What are spiritual gifts and how do I discover mine - by Stephen Kneale

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

This Scriptureless "teaching" completely botches the definition of spiritual gifts. We find the phrase here:

Ro. 1:11 I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong...

Literally, pneumatikos charisma.  

Charisma means, 

5486 /xárisma ("grace-gift") divinely empowers a believer to share God's work with others, i.e. Spirit-empowered service to the Church to carry out His plan for His people.

[5486 /xárisma (but not limited to) "spiritual gifts." xarismata (the plural form) literally means "grace-endowments."]

So a spiritual gift is quite simply a Holy Spirit empowerment.

Because the author is simply riffing on quasi-biblical concepts and never quotes the Bible, we must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

What is a Hyper-Cessationist? - by Ryan Denton (Part one and two)

Found here. An enlightening article explaining a difficult topic. Though we appreciate the author's work, he doesn't quote a single word of Scripture, yet he is able to quote theologians and historical figures at length. This marrs an otherwise helpful presentation. 

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

As a capital “R” Reformed person, I would call myself a cessationist. This simply means that I believe God has “ceased” giving any new doctrine and/or new ethics. You could also describe it as the belief that there is no more canon to be given. It also means God will not give any more infallible revelation that has the authority of Scripture itself. 

But for some time now, I have been deeply troubled by some of the assumptions that the term “cessationist” now seems to carry. Cessationism has morphed into something dark and suffocating. It has become a thick, wet blanket used to smother anything that smacks of the supernatural. There are contemporary proponents of this type of cessationism who seem to think and teach that the term means God has no interaction with us apart from His Word, and that all miracles except for conversion have ceased. At the very least, claims of the miraculous are to be looked at with disdain and doubt. They teach there are no more spiritual gifts. There are no more “signs and wonders.” But such a view is not historical cessationism. It is a type of contemporary distortion that can only be described as “hyper-cessationism,” and its consequences could not be more dire.

Making Sense of Grace and Election - by John MacArthur

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

In this article Dr. MacArthur obsesses about Election, a Calvinistic doctrine that's of little use. We say this because the doctrine changes nothing about living a holy, obedient life, being generous, bearing fruit, or worshiping God more adequately. It does not come to bear on any aspect of a Christian's life.

But more to the point, Dr. MacArthur is unable to lay his finger upon a Scripture which teaches that God chose everyone who will be saved. Likely because it's not found in the Bible.

Further, he never defines terms like "grace" or "sovereignty."

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Are there Modern Apostles? - By Elizabeth Prata

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We have seen these sorts of claims regarding apostolic qualifications before. We are continually surprised when they resurface, because they are so inadequately documented. Don't people like Ms. Prata read their Bibles? It seems not.

Ms. Prata is telling us about some very specific doctrinal claims. Our reasonable requirement is that the proof texts must specifically document those claims. 

In order to document these claims, the proof texts must

1. Speak to the actual claim (i.e., do the proof texts properly address the subject matter of the claim)

2. Indicate an exclusivity (That is, does the text demonstrate that only the apostles are being discussed)

3. If there are others who qualified under the three criteria, are they also called apostles?

4. Are there others called apostles where these qualifications are not described?

She makes three claims about apostolic qualifications:

1. 1st person eye-witness of Jesus Christ 

2. Directly appointed by Christ

3. Ability to work miracles (signs) of the apostles

Let's see how Ms. Prata deals with our qualifications.

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

Doctrine: The Key to Christian Living - by John MacArthur

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Dr. MacArthur muddled thinking is plainly on display here. He first sets a false choice, knowing Bible doctrine versus completely avoiding all Bible doctrine. For him, knowing Bible doctrine is attaining doctrinal perfection. That is his highest goal, his evidence of spiritual maturity. Thus the continual refinement of doctrine is mistaken for growing in faith.

If people don't share his love for the pursuit of better and better doctrine, they don't believe in doctrinal at all. Thus they cannot please God, because they cannot grow in their Christian walk.

We would think that the Holy Spirit is the key to Christian living. We also think that the encouragement of the brethren is an important component. Doctrine, especially as presented by Dr. MacArthur, is merely the accumulation of Bible facts. 

That's not maturity of faith.

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

BE YOURSELF If you voted Republican - Alison Rennie, North Miami Beach

Found on Faceborg:

Transcription: BE YOURSELF If you voted Republican because you fear socialism, then live your truth. Do not accept Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. Avoid public beaches, parks and libraries. Do not allow your children to attend tax-supported schools or to take advantage of food programs. Drive only on toll roads. Do not call 911 unless you intend to pay for services rendered. - Alison Rennie, North Miami Beach

Apparently this is what is considered a clever rebuttal of Republican worries about Socialism. Leftists and Democrats will simultaneously mock people by denying that things are socialist, then they claim that we have socialism already, and then they claim it's wonderful and we should embrace it.

Why did Jesus have to be fully God? - by Stephen Kneale

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is largely a case made from logic based on premises, not the Bible. Logic certainly has its uses, but if the premises are faulty the logical case will be faulty. As such, the author is not really teaching the Bible, he's writing about his faulty logical deductions.

When he does finally refer to the Bible and matters of faith he gets a lot wrong. So his clever deductions do not edify, they do not open up the Scripture to us, and they do not explain any tenet that one might incorporate into one's life for the pursuit of holiness, service, worship, generosity, or obedience.

We must consider this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

How to stop Musk - by Robert Reich

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

**Update** Dr. Reich complains about lies told by Musk as the reason to cancel him. What does he think about Alexa informing people that Trump wasn't shot? Will he call for Google's cancellation?***

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

This is a truly astounding article. Dr. Reich has an ax to grind with Elon Musk, solely on the basis of opinions. Does Dr. Reich want to persuade? No. Does the case he presents carry a thoughtful, considered objective? Negatory. Is he interested in discourse and give and take? Not on your life.

Dr. Reich wants to punish Musk. Punish him for lying (actually, for expressing opinions Dr. Reich doesn't like.) He wants to bring the full weight of government down on him. Hit him hard. Because he doesn't like Musk. 

That's it.

This is the current state of the political Left. Having long abandoned 60s tolerance, love and peace, opposing the Man, and doing your own thing, these people have become what they opposed. In fact, they have became the worst parts of the Man themselves: Wielding power to silence dissent, maliciously prosecuting political enemies, punishing unapproved thoughts and speech, and instilling fear in law-abiding citizens.

Utterly lacking in self-awareness, Dr. Reich happily embraces Gestapo tactics and Fascist language, hiding behind something called the "public interest." That is, one man, Musk, is a serious danger by expressing ideas contrary to the ficticious collective interest of hundreds of millions of Americans.

Dr. Reich is a man that you should avoid at all costs.

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

Justification - Ligonier Editorial

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

There isn't a single word of the Bible quoted here. Not one. There are several Bible references and a couple of quotes from a statement of faith, but there are no verses quoted. How can someone teach the Bible without quoting it?

Further, the author of this article makes a number of of undocumented assertions. Combined with a presumption that the reader is already equipped with a substantial knowledge of the author's doctrines means that this article must be deemed Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Bad Worship Songs - Welcome Resurrection - by Elevation Worship feat. Chris Brown] by Steven Furtick, Cody Carnes

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, Welcome Resurrection.

All in Christ are so according to the Sovereign Grace of God - by Mike Ratliff

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

The author wrestles with the supposed tension between God's total sovereignty and man's free will. He is unable to cite any relevant Bible verse about this, however.

The central mistake Calvinists like the author make is their errant view of sovereignty. To them, sovereignty means control. They mistake God possessing the highest position and power with the use of them. But there is no requirement or obligation for God to use His power and position.

This is key: Calvinism requires God to use His sovereignty. So in their view, if God is not using His sovereignty then He is not sovereign, and other parties (like man) are impinging on God's sovereignty when they exercise their free will.

Thus from a faulty assumption descends faulty understanding. And this confusion is certainly recognizable in the author's presentation.

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

Is the Multi-Service Model Really Practical? - by Danny D’Acquisto

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author doesn't quote a single Scripture. Not one. 

Further, the author confuses the difference between the people as the church and the location as the church. The two are not the same.

Lastly, we don't necessarily oppose the author's view. We oppose his reasoning.

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

Doctrine: The Preacher's Responsibility - by John MacArthur

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Dr. MacArthur builds this entire presentation on three false premises, that Timothy was a pastor, that Paul was writing Timothy to tell him how to be a better pastor, and that pastors lead churches. But Timothy wasn't a pastor, the epistles aren't pastoral instruction, and Timothy wasn't leading this church.

So, if Timothy wasn't a pastor, what was he? Timothy was actually a valued associate of Paul (Ac. 19:22), who labored alongside him (Ro. 16:21), accompanied him on missionary trips (Ac. 16), went to various churches on assignment, and generally did his bidding.

Timothy was Paul's fellow-worker, not a pastor:

Ro. 16:21 Timothy, my fellow-worker, sends his greetings to you, as do Lucius, Jason and Sosipater, my relatives. 

Ph. 2:22 But you know that Timothy has proved himself, because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel.

 He was an itinerant preacher of the Gospel, not a pastor:

2Co. 1:19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by me and Silas and Timothy, was not “Yes” and “No”, but in him it has always been “Yes.” 

Ac. 17:15: The men who escorted Paul brought him to Athens and then left with instructions for Silas and Timothy to join him as soon as possible.

Timothy traveled to various churches:

• Corinth:

1Co. 4:17: For this reason I am sending to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church. 

1Co. 16:10 If Timothy comes, see to it that he has nothing to fear while he is with you, for he is carrying on the work of the Lord, just as I am.

• Philippi:

Ph. 2:19 I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon, that I also may be cheered when I receive news about you.

• Thessalonica:

1Th. 3:2 We sent Timothy, who is our brother and God’s fellow worker in spreading the gospel of Christ, to strengthen and encourage you in your faith...

• The Hebrew church: 

He. 13:23 I want you to know that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I will come with him to see you. 

 Some of Paul’s epistles were co-written with Timothy:

2Co. 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother...

Ph. 1:1 Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus at Philippi…

Col. 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother...

Phile. 1 Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, To Philemon our dear friend and fellow-worker... 

2Th. 1:1 Paul, Silas and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians

It should seem pretty clear that Timothy was one of Paul's company who traveled all over the Mideast as missionaries and problem-fixers. 

Now about the matter of who leads churches. Paul tells us directly: 

1Ti. 5:17 The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.

Pastors don't lead churches, elders do. Timothy wasn't a pastor. Thus the letters to Timothy are not instructions for pastors. Now certainly there's a lot of good information in these letters, so we should not dismiss them. But we should rightly understand their purpose and not think they are what they are not.

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

Why Do So Many Republicans Follow Trump Like Sheep Despite His Blatant Lies? - By Robert Weiner and Olivia Ardito

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Only 679 words here, but even so, one would think it wouldn't be too hard for the authors to identify at least one blatant lie from Trump. 

The authors end up devoting only the first paragraph to the topic, then immediately turn to their amazement that Trump supporters support Trump.

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

Charismatics who give names to demons

We have seen some criticism directed towards certain charismatics who give names to demons, for example, Jezebel or python. While we don't necessarily want to condone every such practice, we do see a Scriptural basis for this.

Is there demon possession or oppression still today? We think so. Does it really matter that charismatics assign names or characteristics to them? Maybe it seems silly, but it is clear from Scripture that certain kinds of demonic forces are active in a variety of ways, manifesting in a variety of ways, and dealt with in a variety of ways.

Let's look at some Scripture. 

Sheep and Goats together - by Amy Spreeman

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is an astonishingly confused explanation. The author assumes without evidence that all contemporary-worship churches are "seeker sensitive" and are trying to fill seats by catering to "goats" yet leaving them in their lost state. That's what she really wanted to write about. As a result, she never actually explains whether or not there should be "goats" allowed in church services.

She then quotes Scriptures that show us the "sheep" (or wheat) and "goats" (or tares) are separated out on the Last Day. She apparently thinks that this does not occur in the church, because she writes, "Yet in the Bible the tares were never invited into the synagogues or early church gatherings." 

This statement is also an Argument From Silence. Since the author employs this technique so shall we: "In the Bible the tares were never excluded from early church gatherings."

But in actual fact the Bible isn't silent. Paul directly informs us that there were unbelievers in church:

1Co. 14:22-23 Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers. 23 So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind?

This is the church coming together, and here we find that spiritual gifts like tongues might be confusing to non-believers.  This implicitly means that non-believers are present. The goats were not excluded, but rather accommodated. 

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

3 Reasons Your Pastors Are a Gift - by Camryn Zamora

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We have come to disdain the adulation of pastors. We're not talking about those who adore mega-church celebrity pastors, we're talking about people like the author who want to admonish us for not appreciating the thankless work of the noble and sacrificial pastor of the local church. 

Now, we in no way want to disparage these hard-working servants of the Lord. Our problem is with those who want to perpetuate the unbiblical church structure of having a top-of-the-pyramid CEO pastor.

The Bible tells us the church is to be led by elders: 

1Pe. 5:1-2 To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow-elder, a witness of Christ’s sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: 2 Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers...

So the below article inadvertently encourages the perpetuation of pastors in a role that is not biblical.

But the author does not stop there. She wants the pastor to be the combination of all five of the offices named in Ephesians 4:11, plus be like the ministry of Paul, plus the pastor is actually Jesus speaking to the congregation.

This is absolutely awful presentation. Terrible. We must deem it Bad Bible Teaching. Perhaps even in the running for the worst teaching we've ever considered here on our blog.

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

Bad worship songs: Yes I will (Vertical Worship)

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, Yes I will.

Audio link.

Rich's proverbs, book three - updated 8/19/24

Book four here.

Book two here.

Book one here.

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

I'll be adding to this post periodically.

Have You Been Crucified With Christ? - by Mike Ratliff

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author shifts from clarity to obfuscation several times in the below article. And there is an unexplained Calvinism/Reformationism infecting his presentation to the point where we start to wonder what he is even talking about. 

Then, his last few paragraphs are about a completely different topic. 

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Guest column: Conventional wisdom is just plain wrong on Social Security - by Terry Minow, Jon Ellingson, Elizabeth Marum, Barbara Archer, Bill Bronson

Found here. Our comments in bold.

How does one know when a Leftist is lying? When words are coming out of their word processors. There isn't a single accurate statement in this entire presentation. Yet these authors present these "facts" without explanation, documentation, or analysis. They are nothing more than a series of assertions.

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

The word of God is living - By Elizabeth Prata

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

Ms. Prata is operating under a misunderstanding, that the word is the Bible. It isn't. The word is the things God speaks, not what is written down.

"Word" is logos, a word, being the expression of a thought; a saying. 3056 /lógos ("word") is preeminently used of Christ (Jn 1:1), expressing the thoughts of the Father through the Spirit. 

This is certainly not the Bible. The Greek word used to describe the Bible would be graphḗ – properly, writing. 1124 (graphḗ) is used 51 times in the NT – always of holy Scripture, i.e. the inspired, inerrant writings of the Bible (the 66 books of Scripture, 39 in Hebrew, 27 in Greek.

While this may be picking nits, such a misunderstanding can lead to errant doctrines. In Ms. Prata's case this misunderstanding contributes to her false belief that God has ceased speaking to Christians.

Lastly, we note Ms. Prata is willing to quote the subject Scripture, but only one of her several proof Scriptures. We will see why.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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