What Kind of Pastor Are You? - by David Kaywood

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We previously critiqued this author here. There we noted he was explaining and defending an unbiblical version of church leadership, the CEO pastor. He continues to do so in the below article.

We need to state unequivocally, there's only one biblical job for a pastor: Care of the flock. All of the pastor-hyphen categories delineated below (except perhaps Pastor-Counselor) are indications that the person is not a pastor.

The author attributes pastor burnout to not liking parts of the pastor's job. However, we believe pastors burn out because they're piling on duties based on unrealistic expectations and a false understanding of church leadership.

The author concludes by suggesting that a pastor should pursue more of the things that connect him with his proclivities. We would think that better advice would be to study and practice what one is not good at to become better at it. A body builder should not skip leg day simply because he doesn't like it.

Lastly, the author doesn't quote a single Scripture. The Bible is completely absent.

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

Why Is Baptism a Means of Grace? - by Nick Batzig

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is a poor teaching. The author employs about 900 words, but never quotes the Bible, never explains the Bible, and in fact, never explains anything. This article is nothing more than a long string of undocumented assertions. There is no information here. 

In fact, the article raises more questions than it answers. We never find out what "means of grace" means. We are told about the elect, but not told what this is. He uses terms like regeneration, confer grace, and covenant promises, without explaining any of them. And some sentences are almost completely inscrutable.

In other words, the author writes about a basic subject, baptism, but requires the reader to have substantial prior knowledge of a variety of doctrinal intricacies. So who, then, would profit by a superficial primer on baptism but already has a deep knowledge of doctrine, as well as Calvinism and its attendant terminology?

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

The Enduring Influence of Marx’s Masterpiece - by Wendy Brown

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is nearly 4800 words, a diarrhea of Marxist jargon. 

Perhaps not apparent to a casual reader, the author is dealing with a book entitled "Capital," which appears in the text with a capital "C." It's also appears with a lower case "c" along with "capitalism," but neither word is clearly defined by the author.

But none of this matters. There is absolutely no information contained here. Nothing is explained. Ideas are absent. 

Thus there is a veneer of intelligence and scholarship in that the author uses big words and long sentences, but it's really only so much nonsense to the average reader. This may be what saves us from Marxism, its proponents are unable to articulate the tenets of their faith, and its salespeople are unwilling to honestly explain their advocacy of a system that has killed millions.

We only managed to get about 25% of the way through this pedantic, impenetrable spew of nonsense.

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

The Arraignment of Mankind - by John MacArthur

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Dr. MacArthur has been appearing our blog more frequently lately. We have come to notice that he doesn't really teach the Bible. He teaches his doctrine, Calvinism. Everything revolves around this. If he can't fit his Calvinism in, he won't teach on it.

This may explain why so many people think he's a great Bible teacher. He's really good at Calvinism. For us, this makes him a bad Bible teacher.

Today he makes the common Calvinistic error that the issues of our sinful state and ultimate salvation is a legal proceeding, in the manner we understand law in the western world. 

However, there is no such thing in the pages of the Bible. There is no arraignment, no trial, no attorneys, no right to a presumption of innocence, and no jury. There is not even a pronouncement of "guilty." 

No, we are already dead and condemned: 

Jn. 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already...

Ro. 5:17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ. 18 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.

Every man, woman, and child ever born on this earth (except one), was born dead. We all were "condemned already," caused by the "one trespass." Adam's sin brought death and condemnation. That is the default state of man. Already condemned.

Which means of course that there is no trial. The condemnation against Adam, death, happened thousands of years ago. We simply are born into the state of death and decay and bondage that creation experienced (Ro. 8:20) when Adam was condemned (Ro. 5:16). Sinning is what dead, condemned people do.

Which of course means that the Dr. MacArthur's entire premise is false.

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

Bad Worship Songs - Resurrecting, by Mack Brock, Wade Joye, Christopher Brown, Matt Ntele, and Steven Furtick

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, Resurrecting.
----------------------

Election and Christ - by John MacArthur

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.

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

Dr. MacArthur is regarded as a great Bible teacher, but the below excerpt is very nearly incompetence. This sounds harsh, but he's simply parroting a Calvinistic/Reformist doctrinal perspective without offering biblical documentation.

His central idea is that Jesus substituted Himself for us and took our punishment, which did not happen. Rather, He died to spill His blood to wash away our sin. 

We are pretty certain that no Christian views Jesus' blood as insufficient to save a man. Nothing needs to be added to the blood; nothing needs to supplement His death. The blood is enough.

Nothing else. Period. Nothing else is needed, including the punishment of Jesus.

If God's wrath against the sinner is totally appeased by Jesus' blood when he repents, why would Dr. MacArthur think that His wrath must land somewhere else? This is the crucial question, and why we believe the Father did not punish Jesus for our sin.

Read this carefully: If the Father punished Jesus for our sin, then He didn't forgive at all, He simply redirected his wrath and carried it out anyway.

We've got to land solidly on this, dear reader. Propitiation is appeasement/satisfaction of God's wrath. If He punished Jesus His wrath wasn't appeased by Jesus' death. The blood wasn't enough. The sacrifice did not propitiate. 

If that's true the Father went out looking for someone to punish because His wrath didn't go away. It landed on Jesus.

This is an evil idea. It is deception to believe the Father punished Jesus. It violates the character of God to not be satisfied with Jesus' sacrifice. 

Jesus had already did everything needed to satisfy the Father. Appeasement negates punishment. Appeasement ends the matter. When someone is appeased, it's over. The blood is enough.

All of the following statements are based on this pernicious idea that the Father punished Jesus. All the following are bare assertions, and in our opinion, quite false.

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

Pastoring, Productivity, and Priorities - by David Kaywood

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Almost all of this is practical advice, not biblical advice. Most of it is in the context of the traditional role of pastors as heads of the local church. 

However, the need for this advice would largely disappear if churches were lead by elders, which is the biblical model:

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 — not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve... 

In churches we typically see three types of leadership, the more common are first:

1. The church hires the pastor to do his ministry. 

This is probably viewed as being necessary in small churches because there might not be the people available to construct the biblical leadership structure. We would consider this to be a dodge, however. Even in a small church there are trustworthy people who can be matured into various leadership positions in a reasonably short amount of time.

Commonly the church board or elders hires the pastor to do all the things they don't want to do or don't think the can or should  do. Other than a few of the most dedicated people who do a few things like help in the nursery, serve as an usher, or play the piano, the pastor does most of the work. 

He's either a mere employee or a superhero. Perhaps both.

2. The people help the pastor do his ministry. 

This is the next level, and somewhat better than the "Hired Gun" illustrated in the first point. In this scenario, there are some, often many, people who eagerly jump in to serve in all the ministries of the church. Though the church benefits by the involvement of these people, the pastor is still the spiritual and administrative boss of the church, with the people serving his vision. It can be a positive environment and can be a healthy church, but it is still built around the pastor.

3. The pastor helps the people do their ministry. 

This approach is closer to the biblical model. The pastor is still the primary or singular leader, but he has an objective to equip and release the people to do the work of ministry that God has called them to do. The pastor is a coach and edifier, a discerner of the church's gifting and the peoples' abilities. The people are the spiritual heroes who build the church. The people aren't helping the pastor advance his vision, they are serving Jesus and advancing the shared kingdom vision of the church. In this model the potential for fruitfulness and growth is significantly higher.

Our opinion, which is the basis for this post, is that biblically speaking the pastor is not the CEO leader of the local church. We think a pastor ought to actually pastor, which might not even involve leadership.

The pastor who assumes his biblical role will be a person who cares for the flock. He's not the CEO, because the elders oversee the church. He's not the decision-maker, because he serves the elders or perhaps serves as one of the elders. He's not the Bible answer-man, although he may be insightful and studied. 

He loves the people, prays for them, and ministers to their needs. He's acutely aware of their well-being. He's not necessarily the preacher, because he has read Ep. 4:11-12:

It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up...

This passage mentions these gifts to the church as distinct, which means the pastor is not required to be the teacher. He might have more than one of these gifts, but not necessarily.

There are very few bench warmers in a healthy church with healthy leadership. This is the church as Jesus intended it. 

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

My Generation’s Best Chance Is Socialism. You don’t need a $200,000 college degree to know when you’re getting screwed - by Sarah Leonard

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

As is typical for Socialists, the author understands neither Socialism or capitalism. She makes blanket pronouncements and grand generalizations about things she does not know about.

She is convinced that Socialism supplies her answers and capitalism causes her problems. She has no idea how or why for either and cannot explain. 

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

Why Did Michael and the Devil Dispute Over Moses’ Body? - by Robb Brunansky

 Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We don't find this topic discussed much, so we were interested to discover the author's thoughts. 

He considers this to be a legal dispute with the Devil. We don't agree. God does not engage in legal negotiations with the Devil. There was no legal principle at stake. God did not consider the validity of the Devil's claims. This is not a legal matter, despite the author's speculations to the contrary.

Rather than law, we think the actual context is position, authority, and glory. Let's consider some of these concepts and how they might relate to the subject. First, let's quote a bit more of Jude than does the author:

Jude 8-9 In the very same way, these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings. 9 But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!”

Notice the context is about certain men who don't know their place and therefore slander celestial beings. They are contrasted with the angels who dared not slander these beings. Angels dare not do what arrogant men do.

Who are celestial beings (literally, "glorious ones")? The Greek word for "celestial" is doxa: angels are called doxa as being spiritual beings of preeminent dignity... opinion, estimate, whether good or bad, concerning some one; good opinion concerning one, and as resulting from that, praise, honor, glory.

They are beings arrayed in splendor, magnificent in nature. But they are not necessarily holy. Some are glorious but fallen. They are not as strong and powerful as angels, perhaps due to their fallen status, yet even then the angels do not bring accusation. 

This concept comes up again in second Peter:

2Pe. 2:10-11 This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature and despise authority. Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings; 11 yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not bring slanderous accusations against such beings in the presence of the Lord.

The angels respect them. And clearly these beings are not holy, for otherwise, why would angels have the potential to bring slanderous accusations against them?

"Slander" is blasphémeó, which is in this context means, to be evil spoken of, reviled, railed at... Whether good or bad, it is clear that the celestial beings are not to be slandered. Imagine, an evil celestial being should not be slandered. 

Both Jude and Peter are writing in the context of arrogant men. These "dreamers" who "despise authority" are not slow to slander celestial beings, even though the angels dare not do so. Michael himself, an archangel, would not even do so with the devil! 

We would conclude that the devil is one of the celestial beings, who has a glory (doxa) even in his fallen state. This suggests that Christians should not engage in slander, taunting, or disrespect against the enemy. Those who think they would "bind" the enemy risk slandering a celestial being, something even the angels refuse to do.

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

Why is Trump claiming a coup? His mind cannot conceive of anything else - by Robert Reich

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Speaking of a mind that cannot conceive of anything else,  Dr. Reich is completely locked in to the leftist narrative. Today, in his single-minded obsession with Trump, he steps up to the plate and whiffs yet again.

Dr. Reich cannot have a world where people who disagree with him are anything but bigots, haters, and extremists. 

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

An Eternal Expression of Love - by John MacArthur

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-----------

Dr. MacArthur takes a stab at explaining his Calvinism and makes some grievous errors. Maybe in some things he is great Bible teacher, but frankly, we have yet to see that. 

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

Assurance - Ligonier Editorial

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is seriously confused. Ligonier is Calvinist, and the author wrestles with the tension created between predestination and assurance. We find this kind of struggle often. The doctrines of Calvinism create the need for explanations and work-arounds. So the author believes that God chose who would be saved, so he wonders how the Elect can doubt their salvation. 

Well, at first he tries to attribute assurance to faith, then he tells us that trusting our faith will not give us assurance. Finally, he tells us that assurance comes from listening to sermons, getting baptized, and taking communion.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Rich's proverbs, book four - updated 9/16/24

Book three here.

Book two here.

Book one here.

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

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

Chapter One

1. Holy Spirit, when you come and fill your house, be merciful to us. Your glory is overwhelming, so be merciful lest we die.

Nevertheless, we must have you in your fullness. Nothing else will do.

2. Submission does not require the other party to be worthy. We submit because we are commanded to, not because the one in authority has passed our test.

3. Psalm 2:8 "Ask of Me, and I will give You The nations for Your inheritance, And the ends of the earth for Your possession."

Although this is a Messianic statement, I still think my prayers have been too small.

4. One thing you have continually reminded me of is how much more of you there is than what I know. The magnitude of your glory exceeds my understanding, but still I need to know you, to comprehend the incomprehensible.

I'm not seeking secret knowledge, I want a revelation of the living God.

From Hillsong to Bethel to Elevation - What Worship is and Should Never Be - By Anthony Wade

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

It's been some time since Rev. Wade appeared in our blog. This is because He writes about the same things over and over, invariably about the "NAR."

He is routinely scattershot in his presentation, and is prone to making undocumented claims.

This "devotional" is mostly a rehash of this article, with a little bit of new material. He does what he always does, he picks a target and goes on and on about them. 

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