Thoughts of a Christian

The Puritian Sinners Prayer

2010-09-19T21:48:00.000-07:00

I don't remember where I found this, but it was included in the evangelism model I had put together several years ago. Good Stuff.

Dear God, whom I hate with all my being precisely because you hate and threaten me with hell, I hate this punishment perhaps even more than I hate you. Or, maybe I should say that I love my comfort even more than I hate you. For that reason I am asking a favor of you. I want you to make me love you, whom I hate even when I ask this and even more because I have to ask this. I am being frank with you because I know it is no use to be otherwise. You know even better than I how much I hate you and that I love only myself. It is no use for me to pretend to be sincere. I most certainly do not love you and do not want to love you. I hate the thought of loving you but that is what I’m asking because I love myself. If you can answer this ‘prayer’ I guess the gift of gratitude will come with it and then I will be able to do what I would not think of doing now—thank you for making me love you whom I hate. Amen.

Ergun Caner, Liberty University and SBC Today

2010-06-26T08:10:00.000-07:00

I have been following the Caner Saga since Dr. White first made mention of it. I have read, listened to and watched many hours of information from both sides on the issue. I have not commented up to this point, but now that Liberty University has released a formal statement, I will keep silent no longer.

I think that Dr. Caner has disgraced the Name of Christ Jesus our Lord. He clearly has sinned against man and God and I pray that he is seeking repentance.

I think that Liberty University has Moved in the right direction by Removing Dr. Caner as dean, however, it appears to me that when one makes " [...] factual statements that are self-contradictory [...]" and has " [...] discrepancies related to matters such as dates, names and places of residence [...]" on things as basic as where you were born, it seems that one is misrepresenting the truth for gain of some type (In my opinion, with no fact to back this up, it was for the credibility and respect it earned him, not to mention book sales, ect.).

I think that SBC today has made the Stupidest statement I have ever heard regarding a public scandal when it stated, " [...] we praise God that Dr. Caner is exonerated [...]" as it seems clear that he was not exonerated, rather that he was deposed as Dean, and has been shown to be a liar. Yes, I am aware that Dr. Caner, when discussing being called a liar, said the following:

Being called a “liar,” however, is a serious charge, especially when it is made by Christians. That would indicate that (1) the accusers can know the motives of the accused person’s heart, and (2) the accused person intentionally misled people.I have never intentionally misled anyone. I am sure I have made many mistakes in the pulpit in the past 20-plus years, and I am sure I will make some in the future. For those times where I misspoke, said it wrong, scrambled words, or was just outright confusing, I apologize and will strive to do better.

The issue here is, We all know where we were born, Dr. Caner and SBC today. I was born in Glendale, CA. I was not born anywhere else, however Dr. Caner has on recording said he was born in two different countries! Hello! That is not misspeaking, that is not scrambled words or confusing, it is lying!

I don't know anyone from sbc today and I am not a Southern Baptist, however, it seems to me that anyone who can make the statement they did, is blinded by some preconceived notion.

Finally, I do not rejoice in this blasphemy of our Lord. I hope and pray that Dr. Caner and all involved in this will come to their collective senses and repent to God Almighty.

Discussion with A Mormon on Translations

2010-06-08T21:11:00.000-07:00

Chelsea: What prompted you to come onto Mormon.org today?

Me: a question

Me: is that ok

Chelsea: yes of course!

Me: it is about the 8th article of the church

Chelsea: alright

Me: has the church stated or defined what the proper translation of the bible is?

Me: should one be using the Joseph Smith Translation?

Chelsea: The church leves the Bible as is, but we have the Joseph Smith Translation to help clarify doctrine that was changed etc.

Chelsea: We use the King James Version of the Bible.

Me: so is the King James the Proper Translation of the Text?

Chelsea: we know that that is not the proper translation completely, because through Revelation Joseph Smith has helped clarify some scriptures. That is why we say in the 8th Article of Faith, we believe the Bible to be the word of Goid as far as it is translated correctly

Me: hmmm

Me: so what is wrong with the King James?

Chelsea: There is just things that have been translaed incorrectly or doctrines that have been changed through mans understanding.

Me: do you have an example

Chelsea: an example is in John 1:1

Me: ok

Chelsea: In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God

Chelsea: In the Bible it says :In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Chelsea: The first was a translation from Revelation through Joseph Smith.

Chelsea: This clarifys it and helps us to understand that the word means the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Word of God—He created all things and was made flesh—John baptizes Jesus and testifies he is the Lamb of God—John, Andrew, Simon, Philip, and Nathanael believe in Christ and follow him. Christ.

Chelsea: alot of people think that that verse means that God and Jesus Christ are the same person. We know that they are two seperate beings but united in purpose

I have to admit, that in all my discussions with Mormons, this is the first time that I have heard this, and while I am not 'surprised' I am shocked at the lengths the Joseph Smith and the Mormon Church go to re-translate the clear texts of scripture.

However, this is where things get more interesting. Go to - http://scriptures.lds.org/en/john/1 and notice the header which reads: Christ is the Word of God—He created all things and was made flesh—John baptizes Jesus and testifies he is the Lamb of God—John, Andrew, Simon, Philip, and Nathanael believe in Christ and follow him.

Does it seem odd that they wouldn't clear up the misconception that Jesus is God right here? I mean why even publish something that is so bankrupt and clearly wrong, would be a good question for our Mormon friends.

The JST (Joseph Smith Translation) reads as follows:

1 In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made which was made.
4 In him was the gospel, and the gospel was the life, and the life was the light of men;
5 And the light shineth in the world, and the world perceiveth it not.

....

14 And the same word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

It seems that there is a bit of a hiccup here because it seems that Ol' Joe forgot to re-translate verse 14, because this would mean that the Gospel was made flesh... and then dwelt among us as who?? ... Jesus ... Maybe? If not then who...?

Despite Ol' Joe's best effort it seems that he missed something, or perhaps the church will get a word about the JST here.

The Hypostatic Union - An Audio Blog

2010-06-06T20:11:00.000-07:00

The Hypostatic Union is a deeply important and yet difficult doctrine to understand, in the following Audio Blog I attempt to discuss the issues surrounding it, esp. as it relates to John 17:3.

Believers Reason Apologetics Class pt 1

2010-02-28T17:10:00.000-08:00

Ah back on the blog again. I have to be honest, working a sales job is very mentally draining and doesn't leave me much energy to blog, however, I am hoping that this gets me back on track. At the church I have started an apologetics class based on The Believers Reason, that will featured Sundays on this blog until its completion ten weeks from now. It is my prayer that over these next weeks God would work in your heart to give you a desire to defend the truth and the Church (universal). As Part of our homework for this week, please download and listen to one sermon/show, from the two groups and compare them, looking for Christ-Centeredness, The Gospel, Life tips, Pop Psychology, Proper use and context in bible verses, the style and Goal of preaching, What does the pastor want you to walk away with, ect.

Here is the Class Audio, go to menu to download it.

Get Sermons From Granger

Get Sermons From Saddleback

Get Sermons from Life Church

And For Quality, More Biblical Sermons and Sermon Reviews

PHOENIX REFORMED BAPTIST CHURCH Get Sermons from PRBC

Get Sermons from The Village Church

Check Out Fighting for the Faith, A program I listen to frequently, for quality sermon reviews and Christian discernment. Yes, I know its by a Lutheran, but hey, they aren't all bad.

The Consumer Driven Church pt. 2

2010-01-11T22:13:00.000-08:00

The more I think about the topic of Consumerism in the church the more comes to mind. Specifically things that are done by mega-churches such as Granger Community Church. Now, I am not condemning large churches in general, but rather the methods that are employed at times, by them. Consider this sign from 'Church Requel.' Notice how the Goal is the drawing of people, not Jesus. Moreover, it is a selfish (sinful) motive that one should come to the church, because YOU want life change. What is worse is the concept being forwarded, is that of life change, and it isn't the Christian Message or even close to it. Yes, Christianity changes lives, but it is because God changes people's hearts, wills and desires, and because we become justified and begin being sanctified. The Christian message is repentance and the forgiveness of sins in Jesus name. The consumerism of our churches has changed that offensive message of the cross to make it more palatable for the unregenerate sinner who has come into the church for 'life change.'

In reality, it seems that the promise of life change is also a simple lie. The main reason I make that comment is that Requel Church, has no power to change lives in the Christian sense, that ability belongs to God alone. Father more it seems to me that the idea of life change is the end goal, and this picture is foreign to biblical authors. In our consumerist desires look to the church/Jesus to increase our comforts, supply desires, and increase prosperity, all while making our quality of life better. Yet consider Paul's statements that he makes without disdain:

To my shame, I must say, we were too weak for that! But whatever anyone else dares to boast of--I am speaking as a fool--I also dare to boast of that. Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they offspring of Abraham? So am I. Are they servants of Christ? I am a better one--I am talking like a madman--with far greater labors, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death. Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I was adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers; in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure. And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches. Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to fall, and I am not indignant? If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness. (2 Corinthians 11:21-30 ESV)

Yet in all of this, the modern ideal of comfort is missing. Where is the concept of Life Improvement? I mean, Paul's life was changed, from that of a rich young lawyer, well respected by his community to what we see him describe above. That isn't what I would call improvement, save for his salvation a sanctification in Christ Jesus the Lord. The whole point of this Life Improvement gospel, is an appeal to the consumerist driven American culture.

I think that the recent Facebook postings of womens bra colors are a picture of this same consumerism. How? Walk through any mall, and you will see Large photographs of women in their bra's, designed to excite and spawn desire, the same can be said for TV, Billboards, some Magazines, ect... all this consumerism has lead to a hardening of our minds in terms of sexuality, whereby we need more to be excited, but also we fail to even realize that behavior such as this is even sexual. This is from the root of consumerism that screams "BUY BUY BUY" and as the saying goes, "Sex Sells."

Let us work to recapture our innocence of heart and mind. Let us Strive to realize that the consumerism in our lives and mortify it. If not, We will usher in our children to the Consumer Driven Church.

How to critique, from Dr. James White

2009-12-17T07:30:00.000-08:00

Not often do I completely rip off someone else's work for the sake of this Blog. However, today is going to be an exception. I have to say that Dr. White is an incredibly smart yet humble man and that when he critiques someone we should take notice not only of what he says, but how he says it. I want to direct you, reader, to his blog for a critique of William Lane Craig's view of middle knowledge.

Welcome back.

I want to point out several things. First is the biblical emphasis that the post has, the repeated statement of being grieved at the sub-biblical nature of Middle Knowledge (Molinism). I think that this speaks to not only how but why we critique someone else who claims to be within the Christian faith. First, is the relation of their teaching to biblical revelation, in other words, how does what this person says relate to Scripture (our guide). Second, the critique focus upon the effect of the theology on those who embrace it. In this case, Dr. White is saying the theology in question points people away from scripture. Finally, he responds with his desire for repentance toward God for this sub-biblical theology/philosophy.

The Gospel centered focus of this gives all of us something to look toward as an example of how we should critique those whom we disagree. In a someone practical way I believe that we can rightly apply Philippians 4:9 to Dr. James White.

A Grace Gem by J. R, Miller

2009-12-16T08:44:00.000-08:00

If you don't get Grace Gems, I highly suggest that you do. They are both challenging and encouraging at the same time, and they give a picture of what Christians have thought and said in the past. They often go by author, and I have to say that J.R. Miller is quickly become someone I deeply respect. Here is today's devotion for your consideration.

(J. R. Miller, "The Beauty of Quietness" 1903)

"They will be like dew sent by the Lord." Micah 5:7

The lives of godly people are sometimes compared to the dew. One point of likeness, is the quiet way in which the dew performs its ministry. It falls silently and imperceptibly. It makes no noise. No one hears it dropping. It chooses its time in the night when men are sleeping, when none can see its beautiful work. It covers the leaves with clusters of pearls. It steals into the bosoms of the flowers, and leaves new cupfuls of sweetness there. It pours itself down among the roots of the grasses and tender herbs and plants. It loses itself altogether, and yet it is not lost. For in the morning there is fresh life everywhere, and new beauty. The fields are greener, the gardens are more fragrant, and all nature is clothed in fresh luxuriance!

Is there not in this simile, a suggestion as to the way we should seek to do good in this world? Should we not wish to have our influence felt--while no one thinks of us; rather than that we should be seen and heard and praised? Should we not be willing to lose ourselves in the service of self-forgetful love, as the dew loses itself in the bosom of the rose--caring only that other lives shall be sweeter, happier, and holier--and not that honor shall come to us? We are too anxious, some of us, that our names shall be written in large letters on the things we do, even on what we do for our Master; and are not willing to sink ourselves out of sight--and let Him alone have the praise.

Our Lord's teaching on the subject is very plain. He says: "Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full." That is, they have that which they seek--the applause of men.

"But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." The meaning would seem to be, that we are not to wish people to know of our good deeds, our charities, our self-denials; that we should not seek publicity, when we give money or do good works; indeed, that we are not even to tell ourselves what we have done; that we are not to think about our own good deeds so as to become conscious of them; not to put them down in our diaries and go about complimenting ourselves, throwing bouquets at ourselves, and whispering: "How good I am! What fine things I have done!"

This is an insightful test of our lives. Are we willing to be as the dew--to steal abroad in the darkness, carrying blessings to men's doors, blessings that shall enrich the lives of others and do them good--and then steal away again before those we have helped or blessed awaken, to know what hand it was that brought the gift? Are we willing to work for others . . .
without gratitude,
without recognition,
without human praise,
without requital?

Are we content to have our lives poured out like the dew--to bless the world and make it more fruitful--and yet remain hidden away ourselves? Is it enough for us to see the fruits of our toil and sacrifice--in others' spiritual growth, and deeper happiness; yet never hear our names spoken in praise or honor--perhaps even hearing others praised for things we have done?

If you go about doing good in simple ways, in gentle kindnesses, not thinking of reward, not dreaming of praise, not hoping for any return--you are enshrining your name where it will have immortal honor! Our lesson teaches us that this is the way we are to live--if we are followers of Christ!

Husband and Wives as Christ and the Church

2009-12-15T21:41:00.000-08:00

I was doing dishes this evening and I was simply musing on something, and I figured I would put it up on here for consideration. I would especially ask for a few wives ( maybe even my own) to comment.

In Ephesians 5, Paul likens the Husband and Wife to Christ and the church, and says that wives are to submit to their husband's as they submit to The Lord. Now in general if Jesus were to ask you to do something, and you were to fail to do it (ie, the 3 and prayer on the Mt. of Olives) it would be sin. My thought was, does this follow with the husband wife relationship or is Paul simply saying that this is the seriousness with with you are submit to your husband.

So ladies, If you husband asks you to clean the house, make dinner, have sex, whatever, is it in your mind that you are to submit to him as to Jesus. Do you think you are to submit to the request as if Jesus was asking?

As a note, I have no conclusion, or statement either way, I am not looking for my wife to do something, but I am posing a serious theological question.

A discussion of Heb 1:1-2, with an Outlawpreacher

2009-12-12T15:21:00.001-08:00

On twitter, I have been having a discussion with a guy by the name of pastornar abbout Hebrews 1:1-2, and it's relation to direct revelation from God to us(you). Keep in mind that twitter limits you to 160 characters, several of which go toward the persons name, ect...

"I believe the Scriptures say that in these last days he has spoken to us in/thru his Son.... If the Head of the Body cannot directly communicate with the Body we have a weak, sick, handicapped Body."

Now he is referencing as you can tell, Hebrews 1:1-2.

Here is what that text says, (ESV) Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.

Simple questions here:
What is then tense of Spoken, I would say past.
Did God speak to your fathers by the prophets? Unless you are Jewish, No.
Did the author of this text mean for it to imply that Christ is actively speaking to the people via special revelation? I Would say no, and here is why --

According to Vincent's Word Studies, the literal greek rendering of the phrase 'in these last days' is "at the last of these days." Notable Commentator John Gill says about this -

[...] the Alexandrian copy, the Complutensian edition, and several other copies, read, "in the last of these days": perfectly agreeable to the phrase באחרית הימים, used in Gen_49:1 to which the apostle refers, and in which places the days of the Messiah are intended; and it is a rule with the Jews, that wherever the phrase, "the last days", is mentioned, the days of the Messiah are designed: and they are to be understood not of the last days of the natural world, but of, the Jewish world and state;[...]

Clearly the time period of Christ was the 'last days' for the Jewish nation and for temple based Judaism with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.
The question that should follow in our minds then is, Does this passage speak of direct personal special revelation from Christ to all individual Christians, or is it speaking about God's revelation of the Gospel through his son? Given the direct context I would submit that the later interpretation is more accurate to what the author had in mind when writing this text.

Biblical Modesty v. Legalist Dress Codes

2009-12-05T10:44:00.000-08:00

I think that the topic of biblical modesty for women is one that is both of prime importance and practical significance. To that end, I would like to submit a view to be considered, namely that a legalistic dress code is equally sinful when compared to immodest dress.

"Being more conservative than scripture is no more praiseworthy than being more liberal than scripture." - Doug Eaton

The problem of the legalistic dress code is that it does not allow two important things. First, it denies woman's ability to live the gospel out in their dress, and instead it forces women back under the law. Second, it defines what is 'modest' generally in terms of Historical American dress, and thus, defines the bible's concept by our culture. Let me give an example. The blog Modesty tells us that " Modest dress is dressing in dresses or skirts [...]" it continues to say that if a women isn't covered from neck to ankle, with full sleeves that "she is dressing like a harlot." I would love to hear this women try to give a biblical guideline, for someone of a non-american culture. I also loved the womans statement after showing some photo's that when asked about these womens dress she states, "If he is a real godly man he will tell you that these women look like harlots." The arrogance that is present is staggering.

Looking at the Bible:

The bible speaks of modesty at several points, most clearly, 1 Tim 2:8-10. It is also noteworthy, that women in Proverbs 31 is never said or give a specific mode of dress other then she is clothed with fine linen and purple (ESV).

I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness--with good works. (1 Timothy 2:8-10 ESV).

The questions to be answered are, what is respectable apparel, and what is costly attire? I don't think that these questions have a specific answer, and by that I mean that the answer is different for different cultures. In some cultures, that may mean neck to ankle, in others it may mean something less. I can only imagine that standard being applied to places where weather would make that impossible, or where it is still only hide that is used for coverings. My point is this, we must allow the gospel to define modesty for us, not a set of rules. We need to function from grace and in a manner that is set at glorifying God, not obeying the law.

Eugene Peterson, Author of The Message Bible

2009-11-14T19:54:00.000-08:00

I am well aware that people know my thoughts on The Message Bible (See image for reference) but I have to say that the author of said work, Eugene Peterson, has written something that I think is Perfectly Brilliant. So without delay here are Eugene Peterson's comments on the Church and Pastors...

For a long time, I have been convinced that I could take a person with a high school education, give him or her a six-month trade school training, and provide a pastor who would be satisfactory to any discriminating American congregation. The curriculum would consist of four courses.

Course I: Creative Plagiarism. I would put you in touch with a wide range of excellent and inspirational talks, show you how to alter them just enough to obscure their origins, and get you a reputation for wit and wisdom.

Course II: Voice Control for Prayer and Counseling. We would develop your own distinct style of Holy Joe intonation, acquiring the skill in resonance and modulation that conveys and unmistakable aura of sanctity.

Course III: Efficient Office Management. There is nothing that parishioners admire more in their pastors than the capacity to run a tight ship administratively. If we return all phone calls within twenty-four hours, answer all the letters within a week, distributing enough carbons to key people so that they know we are on top of things, and have just the right amount of clutter on our desk—not too much, or we appear inefficient, not too little or we appear underemployed—we quickly get the reputation for efficiency that is far more important than anything that we actually do.

Course IV: Image Projection. Here we would master the half-dozen well-known and easily implemented devices that that create the impression that we are terrifically busy and widely sought after for counsel by influential people in the community. A one-week refresher course each year would introduce new phrases that would convince our parishioners that we are bold innovators on the cutting edge of the megatrends and at the same time solidly rooted in all the traditional values of our sainted ancestors.

(I have been laughing for several years over this trade school training with which I plan to make my fortune. Recently, though, the joke has backfired on me. I keep seeing advertisements for institutes and workshops all over the country that invite pastors to sign up for this exact curriculum. The advertised course offerings are not quite as honestly labeled as mine, but the content appears to be identical—a curriculum that trains pastors to satisfy the current consumer tastes in religion. I’m not laughing anymore.)

from Working the Angles: The Shape of Pastoral Integrity (pp. 7-8), As quoted by Matt Chandler.

Event Review : Hellhouse

2009-11-01T20:54:00.000-08:00

Backstory: The Church, Andy specifically, received an invite from a semi-local church who for Halloween was putting on a 'hellhouse.' When I first heard about the event, and saw the postcard/flier I was less the enthusiastic to be sure. I find no pleasure in putting ones self into frighting situations for entertainment. However, when I read the accompanying letter with tickets, I was attracted.

The Letter boasted that 1 in 4 people going through this pray a prayer of salvation, and 25% of those are for the first time! (notice that out of 16 people, 4 "make a decision" and 3 of those have done it before...). It seemed that I would be going to the Hellhouse after all, to see if it was indeed an effective evangelistic tool, what the Gospel presentation was, ect... (all those minor theological issues) I felt it to be wise to take along someone, and go figure there were two tickets.

Into The Hellhouse: I will note that I was a bit distracted, it was a cold (mid 40's) evening and we arrived at the hellhouse at about midnight Halloween night (so technically this morning). As a personal note, an event center is not a strictly understood indoor venue per se, and a jacket would have been a wise addition to the lone t-shirt I was wearing. There was a line when we arrived, which is to be expected, however, it wasn't a long one. We waited just about 30 minutes to enter. Walking through the double doors covered with what seemed to be black plastic sheets of some sort, it was difficult to see, and we were guided as a small herd to the center of the room, it was then that I first noticed our tour guides, they were 'demons' In the center of the room was a young lady (teen) in a casket. The main tour guide (again, demon) began telling us how we would all end up like this some day, and that it was his goal to make it sooner rather then later.

The next room was a bathroom, with a teen boy sitting on the toilet. The tour guide began to explain how much he enjoyed suicide. A drama was played out where a demon lead the young man essentially from life problems ( girlfriend issues, Sports teams, absent father) to the point of suicide. The end was predictable, with the young man shooting himself, and the demon rejoicing. (no blood/guts). The before entering the next room the demons (about 4 or 5 that traveled with the group, began telling us about their next scheme, Sex. As we entered the next room, I was shocked; the setup was that we would be seeing a boyfriend and girlfriend after prom, with her parents away, and they were in love (dating all of three weeks). In a bed, was a shirtless young man, and a clothed young lady (presumably of High School age) making out, hardcore. The tour guide calls for the execution of the pearl of her virginity. This is followed by her hearing the tour guide and the boy getting down to business so to speak. She under the blanket she removes her shirt, and the couple have simulated sex. The demons dance in pleasure sing, "that's the way I like it, uh-huh, uh-huh." The boy leaves, and the girl is left alone, weeping.

The next room was an accident scene, where 3 had died, and one young man, had lived. He falls out of his car, with a beer bottle, weeping. Paramedics arrive, and explain that the other people are dead. The scene ends with the demons rejoicing. We are then ushered it to a party scene. A girl was encouraged to remove some clothing, and drink. She passed out, and some boys said they would have their way with her. However, the demons spoke not of the rape, but of the drinking.

The next room, from my understanding is a staple at all hellhouses and that is the abortion room. I have to say that it was not overly realistic, but there was gore. Mostly a screaming girl and an uncaring doctor... The demons rejoiced at the death of infants. The room that followed, was perhaps the most striking of the entire experience, and it was the newly emptied womb, the mother, and four manifestations of the dead child, as a young child, a teen, a bride and as an old women. This was combine with a weeping mother and the "angel of the future."

The next room was, hell. It was stereotypical, demons torturing people for pleasure, Satan as the king, he even had a throne. The general message was that it was Satan's goal to get you there. We were then ushered into a room that had 5 floor to ceiling coffins. We were put into them and the were locked on both sides. After a short time the opposite door opened to a bright, all white heaven, complete with Jesus and Angels. Jesus had no throne but stood and addressed us. The final place we were taken into was the 'decision' room. One of the youth pastors addressed as and basically made an alter call.

The Christian Perspective I think that there are several things that were extremely problematic about this Hellhouse. First, It presented an essentially dualistic view of God and Satan. Demons seemingly had the power to kill man, and God was absent. Second, The Gospel was absent. At no point was there a clear presentation of the forgiveness of sin. We were told that if your name is found in the book of life you will not parish, however, this is far from a clear gospel presentation. Moreover, the concept of repentance was also absent. There was plenty of law preaching, what sin was, was clear, but the concept of repentance was just not spoken about. However, it was only briefly mentioned of such sins as lying, cheating, stealing, and in some respects i don't think that this brief mentioning of the law really hit people. That said, it seems that if you haven't have premarital sex, or killed someone with a car, raped someone, gotten hammered, had an abortion, the law missed you. These are problems, but the width of condemnation wasn't wide enough.

The next issue is the couple in bed. Now, I am not sure if they were a married couple, which is my hope. If not, the problem is huge, and clear. Also, The Gospel in the decision room was so weak and anemic that it hardly recognizable. The message of do you know where you are going when you die, is not the Gospel. I wonder what the 1/16 first time responders really responded to. Was it the Fear of God's Wrath? I don't think so. Was it brokenness over their sin? I don't think the presentation definitionally warranted the belief that we have sinned against a holy and righteous God. I struggle with the presentation of the powerful Satan, and the yearning God.

Concluding Thoughts: The Hellhouse was an interesting experience. Would I say it is an effective evangelism tool? Maybe. There were significant issues with this one, that made it problematic, however, I think that it could be done in such a way as to present truly biblical views. That said, I don't think that it takes the place of preaching the forgiveness of Sin in Jesus' name. I struggle with the tactic in general. I don't think it is by definition sinful. I would be interested to see the results v/ cost, as well as a defense of charging people to enter. Overally, I rate the event a 2 out of 10 for evangelistic value, Gospel Centered, and Biblical Accuracy.

40 Days of Love Sermons - Love Tells the Truth

2009-10-14T23:00:00.000-07:00

Here is a Sermon that I preached last Week. It is in my opinion the finest sermon I have EVER preached, and the recorder died half way through....

Enjoy!

Sermon - 40 Days of Love - Love Forgives

2009-10-14T22:25:00.000-07:00

So tonight I preached a sermon on from the church's 40 days of love series, on Love Forgives.

Enjoy!

Special Guest Blog - Why The Bible Is Necessary

2009-09-14T19:36:00.000-07:00

I have asked a friend, who is far smarter and more of a scholar then I to write an entry on something that he felt would be valuable for the readership. So here is his Entry.

Why The Bible Is Necessary For Apologetics: A Brief Reflection On 1 Peter 3.15

Introduction

The study of defending the Christian faith has recently become extremely popular. Bookstores are filled with manuals on how Christians can defend their faith. Usually the books present “facts” from secular writings. The Big Bang Theory, Ancient Greek philosophy, Near Death Experiences, selections from secular Roman historians and even liberal theology are used to try and show unbelievers that Christianity is reasonable. Christians are encouraged to look at these “facts” with unbelievers in a “neutral” way as though God does not exist or the Bible is not His Word. I find this odd.

When we are looking for help in our marriages, or need to tell someone how to be saved, or we are trying to find a word of comfort to share with a hurting friend we typically go to the Bible. If we do not go to the Bible for these things, we at least should do so! I find it odd, then, that we should go anywhere other than the Bible when we are called upon to defend our faith.

God knows everything. Thankfully, God has revealed some of His knowledge to us. We have a basis for our knowledge because of revelation. It is for this reason we should turn to the treasures of wisdom (the wisdom of God) we have in the Bible when we need help with…well…anything! Defending the faith is not an exception.

Motive

The Bible is needed for motivation to defend the faith. If someone asks, “Why should we even defend the Christian faith?” the only way we are able to answer at all is if we turn to the Bible. “In your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect…” 1 Peter 3.15 (ESV) This verse of the Bible commands Christians to always be ready to make a defense. This is one verse that gives us our motivation for defending the faith. There are many others. If we approach an unbeliever from a point of view where God does not exist or the Bible is not His Word then there is no need to defend our faith. There is no honest way to get on “common ground” with an unbeliever and still have a reason or motivation to defend our faith. We not only have to be committed to the Bible, we should be committed to it! The Bible tells us that we must defend our faith.

Material

The Bible is needed to tell us what we are defending. The answer to the question, “What is Christianity?” can only be found in the Bible. The verse referenced above mentions that Christ is Lord and speaks of the hope that is within us. This is one verse which presents at least two components of Christianity. There are many others. If we understand that we must defend our faith but do not know what our faith is in then we are unable to defend our faith. We must know what it is we are defending before we are able to defend it. We not only have to know the Bible, we should know it! The Bible tells us about the faith we defend.

Manner

The Bible is necessary to tell us how to defend our faith.

If we believe the Bible then we have a motive for defending our faith and we know what we have faith in, but how should we defend our faith? The verse we have been considering tells us to provide a defense and tells us what we are defending. It also tells us how to defend our faith. We start by regarding Christ the Lord as holy, and we present our arguments with gentleness and respect. This verse contains instruction on how we are to defend our faith. There are many others. There is no reason to regard Christ the Lord as holy or to be gentle and respectful toward those who oppose the faith if we do not recognize that the Bible is morally binding. We cannot even know who Christ is apart from the Bible, much less call Him Lord or regard Him in our hearts as holy. We not only have to submit to the Bible, we should submit to it. The Bible tells us the way in which we are to defend our faith.

Method

The Bible is necessary to tell us the method by which we are to defend our faith.

The Bible is necessary for the motive, material, and manner of the defense of the faith. There is another sense to the question, “How should we defend the faith?” This question is not asking for just the manner in which we defend our faith, but the method by which we defend it. Of course motive, material and manner are all parts of method and we have seen that all three come from the Bible. The method by which we defend our faith likewise comes from…you guessed it…the Bible! Remember that 1 Peter 3.15 commands that we are to honor Christ the Lord as holy. There is no realm in which Christ is not Lord; Christ is Lord of all. Those who do not submit to the Lordship of Christ Jesus are rebelling against God. They disagree with God in thought, word, deed, or some mixture of all of the above. However, no one can disagree with God on a point and still have the truth about it. Disagreeing with God is, to put it plainly, stupid. For example, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’ Psalms 14:1a (ESV)”; ^“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction. Proverbs 1:7 (ESV)”; and “For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools Romans 1:21-22 (ESV)”.

Believing The Bible

When someone contradicts the Lord Jesus Christ, who is Truth (John 14.6), on a fundamental point (e.g. the universe is created by God, the Bible is the Word of God) that person is attempting to start off in the wrong direction when it comes to understanding anything correctly. Our method of defending the faith should be the same as what the Bible presents. The Bible makes the claim that it is the Word of God. It is self-attesting. ^“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. 2 Tim 3:16-17 (ESV)” If God is the final authority on all matters of truth, then what He says goes. Hence the Bible as the Word of God is also self-authenticating. There is no higher standard than the Word of God by which we may judge the Word of God. “For when God made a promise to Abraham, since He had no one greater by whom to swear, He swore by Himself Hebrews 6:13 (ESV)” If someone does not agree with the Word of God, you can be pretty sure that he or she will not agree with your words concerning the Word of God. The Bible is the Word of God, the Word of God is true, and to reject this results in futile thought.

Foolishness Of Unbelief

Many think it is foolish to have such faith in the Bible, including Christians. It angers many that someone should take the Bible to be the final authority, as we do, on faith. What alternative do those raising this supposed objection have to offer? They say that they object based upon what their senses and their reason tells them. Perhaps they claim to take “science” as their authority in matters of truth, even when it comes to judging whether or not the Bible is the Word of God. There is a serious problem with this view. How do we know that science is a reliable guide to truth? We cannot test “science” using science. Even if we could test science in this way, we would just be using science to test science, and the question is whether or not science is reliable in the first place! Those wanting to defend the view in question could say that they have faith in science, but this means that their final authority fails at the most basic level. Having “faith in science” is not scientific at all, and so the position falls under its own weight. The foundation is cracked, and even if it were not, it would not be wide enough. There are many things which cannot be touched by science. Logic is not scientifically testable, nor are moral laws, yet the reality of both of these press upon us every day! Furthermore, how do we know that the universe will continue to work in predictable ways? Should we remain open to new possibilities in scientific discovery, even unpredictable ones? If so, why should we continue in science upon the assumption that things will remain the same?

Christians believe the Bible. God has given us our senses and reason to use in coming to truth. Science is something we are able to do because God made and controls the world. Furthermore God has made us in such a way that we are able to come to know the world. While there is much to learn, we will never learn anything that overturns a fact which is known and revealed by our all-knowing and loving God. God has revealed Himself to us through His creation and given us reliable tools to know Him more. This we know because the Bible tells us so. We make observations and think about them and come to conclusions. However, in using our faculties we do not take them to be the final authority.

God has given us the Bible. May we reflect on this and allow it to shape our understanding of all we think, say, and do, even when it comes to defending the Bible itself.

About the Author

C.L. Bolt holds a B.A. Philosophy (High Honors) and B.A. Religion from Lynchburg College (Magna Cum Laude) where he was awarded with the 2007 Raymond Morgan Award in Philosophy, 2008 Virgil Hinds Award in Religion, 2008 Access Achievement Award, was inducted into Phi Kappa Phi and was a member of the 2008 VFIC Ethics Bowl Team. He is pursuing his M.Div. with a concentration in Biblical and Theological Studies at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY. He contributes to Choosing Hats apologetics blog at www.choosinghats.com and wrote a chapter for The Portable Presuppositionalist by Jamin Hubner available at www.amazon.com. He lives in Indiana with his wife Kerri and dog Flash.

Conversation with a Mormon -- Forgiveness and Repentance

2009-09-09T11:19:00.000-07:00

Dustin:Hello, how may i help you?
Ken: I was wondering if you could explain something to me about Forgiveness
Dustin: sure?
Dustin:great what would you like to know about it?
Ken: A friend of mine, who is a Mormon, was explaining a parable an LDS leader told about forgiveness where you owe God, and Jesus takes your fine
Dustin: ok
Dustin: Well every body sins and there is no way for use to pay heavenly father back of doing this wrong
Ken: ok
Dustin: the only way we could pay him back is to sacrifice something that is perfect and without sin
Dustin: and jesus christ is the only one who was perfect besides god.
Dustin: so jesus volunteered to die for our sins
Dustin: so we could return to our father in heaven. but it's not a free ride. we still have to repent.
Ken: ok, so when Jesus Died on the Cross, I don't understand how my debt transfered, so that I owe him and not the Fatherhttp://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=3888890053009864274
Dustin: ok well have you ever had to pay some one so you barrowed money from some one else?
Dustin: its like paying a cell phone bill with a credit card.
Ken: ok
Dustin: you have payed it you just barrowed money from some one else.
Ken: ok
Dustin: jesus is like the credit card he was the only one who could pay heavenly father back.
Ken: ok
Dustin: so our debt goes to jesus. Did that help at all?
Ken: yes
Ken: I don't then understand how I am getting out from under my debt
Ken: if forgiveness is defined as "It is to pardon or excuse someone from blame for an offense or misdeed"
Ken: It doesn't seem like that happens, I never get excused
Dustin: well you aren't, how you return the debt to jesus is to repent.
Ken: I just get passed off
Dustin: like paying the credit bill when it comes.
Ken: So it is up to me to pay off Jesus?
Dustin: well it does when you repent you are getting the excuse or pardon from jesus
Ken: If I am doing something, how is it a pardon
Dustin: yes yes it is completely up to you. you have to choose to repent to pay off jesus
Ken: it seems really hard
Dustin: you have to repent. do you know what it means to repent?
Ken: To turn around, seek forgiveness, and then Not do it ever again?
Dustin: yes it is hard. its how we show were are sorry for the things we done. but its not impossible. i have repented for things in my life.
Dustin: yes that is repentence
Ken: how do you know you won't do them in the future?
Ken: I mean, as a dude, can you tell me that you or I go a day without lust?
Dustin: you don't it is completely up to you. if you choose to do them or not. but true repentance you will strive to not do them again
Dustin: i know exactly what your talking about.
Ken: So is Repentance about actually not doing it again, or just meaning to not do it again?
Dustin: the point were you have to repent is if you act on that lust.
Ken: so just lusting is ok, but when I act on it, that is when it becomes sin?
Dustin: Repentance is not doing it again. lust is the temptation.
Dustin: yes
Ken: ok
Dustin: i'm a missionary and i still look at girls and have the same temptation but i do not act on it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portions of this chat were changed (spelling corrections and double lines removed), emphasis was added. My Purpose for this is not to trap Mormons, but rather for us to see what they will actually say.

I have to say that is was the most telling and troubling conversation I have ever had on Chat with a Missionary. The amount of redefinition that occurred was unthinkable, and this is most shocking when it comes to Sin.

The other thing that I am a bit confused about, and maybe a Mormon can comment on this, When He (Dustin) said that Jesus is the only person who is perfect besides the Father, he seems to be leaving out the Holy Spirit ( who is described as a personage in LDS theology) and Elhoim's Father (God's Father).

Obama Preaches Sermon to School Children

2009-09-08T09:31:00.001-07:00

Christian Pulpit News Today -

In a stunning development President Obama abandoned his planned speech this morning to the nation's school children, and instead preached an evangelical sermon. Many hearing this were shocked and amazed that the President would go against the popular opinion of his political party and speak to the children about Jesus.

The Reverend E.R. Tickler of the Feelings Tabernacle, in West Warwick, RI said this after hearing the President's sermon, "I was shocked and extremely pleased that he could be so relevant to the youth culture today. What was even more amazing is that he seems to use the same depot that I get my sermons from." When asked about where He purchased his sermons, Reverend Tickler had no comment, however, He said that he now supports the President more then ever.

Other Christian leaders have also stepped up to offer their thanks to the President, Donald Miller, who helped Obama in his bid for the presidency was overcome with emotion while watching the sermon. He commented that he knew Obama wanted to reduce the number of abortions in the nation, feed starving people and get healthcare to those who need it and never knew that he planned on using preaching accomplish these goals.

Not everyone is pleased with the presidents sermon. The ACLU has already filed a federal lawsuit to expel the president from schools and any other government run activities. The media contact for the ACLU, Ms. Johnson said this," Today we will begin to wage a war on religion in American Schools. The President has no right to preach a sermon to the American children." When asked if She believed that the ACLU was forwarding the religion of Secular Humanism within the school system, Ms. Johnson has no comment.

The highlight of the sermon is something that echos in Christian churches around the United States every Sunday. No doubt Christians are familiar with the gospel that is preached there and by president Obama. "Every single one of you has something you're good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is... Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who've had the most failures. JK Rowling's first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career."

As the fall out from the preaching of this evangelical sermon continues we are committed at Christian Pulpit News Today to keep you updated and informed.

Modern Worship Music pt. 2

2009-09-07T18:22:00.000-07:00

In the last post on Thoughts of a Christian on the topic of Worship Music, the song Above All was discussed. The song had some positive points, and some negative ones too. However, today's song, is to date the worst 'worship' song I have ever heard.

Title: The More I Seek You
Artist: Kari Jobe
Written by: Zach Neese
Record Label: Integrity Music
Theological Review Preformed by: N/A

Lyrics:

The more i seek you,
the more i find you
The more i find you, the more I love you

Chorus:I wanna sit at your feet
drink from the cup in your hand.
Lay back against you and breath, here your heart beat
This love is so deep, it's more than I can stand.
I melt in your peace, it's overwhelming
(Repeat from Beginning)

Chorus:4x

I think that there are several issues that can be addressed in this short song. When I look at a worship song, I am looking for something that can be both prayed in private and sung in a corporate setting. So when looking at this song my first, and possibly the most troublesome issue with this song, is that this song could be sung to any lover one could choose; man, women, God... really whomever you choose. The Object of this song is completely ambiguous, which has no historically grounds as valid within the Church. Secondly, this song is very very sexual in the nature of the lyrics. Given that the song is indeed about Jesus, I can't honestly say that I have any of these quasi sexual feelings about Jesus. I don't want to sit at his feet, or lay back against him and hear his heart beat. Third, speaking of Jesus in these amorous terms is, I believe, disrespectful to his Divinity. This is God we are talking about (to) here. Fourth, There is zero theological content. Any heretic could sing this without a flinch. It isn't edifying to the body. Finally, The last problem with this song is, in the words of Mark Driscoll, that it turns Jesus into my 'Bearded Girlfriend.'

I say we go back to quality, none-emotionally based worship music.

A Powerful Reminder from Spurgeon

2009-09-06T00:27:00.000-07:00

If you don't receive Grace Gems, I highly recommend you do. Here is one that I received not long ago, with a powerful reminder from C. H. Spurgeon:

May you so live, that when you stand over your child's dead body, you may never hear a voice coming up from that clay, "Father, your negligence was my destruction! Mother, your prayerlessness was the instrument of my damnation!"

"Impress these words of Mine on your hearts and minds. . . Teach them to your children, talking about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up." Deuteronomy 11:18-19.

I think that this is a fitting 100th blog post, Praise the Lord.

More of Steven Anderson's Antics

2009-09-02T21:26:00.000-07:00

Well, I know... I shouldn't be shocked by the ignorance of the KJVOnlyist 'pastor' Steven Anderson, however, he has fallen to a new low in my book. He has video taped himself burning a copy of the NIV bible. This is truly a sad and stupid act. I have to say that the thing that sickens me the most about this video is Mr. Anderson's Smile.

Now Dr. James White, a Critical Consultant, on the NASB has issued a response that is very good.

I would ask that those who are KJVO or are KJV preferred really look into the issues here. There are a lot of complexities that need to be understood.

The Luthers and Beer

2009-09-01T16:34:00.001-07:00

One of my favorite Luther quotes of all time is:

"... while I sat still and drank beer with Philip and Amsdorf, God dealt the papacy a mighty blow."

And so keeping that quote in mind, I would ask my Lutheran Brothers, what is the deal with this picture...
( In case you can't tell the little white sign says, " No Alcoholic Beverages Allowed" )

I think that this might baffle Chris Rosebrough over at Fighting for the Faith.

More Logicless thinking at 'New Christians'

2009-08-29T19:18:00.000-07:00

Tony Jones Blog Seems to be just a breading ground for thinking that is just out of left field. I will give you an example, this is on the same thread as my previous post, regarding the intersexed.

Your Name [ yes, this is the name of the poster]
To the intersexed individual wanting answers...
Just my opinion: I wouldn't seek them here. It sounds like most of the people here haven't walked in your shoes (or don't know that they have since many parents and doctors choose the gender for intersexed babies at birth)...

It seems to me that this guy is guilty of a major logic error. Namely, I don't have to walk in the shoes of a murderer or a homosexual or a pro ball player to understand their struggles/nee ds. I mean this amounts to no one person being able to understand any other person, as we haven't all have the same experiences. I mean come on, lets try to think rationally.

Who is the Real Fundimentalist

2009-08-25T20:10:00.000-07:00

I have been busy over at Tony Jones' Blog. They posed a question about being 'intersexed' and I have been responding to one person specifically, Panthera.

I am going to post the conversation that has being occurring between He (?) and I, the goal of this is to see who the real fundimentalist is within this conversation.

panthera:

dustin germain my marriage is legitimate. What you and your hateful version of Christianity thinks is totally irrelevant.

For what it's worth, my opinion is very simply put:

You should love the person who loves you. Build a committed, monogamous, loving, faithful and true marriage. Who cares what your chromosomal status or your sexuality is, marriage is strictly between two people and not determined by hateful conservative Christians.

Regardless of how often they rape, torture, beat and kill us.

Me:

Panthera~

I don't know what your story is, or frankly anything about who you are, and I'm not trying put on a pretense of judgment towards you, however, I think that for the Christian, the word of God must be our Authority for Truth. There are so many experiences, philosophies, sects, cults, and religious persons that I believe that to submit to any of them outside of scripture is folly.In Short, We must have an Arbiter of truth that is external from us.

That said I am a conservative Christian. I have never Raped, Tortured, Beat or Killed anyone and being as I don't even know who you are I clearly don't hate you. That said, I am, because of my belief in Sola Scriptura, against any and all forms of marriage that are not given to be valid covenantally by the Word of God (see Gen. 1-2, Matthew 19). I am forced by my love for scripture and the God of Scripture to say that out side of God instituting a covenant, persons in committed, monogamous,loving, lifelong relationships are still fornicating, an act described as sin by both the New and Old Testaments.

Is it possible for you to see that perhaps persons who take the view that I have just outlined are not hate-mongers, but rather are people who lovingly desire for you to not come under condemnation from God Almighty?

panthera:

Of course it is possible for me, Ken.

I find it sad that you needs must imprison God by limiting Him to your interpretation of the Bible. And that is what you do.

Calling my marriage fornication is absurd. Do you really think I would abandon my husband just to satisfy your mumbo-jumbo?

Not going to happen.

There is little charity amongst you fundamentalist Christians, little indeed if you can call a faithful partnership of 25 years a sin.

Oh, and, yes, I am a Christian. You can be a Christian and gay. Even a Christian and gay and married.

Me:

panthera -

I would like to systematically address your response.

1. I think that it is completely irrational and unreasonable to say that I am imprisoning God. If the text explains God, then holding to that isn't an imprisonment, but rather a representation. This type of language serves more to Poison the Well, rather then to make a rational argument.

2. I am not calling your marriage fornication, I am saying that I do not believe that you can support from scripture same-sex marriage, being covenantally begun by God. I would also note that Dee Bradshaw a pastor in the MCC in his debate with Dr. James White said that he could not do so.

3. Do I really think you would abandon your husband just to satisfy my "mumbo-jumbo?" No, I don't. I don't think in fact if Jesus came down and told you that he did not approve of your actions that you would abandon your 'husband.' I hope that you understand that I mean that in the kindest was possible.

4. To say that there is little charity amongst fundamentalists may or may not be true, however, I am not a fundamentalist, which is frankly a derogatory term, that has no place in civil discussion. Notice that no where in what I have said did I Directly say that what you are doing is a sin. That is your conclusion from the logical case I am forwarding, but I did not use the word Sin.

5. I think that we must submit to 1 John as to what a Christian, I don't Judge you.

panthera:

Ken, you wrote, I answered. I won't get into the hysterical fundamentalist/conservative/literalistic/bible-as-God's-only-message discussion with you.

Calling a fundamentalist a fundamentalist is no more an insult than it was after church Sunday when a local farmer came up to me and said his b i t c h was in heat and did I think my dawg might spend the week with his family, 'cause he knows what to do with his nose.

That man would die for his pretty little dog, they're that close. But he still calls her by what she is.

Tony, I see little hope of any mercy from these people for anyone whom they consider 'other'.

Me:

Panthera ~

The clear issue is that I am not a Fundamentalist. As a matter of fact based on the definition of the term, by Richard Dowkins, You are more of a fundamentalist then I am. "Richard Dawkins has used the term to characterize religious advocates as clinging to a stubborn, entrenched position that defies reasoned argument or contradictory evidence."

The clear fact is that you, in our brief encounter, have done exactly this. Thus we must conclude that You are the Fundamentalist not I.

panthera:

Ken,
And Richard Dawkin's opinion is relevant because...?

I simply don't care how you self-identify. I have no interest in the mumbo-jumbo you practice in your version of Christianity in your church.

All I care about is that you cease attacking my status as a human and stop blocking my civil rights, including the right to have my marriage legally recognized in the US.

That is the difference between us - I am more than happy to leave you and your hatefilled ilk be. You recognize neither my status as Christian nor human, demanding I bend to your perverted, hatefilled will.

Ain't gonna happen.

I will die before I surrender to you and your nasty fellow travelers.

Me:

Panthera ~

Can you please show me, and everyone else reading this where exactly I have said you are "not-Human" in any interaction here.

I find it funny that you refuse to do anything but cry victim, as if I have dehumanized you, degraded you, or treated you at all poorly. When in fact I have done none of these things. I understand that you have no doubt been mistreated previously, which I openly condemn. I am simply trying to have a rational discussion with you about in issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I find it amazing that 1. I am not a nasty, hate-monger, anti-gay, dehumanizing, fundamentalist. However, looking at the more modern definition given by Richard Dawkins, I am asking:

Who is the Real Fundamentalist??

You be the Judge.

Terms Defined - LDS Testimony

2009-08-23T21:03:00.000-07:00

In Mormonism, the term Testimony is defined in "True to the Faith" (2004 Edition) as:

A Testimony is a spiritual witness given by the Holy Ghost. The Foundation of a testimony is the knowledge that Heavenly Father live and loves us: that Jesus Christ live, and that He is the Son of God, and that he carried out the infinite Atonement; that Joseph Smith is the prophet of God who was called to restore the gospel; that we are led by a living prophet today; and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Savior's true Church on the earth. With this foundation, a testimony grows to include all principles of the gospel.

She Will Keep the Baby!

2009-08-23T19:54:00.000-07:00

I have to admit, I have no idea who Kourtney Kardashian is. I don't know that I have even heard the name before (does this mean I have been living under a rock?) However, in doing my normalish blog reading I came across this story from People Magazine. There was something very striking about this woman's comments and about the graphic detail in which she describes her situation.

First, it is clear from the statements of both Ms. Kardashian and her boyfriend Scott, that neither is pro-life; clearly they are pro-choice. Yet Ms. Kardashian's comment on her choice is very clear -

For me, all the reasons why I wouldn't keep the baby were so selfish: It wasn't like I was raped, it's not like I'm 16. I'm 30 years old, I make my own money, I support myself, I can afford to have a baby. And I am with someone who I love, and have been with for a long time... My doctor told me there is nothing you will ever regret about having the baby, but he was like, 'You may regret not having the baby.' And I was like: That is so true. And it just hit me. I got so excited"

It seems that for Ms. Kardashian that being unwed caused the question, and that the answer was at least partly that she couldn't justify murdering a young human being, which is to be praised in this culture where women are told that they have the right to play God. Let me just say, Congratulations, you have made a wise choice Ms. Kardashian, your child thanks you.

Now there has never been a truer statement then what that doctor said; regret only comes from murdering your child.

I would like to just put forth, an argument from Scott Klusendorf:

Put simply, there is no morally significant difference between the embryo you once were and the adult you are today. Differences of size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency are not relevant such that we can say that you had no rights as an embryo but you do have rights today. Think of the acronym SLED as a helpful reminder of these non-essential differences:⁴

Size: True, embryos are smaller than newborns and adults, but why is that relevant? Do we really want to say that large people are more human than small ones? Men are generally larger than women, but that doesn’t mean that they deserve more rights. Size doesn’t equal value.

Level of development: True, embryos and fetuses are less developed than you and I. But again, why is this relevant? Four year-old girls are less developed than 14 year-old ones. Should older children have more rights than their younger siblings? Some people say that self-awareness makes one human. But if that is true, newborns do not qualify as valuable human beings. Six-week old infants lack the immediate capacity for performing human mental functions, as do the reversibly comatose, the sleeping, and those with Alzheimer’s Disease.

Environment: Where you are has no bearing on who you are. Does your value change when you cross the street or roll over in bed? If not, how can a journey of eight inches down the birth-canal suddenly change the essential nature of the unborn from non-human to human? If the unborn are not already human, merely changing their location can’t make them valuable.

Degree of Dependency: If viability makes us human, then all those who depend on insulin or kidney medication are not valuable and we may kill them. Conjoined twins who share blood type and bodily systems also have no right to life.

In short, it’s far more reasonable to argue that although humans differ immensely with respect to talents, accomplishments, and degrees of development, they are nonetheless equal because they share a common human nature.

One Table Many Heresies

2009-08-22T18:28:00.000-07:00

In the Booklet "One Table Many Blessings" there are a collection of 'devotionals' for the ELCA Assembly that meets until the 23rd of this month. The booklet says this about itself:

Mingled with the devotions you will find twelve stories and pictures from the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. Each is a story of a family: of individuals within church families, of couples with and without children, of extended families of kin. Some are clergy, some laypeople. All give witness to the importance for the church to recognize and support the ways their ministries and families are called by God and are poured out in service to the neighbor. In Christ, we are one family, and our families take many shapes.

I would like to bring to light one of these stories. The story is of two lesbians ('Rev.' Phyllis Zillhart and 'Rev.' Ruth Frost) who are both Ordained ministers. They have been together for 25 years this fall, and have a fifteen year old daughter who they raise with two gay 'men.' While there is much to be said about this unnatural parenting arrangement, I would like to set that aside and focus instead on something that they say about there daughter. This is their statement:

The “village” that has helped raise our daughter includes LGBT people of faith and our allies. She has marched in Pride parades every year of her life. She is clear about who her parents and her village are to her. She is not clear what the Lutheran Church as a whole is to her. Her generation will decide what place the Church will have in their lives based on the justice and hospitality they see extended to or withheld from LGBT people.

Notice what they link the activity in the church body to... It is how the church treats "LGBT people." Now, last I checked, and maybe I have missed some memo - but is it not the Gospel that dictates our Church activity. After all, why would we call a gathering of non-christians, in the name of there invented Christ? It Certainly isn't The Church. Maybe it is a church, like a Jehovah's Witness Kingdom Hall is a church. The Church is those who are regenerated by Christ, who are in relationship with him.

"Reverends" with all due respect, It is not the way we treat GLBT people, but rather it is those who are Christ's Sheep who will come into the Fold. Moreover, If we do not call for both your repentance, and the repentance of all sinners, the church will be of little eternal meaning in the future.

There is another part of this One Table Many Blessings, that I would like to address, it is the 95 Persons who signed the document acknowleding their Homosexual, Bi-Sexual or Transgendered status and having been "separated from the ELCA roster in one way or another, through removal, resignation, retirement (sometimes early), postponement, leave, being dropped from candidacy,or are awaiting call." These people have rightly been disciplined, for their lack of repentance, and now, thanks to this choice by the denomination, they will be told that they are no longer in sin by being in a same-sex relationship. It seems to be that the result of liberalism, is the acknowledgment of sin, as non-sin.

For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. (2 Timothy 4:3-4 ESV)

A Brilliant Piece of Christian Philosophy

2009-08-22T11:29:00.000-07:00

I have to say that hanging around Tony Jone's Blog has for the most part been, frustrating. Seeing the Ignorance of biblical theology, meaningful hermeneutics, and Christian Worldview both deeply sadden me and frustrate me. However, there have been a few glimmers of hope. One such glimmer came from an outside link, it was to a final for a Christian Ethics class at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. It is regarding transgender issues from a pastoral perspective. The Professor of the class is Dr. Russell D. Moore, who is a Dean of the School of Theology. The writing of the question was masterfully deep and complex, yet it held a realistic quality. It was Emotional and Intellectual, and powerfully Gripping. Yet, as wonderful as the question was, the Answer was even more so. I would suggest that this would be a great piece to show the beauty of Christian Philosophy, it's depth and richness. Thank you Dr. Moore.

We All Saw This Coming - News from the ELCA

2009-08-21T15:24:00.001-07:00

The title says it all, if you know anything about the ELCA, you know that it is moving the way of liberalism. When they began accepting the the homosexual lifestyle, by becoming open and affirming in the 90's it was only a matter of time until what happened today, occurred. Based on a vote of 619-402 the motion that asks "the assembly whether, in principle, this church is committed to finding a way for people in such publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as professional leaders of this church" has passed. Yet another American Denomination has abandoned the clear teaching of scripture, today is a day for morning. Sinners will not be called to repentance, as their sin will not be called such.

**Update**

There is headline news from Yahoo, put forth today.

The Following is a quote, from that article.

Tim Mumm, a gay man and an assembly delegate from Whitewater, Wis., said the Scripture that guides opponents of the more liberal policy was written by mortals, at a much earlier time, and doesn't reflect what many Christians now believe.

"I believe for me to marry a woman would be wrong — even sinful," Mumm said.

Tony Jones and Gay Marriage, Video Blog

2009-08-20T11:41:00.000-07:00

I have started to read Tony Jones Blog. If you are unaware of whom Tony Jones is, I would suggest you google the man, but as a short description it would follow (from Zondervan) -

Tony Jones is the National Coordinator of Emergent Village (www.emergentvillage.org), a network of innovative, missional Christians. He's also a doctoral fellow and senior research fellow in practical theology at Princeton Theological Seminary. Tony has written several books on philosophy, theology, ministry, and prayer, including Postmodern Youth Ministry and The Sacred Way. He's a sought-after speaker on the topics of theology and the emerging church. Tony lives in Minnesota with his wife, Julie, and their three young children.

Now Tony describes his stance on the issue of homosexuality as follows -

I now believe that GLBTQ can live lives in accord with biblical Christianity (at least as much as any of us can!) and that their monogamy can and should be sanctioned and blessed by church and state.

So what we have is yet another 'christian leader' who believes that Scripture does not condemn homosexual activity as unnatural, improper or unrighteous. Now I say this with the understanding, that I am assuming that Tony believes and subscribes to Sola Scriptura. However, I do not dismiss the idea that Tony could reject Sola Scriptura, Consider the conclusion of an article from Emergent Villag e titled So Long Sola?, "We should welcome challenges to the doctrine of Sola scriptura. What was a pillar of truth half a millennium ago, has become an untenable deadweight (one is tempted to say, an idol) in the life of the church." It is possible, given the content given to us from other emergents, that Tony subscribes to an emergent form of finding truth, which would involve Scripture, reason, tradition, experience, creation, intuition, and imagination.

Now that there is a bit of introduction about Tony Jones. I would like to respond to a challenge that Tony Issued on his blog about homosexuality and gay marriage, with the first ever video blog from Thoughts of a Christian.

ACLU says Jail for School Prayer

2009-08-16T20:28:00.000-07:00

Grabbing title I know. You would think that in the USA that we would have the Freedom from prosecution for religious practice. This is not what the ACLU says however. I am asking that you call your state Senator, or Congressmen and ask them to act in this case. This is frankly, Immoral. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/aug/14/criminal-prayer-case-stirs-protests/?feat=home_headlines&

We Must Act now, Protect Freedom. Prayer is not a Criminal offense. This is not Communist China.

Demon Flower Mantis

2009-08-14T15:19:00.000-07:00

I just wanted to throw this up here because I thought it looked so Cool. I mean, God is an amazingly creative Creator. Let us Praise him.

Islam: The Religion of Peace

2009-08-14T13:34:00.000-07:00

I have stayed away from posting much about Islam to date mainly because I am not overly knowledgeable about the topic. However, it seems that the Religion of Peace, has struck again. I am a bit confused by all of this, but it seems that the hate for Christians runs very deep. The story of which I am speaking of describes the beheading of four Christian aid workers in Somalia, for refusing to renounce there faith in Christ Jesus the Lord. My response is this, mostly to the families of those who were Martyred by members of the Religion of Peace: If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: 'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have been guilty of sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. Whoever hates me hates my Father also.
(John 15:18-23 ESV). To Christ be the Glory, our Fellow Brothers have had there blood shed on account of the savior, what a glorious blessing they have received. Weep not, for they are with the Lord, and are blessed richly by him.

Family Friendly Radio

2009-08-06T20:54:00.000-07:00

I am so tired of 'Christian' Radio, there are several reasons, however, the one that I would like to discuss briefly is not the music per se, but rather how they "sell" themselves. It seems to be an almost universal reference by these stations that they are "Family Friendly." First, I am not completely sure what this means... I imagine it means that they are saying that they don't play music that could be found problematic for children. However, the reality of that statement is that the Classical music station is also "Family Friendly." Second, It seems to me that these 'Christian' radio stations so often speak very little about Christ in any meaningful way, but rather simply take the questionable materials out of the programming. I admit, it is good to remove these things, but is it really enough? I mean are they really working to Glorify Christ, are they preaching the Gospel? It seems that the talk portion of these programs are often difficult to distinguish from any secular radio. This is not to say that I condemn these radio stations, just that personally, I think that they sell themselves as less then Christian, and are not forward enough with Jesus and the Gospel.

The Watchtower throwback

2009-07-27T20:04:00.000-07:00

I need to preface this blog with some basic information.

1. The watchtower is the publication of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society... Members of this Society are known as Jehovah's Witness'. These members/society will further be addressed as "JW."

2. The JW's have several specific doctrinal beliefs which include, but are not limited to the following: Christ is God's Son and is inferior to Him; Christ was first of God's creations; Christ died on a stake, not a cross.

3. The cross is something that is heatedly denied, rejected and disdained by every JW i have ever have the pleasure to have conversed.

So all that said - I would like this explained...

Please note the Top Left hand Corner and the Tower itself.

Not a lot of meat here... just an old scan.

Consider it Pure Joy

2009-07-12T20:30:00.000-07:00

Recently, a friend of mine who is a Pastor in New York state, was attacked by an unknown person on a blog. This is over a Series of Sermons he has posted on the Internet. I wanted not to write a defense of Pastor T. Bartolucci, as none is needed, but I instead wanted to write a message of encouragement for him, and all the brothers who are also being attacked.

I would say to you in the words of our gracious Savior, "If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.
(John 15:18-19)" I would ask you to consider it nothing but Joy that you are counted worthy in some what to suffer for the name of Christ. Bartolucci, I think that you are really striking at the heart of the people, and there natural response is Ad Hom. attack on you (in this case), because they have nothing better to go after you with. Somehow, they believe that if they call you a bigot, and say you don't know what you are talking about, they are excused from listening and ligitamantly respond to you.

This is Very similar to the attack of Dr. White, on the issue of there being Lutherans and Catholics in the body of the Nazi concentration camp forces ( if you are unclear about this, I would suggest the July 2nd Dividing Line). He wasn't making even an argument yet, it is for this, not his true arguments he is attacked. Why? I think that the conclusion must be that there is nothing else to go after, as the real arguments can not be addressed.

My Brothers and Sisters in the Lord, let us rejoice when we are slandered, mocked, hated, mistreated, maligned, abused, cursed and disdained for the sake of Christ. Let us Remember the attitude of the Sister described in Tortured for Christ when she was arrested on her wedding day; "She looked toward her beloved, then kissed the chains and said, 'I thank my heavenly Bridegroom for this jewel He has presented to me on my marriage day. I thank Him that I am worthy to suffer for Him.'"

It is my prayer that this would be our attitude. That we may look at this evil as a blessing.

Debate: A lost Art

2009-06-21T01:33:00.000-07:00

I have a Confession - I love Debates.

Currently I am averaging about 4 a week on a wide varaity of subjects, including, Atheism, Unitartianism (The Trinity), Morality, The Bible, and others... I have to say that there is something amazing about the entire debate process. They contain an opening, which is basically a very specific short (15-30 min) lecture. Continuing to Rebutlal, and Cross-Examination (direct questions) and if you're lucky, these will be repeated, and then there is a closing statement. I have to say that this process allows a person to truly understand ( in a good debate) both sides of an issue, and which is superior. There seems to be no better way to understand any issue then to watch to experts debate it, in a polite, academic manner.

However, it seems to me that many people today dislike debate. Moreover, it seems that they think that debate is nothing more then argument. I think that this is a gross misuderstanding that is perpetuated by CNN style political debate; which is nothing more then logical fallacy after fallacy, meant to discredit an opponient via fallacy, which is why everyone thinks that they learn nothing from these debates, and that they do not truly address the issues in a direct way.

To that end, I would like to challange you to do 2 things - 1) If you have never listened to a debate, find on and listen. 2) List on here you favorite debate and why it is your favorite, so that we can all listen to what are quality debates.

Gender Roles - Homosexual Student named "Prom Queen"

2009-05-28T23:40:00.001-07:00

I have to say that I was prepared to write something on this several days ago, however, I took a couple of days to cool off. For whatever reason this story really fired me up...
(http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-news-promqueen0528,0,1160352.story)

Openly Gay Student Dubbed Prom Queen

Senior high school student met with encouragement and support at LA-area high school

By Ari B. Bloomekatz Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

May 28, 2009

Sergio Garcia stood in the gymnasium and told the senior class at Fairfax High School not to worry: If he was elected, he wouldn't wear a dress.

"I will be wearing a suit," Garcia said, "but don't be fooled, deep down inside, I am a queen!"

Garcia, 18, spent most of his years at Fairfax openly gay and wanted to be part of the Los Angeles school's prom court -- but not as prom king. He felt that vying for prom queen would better suit his personality, so he decided to seek that crown, running against a handful of female classmates.

He said it started out as a bit of a stunt and challenge -- he wasn't sure the school would allow it. But his campaign for queen ended up being serious and sparking dialogue about gender roles on campus.

A few days before the dance and election, the contenders gave short speeches on why they deserved the crown.

"At one time, prom may have been a big popularity contest where the best-looking guy or girl were crowned king and queen. Things have changed and it's no longer just about who has the most friends or who wears the coolest clothes," Garcia told the crowd of seniors. "Sure, I'm not your typical prom queen candidate. There's more to me than meets the eye."

The audience erupted in applause after his speech, and a group of his female friends spent the rest of the week wearing pink crowns and campaigning for him.

On Saturday night at the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel, wearing a charcoal-gray tuxedo and a black bow tie, he was named prom queen.

"I felt invincible," Garcia said.

He's among the first male students in Southern California to take the title usually owned by female high school beauties.

"It just shows how open-minded our class is," said Vanessa Lo, 18, the school's senior class president.

Lo said that she, like many students, had initially been against the idea of Garcia running for prom queen. But she said he "spoke with complete confidence" and carried himself in a way that made students believe he was serious, not a class clown or joker just trying to get attention.

"His speech was great," recalled Unique Payne, 17, a senior who said she voted for Garcia. "I did it because I support the gay community," she said.

Although many students were supportive of Garcia's run, others were upset and didn't understand why Garcia chose to run for prom queen.

"I'm not really happy about that. He should've run for prom king," said 17-year-old senior Juan Espinoza.

Espinoza said he has nothing against Garcia but believes many students voted for him as a joke so they could see the prom king dance with another guy on prom night.

One member of the prom court also said she didn't think it was right for a male student to take the crown.

Garcia, who lives in Mid-City and is an aspiring choreographer and hairdresser, said he didn't plan on running for prom queen until notices were posted around school. The qualifications didn't include gender, and he said running for king didn't quite feel right.

"I didn't really know if the school approved. I thought 'Why can't I do it?' " Garcia said. "I see myself as a boy with a different personality. . . . I don't wish to be a girl; I just wish to be myself," he said.

Some teachers and students were encouraging, others told him not to "stir things up," he said. But his close friends continued to support him, and after his speech, the campus community seemed to be coming around to the idea.

Fairfax High, which is near West Hollywood at the intersection of Melrose and Fairfax avenues, has often been at the forefront of the gay rights struggle. It has a Gay-Straight Alliance student group on campus, and Project 10, an on-site support program for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender youth, was started there in 1984 after a social worker wanted to help a gay student who was being harassed by his peers. The program has since been expanded to encompass the entire Los Angeles Unified School District.

Project 10's founder, Virginia Uribe, said she was encouraged by news of Garcia's crowning. She said that in the last two years, there have been similar elections to prom and homecoming courts in high schools and colleges around the nation.

"I think that indicates where our society is right now. That the young people, they are not involved in this whole argument about gay rights. They think this whole fight is silly. They just accept people for who they are," Uribe said. "Gender-bending is just kind of in," she said.

--------------------------------

Ok, so this is really messed up, for clear reasons, but let me make it more clear. 1. If you have a Penis, you can not be a "queen," you may sexually act like a woman, dress like a woman, ect... However, you are not a Woman, you are gay, but you are still a man. Personally, I am troubled that Teachers/School Employees would promote any type of none traditional gender understanding. You are a man, you are not a Queen deep down. You are just gay. I am tired of homosexuals being treated as 'special.' No More Special Rights! Your sexual desires should not somehow change traditional gender identity. Finally, I am frustrated that Homosexuals are doing the same thing they accuse evangelicals of doing; namely using their sexual ethic to define law. Yet, we are condemned as Bigots or anti-gay or hateful.

How do you think that the guy who was dubbed Prom King feels? Does he have to pariade around with this gay guy now? He Certainly wouldn't want to be doing the king/queen dance... How is he going to remember his senior Prom? What are his Children going to see in their dad's yearbook?

San Diego County Interrogates Pastor Over Home Church

2009-05-28T19:41:00.000-07:00

From : http://www.10news.com/news/19562217/detail.html

SAN DIEGO -- A local pastor and his wife claim they were interrogated by a San Diego County official, who then threatened them with escalating fines if they continued to hold Bible studies in their home, 10News reported.Attorney Dean Broyles of The Western Center For Law & Policy was shocked with what happened to the pastor and his wife. Broyles said, "The county asked, 'Do you have a regular meeting in your home?' She said, 'Yes.' 'Do you say amen?' 'Yes.' 'Do you pray?' 'Yes.' 'Do you say praise the Lord?' 'Yes.'"

The county employee notified the couple that the small Bible study, with an average of 15 people attending, was in violation of County regulations, according to Broyles. Broyles said a few days later the couple received a written warning that listed "unlawful use of land" and told them to "stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit" -- a process that could cost tens of thousands of dollars."For churches and religious assemblies there's big parking concerns, there's environmental impact concerns when you have hundreds or thousands of people gathering. But this is a different situation, and we believe that the application of the religious assembly principles to this Bible study is certainly misplaced," said Broyles.

News of the case has rapidly spread across Internet blogs and has spurred various reactions. Broyles said his clients have asked to stay anonymous until they give the county a demand letter that states by enforcing this regulation the county is violating their First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion.Broyles also said this case has broader implications."If the county thinks they can shut down groups of 10 or 15 Christians meeting in a home, what about people who meet regularly at home for poker night? What about people who meet for Tupperware parties? What about people who are meeting to watch baseball games on a regular basis and support the Chargers?" Broyles asked. Broyles and his clients plan to give the County their demand letter this week.If the County refuses to release the pastor and his wife from obtaining the permit, they will consider a lawsuit in federal court.

Ok... so think about this, To have a group of friends over for a BBQ, and Prayer, worship, and some theological discussion... guess what... its ILLEGAL. Sense when was San Diego County, the USSR or North Korea or China?? nice work

Tortured For Christ

2009-05-27T12:34:00.000-07:00

The Beginning

As of late, I have had the pleasure of reading a book, “Tortured For Christ” by Pastor Richard Wurmbrand. I must confess that it has brought me to the brink of tears on several occasions. It is a powerful and moving account of a faithful pastor, who was imprisoned in Communist U.S.S.R. for 14 years. The accounts of the beatings, abuse and mistreatment is powerful, however, more powerful is seeing this man's heart for people. He was kidnapped off the street in February of 1948, and his first imprisonment lasted 8 ½ years. When I look at all of the horrible things he and his family endured perhaps one of the things that pains my heart the most was this: “My wife was visited by the secret police who posed as released fellow-prisoners. They told her that they had attended my burial.” What a wretched evil, vile thing to do. Think of the pain, really imagine it. It wasn't enough that he was taken, but that he wife was told that he was dead to pain her also. However, I don't find that the thing that was most striking. Every story he told, was powerful, yet I can not quote the whole book.

Father, Son and Murder

For your digestion I offer you this, the first story of his I read. Granted, it is something that happened to someone other then him, nevertheless, the pain of simply knowing the man must have been inconceivable.

A pastor by the name of Florescu was tortured with red-hot iron pokers and with knives. He was beaten very badly. Then starving rats were driven into his cell through a large pipe. He could not sleep because he had to defend himself all the time. If he rested a moment, the rats would attack him. He was forced to stand for two weeks, day and night. The Communists wished to compel him to betray his brethren, but he resisted steadfastly. Eventually, they brought his fourteen-year-old son to the prison and began to whip the boy in front of his father, saying that they would continue to beat him until the pastor said what they wished him to say. The poor man was half mad. He bore it as long as he could, then he cried to his son, “Alexander, I must say what they want! I can’t bear your beating anymore!” The son answered, “Father, don’t do me the injustice of having a traitor as a parent. Withstand! If they kill me, I will die with the words, ‘Jesus and my fatherland.’” The Communists, enraged, fell upon the child and beat him to death, with blood spattered over the walls of the cell. He died praising God. Our dear brother Florescu was never the same after seeing this.

While the pain of torture and beating, abuse, murder man seem like the primary story here, I think that the greater story is that of Brother Florescu raising a faithful son. Oh how I long to know that my son would choose death rather then betray Christ or have others betray him. That is faithfulness, that is Godly parenting. Perhaps, I (we) should make Proverbs 1:10 our prayer - My son, if sinners entice you, do not consent. Flee Sin, Run Far from it. Do not let your eyes take pleasure in wickedness. My son, do not betray Christ. He is worth more then all the riches this life can give you.

My son, keep your father's commandment, and forsake not your mother's teaching.

Proverbs 6:20.

Do you have cause to think that man is Good? Let me Remove it.

I don't think that there is a political system of governance that causes people to become wicked. I think and believe that it is there nature, it is inborn. They have the nature of there father Adam, fallen depraved and full of anger, hate and malice. Often times I have quoted portions of Scripture that attests to this fact, however, as a refresher, allow me to briefly state the bible case:

The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the LORD was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. (Genesis 6:5-6 ESV)

And when the LORD smelled the pleasing aroma, the LORD said in his heart, "I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the intention of man's heart is evil from his youth. Neither will I ever again strike down every living creature as I have done. (Genesis 8:21 ESV)

Can mortal man be in the right before God? Can a man be pure before his Maker? Even in his servants he puts no trust, and his angels he charges with error; how much more those who dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, who are crushed like the moth. (Job 4:17-19 ESV)

To the choirmaster. Of David. The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none who does good. The LORD looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one. (Psalms 14:1-3 ESV)

Who can say, "I have made my heart pure; I am clean from my sin"? (Proverbs 20:9 ESV)

Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins. (Ecclesiastes 7:20 ESV)

"Why do you contend with me? You have all transgressed against me, declares the LORD.

(Jeremiah 2:29 ESV)

The godly has perished from the earth, and there is no one upright among mankind; they all lie in wait for blood, and each hunts the other with a net. Their hands are on what is evil, to do it well; the prince and the judge ask for a bribe, and the great man utters the evil desire of his soul; thus they weave it together. The best of them is like a brier, the most upright of them a thorn hedge. The day of your watchmen, of your punishment, has come; now their confusion is at hand. (Micah 7:2-4 ESV)

And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. (John 3:19 ESV)

What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips." "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness." "Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known." "There is no fear of God before their eyes." (Romans 3:9-18 ESV)

For all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions--is not from the Father but is from the world. (1 John 2:16 ESV)

Of course this is only a handful of texts, and there are many many more, yet I think that some have devalued the word of God in there sinfulness as to not have these be an authority. I offer you accounts of this depravity from Pastor Wurmbrand's experiences.

What the Communists have done to Christians surpasses any possibility of human understanding. I have seen Communists whose faces while torturing believers shone with rapturous joy. They cried out while torturing the Christians, “We are the devil!”We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities and powers of evil.... I often asked the torturers, “Don’t you have pity in your hearts?” They usually answered with quotations from Lenin: “You cannot make omelets without breaking the shells of eggs,” and “You cannot cut wood without making chips fly.” I said again, “I know these quotations from Lenin. But there is a difference. When you cut a piece of wood it feels nothing. But here you are dealing with human beings. Every beating produces pain and there are mothers who weep.” It was in vain. They are materialists. For them nothing besides matter exists and to them a man is like wood, like an eggshell. With this belief they sink to unthinkable depths of cruelty. The cruelty of atheism is hard to believe. When a man has no faith in the reward of good or the punishment of evil, there is no reason to be human. There is no restraint from the depths of evil that is in man. The Communist torturers often said, “There is no God, no hereafter, no punishment for evil. We can do what we wish.” I heard one torturer say, “I thank God, in whom I don’t believe, that I have lived to this hour when I can express all the evil in my heart.” He expressed it in unbelievable brutality and torture inflicted on prisoners. I am very sorry if a crocodile eats a man, but I can’t reproach the crocodile. He is not a moral being. So no reproaches can be made to the Communists.... They boasted that they had no pity in their hearts. I learned from them. As they allowed no place for Jesus in their hearts, I decided I would leave not the smallest place for Satan in mine.

Does this bring Romans Chapter 1 to mind for anyone else?

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (Romans 1:18-23 ESV)

Taking a Beating for Christ

I must say, that when Pastor Wurmbrand, speaks of another pastor whom he was imprisoned with, Pastor Milan Haimovici, I was shaken to the core. While what is said about him is very brief, I have to say that this man is the greatest evangelist I have ever known about. Here is his Story – The heroic examples of those in prison greatly inspired the brethren who were still free. One of the really great heroes of the faith was Pastor Milan Haimovici. The prisons were overcrowded and the guards did not know us by name. They called out for those who had been sentenced to get twenty-five lashes with a whip for having broken some prison rule. Innumerable times, Pastor Haimovici went to get the beating in the place of someone else. By this he won the respect of other prisoners not only for himself, but also for Christ whom he represented.

Think about it for a moment... Would you take 25 lashes for someone else, simply to show love like Jesus? We are all about showing love like Jesus did in this country, but how far are we really willing to take it. Money, Time, Food, Hospital Visits, ect? How about 25 lashes? Of course this isn't the only beatings that were taken and given. It was strictly forbidden to preach to other prisoners, as it is in captive nations today. It was understood that whoever was caught doing this received a severe beating. A number of us decided to pay the price for the privilege of preaching, so we accepted their terms. It was a deal: we preached and they beat us. We were happy preaching; they were happy beating us—so everyone was happy. The following scene happened more times than I can remember. A brother was preaching to the other prisoners when the guards suddenly burst in, surprising him halfway through a phrase. They hauled him down the corridor to their “beating room.” After what seemed an endless beating, they brought him back and threw him—bloody and bruised—on the prison floor. Slowly, he picked up his battered body, painfully straightened his clothing and said, “Now, brethren, where did I leave off when I was interrupted?” He continued his gospel message! I have seen beautiful things!

Beautiful things indeed – How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news! How much do you enjoy encouraging your Christian brothers and getting the joy of suffering for it.

This is a powerful book. I would fully recommend it to all to read. I hope that we can learn from the faithfulness of these men and women, who have suffered before us, so that we may suffer for our savior.

Conversation with a Mormon -- Objective Truth

2009-05-05T22:24:00.000-07:00

This has to be one of the most unique and fun conversations I have ever had at Mormon.org. That said, I want to give a brief intro to this one; I was connected with "Austin" prior to this exchanged, and I asked him if he believed in Absolute Truth, which he said he did. This is where our conversation went from there....

Austin: Hello Ken
Ken: hi Austin
Ken: we were just speaking a moment ago
Ken: and i think you must have missed something
Ken: i said
Ken: I asked you if there are two contradictory testimonies, if they could both be true
Austin: Yes, I remember
Ken: did you have an answer for that question?
Austin: Yes
Austin: I said, if they are really contradictory then they cannot both be true. But I also said that sometimes two testimonies can appear to be contradictory until further information shows that they are not
Ken: ok
So this is Good, he accepts the 1st law of Logic
Ken: So then, If you have two testimonies that are contradictory, say yours and a Jehovahs Witness... What would be the proper way to find which is true?
Austin: we believe that you can ask God and gain your own testimony
Now I know that mormons are big on Personal testimony, however, notice that the appeal to personal 'revelation' as opposed to something objective. In answering this question, Austin, rejects the very idea of knowable absolute truth, because EVERYONE claims to have been given truth by God.
Austin: everyone has the right to believe what they think is best
Ken: You didn't answer the question
Ken: you avoided it
Ken: How do you find which testimony is actually True?
Austin: what do you mean?
Ken: how can one find which testimony is truth
Austin: how would you find out which of two results to the same scientific experiment were true
Austin: you would do it yourself and see what result you got
Austin: the same applies here, I thnk
Austin: ask God for yourself and gain your own testimony.
Gaining, a personal testimony doesn't mean one is objectively true.
Ken: to gain your own testimony is a bit of a relativistic concept that is equal to saying I feel this one is true. How do you know objectively or absolutely which is true?
Ken: we need to find truth which is outside of man correct?
Ken: if it is from God as you have said.
Austin: that's right
Ken: I guess, i don't understand why you wouldn't appeal to something outside of man
Austin: God
Austin: God is outside of man
Austin: you should ask God for yourself
Ken: because even with a personal testimony... both sides claim God
Ken: So If I ask God and lets say that it is revealed to me that the Jehovahs witness has it right, would that be an objective basis for me to say that you are wrong?
Austin: Yes, a personal spiritual experience only provides reason for the experiencer to believe. It does not provide objective reason for anyone else to believe.
Ken: so you have no objective truth, it is only true for you
Ken: you couldn't say that the Jehovahs witness is wrong
Austin: I believe that it is true for everyone, but that does not force anyone else to believe it. I cannot force my beliefs on anyone else
Austin: I believe they are wrong, but no, I cannot prove it. That is between God and other individuals
Ken: i understand it is "what you *believe* is true for everyone" but that isn't objective is it?
Notice that he is claiming to KNOW truth for all of us, aka the LDS church, but that he can't prove it.
Austin: From my personal experiences, I know that the LDS Church is God's organization on Earth just as much as I know that I exist. But you're right, I cannot give that knowledge to anyone else.
Austin: It must be received by God, through His Spirit
Ken: i notice that you haven't appealed to scripture at all when trying to find what is true... does experience trump scripture in terms of what is true?
Austin: no, of course not. we can compare what we think we recieve from God with scripture. But we must also gain a testimony that scripture is true. Learning to recognize the Spirit in our lives is a process
Ken: so does scripture trump experience?
Austin: Truth trumps all. In order for scripture to mean anything to you, you must accept that 1) God exists and that 2)scripture comes from God 3) God has Truth and 4) God freely gives truth
Austin: that acceptance can come from God himself
Austin: scripture and experience must go together
Ken: so scripture has no value outside of personal belief in/about it
Austin: do you believe that scripture is the word of God?
Ken: depends on what book you mean by Scripture
Ken: but yes
Austin: why?
Ken: because they claim to be (scripture) and they are accurate in prophecy, history,ect.
Austin: we believe that God can give us more definite knowledge than that, through His Spirit. We believe that God can only be understood through His Spirit
Ken: how are personal 'testimonies' that can be mistaken via emotionalism, or personal agenda, or presuppositions, more definite then written words?
Austin: how can you know for sure who wrote the words? or whether they have not been changed since originally written? or whether the writer was mistaken, etc.
Notice now that he Attacks Scripture, rather then answer the question. This is called a Red Herring.
Ken: hmm, good questions
Ken: when you look at the number of Greek manuscripts that exist, there are actually very very few textual variants...
Ken: basically, the authors esp. of the NT claim to be speaking for God, and that other apostles are speaking for God
Ken: and we have very early manuscripts that show that the text has not been changed
Ken: moreover if you look at the writings of the early church fathers, every verse of the entire bible can be constructed, save about 30
Austin: The best I can say is that if you had experienced in your life, what I have experienced in mine...there would be no doubt that it was from God. We believe that God can lead us and we can learn to recognize His guidance more over time.
Ken: so you would say that you know in your heart that the LDS church is correct?
Austin: not just my heart. I know in my heart, mind and soul. I know that as much as I know anything else.

Ken: ok
Ken: thank you for your time
Austin: you're welcome

Lecrae - Go Hard

2009-03-22T16:32:00.000-07:00

Gentle tones

Go Hard
OR
Go Home

It Repeats

The hook ends with a sharp and shocking statement:

"Lord kill me If I don't preach the gospel"

I truly question that statement -- It makes me reflect -- Can I pray that same thing? Can You? I mean really think about the Power of that statement. Would you rather Die then not preach the Gospel? Would you have God take your life if you Aren't preaching the Gospel. Do we in our churches today have that kind of devotion and commitment to Christ and the Gospel.

However, the thoughts and meaning of this song only deepens from here.

If the Cross don't move me then I don't wanna breath no mo -- If I aint seeing Christ potna I dont wanna see no mo...

I often question how many of your average Church Goers would say that if they aren't moved by the cross or seeing Christ, they would prefer death. This seems to be such an anti-american, anti-self focused, Anti-Jesus came to serve me concept that I wonder if in the American Evangelical Church even a small percentage of people want this statement to apply to them. Yet it is the Message of Jesus, He is the Bread of Life, He is Living Water. Without Him we will die, and die for eternity, we do not want simply flour and water, we want that which truly gives life. I need, We need to learn to have our lives kept by and in Christ to the point where we would die without Him. For all you Joel Osteen Fans, I think that would be true "Kingdom Living."

Can they tell you value Jesus by the way you rep his name?

Lecrae asks the question that has been asked many times and in many ways both biblically and sermonically (is that a word?),

"Thank you for the Grace for the will and the desire/ got me living for your glory stead of living to retire/ But I pray I'll never tire of Going hard for Messiah/I don't need no motivation You the reason I'm inspired."

Why are we doing good works? Is it because we have been redeemed and want to show that same type of kindness that we were shown to others? Is it because we are trying to work our way into God's Favor? Are we Working to see the name of Jesus Christ Glorified?

The song ends with this powerful statement -

But don't play yourself to save ya self/and walk in fear/ Scripture's like a mirror/the truth is closer than it appears.

If you think your works can save you, you are dead and wrong. Repent Turn to Christ and walk in the Fear of the Lord. I love the illusion here to the Luther quote, that the law is a Mirror, a Curb and a Guide.

If you somehow think that Rap by nature is Wicked. You are missing the beauty of Christian Men who are exhorting us to good works and preaching the Gospel with there beats. Time to rethink what makes music Christian I say, because this never gets play of the 'Christian Radio' stations around here.

Modern Worship Music

2009-03-12T20:41:00.000-07:00

Has anyone noticed the trend in modern "Worship" music, that it has been abandoning more and more the solid theological perspectives of the past, and instead become something that is highly emotional in nature? I have some strong criticisms of these song, some of which are very popular, and I also have some strong praise for songs that are going against the grain of this trend. When I am speaking about a song, I am in no way addressing the Artist who wrote the song, in terms of there theological views nor am I questioning there faith or confession. I am addressing the lyrics as prayer, and I am doing so from a theological perspective. Thus, my basic question will be: Does this song line up with the Word of God?

Admittedly, there are some songs that could be criticized, that I will not be addressing, at this point, but please feel free to give songs for review. It is my belief that Song Writers should for the Brothers Wesley in their model of reviewing perspective songs. Above all we must not forget that these songs are meant to be worship to the Most High God, and as such, we are in a sense praying with or via the lyrics. Our singing of these words is our stamp of approval. That Said the first song I will address is, Above All -- by Michael W. Smith.

Above all powers above all kings
Above all nature and all created things
Above all wisdom and all the ways of man
You were here before the world began

Above all kingdoms above all thrones
Above all wonders the world has ever known
Above all wealth and treasures of the earth
There's no way to measure what You're worth

Crucified laid behind a stone
You lived to die rejected and alone
Like a rose trampled on the ground
You took the fall and thought of me
Above all

This is a very popular song, that is sung in churches around the US. The problem with the song is that it is theologically inaccurate and in doing so, it exalts man above God. The song's structure is essentially one that lists all the things that Jesus is above, this is accurate. However, when the chorus comes, we get into trouble.

The phrase 'you took the fall and thought of me/ above all' is problematic for 2 reasons. First, there is no biblical evidence to believe or assert that Jesus Christ thought of you or me during the last part of his life. Second, to say that this unbiblical thinking of us was "above all" would by the textual usage of the term all in the song include the Father, and Holy Spirit, thus denying the Trinity, and committing blaspheme.

Some would say that I am being to critical here. However, it is clear that these songs teach theology, and people repeat these statements in churches all around the nation. Theological error begets other errors.

Salvation Army - To Rank or Not to Rank

2009-03-12T13:37:00.000-07:00

This Post is written at the Request of my partner in Ministry, Andy...

As you may or may not know, The Salvation Army Church gives ranks and special commissions to it's ministers. I would like to discuss why I not only think that this is biblically acceptable, but I think it is wise.

Here are the ranks that are now being handed out, and next to that is what is done to receive that rank -

Cadet - Entry into 'College of Officer Training'
Cadet-Lieutenant - Cadets who have had previous experience - generally spend less time in the College of Officer Training
Lieutenant - Graduate from 'College of Officer Training' who have received their "marching orders"
Captain - Five years of Service
Major - Fifteen Years of Service
--------------------
Lieutenant-Colonel - Major on Special Assignment
Colonel - Major on Special Assignment
Commissioner - Major on Special Assignment
General - Major on Special Assignment

I would like to discuss what I believe are the good and bad parts of this 'Ranking' system. As well as the biblical look of a hierarchy within the clergy.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that when looking at the Preisthood within the OT, we can see several things
Exodus 38:21 tells us that the Levities are under the Authority of the High Priest. I think that it is pretty clear that there is an authority structure within the priesthood, and I am really not willing to spend a whole lot of time on the subject, as it is super clear from the OT. I think that there is another authority with in the OT, and that is the office of prophet. Prophets are appointed by God, as messengers to the people of God. Prophets held a special status among the people, this status was different from that of the Priests. Overall, I think that it is clear that there is an authority structure within the OT.

Within the NT I think that we see an even more strong authority structure. I think that the basic outline is as follows:

Christ (God)
Apostles (the 13 - including Paul)
Elders - Pastors - Bishops
Deacons
Teacher's
Members
Catechumins

This list comes from both Church history and the Scriptures. I am open to restructuring it, but in general I believe that this is the Christian model.

In light of that, I don't think there is anything wrong with the ranking authority of christian leaders, as the Salvation Army does. I think it is wise thing, to let the elders have a hierarchy of leadership. I believe that this is what the Salvation Army does, and I think that there is a lot of wisdom in it. As a final thought, I think that some people take issue the military style of the Salvation Army. I don't see anything that biblically prohibits this, and thus I would say that it falls into the area of Christian liberty.

Here are some bible verses so that you can continue to study this topic of Leadership in the Bible:

1 Peter 5:1-5
Acts 11:29-30
Acts 14:23
Acts 20:28-32
1 Timothy 5:17-19
Titus 1:5-9
Hebrews 13:17

I really need to have a Chat with Donald Miller

2009-03-09T11:25:00.000-07:00

Like the Title says, I really need to have a Chat with Donald "Blue Like Heresy(Jazz)" Miller.

The Following Article is from The Guardian

"Obama to lift restrictions on funding stem cell research"

Ian Sample, science correspondent
The Guardian, Monday 9 March 2009

Stem cell research in the US will receive a major boost today when Barack Obama lifts restrictions on federal funding that were imposed eight years ago by the Bush administration, scientists say.

The long-awaited announcement will overturn a ban that prohibits scientists from using taxpayers' money to study embryonic stem cells created after 2001.

The ban has meant scientists working in the US can use government grants only when working on some of the oldest embryonic stem cells available. Many centres have been forced to divide their labs in half, to keep projects paid for by private money separate.

The seemingly unique ability of embryonic stem cells to grow into any type of tissue in the body has led scientists to believe they could transform medicine through treatments that replace and regenerate damaged or diseased organs.

Lifting the ban will unleash a flurry of collaborations between scientists who had been barred from working together.

John Gearhart, director of regenerative medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, has made more than 100 trips to Washington to protest against the ban and has been invited to the White House for today's announcement.

"Better use of space and resources will have a great and immediate effect. That to me is the biggest benefit of this," he said.

Douglas Melton, co-director of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, said he planned to begin collaborations with publicly funded scientists immediately. The research will investigate treatments for diabetes, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease using freshly made embryonic stem cells.

"The removal of a barrier that has stood in our way for eight years will open important new areas of research, and move the field forward more rapidly," he said.

Scientists are still unclear how quickly the change will take effect. Some expect Obama to look for legislative backing from Congress, and to ask the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to draft documents outlining how embryonic stem cells could be used. Both processes would take time and could be held up by religious groups who strongly oppose lifting the ban.

"The conservatives will rally support to slow this down, so on one hand we're celebrating, but there's a way to go yet. This is not a slam-dunk," said Gearhart.

The timing is particularly critical for researchers hoping to benefit from the $10bn (£7bn) awarded to the NIH through the president's stimulus package.

The Bush administration's unfavourable stance on stem cells drove some US scientists to leave for Britain, where laws on stem cell research are more liberal. By overturning the ban, Obama may trigger a brain drain back to the US.

Stephen Minger, a US stem cell scientist at King's College London said: "It's unlikely we'll see a mass exodus to the US, but funding for embryonic stem cell research in the UK is low and extremely competitive."

I would First like to point out that when thinking about President Obama, and Abortion/Rights for Unborn Children he has done the following: Reversed a Ban on Funding for Oversea's Abortions , He has named Kathleen Sebelius the Health Secretary, He has taken the next step to remove protections for pro-life medical centers and staff who do not want to do abortions; He has Failed to invite Pro-life medical Groups to a summit on Health Care Reform and now he is increasing funding for Embryonic Stem Cell Research... In Light of all this I have to say that it is fitting that Obama has a 100% pro-choice rating from NARAL.

What does all this have to do with Donald Miller you ask...

First of all, Mr. Miller was very very active in his support for Now President Obama. He spoke often on how Mr. Obama was "the only candidate who has a plan to reduce the number of abortions.(1)" He continues on, "McCain's only plan is the same old trick: say that you are pro life and offer no plan at all other than to criminalize abortion.(1)" This begs the question Mr. Miller -- Do you believe that Unborn people are Children worthy of the same protection of born children? If so, isn't Murdering them Criminal? Shouldn't they then be punished and treated as the Murders that they are? The alternative, Mr. Miller, leaves us asking either, what is this Unborn Child, if not human, if it doesn't have the same rights because it hasn't been seen outside of the womb. If you don't believe that Murdering Children is Criminal, what is it? "I simply think that plan hasn't worked, and we have to face that fact and look for other ways to make progress.(1)" The problem is this Mr. Miller - Roe V. Wade was decided January 22, 1973. This is 2 years after you were born, and 12 years before I was born. Neither of us have seen in our lifetime the results of Abortion being Criminal. History tells us however, that in 1966 there were only 1028 Legal abortions. After Roe V. Wade in 1973 there were 615,831 Legal abortions. That is about 599 times the number of abortions in 1966(2). So it seems to me, that we haven't really tried actually making abortion Criminal. That we haven't really outlawed it, but that you and others like you, Mr. Miller, simply say that it won't or doesn't work. The fact it, it is a Good Plan to reduce abortion, make it illegal.

Donald Miller says this,"I believe in the sanctity of life, I simply think we need to begin making progress, and Barack is offering progress.(3)" I have to say, that I do genuinely believe that Mr. Miller is Pro-life and that He believes that life should be protected, in fact he says, "I do wish we could end abortion completely, but the Republicans have not spelled out a realistic plan to do so, and until they do, I won't vote for a candidate who simply throws us a pro-life line and no plan. (3)" The problem here is at least two-fold: 1. Obama has not reduced anything having to do with abortions, He has expanded. 2. If you really want to end abortion Mr. Miller, if you really believe it is the Cancer, the abomination, that I do, then why arn't you fighting for that, why instead to you back a person who is openly and by your own admission, Pro-Choice(4). That would be like me saying that I was anti-Rape, but then Voting and supporting and Campaigning with a Rapist.

Mr. Miller, I want to call you to repentance. I believe that if you look at the facts at this point, you must come to the same conclusion I have, mainly, you were mistaken; that you sinfully helped a man get into the highest office of the land, who is openly willing to enable the murder of Children in the Womb. It is my prayer that you would openly make a statement that you do not support what Mr. Obama is doing, and if you are truly Pro-Life, that would be the case.

Footnotes
1. http://burnsidewriterscollective.blogspot.com/2008/09/interview-with-donald-miller.html; Paragraph 6
2. http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-unitedstates.html
3.http://burnsidewriterscollective.blogspot.com/2008/09/interview-with-donald-miller.html; Paragraph 7
4. http://burnsidewriterscollective.blogspot.com/2008/09/interview-with-donald-miller.html; Paragraph 8
5.

Moral Purity

2009-02-25T10:23:00.000-08:00

Over the past several weeks the topic of Moral Purity has been on the forefront of my mind. In my typical fashion, I have divided this subject into topics to make a large list. Before I begin, I want to lay out these topics so that they can be discussed with greater ease and clarity.

Moral Purity

A. Sexual
1. Sexual Orthopraxy (Orthopraxy is a term derived from Greek (ὀρθοπραξις) meaning "correct action/activity")
2. Sexual Intentions of Physical Touch
3. Sexual Intimacy

B. Non-Sexual (Subcategory: Relational)
1. Friendship
2. Emotional Intimacy
3. Spiritual Intimacy

C. Other Non-Sexual
1. Counseling
2. Business Dealings
3. Service to Others

This list is subject to expansion and change.

Selling the Gospel -- Revisited

2009-01-31T12:56:00.000-08:00

As of late there have been several comments on an older post, on the topic of selling the Gospel. I would like to address some of the issues that they have brought up, as well as do an overview on the topic of Selling the Gospel.

Many people look at both Church and Para-Church ministries and scoff at there selling of products such as, books, CD's, Dvd's, ect. However, I think that these Scoffers are somewhat misguided in there understanding of how these ministries work and perhaps how the real world works.

Let me Start of with Scripture - Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer deserves his wages." (1 Timothy 5:17-18 ESV) - This is the basis for paid ministry within the Church, however, I think that it also tells us a bit more than just, paid ministry should exist. It also tells us that Elders (pastors) who rule well should receive double honor, many believe this refers to wage. So I would ask, How many of us Give more when we see a Hard Working Pastor? I would say not many people that I know do this. I think that Most Churches scrimp and save, just to make it now days, there are pastors who cut there pay, some who go without pay, simply because Members do not give enough.

That said I would like to address the selling of Hard Media - I would say that anything that you can put your hands on, ala books, CD's and Dvd's can and should be sold, these materials do cost money, and there was a lot of hard work put into them. There is also normally a cost to produce them, and while may people expect the church to absorb that cost, their giving does not allow the church/ministry to do that. This is really simple, Churches when they sell these types of materials are not selling the gospel, they are selling teaching materials.

Soft Media - I would define this as anything that is digital. This is something that is downloaded ie essays, sermons, ect.. These are materials that can be put on Hard Media, but as soft media, they should be given away. I believe that most ministries do give this type of media away for free.

Selling the Gospel -- I would say that selling media is far different then selling the Gospel. The Gospel is the message found in Scripture about Jesus' death, Burial and resurrection. Selling the Gospel, would be things like monetary requirements for coming to Church, Mormons do this with their members. I believe that selling the gospel is not something that your average Christian Church does. I don't believe that it is a very common thing in American churches. That said, I welcome examples of where people believe this is happening.

Conversation with a Mormon -- The Fall of Man

2009-01-22T06:55:00.000-08:00

This is a pick-up conversation from a discussion I had with a mormon fellow, Andrew. The topic is moving from Harmatology, to the fall of man. Most people who study Mormonism are aware of there concept of "falling-up"

Ken:
So, based on that, wouldn't it be better to not tell anyone that anything is sin, so that they arnt held accountable for it?
Andrew:
No... because then we would never learn anything... we would be as naive and innocent as we were before we were born. God wants us to experience, learn, grow, make mistakes and then correct ourselves, so that we can grow and become like him.
Andrew:
If we never have to choose between right and wrong, we can never grow, learn, or change for the better.
Andrew:
We become better when we learn how to make right decisions.
Ken:
But didn't God Make adam and eve without the knowledge of sin, and say it was "very Good"
Ken:
what is better then Very Good?
Andrew:
Well Im sure he was pleased with their physical bodies that he created... his creation (their bodies) is what he called "very good"
Ken:
wouldn't there character and nature also be included in his creation?
Andrew:
http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?type=references&last=2+Nephi+2%3A23-25&help=&ro=checked&search=2+Nephi+2%3A22%0D%0A-25&do=Search&show=%0D%0A%0D%0A
Andrew:
These scriptures help in understanding what they were like in the garden of eden.
Ken:
So would you say that Sin Entering the World was a good thing?
Andrew:
In the long run it is.
Andrew:
Thanks to the Atonement of Christ.
Andrew:
this article might help:
Andrew:
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=89e2de3e3559b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1
Andrew:
Im sorry Ken but I have to be going soon. It has been a privilege to talk with you and I hope I have been of some help.
Ken:
So have you ever thanked God that there is Rape, Murder, Adultery, Homosexuality, Bestiality, Pain, Suffering, Bitterness, Lust, Pornography... ect? Sense they are good in the long run
Ken:
or rather it is good that they are here?
Andrew:
Im sorry to have upset you. Those are terrible things that men have chosen to do because God gave us "agency." Those are unfortunate side effects caused by man, but if God never gave us "agency" we would still be naive, innocent children.
Andrew:
He's giving us an amazing chance.
Ken:
oh, don't mistake me for being unset... but it seems religiously backwards to have a form of closet approval of the effects of sin
Andrew:
Well I have to go now, but please read those linked articles and log back on again soon! God bless you

A Commentary on a Christianity Today Article

2008-12-24T12:20:00.000-08:00

The Article can be Found Here - Me and My Dirty Mouth

First I would like to say that I do respect at least part of the staff of Christianity Today, as I am looking at Dr. Thomas C. Oden's Systematic Theology on my reference shelf. That said, I think that this article is incomplete, inaccurate and misleading.

That said I will air my issues and comments on the subject. The overall theme of the article was swearing is bad. Pretty Simple and straight forward. However, the theme is muddied with this issue of Blaspheme and it's relation to "swear words." The Author Lisa Harper, does do an excellent job at condemning Blasphemy, something that many Christians have swung and missed on in evangelicalism. Her Comments are as follows:

The original intent of the third commandment, "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain" (Exodus 20:7, ESV), was to forbid the Israelites from attaching God's name to purposes that weren't his, explains pastor and author Andy Stanley. We do so when we use language like "God told me" to legitimize selfish motives. Or we employ phraseology like "so help me God" to mask a lie, abusing Jehovah's perfect character as collateral for deceit.

Misuse of God's name isn't merely an accidental, irreverent slip of the tongue, but a deliberate thumb of the nose at the Creator of the universe.

That said there are some problems. My Biggest problem is the lack of defined terms. She doesn't state what clearly what is and is not "swearing." She also failed to address expletives at all. The point that I am trying to address with this is twofold - First: What we consider 'swearing' is simply acronyms of the past, and/or legitimate technical terms that have been deemed 'Foul.' There is nothing ontologically within certain words that make them bad, instead people of the past have seen them as foul and we have continued to perpetuate that belief. Second: There are things within the pages of our bibles that could be seen as swearing if said by a modern person. Most are written by Paul, but I think that these statements need to be considered in light of other biblical commands of having pure speech.

The Statements:

Romans 6:2 By no means! -- the Greek phrase [...] is a strong expression of surprise and disapprobation. -- This Phrase was rendered very powerfully in the KJV as God Forbid.

Philippians 3:8 For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ. -- The term Rubbish is most properally understood as "dung" In fact, the head pastor of the Church I attend, said it best when he explained that if this were a bumper sticker, it would read "Rubbish Happens." This is definitely akin to the terms that are seen as swearing today.

Galatians 3:1 You foolish Galatians! Who put you under a spell? -- This is Paul Calling the believers of Galatia Idiots... Basically, according to Albert Barnes, Paul is saying that the Galatians are Remarkable Imbecilic.

Galatians 5:12 I wish that those who are unsettling you would castrate themselves! -- Need I say more, Paul is pretty clear on his feelings about those who are preaching circumcision.

All that as evidence, I think that there is a clear time and place for strong and even foul language. We should use foul terms to describe foul things.

As a caveat, I would say that this requires some defining on a personal level as to what is and is a foul thing, but what is foul language. I think that one must balance the foulness of the act/belief/event and the perceived foulness of the word used.

A Christmas Devotional

2008-12-21T10:19:00.000-08:00

In sacrifice and offering you have not delighted, but you have given me a pierced ear. Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required. Then I said, "Behold, I have come; in the scroll of the book it is written of me: I delight to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart."
(Psalms 40:6-8)

As Christmas time draws near, I believe it is a wonderful time for all of us to reflect not simply on the miracle of the birth of the God-Man Jesus Christ, but also a time to reflect upon our total need for Him. One of the things that I love about this passage of the Psalms is that David is speaking directly about the desires of God. Verse six starts by telling us that God doesn't delight in the sacrifices made by Israel or even in the offerings that they have given. This is something that when we think about should make us step back for a moment and ask Why. I think that the answer is clear, when we consider the purpose of the sacrifices that the Levitical priests made. The overarching purpose and plan of God was that when a person sinned, by breaking Gods law (1 John 3:4) they were required to make a sacrifice of a specific type and kind. Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 9:22 ). The purpose of this sacrifice was to delay the wrath of God. I realize that the majority of you at this moment are shouting, “No!, the purpose was to atone for sin” and I will grant that you are in a sense correct, however, the problem we see is that “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins (Hebrews 10:4).” So while they did have a forgiveness, it was neither complete nor permanent. Just imagine the feeling of the Jewish believer for a moment; imagine with me that you have really screwed up, you have violated the law of God. Now, you have to go and take one of your precious flock a flawless lamb, you take it to the place where it is to be sacrificed by a priest, the preist then kills the lamb and lets the blood cover the alter. He tells you that your sin has been covered, by the blood of this lamb. You leave, yet within you, you still have guilt, grief, sorrow, because you know that while your sin is covered is it has not been fully taken away. David said it this way in Psalm 31:10 - For my life is spent with sorrow, and my years with sighing; my strength fails because of my iniquity, and my bones waste away. The grief of his sin had never left him. This was the case for all old testament believers. How wearysome would that be? I would like you to consider the following questions, and consider if you still had to feel guilt. How many Lies do you think you have told in your life? How many things have you stolen? How many times have you used the name of God in a filthy way? Has God Always been first in you life? These are four of the ten commandments, part of God's moral law, that all mankind has to live under. This is the Law that is written in the hearts of men.
The next part of this verse talks about God piercing the ear of David. This is a reference to the concept of the bond servant. According to Deut. 15:16-17 if a Hebrew servant refused to leave the house of there master after 6 years, (during the year of Jubilee) they were to put an awl through there ear, and they were then consider a servant of the master for life. We should desire deeply that Pierced ear, we should desire God to have marked us, not with an awl, but with his Holy Spirit.
Finally, we then see that David is speaking in a prophetic manner when he says Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required. As we now know, we do not need any Burnt or sin offerings, because of Jesus Christ. Jesus who is the center, the earmark of this holiday season, is the one who would become our offering. I would say that when we Celebrate Christmas this year, we don't think about simply the incarnation ( literally, becoming meat – the Status of Christ Jesus) but that we think of the reason of for the incarnation. The reason is our sin. It is that we are wholly unable to attain to the standard of God's Holiness. Because of this Jesus became meat for us, he became the something so low that it is literally uncompilable for us. God took on this body and through it “Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins (Hebrews 10:12a).” This was not like the levitical Priests who killed animal after animal, but Jesus took care of our sin “not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption (Hebrews 9:12).” This is why when Jesus approached John the Baptist, John cried out "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! (John 1:29).” The primary purpose of Jesus ministry was to seek and save that which was us (Luke 19:10). If you have been sought and saved, Jesus' Call is for you to go then and make disciples. What better time this the Christmas season, when Jesus is already on peoples minds? Let us not be content this year to give simple gifts to one another, but let us share the Good News with a lost and dying generation.

More Thoughts from A .W. Pink

2008-12-19T23:28:00.000-08:00

One reason why Christ was despised and rejected, was because He denounced religious traditions. Despite the Fall, man is essentially a religious creature. The peoples of the world pay homage to gods of their own devising; and there are few things on which they are more sensitive--than their religious superstitions! He who condemns or even criticizes the devotees of any religious belief or practice--will be greatly disliked. - A. W. Pink

What an amazing statement, and in a sense it is prophetic, in that today the greatest crime is criticizing another persons religion or religious beliefs. I mean today this criticizing is seen as intolerant. It was not long ago that Mitt Romney was calling Evangelicals intolerant for calling Mormonism a Cult... which it is, and has always been seen as, and will most likely always been seen as.

I mean it almost seems like we live in a world where I could say that my Wii is God and I could get a religious holiday just for it...

Calif. AG urges court to void gay marriage ban - You Have Got to be Kidding me!

2008-12-19T23:16:00.000-08:00

By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer Lisa Leff, Associated Press Writer

SAN FRANCISCO – The California attorney general has changed his position on the state's new same-sex marriage ban and is now urging the state Supreme Court to void Proposition 8.

In a dramatic reversal, Attorney General Jerry Brown filed a legal brief saying the measure that amended the California Constitution to limit marriage to a man and a woman is itself unconstitutional because it deprives a minority group of a fundamental right. Earlier, Brown had said he would defend the ballot measure against legal challenges from gay marriage supporters.

But Brown said he reached a different conclusion "upon further reflection and a deeper probing into all the aspects of our Constitution.

"It became evident that the Article 1 provision guaranteeing basic liberty, which includes the right to marry, took precedence over the initiative," he said in an interview Friday night. "Based on my duty to defend the law and the entire Constitution, I concluded the court should protect the right to marry even in the face of the 52 percent vote."

Brown, who served as governor from 1975 to 1983, is considering seeking the office again in 2010. After California voters passed Proposition 8 on Nov. 4, Brown said he personally voted against it but would fight to uphold it as the state's top lawyer.

He submitted his brief in one of the three legal challenges to Proposition 8 brought by same-sex marriage supporters. The measure, a constitutional amendment that passed with 52 percent of the vote, overruled the state Supreme Court decision last spring that briefly legalized gay marriage in the nation's most populous state.

Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, called the attorney general's change of strategy "a major development."

"The fact that after looking at this he shifted his position and is really bucking convention by not defending Prop. 8 signals very clearly that this proposition can not be defended," Minter said.

The sponsors of Proposition 8 argued for the first time Friday that the court should undo the marriages of the estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who exchanged vows before voters banned gay marriage at the ballot box last month.

The Yes on 8 campaign filed a brief telling the court that because the new law holds that only marriages between a man and a woman are recognized or valid in California, the state can no longer recognize the existing same-sex unions.

"Proposition 8's brevity is matched by its clarity. There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions or exclusions," reads the brief co-written by Kenneth Starr, dean of Pepperdine University's law school and a former independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton.

Both Brown and gay rights groups maintain that the gay marriage ban may not be applied retroactively.

Starr's co-counsel Andrew Pugno said Brown's decision to challenge the voter-approved measure and the argument advanced by the attorney general was "totally unprecedented."

"His legal duty as attorney general of the state is to defend initiatives passed by the voters," he said.

The state Supreme Court could hear arguments in the litigation in March. The measure's backers announced Friday that Starr had signed on as their lead counsel and would argue the cases.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What does it take? The voters have spoken, Twice! Get it through your head California Liberals, Gays, and Mr. Brown - The People Don't want Gay Marriage.

This is where things get to be even more amazingly Stupid - - - This is a direct quote from Mr. Brown:

Based on my duty to defend the law and the entire Constitution, I concluded the court should protect the right to marry even in the face of the 52 percent vote.

The Gays already have the Right to Marry, they can marry Just like everyone Else -- You sir are talking about extending a Special Right, creating a new right... People already have the right to marry in California. No Special Rights for 'Special' People!

You Gotta Get Up

2008-12-13T08:57:00.000-08:00

This is a first for me, as a blogger, I am posting a song that I think is Super Cool. It is a Christmas song, perhaps my favorite of all time. The song is called, You Gotta Get Up by Five Iron Frenzy. It Should be seen in the side bar.

*** Update *** I can't get this HTML code to work... any ideas?

Theological Terms - Theophany

2008-12-12T23:22:00.000-08:00

This is an important term, that follows with some very important concepts; the term is Theophany, lets explore it a bit.

Basic Definition -

An Appearance of God that is perceptible to Human Sight.

Entomology -

From the Greek Theos meaning God, and phainesthai meaning to appear.

Biblical Examples -

Genesis 12:7, Genesis 17:1, Genesis 18:1, Genesis 32:30, Exodus 6:2-3, Exodus 24:9-11, Exodus 33:11, Exodus 34:5, Numbers 12:6-8, Isaiah 6:1, Luke 3:22, Acts 7:2, And of Course Revelation.

ADF Update - When Police Ignore the Law

2008-12-03T14:00:00.001-08:00

I get seemingly random updates from the Alliance Defense Fund, an organization that could be compared to the Christian version of the ACLU. The last update I received was this afternoon, and it had a story that was frankly, scary. I will share it with you here.

December 2, 2008

Because Kevin Deegan loves the Lord and cares deeply for his fellow man, he likes to preach and hand out gospel tracts on the commons area of Ithaca, New York. He doesn't exactly stand out from the crowd. In fact, on any given day, on that commons, you can find any number of recreation activities, celebrations, demonstrations, rallies, musical performances, poetry readings, speeches, and other expressive undertakings underway. It's a lively, rowdy crossroads of the community.

Not too long ago, Kevin was preaching in that setting when some of the local constabulary approached and told him he'd have to be quiet. City ordinances, they explained, dictated that no sound could be made on the city streets and sidewalks if that sound was loud enough to be heard more than 25 feet away.

Kevin was understandably stunned. Under those restrictions, public sneezing would be illegal on the streets of Ithaca. So would almost every other activity then underway on the commons. Indeed, as a noise expert hired by the Alliance Defense Fund (which represented Kevin) testified, this city ordinance would outlaw even such everyday sounds as the clicking of boots, small children playing, a ringing cell phone, and normal-decibel conversations.

Not only was the law ridiculous, it was very selectively enforced – in fact, ADF attorney Nate Kellum couldn't find evidence that the city had ever invoked the ordinance against anyone except the evangelist. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit agreed and found in favor of Kevin's First Amendment right to free speech…even on the Ithaca Commons.

That was two years ago. Three months ago, a friend of Kevin's, Jim Deferio was standing at Kevin's accustomed spot on the commons, doing a little preaching of his own. He, too, was approached by police officers who told him he'd have to stop, since he was violating the same city ordinance their predecessors had invoked against Kevin.

The next week, Kevin went back to the spot with Jim, and the two of them were approached by police, citing the same law. Kevin produced a copy of the federal court order authorizing him to exercise his rights, but the officers told him – incredibly – that the order didn't apply to them – only to the specific officers who had confronted Kevin years earlier.

So, now ADF is representing Jim. We've filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Ithaca on his behalf, along with a motion asking the court to suspend the ordinance while the case moves forward.

"Christians shouldn't be penalized for expressing their beliefs, especially when a court has expressly upheld their right to do so, as is the case here," said ADF Senior Counsel Nate Kellum. "Police officers cannot step beyond their authority and illegally suppress Christian speech in defiance of a court order."

The complaint in the lawsuit Deferio v. City of Ithaca filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/DeferioComplaint.pdf. The motion for preliminary injunction and memorandum in support is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/DeferioMPI.pdf.

Please pray for our lawyers, including ADF-allied attorney Bob Genant, who is serving as local counsel in this case. And pray for the judges who are hearing more and more of these kinds of cases, as First Amendment rights are being ignored with increasing frequency, especially as they apply to Christians sharing their faith.

Election '08 - Clergy for Obama

2008-11-02T17:15:00.000-08:00

Lets begin with the website --- http://clergy4obama.wordpress.com/ ---

Frankly, Just the name makes me tremble. It sounds like saying, Pastors for Damnation. It seems like the two are just oil and water... That said, I will start with there motto and move on from there.

We are Clergy for Obama.

We believe in Barack Obama’s ability to change this country we love so dearly; more importantly, we believe in our ability to be the change.

We believe in our ability to create a country where:
all children have nourishing food
the sick can find affordable healthcare
our young adults have real opportunities and a future they can trust
the elderly live securely and in community
women and men have choices about their private lives
armed conflict is a last resort, not a substitute for diplomacy

Together we believe in our ability to move this country
to a politics of hope
to a deep regard for the life of the planet and care for all creation
to an investment in programs that work to end poverty
to equal pay for equal work

We are children of God.
We are citizens of the United States of America.
We believe now is the time for change.

We are Clergy for Obama

I would like to begin here --
We believe in our ability to create a country where: all children have nourishing food --

Problem 1: "NARAL Pro-Choice America PAC endorses Sen. Barack Obama for president in 2008. Sen. Obama has a fully pro-choice record, and we are confident that as president he will be a champion for women's reproductive rights." So really the issue here is that Sen. Obama, is without a doubt a liar and a hypocrite. Many would quickly ask, "What?!" Let me explain -- Mr. Obama, claims to be a Christian, I'll be it a unitarian universalist, but a Christian none the less. Christianity at its core believes that Murder is sinful, and an immoral act. It would then follow that if Sen. Obama, truly was a Christian He would believe that Murder is immoral. When looking at what is within a mothers womb, and what a fetus is, it is clear that it is both human and a person. I will grant that it is in an odd location ( though all humans seem to have been there at one point in time save the first two) and it is rather under developed. It is very small and it's environment is different, much attached to it's location. All this said, it is still human, still a person. So then how can Sen. Obama be consistent with his so stated beliefs, and yet be a Christian? How can Clergy who are Christian support him? I think the answer is clear. I think it is fair to call him a hypocrite and a liar.

---women and men have choices about their private lives---
First and foremost, I would like to say that I both agree and disagree with this statement. The problem here is that the implication is that they are talking about the choice to kill their unborn child. Should people be free to make all kinds of choices with their private lives? Yes, Should those choices be allowed to cause harm to other human beings? No. Choices like rape, murder, abortion, torture, infanticide, abuse, neglect, ect. should all be regulated by the state, because they directly harm other persons. They are not choices that people should be allowed to make. Choices to Hurt others are unacceptable. Moreover, there are many "private" choices that the government moderates... Drugs (Yes, they are still Illegal), Sex (passing STD's), Rock n Roll (sound Curfew), Adultery ( if you are in the military). Abortion is unacceptable because it ends a human Life.

--- armed conflict is a last resort, not a substitute for diplomacy ---
No one likes war. I personally don't like war, mostly because unbelievers die and go to hell. That said, I think that the idea that diplomacy can work with radical Islam, is a joke. These are people who's scripture tells them to Kill Christians and Jews. How do you suggest that we deal with Radical Islam? How can you be diplomatic with people who simply want you dead?

---Together we believe in our ability to move this country---
--to a politics of hope--
How can a biblical centered preacher think that somehow our hope is in politics and not the Gospel? Our Hope is in the Cross... We don't want to put our hope in anything else? How would this statement work for someone who is in China, it wouldn't work for Christians there, why should it work here?

--to a deep regard for the life of the planet and care for all creation--
A deep regard for life... well except for the unborn, being as a tree seems to have more rights then a fetus... Do you really expect Mr. Pro-Death Obama to Change this?

---We are children of God.---

I seriously question if the majority of you are more likely Children of the devil.

I would like to make the public statement that I will not be voting for Obama, I do not believe that A christian Can vote for Obama, without sinning.

I personally Endorse McCain/Palin in '08.

I may not live in California but ...

2008-10-28T21:57:00.000-07:00

I realize that I don't live in California. But as they say, so goes California, so goes the country... Which brings me to Proposition 8. For those who are unaware -- The Passage of Proposition 8 would amend the state constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, negating a California Supreme Court decision in May that legalized same-sex "marriage" in the Golden State.

This then brings me to who is for and who is against this --

In support of Porp 8.

Rick Warren, Jim Garlow, Miles McPherson
The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod
Roman Catholic Church, LDS Church

Opposed to Prop 8.

Google, Apple, Every Major Californian News Paper (10 in all)
All six Episcopal diocesan bishops in California, and Several Liberal Jewish Groups.

I would like to publicly say that I believe that Pastor Rick Warren, of whom I am often Critical, is acting in both a biblically sound and proper Christian Manner. Well Done sir, Well done.

To The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - You have done well to speak out on all three state issues that you have. If I were a Lutheran, I would most likely Go Missouri Synod.

To the six Episcopal Bishops - May God have mercy on your souls. I pray that you would repent and return to sound biblical thought. I hope the Anglican Communion gives you the left hand of fellowship. You openly blaspheme the name of Jesus Christ. Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Notes - Image of God 1

2008-10-18T22:00:00.001-07:00

1.Introduction – New Series on The Image of God
2.Gen 1:26ff “Creation
1. “Let Us” “Our” “Very Good”
2.What is the Image of God?
1.Character
2.Nature
3.Appearance?
4.Male/Female
3.Gen 3:6ff “The Fall”
1.Image Distorted
2.Romans 5:12 – Sin/Death
3.Despite all of this
4.Gen 9:5 “Man's Life is Still Valued”
1.Why?
2.Because of the image of God
3.Dispite
4.Romans 3:10-18
5.Gospel “God Seeks”
1.Man Doesn't like God/Law
2.Grace - Jesus

Evangelism: Fun or Not Fun?

2008-10-06T22:33:00.000-07:00

Today I was in a Chatroom that will remain unnamed, to protect the innocent. I made the comment that I believe that evangelism, esp. in the context of meeting with Mormons, is fun. I was instantly attacked for such a view. I thought to myself, are these people joking with me?

Answer: Nope!

Without getting to technical I would like to argue my point, and really defend what I had said.

Now I would argue that first of all we should obey Christ's command to share the gospel. Matthew 28:18ff makes that crystal clear. Now I would also argue that that Christians should Delight in the Law of God (Psalms 119:77, Romans 7:22). To delight in something means that we get pleasure from it. Here is where it gets technical - The Word 'Enjoy' is defined as - "derive or receive pleasure from." The Word fun is defined as - "activities that are enjoyable or amusing." So based on language alone it is clear that Keeping God's Law is Fun, and therefore, evangelism, apologetics, ect should also be considered fun.

Pastor Fights Back: A news Story.

2008-09-20T20:17:00.000-07:00

Girl blowing a kiss song from an increasingly popular singer is still stirring controversy as well as criticism for a pastor for openly objecting to the song.

Pastor Dave Allison of Havens Corners Church of Christ in Christian Union in Blacklick, Ohio, heard about Katy Perry's song I Kissed a Girl (and I Liked it) -- and he did not like it. As he explains, he became especially upset while he and his family arrived at a camping site.

"And as we went to check in there, there was a CNN story about how this song is literally changing behavior across America," Allison explains. "Young girls Pastor Dave Allisonare acting out on it, experimenting with kisses in public and those kinds of things."

Allison was then inspired to put a message on the church's sign reading "I Kissed a Girl and I Liked It. Then I went to Hell." He contends he was just trying to get across a message on the Bible's firm statement about homosexual conduct among men and women.

"[W]e're living in a liberal culture today, a relativistic culture. They don't read their Bibles the way people used to read their Bible," Allison adds. "And the liberal churches in America have done us a great injustice by muddying the water on the issue of sin when it comes to homosexuality."

He says he intended the sign as a loving warning to young people who might be taken in by the song.

I have to say that I really understand where this guy is coming from. Homosexuality is on the rise as is fornication, and I would submit that pop culture has a lot to do with it. Liberals in and out of the church want and fight to get us to water down the Christian message, and I, like this pastor am tried of it. I say that we should fight back, we should show that we oppose such behavior. We must teach the truth of Sin and Judgment to come.

That said, I think this billboard was a swing and a miss. I like that he stepped up and did SOMETHING, however, I think this loving attempt will be misunderstood. That said perhaps a good discussion on if understanding of people should effect the message, and how this message could have been changed to be more effective.

Landmarkism - More Theological Terms

2008-09-15T20:23:00.000-07:00

I will be honest with you, and say that I had not heard of this (cult like) idea until I purchased two dictionary's of theological terms.. but I have learned that seemingly nothing good came out of the 1800's in American Theology...

A theological movement originating in Tennessee in the Mid-nineteenth century, holding that only Baptist Churches are true churches, that baptism is only valid when administered by a Baptist Congregation and that communion is to be restricted to the members of a particular congregation, for there is no such thing as the universal church. Landmarkism also hold that there is an uninterrupted line of succession of true Baptists, linking the present-day congregations with Jesus and the apostles. In order to show this, Landmarkist historians seek to reinstate many in the past whom the church at large considered heretics, and whose views are now reinterpreted in order to bring them in line with Baptist teachings.[From Essential Theological Terms, Justo Gonzalez].

So what we have is a group of Baptists, who now Join the ranks of The Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox churches to have Succession (Though they call it church succession, as opposed to Apostolic succession) . But they also take on the classic American Cult Mantra --- Unless you are one of US you can't be saved. (Jehovah's Witness', Mormons, perhaps even SDA's fall into this [not all of them mind you] All American, all abhorrent).

Well that is your Term of the Day. Enjoy!

More Bathroom/Shower Issues

2008-09-11T20:39:00.000-07:00

Remember how it is that there is no longer segregation in term of sex in Colorado? This is now going to be voted on in Maryland. OneNewsNow.com Reports:

Baltimore residents have lost their battle against an ordinance protecting transgendered people.

Under the controversial "gender identity" law, a man would be allowed to walk into a women's restroom or shower room claiming he believes himself to be a woman, essentially opening the door for rape or sexual molestation. In July a lower Montgomery County court agreed more than 900,000 petition signers had the right to see it on the ballot to choose whether to overturn it -- but it was appealed.

"A group that supports rights for cross-dressing transsexuals came into court at the last minute and raised a number of technical objections, many of them quite far-fetched," says Alliance Defense Fund attorney Jordan Lorence.

But the Maryland Court of Appeals apparently did not see the objections in that light, and ruled that the measure will not go on the ballot. Consequently, says Lorence, voters are "stuck" with the transgender discrimination ordinance. "And there's nothing they can do about it unless they start all over again to gather signatures," the attorney laments.

There is no provision in the law to protect citizens from predators, and there is no exception for religious organizations -- including the church, says Lorence. For example, he states it would be a violation of the ordinance if two men, one of whom claims to be a woman, wish to get married but are denied by a church that defines marriage as a man and a woman.

Wow, this is a great day for horny teen-age boys who want to use the womens locker room. Moreover, lets make it so that not only is Gay Marriage legal, but so that Churches can get sued over not marrying a Man and a Women, or a man who believes he is a Women. This is just foolishness. Man has desired for equality with such vigor that now we have equality in our bathroom usage. This is exciting... When will we come to our senses and stop allowing perversion to dictate morality? Stand up for Truth!

A sad day Down Under

2008-09-01T11:01:00.000-07:00

I was Browsing through OneNewsNow (which has a Church Section) only to find this story. I have to say I was, angry to say the least. I have to say that I am ashamed of this man, for this church, and most of all I am sorrowful for all the people who wrongly supported, prayed and gave to this man. May God Have mercy on his soul?

About two years ago, Pastor Michael Guglielmucci announced to his congregation that he had terminal cancer. Today, he is cancer-free.

To the shock of many church members and fellow pastors, at a recent Australian Christian Churches (ACC) – formerly named The Assemblies of God – national executive meeting, the pastor admitted to having a lied about his battle with cancer. The Advertiser stated that the ACC was going to audit Mr. Guglielmucci's bank accounts, which were filled with donations he willingly accepted from people who prayed for his plight.

After inventing his cancer story, the pastor wrote a hit song titled Healer, which – according to the newspaper account – became "an anthem of faith for believers, many of whom are suffering illnesses and were praying for Mr. Guglielmucci." While performing it live at his church called Planetshakers – a subset of the church Guglielmucci's parents founded called Edge Church International – he wore an oxygen tube in his nose. The song, which is on Hillsong's latest album, appeared at No. 2 on the ARIA charts.

In the Healer video, Guglielmucci talks about his feelings after he found out about his so-called "aggressive form of cancer."

"I just went home," he said. "I knew I had to go home and needed to get alone with God."

And his followers were not the only one surprised by the deception. Among them also were his wife and family. Guglielmucci's parents are with him while he seeks professional help. Sources in the church community report that he attended his medical appointments alone.

Jonathan Fontanarosa, Edge Church's executive pastor, says everyone is waiting on a better explanation pending further investigation.

Todd Bentley Is Done, Finally the end has come

2008-08-30T15:10:00.001-07:00

For those of you who are unaware, Todd Bentley is the Canadian Faith Healer who has been holding the "revival" in Lakeland,FL. He has claimed to have healed many people, yet there is NO proof, nothing shown on follow-up. Here is a sample of His work.

Hmm... Let me Knee you in the Stomach, so that the Demons will come out. So that you can then get prostrate (laid out) before the Lord... Disgusting. this man should go to jail for assault.

However, The End is Here to quote Five Iron Frenzy, According to OneNewsNow

Todd Bentley will step down as head of Fresh Fire Ministries, after the ministry revealed he had an "unhealthy relationship" with a female staffer. That announcement comes one week after Bentley's ministry announced he and his wife were separating. . . The Canadian evangelist will also cease all public meetings, including a 38-city stadium tour of U.S. cities.

I have noticed something, and it is this, it seems that False prophets tend toward sexual immorality. While that may or may not be the case here, whatever happened it resulted in Mr. Bentley's wife leaving him. Here is the real question, if you are in the middle of committing adultery in some sense, how is it that God is going to be working through you to Heal people? It seems a bit odd to me.

Well, whatever the case, I am glad that the Charlatan is done with his 'revival'

Dooney Da Priest - The Good and the Bad

2008-08-20T21:13:00.000-07:00

I was listening to an episode of Way of the Master Radio as I normally do, and they played a song from a fellow named Dooney the Priest. It was a cool song called "Pull Your Pants Up" so I figured I would check out this guy out. Here is a Statement that I found on his myspace page.

Dooney's mission as "The Street Priest" is to reach those that are trapped in environments of broken homes, drugs, alcohol, gangs or abuse and show them that with God's inspiration they can overcome as well as live a positive and victorious life in Christ Jesus!

Did you catch what set off my warning bells? How about the phrase, "show them that with God's inspiration they can over come ... [ and ] live a positive and victorious life in Christ Jesus." Tell me, where does the bible say that with God's "inspiration" we can have a victorious life or a Positive life?? Did Paul, or any other apostle for that matter live a "positive" life? really it is all about how you define the terms positive and victorious. A standard definition after a little google search, says,

characterized by or displaying affirmation or acceptance or certainty etc

I must say, I don't know where in the bible we are told that we can have a life of affirmation or acceptance or even certainty for that matter. It seems to me the unconverted, will do nothing more then HATE believers, because they HATED our Master.

Brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death, and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes. "A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master. It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household. (Matthew 10:21-25 ESV)

So how when Bloodthirsty men seek the very lives of the upright (Consider Modern China and Prov. 29:10 - but the verse first, then the people) how can we have a Positive life? The simple answer is that we Don't and should expect a life where we must Sacrifice ourselves for the sake of the Cross. This is a concept that I fear to many of my peers and fellow 'believers' can not stomach.

I would also like to Point out that we don't need God's inspiration, we need Christs' efficacious atoning sacrifice and the removal of the wrath of God. We need our sins forgiven. It seems that da priest, is coming from a very high view of man, with no understanding of depravity. This got me thinking, well why is this guy sounding like the Black Joel Osteen? Well, maybe because He is "not on the streets spreading the Word, he serves as a minister as part of the Shepherd's Staff at Bishop T. D. Jakes' The Potter's House of Dallas." (Gospel City)Oh, that's right, He works with T.D. Jakes... ya know that Guy who rejects the Trinity!!

So while the Music is Good, I compare it to someone like KJ-52, and I have to say that it just isn't That Good. And frankly, sir, with all due respect, the idea of a Christian leader putting a woman with a thong and her backside showing on his album cover is just a little off to me.

Mission For Life Outline

2008-07-31T21:25:00.000-07:00

Sermon from NCC Fuel on 30 July 08

Mission for Life ---

Introduction -- Mission Trips are Great, But short lived.

1. Why we Go on Mission Trips - What is our Mission?

Biblical Examples of Mission Trips - Jonah, Paul

1. Serve Other Christians

John 15:12 - This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.

Act 2:45 And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need.

2. Share the Gospel

Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. (Luke 24:45-47 ESV)

Matthew 28:18ff - And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

2. Why Do We think that we need to Go somewhere to do these things?

1. The Stereotypical Christian
8% Share there faith - How does this line up with Scripture??

John 14:21 Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.

2. Are You the Stereotypical "Christian"

1. 3 Questions
1. Do You Know the Gospel message?
1 Corinthians 15:1-4
2. How is you Life?
Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. (1 John 3:7-9 ESV)
3. How is Your Mission?
Matthew 28:18ff

David Crowder and Squirrels

2008-07-31T20:20:00.000-07:00

So I really have like David Crowder sense he was at CIY in Idaho, Got to hang with him, talk with him, ect... So I have found two Videos of Mr. Crowder, that made me laugh... Enjoy!

So remember, Squirrels are evil, evil Creatures.

To my friends down under, have no fear... there are no squirrels there.

Tony Campolo in Town

2008-07-26T16:03:00.000-07:00

As you may or may not be aware, Tony Campolo is a major player in the Red Letter Christianity movement. Which basically wants to focus less on Abortion and Homosexuality and more on things like AIDS.

I wanted to share a quote from the local paper here in town that spoke about his visit.

Finally, on abortion Campolo argued than rather than outlawing it - which, he says, never prevented abortions before - he would rather work to reduce the number of women who choose abortion. He said that 70 percent of abortions are financially motivated; providing contraception and the means for young mothers to care for their babies would drastically cut the number of abortions.

Now, several things were Striking to me. First, the basic line of argumentation is flawed, it looks something like this; people will get abortions even if it is banned so why bother banning it - seems to be the basic idea. With all due respect to a man who was once a good preacher, sir - We ban Drugs, murder, theft, ect... and people still do it, so should we legalize those things too? Of Course not. You have balked at the moral issue at hand, which is Murder. You have in effect said, people will murder others, so lets make sure that there are less people to be killed! This is crazy talk. Well we can't stop Murderer's so lets not make it Illegal! You have to be kidding me, sir.

Second, Most abortions occur in women who are not married. So why not teach the bible, and Jesus' words that teach that Lust and fornication are Sin. That we shouldn't do them. You want to cut back abortion without law, use the bible. It is the Truth that sets people free from the wickedness of Sin. So why not preach the Word, instead of saying, "sin all you want, with no consequences?" You see, the basic order of things is as follows - Sex leads to Babies. More sex, equals greater chance of having a baby. Sex with Lots of different people may lead to having a baby with someone you did not want to have a baby with and/or not knowing who you are having a baby with. This doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of diseases that Mr. Campolo is so concerned about. If you are worried about abortion and Aids, teach people to get married, and only have sex with there spouse.

Pisseth on the Wall by Steven L. Anderson

2008-07-13T20:43:00.000-07:00

This is a Real Pastor?!?!

I have visited this church's website and found some odd stuff. First is there Doctrinal Statement.

Doctrinal Statement

We believe that the King James Bible is the word of God without error.

We believe all Scripture was given by inspiration of God, and that God also promised to preserve his word. Divine inspiration is of no value to Christians without God's promise of preservation.

We believe that salvation is by grace through faith. Being born again by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ is the only requirement for salvation.

We believe that Jesus is God, and that Jesus Christ was begotten by the Holy Ghost of the virgin Mary.

We believe only in the local church and not in a universal church.

We reject the teaching of Calvinism and believe that God wants everyone to be saved.

We are Non-dispensational.

We believe that life begins at conception (fertilization) and reject all forms of abortion including surgical abortion, "morning-after" pills, IVF (In Vitro Fertilization), birth control pills, and all other processes that end life after conception.

We oppose worldliness, modernism, formalism, and liberalism.

I have removed some things for brevities sake, but this is the weirdest SOF I have ever seen. I was sitting here thinking why is this so odd? then the website told me...

Pastor Anderson holds no college degree

Oh, that explains it, wonder why the guy can't exegete his way out of a paper bag??? Wonder why he feels that one of the most inferior biblical texts (1611 KJV) is the only truly inspired word of God? Wonder why He preaches sermons about real men who "piss" standing up? Because He has received no training on what it is to be a pastor. He is an Average Joe, who has Memorized a lot of the bible, over 100 Chapters according to the church's website, who has no idea of how to practice good hermeneutics. In fact, the Guy says that that Bible College is Blasphemous!! This man is clearly clueless about theology. I pray that God would get him into a good Sem.

Pastor Anderson

I understand you are a KJV Only Guy... But I have to say that Your argument is full of logical errors and frankly is just unconvincing. But Just for fun, I will give an error in the KJV, to prove that it isn't the perfect text....

Hebrews 4:8 says For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. in the 1611 KVJ.
Hebrews 4:8 says For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on. in the ESV.

Jesus did give us rest, and no other day was spoken of... We find rest and fulfill the 4th commandment by being Christians and Having rest in Jesus.

A real Man doesn't need to stand up to Pee, a Real man needs to Love Jesus, and Understand Theology.

Oh that the reformers were here

2008-06-24T21:34:00.000-07:00

From - http://www.jamesdobsondoesntspeakforme.com/

James Dobson doesn't speak for me.

*Well He doesn't speak for me... so no issue there.

He doesn't speak for me when he uses religion as a wedge to divide;

*I think that Religion is a Wedge that SHOULD divide us... there are people who believe in many False Gods, there are people who believe in a couple of False Gods and there are people who believe in just one False God... But they all believe in a false God(s) {which Mark Driscoll would say is a demon) and not the True and living God. There is a Wedge there and rightfully so.

He doesn't speak for me when he speaks as the final arbiter on the meaning of the Bible;

*I have to agree here, but I think that he is pretty close most of the time at least more so then Mr. Obama.

James Dobson doesn't speak for me when he uses the beliefs of others as a line of attack;

*Generally speaking I would say he doesn't here either, but only because he doesn't go far enough... Is should be a line of attack and a plea to come to there senses.

He doesn't speak for me when he denigrates his neighbor's views when they don't line up with his;

*Again, I think if he denigrates a view, I would agree 9 times out of 10.

He doesn't speak for me when he seeks to confine the values of my faith to two or three issues alone;

*There really is only one issue and two issues of our day - 1. How do you line up to the BIBLE?! [ Abortion and Gay Marriage for which I think he does speak for me, they are both sinful, immoral and disgusting... a tribute to man being able to invent new ways of doing evil.]

What does speak for me is David's psalm celebrating how good and pleasant it is when we come together in unity;

*As long as we have unity IN Jesus Christ, I agree

Micah speaks for me in reminding us that the Lord requires us to act justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with Him;

*I agree here to, and how can we act justly if we are allowing thousands of babies to be murdered daily??

The prophet Isaiah speaks for me in his call for all to come and reason together and also to seek justice, encourage the oppressed and to defend the cause of the vulnerable;

* "defend the cause of the vulnerable" Like the unborn who are being murdered, who Mr. Obama would allow to be murdered more easily... the thought that a 'Christian' could support Murder is beyond me.

The book of Nehemiah speaks for me in its example to work with our neighbors, not against them, to restore what was broken in our communities;

*Ummm... this is exegetically poor. This was a community of people who had the same faith. How can I would with an unbeliever and give God the Glory?

The book of Matthew speaks for me in saying to bless those that curse you and pray for those who persecute you;

*It sure does... and I have a feeling that persecution is knock, knock, knocking at the door in America for true Christians.

The words of the apostle Paul speak for me in saying that words spoken and deeds done without love amount to nothing.

*I agree... and what is more loving then telling someone they believe a Lie?

The apostle John speaks for me in reminding us of Jesus' command to love one another. The world will know His disciples by that love.

*We are to love other Christians with a special love and outsiders with a different love. We are to love, no disagreement there, the question is what is love? I have to say Tolerance isn't Love, it is more like apathy.

These words speak for me. But when James Dobson attacks Barack Obama, James Dobson doesn't speak for me.

*Ummm... wrong, he does speak for me there.

What does that mean?

2008-06-22T21:29:00.000-07:00

Have you ever been talking with someone and just wanted to say, "What in the World does that mean?!?" I had an experience like that today, and Yes this will be about theology. So I was talking with a pastor and he was relating a story and within this story told me that if i was going to do what he did, I would need, prayer, fasting and to "make sure I was right with God." How can a Christian not be right with God if all of our past, present and future sin has been removed, and we are seen as Righteous, because of Christ's imputed righteousness? Heard this phrase many times from Christians, get right with God, and it seems what they are speaking of is to repent of the sin in our life. But when is our life without sin? If you understand the rhetorical nature of the question, you will see the problem here. We are either right with God or we aren't, God can't say, OH you sinned 5 min. ago now we aren't square, because Jesus squared everything at the cross.

So where did this term come from and why are we saying it?

Mercy and Justice

2008-06-22T08:41:00.000-07:00

"We all are hypocrites, We all want to recive mercy [from God] and give justice." - Mark Driscoll

I was stricken by the truth of this statement. When I sin, I only want God to deal with me via his loving kindness and mercy, but when someone sins against me - I am ready with the imprecatory Psalms on standby. I virtually scream out, "God Get them, Show your wrath and avenge me."

As for the head of those who surround me, let the mischief of their lips overwhelm them! Let burning coals fall upon them! Let them be cast into fire, into miry its, no more to rise! (Psalms 140:9-10 ESV)

Yet I think that this is something that needs to be rehashed within myself, I need to have my spirit filled with compassion for the sin of others against me. I am actually reminded of a sermon preached by T.J. Southard at Mountain View Christian Church on forbearance. He was preaching from the text Mark 1:40-45.

And a leper came to him, imploring him, and kneeling said to him, "If you will, you can make me clean." Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand and touched him and said to him, "I will; be clean." And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. And Jesus sternly charged him and sent him away at once, and said to him, "See that you say nothing to anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to them." But he went out and began to talk freely about it, and to spread the news, so that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town, but was out in desolate places, and people were coming to him from every quarter.(Mark 1:40-45 ESV)

The point that T.J. Made was that Jesus healed this Guy who came to him and basically asked for healing; Who if he was healed of his skin disease could get his life back. Jesus Healed him with the quasi condition of "See that you say nothing to anyone." Jesus basically says don't tell people that I healed you. But the Guy doesn't obey, instead he goes and tells people, and Jesus could "no longer openly enter a town, but was out in desolate places." Jesus had to stay out of populated places because of this guy. If I was Jesus, I think I would have removed the healing from the guy. He didn't keep his part. Jesus could have rightly removed this man's healing, taken away his life and possibly family, but He didn't.

I think that is the attitude that I need to have. I think that is the attitude that we all need to have, after all we shouldn't be paying back those who mistreat us with anger, we should be praying that God effects them, changes them. Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing (1 Peter 3:9 ESV). We are called to forgive, not be vengeful because vengeance belongs to God alone (Deuteronomy 32:35; Romans 12:19).

25 Questions to ask a Pastor, while looking for a Good Church

2008-06-06T07:23:00.000-07:00

I will confess, I didn't come up with the questions myself, but I think that they are very Good. That Said, I e-mailed these questions to 3 pastors here in town, only one has responded. I will also put his response here. The only other information I have about this pastor is that, while at a local event, when asked what the gospel was, he danced around for about 3 min and never mentioned repentance in any form; nor was there any clearly defined answer.

1. What is man's biggest problem, sin or self esteem?

2. What must a man do to inherit eternal life?

3. How do you deliver the salvation message?

4. How hard is it to become a Christian?

5. How often do you talk about sin, righteousness and judgment?

6. How seeker sensitive is your church?

7. Who do you do church for?

8. Do you dumb down your sermons?

9. Can you explain the Doctrine of the Trinity?

10. Do your sermons emphasize theology or are they more relevant?

11. Describe your youth programs.

12. Describe your evangelism programs.

13. What church growth model do you follow?

14. How much do you give to missions and the hungry?

15. Do you believe the Bible contains no errors or contradictions?

16. Do you believe in a literal 6 day creation?

17. Do you believe in a literal hell and eternal punishment?

19. When you distribute the Lord's Supper, do you emphasize the need to exa! mine yourself?

20. Can a person who is living in a persistent lifestyle of sin inherit eternal life?

21. Does your church exercise church discipline?

22. Do Sunday school teachers, nursery, and youth volunteers fill out an application to answer questions about their core beliefs

23. What are the essentials of the faith?

24. Do you have a cross in your sanctuary?

25. What is the primary purpose of man?

Hi Ken,

In response to your email – Family Life Church is all about Encountering Jesus, Experiencing Life and Expecting Change. Our core values and beliefs are on our web site (listed below).

As to the answers to your list of questions I think you will find them on our web site, also. We endeavor to make it as informative as possible. However, I can tell by your questions that FLC may not be what you are looking for, but if not, I know there are many great, Bible – believing, Christ-centered churches here in Newberg.

God Bless,

Dave Benson

www.myflc.org

A new Series - Understanding Theological Terms

2008-05-24T22:29:00.000-07:00

Today I have finally made a decision... I am going to start a series on Theological Terms. I will begin presently.

Harmartology - The term used to refer to the theological investigation of sin. Harmartology concerns itself with understanding the origin, nature, extent and consequences of sin. Furthermore, harmartology seeks to understand how sin is transmitted throughout the human race and how sin opposes God's purposes for creation.

These Definitions will be coming from several theological terms dictionaries I have.

Ceder Mills Bible Church - Statement of Faith

2008-05-21T09:39:00.000-07:00

One thing I enjoy doing when I go to other churches is looking at the statements of faith. Yesterday I was at Ceder Mill Bible Church. So I picked up their statement of faith, read through it... thought this is pretty Good. I will give two example directly from the Statement of Faith, one good and one questionable.

We Believe in the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as inspired of God and inerrant in the original writing, and that they are of supreme and final authority in faith and life. (II Timothy 3:15-17; II Peter 1:21)

This is a Good example of a clear statement. It gets the the point, it is supported by Scripture and it oozes confidence. Well done.

This next example is from the same Church.

We Believe that man was created in the image of God, that he sinned and thereby incurred not only physical death, but also spiritual death which is separation from God; and that all human beings are born with sinful natures, and in the case of those who reach moral responsibility, become sinners in thought, word and deed. (Genesis 1:26,27; Psalms 14:1-3; Isaiah 64:6; Romans 3:10-19; Ephesians 2:1-3; 1 John 3:8)

There is a lot to unpack here. I would put into the 5 statements I see.

1. We are made in the image of God
2. Adam sinned and Earned Physical and Spiritual Death
3. Spiritual Death is separation from God.
4. All men are Born with a sin nature.
5. We only become sinners once we reach 'moral responsibility.'

First, I want to say that the wording of this is somewhat unclear. It isn't simple, like there other statements. It lacks the clarity of the previous statement. In fact, when showing this statement to two pastors they both said they were unclear on the exact meaning, and timing of said moral responsibility.
Second, this is my major point of contention. I believe that they have failed to provide any clear reference from scripture to support statement 5. Not that I think it is wrong, per se, but I think it is unsupported. Perhaps the addition of a scripture like James 4:17 and 1 John 3:4 could clear up what sin is and when it is committed. I see No biblical warrant for statement 5. Sin is Breaking the Law of God at any age.

I think that if they support there statement that this could be a very good statement of faith.

Jan Hus Sermon.

2008-05-07T22:45:00.001-07:00

Well, it has been a Very long time sense I have taken the Time to write a Blog. I apologize for that. I have been occupied with other things...

One of which I will be discussing and posting about here, in the post you are reading.

I have been preparing a message about Jan Hus (John Huss) the reformer. It was kind of like my first "adult" sermon... as I preached a couple of times in High School. So I addressed the Youth Group tonight and it was Great. I will Post the Outline here, for you to read, and Will soon post the full length Video.

Jan Hus Sermon Outline

Who was Jan Hus? b.1369(1374)-July 6th 1415.
- Rector of the University in Prague.
- Follower of John Wycliffe
What did He Teach?
- Christ is the Head of the Church (Not the pope - Picture)
  - Christ Alone can forgive Sin.
  - Bible is the Authority ( Bible to be read by the People)
- No Indulgences ( What is an Indulgence?)
  - Pay money or Do something to get forgiveness for sin
What happened (The Story)?
- Promise of Safty
- Fake Trial
- Burned (twice)
How do this relate to us?
- Living For Christ – ( You call yourself a radicle Christian??)
- Are you really a Christian?
Gospel Message.
- Law – Ten Commandments
- Grace – Jesus Died on the Cross for Sinners

Scriptures

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.' (Matthew 7:21-23 ESV)

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
(Hebrews 11:1 ESV)

Just Plain Sick

2008-04-18T00:46:00.001-07:00

New Haven, CT (LifeNews.com) -- A Yale University art student is causing a national controversy with her senior art project that revolves around self-induced abortions. Aliza Shvarts says she artificially inseminated herself “as often as possible" in order to become pregnant and reportedly used herbs to cause abortions.

Shvarts, a senior art major, intentionally caused the death of the babies with the herbs.

Afterwards, she allegedly saved her blood and the blood from each of the babies she killed to create an art display.

The display consists of a cube with video footage she took of the miscarriages on either side and a canvas in the middle with paintings created from the blood.

Shvarts mixed Vaseline with the blood to prevent it from drying and placed the blood between sheets of plastic wrapped around the cube that hung from the ceiling.

In a statement, Shvarts wouldn't reveal how many abortions she had over the nine month period in order to create the art project but it appears at least two abortions were necessary to complete the art display.

Shvarts said she did not intend the project to have "shock value" or to generate controversy.

"I hope it inspires some sort of disclosure. Sure, some people will be upset with the message and will not agree with it, but it’s not the intention of the piece to scandalize anyone,” she said.

"It was a private and personal endeavor, but also a transparent one for the most part," Shvarts said. "This isn't something I've been hiding."

Laura Echevarria, an editorial columnist for LifeNews.com, says Yale University officials should have put a stop to the project or at least not display it.

"Yale should be ashamed that it is allowing an 'art' project that will offend millions of Americans," she said.

"Abortion is the deliberate destruction of human life. Putting that destruction on display as so-called art crosses a line and Yale should respond by pulling this project," Echevarria added.

Though Shvarts contends otherwise, Echevarria insists Shvarts likely created the project to receive attention.

"It is a gruesome and macabre display that, contrary to the 'artist's' assertion, was likely contrived because of its shock value," Echevarria said.

"This is just unbelievably macabre. I mean, how does someone do this not only to their own body but to the lives she kept creating and then aborting. How do you lose your sense of humanity to do such a thing?" Echevarria added.

She said Shvarts's project is also offensive to women who have had miscarriages and suffered the loss of a child they desperately wanted.

According to a Yale Daily News report, Shvarts won't reveal the names of the sperm donors and said they were checked for sexually transmitted diseases.

She said she wasn't concerned about the medical effect of the abortions -- even though the legal abortion drug RU 486 has killed 13 women worldwide and injured more than 1,200 in the United States alone.

Jonathan Serrato, a member of the campus pro-life group, told the Yale student newspaper he finds the concept disgusting.

"I feel that she's manipulating life for the benefit of her art, and I definitely don't support it," Serrato said. "I think it's morally wrong."

Yale University will have the project on public display from April 22 to May 1 and Shvarts' display will appear next to other senior art projects.

The Church Fathers of Mormonism

2008-04-15T16:19:00.000-07:00

Orson Pratt said this :

there is no doubt that the holy ghost came upon mary to sanctify her and make her holy and prepare her to endure the glorious presence of the highest that when he should overshadow her she might conceive being filled with the holy ghost hence the angel said as recorded in matthew that which is conceived in her is of the holy Ghost that is the holy ghost gave her strength to abide the presence of the father without being consumed but it was the personage of the father who begat the body of jesus and for this reason jesus is called t the only begotten of the father that is the only one in this world whose fleshly body was begotten by the father there were millions of sons and daughters whom he begat before the foundation of this world but they were spirits and not bodies of flesh and bones whereas both the spirit and body of jesus were begotten by the father the spirit having been begotten in heaven many ages before the tabernacle was begotten upon the earth. The Seer Page 158.

Jehovah's Witness' Hymn's

2008-03-30T16:03:00.000-07:00

Now I know that JW's Reject the Deity of Christ.
And thus they Should Reject the Worship of Christ.

They Question is do they worship him??

The JW's that I meet up with claim that they don't... However, let me submit a hymn from the JW hymnal - Sing Praise to Jehovah - Copyright 1984.

#53 - Theocracy's Increase

1. Hail the Theocracy ever increasing! Wondrous expansion is now taking place. Praise to Jehovah is sung without ceasing By those who walk in the light of his face. Long years ago saw the humble beginning As our Redeemer a lowly way trod. Now a great crowd join the remnant in bringing Praises to him at the right hand of God.

Now Let me juxtapose this with the 10 commandments and some other bible verses.

"You shall have no other gods before me. "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments. (Exodus 20:3-6)

6 “This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. 7 And who is there like me? Let him call out, that he may tell it and present it to me. From when I appointed the people of long ago, both the things coming and the things that will enter in let them tell on their part. 8 Do not be in dread, YOU people, and do not become stupefied. Have I not from that time on caused you individually to hear and told [it] out? And YOU are my witnesses. Does there exist a God besides me? No, there is no Rock. I have recognized none.’” (Isa 44:6-8 NWT)

Then Jesus said to him, "Be gone, Satan! For it is written, "'You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'" (Matthew 4:10)

Isn't This Hymn seeming to Worship Jesus?

Easter Sunday, Pretentious Sunday

2008-03-23T10:58:00.000-07:00

What does your Church look like on the average Sunday Morning, when there is nothing 'special' going on - Except for the Preaching of God's Word - Does it look casual, dress casual, formal, Black Tie? I am not commenting on the attire of people in the church, as I don't really think it matters, But what does matter is when that attire changes. The Church I attend in normally casual to dress casual. I like it that way, it is comfortable, yet reverent. Now, I haven't been at this church for a year yet, but pretty close, the first day we ever visited there was last easter.

What I observed today was the following, People who have never worn a tie before were wearing ties. People who had never worn a suit before were wearing suits. I have to, ask myself why? Now, there is no doubt in my mind that the Choir director asked people to dress nicely, which is fine, it was a bit of a performance. That said, it does give an impression that there is something that happens on a regular basis, that just isn't the case. Why do we dress up on Easter, knowing that a bunch of people who don't normally come to church, will be there? Are we trying to make ourselves look better? Are we dressing up so that we will fit the expectations of people? What is the Deal here? Why not just look like you normally do, and give a gospel message, and talk about how Jesus IS alive? I mean what is the deal with the change? What effect do people think it will have? Is this something that is just a throw-back to when the older generation went to church on easter and put on there 'Sunday Best?'

Honestly, why the pretension? Why not be who we are every Sunday, even on Easter Sunday, even on Christmas Eve? God looks at the Heart, not the clothes, doesn't He? I mean do we honestly think that God will somehow be more present if we dress up? Let's focus on the Heart, the Cross, the Blood, the Christ, and not on what people will think about the clothes we wear. Don't we go to church for Christ, and to come close to him, to be encouraged by His Word, and not to show people how good we can look, how nice of a suit we have, ect..?

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean. "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people's bones and all uncleanness. So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. (Matthew 23:25-28).

We don't want to give people the appearance that we are Good on the outside when we are rotten on the inside, do we? Do we honestly think the wearing a suit to church, verses jeans and a t-shirt makes a difference to anyone but men who will judge you on the way that you appear?

A response to Sargon

2008-03-21T01:06:00.000-07:00

I was looking around on a Mormon Apologetics discussion board and found this post, and saw fit to respond to it.

Mainstream Evangelical Christians believe that no man, including Joseph Smith of course, can view the face of God and live. This belief is based mainly off of one verse in the OT, and a few choice proof-texts in the NT. Rather than engage those specific verses at this time, I wish to point out another facet of the discussion.

LDS often quote OT passages which unambiguously say that certain OT prophets viewed the face of God and survive. To reconcile these seemingly contradictory passages, Evangelicals such as Mr. Slick of CARM have devised a way interpret these OT passages through the lens of the NT.

Mr. Slick of CARM tries to explain the discrepancy this way:

QUOTE
Second, though they are most definitely are occurrences of God being seen in the Old Testament, these are not manifestations of the Father. They are the appearances of the pre-incarnate Christ.

Mr. Slick then continues to list a few places in the OT where God is said to have been seen. However, Mr. Slick offers no further explanation for why his view is justified, other than mentioning that the NT text prohibits God the Father from ever being seen by man. What I wish to point out is an obvious double standard being used by critics of the LDS church.

Mr. Slick, and others, contend that the apparent contradictions in the OT involving theophanies can be properly understood if we use chronologically later revelation and scripture to interpret it. A short afternoon spent in the CARM chat-room with a poster named Neolights reveals that it is an acceptable and common practice used by Evangelical Christians. Mr. Neo assured me that it was perfectly permissible to interpret the OT texts through the lens of the NT. It was also candidly admitted that the OT writers did not have that advantage.

I of course have no qualms with that methodology, in fact I believe it! What irks me however is the double standard. While Evangelical Christians can use later revelation, the NT, to interpret older revelation, the OT, Mormons apparently are not given that privilege. Mr. Slick from CARM and his associates use NT scriptures which they believe teach the Trinity, and interpret the theophany passages in the OT with them. They interpret the passages by suggesting that it is Jesus, not the Father, who is seen in these passages. The immediate context of these passage gives absolutely no hints of this perspective, and the OT authors certainly had no such idea in mind.

Mormons also have the privilege of interpreting both the OT and the NT texts through the lens of modern revelation, whether or not Evangelicals like it. We understand the passages a bit differently then our Evangelical brethren, but our methodology is the same. We use scripture to interpret scripture. Evangelicals need not believe that our scripture is inspired and true in order to understand this right that we share.

We reserve the right to interpret Biblical statements about who can or can't see God by the information provided to us in modern revelation and scripture.

The argument made from OT texts by Evangelicals which suggests that God’s face cannot be seen by virtue of NT passages cannot be upheld without employing a hypocritical double standard, one which has been and should continue to be exposed.

Sargon

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I for the most part understand where Sargon is Coming From. He says that Mormons have the same right to understand previous revelations with more current revelation. In principle I understand where he is coming from, because he is correct in that we do the same thing as Christians. However, Christians practice a little thing called "hermeneutics." This is the art and science of biblical interpretation. We, as a rule reconcile, all verses so that there is not a contradiction within the revealed Word of God. Mormons, however, do not do this. Mormons look at the most modern revelation, and then use previous texts to support that revelation and discard any text that does not agree with the modern revelation. Mormons Do not use hermeneutics. Remember that Mormons don't even truly believe that the bible is the infallible word of God, they state that they believe the bible so long as it is correctly translated. So I would suggest asking our Mormon Friends what verses in the bible are incorrect?

Let me sight some examples of this -

James 1:5 - If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.

Now a Mormon would look at this and say that Joseph Smith prayed to God, as one who was seeking for truth and asked which church he should join.

As a Christian, I see several problems with this. 1) The context of the Book of James - v.2 tells us that it is to the believers, Those who are saved. Was Joseph Smith saved when he was asking God for Wisdom? I Would argue that he wasn't. He makes no statement of faith, no confession or statement of regeneration. 2) Rom 3:11 says that no one seeks for God. So how is it that Joseph Smith was seeking for God?

So the idea that God answered Joseph because of his plea for wisdom is out of the picture, because the verse doesn't apply to him.

This is the same thing that Christians do to both orthodox beliefs and to Mormon beliefs, Check the doctrine against the bible, and see if it checks out, does it contradict any bible verses?

The Goal here is to strive for correctness. And to be honest, I don't see Mormons doing this with the bible.

News and Responce: Gays Have More Rights then Christians, in New York

2008-03-16T21:29:00.000-07:00

I am not a fighter for 'civil rights,' I am a fighter for the gospel. However, there comes a time at which we must take a stand for the civil liberties of the people of this (Great?) Nation. To that effect, I am posting this story that I recieved in my e-mail today, and will right a response to it. Please Read on.

ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND NEWS RELEASE

March 14, 2008 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT ADF MEDIA RELATIONS: (480) 444-0020

ADF files appeal after court finds Christians “guilty” of praying

Christians who engaged in free speech in New York public park convicted by judge

ELMIRA, N.Y. — ADF attorneys filed an appeal Friday on behalf of four Christians arrested and convicted on charges of disorderly conduct for praying in a public park. Police arrested the four last year after they silently prayed during an event celebrating homosexual behavior while lying prostrate on the ground.

“Christians shouldn’t be punished for expressing their religious beliefs. They have the same First Amendment rights as anyone else in America,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Joel Oster. “Arresting and prosecuting Christians simply because they choose to exercise their First Amendment rights in a public place is unconstitutional.”

On June 23, 2007, four Christians, including Julian and Gloria Raven, entered Wisner Park with their heads bowed to pray for the participants of a “gay pride” event. Materials advertising the event stated that it was open to the public and that all were invited.

The four were told by a police sergeant that they were not allowed to “cross the street, enter the park, or share their religion with anyone in the park.” The entire group was later arrested and charged with disorderly conduct even though the officer herself testified at trial that their actions were peaceful.

The court sentenced the Ravens, along with Maurice Kienenberger and Walter Quick, to a $100 fine at a trial Feb. 29 (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4408). Additionally, each member of the group is required to pay court costs.
“At no time did the peaceful actions of this group break the law,” Oster said. “If the sit-ins of the 1960s were not a crime, then certainly this wasn’t either. The law on this is well established.”

A copy of the appeal filed by ADF attorneys in Elmira City Court in People of the State of New York v. Raven is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/RavenAppeal.pdf.

How is it that today, in the United States of America, we can have people arrested for public prayer? Is this not a Christian nation? If it is, how is it that Homosexuals have more rights then Christians? How is it that a Christian is not allowed to "cross the street, enter the park, or share their religion with anyone in the park." Are we not free to evangelize anymore? Is this where we are going? I am wondering where the ACLU is, with there love of "free-speech"? Or have they, like most people, including Christians, bought into the idea on one way tolerance, tolerant and even accept anyone, but the Christians?

Why do Christians have fewer rights then other groups?

Thoughts from A .W. Pink

2008-03-14T11:09:00.000-07:00

The more fully we are conformed unto the image of Christ—the less power will the world have to
attract us. When I say that, I refer to something more than its amusements and grosser sins; I
mean also its pretty things.

One of the marks of a child is to value a thing not according to its worth and usefulness—but
according to its attractiveness to the eye. The more we are really growing in grace—the less shall we be attracted by such baubles, and the more attention shall we give to the adorning of our souls.

One half of practical godliness, is a dying unto the world; the other half is a living unto God: the mortification of self-love; and the strengthening of love to God. "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, andI unto the world." (Galations 6:14) That is the language and the experience of a mature saint—dead to the world. It no longer has any attraction for him, nor power over him.

A. W. Pink

What do we truly "Glory" in? Is it The Cross?
Do you realize that saying,"We Glory only in the Cross" is ( to paraphrase John Piper) Like saying:
"I glory in Lynching"
"I glory in the Electric Chair"
"I glory in Lethal Injection"
Think about how offensive that would be to say today, and that is how offensive

the Cross Truly is.

The Perfect Man-God, Jesus Christ, Was nailed to the Cross For OUR sins.

Now that is something to be offended over.

News: Disordely conduct, aka Worship Music

2008-03-11T17:10:00.000-07:00

ANN ARBOR, MI — Without a warrant or other legal authorization, uniformed police officers conducted several raids on Faith Baptist Church in Waterford Township, Michigan, and threatened to prosecute several young Christian musicians for disorderly conduct – because the Township prosecutor objected to the playing of contemporary religious music. “Praise and worship” music is a central part of Faith Baptist’s religious services.

The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a federal lawsuit on Monday against the Waterford Township supervisor, prosecutor and two high ranking police officials. The lawsuit was prompted by the series of police incursions into the church and threats by the Township prosecutor to raid the church every time music was heard coming from it.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, observed, “Uniformed police officers entering a church during religious services and young church members being threatened with prosecution is something that happens in Communist China – not in America.”

Continued Thompson, “It is clear that Waterford Township authorities targeted Faith Baptist Church because of the type of religious music it uses in its services. Some of the individual police officers involved in the raids – apparently more sensitive to the constitutional protections surrounding religion than were their superiors – personally apologized afterwards.”

Faith Baptist Church, headed by Pastor Jim Combs, has a congregation of 10,000 members and conducts religious services on three different campuses. The police raids targeted the Waterford Township campus with 5,000 members.

Pastor Jim Combs first contacted the Thomas More Law Center in late October 2007, after the first in a series of police raids.

During a Wednesday night youth service, uniformed Township police, led by the Township prosecutor, burst into the Church’s sanctuary where the Church’s “Praise and Worship” band was warming up. The prosecutor ordered the officers to take the names and addresses of all the young people on stage so that they could be charged with “disorderly conduct.”

The very next Sunday, Waterford Township police again raided Faith Baptist, this time during the Pastor Comb’s evening sermon. Officers were about to disrupt the services and remove the “Praise and Worship” band members and order them to surrender their driver’s licenses for personal information. However, an Assistant Pastor volunteered to bring the members to the police so as not to create an uproar among the congregation.

The Township prosecutor was caught conducting personal surveillance on the Church from his parked car just days later.

The lawsuit, filed Monday, alleges that Waterford Township officials violated Faith Baptist Church’s and the band members’ rights to Free Exercise of religion, Free Speech and Freedom of Association under both the Michigan and the United States Constitutions, and that Waterford Township’s actions have chilled Plaintiffs’ ability to worship according to their religious beliefs. Plaintiffs are asking the court to permanently prohibit further police raids and for monetary damages.

Brandon Bolling, the Law Center attorney handling the case, stated, “The Township prosecutor was very explicit: he told the pastors that churches should not play ‘rock music,’ and threatened that each time he heard music coming from the church he would conduct a raid.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

A Knock at the Door

2008-03-11T14:33:00.000-07:00

I was sitting at home alone, on Friday. It was about noon. I was watching the end of the movie "Gladiator." Then came a knock at the door.

I was very confused... I was not expecting anyone, but was clothed by chance. I looked through the peep hole, and there was a single older gentlemen, who I was sure was a vacuum salesmen. He had on a long black coat and a very nice black hat.

I opened the door.

"Hello," he said. " I am looking for John Conrad."
*Confused* "Well, my wife and I live hear, and I am not John Conrad. Is there something I can help you with?"
"Oh, well, I have here a request from John Conrad, This is 203 correct?"
"This is 203, but I am not John Conrad."
"Well, John was looking to have someone teach him about the bible"
*I perked up from my distress at missing the final fight seen* "Really?!"
"Yes, Are you interested in learnig about the bible?"
*At this point I was fairly confident, that this man was no longer a Vacuum salesmen, but that he was a Jehovah's Witness, I know I let out I big grin* "well sure, Come on in!"
"Well, Thank you"
*A chance meeting. I was looking to call these guys and look who shows up. This is just to convenient.*

The fellow, who would introduce himself as "Dean" came in and proceeded to try to explain what the bible was. He seemed very, shall I say, unrehearsed. He stumbled over his words, he seemed very unsure of himself. I wonder if it was because I was intimidating, or he hadn't done this often. Either way it was a painful ten minutes of "bible-learnin" I couldn't stand to Hear the introduction of what the bible was.

"You know Dean, I think that this is pretty cool, but I am in Bible College"

This launched us into a 5 minute discourse about bible college.

Which culminated in him finally opening the bible, to 2 Peter 1:20-21. (which is surprising that he didn't go to 2 Timothy 3:16).

We had a pleasant conversation, and then he asked if there was a time that he could come back. I said that the next day, Saturday, would work.

He and His wife came back on Saturday at one, it was pretty cool. I have it recorded, in audio form. Which may make its way up here at some point.

Who Speaks Truth in Mormonism

2008-02-27T13:03:00.000-08:00

So I have been doing more reading on the topic of Mormonism, thus the all posts about it. This is another. The question is as follows:

Who Speaks for the Truth that is in Mormonism? Why should any Mormon believe the unofficial view LDS Apologists and BYU profs. or what has been said by Joseph Smith?

Lets examine this question in light of the peoples in the Americas.

Joseph Smith says - That all American Indians are "Literally descendants of Abraham." Ohio Journal 1835-1836, Nov 9.

The BOM supports Him.

Mormon 1:7 - The whole face of the land had become covered with buildings, and the people were as numerous almost, as it were the sand of the sea.

This is Echoed by Previous Prophets also, " The Term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as Polynesians, the Guatemalans, The Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo and others." - Spencer W. Kimball

But LDS Apologists and BYU Profs. are saying something different in light of what is found by DNA tests that Show that Native Americans are Asiatic. (Thomas W. Murphy, "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy and Genetics" ; Michael Crawford, "The Origins of Native Americans" ; D.C. Wallace et, al., "Dramatic Founder Effects in Amerindian Mitochondrial DNAs" And Others)

LDS Prof. Jeffery Meldrum says this, " The necessary experiment simply cannot be designed that would rufute the historicity of the Book of Mormon as the record of a small population ( small intermingled population ) on the basis of DNA studies and population genetics. [emphasis added]"

Modern day Mormon scholars see the problem and are trying to get around the issue. They are saying it is a small group of people, that this group of people that both the BOM and LDS prophets said are very large, are small.

So who do you put your trust in as a Mormon? Prophets or Scholars? There is only one truth and each side is opposing the other. The Secular evidence is against the Prophets. So who is your trust in?

The problem of the First Vision

2008-02-25T17:32:00.000-08:00

In the official First Vision account it says this ( Paraphrased) Two Persons appeared, one said to Joseph, " This is my beloved Son, hear him." These persons were Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. This occurred in 1820 when Joseph was 14 (in his 15th year).

However this seems to be very Problematic. Setting aside 1 Tim 6:16. We have D&C 84. Which was received on Sep. 22-23, 1832. Verses 21-22 say this -

Quote:

And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the {Melchizedek} priesthood, the power of godliness is manifest. And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh; For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.

And this is what is said on lds.org

Quote:

This greater priesthood was given to Adam and has been on the earth whenever the Lord has revealed His gospel. It was taken from the earth during the Great Apostasy, but it was restored in 1829, when the Apostles Peter, James, and John conferred it upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery.

Do you see the Contradiction here? Joseph Smith didn't get the Priesthood until 1829. But He claims that he Saw the Face of God and Lived in 1820. This is denied by MORMON scriptures.

The only logicals Conclusion are: 1) that the Joseph Smith did not See the Father like He said making him a Liar. 2) He made a False Prophecy in D&C 84, and thus is not a True Prophet of God.

The Philosophical Problem of Mormonism

2008-02-21T11:26:00.000-08:00

There are some serious issues with Mormon's having a Living Prophet. The most serious of these is that Mormon Truth is not Absolute.

Consider what Ezra Taft Benson says in Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet...

Therefore, the most important prophet, so far as you and I are concerned, is the one living in our day and age to whom the Lord is currently revealing His will for us. Therefore, the most important reading we can do is any of the words of the prophet contained each week in the Church Section of the Deseret News, and any words of the prophet contained each month in our Church magazines. Our marching orders for each six months are found in the general conference addresses, which are printed in the Ensign magazine.

The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.

Basically, what this means is that when it comes to LDS Doctine, there is nothing concrete. Mormons can only find truth in what is being taught currently. So when someone looks at the D&C section 132 and the need for polygamy it is superseded by official decree 1, but only if it is supported by the modern prophet.

Where does this leave truth. Mormons seem to have an evolving truth, where it is one thing one day and another the next. This is so philosophically problematic.

First, Truth is absolute. Relativism is not a philosophical option. There is one truth, and it can not change or waver or it would not be truth. God is Truth. So then, what do we do with statements within Mormonism that contradict each other? I know Mormons will tell me that " That ( referring to the old [ like blood atonement or anything in JOD or HOTC]) was truth for that time, and today we have truth for our time." They do truly believe what it is that was taught by elder Benson.

This, however, creates a serious issue with the concept of evolving truth, that sometimes completely contradicts what was previously true. This rational is at is core covered in logical fallacy. Consider the Law of Non-contradiction. What Mormon's, in fact, have to say about certain teachings of past prophets is that, it was true but it isn't true now. This violates the first law of logic. It also violates the Law of Identity (which says something is what it is), because truth becomes not truth. It is not what it is. Truth by nature must be stagnant, and unchanging. There is no such thing as 'new' Truth. We can discover truth, yes, but it has always been, and it doesn't change, it isn't new.

For Mormons, truth is determined prophet to prophet. They have no stagnant truth. If The prophet were to come out today and say that homosexuality is acceptable, what could Mormons do? They couldn't even go to the Standard Works, because the (believed) truth therein, is less true then the Prophet.

Another area where this comes into play is when people pray about the truthfulness of the BOM. I know that it is frustrating when Mormons pray with people about the BOM and the person says they feel nothing. Or when a person like myself prays about the BOM and it is revealed that it is false. There is a disconnect of truth here. Because the book is either true or not true. And if Mormonism is truly the only way to return to Heavenly Father and wants people to return to him (Eze 18:32) why would He not give such a confirmation? Most Mormons attack the person, for being willing or sincere enough to hear from God. This, however, creates several theological issues, which I will not delve into here, but perhaps will at a later time.

I would also submit that sometimes Mormons just don't know what the truth is on a given subject. I will cite two examples to make this most clear. First, Where did the battles recorded in the BOM take place? There has been no archaeological support for any of these 'Great Battles.' Where is the Truth? Where did they take place? Why Haven't they been found after 60 years? Why are there no maps in the BOM outlining these things? Second, What are the "gold plates" made out of? LDS apologetics cite FARMS will say they are made out of a material called Tumbaga, which is a mix between Gold and Copper. Yet the Church and Mormon documentation disagrees. Mosiah 8:9 says that the plates of the Jaredite's are Pure Gold. And we also see this is a May 15, 1999 article in the LDS Church News - He had also been instructed by an angel, Moroni, who had met with him each year for four years. On his last visit, he was entrusted with plates of solid gold, which he had been translating by the power of the Spirit." So what is the Truth? Are they Gold or Not? How Can any LDS be sure of these things? Personal Testimony, The usual answer leads nowhere, but to more problems within the nature of truth, in that it can be one thing for one person and another for a second. This is Not truth. How Do Mormons Live Without Solid Truth?

God's Purpose for Family

2008-02-14T11:23:00.000-08:00

He (God) established a testimony in Jacob and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers to teach to their children, that the next generation might know them, the children yet unborn, and arise and tell them to their children, so that they should set their hope in God and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments; and that they should not be like their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation, a generation whose heart was not steadfast, whose spirit was not faithful to God. (Psalms 78:5-8).

This was something from the devotional book Courtney and I read together, and at first I disliked the exegesis of the passage and as time has gone on, it has started to make more sense. So, this passage is something that I believe should be seen as at least part of God's plan in family. Remember that God is a Jealous God who visits the iniquity of the father to the third and fourth generation (Ex. 20:5) at least until Ezekiel (chp. 18) became a prophet. So how does this psalm apply to us, if each man is credited his own works and not the works of his father? Simply stated it teaches us the importance of raising up our Children in the Lord. Six times in the book of Proverbs, that a father should not spare the Rod from his son; reason are things like so he will grow in wisdom, and not bring shame to his mother. We must teach our children discipline, this is clear.
Notice what the Psalmist is saying here, that we teach the law of God to our children so that they will not be like there fathers, stubborn and rebellious, but so that they will have a heart that is faithful to God. Also, there is a phrase in there that is worth bringing out, "so that they should set their hope in God and not forget the works of God." We teach our children the not only the law of God, but we are to tell him the great things he has done, for us in the past. Anyone who has read the OT, (Kings and Chronicles specifically) can see that what a father did for his son, had a great effect on how he ruled the nation. Whether or not he was wicked in the sight of God depended on his memory of what God had done for his forefathers.
This seems logical, in that, if a man doesn't know about God's love for him, he certainly won't love God ( 1 John 4:19). I guess the point is that if our Children are not taught wisdom, are not taught and modeled the love of Christ, are not taught the laws of God, what else can we expect from them other then to wallow in their own depravity?

Homosexuality Argument

2008-02-12T23:19:00.000-08:00

I am showing:

1. Why marriage can not be between members of the same sex, as there is not starting of the practice by God. ( Genesis 2:24)

2. As Homosexual's can not marry, therefore they must fornicate.

3. Fornication is sin. (1 Corinthians 6:18 Darby : Flee fornication. Every sin which a man may practice is without the body, but he that commits fornication sins against his own body. )

4. Christians should Hate Sin. ( 1 John 3:8-10)

Therefore:

5. A Christian can not be a homosexual, in action.

All fornication is sin. (1 Corinthians 6:18) This is regardless of who you are fornicating with.

Now, the issue is can a homosexual be married. Because if he can then one might be forced to look beyond this argument, as it is beyond the scope.

So, lets look at when marriage was instituted.

Gen 2:22-25: And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from the man, made He a woman, and brought her unto the man. And the man said: 'This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.' Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

some NT statements to the same effect...

Eph 5:22-31: Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the saviour of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. Even so ought husbands also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his own wife loveth himself: for no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the church; because we are members of his body. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh.

Mark 10:4-9: And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. But Jesus said unto them, For your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of the creation, Male and female made he them. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh: so that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Mat 19:3-6: And there came unto him Pharisees, trying him, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said, Have ye not read, that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh? So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

The question then is -

Can anyone give a God ordained example of members the same sex marrying, from the bible or one could show where homosexual marriage is instituted by God.

If not, we must say that all homosexual acts are fornication, and therefore sinful.

I am not saying that Christians can not have homosexual attraction, But i am saying that if they openly practice this behavior, they are in opposition to Scripture.

Door To Door Sales - OK. Door to Door Christians - Not

2008-02-11T22:00:00.001-08:00

From The Alliance Defense Fund -

MILWAUKEE — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund filed a lawsuit in federal court Friday to strike down a Kewaskum village ordinance that severely restricts the constitutional right to free speech and religious freedom.

“Christians should not be penalized for expressing their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Counsel Nate Kellum. “Exercising your First Amendment rights is not a crime. Our client simply wanted to quietly leave religious literature on door handles of city residents without bothering anyone, yet the city denied him even this most basic exercise of his constitutional right to free speech.”

On April 25, 2007, Michael Foht went to two neighborhoods in the village of Kewaskum to place flyers sharing his Christian beliefs on the door handles of residences. After receiving a complaint from one of the residents, a Kewaskum police officer informed Foht that a local ordinance prohibited him from distributing the information. The officer informed him that he would be fined $172 every time he was found in violation of the ordinance, and might even face arrest. Foht has not returned to the village to distribute his literature.

“It’s our hope that the court will strike down this overly broad ordinance and allow Mr. Foht and others to once again distribute literature to village residents,” said Kellum.

I hope that folks realize that the implication of this 'village law' is that it is great for me to pass out an add about something that I am selling, but that I will get fined $ 172 if I were to pass something about the Gospel.

Selling the Gospel

2008-02-11T11:54:00.000-08:00

"Selling the Gospel 2 Corinthians 11:6-7" - Even though I may be untrained as an orator, I am not so in the field of knowledge. We have made this clear to all of you in every possible way. Did I commit a sin when I humbled myself by proclaiming to you the gospel of God free of charge, so that you could be exalted?

Paul was very learned in the Scriptures, He had spent the majority of his life being trained in the OT, He most likely had the entire OT committed to memory. This He states is a good thing, and there seems to be a literal technique being practiced of comparing opposites to make a point. ( I don't know the real term for that) Notice, he says, I am not a trained speaker, but I am a trained theologian. I think that training in bible college and Seminary is very important. It helps one learn from other great theologians in a discipleship fashion. I mean just imagine being taught the ins and outs of the Gospel by the Apostle Paul. That would make you a great evangelist. Today we don't have Paul, but we do have someone like John Piper or Paul Washer. We Have men like John Macarthur who have great insight about the overall concepts and themes in scripture. We have Josh McDowell who can teach you all about the historical accuracies of the Bible and the evidence for it's truth. The difference between a layman and a studied preacher is a huge amount of knowledge. I mean the process of exegesis and accurate hermeneutics are things that take time and learning from a good teacher. Now, the next verse Paul talks about not selling the Gospel. This is something that I believe no true Christian could do. We have the message of God that He has died for our sins, and that we can receive forgiveness and everlasting life. Could you image a person selling this? Saying, " I will give you the path to eternal life, if you give me $20." This is inconceivable. A person working hard to counsel, teach, disciple, grow, guide, teach, lead and manage the Church Body, the offerings, and to organize the local body so that they can most effectively affect the community around them for Christ, is doing something far different then selling the Gospel.

Other relevant Scriptures to this topic -

I am free, am I not? I am an apostle, am I not? I have seen Jesus our Lord, haven't I? You are my work in the Lord, aren't you? If I am not an apostle to other people, surely I am one to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord! This is my defense to those who would examine me: We have the right to eat and drink, don't we? We have the right to take a believing wife with us like the other apostles, the Lord's brothers, and Cephas, don't we? Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living? Who would ever go to war at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat any of its grapes? Or who takes care of a flock and does not drink any of its milk? I am not saying this on human authority, am I? The law says the same thing, doesn't it? For in the law of Moses it is written, "You must not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain." God is not only concerned about oxen, is he? Isn't he really speaking on our behalf? Yes, this was written on our behalf, because the one who plows should plow in hope, and the one who threshes should thresh in hope of sharing in the crop. If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap material benefits from you? If others enjoy this right over you, don't we have a stronger claim? But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with everything in order not to put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ. You know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple and that those who serve at the altar get their share of its offerings, don't you? In the same way, the Lord has ordered that those who proclaim the gospel should make their living from the gospel.
(1 Corinthians 9:1-14)

Elders who handle their duties well should be considered worthy of double compensation, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, "You must not muzzle an ox while it is treading out grain," and "A worker deserves his pay."
(1 Timothy 5:17-18)

Unpopular? I Can Deal With That... A discussion of women in the Church.

2008-01-24T17:24:00.000-08:00

Women in the Church has been a highly, shall I say, flammable that can drive a wedge between families and can tear a church apart. It separates denominations, and can be the cause for tossing insult and innuendo. That being said, I want to place what I believe is the biblical view out there. I have no doubt that names will be called and that accusations will be made based off of this, but that is fine with me, as such tactics are reserved for those who have no intelligible argument to rebut with. This stems for a resent post that I read on another blog that will not be named, but I will say that I have not received a response.

Where do you believe women can serve in the Church?

“... A quick response would be to say anywhere except for men’s ministries.”

- I was somewhat assuming that this would be your stance. I do have one question for you. Do you believe that Women can be Husbands? I know it sounds funny but I think it is a very important issue. Here is why:

Tit 1:5 shows that Elders are to be appointed to there office. And 1 Tim 5:17 defines at least part of there job as preaching and teaching, that is not the totality, but anyone who does such things should be considered an Elder.

Tit 1:6 says that an Elder must be the Husband of one Wife. This is echoed in 1 Tim 3:2. 1 Tim 3:5 asks the Question - if a man does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church? Again, the idea being that the elder must be male.

In fact, when looking at what is said about elders, there is no feminine or neutered gender involved, it is all male. ( This is of course in the Greek).

I would love someone to supply an argument detailing why women can be pastors, in response to this. Also, I would like to make a few things clear. This is not a statement on the worth of women, or even on the ability of women, but simply of the office that is to be held and the qualifications and requirements of being an Elder. Not making the cut is not a bad thing, many men, many elders today in American churches don't make the cut, this does not demean there worth in any sense.

Funny Joke

2008-01-07T12:23:00.000-08:00

Ok so I read this and laughed really hard. I hope you get it.

A pastor went out one Saturday to visit his church members. As he walked to the door of one house, he passed a beautifully kept flower bed. He knocked at the door. It was obvious that someone was home, but nobody came to the door, even though he knocked several times. Finally, the pastor took out his business card, wrote "Revelation 3:20" on the back of it, and stuck it in the door.

The next day, the card turned up in the collection plate. Below the pastor's message was the notation "Genesis 3:10."

The Mediator - An LDS Parable Examined

2008-01-06T15:56:00.000-08:00

The Mediator

There once was a man who wanted something very much. It seemed more important than anything else in his life. In order for him to have his desire, he incurred a great debt. He had been warned about going into that much debt, and particularly about his creditor. But it seemed so important for him to do what he wanted to and to have what he wanted right now. He was sure he could pay for it later. So he signed a contract. He would pay it off some time along the way. He didn’t worry too much about it, for the due date seemed such a long time away. He had what he wanted now, and that was what seemed important. The creditor was always somewhere in the back of his mind, and he made token payments now and again, thinking somehow that the day of reckoning really would never come. But as it always does, the day came, and the contract fell due. The debt had not been fully paid. His creditor appeared and demanded payment in full. Only then did he realize that his creditor not only had the power to repossess all that he owned, but the power to cast him into prison as well.

“I cannot pay you, for I have not the power to do so,” he confessed.

“Then,” said the creditor, “we will exercise the contract, take your possessions and you shall go to prison. You agreed to that. It was your choice. You signed the contract, and now it must be enforced.”

“Can you not extend the time or forgive the debt?” the debtor begged. “Arrange some way for me to keep what I have and not go to prison. Surely you believe in mercy? Will you not show mercy?”

The creditor replied, “Mercy is always so one-sided. It would serve only you. If I show mercy to you, it will leave me unpaid. It is justice I demand. Do you believe in justice?”

“I believed in justice when I signed the contract,” the debtor said. “It was on my side then, for I thought it would protect me. I did not need mercy then, nor think I should need it ever. Justice, I thought, would serve both of us equally as well.”

“It is justice that demands that you pay the contract or suffer the penalty,” the creditor replied. “That is the law. You have agreed to it and that is the way it must be. Mercy cannot rob justice.”

There they were: One meting out justice, the other pleading for mercy. Neither could prevail except at the expense of the other.

“If you do not forgive the debt there will be no mercy,” the debtor pleaded.

“If I do, there will be no justice,” was the reply.

Both laws, it seemed, could not be served. They are two eternal ideals that appear to contradict one another. Is there no way for justice to be fully served, and mercy also? There is a way! The law of justice can be fully satisfied and mercy can be fully extended—but it takes someone else. And so it happened this time. The debtor had a friend. He came to help. He knew the debtor well. He knew him to be shortsighted. He thought him foolish to have gotten himself into such a predicament. Nevertheless, he wanted to help because he loved him. He stepped between them, faced the creditor, and made this offer.

“I will pay the debt if you will free the debtor from his contract so that he may keep his possessions and not go to prison.”

As the creditor was pondering the offer, the mediator added, “You demanded justice. Though he cannot pay you, I will do so. You will have been justly dealt with and can ask no more. It would not be just.”

And so the creditor agreed. The mediator turned then to the debtor. “If I pay your debt, will you accept me as your creditor?”

“Oh yes, yes,” cried the debtor. “You saved me from prison and show mercy to me.”

“Then,” said the benefactor, “you will pay the debt to me and I will set the terms. It will not be easy, but it will be possible. I will provide a way. You need not go to prison.”

And so it was that the creditor was paid in full. He had been justly dealt with. No contract had been broken. The debtor, in turn, had been extended mercy. Both laws stood fulfilled. Because there was a mediator, justice had claimed its full share, and mercy was satisfied.
- Elder Boyde Packer, Gospel Principals pg. 75.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a nice story but there are some serious problems with the theology of the atonement here, that I thought were worth pointing out.

1. You still owe a debt that you do not have the power to pay.
2. There is no Law of Mercy, only justice. The only reason God Gives us mercy is because He is so kind. God is Just and must punish lawbreakers.
3. We never agreed to a contract. * I am assuming that this is the LDS pre-existence idea* for which there is no biblical support.
4. We can not make Token Payments, Our righteousness is as filthy rags to God. Our Hearts are wicked, and we only think to do evil continually.

Most of this can be shown with Isa. 64:6 Jer. 17:9 Gen 6:5, But there is also the lack of biblical support for points 2 and 3. Thus one must assume that they are false until proved to be true.

Joel Olsteen On Larry King Live - Dec 26th

2008-01-04T11:17:00.000-08:00

I feel that perhaps my criticism of Joel can be at times a bit harsh, and one sided. I think Joel says some good things; they are just few and far between.

So I will objectively ( as possible) point out the pro's and con's from his interview on Dec. 26th on Larry King Live. This is from cnn.com

KING: Could an atheist be changed?

J. OSTEEN: I think so. I think...

KING: Without having to believe in God?

J. OSTEEN: Well, I think there's a void in every person that only God can fill -- that only God can fill. I think that's how you can really be fulfilled, truly. So I would think an atheist can be changed and their attitude in certain things. But I think if you come to a belief that there's something bigger than yourself, you're going to be more fulfilled.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My issue here is : that of course a person can be changed by the Word of God. But the Bible was not written to give you a better attitude, it was written so that we might be able to bring Glory to God, understand His character and nature, and so that we might receive Salvation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KING: How do you react to the critics who call your message theology lite?

J. OSTEEN: Well, I've heard that before. It's interesting, Larry, every week in our services we deal with people that are -- have children that have cancer, people that have a husband or a wife that left them. We deal with the real issues of life. I talk about forgiveness and how to have faith when bad things happen and, you know, how to overcome and, you know, love your enemies and things like that.

So when they say it's gospel lite, I think, you know, we're helping people where the rubber meets the road.

I mean last Sunday, there was a little girl there. She was 2- years-old. She has cancer. She's at our MD Anderson Cancer Hospital.

And you know what?

We give them hope. We pray for them. We say God's going to give you strength. I mean we don't know exactly what the outcome is going to be. We hope they -- we hope she'll live.

But, you know, how can that be gospel lite to me?

That's why I come back to saying I'm helping people.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where is SALVATION? honestly, this may sound harsh or even mean, but who cares about cancer in light of ETERNAL HELL?

If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.
(Mat 5:29-30)

Does this make any sense? It is great to help people on earth, but it they don't have Jesus Christ as an atonement for their SINS it doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KING: What's your notion of hell?

J. OSTEEN: Well, I believe hell is a real place. I think it's -- you know, the scripture talks about it's separation from God. And I think -- I believe if God as light and love and everything good, then hell's going to be everything bad. I mean we certainly do not want to go there and I don't think hell was designed for people.

KING: You think there's life after death?

J. OSTEEN: I do. I believe we're all going to live on, that we're a spirit. This body -- I like to think of it as just like my coat. There's something on the inside of me that's making this thing move. And I'm -- the real me is on the inside. So I do believe we'll live on.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good Job Joel! While I don't agree with him on every word here, I love that he said hell is a real place and that people will go there. (that was implied). There is a heaven and a hell. Good Work.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KING: Do you minister to the poor?

J. OSTEEN: Oh, we do. We do.

We have outreaches in our church. We support local outreaches as well. I mean, that's what the gospel is all about, helping others that are less fortunate.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No sir, it's not. The Gospel is about Christ dying for the sin's we have committed so that we might be reconciled to God. Our treatment of the poor is simply a reflection of the gift that Christ has given to us. The Gospel is about Salvation, and bringing Glory to God for being so MERCIFUL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KING: What's your reaction, though, when God gets a bad name? There has been more people killed by religion than any other thing.

J. OSTEEN: It's been going on for centuries. Well, it's just like you said, God gets a bad name, and there are -- I think there are extremists in any group.

And, you know, we're not for that. We're for loving our enemies and helping people. But, you know, I -- you can fault anything. But a lot of times, it's extremists.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bad premise's lead to bad conclusions.

Hitler and Stalin combined killed more people then any other group somewhere in the 30 million range, but that seems a little low.

Even so, Christianity has very little as far as deaths are concerned. The inquisition. The Crusades which was more of a Iraq I style war then anything it was about freeing people...

So really the issue here is that this is a fallacious attack that is repeatedly made on Christianity and should be answered once and for all and shown to be false.

Atheism is responsible for more deaths then anything else.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joel has some good and some bad, but I think we need to pray that God Almighty would teach him the truth of the Gospel.

The Word... The New Plan

2008-01-03T00:41:00.000-08:00

Happy New Years! It's 2008!

Many people make goals or resolutions because of this
I am not
Therefore in the spirit of Matthew 5:37 I will make the following statement

I will read through my bible cover to cover in order again.

And so I would ask/tell you the following

There was a preacher whom I once heard say the following:
"You can't recall what you haven't called before"

So have you called your ENTIRE bible?

John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

Can you remember something you haven't see or thought or experienced previously?

In a word: NO!

So Go read your bible!

I will even give some links to bible reading plans.

Heartlight
Bible Plan
The Bible in 90 Days
One Year Breakdown

How are you seen?

2007-12-24T00:12:00.000-08:00

So I was at the mall today, for the first time in a while, and I noticed something that is quite interesting and I was interested to see if anyone else saw or perceived issue. The issue is this, Women in general are displayed as sexy, attractive, sensual, and desirable. Women who are mothers are displayed as caring, fashionable, intelligent. The two are not mixed and are not seemingly compatible. This seems to be the modern American sales model. Frankly, I am confused by this. Do women lose their sex appeal when they become pregnant and suddenly become smarter? No doubt their are intelligent women who are not mothers. So why is this the image that we are shown and in a sense taught to believe? I mean lets get real for a second, a women doesn't become pregnant by not having sex, is she expected to not have sex again after conception? Why is it that this is the model that advertisers want us to buy into, in the most literal cents.

I guess this then raises the larger question of how are we seen? As Christians, as men, as women, as fathers, as mothers, as Americans, as human. How are you see, and who sees you that way? Who sees only what you want them to see? Do we create a false image of ourselves for others? Isn't this one of the problems in our churches today, People put on the face of christian two hours a week, and yet keep the title all week; to be seen and judged by non-believers all week.