Disclaimer: Some postings contain other author's material. All such material is used here for fair use and discussion purposes.

Monday, December 23, 2024

Are Catholics Christian? - by Stephen Kneale

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

The author asks the wrong question but eventually gets to the right answer, then reverses course at the end. The correct question is, what doctrines must one believe in order to be saved? Or maybe, if you believe all the right doctrines, are you saved? Or, if you are in the right denomination, are you saved?

There is a marked tendency among Christians of all stripes to characterize salvation in relation to what doctrines a church believes. This is an abiblical concept. Certainly it is true that we need to hold to sound doctrine, but doctrine doesn't save us. There is no set of doctrines we can point to and say that people are saved or not saved based on their adherence to those doctrines.

In addition, where you go to church doesn't speak to salvation. Even belonging to a cult is a separate issue from salvation. The author eventually lands on this right answer:
Christians are simply those who are going to Heaven. Which means there may be people who believe otherwise errant things who nevertheless believe the biblical gospel and will be going to Heaven. 
There is one substantial factor missing in the author's thinking, the Holy Spirit. He writes, 
if they have somehow come to the conclusion that their salvation is, indeed, exclusively by faith in Christ alone – errant as the denomination may be – that individual can rightly be called a Christian.
A person does not "come to the conclusion" to become a Christian. No intellectual process is involved. A person doesn't hear or read the Gospel then based on the pros and cons reach a "conclusion." Rather, the Holy Spirit is the agent by whom we are saved: 
Jn. 3:6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.
Oddly, after expending hundreds of words, he swerves away from the correct answer at the end, asserting:
 
Anyone who either doesn’t believe on the Lord Jesus Christ or who says certain works are necessary in addition to the work of Jesus, will not be saved. That is, will not go to Heaven. Which is to say, is not a Christian. When understood that way, Catholic are not Christians.

Hmm. So there is a doctrine that is required for salvation. Salvation means one cannot believe that works play a role in salvation. This of course is false.

Lastly we note that the author neither quotes nor references the Bible. He does use the word "Bible" a couple of times, but there is no Bible teaching or principle contained in this article. Which means everything here is mere speculation and intellectual posturing.

We must regard this as Bad Bible Teaching.
------------------------------

Rich's proverbs, book nine

Book nine here.

Book eight here.

Book seven here.

Book six here.

Book five here.

Book four here.

Book three here.

Book two here.

Book one here.

This is a continuation of my practice to take notes on what I prayed.

Chapter One

1. Rev 13:8 ...the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world.

The cross is much more than the point in time when you gave your life for us. Jesus, your sacrifice transcends eternity. Your salvation plan was already accomplished before you even created anything.

Wow. Our view of you is so limited. Open our understanding to know your ways.

Friday, December 20, 2024

Did the Son of God Leave Heaven When He Came to Earth? - by Kevin DeYoung

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

We've examined several of this author's articles and are beginning to wonder if he's a competent Bible teacher. 

Today's article is more than 1100 words (we subtracted the author's extended quotes of Calvin), but there are only 20 words quoted from the Bible, none of which come to bear on the author's thesis.

Adding back the two extended quotes from Calvin (142 words), and then accounting for quotes from and references to other authors (E.S. Elliot, K. J. Drake, Andrew McGinnis, Cyril of Alexandria), various groups (Lutheran and Reformed theologians), and statements of faith (the Nicene Creed, something "Chalcedonian," the Heidelberg Catechism), as well as appealing to arcane doctrinal ideas like Calvinisticum.... well, the amount of actual Bible teaching contained here approaches zero.

Further, it seems the author derived at least some of his presentation from Wikipedia, but Wikipedia does it better.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.
----------------------

Wednesday, December 18, 2024

Chosen - by Mike Ratliff

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

Mr. Ratliff engages in a good bit of contorting to bolster his Calvinistic false doctrine, the predestination of the Elect. He looks at the syntax, tenses, and grammar of two passages. However, he misses the forest for the trees. All of his analysis of the Greek words might be true and accurate, but he misses the context for all this. These two passages are not about our predestination. 
-------------------

1967 Pontiac Lemans #2 - budget build - Episode seven - the doors, rust surface prep - updated 12/23/24

 October 5th, 2024:



October 6th, 2024:



Episode one, introduction, here.
Episode two, disassembly and assessment, here.
Episode three, rough body work, here.
Episode four, rust repair, installment one, here.
Episode five, rust repair, installment two, here.
Episode six, rust repair, installment three, here.
Episode seven, the doors, found here.
----------------

It's now time to turn to the more detailed bodywork. I've actually been a hammering fool already, especially regarding the driver's quarter and the passenger fender, both of which needed extensive work.

The third problem area is the doors. 

Tuesday, December 17, 2024

Man’s Enduring Guilt - by John MacArthur

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.
---------------------
Paul could have made his argument many ways without having a New Testament at his disposal. Indeed, in the course of his epistle to the Romans, he returns to this point and sometimes brings up additional arguments that prove the sinfulness of all humanity. For example, in Romans 5:14, he points out that “death reigned from Adam until Moses” even before there was a written law defining what sin was. He argues that sin must be universal because death is universal. Sin is, after all, the whole reason people die. “Death [entered the world] through sin” (Romans 5:12). “The wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). And everyone dies. That 100 percent statistic furnishes undeniable proof that everyone is a sinner. - Dr. John MacArthur
Dr. MacArthur almost gets it. But it isn't that we are all sinners, even though that's true. It's that we are all dead. That's what we inherited. We have discussed this in the context of the idea of original sin, and our examination led us to some surprising conclusions. 
-------------------

Monday, December 16, 2024

What Is Total Depravity? - by Darrell B. Harrison

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

The author tells us nothing about a supposedly core idea or how it might be relevant. In fact, the author will tell us that we are not actually "totally" depraved, because "total" does not mean "utter." And, he wants "depravity" to be understood as "inability." 

Well. That's helpful.

Further, the author references a few Bible verses but apparently is "utterly" unable to quote it. The fact that these supposed Bible teachers cannot or will not quote the Bible continually mystifies us.

 So it is left to us to explain what the author attempted to explain. "Total Depravity," aka "Complete Inability," is important to Calvinists because it interfaces with other parts of Reformed doctrine. Calvinists believe in predestination, that long ago God chose those who will be saved. His will is irresistible; if a person is predestined he will inexorably be saved and cannot lose his salvation.

Thus Total Depravity is required because God does everything. It's all lined out as God's will. You cannot assent to salvation or put your faith in Jesus. Or, perhaps more accurately, your participation is irrelevant because you are either chosen to be saved or you are not. You are essentially a robot. Your destiny is already determined. God will save you or He will send you to hell. Nothing you can do will change this.

Calvinists will go to the mat to defend their doctrines. What is inexplicable is why. Why is it important to know we are totally depraved (or, completely unable)? What difference does such knowledge make in our service, worship, or daily walk? How does it change our generosity, our evangelism, or any aspect of holiness?

Well, it doesn't. The doctrines of grace make absolutely no difference in any obligation or privilege we possess as Christians.

We take deep dives into various aspects of Calvinism/Reformed doctrines at this tag.
---------------------------

Friday, December 13, 2024

The Trump-Muskrat plot to kill Social Security - by Robert Reich

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

Dr. Reich wants to foment greed. He wants you to think that you're entitled to other peoples' money. Your not getting your piece of the pie, so government needs to come in and extract more money from the rich so you can get your fair share of their money.

He hides his objectives behind the Social Security smokescreen. SS is actually another tool in the leftist arsenal with the potential to coerce even more money from the eeevil rich. SS is therefore not a retirement plan, it's a wealth extraction plan. He wants to use it to redistribute wealth from those who earned it to those who want it.
------------------------------

1967 Camaro coupe project, 2005

My dad infected me with the car disease. My first car project was this 1947 Ford:


We found this car for $200 in 1974. It was rough but all there. My uncle taught me to gas weld, and one of my dad's friends taught me how to bump panels. My mom sewed up an interior, and I did all the work including the paint. My dad financed it as long as I was willing to do the work. What a deal.

After leaving for college I left the car in my dad's hands, and he drove it for years, finally selling it with a tear in his eye. My attention turned to aircooled VWs, and through the early days of my marriage we bought and sold three of them.

I bought a 1940 Ford sedan delivery in 1985, and sold it in 1993 after fixing all the rust and replacing the floor pan, adding a Mustang II front suspension, and a parallel leaf rear. The next project was a 1946 Ford coupe, which received a small block Chevy. After that was a 1962 Chevy stepside in 2001, which was a basket case, but was built to completion:


This truck marked the beginning of my shift from early Fords to more modern cars. I love the shape and style of the '32-'48 Fords, but like aficionados of Model Ts and Model As, those who love the V-8 flathead Fords are a dying breed.

Thursday, December 12, 2024

On Images (or Against Images) - by Colin Fast

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

The author may or may not be correct regarding the worship of images of God, but he doesn't give us the whole picture (pun intended). The second commandment, which he quotes, actually contains two sub-commandments with qualifiers for each:

1. Do not make a carved image
  • Do not make a likeness of anything
    • in heaven
    • on earth
    • under the water
2. Do not bow down or serve them
  • for He is jealous
But the author quotes the Heidelberg Catechism:
But as to creatures, though they may be represented, yet God forbids to make or have any resemblance of them either in order to worship them or to serve God by them.
Notice that the Catechism very directly contradicts the commandment. We are comprehensively forbidden from making ANY likeness. Of anything. Period. But the Catechism permits his.

And at the top of this very article's web page is this image:


Under the author's criteria (despite his unfounded exception), this image violates the second commandment.

Well, except... Let's take a closer look. First, "carved image." The Hebrew word is "pecel," which simply means idol, graven image. That would mean that we are forbidden to create an image designed for worship, or that we would ourselves worship. 

"Likeness" is "tmuwnah," In the biblical context, "temunah" is frequently associated with the prohibition against idolatry... So the terms are connected regarding the prohibition against idolatry.

Therefore, the first phrase of the commandment is amplified by the second phrase:
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. 
Then all of this is trumped:
You shall not bow down to them or serve them...
The commandment is very specific and clear: It is solely about creating or worshiping a graven image, an idol. Clearly this is not about hanging a picture of Jesus on your kitchen wall. 

The author objects at this point: "if the image is a true representation of Christ, then worship ought to be expected – how can we see an image of God in the flesh and not worship?" This is a nonsense statement. 
  • First, this is not a biblical argument, it is a speculation. 
  • Second, why should worship of an image of Christ be expected, since that very thing is forbidden by the commandment? 
  • Third, if an image precipitates worship of God, then the image is not an idol.  
  • Fourth, anything that causes one to worship God (A beautiful hymn, a sunset, a new born baby) under the author's criteria is an idol. 
Lastly, we will note another use of the word "Likeness" (tmuwnah):

 Ps. 17:15 And I — in righteousness I shall see your face; when I awake, I shall be satisfied with seeing your likeness.

The obvious question is, what sort of likeness was David seeing when he woke? It's certainly not a graven image.) 
*******

Wednesday, December 11, 2024

Why Was Jesus Flogged? – A Confirmation of Propitiatory Atonement - by John Stevens

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

The author attempts to apply every little detail of the prophecy delivered to David by Nathan. Because it fits his theology he pounces on one part, the punishment by flogging.

We cannot do this with these Bible passages. 

Some of what was written applies specifically to the actual situation, while at the same time is intermixed with messianic statements. Not everything contained therein is messianic, and that's where the author fails. 

For example, Psalm 22 is a profoundly messianic passage. Yet in the middle of it we find this verse: 
Ps. 22:20-21 Deliver my life from the sword, my precious life from the power of the dogs. 21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions; save me from the horns of the wild oxen.
Jesus' life was never imperiled by the sword. He was not rescued from wild animals. David was.

In Psalm 45 we find this:
Ps. 45:9 Daughters of kings are among your honored women; at your right hand is the royal bride in gold of Ophir.
No daughters of kings attended to Jesus.

And from the author's second example, Psalm 89:
Ps. 89:43 You have turned back the edge of his sword and have not supported him in battle.
Jesus never was unsupported as He wielded a sword in battle.

There are many examples of this throughout the Bible. Simply because there are messianic statements in a passage does not mean everything in the passage is messianic.
----------------------

Tuesday, December 10, 2024

“If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor..." Faceborg meme

Another brainless meme found on Faceborg:



Transcript: 

“If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don't want to do it.” ― Stephen Colbert

The Christian-hating Left needs to get better at meme-ing, because this statement is just insipid. And it makes it even worse when they think it's clever. 

Monday, December 9, 2024

Elementary School Offering Satanic Studies? NAR Gets Masterfully Trolled - By Anthony Wade

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

It's been a blessed time of respite from Rev. Wade's incendiary posts. We have not had reason to comment on his writings because he is fixated on the NAR and hates Republicans and conservatives, so his dozens of recent articles articles contain nothing new.

Today he levels his guns at those who want their children to have the opportunity to have time away from the endless barrage of wokeism and get some good, old fashioned Christianity.

In his scriptureless "devotional" he will disparage those who want their children to be able to attend religious classes during the school day, but will write approvingly of Satanists for their wonderful tolerance.

Rev. Wade barely disguises his left-wing proclivities. He pretends to teach about Christianity, but his articles are actually political screeds and leftist agitprop sloppily dressed up with a veneer of Christianese.

Ordinarily we would tag this with "bad Bible teaching," but there is no Bible teaching here at all. 
-----------------------------

 The Charisma News headline blared out something that seemed almost too bad to be true - "Elementary School Offering Satanic Studies!" It seemed like such obvious clickbait, that Charisma is renowned for, that I passed it by until this morning when I saw the report offered on a mainstream news website. So, I decided to take a look at the above link from Charisma and see how they framed this true story, whose blame can be laid directly at the feet of the NAR dominionist church. (Oh. Satanists in schools is the fault of the NAR. Let's see if Rev. Wade gives us evidence for this claim.)

I have constantly tried to warn that this country is not a theocracy, so when you pass rules and laws to benefit your religion by mixing it with the state, (So the NAR passed rules and laws to benefit Christianity? What laws are those?)

you open Pandora's Box for any other religion as well. (It's not these supposed NAR laws that benefit other religions. Christianity was in the schools since the inception of our country up until the early 1960s. The NAR wasn't even around when Christianity was given the boot from schools.

Those groups demanding access to schools are able to do so by appealing to constitutional provisions [albeit misinterpreted], and are facilitated by Christ haters. In fact, anti-christ powers have been accessing public institutions for many decades, while simultaneously excluding Christianity from those institutions.

Therefore, those who want access for Christians are simply attempting to restore what we had before Christianity was banned.

Basically, Rev. Wade has it backwards.)

There is a reason why the founders believed in the separation of church and state and please do not fall for the brain-dead NAR talking points that try and pretend they did not want that. (Dissent from Rev. Wade's opinion is not just wrong, but brain dead. This is why we tag our posts about him with "scorched earth discernment.")

They absolutely did and to claim otherwise is to show a breathtaking stupidity (He piles on. Brain dead and now breathtaking stupidity. Disagreeing with Rev. Wade means that one is a complete idiot, ignorant, and probably evil. Thus he frames the issue as his opinion being the only choice.)

when it comes to the history of this country. That essential part of the founder's philosophy was not to shut Christianity out (??? Rev. Wade is complaining about theocracy, remember? He wants Christianity shut out because otherwise it opens the door for every religion, remember? )

but rather to prevent any and all religions from taking over the government. (Rev. Wade mentioned the separation of church and state, which has nothing to do with religion taking over government. The principle was articulated by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists to assure them that government was enjoined from meddling in religion. 

Again Rev. Wade has it backwards.)

They did not want the systems they escaped from which relied upon religious dogma to dictate many public institution's direction. (Yet at their behest Christianity was heavily entangled in their newly formed government. How does Rev. Wade explain this?)

The NAR does not care though because of their staggering arrogance and they just never thought ahead as to what the consequences might be. Allowing Christian prayer in school for example, means that Muslim prayer has to be allowed on equal footing. (As we mentioned, Christian prayer was in schools before it was banned as unconstitutional, beginning with Engel v. Vitale in 1962. There were no Muslim prayers in schools prior to 1962. The presence of Christian practices in schools for 150 years did not create a surge of other religions wanting access.

Rev. Wade is completely wrong, dare we say brain dead and breathtakingly stupid. No, we shall not do so. Rev. Wade is mistaken and perhaps deceived.)

Allowing the Ten Commandments in a courthouse paves the way for other religions to be equally represented as well. (Here is a picture of the US Supreme Court building in Washington DC: 


Who is that fellow in the center? Let's zoom in:


Oh, it's Moses, holding the two tablets representing the Ten Commandments. Did the NAR carve this frieze? 

Various Christian symbols are found all over Washington DC. Was it the NAR who caused all this to happen?

For 150 years the nation was influenced by Christianity [or more specifically, completely comfortable with mutual cooperation]. Where were all these other religions during this time? Why didn't they infiltrate schools back then?)

So, let us reason once more through this bizarre short story above.

"An elementary school in Marysville, Ohio, is offering a "satanic studies" program. The Hellion Academy of Independent Learning (HAIL) program serves as a "religious release" period for children. The Satanic Temple operates the program. June Everett, described by NBC 4 as the "campaign director for the After School Satan Club and an ordained minister for the Satanic Temple," said a parent reached out to the Satanic Temple, requesting a program be implemented at the school. "We aren't trying to shut the LifeWise Academy down, but I do think a lot of school districts don't realize when they open the door for one religion, they open it for all of them," Everett said." - Charisma News

In 2014 the NAR church leaders and influencers in the cultural mountain of government thought it would be cool to mix public school with Christianity. They created the religious release program that allowed schools to release students early to engage in religious studies. (Rev. Wade keeps tripping over himself, mostly because he so completely buys in to the mythology of the political Left. Yes, Rev. Wade is a leftist. 

Released Time is not something that the NAR just conjured up:
The original idea of released time in the United States was first discussed in 1905 at a school conference in New York City. The proposal was that public elementary schools should be closed one day a week, in addition to Sunday, so that parents could have their children receive religious instruction outside the school premises. This idea was later implemented by Dr. William Albert Wirt, an educator and superintendent of the school district of Gary, Indiana, in 1914. 
Rev. Wade is beclowning himself.)

I am surprised it took ten years for someone else to take advantage of this absurdity but now we have what appears to be the most excellent example of trolling the NAR I have seen in some time. June Everett, a minister at the Satanic Temple tried to explain what many Christians cannot understand:

"We are not devil worshipers. Different Satanists across the United States will give you different answers depending on how they personally believe. But as a whole, we are non-theistic, meaning we don't believe in any supernatural deities and that includes, you know, God or Satan." - June Everett

Please, I am not suggesting that this means they are harmless, far from it. That is not the point. The point is this is the end result of trying to Christianize the country, instead of preaching the gospel and letting people be drawn by the Holy Spirit. Realize that a parent reached out to Everett and asked for this. You cannot continue to show disdain for the lost and think you can shove our beliefs down their throats. At some point, they will push back. Like Everett or not, she is 100% correct when she says that when you open the door for one religion, you open the door to all of them. (Oh, so that's where Rev. Wade got this oft-repeated talking point, from the Satan worshiper. In other words, he agrees with the devil on this point, and has made it the central argument of his article.)

'Each lesson in LifeWise, a Christian program, focuses on three areas: Head, Heart and Hands.

The curriculum is "designed to take students through the entire Bible, beginning in Genesis and ending in Revelation," LifeWise's website says. "Each lesson reviews a Bible passage as well as a 'Living LifeWise' character trait. The lessons' order and activities are flexible and can be modified as the teacher finds necessary." The Satanic Temple described the HAIL program as a program for students that "allows them to learn about values such as empathy, compassion, and justice in a fun environment without religious pressure or coercion." "Any students who choose not to attend are later regaled with stories of fun activities and warnings from their classmates that they will surely burn in hell for not participating," the Satanic Temple added. "These programs have been heavily pushed in recent years by groups such as Lifewise Academy and Joy El Club."' - Charisma News


Now, if you removed the fact that the HAIL Program was held at the Satanic Temple, both curricula descriptions sound perfectly reasonable for children, no? LifeWise uses biblical characters to teach positive traits, which I can only assume means they stay away from some of the more salacious biblical characters? (Displaying his Leftist bonafides once again, he levels an attack on the Bible because it tells about the many moral indiscretions of its characters.)

Or maybe they just put a fresh coat of Christianese on them? The nuances of King David being and adulterer and murderer yet still a man after God's heart is probably not best designed for kids to understand. (Really, Rev. Wade? You're speculating on the contents of the LifeWise program, wondering if it teaches about murder and adultery? What? Why?)

Notice that the HAIL program is teaching empathy, compassion and justice, free of religious pressure and coercion. (After noting his disapproval of the salacious details of Bible characters, he turns approvingly to the HAIL program's superior values.)

Note the word coercion. That is how the lost view what silly laws such us this really are. We are not supposed to try and coerce people into our faith beloved. (The presence of Bible information in schools is coercive, but the HAIL program is not? What?

We are absolutely convinced that Rev. Wade. is incapable of clear thinking.)

The poke they make about telling people who do not go that they will surely burn in hell might sound mean but it basically is just the trolling coming full circle. (Rev. Wade approves of HAIL once again.)

The message from the NAR to the lost is about them going to hell, (??? This is a central teaching of historic Christianity.)

so why be offended when someone simply co-opts your position? (??? Who is offended? About what?)

Make no mistake about it beloved. Ohio now has to allow students to leave school early to attend a class at the local Satanic Temple because of the NAR -period full stop. (No, the Ohio government voted to allow parents the choice of doing this, not because of the NAR, but because the removal of Christianity from the schools has caused numerous problems. Other religions competing for their part was never a problem in the early 20th century. In fact, this is a developing problem based on the idea that publicly-funded schools must be secular, excruciatingly fair, and serve the state's interest rather than the parent's.)

 When you hear all of the seven mountains nonsense it may sound good. Prayer in schools might tickle the ears but that is only because Christianity is still largely in charge. Who knows what the demographics will look like 10 years, fifty years from now? (Rev. Wade opposes Christianity in the schools because of what might happen later. Puerile.)

I am sure in 2014 Ohioans thought this was a great idea. Just ten years later however and here we are. Thirty three percent of this country are either non-Christian identified or not affiliated at all. Forty million people have left the church in the past 25 years alone. The great apostasy is well underway. All the world hears from the church is judgment and hatred. (All we hear from Rev. Wade is hatred of the NAR and those who would want to stem the flow of godlessness in our institutions.)

Then they watch as they pass draconian laws or advocate for rules that appear to only benefit the Christian faith. That is not how our country was birthed or currently exists. It never was and never will be a theocracy. Keep mixing church and state but do not whine when other churches and faiths take advantage of the same exact nonsense. Preach the gospel - leave those imaginary cultural mountains far, far behind.

Friday, December 6, 2024

Holy Spirit: poured out or pouring out?

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.
-----------------------

Thursday, December 5, 2024

Good church, the goal?

A wall in our church has several values statements hung on the wall:


Ridiculously generous - We generously pour out all that we have been given.
Irrational in honoring - We give and lead with honor.
Real. Raw. Authentic - We embrace and celebrate who God has called us to be.
Radically relational - We have a radical commitment to relationship.
Always hungry - We have a relentless hunger for more of God.

"For the city." (This is derived from Jeremiah 29:7)
----------------

Wednesday, December 4, 2024

If you are okay with having Muslim, Jewish, and Hindu students sit through a Christian prayer... Faceborg meme

A meme posted on Faceborg:


Transcript: If you are okay with having Muslim, Jewish, and Hindu students sit through a Christian prayer in a public school, and not okay with having Christian students sit through a Muslim, Jewish, or Hindu prayer, then it's not religious freedom - it's religious oppression.

How does one deal with the multiple levels of idiocy contained here? The person who wrote this, and those who posted it, obviously thought it to be a devastating argument.

Tuesday, December 3, 2024

Bad worship songs: How deep the Father's love for us - by Stuart Townend

From time to to we examine the lyrics of worship songs. Our desire is not to mock or humiliate, but rather to honestly examine content with a view to calling forth a better worship expression.

With the great volume and variety of worship music available, none of us should have to settle for bad worship songs. We should be able to select hundreds or even thousands of top notch songs very easily.

What makes a song a worship song? Is it enough to contain words like God or holy? How about vaguely spiritual sounding phrases? Should Jesus be mentioned?

We think an excellent worship song should contain the following elements:
  • A direct expression of adoration (God, you are...)
  • A progression of ideas that culminates in a coherent story
  • A focus on God, not us
  • Lyrics that do not create uncertainty or cause confusion
  • A certain amount of profundity
  • A singable, interesting melody
  • Allusions to Scripture
  • Doctrinal soundness
  • Not excessively metaphorical
  • Not excessively repetitive
  • Jesus is not your boyfriend
It's worth noting the most worship songs contain at least something good. That is, there might be a musical idea or a lyric that has merit. Such is the case with this song, How deep the Father's love for us.
------------------------------

Monday, December 2, 2024

What are "sign gifts?"

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.
-----------------------

Friday, November 29, 2024

You Must Be Baptized to Receive the Lord's Supper - By Cameron Shaffer

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

The author sets out to explain his belief in an excruciatingly logical manner. We don't necessarily fault him for this, but logic always begins with premises, things that are assumed to be true. This means the author has made assumptions to build his logic upon, and unfortunately they are false assumptions. This means his resulting logic is faulty.

Premise: The Lord's Supper and baptism are church rituals
Premise: Discerning the body of Christ means self-examination for worthiness and the need for repentance
Premise: Being worthy is a matter of church discipline

These premises miss the essential message Paul was conveying in 1 Corinthians 11. The context is about the division within the Corinthian church when they gathered:

1Co. 11:18 ...I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you...

Paul was referring to them gathering to eat their meals:

1Co. 11:20 When you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat...

They were shaming and dishonoring fellow believers by eating all the food and getting drunk while these others got nothing. 
1Co. 11:22 Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing?
This is the context for Paul's instruction. We need to understand that the Lord's Supper wasn't a church ritual, it was a gathering together of the saints to share a meal. Sharing a meal was an important component of this culture. It conveyed acceptance, belonging, identity, and fellowship. When they ate together it meant that everyone present was a part, like family. So the Corinthian church was violating the central principle of what it meant to belong.

This is where we get to Paul's admonition: 
1Co. 11:29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.
The body and blood of the Lord, as represented by the bread and the wine, speaks of His sacrifice. This is the context for Paul's central message: The Corinthian church was under judgment for dishonoring fellow members of the body of Christ. This is not about examining ourselves for worthiness to make sure we are fully repentant, or that we fully understand and comply with the implications of salvation, it's about how we treat our brothers and sisters in Christ, particularly when sharing meal.

From this misunderstanding the author constructs an entire edifice out of presumption. Rather than a joyful potluck with a pause to honor Jesus and His church body, we have a prescribed somber ritual. And because of that, element like church discipline and determinations of inclusion and exclusion commence.

This is all very unfortunate, because the author isn't explaining the Bible, he's explaining his church tradition.

Lastly, this article is almost 2900 words. Number of words quoted from the Bible: Six. Number of Calvin's words: Fifty-six. Number of words from a confessional: Forty-one. Number of unquoted Bible references: Thirty-four.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.
--------------------

Wednesday, November 27, 2024

The First Amendment Will Suffer Under Trump - by Nan Levinson

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-------------------
Oddly, the author will never tell us why the First Amendment will suffer under Trump. She mentions Trump's name eight times, but never tells us anything Trump has said or done that will imperil free speech. Nothing at all, except some vague fears people might have.

Very strange.

Strange also is the author fears what Trump and his supporters MIGHT do, while the Left is ALREADY imperiling free speech, and has been doing so for decades. For example, Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, and Charlie Kirk, who have been shut down, assaulted disinvited, or shouted into silence. And the poor cake baker in Colorado, who has been targeted multiple times. An abortion protestor was recently imprisoner for his free speech. Parents who are deemed terrorists for speaking up in a school board meeting. And of course, Trump himself being subject to a gag order regarding his prosecution in New York.

We could go on and on. Yet Trump is the problem?

Lastly, we are pretty sure the author doesn't understand what censorship is. It isn't protesting books in school libraries. It isn't Faceborg suppressing dissent about the vaxx. It isn't about what newspapers publish or don't publish. Censorship can only be accomplished by government.
-----------------------------