We do not believe in order to be born again; we are born again in order that we may believe - R.C. Sproul

Found here. Our comments in bold.

The five points of Calvinism, TULIP, are as follows:

• Total depravity
• Unconditional election
• Limited atonement
• Irresistible grace
• Perseverance of the saints

Calvinists are so committed to John Calvin's doctrine that they very nearly place it on the level of the Scriptures themselves. Which means to diverge from it even slightly is rank heresy. 

They are particularly proud of the sovereignty of God, that is, that God chose the elect, and those people are pre-ordained to be saved. Because we are depraved, there is nothing at all that would allow us to participate in our salvation. We do not yield to God and agree with Him that We need salvation. No, our salvation is already chosen for us. God is sovereign and unconditionally elected us, so we don't have a choice because of irresistible grace.  Only the elect are saved, because the atonement only covers the elect. We can't fall away if we're among the elect, because once we are saved we are always saved.

What strikes us about Calvinism is how much it doesn't matter. Yes, Calvinism doesn't matter. Practically speaking, none of the points have any bearing on our day-to-day faith. 

Why? Imagine that TULIP had never proposed as a doctrine. Nothing of them were ever offered to you for consideration. You were unaware of these principles. So, would TULIP change the fact that you need salvation? Would it change your standing before God? If you are saved, would it change the way you lead your life? No. Would you still share your faith, pray for the sick, and be generous with your time and your money? Yes.

None of these principles, even if true, would matter in the least. You would still be lost and in need of a Savior, you would still be called to lead a holy life, you would still be obligated to help the widow and the orphan, you would still be required to study the Word and live a life pleasing to God. TULIP is nothing more than arcane doctrinal hairsplitting, an intellectual exercise used to determine Us vs. Them.

What Is Discernment? - Sinclair Ferguson

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

On the whole a pretty good article, but glaringly incomplete. The author completely omits an explanation of the biblical gits of discernment, which is given by the Holy Spirit specifically to service the Body. 1Co. 12:7-10: 

Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8 To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits...

The word "distinguish" is διάκρισις, Definition: distinguishing; hence: deciding, passing sentence on; the act of judgment, discernment.

The Holy Spirit is the source of all discernment. 1Co. 2:14:

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 

Here the Greek word is ἀνακρίνω Definition: I examine, inquire into, investigate, question.

We are commanded to test spirits as well. 1Jn. 4:1: 

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

The word here is δοκιμάζω Definition: I put to the test, prove, examine; I distinguish by testing, approve after testing...

This is a far cry from the so called "discernment" ministries, which simply lambaste people they disagree with. Discernment in reality is the primary activity of those who are gifted with discernment, and it operates in the local Body to ensure correct teaching, the detection of spiritual forces of darkness that might be at work in the gathering, and for things like exhortation and deliverance.

But in the NT, we just don't see any examples of people going around evaluating and criticizing other churches and ministries. We do see discernment at work as Paul goes around to those churches he is apostle over. We see discernment at work in evangelism (Simon the Sorcerer is a good example), and we see discernment at work in the church to test prophetic words.

Lastly, the author will assert that "judgmentalism" is bad, but judgment is ok. He does not tell us the difference. 

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

Clarity Not Charity - by Tim Bates (The song "Reckless Love")

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

The song under scrutiny is "Reckless Love," by Cory Asbury. The lyrics read:

What Really Happened on the Cross? Part 1 Sacrifice and Propitiation - by MIKE RICCARDI

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-------------
We've previously commented on the atonement here, here, and especially, here. 

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

The atoning work of the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross stands at the very epicenter of Christianity. It is no exaggeration to say that the cross-work of Christ is the heart of the gospel. When the apostle Paul summarized the gospel he preached, he encapsulated it by speaking of the atonement: “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3). The cross is the content of the gospel itself, for “we preach Christ crucified” (1 Cor 1:23). The gospel message by which we are saved is “the word of the cross” (1 Cor 1:18). The eighteenth-century slave-ship captain turned Puritan preacher, John Newton, captured it well when he said, “I advise you by all means to keep close to the atonement. The doctrine of the cross is the sun in the system of truth.”

One way to “keep close” to the atonement is to ensure we understand precisely what happened on the cross. We’re likely familiar with the events of the crucifixion, but the significance of those events is so boundless that it will be the theme of the saints’ praise for eternity (Rev 4–5). Despite this, there has been, historically, and there is, today, great confusion concerning this central and essential doctrine of the Christian faith. We must therefore ask of the text of Scripture, “What really happened on the cross? What is it that Jesus has accomplished in His work of atonement? What is the biblical significance of what our Savior has done on our behalf?”

The cross is not a ransom payment to Satan; the chief captive of hell is in no position to demand ransom payments from God. The cross is not an illustration of God’s general moral government of the world. Still less is the cross God’s declaration of the value and worth of humanity, except as it testifies to the depth of our sinfulness. Neither is the cross merely a cosmic victory of good over evil or a good example for Christians to imitate. Most fundamentally, the cross is a work of penal substitution—the Lord Jesus suffering the penalty for the sins of His people as a substitute for them. In His great love, the Father appointed the Son to stand in our place, to bear our sin, to carry our guilt, to receive our punishment, and thereby to satisfy the righteous wrath of God against us. (We do not agree Jesus was punished. God was never mad at Jesus. 

There is a great difference between "bear our sin" and "receive our punishment." Jesus indeed carried our sin, as one might take out the garbage. Col. 2:13-14: 

When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature,  God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having cancelled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.

"Took it away" is the Greek word αἴρω which is I raise, lift up, take away, remove. Jesus literally carried  our sins like a bundle on His shoulders to the cross. There is absolutely no hint that God punished Jesus in any way. God was never mad at Jesus.)

Judge Everything - by John MacArthur

Found here. 

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

I am so pleased to be able to offer a John MacArthur article without commentary. Ordinarily I find so many whoppers that I am pressed to respond. But not here.
-------------------------

False teachers flourish where there is no scrutiny. That’s why so many of them set up camp in environments where there is little to no biblical discernment—where God’s Word is nothing more than a supplement to personal experience, anecdote, and embellishment.

Why do the heavy lifting of careful Bible study when one can simply “let go” and be drawn into the gravitational pull of a religious guru? Our short attention span and quick-fix culture is easily preyed upon by charismatic sideshows, feel-good philosophy, and the television hucksters of modern pseudo-Christianity.

But we are derelict in our Christian duty if we allow that to happen to us and our churches. When the apostle Paul says to “examine everything” (1 Thessalonians 5:21), he is calling on all Christians to practice careful biblical discernment in all realms of life.

That may surprise some Christians who see discernment as uniquely a pastoral responsibility. It is certainly true that pastors and elders have an even greater duty to be discerning than the average layperson. Most of the calls to discernment in the New Testament are issued to church leaders (1 Timothy 4:6-7, 13, 16; Titus 1:9). Every elder is required to be skilled in teaching truth and able to refute unsound doctrine.

Lessons From a Prayer Warrior - by Mike Phay

Found here. A very good article.

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

This is not an article for spiritual giants who spend three hours a day on their knees, attend every prayer meeting, and pack each spare moment with petitions and praises.

If this is you, feel free to stop reading now (and pray for the rest of us).

This is an article for those of us who think the word “PRAY” is the most jarring four-letter word uttered in the church. It’s for those of us who struggle to pray, who are afraid to pray, or who feel guilty about our crummy prayer lives.

I get it. I struggle to pray, too. I don’t consider myself a prayer warrior or a prayer giant. I’m more of a prayer toddler.

But I want to learn to pray. Not set any prayer records—just learn to pray. I want to be a man known for prayer. When you don’t know how to do something, you ask an expert. So that’s what I did.

More thoughts from an 80 year old - reflections from the 1980s

6/10/85 - Be still and know I am God. Your guidance is for one day at a time. The future you could not bear otherwise. I am with you and you will have the necessary strength. All is secondary to My plan. Have more faith.

8/29/85 - Praise and thanksgiving are to be used every day. Love more. Be cheerful and happy in the Lord at all times. I am directing your paths. Be obedient.

The Argument from the Bible (1996) - By Theodore M. Drange

Found here. My comments in bold.

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

Another analytical attempt at debunking the Bible. Many of the author's arguments can be dismissed on their face because a lack of understanding of the Christian faith. Some can be dismissed because there is no issue. And had the author took some time to look up what's already been written about some of these, he wouldn't even bother to include them. 

Others we will examine in greater detail.

This is a very long article.  I'm not quite sure I will be able to critique it in its entirety. However, it is very clear that the author's objections are of a sort that can be easily dealt with. Given that, we can safely assume that what I do not get to will be of the same vein.

I might return to this post from time to time to add commentary. 
-------------------

Almost all evangelical Christians believe that the writing of the Bible was divinely inspired and represents God's main revelation to humanity. They also believe that the Bible contains special features which constitute evidence of its divine inspiration. This would be a use of the Bible to prove God's existence within natural theology rather than within revealed theology, since the book's features are supposed to be evident even to (open-minded) skeptics. Furthermore, since a divinely inspired work must be true, those features are thereby also evidence of the Bible's truth, and thus can be used in support of Christianity as the one true religion. When expressed that way, the reasoning can be construed as an argument both for God's existence and for the truth of the gospel message from the alleged special features of the Bible. We may refer to it as "the Argument from the Bible". Although almost all evangelical Christians agree with it at least to some extent, it is an argument that is for the most part ignored by professional philosophers of religion. One explanation for such neglect is that the argument can be easily refuted. In this essay/outline, I shall try to sketch how such a refutation might be formulated, though I am sure many will feel that I am attacking a strawman. (I believe there are millions of such "strawpeople" out there!)

1. The Argument Formulated

The Argument from the Bible is usually regarded as a kind of "cumulative-case" argument. It may be formulated as follows:

(1) The Bible contains a large number of prophecies of future events which have been remarkably fulfilled. (Agree.)

(2) The Bible does not contain any unfulfilled prophecies. (Disagree.)

(3) The only reasonable explanation for the above facts is that God used his foreknowledge to make the prophecies and inspired the authors of the Bible to record them. (Agree.)

(4) The Bible contains a convincing eye-witness account of the resurrection and subsequent appearances of Jesus of Nazareth. (Agree.)

(5) The only reasonable explanation for the above fact is that Jesus was and is a divine being, which shows the truth of the Bible and its gospel message. (Agree.)

(6) The Bible contains no contradictions. (Agree and disagree.)

(7) The Bible contains amazing facts about the planet earth, compatible with modern science, which were unknown in ancient times. (Agree and disagree.) Also, the Bible contains no conflicts with modern science or errors of a factual nature. (Agree and disagree.)

(8) The Bible contains a perfect morality, and no ethical defects. (Agree.)

(9) The only reasonable explanation for facts (6)-(8), above, is that the ultimate author of the Bible is God himself. (Agree and disagree.)

(10) Putting together results (3), (5), and (9), above, we may infer that the Bible is not a purely manmade work, but divinely inspired, which establishes the truth of Christianity and its gospel message. (Agree.)

Other premises are sometimes appealed to in the formulation of the argument. For example, Henry M. Morris places much emphasis on the alleged uniqueness of the Bible. [1] He also mentions what he takes to be remarkable numerical designs in it. [2] But for our purposes, the given formulation should suffice. It includes what are regarded to be the main factors within the Argument from the Bible. (We have some additional criteria.

1. The historical accuracy of the Bible
2. The huge variety and numerousness of manuscripts placed close to the events
3. The presentation of main characters that include all their flaws.

The Bible is a trustworthy book for what it presents. It is the best-attested document from antiquity. There is no reason to doubt what it contains, except for those who enter the equation with preconceptions and biases against God and the supernatural.)

The Bible is sufficient. - Excerpt from Tim Challies

Found here.
----------

I wonder if the author is cleverly phrasing his statements in order to sort of say something without saying it. He writes:

1. The Bible is the final and sufficient authority on matters of life and faith. 
2. We do not need any other revelations from God to complete the Christian faith. 
3. By saying it is the final authority, we acknowledge that other forms of Special Revelation have ceased. 
4. We no longer expect to receive God’s revelation by dreams, visions or by hearing His voice directly. 
5. The Bible is complete and perfect, meaning that no more books can be added to it or taken from it.

Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word! - by Scepcop

Found here. My comments in bold.

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

It's not often you come across an atheist who quotes the Bible, expounds on the ideas contained in those quotes, and then draws reasonable and discuss-able conclusions from those ideas, all without excessive mocking or derision. Such is the author of today's article.

His presentation is not without its flaws. Ultimately, the author deems the Bible to be unremarkable and unprovable. But such a standard is one not possible for any document from antiquity.  

For example, we cannot prove the Constitution was written by James Madison. We have no DNA evidence, no eyewitnesses to interview, no photographs. All we have is historical documentary evidence. It is unprovable, therefore, that James Madison wrote the Constitution.

So of course we can't prove that God inspired the Bible. We can only read it for ourselves, study the original languages, read apologists and critics, and reach our own conclusions. We think the average person who retains a balanced and unbiased approach to the Scriptures, will conclude they are indeed unique, worthy of devotion, and quite possibly the answer to all the questions of life.
-------------------

Argument # 1: The Bible is the infallible word of God.

This is the first and most fundamental claim that Christians make when Evangelizing. It is just taken for granted that it is true, but if you analyze the weight of the evidence for this doctrine, you find that it is in actuality both weak and nearly non-existent. First of all, the first sentence of this argument, that the “Bible is the word of God” implies that the text in the Bible books are God’s words verbatim. However, we all know, including the Christians, that humans wrote those books. The only difference is that Christians believe that the humans (the identity of many of them are unknown) who wrote the Bible were guided by God the Holy Spirit, and therefore, they are God’s words verbatim and without flaw.(That may indeed be the implication in the author's mind, but it's not the only thing that can be inferred. Other reasonable inferences are

1. The Bible is filtered through the personalities of the writers, yet is still inspired and trustworthy
2. The Bible captures the essence of what God wanted humankind to know and is sufficient for communicating His purposes towards us
3. The Bible is wholly written by man, yet God moved through those writings
4. A combination of any of these.)

 The question then becomes, were they? Furthermore, they argue that since we would assume that God would protect his own word, that the Bible has remain unchanged.

Now these are huge assumptions for one thing. It would take A LOT to prove or even demonstrate such outlandish claims literally. (The author has not demonstrated that these are outlandish claims. And in fact voluminous scholarship has been undertaken over the centuries to demonstrate these very things. The field is apologetics, sir.)

However, not only do Christian Evangelists make these assumptions, but they just assume it to be true as well without any real basis. (The author has not demonstrated Christians are making assumptions, nor has he established that there is no basis. So far, he has only made summary statements.)

In general, the issue is not questioned or analyzed in the church as to whether the Bible is God’s word or not. It is simply ASSUMED to be so. It’s a GIVEN. (Another summary statement. As we mentioned, there is a substantial field of study in Christian apologetics.)

And it rests on a very shaky foundation, much more so than they could imagine. What most Christians don't realize and never think about is that God himself never actually told them directly that the Bible was his word. (Undocumented assertion.)