He had to do to save sinners, His victory cry, “It is finished,” speaks volumes. Righteousness had to be perfected, divine justice had to be satisfied, blood had to be shed, redemption had to be paid, sins had to be forgiven, reconciliation had to be accomplished, death had to be conquered, salvation had to be secured, and heaven had to be opened. All this was perfectly accomplished so that eternal life could be offered as a free gift of God’s grace to those who trust the all-sufficient Savior.

As with every lying anti-Catholic propaganda there is always some measure of truth that is wrapped up in the lies and errors that will make it more acceptable to people. Kind of the same way one might take a poison and hide it a delicious food to convey it to your intended victim.

This part is exactly that because no faithful Catholic would agree with what Gendron says there. … But watch all that follows.

Only when sinners realize their hopeless and helpless condition can they begin to understand the glorious promises revealed in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Everything that man could never do was completely accomplished by our Lord Jesus Christ. His mission to seek and to save the lost culminated on the cross. The work of salvation was finished. The eternal sin debt was paid in full. Since it was an eternal debt, it was impossible for man to pay. But God forgave us “all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross” (Col. 2:13-14).

Yeah Mike we call it grace…
(Cont’d)

 

[Church_Militant]

Jesus “appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Hebrews 9:26).

And we can all say and Alleluia http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc/signholder.gif ,right?

Yet Catholicism rejects the Word of God by teaching a Catholic must do “something more to make amends for the sin: he must ‘make satisfaction for’ or ‘expiate’ his sins. This satisfaction is called ‘penance’” (

CCC, par. 1459).
And so here we go. This guy starts off like someone who wants to tell you all about the Good News of the Gospel and then drives right into his a-C propaganda . Let’s have a look at this catechism citation of his and see what the truth is. Quote:

Satisfaction
1459 Many sins wrong our neighbor. One must do what is possible in order to repair the harm (e.g., return stolen goods, restore the reputation of someone slandered, pay compensation for injuries). Simple justice requires as much. But sin also injures and weakens the sinner himself, as well as his relationships with God and neighbor. Absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused.62 Raised up from sin, the sinner must still recover his full spiritual health by doing something more to make amends for the sin: he must “make satisfaction for” or “expiate” his sins. This satisfaction is also called “penance.”

Now let’s look at how this is appears in the New Testament.

Matthew 3:8 John the Baptist says, "[8] Bear fruit that befits repentance, "

Luke (3:8) expresses it more intensely still saying, "
***[7] He said therefore to the multitudes that came out to be baptized by him, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? [8] Bear fruits that befit repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, `We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.
[9] Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.”

***Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ approved of this publicly with Zacchaeus in Luke 18:8-10. "
[8] And Zacchae’us stood and said to the Lord, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have defrauded any one of anything, I restore it fourfold.” [9] And Jesus said to him, "Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. [10] For the Son of man came to seek and to save the lost."

So then…how is some form of penance scripturally wrong?
(cont’d)

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

Quote:
Satisfaction
1459 Many sins wrong our neighbor. One must do what is possible in order to repair the harm (e.g., return stolen goods, restore the reputation of someone slandered, pay compensation for injuries). Simple justice requires as much. But sin also injures and weakens the sinner himself, as well as his relationships with God and neighbor. Absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused.62 Raised up from sin, the sinner must still recover his full spiritual health by doing something more to make amends for the sin: he must “make satisfaction for” or “expiate” his sins. This satisfaction is also called “penance.”
unquote

quote
Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
[8] Bear fruits that befit repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, `We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.
[9] Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire."
unquote

Plus the fact that Zacchaeus was going to make reparation not only to his victims but (as Jesus pointed out) as an exercise to benefit himelf.

Some Protestants used to have this, they called it “breaking the power of cancelled sins”, but it is getting very unpopular with them these days and too many of them have thrown it out (together with most of the rest of the Bible). :frighten:

The only thing we have extra is the role of ordained clergy and the way God works through that. But they package-deal, they conflate or confuse (whether carelessly or very deliberately) the clergy role with the moral dynamic of it. Hence they have decided baby (ironically the core of their vaunted conversion and sanctification) has to go as well as bathwater.

I m o, they should distinguish between bone and marrow like the Word of God they so vaunt.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Yet Catholicism rejects the Word of God by teaching a Catholic must do “something more to make amends for the sin: he must ‘make satisfaction for’ or ‘expiate’ his sins. This satisfaction is called ‘penance’” (CCC, par. 1459).

I HATE to say this but will say it anyway!

I don’t know this Gendron guy but he puts forth his argument, which even you, Church Militant, cannot dispute:

**The eternal sin debt was paid in full. Since it was an eternal debt, it was impossible for man to pay. But God forgave us “all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross” (Col. 2:13-14).
**

Okay, now you get upset - and I would guess that anti-c bashing is your no. 1 reason for getting upset? - because he says:

Yet Catholicism rejects the Word of God by teaching a Catholic must do “something more to make amends for the sin: he must ‘make satisfaction for’ or ‘expiate’ his sins. This satisfaction is called ‘penance’” (CCC, par. 1459).

This goes along with the protestant idea that you accept Jesus as your savior and NOTHING ELSE is required. Everything else becomes WORKS.

So you’d have to agree that his statement is correct. We DO teach penance, we DO teach that sins need to be expiated, we DO teach satisfaction. I mean think of purgatory.

So you can not agree with him, which is fine - I’m catholic too - but you can’t say his point is wrong. Know what I mean? He IS basing his point on a fact. That we do require the above listed “works”.

God bless

 

[frangiuliano115]

Quote:
Satisfaction
1459 Many sins wrong our neighbor. One must do what is possible in order to repair the harm (e.g., return stolen goods, restore the reputation of someone slandered, pay compensation for injuries). Simple justice requires as much. But sin also injures and weakens the sinner himself, as well as his relationships with God and neighbor. Absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused.62 Raised up from sin, the sinner must still recover his full spiritual health by doing something more to make amends for the sin: he must “make satisfaction for” or “expiate” his sins. This satisfaction is also called “penance.”
unquote

quote
Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
[8] Bear fruits that befit repentance, and do not begin to say to yourselves, `We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.
[9] Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire."
unquote

**Plus the fact that Zacchaeus was going to make reparation not only to his victims but (as Jesus pointed out) as an exercise to benefit himelf.

Some Protestants used to have this, they called it “breaking the power of cancelled sins”, but it is getting very unpopular with them these days and too many of them have thrown it out (together with most of the rest of the Bible). :frighten:**

The only thing we have extra is the role of ordained clergy and the way God works through that. But they package-deal, they conflate or confuse (whether carelessly or very deliberately) the clergy role with the moral dynamic of it. Hence they have decided baby (ironically the core of their vaunted conversion and sanctification) has to go as well as bathwater.

I m o, they should distinguish between bone and marrow like the Word of God they so vaunt.

Re the highlighted above. Mainline protestant denominations I know do teach reparation for the reasons Jesus taught, of course.

I don’t hear much of this in the Word of Faith movement and in the Grace Movement. Are these movements and the denominations they include considered mainline? I’m not sure.

Also, I’d be interested in understanding better what you mean by:

they conflate or confuse (whether carelessly or very deliberately) the clergy role with the moral dynamic of it. Hence they have decided baby (ironically the core of their vaunted conversion and sanctification) has to go as well as bathwater.

…if you care to elaborate.

God bless

 

[Church_Militant]

Yet Catholicism rejects the Word of God by teaching a Catholic must do “something more to make amends for the sin: he must ‘make satisfaction for’ or ‘expiate’ his sins. This satisfaction is called ‘penance’” (CCC, par. 1459).

I HATE to say this but will say it anyway!

I don’t know this Gendron guy but he puts forth his argument, which even you, Church Militant, cannot dispute:

**The eternal sin debt was paid in full. Since it was an eternal debt, it was impossible for man to pay. But God forgave us “all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross” (Col. 2:13-14).
**

Okay, now you get upset - and I would guess that anti-c bashing is your no. 1 reason for getting upset? - because he says:

Yet Catholicism rejects the Word of God by teaching a Catholic must do “something more to make amends for the sin: he must ‘make satisfaction for’ or ‘expiate’ his sins. This satisfaction is called ‘penance’” (CCC, par. 1459).

This goes along with the protestant idea that you accept Jesus as your savior and NOTHING ELSE is required. Everything else becomes WORKS.

So you’d have to agree that his statement is correct. We DO teach penance, we DO teach that sins need to be expiated, we DO teach satisfaction. I mean think of purgatory.

So you can not agree with him, which is fine - I’m catholic too - but you can’t say his point is wrong. Know what I mean? He IS basing his point on a fact. That we do require the above listed “works”.

God bless

You are dead wrong here as I have highlighted in red above…the Catholic Church does not now and has not ever “rejected the Word of God”. the fact is that all of catholic doctrine can be supported from scripture, so Gendron is misrepresenting Catholic teaching…and the Bible because it does indeed teach the efficacy of penance and to "Bear fruits that befit repentance"

Further…I am never upset…I understand the a-C mindset all too well after spending about 35 years among them. This guy has a long history and makes his career out of Catholic bashing instead of “Proclaiming the Gospel” as his “ministry” is named.

I’ll be taking apart the rest of his message over the next day or so…

 

[Church_Militant]

Yet Catholicism rejects the Word of God by teaching a Catholic must do “something more to make amends for the sin: he must ‘make satisfaction for’ or ‘expiate’ his sins. This satisfaction is called ‘penance’” (CCC, par. 1459).

I HATE to say this but will say it anyway!
**
I don’t know this Gendron guy but he puts forth his argument, which even you, Church Militant, cannot dispute:**

**The eternal sin debt was paid in full. Since it was an eternal debt, it was impossible for man to pay. But God forgave us “all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross” (Col. 2:13-14).
**

Okay, now you get upset - and I would guess that anti-c bashing is your no. 1 reason for getting upset? - because he says:

Yet Catholicism rejects the Word of God by teaching a Catholic must do “something more to make amends for the sin: he must ‘make satisfaction for’ or ‘expiate’ his sins. This satisfaction is called ‘penance’” (CCC, par. 1459).

This goes along with the protestant idea that you accept Jesus as your savior and NOTHING ELSE is required. Everything else becomes WORKS.

So you’d have to agree that his statement is correct. We DO teach penance, we DO teach that sins need to be expiated, we DO teach satisfaction. I mean think of purgatory.

So you can not agree with him, which is fine - I’m catholic too - but you can’t say his point is wrong. Know what I mean? ** He IS basing his point on a fact. That we do require the above listed “works”.**

God bless

I beg to differ…it’s not hard to prove Gendron wrong on this and so many of his other anti-Catholic messages which I’ve done before.

• Response to Hard Questions to Ask Good Catholics (By Mike Gendron)
• Refuting anti-Catholic tract: “Rome vs The Bible” by Mike Gendron
• Refuting: “Is a Catholic Christian an Oxymoron?”
• Refuting Mike Gendron’s attacks on Eucharistic Adoration
• Refuting Mike Gendron’s tract “Are You Being Deceived?”
• Response & Refutation: Mike Gendron’s “Why Can’t Born Again Christians Remain in the Catholic Church?”
• Mike Gendron doesn’t like me. (Glory be to God!!!)
• Refuting Mike Gendron’s “Do Pope Francis’s Remarks Have Prophetic Implications?”
• Mike Gendron’s lies and he wanted to see Pope Benedict XVI
• Refuting Mike Gendron’s ‘Another Jesus?”
• Mike Gendron “witnesses” to Priest in confession.

BTW…we require those works why? Because the Bible says so…so who then is actually rejecting the Word of God?

 

[frangiuliano115]

You are dead wrong here as I have highlighted in red above…the Catholic Church does not now and has not ever “rejected the Word of God”. the fact is that all of catholic doctrine can be supported from scripture, so Gendron is misrepresenting Catholic teaching…and the Bible because it does indeed teach the efficacy of penance and to "Bear fruits that befit repentance"

Further…I am never upset…I understand the a-C mindset all too well after spending about 35 years among them. This guy has a long history and makes his career out of Catholic bashing instead of “Proclaiming the Gospel” as his “ministry” is named.

I’ll be taking apart the rest of his message over the next day or so…

Ooops. Didn’t catch that.

I’ll be looking up some of the stuff you linked, but not all since I know a bit about protestantism myself and am very familiar with catholic bashing.

Yes. The book of James and the fruit of the tree, etc. Okay.

Thanks for the reply.

God bless you

 

[frangiuliano115]

You are dead wrong here as I have highlighted in red above…the Catholic Church does not now and has not ever “rejected the Word of God”. the fact is that all of catholic doctrine can be supported from scripture, so Gendron is misrepresenting Catholic teaching…and the Bible because it does indeed teach the efficacy of penance and to "Bear fruits that befit repentance"

Further…I am never upset…I understand the a-C mindset all too well after spending about 35 years among them. This guy has a long history and makes his career out of Catholic bashing instead of “Proclaiming the Gospel” as his “ministry” is named.

I’ll be taking apart the rest of his message over the next day or so…

Me again. It’s okay to be upset when it’s for a good cause, BTW. It wasn’t meant in a detrimental way.

Will be checking in.

God bless

 

[Church_Militant]

What a terrible deception this is for faithful Roman Catholics who look to their church, rather than the Bible, for truth!

The only deception I see here is Gendron’s willful misrepresentation of Catholic teachings. Where precisely in authoritative Catholic teaching is it said that we Catholics reject the Bible and rely solely upon the Church. If this were true then why in the world does the Church encourage us to read the Bible…even offering an indulgence as an incentive to do so?

Moreover…it was the early church Catholics following the apostles who gathered the writings and by eh Holt Spirit discerned what was inspired canon and what was not. They then defended it as needed even during the Reformation when they had to dogmatically affirm that same 73 book canon as inspired while Luther sought to revise it, excluding the Deuterocanon and even going so far as to question the canonicity of New Testament books like James and Revelation.

By adding to the perfect and sufficient work of Christ they have nullified God’s grace which is the only means by which God saves sinners (Rom. 11:6). The very purpose Christ became our kinsman redeemer and suffered an excruciating death was to expiate sin, once and for all, by His perfect sacrifice.

This is specious misinformation since the Church adds nothing that is not found in scripture nor does our teachings on works contradict anything. His citation reads, "[6] But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace. " This is his errant interpretation of scripture which actually contradicts a great deal of the New Testament in context. Note these scriptures:
Matthew 25:31-46
John 14:15-24
James 2:14-26
(cont’d)

 

[Church_Militant]

Roman Catholicism also rejects another finished work of Christ: the purification of sins. God’s Word declares “when He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high” (Heb. 1:3).

Look at the citation he offers here. “[3] He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,” This is a very poor choice since in context that passage speaks of far more than the finished work of Christ (and the Catholic Church nowhere teaches that our salvation is found in anything else…) Notice then what the author of Hebrews says in chapter 3. "[1] Therefore we must pay the closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. [2] For if the message declared by angels was valid and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, [3] how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, " So then, isn’t obedience a works commanded by God Himself as it says right here? So…who then is wrong in their teaching the Catholic Church or Mike Gendron?

Those who trust Christ alone are purified from all sin, by His blood (1 John 1:7).

Here again we see Gendron cherry picking scripture and offering out of context to try to deceive both Catholics and his own followers. Please look here at the context of this verse. " [5] This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light and in him is no darkness at all. [6] If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not live according to the truth; [7] but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. [8] If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. [9] If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. [10] If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. " Here again we see St. John plainly telling us that we must “walk in the light”…this walking is certainly a work of obedience. Note also that he says that we must confess our sins…another work prescribed by the New Testament…and rejected by Gendron and those like him.

At this point, I urge any and all followers of Mike Gendron to prayerfully examine these scriptures and take note of the fact that your preacher has taught you out of context and, in fact, contradicts the word of God. He has (again) misrepresented both Catholic teaching and the Word of God. **Who then is deceptive?
**(Cont’d)http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001gv0E...retsbDmaAh0FEQJvuU0I48HLXp5iMT-BRGFvE=&c=&ch=

 

[Church_Militant]

Catholicism denies the efficacy of Christ’s blood and instead offers a place called “purgatory.” It states: “every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory” (CCC, par…1472). How can a religion which names the name of Christ reject His precious blood for a fictitious place that robs Him of His glory?

This is further misstatement of Catholic teaching and its scriptural basis. I’ll let the following links refute him because they are concise and extensive,

• Purgatory
• The Roots of Purgatory
• Do Catholics still believe in purgatory?
• The Logical Case For Purgatory
• Where Is Purgatory in the Bible?
• The Bible Blueprint for Purgatory
• Is Purgatory a Catholic Invention? No Way
• Biblical and Jewish Traditional Beliefs About Purgatory

(cont’d)

 

[Church_Militant]

After finishing His all-sufficient work on the cross, Jesus now offers His righteousness as a gift to all who believe (Rom. 5:17). The only way to receive the gift is by faith in Christ alone.

Which is exactly what the Catholic Church teaches.

From the catechism:
169 Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: "We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation."55 Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith.

II. THE LANGUAGE OF FAITH
170 We do not believe in formulas, but in those realities they express, which faith allows us to touch. "The believer’s act [of faith] does not terminate in the propositions, but in the realities [which they express]."56 All the same, we do approach these realities with the help of formulations of the faith which permit us to express the faith and to hand it on, to celebrate it in community, to assimilate and live on it more and more.

171 The Church, “the pillar and bulwark of the truth”, faithfully guards “the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints”. She guards the memory of Christ’s words; it is she who from generation to generation hands on the apostles’ confession of faith.57 As a mother who teaches her children to speak and so to understand and communicate, the Church our Mother teaches us the language of faith in order to introduce us to the understanding and the life of faith.

Those who are blinded by religious deception must do what the Apostle Paul did.

Based upon what you have seen in his article and in the Bible and authoritative Catholic documentation, who would you say is the deceiver and seeking to deceive?

He exchanged his religion for a relationship with Christ. He wrote:** “I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith” (Phil 3:8-9)**.

Odd, but that seems to be the message i am hearing all the time at Mass and from Pope Francis…

 

[Church_Militant]

The Finished Work of Christ for His People

He testified to the truth; listen to Him! (John 14:6; 18:37; Acts 3:22)

He came to give life to people who are spiritually dead. (John 14:6)

He gave us access to the Father. (John 14:6; Mat. 27:51)

He gave His life as a ransom for many. (Matthew 20:28)

He bore our sins in His body on a tree. (1 Peter 2:24)

He died for the ungodly. (Romans 5:6)

He gave Himself up for us as a sacrifice to God. (Ephesians 5:2)

He died so that we may live together with Him. (1 Thes. 5:9-10)

He gave Himself for us to purify His people. (Titus 2:14)

He died for sins, once for all, to bring us to God. (1 Peter 3:18)

He exchanged our sin for His righteousness. (2 Cor. 5:21)

He has forgiven all our sins. (Col. 1:14)

He purified us from all sins. (1 John 1:7; Hebrews 1:3)

He has reconciled us to God. (Ephesians 2:14-18)

He redeemed us from the power of sin. (Galatians 3:10-14)

He saved us from condemnation. (John 3:18, 5:24)

He delivered us from darkness into His kingdom. (Col. 1:13)

He satisfied divine justice for our sin. (1 John 2:2)

He made us into new creations. (2 Cor. 5:17)

He is the only Name by which man can be saved. (Acts 4:12)

What a glorious and all-sufficient Savior we have in Christ Jesus!

This is where this becomes truly sad. I have to wonder how anyone who can put together such a fine list of scriptural statements about the work of Christ’s suffering and death can be so duplicitous and deceptive in the rest of his message as he misstates both Catholic teachings and the very Word of God.

It tells me that this man has the knowledge to be authentically “Proclaiming the Gospel” (the name of his “ministry”) and yet that is not what he does…

I close with something that taken from
Radio Replies Vol 1 intro where, then Monsignor Fulton J. Sheen says,
**There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church - which is, of course, quite a different thing. These millions can hardly be blamed for hating Catholics because Catholics “adore statues”; because they “put the Blessed Mother on the same level with God”; because they say “indulgence is a permission to commit sin”; because the Pope “is a Fascist”; because the “Church is the defender of Capitalism.” If the Church taught or believed any one of these things it should be hated, but the fact is that the Church does not believe nor teach any one of them. It follows then that the hatred of the millions is directed against error and not against truth. As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do.

**May the peace of the Lord be with you all always.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

Re the highlighted above. Mainline protestant denominations I know do teach reparation for the reasons Jesus taught, of course.

I don’t hear much of this in the Word of Faith movement and in the Grace Movement. Are these movements and the denominations they include considered mainline? I’m not sure.

Also, I’d be interested in understanding better what you mean by:

they conflate or confuse (whether carelessly or very deliberately) the clergy role with the moral dynamic of it. Hence they have decided baby (ironically the core of their vaunted conversion and sanctification) has to go as well as bathwater.

…if you care to elaborate.

God bless

The moral dynamic is going for reparation and the things in the Scriptures quoted here. Old-fashioned Protestants (though I don’t know about Reformation leaders) used to hold with this and you know some that still do thank God, even though they didn’t recognise a role for ordained clergy (priests) in it. The new trendy types (sorry I know too many of them and it’s been getting to me) throw out the former as well as the latter.

 

[Church_Militant]

This will be the next article added to my blog.

Hopefully some of Gendron’s devotees will see it, realize they have been deceived, and abandon him…then perhaps maybe his heart may soften and the Holy Spirit draw him home.