Notitia, Assensus, and Fiducia: The Nature of Saving Faith - by Ed Dingess

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

Mr. Dingess has a real fondness for foreign words and obtuse explanations, which has the effect of rendering his article nearly impenetrable. Maybe he thinks it makes him seem more intellectual, or maybe it's an affectation. 

Regardless, there is no reason to write this way, especially for one who fancies himself a Bible teacher. Teachers explain, clarify, and impart information. A teacher who would impede that is known as a poor teacher.

And, the author has nearly 1200 words (minus quotes) in which to do this.

We will summarize: It's not enough to believe there's God. Further, it's not enough to believe accurate information about salvation. Saving faith is necessary, and that is a gift of God. That's all there is to this article, in terms of the author's stated objective. He adds little else, which leaves us wondering why he wrote the article at all.  

Happily, the author actually quotes Scripture. This rather rare occurrence among these "Bible teachers" gladdens our hearts.

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

John the Baptist: The Last Prophet - by John MacArthur

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Dr. MacArthur is a respected Bible teacher, so we are surprised at the errors and even bad doctrine often contained in his postings. Since he represents himself as an authoritative voice, we feel justified to hold his feet to the fire.

Today he discusses John the Baptist, and in doing so makes several errant comments, not the least of which is contained in the title, "The Last Prophet." But by no measure was John the Baptist the last prophet. Dr. MacArthur will not mention anything about him being the last prophet in this article, but he will provide a single-sentence mention of this in his subsequent article:

Though his story is told in the gospels, John was the last of the Old Testament prophets.

Oh. So he wasn't the last prophet, he was the last OT prophet. But how does Dr. MacArthur know this? The Bible doesn't say so. Jesus does identify him as a prophet, and more [Lk. 7:26]. And we do have some of John's prophecies [Lk. 3:16-17 and Jn. 1:33 for example], so there is no doubt he was a prophet, and no one was greater [Mt. 11:11].

There were numerous NT prophets [Ac. 11:27, Ac. 13:1, Ac. 15:32, Ac. 21:9]. There is the prophetic office [Ep. 4:11] and the spiritual gift of prophecy [Ro. 12:6]. However, Dr. MacArthur, being a cessationist, wants John the Baptist to be the last prophet because he doesn't believe in contemporary prophecy.

But at least he quotes Scripture. This is relatively rare among these Bible teachers.

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

An Open Letter to Fellow Believers Who Have Concerns About Online Polemics/Discernment Ministry - by David Morrill

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

"Discernment" ministries are nothing if not sensitive. They're in the business of criticizing pastors and churches, but they don't like being on the receiving end of criticism. 

And Protestia is no exception.

The thing about it is, "discernment" ministries are sometimes worthy of criticism. They are too often over-the-top, insulting, and, yes, down right wrong. In keeping with their hyperbolic tendencies, their response to criticism is also hyperbolic.

Here's a "discernment" ministry that claims that its brand of discernment is definitionally loving.

This is a "discernment" minister who was respectfully asked a question about the status of her heart when she writes about false teachers, and her response is truly astounding.

This same person does concede that some criticism is deserved, but spends the greater part of her article complaining about how difficult it is to be a "discernment" minister.

Here we have a person who believe that only false teachers are divisive, which apparently justifies any and all bad behavior of "discernment" ministers.

"Discernment" ministers can get really nasty. Here's some examples:

• Karen Swallow, an admittedly questionable Christian, was "discerned" (by Protestia!) as follows:

hideously ugly

post-menopausal woman 

bizarre wardrobe choices

a penchant for cackling

no personal charisma

a face that scares children

a voice that sounds like nails down a chalkboard

pugnacious

unladylike

uglier on the inside than she is on the outside

the personality of a Roomba 

 the personal charisma of fetid corpse

unpleasant and evil woman

• Here's a "discernment minister" (also from Protestia) who thinks it's appropriate to rank the worst Christian of the year.

• Here's one who accuses a person of committing the unforgiveable sin.

• T.D. Jakes might have some problems, but here's what a "discernment" minister wrote about him: TD Jakes deserves no honor among bible teaching, God-fearing men. Like you, he deserves nothing but our contempt and the working end of the shepherd's rod.

• Here's a fellow who seriously wants all charismatics to die of COVID (from Protestia's predecessor "Pulpit and Pen").

• This man says we don't have to pray for people who are false teachers.

• This man feels it's within the bounds of proper discourse to call someone an imbecile (also from Protestia's predecessor "Pulpit and Pen").

Also, the author seems to think that because Jesus was violent once and Paul was insulting once that it gives him carte blanche permission to do the same. This of course is ridiculous. Description is not prescription.

We don't want to suggest the above examples are typical, but they happen frequently enough that they're not aberrations. And thankfully, there are sane voices who carry a message of caution that is valuable for all of us.

As a final note, this long defense of the author's "ministry" doesn't contain a single quote from the Bible. There are many Bible references, but no verses. It's continually dismaying to us how these people think they can teach the Bible without quoting it.

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

Euthanizing The Poor Is Just Capitalism’s True Face: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix - by Caitlin Johnstone

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

The author is a doctrinaire leftist, and not a particularly bright one. She is so inured to the leftist agitprop that she really believes it to be the truth. We've often found that socialists have a unique set of blinders they wear when considering political systems. They have an uncanny ability to completely ignore the atrocities perpetrated in the name of their political philosophy while simultaneously blaming the other side for the results of their advocacy.

It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

However, the reality is most leftists are cynically spewing their agitprop. They don't really believe anything they say or what other leftists say. They are simply doing their duty in service to The Narrative. A leftist is permitted, even encouraged to say anything if it serves The Narrative. In return, they get accolades from their leftist friends, they get a pass on behaving like greedy capitalists, and they are free to engage in any behavior, legal or illegal, they wish, if they simply say the right things and hold to the right ideas.

The Narrative, therefore, is the talking points and bumper-sticker slogans approved by the Central Committee for dissemination each day. This is why we see such uniformity in The Narrative as each purveyor of agitprop receives his or her marching orders.

The sole purpose of The Narrative is not to tell facts, explain things, or increase understanding. No, the Left doesn't care about women, the poor, gay rights, fascism, inequality, abortion, or racism. Those things are only of interest to the degree they can be used to service The Narrative. In fact, Leftists regularly act in opposition to these causes, but as we said, they will invariably get a pass because they are serving The Agenda.

The Narrative has one singular purpose: To advance The Agenda. The Agenda, quite simply, is to overthrow the power structures so as to install Marxism. They want rich people's money taken from them, America's liberty negated, and respect for individual rights subordinated to the state, and the destruction of every idea or activity that allows people to live in peace unaccosted by tyrannical government as they pursue their beneficial self-interest. 

The Left cannot countenance a people who have achieved a nice life, a nice family, who are generous and helpful, and polite and hard working. The Agenda requires a disaffected, dissatisfied, envying class of people (the proletariat) who can be persuaded to rise up against the power structure (the bourgeois). 

Thus the purpose the author's article is solely to promulgate The Narrative. She did her duty today, and will repeat the same bumper sticker slogans and leftist talking points tomorrow and every day until The Agenda is finally installed.

As an aside, it is the Left that wants to euthanize. Canada, a decidedly leftist government, has legalized euthanasia, and to date, has euthanized nearly 32,000 people. A former Olympic athlete who had been trying for years to obtain a wheelchair ramp was instead offered euthanasia.

This is typical for leftists, to accuse their adversaries of doing something untoward while they themselves are actually doing that very thing.

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

Does “only God know the heart”? Or are there cases when we do too? - by Elizabeth Prata

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We are saddened once again to be pressed into service regarding Ms. Prata's errant teaching. Today she sets out to refute the idea that no one can know someone's heart. She claims that it's possible to know a false teacher's heart, and lists a bunch of Scriptures that are supposed to document her case.

Thus there are three prongs to this issue that come to bear:

1. The cited Scriptures talk about the heart
2. The cited Scriptures tell us we can specifically know someone else's heart, and 
3. The cited Scriptures are all about false teachers.

Unfortunately for Ms. Prata, each of the prongs is incorrect. None of these verses contain the English word "heart," none of them contain the Greek word kardia, none of them tell us we can know someone's heart, and only some of them are even about false teachers. 

From these Scriptures Ms. Prata concludes that she is able to discern the contents of a specific false teacher's heart. That is, because the Bible describes what comes from an evil heart, for her that is the same thing as being able to know an individual heart. Or more likely, she had an idea in mind and went searching for Scriptures that confirm it.

So what about knowing hearts? We are pretty certain that Ms. Prata does not believe that apostolic power is in operation today, nor does she believe in the "supernatural' gifts. Peter, an apostle, discerned both Ananias' and Simon's heart:

Ac. 5:3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land?  

Ac. 8:21 You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. 

The prophetic gift reveals hearts: 

1Co. 14:25 ...and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, “God is really among you!”

These are about supernatural empowerments. So unless the discernment Ms. Prata claims to possess is the supernatural ability [1Co. 12:10] to distinguish between spirits [1Jn. 4:1], she does not have the ability to know a particular someone's heart. Knowing what comes from evil hearts does not necessarily give the ability to know a specific evil heart.

We do find evidence that we can get a hint as to the nature of our own hearts:

Mt. 6:21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

We might have some evidence of the contents of someone's heart, but that does not mean we actually know someone's heart: 

Mt. 12:34b For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks.

Mt. 15:19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.

Further, a deceptive heart definitionally means that evil is being hidden by deception. Deception means someone is being deceived:

Mt. 24:24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect — if that were possible.

What does the Bible actually say about who knows the heart? 

He. 4:12 For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

Je. 17:9-10 The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? 10 “I the LORD search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve.”

The thing about this is, Ms. Prata presents herself as a teacher of women. She has a website that purports to tell the truth. But invariably she has an underlying agenda in mind when she writes about something. So rather than teach the topic, she simply tries to refute something under the guise of a teaching, in this case those who would defend who she thinks are false teachers.

Thus she enters the equation with a bias, which means she will completely miss the things we just discussed, leading to faulty teaching.

Lastly, once again we find a supposed Bible teacher who is unable to quote Scripture. We shall remedy that problem below.

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

Dr. Michael Brown Blaming the Lost and Defending His War Against Them - By Anthony Wad

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Rev. Wade's premise is in his title. But Dr. Brown never blames the lost, nor does he describe any sort of desire to war against them. These two accusations are the result of Rev. Wade insisting on his own definition of words. Dr. Brown employs the phrase "culture war" to describe the conflict between good and evil in society, which is a very common descriptor for the state of our country. Rev. Wade badly wants this phrase to mean that the other side of the "culture war" must be an enemy. Thus Dr. Brown is blaming sinners as being the enemy.

But no one uses the phrase in this way. In fact, it is a rather mild hyperbole used to describe the struggle between two world views.

Rev. Wade uses more than 2700 words (excluding quoted material). Notice that we summarized Rev. Wade's position in a couple of sentences. Because Rev. Wade is given to long tangents and stream-of-consciousness presentations, he is largely unable to express cogent thoughts.

In addition, Rev. Wade neither quotes nor references any Bible verse (except for the opening Scripture). Not a syllable of the Bible anywhere in this "devotion." No doctrine explained. No exegesis. No precept we might be able to use to enhance our walk of faith. No biblical principle clarified. Nothing of eternal importance. 

Nothing.

We should say, we are not here to defend Dr. Brown. Our intent is to examine Rev. Wade's presentation.

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

Why Trumpism as a fascist movement will not disappear - By Wayne Madsen

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Yet another Trump-is-fascist article. When the command goes out from headquarters, the minions leap to their word processors and start cranking out their bumper-sticker slogans.

This article is one of those. The author's purpose is not to inform, explain, or clarify. He's not intending to impart information or understanding. This is not written to contribute to the debate.

No, the author is simply bolstering The Narrative in service to The Agenda. The Narrative is the Leftist talking points of the day, the factoids and topics that always appear simultaneously all over the media landscape, designed to facilitate The Agenda. The Agenda is the elimination of the current system to install Marxism. 

This article is far more clumsy than what we typically see. It is so breathtakingly dumb, so filled with agitprop, false narratives, leftist talking points, and invented conspirators, that we barely know where to start. We are attempting to shake off the effects of this, but an odd brain fog resists all our efforts to do so. 

This is what raw, unadulterated leftism does to a previously clearheaded person's mind.

We should also note that the author is engaging in Mountain Man's Law. Everything he tells us about the Republicans is something the Left is actually doing.

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

RESPONDING TO QUESTIONS ABOUT AMILLENNIALISM - by Gabriel Hughes

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

In the past we have criticized the author for his poorly reasoned writings. But for the most part today's article is a very well done explanation regarding his eschatology. He quotes Scripture, challenges conventional thinking, and respectfully lays out his case logically and from the Bible. 

This presentation gladdens our heart. So rarely do we find Bible teachers who actually quote and reference the Bible. And no attacks on the opposition. Well done.

Unfortunately, the author doesn't really explain amillennialism is or even what the millennium is.

In addition, we do have some quibbles with the author's presentation, which we will note below.

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

Unformed Expression Share -by DAVID DE BRUYN (about structure in our church practices)

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author builds an elaborate edifice based on preconceptions, appeals to historical practices, and culture-based factors. 

We don't accept the author's premise that spontaneous expressions (i.e., a preacher speaking extemporaneously, a worship leader singing a spontaneous song, or a person going off script when giving a testimony) are without form and therefore undesirable. It seems to us that a spontaneous expression can and often does have its own form, perhaps undiscernible to the casual listener. 

Further, even if there's a lack of form, we are at loss to produce a Scripture that tells us this is bad.

And in fact, the author is unable to produce a Scripture that says this. In fact, he is unable to quote or even reference a single Scripture. Not a syllable. We have noted many times this defect in the presentations of supposed "Bible" teachers.

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

Rethink - Original Sin

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 what we think are 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 too 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 there is more than one way to interpret doctrine, more than one way to think about the faith, and more than one way to read the Scriptures. We would not suggest that our way is the only way, or the right way; we are not Bible scholars. But we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to rightly divide the Word of God.

Election Day 2022 - Exegeting Psalm 95 to Remember What God We Serve - By Anthony Wade

Found here. Our comments in bold

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

Rev. Wade comes out with guns a-blazing again, this time disguised as an exegesis. If only he could set aside his leftist political agenda long enough to actually deliver a teaching, he might turn out to be good at it.

This has yet to happen, however. Today's article nothing more than a grenade toss at the NAR.

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

Get Ready for the Coming Impeachment of Joe Biden. The GOP is ready to again beclown American democracy - By Jeet Heer

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

It renders us nearly speechless to read articles like this. This agitprop so brazenly spins the truth that we are left dizzy.

This author warns us of a possible clown show coming regarding the impeachment of Joe Biden as if the Democrats didn't clown show impeach Trump twice, the second time when he wasn't even in office. So the author warning us about something the Democrats have already done, a politically motivated impeachment.

We have deemed this rhetorical technique Mountain Man's Law, which is: "Everything a Leftist Democrat accuses someone of doing is actually being done by Leftist Democrats." So if there is an accusation of nefarious activity, tax evasion, moral depravity, or corruption leveled by a Leftist, one can be sure that it is a cover for what Leftists are actually doing.

Also, we must remember that when dealing with a doctrinaire Leftist, the issue is never the issue. The issue is actually a smokescreen, an excuse, a diversion. The author doesn't care about impeachment, he cares about The Agenda. The Agenda is the implementation of Marxism. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to promulgate The Narrative (which is the agitprop used to advance The Agenda), nothing more.

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

Emotionalism versus reason

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 what we think are 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 too 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 there is more than one way to interpret doctrine, more than one way to think about the faith, and more than one way to read the Scriptures. We would not suggest that our way is the only way, or the right way; we are not Bible scholars. But we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to rightly divide the Word of God.

Sola Scriptura and Cyber Worship - by Jacob Trotter *updated*

Found here. Our comments in bold. See our *update* below.

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

Though Mr. Trotter complains that the article he is evaluating is lacking in Scriptural content, he will manage to quote only a single Scripture in the nearly 1200 words of his article. We find this way too often in these so called Bible teachers.

Mr. Trotter promises more articles where he will apparently explain biblical worship. If today's article is any indication, however, we doubt he will do so since he was unable to explain it here. 

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

An Appeal to Charismatic Friends - by John MacArthur

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

One would think that an appeal designed to draw people out of error and into the truth would not be phrased to alienate them. We think the typical charismatic would find this sermon condescending and insulting. Rather than treating his adversaries as thoughtful people, he denigrates them, stereotypes them, and considers them his inferiors.  

But more to the point, this long sermon is completely absent of documentation of his central points. We realize it is the conclusion of several days of preaching, but we still require documentation of the assertions he makes. 

As he wanders off course into a tangent, he does manage to quote a number of Scriptures, but he only supplies references to his ancillary points. But he is unable or unwilling to document his doctrinal claims about charismatics. 

As an aside, we should not that this sermons was delivered several years ago. But since Dr. MacArthur is still speaking against nameless charismatics to this day, we think it's still worthy of our analysis.

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