On the Nature and Extent of the Atonement -- A Look at Paul's Doctrine of Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5:17-21 - Kim Riddlebarger

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author of today's article intends to explain the Calvinistic doctrine of "Limited Atonement," which is the idea that the scope of Christ's sacrificial death extends only to those God chose to be saved (the Elect.) 

Limited Atonement is one of of the five "doctrines of grace" represented by the acronym TULIP:

Total Depravity

Unconditional Election

Limited Atonement

Irresistible Grace

Perseverance of the Saints

We are sorry to write about Calvinism again, but these largely useless doctrines are pursued with obsessive diligence by Calvinists. They are always teaching them. In fact, they will never teach the Bible unless they can explain some aspect of Calvinism. We call these doctrines useless because they simply have no application. No change to any privilege or obligation we have as Christians is affected by Calvinism.

And, the author writes almost 1450 words, yet no Bible verses are quoted. None. Zero. It continues to astonish us how these so-called Bible teachers can go on and on about what the Bible means but never quote it.

We must consider this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Tara Leigh Cobble, The Bible Recap, & D-Group - by Michelle Lesley

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.
---------------------------

Ms. Lesley has appeared in our blog dozens of times, mostly for micro-dissecting 1 Timothy 2:11. When she is not examining every little detail about what women can and cannot do regarding church, she is one of the Doctrinal Police, continually scouting the spiritual horizon for heretics.

We at first thought she was a harmless, though mistaken, Bible teacher. However, we have come to the conclusion that she is not harmless. She is either unable or unwilling to honestly teach the Bible, preferring to interpret it via her doctrine, rather than obtain her doctrine from it.

Today she is evaluating the podcasts of someone named Tara Leigh Cobble, looking for instances of her not toeing the proper doctrinal line. She apparently found a problem, in Ms. Cobble's 8th episode.

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

John Calvin and the Doctrine of Irresistible Grace - by Keith Mathison

Found here. Our comments in bold.
----------------------

With a zealotry bordering on obsession Calvinists teach Calvinism. They will never teach the Bible unless they can teach Calvinism. Calvinism is their faith, not the Bible. What the Bible can be made to say about Calvinism is the goal.

Such is the case with today's article. We are yet again visiting Calvinism, reluctantly. We apologize. However, it is necessary because of the grievous errors committed by the author. He is here to tell us about one of Calvin's doctrines, Irresistible Grace, part of the Acronym TULIP:

Total Depravity

Unconditional Election

Limited Atonement

Irresistible Grace

Perseverance of the Saints

These largely useless doctrines are continually pushed by Calvinists, along with incessant fawning praise of Calvin himself. We say "useless" because no matter which side you take in the doctrinal debate it makes absolutely no difference to any privilege or obligation we possess as Christians. No matter your preference, we are still called to faith, obedience, worship, holiness, and generosity. 

TULIP doesn't change any of this.

This author has been examined several times in our blog, and invariably explains Calvinism and Reformed Doctrine. In the space of a few paragraphs he will touch on every single petal of TULIP, couched with innocuous language which would cause the casual reader to think good doctrine is being explained.

Total words: 1493

Number of words from the Bible quoted: 14

Number of words from theologians: 786

We must consider this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

A Pastor Is an Elder Is a Bishop - by Ben Robin

Found here. Our comments in bold.
---------------------

The author makes an attempt to explain church leadership, and uses the Bible to justify his church's tradition regarding the pastor position. Because of this he assumes that elder means pastor, and the on staff paid pastor is the head of the local church.

However, the traditional church leadership model of a singular chief leader is not biblical. This is what the author advocates, and this is Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Hey Churches: Make Sure You Have Christmas Songs For All Year Round - by Steve McAlpine

Found here. our comments in bold.

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

We think the author's heart is in the right place. He understands that tradition does not equal biblical. He loves hymns and Christmas Carols for their theological depth, but he also understands the need for actual worship: 

What about adoration and worship, you ask? Well, here’s a thought: the deeper we dive into the wonders of the historical gospel, planned by God in eternity, and fulfilled in the coming of Jesus and the globalising gift of the Holy Spirit, the deeper our adoration and worship.

It is clear here that he thinks deeper understanding of biblical truths enhances worship, but this is a matter to be proved. His hope in worship is for the " biblical depth, theological astuteness, and gospel longing" that Christmas carols have. So he's torn between the desire to adore and the desire to understand, and wants to combine the two. 

That generally does not work, mostly because reciting doctrine is not worship.

Nevertheless, on the whole we agree with the author, particularly that too many supposed "worship songs" are superficial fluff that secular radio would have no problem playing. We have examined many contemporary worship songs in our "Bad Worship Songs" series, and have found only a handful that we could recommend.

On the minus side, the author offers no Bible quotes or verse references.
--------------------------------

Spiritual taxonomy

Introduction

A friend and I were talking recently, and he presented me with something I want to call a "spiritual taxonomy." The word "taxonomy" means 

a system for naming and organizing things, especially plants and animals, into groups that share similar qualities

So a spiritual taxonomy would be the categorizing or parsing of spiritual observations into an organized structure, with the goal of making sense of the relationship between those observations, and developing from them a set of spiritual principles. 

My friend's taxonomy is an effort to describe certain aspects of interpersonal relationships, which he describes as follows:

• Mutually sick: both parties are in sin’s deception, are synergistically harming one another and participating within the plans of darkness by fighting against one another.

• Mutually helping: both parties are in the grip of grace, are synergistically standing with one another and warring against the plans of darkness by fighting together with one another.

• Mutually healthy: both parties are ruling and reigning within the life of kingdom righteousness by the power of God’s Spirit and preserving an inheritance of unity through peace, fighting for one another (i.e. serving others with our freedom).

He explains: 

"The narrative arc is getting slaves out of Egypt, getting Egypt out of slaves, and then ruling and reigning in the promised land, co-laboring with and in God’s ways. The identity of 'more than conqueror' is 'ruler with Christ.' 

"I lump the desert and driving giants from the land all together into stage two of 'getting Egypt of out of God’s people,' while one could see an intermediary fourth stage as ridding the land of giants."

Definitions

My friend's taxonomy could perhaps be distilled into a single word, sanctification. The Greek word for "sanctify" is hagiazó, "...to purify internally by reformation of soul."

1Th. 5:23 May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The same word is used here:

He. 10:14 because by one sacrifice he has made perfect for ever those who are being made holy.

Another word, teleios, means 

mature (consummated) from going through the necessary stages to reach the end-goal, i.e. developed into a consummating completion by fulfilling the necessary process (spiritual journey)

It is found here:

Ja. 1:4 Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.

One more word, paideia. It means "...instruction that trains someone to reach full development (maturity)." It is found here:

He. 12:11 No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it.

This definition might surprise the reader, as it did us. We thought this was about corrective discipline, but actually it is pedagogic training.

Application

This background should establish for the reader that salvation is the beginning of a necessary process that brings the believer through a sometimes painful refining and training into fullness of faith. It is a construction of a Holy Spirit habitation, which might take years or decades.

This process must happen. Individuals and churches must pursue this.

In one sense it is a ministry of the Holy Spirit, but in another sense is the ministry of the Body. In the context of my friend's taxonomy, this inner transformation toward spiritual maturity has relationship implications. An individual does not obtain maturity in a vacuum, and his maturity likewise must come in the context of relationship. Crucially, this process of sanctification begins the cooperative work between sanctified persons to cultivate a harvest of righteousness.

The NT is full of one-anothers:

• Jn. 13:34 Love one another
• Ro. 12:10 Be devoted to one another
• Ro. 12:16 Live in harmony with one another
• Ro. 14:13 Stop passing judgment on one another
• Ro. 15:7 Accept one another
• 1Co. 1:10 Agree with one another
• Ga. 5:13 Serve one another
• Ep. 4:2 Bear with one another
• Ep. 4:32 Be kind and compassionate to one another
• Ep. 5:21 Submit to one another
• Col. 3:16 Teach and admonish one another
• 1Th. 5:11 Encourage one another
• Ja. 4:11 Do not slander one another
• 1Pe. 3:8 Live in harmony with one another
• 1Pe. 4:9 Offer hospitality to one another

This is not a by-product of spiritually healthy persons, it's a primary result.

A Tease

I teased my friend that maybe there's a fourth stage to add to the three he proposed. I was partly unserious when I did this. However, I believe there is a further necessary application, beyond the spiritually healthy interaction between two people. That would be the healthy ministry of the Body in toto, a healthy local church as a manifestation of the healthy (C)hurch. 

Such a church, comprised of learners and spiritually complete, maturing and matured, disciples and disciplers, would create a synergy greater than that of the individuals. This is known as discipleship, commonly manifesting in one-one-one relationships. 

Discipleship in the biblical sense is sorely lacking in the contemporary (C)hurch, which is one reason it is compromised, divided and powerless. How can there be unity of faith if no one is teaching holiness and no one is learning it? How can there be effective, empowered ministry, evangelism, or even prayer without discipleship? How can a church come together as one body if its members have no idea what that means?

The one-on-one between the young single man and the gray hair, the mother of toddlers with the mother of college students, and the newly saved man with man who has a fruitful 10+ year Christian walk must impact the greater body ministry. Discipleship is one of the cellular manifestations that combine into an organ or body part. 

This is Holy Spirit empowerment, where the body takes hold of the ministry to the lost, to the widow and to the orphan, and does so with unity, clarity, and unceasing effort. 

Conclusion

The church and the (C)hurch has done a lot of amazing things without the Holy Spirit. But now it's time to become the Living Stones and be the inhabited temple, a holy nation, a body without missing or despised parts. The sanctification of its members must manifest in harvest, healing, and restoration that touches communities and nations with the Kingdom.

That is, revival.

Christ Our Atoning Savior: Why We Need Redemption and How God Provides It - by Stephen Wellum

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-------------------------

At 1271 words, the author has ample opportunity to not only teach us his doctrines, but tell us where in the Bible to find them. Now, he does supply numerous Bible references, but invariably when we look them up we find that the verses do not tell us what the author says they say.

That's probably why he doesn't quote them.

Worse, the author's Bible documentation disappears for great swaths of his presentation. As such, we must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

We also need to note that the author's doctrine is Reformist/Calvinist. And as is typical for those of this persuasion, he does not write to teach the Bible, his purpose is to teach this doctrinal perspective. These teachers will never teach the Bible unless they can slip this in. 

We have written about these teachings frequently. We certainly don't want to weary the reader but we think it's important to continually challenge these false, pernicious doctrines:

• Jesus did not die in our place, because we must die too
• Jesus did not pay for our sin, He paid for us
• Jesus was not punished by the Father, His spilled blood is sufficient
• Jesus did not engage in a transaction, He engaged in a sacrifice

We will explain below.

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

Muslim Dreams, Modern Prophets, and Biblical Truth - By Elizabeth Prata

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

It's been since the end of August that Ms. Prata last appeared here, which has been a welcome respite. She represents herself as a Bible teacher, but as we have discovered over and over, she is just not competent to do this. We don't wish to be disrespectful, but it's important to understand that her Bible teaching ought not be trusted.

At little over 2000 words this is a scattershot explanation. It is all over the map, jumping from topic to topic with no explanation or reason. Ms. Prata makes a series of assertions as if they are relevant, but never explores them or even documents them. Frankly, it's only because of our extensive study of cessationism that this even makes sense.

And that's the bottom line. One must be steeped in certain cessationist doctrines to be able to understand Ms. Prata's superficial presentation.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

We discuss Muslim dreams here.

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

What Constitutes a True Baptism? - by Sam Emadi

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.

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

For some unknown reason, the author wrote this article on "true baptism" but doesn't want to explain it. He simply refers his readers to other authors. Really, he's simply making assertions about his church tradition, tacitly relegating baptism to an official act only done by church officials in a church building on a Sunday morning.

It seems he has an axe to grind with those who happen to operate outside the traditional church structure, having written a previous article along the same lines, which we critiqued here.

None of this is in the Bible, which is probably why the author doesn't quote a single word of  it. Not one. We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

The Pastor's Office or Study? - by JV Fesko

Found here. Our comments in bold.
------------------------

The author's article comes from a complete misunderstanding of how churches are to governed, and what a pastor's role is in a church. He bemoans the change in the pastor's role from his tradition to a new tradition, i.e. a student of the Word to a church manager.

Well, neither role is biblical, and both descend from the same false idea, that the pastor is the head of the local church. However, there is absolutely no biblical evidence that pastors lead churches. None. A pastor cares for the flock, a teacher instructs the people on the word, and the elders lead the church (1Ti. 5:17, 1Pe. 5:1-2).

Further, the purpose of his article is to correct people regarding what a room in a church building should be called. This apparently is a matter of importance to him.

Lastly, since the author neither quotes nor references any Bible verse, we must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Farewell to "60 Minutes:" It just went the way of the Washington Post's editorial page - by Robert Reich

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Sometimes leftist mouthpieces like Dr. Reich are so over-the-top with irony it's a wonder they can keep a straight face. Every single accusation Dr. Reich raises against Trump and the political right exactly matches what the Right has been complaining about what the Left has itself been actually perpetrating for decades. Every single concern he raises is something the Right has already raised about the Left. 

Every single encroachment on freedom. Every single expansion of government power. The specter of using the government against one's political enemies.

All of it. 

The Left has been doing it. With impunity. For years, if not decades.

So when we read something like the article below, we can scarce believe our eyes. 

We've seen these words before, uttered by ourselves. With a brazenness seldom seen, Dr. Reich simply appropriates the Right's complaints against the Left and reverses them. He's not even particularly creative about it. 

Astonishing.

We do have a bit of solace, however. The worries of the Right now are the worries of the Left. They now know how we've felt for decades. 

Good.

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

The Reality of Eternal, Conscious Hell - by Publisher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We have examined the writings of this unnamed "Publisher" before, and have found them invariably superficial and base. He is not a competent Bible teacher.

Even when we agree with him. We agree with "Publisher" about the nature of hell. But he so poorly explains his reasoning that we decided we must once again analyze his presentation. We will discover that in typical fashion he is unable to articulate the biblical case for his doctrine.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

What Does God Think of Your Church’s Worship? - by Scott Daniel

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We nodded our heads in agreement as the author explained the biblical basis for proper worship. He offered pertinent Scriptures, insightful commentary, and appropriate cautionary warnings. But as we read we waited and waited for him to tell us exactly what is biblical worship. How does God want us to worship him? What does it look like? And where is this instruction found in the Bible?

After almost 900 words, the author drops it on us right at the end, without any cited Bible reference or explanation:

...don’t go “off the registry” to bring the Lord an insightful skit or a poignant movie clip or an interpretive dance. Our Triune God has registered for Bible-reading, Bible-preaching, prayer, congregational singing, and the celebration of baptism and the Lord’s Supper . . . so bring him what he asked for!

We are flabbergasted. THIS is the author's instruction on what constitutes proper worship? 

Let's start by defining terms. "Worship" is the Greek word proskuneó, which means 

to kiss the ground when prostrating before a superior; to worship, ready "to fall down/prostrate oneself to adore on one's knees"

Now take another look at the author's list of do's and don'ts. Does the reader see anything in his list that even comes close to worship in the biblical sense of the word?

Let's explain. When the author talks about worship, he's not referring to the activity of worshipping or the heart posture associated with this. The author's idea of worship is not actually engaging in the worship of the Lord. No, worship for him is the way a church service should be conducted. The way his church does things. They way his tradition has done things.

This is what the author meant when he mentioned the "regulative principle of worship." This phrase isn't a casual idea, it's an official doctrine of Calvinism/Reformed Christianity. Calvin himself wrote,

God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by His Word.

Calvin, like the author, was not describing worship itself, he was describing a proper church service.

This means that a proper church service does not include skits, movie clips, or a dance because those things are not found in the Bible. Ergo, they are not "worship." But, stuff that the author's church does and his church tradition has practiced, like reading the Bible, preaching a sermon, praying, singing, baptizing, and communion, those are worship because they are things to include in a church service. 

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Keeping Sovereign Grace in Gospel Partnerships - by John Piper

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Dr. Piper enjoys a reputation as an excellent Bible teacher, but we have examined several of his explanations and have found them lacking. 

He is Reformed/ Calvinist in his doctrine. Reformed/Calvinists do what they always do: Explain Calvinism. They never explain the Bible unless they can transform it into an explanation of  Calvinism. This is exactly what happens here. Dr. Piper is asked about why his group identifies itself as Reformed/Calvinistic, but instead of answering he devotes his long response to explaining Calvinism.

More to the point, Dr. Piper never defines the terms he uses and never explains Calvinistic concepts like "sovereign grace." He presumes his audience is Calvinistic and therefore already knows all the ins and outs of these doctrines. So in the end Dr. Piper doesn't really explain anything, he's just reciting and reinforcing Calvinism, and assumes his audience is nodding their heads in agreement.

But worse, the question he is asked is never answered. And, he produces not a single Scripture that proves his doctrines. 

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

A Decent and Orderly Case for Raising Hands in Worship - by Sean DeMars

Found here. Our comments in bold.
--------------------------

The author of this article is a part of the Reformed stream of Christianity. He is writing because his church tradition demands conformance to a particular way of doing Sunday church. Generally speaking, Reformed church services are characterized by somber, emotionless, reverent proceedings, which means no physical expressions of worship. It's considered chaotic and perhaps even sinful to express any physical response during a church service.

The author courageously advocates for obeying the biblical command to raise one's hands in worship. The Bible does not recommend it or leave it to a matter of preference. It's required. The author himself cites some of these biblical commands. Therefore, we would suggest that Reformed churches are violating Scripture by not raising hands, and should immediately repent. 

This deeply entrenched tradition is why the author is treading so lightly. One can almost feel the reluctance to simply come out and say what the Bible tells us. He couches things in terms of carnality and offending one's brothers, but never considers the fact that this reserved, non-physical worship might also be carnal and offensive. The bottom line is he is worried who will be offended by his advocacy. 

And that may be the key concept. The author is primarily concerned about offending people with his raised hands. What will people think? Will they disapprove? Will he cause them to stumble? The author deems it a matter of edification, but we think that's a diversion. Lifting hands or not lifting hands has no impact on edification, but has a lot to do with offending peoples' sensibilities. And sometimes those sensibilities should be offended.

In any case, we welcome our Reformed brothers and sisters to biblical worship.

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

The Agonizing Prayer - by Jerry Bridges

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This may be one of the worst Bible teachings we've ever read. We don't say that lightly. The author completely perverts the work of the cross, rejects the meaning of terms because they conflict with his doctrine, and lies to us about the Bible.

This is so astonishing that we found ourselves at loss for words. He writes:

The theological term for Jesus’ act of drinking the cup is propitiation. A modern dictionary will say that to propitiate means “to appease” or “to placate.” I find these definitions unsatisfactory...

Did the reader catch that? The meaning of a word is unsatisfactory because it is at odds with his doctrine. This is the unfortunate logical extension of the author's Calvinism/Reformed doctrine, the precepts of which are, we believe, deception. Yes, we must conclude that if one's doctrine supersedes the meaning of Bible words, it can only be deception.

On what basis does the author reject the propitiary nature of Jesus' sacrificial death? Certainly not a biblical one, because he supplies no Scripture that tells us the Father punished Jesus in our place. Here's the author's problem. If Jesus did propitiate (turn way the Father's wrath), then the Father, being satisfied, had no need to punish Jesus. The author cannot accept this, because His doctrinal tradition teaches that the Father punished Jesus in our place.

This article eminently qualifies for our label, Bad Bible Teaching. We discuss the substantial problems related to Penal Substitutionary Atonement here. We discuss how substitution contradicts propitiation here.

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

What False Teachings Should Make Me Leave a Church? - John Piper

Found here. Our comments in bold.

It's interesting that Dr. Piper's advice is generally good regarding what to do if a person is in a church where the pastor is falsely teaching, but the subject verse is not about that. John was warning "the chosen lady" about itinerant false teachers. Such people ought not even be guests in her house.

Side note: Who was this lady? Was she in the leadership of a church needing encouragement and exhortation? Was she a nobody trying to decide whether or not to stay in a church? Why does John refer to her in such glowing terms?

This is important because Dr. Piper is applying the subject matter as if it's advice to a person or to a church. This muddles the issue considerably when we read the letter as a whole.

Ironically, though Dr. Piper provides some good teaching he misses the point of the letter, which means we must deem this Bad Bible teaching.

Lastly, in the midst of good teaching he reveals his Calvinism/Reformed doctrine. We have written extensively about the false teaching that Jesus was punished by the Father.

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

The courts of heaven - rethink

Recently we've been reconsidering many of the things we thought we understood regarding doctrine and faith. We have begun to question certain beliefs, church structures, and practices of the western church. Too often we have discovered unbiblical doctrines and activities. This causes us concern. We have deemed this our “rethink.”

Our questions include, how did we arrive at our doctrines? Does the Bible really teach what we think it teaches? Why do churches do what they do? What is the biblical basis of church leadership structure? Why do certain traditions get entrenched?

It's easy to be spoon fed the conventional wisdom, but it's an entirely separate thing to search these things out for one's self. In the past we have read the Bible with these unexamined understandings and interpreted what we read through those lenses. We were lazy about our Bible study, assuming that pastors and theologians were telling us the truth, but we rarely checked it out for ourselves.

Therefore, these Rethinks are our attempt to remedy the situation.

We should note that we are not Bible scholars, but we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to understand the Word of God.
----------------

The Silent Drift Inside the Charismatic Church - By Stephen Strang

Found here. We agree with author, this is a great concern, not only for Charismatics but also regarding conservative and fundamentalist churches. Mr. Strang makes the clarion call for us to be the Holy people God has called us to be. This is applicable to the whole Church, not just charismatics.

It's an issue near and dear to us, as we have recognized the pressure of the Holy Spirit ourselves to repent and be obedient. This conviction was recently reinforced by Mitch Wong's song "Stronger Man," which contains the lyrics, 

A Holy God lives in a holy house

If it's not holy then get it out

So although Mr. Strang is a charismatic, his word must not be dismissed by conservative Christians.

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

The Real Reason Many Reject Penal Substitutionary Atonement - by Phil Cotnoir

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

After we read this article we were dismayed to find no biblical arguments. In fact, we found no Bible verses or references at all. So we asked the author for some biblically-based commentary. He first recommended an article by Derek Rishmawy, which we had already critiqued back in August. It had very little in terms of biblical documentation.

When we pressed farther for a biblically documented article, he referred us to Thomas Schreiner's article, which we critiqued here. He also referred us to Geoffrey Butler's article, critiqued here.

Sadly, none of these articles provided us with the needed biblical documentation. When the Bible was quoted, it was most often to bolster ancillary ideas. When the moment came to document the key claim, Bible documentation disappeared.

We supply our biblical reasons for rejecting PSA in the links above, but we take a deeper dive here. To summarize:

• The Father did not punish Jesus for our sin because the Blood alone is enough to appease the Father's wrath.
• The Father did not forsake the Son. Jesus quoted Psalm 22:1 because it's a messianic Psalm. Jesus was not bemoaning His abandonment, He was pointing to the Psalm as being fulfilled right at that moment.
• Jesus did not die so we wouldn't have to. We must die too.
• Jesus death was not atoning, it was propitiating. 
• Jesus did not pay for sin, He paid for us.

The reader is encouraged to read our links and come to his own conclusion. 

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