Why You Should Not Turn the Lights Dark During Worship - JD Hall

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

The author is convinced that turning off the lights in the sanctuary during the musical worship is unholy. However, not one Scriptural reference is provided. Not one biblical principle is cited. Therefore, his judgment is not based on a biblical argument.
-----------------

Here’s why you should not turn the lights dark during worship.

1. By default, spotlights are on the stage. The people on the stage then have “the spotlight.” People should never have the spotlight (Jesus should). (The author offers a false choice: Spotlights are either us or Jesus. The author does not explain to us how a darkened room automatically dishonors Jesus.

And we wonder, should Paul not have been in "the spotlight?" 

Ac. 17:22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious."

And how about when Paul appeared before Felix?

Ac. 24:10 When the governor motioned for him to speak, Paul replied: “I know that for a number of years you have been a judge over this nation; so I gladly make my defense." 

And what about pastors? They stand center stage behind a podium making solemn statements. Many churches have the elders and other notable people seated on stage. What about the person who reads announcements? The person who sings a solo during the offering? Do these also steal "the spotlight" from Jesus? 

Can you see the arbitrary nature of the author's objections?)

The seven cells of the American church prison system - Jeremiah Johnson

A sobering chart about church involvement and service in ministry.

3 Reasons Charismatics Are Wrong about New Testament Prophecy - by Justin Taylor

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

In our quest for the biblical explanation of the ceasing of the "supernatural" gifts, we turn to Justin Taylor. 

By the way, it has become a substantial irritation to us that cessationists will rarely, if ever, quote scripture. Mr. Taylor also fails to do so.

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

Trump’s Assault on the Rule of Law - by Robert Reich

Found here. My comments in bold.

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

Dr. Reich is troubled by the supposed lawlessness of President Trump. However, he had no concern about Obama declining to enforce DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). Obama famously threatened he would flout congress with a pen and a phone. In addition, "...Obama... has harmed the separation of powers that the Founders so carefully delineated — bydelaying implementation of the Affordable Care Act; refusing to enforce federal drug laws under the guise of prosecutorial discretion; and effectively amending our immigration laws by not only delaying deportations but also granting status and benefits to people who have immigrated to the U.S. illegally. In doing so, he has positioned himself as a super-legislator with the power to override the law."

Indeed, if the Rule of Law is so important, why did the Left tell us that there is no presumption of innocence with Judge Kavanaugh? If the Rule of Law is so important, why does the Left continually trumpet Clinton winning the popular vote in 2016, when the law is the Electoral College?

And why does the Left continually take settled law to the courts to be overturned? Why do they continually delay the vote count until more votes are found? Why do they have sanctuary cities, deliberately designed to negate federal law? 

So Dr. Reich's sudden concern for the Rule of Law rings hollow.

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

ETS II: My Response to Tom Schreiner - By Andrew Wilson

Found here. A continuation of the previous post.

The opening section of my response to Tom Schreiner overlapped with the summary of his argument I posted on Friday, so I won’t rehash that here. Instead I’ll focus on my disagreements with him, which in the end boil down to just three things:

ETS I: My Paper on the Continuation of the Charismata - By Andrew Wilson

Found here. An interesting article.

It is a huge privilege to open this discussion on spiritual gifts, with individuals from whom I have learned so much in so many areas. Thank you, Patrick, for making this possible—and for letting me go first. “The first to present his case seems right … until another comes and examines him.” Because this panel is based on two books, rather than one, and because Tom’s book and mine come to different conclusions on the continuation of the charismata, it would be easy for a discussion like this to become repetitive, with essentially the same material being covered six times over. To try and avoid that, in this presentation I plan to do three things. First, I will try to define the scope of the debate as simply as possible, so we don’t end up talking past each other. Second, I will lay out the Charismatic case in a positive way, with what seem to me the three key arguments for it. Third, I will summarise the strongest argument for Cessationism, and then challenge it, before concluding. I will leave a discussion of the other Cessationist arguments until we engage with Tom’s book later on.

Hyper Grace churches - FB Discussion

I posted this on FB, and a conversation ensued:


Me: Whenever a church only preaches the love and blessings of God in Christ without ever mentioning the need to repent and or the consequences of sin in the life of the believer, there is a good chance that is a hyper-grace church.


Me: We do not have to choose between repentance and grace as concepts. It's not an either/or situation. One does not exclude the other.

The fact that grace abounds does not mean repentance is no longer needed. Repentance represents the total shift of the whole man. God requires this, and it includes small repentances as well as large.


Steve: What's with term "hyper-grace?" Are we labeling people unnecessarily?

You are correct in saying it's not an either/or proposition, but by using the term hyper-grace it seems like you are saying we can have too much grace. That's like saying we can have too much love. Hyper-grace is actually a Biblical term, the Greek "ho charis HYPERperisseuō" literally means hyper-grace. (See the Mounce Interlinear NT)

"The grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. It teaches us to say 'No' to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age." (Titus 2:11-12 NIV)

Grace teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness. Is this not repentance? This passage teaches that it is grace which inspires us to repent and thus helps us to overcome. To say you can have too much grace is tantamount to saying you can have too much overcoming.

How about overcoming the apparent need to label/judge others? 8|

Me: I am happy to judge unrighteousness and false teaching.

Old Saints where are your new songs? - by PBSOMERS

Found here. An incredibly good article.

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

When do you officially become an ‘old’ saint?

Is it when your years as a follower of God are more than double the years you haven’t been? Is it when you’ve trusted God through some of life’s darkest challenges? Through pain, persecution, robbery or death? Is it when you have reached both a physical and spiritual ripe old age and still have a fresh and growing faith?

So what do you get for making it this far?

• Proverbs 16:31 grey hair/no hair and some depth of righteousness
• Job 12:12 wisdom and a greater depth of understanding
• Proverbs 20:29 a degree of splendor (rank, renown, glory)
• Titus 2:2-3 a reputation for faithfulness and opportunities to speak into the lives of others
• Hebrews 11 battle scars of this journey to sanctification
• Joshua 14 a reset vigor for the promises of God
• Leviticus 19:32 respect
• Psalm 90:10  a life time marked by faithful scars and a critical eye from having lived well in a broken world

What else? What’s next?

If you are somewhere on the continuum of older saint, the church needs you. We need your wisdom, your resource of experience, your critical eye. We need to hear your words of caution or your encouragement for prayer, trust and faithfulness.

That’s not all we need from you.

Those things can be done at a distance. We don’t need your distance.

-We need your gospel stories lived in the present Psalm 92:12-14
– We need to see how God gives you strength in some of the most difficult realities you face right now Psalm 40:29
– We need to know how you are hoping now in the goodness of God Isaiah 40:30-35
– We need to see God’s Spirit alive and working through your life Joel 2:28
– We need to see how you flourish and bear fruit in faithful labor with your church Psalm 92:12-14
– We need to learn from your holy boldness in witness and testimony of God’s ability to save, even now Psalm 71:15-18

These things can only be done up close. These are activities whose impact are only transferred through life on life. We need your gospel mentorship and discipleship.  We don’t need your distance, we need you to give away the depth of bold faith you have gained by inviting us, and our kids, into your lives.

One last thing we need from our older saints in the church,

We need your new gospel songs.

An in depth conversation with an atheist about meaning

FB friend B.R. posted this:

Yeah, I'm totally cool with this. In fact, when a declared atheist is elected to office, I hope he/she takes their oath over whatever book brings them the most inner peace and faith in humanity.

America's First Ever Hindu Congresswoman Will Take the Oath of Office Over the Bhagavad Gita jezebel.com

Me: I notice your two provisos for atheists, inner peace and faith in humanity. Why should they value them?

B.R.: Why shouldn't they? Belief in a determined God-figure is not required for inner peace and faith in humanity. I know many atheists who possess both provisos, and a few folks who believe in God but have neither.

Me: You miss my point. On what basis would you suggest that an atheist value the things you value? What other people possess is not relevant.

B.R.: Oh. Well. Then you can consider it wishful thinking. I pray that all human beings find inner peace, but obviously it's not a prerequisite for being an elected official. I would hope that elected officials have faith in humanity, but again it's not for me to say whether they do or not. Basically, I assume that Christians take the oath of office over the Bible because it represents their set of beliefs. Since atheists inherently have different beliefs, I hope they would choose a bound book that represents those beliefs. Inner peace and faith in humanity are just the ones I think are important. They can choose for themselves.

Me: Well said. You should have no expectation that they assent to the same values as you, or any values at all. But even to suggest that there is desirability for an atheist to select a symbol representative of their beliefs is in itself a moral imperative you are imposing. Further, to suggest that an atheist has any beliefs that should be explained or be adhered to is presumptuous. An atheist's values are of no interest or value to anyone other than the atheist.

D.G.: I disagree, Rich. A candidate's values are significant to me. I don't care what belief system those values arise from, and some values--e.g. prizing knowledge & accuracy--are often unrelated to belief systems that are traditionally considered religious or moral. But a candidate can't specify in advance how they'll respond to every possible policy issue, so their values are quite relevant to their performance in office.

B.R.: Thanks, I agree that it's foolish to expect them to have the same values. However, I'm completely satisfied to imposing an imperative that an elected official should take the oath of office by using a book that means something to them morally.

"Further, to suggest that an atheist has any beliefs that should be explained or be adhered to is presumptious." - Life has led me to understand that everyone has beliefs they adhere to, regardless of their religious commitment or lack thereof. I've never met someone without beliefs.

"An atheist's values are of no interest or value to anyone other than the atheist." - Why not? Why are they of any less value than a religious person's, especially in the scenario that they're an elected official?

Me: D.G., I quite agree, a candidate's values are significant to me as well. But we are talking specifically about atheists. An atheist's values, if any, are chosen based on whatever criteria he might deem important, and abandoned or modified in the same way. You or anyone else who might place expectations on an atheist to value something or perform or believe in a certain way is an imposition of your values upon the atheist. The atheist as well has no moral imperative to impose his on you. One might justifiably wonder how an atheist can govern without imposing values.

Me: B.R., it is true that everyone seems to have values. This is not being disputed. It is the nature of those values, how they are arrived at, and the obligations we might put on ourselves to act or not act on them that is the issue. If values are personal and individually determined, embraced, modified, and rejected, then they are only relevant for the individual.

Relative and Objective truth - FB comments

In an earlier post I engaged what I must assume was a vegan post-modernist new ager. In that particular thread we had begun by talking about the morality of killing animals, and he believed it to be immoral.

The conversation morphed. The new-ager's comments about truth of his opinions were fascinating, if confounding.

My comments in bold.
---------------------

Comment One:

I’m just stating truth. And no it’s not my personal truth. (So we are clear that our interlocutor views himself as making objective truth claims and not subjective truth.)

It’s actually our creators truth. (Now he invokes an unnamed creator, further solidifying his claim to objective truth.)

The truth is that it is unloving to kill harm or torture any living creature. (He makes an objective moral claim. He does not reference the basis or source of this claim, however.)

(...)

Comment Two: 

There is absolute truth and one must figure that out for themselves. (We've been using the word "objective" truth, but our interlocutor uses the word "absolute." Absolute truth is an unvarying, rigid standard, but there is contained no suggestion that such standards are knowable, or even operate in the real world. However, objective truth is knowable truth that works through our lives in practical ways, and true no matter what one believes.)

One has to have desire to investigate our creators love and truth. We must have a deep emotional longing from within to figure out absolute love and truth from our creators perspective- not ours. Their are billions of personal truths that are out of harmony with Gods love and truth. Don’t believe me. I’m just giving counsel and advice. I encourage you all to grow in love. Keep experimenting with what’s loving and unloving on everything based on how you feel. (Our interlocutor contradicts himself. Having embraced "absolute" truth, he retreats to what feels to be true. No longer an absolutist, he has become a relativist.

Interestingly, despite it being his personal truth, he evangelizes for it. "We must" is a moral imperative, but such imperatives cannot exist in a subjective framework. In other words, if truth is my truth, how can I claim it to be yours as well?)

What does the heart feel. What does the soul feel. Get out of your intellectual mind and start having true real conversations with your feelings. (Now he begins offering prescriptions, with our feelings as the standard.)

Your feelings will set your true freedom. This is not about me or any religion or a book. (How can it not be about him if it invokes his feelings? And of course he is most certainly making religious claims about our "creator." Most likely, he read this stuff in a book somewhere.)

This is about us making personal choices privately to ask long and communicate to our creator for her love (Ah, now we know that this "creator" is not God. We conclude he is talking about some pagan goddess like Gaia. "Many Neopagans worship Gaia. Beliefs regarding Gaia vary, ranging from the belief that Gaia is the Earth to the belief that she is the spiritual embodiment of the earth, or the Goddess of the Earth."

This would certainly make sense given his veganism, for it would certainly be immoral to eat a fellow creature.)

and truth to transform the condition of our soul.

Killing an animal is murder - FB conversation

A FB friend posted this.
______________


Vladka November 5 at 6:25 PM ·

I don’t even know what to say! My little Joshua is growing up!!! Bitter sweet 😊❤️ I am super proud of him🙏❤️🙏




Jason: It’s actually quite sad to see a young boy be taught that it’s ok to take the life of another creature. The truth is all animals have the divine right to live freely without being murdered - kidnapped - live in suffering- torchered or used and abused in anyway. The more you desire to grow in love from within. You will see this and feel this very clearly.

Kenton: It’s sad for those who don’t hunt. Why? Because the bean fields in which the farmer is growing tofu has an abundance of rabbits, turtles, mice, raccoons and so many more little animals that are being murdered without cause, except to grow the beans for vegans. We can definitely dig much deeper on this subject. I don’t know how right it would be to judge anyone but ourselves.

Kip: Awesome job little buddy bringing home the steaks!!

Kip: Jason, its only your truth. Shut up. Keep your hippie loving mushroom eating opinion to yourself. Not needed. That deer is tasty steaks.

Kenton: Jason, step outside of what you’re saying. Do you understand the farmers who raise your tofu burgers and turkeys kill the animals who try to eat the beans? This is your truth, everyone has their own truth. What has a vegan done for wildlife?! Seriously! People who think like this do not understand the balance that is required. The wolves which were released into Yellowstone, they kill elk, deer and moose for fun. This is not what we do, we carefully prepare these delicious burgers, steaks, breakfast sausages, jerky, salami so we can invite you and your family over to enjoy organic food. You’re barking up the wrong tree my friend. You ask us to dig deep, I ask you to dig even deeper to see the animals killed to protect your lifestyle too.

Jason: Thanks for your feedback brother. Keep progressing in love bro. We’re all learning and growing. Thanks for the conversation.

Stepanka: Do you feel proud because your son kills an animal? Incomprehensible

Kip: Stepanka, VERY PROUD!! That boy is learning how to provide good healthy organic food for himself and his family in the future. Don’t like the post? Roll on by. We do not need your opinions. I see on your page your eating innocent oysters. Poor things. If you preach it. Live it.

Vladka: I am proud of him that he gets out there,have fun and provides organic meat for us. This is not easy to do, it takes hard work and courage. You are seeing from completely different side and I understand it as well. Hugs 🤗

Kenton: Why yes, yes we do😊

Me:

ACLU email: Sessions' replacement even more evil

I receive emails from the ACLU quite frequently. Here they make the astounding claim that the new attorney general suddenly has the power to fire Mueller. In actual fact, the attorney general has always had the power to hire and fire his staff. 

In addition, the AG is part of the executive branch. Trump has the constitutional power to pick his own staff, regardless of the potential for it benefiting Trump in some way.
------------------

PROPHETIC WORD: THE NEW WINESKIN IS FORMING - By Jeremiah Johnson

Found here. A very true word.

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

I'm convinced that church leaders who refuse to drop the mic and get off a stage to learn how to actively mother and father the generations will become obsolete in the days ahead. Obsolete meaning: Out of date. Churches shutting down. No longer effective and bearing fruit type obsolete.

The "old wineskin" in the Church is currently trembling because the saints are over the one man ministry does all model. They are looking for fathers and mothers who are willing to roll up their sleeves and do life with them. They don't care much about the sermons anymore. They are actually looking for church leaders to model a healthy marriage and what it looks like for your kids to serve the Lord with everything in them.

The Supreme Court just agreed to hear a case that could nuke the separation of church and state - by IAN MILLHISER

Found here. My comments in bold.
-----------------------------

Get ready for a whole lot more religious icons in government buildings.

In what will almost certainly be a victory for the religious right, (Actually, a win for religious liberty.)

the Supreme Court announced on Friday that it will decide whether the Constitution permits a local government to display “on public property a 40-foot tall Latin cross, (The cross was erected in 1925. I wonder when it changed from constitutional to unconstitutional?

The memorial's base is "...inscribed with the words 'valor,' 'endurance,' 'courage' and 'devotion.'” Are those religious words? 

The memorial happens to be in the shape of a cross. Perhaps it's shapes that offend the haters and humanists? The mere fact of the shape is offensive? Shapes can be unconstitutional?)

established in memory of soldiers who died in World War I.” Although a federal appeals court held that this cross violates the Constitution’s ban on laws “respecting an establishment of religion,” (This cross is a law? I thought it was a monument?

Let's quote the First Amendment: 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

So we ask the author, what law did Congress make regarding this monument?)

How do I evaluate claims of supernatural experiences? - by Clint Archer

Found here. My comments in bold.

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

Once again we find a Bible teacher not providing any Bible references, or any references of any sort.

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

Whose job is it to keep mama happy? - by Dalrock

Found here. A Very good article.

We can no longer ignore that voice within women that says: ‘I want something more than my husband and my children and my home.’

–Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique

Women are especially prone to falling into discontentment and disrupting the lives of everyone around them when they do.  The Book of Proverbs warns repeatedly of this tendency:

• Proverbs 21-9 (ISV):  It’s better to live in a corner on the roof than to share a house with a contentious woman.
• Proverbs 21-19 (KJV):  It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman.
• Proverbs 25-24 (ISV):  It’s better to live in a corner on the roof than in a house with a contentious woman.
• Proverbs 27-15 (NKJV):  A continual dripping on a very rainy day And a contentious woman are alike;
• Proverbs 14:1 (NIV):  The wise woman builds her house, but with her own hands the foolish one tears hers down.

Betty Friedan called this tendency of women toward discontentment “the problem that has no name” in her 1963 book The Feminine Mystique.  The book is commonly credited with identifying the problem (the mysterious discontentment of women) and thereby kicking off second wave feminism.

Is Jesus currently limited by his incarnation? - by Clint Archer

Found here. My comments in bold.

------------------------------
Here is one of those arcane theological arguments that is a lot of heat and no light. For those who must have all their theological ducks perfectly in a row, we suppose it's important. 

As is too typical for these types of people, the author will not quote any verses at all. We are left to do that for him, to see if his assertions are backed up by the references he gives.

As an aside, it is terribly dangerous to discuss the nature of God as if He is a Being operating in the space-time continuum. His eternal nature means we cannot demand that He conform to a time point.

And we note that this Bible teacher will never quote the Bible.
---------------------------