Worm theology - All Nations Church

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We had never heard of "worm theology in the 40+ years of our Christian experience. In actual fact, we are glad. It is a damaging doctrine that suggests that God despises even the saved. It also carries with it the idea that even though we have been saved, regenerated, and seated with Christ in heavenly places, our status remains lowly and worthless.

The danger of this doctrine as we see it is that we put upon God an attitude that He does not possess. But there is no Scripture that tells us God despises humankind. Just the opposite:

Ps. 8:5 You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. 

Ps. 138:6 Though the LORD is on high, he looks upon the lowly, but the proud he knows from afar.  

Ezekiel 36:30-31 I will multiply the fruit of the tree and the produce of the field, so that you will not receive again the disgrace of famine among the nations. 31 Then you will remember your evil ways and your deeds that were not good, and you will loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and your abominations. 

1Co. 1:27-29 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things — and the things that are not — to nullify the things that are, 29 so that no-one may boast before him.

Further, for the Christian, this false humility, this affectation, means we wallow in regret and we get stuck at the cross, never moving on in sanctification. In fact, sin should be expected. We can do no better, We are is powerless and weak. We cannot stand against the tide of unrighteousness that rises around us. We should anticipate failure. 

Worm theology is in stark contrast to the teaching of the Bible: 

2Co. 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! 

1Co. 15:57 But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. 

Ro. 7:5-6 For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Ro. 8:6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace...

Ep. 2:10 For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

There is no place in the Bible that teaches worm theology regarding God's view of humanity or the Church.

What Does it Mean that Jesus “Became Sin” For Us? - By Publisher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Again Distnr provides a teaching, but it cannot just simply present its case. Nope, once again a supposed false teacher is dragged in for the purpose of taking a few more shots. In this case the unnamed author gratuitously recycles its criticism of Todd White to no one's benefit. 

We should also note that the only Scripture quoted by the author is subject verse. He does not make his case from the Bible.

Further, the author does manage to make occasional good points, but immediately negates them with undocumented false assumptions. For example, the Calvinistic "Penal Substitutionary Atonement" doctrine is mentioned but never documented.

Lastly, it seems the author wants to assume a scholarly veneer by explaining interpretive methodology and quoting Greek word meanings, but it comes off as posturing. A teacher's job is to explain, not obscure. The author obscures, which make him a bad teacher.

Hypocrisy of Religious People Regarding Women - By Bob Johnson

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Mr. Johnson has appeared in our blog several times. Invariably he writes critically about religion, with particular emphasis on Christianity. His underlying agenda is to push his never-explained deism.

We have found him to be a less than rigorous thinker. Though not an atheist, he might as well be, since his rhetoric conforms particularly well to atheism. Further, he largely contents himself with spurting regurgitated atheist and/or leftist talking points. 

Ironically, he relies on the morality of "revealed religions" to make his pronouncements. So there is a code of right and wrong with him, from which he derives moral imperatives which he happily desires to impose on others. However, he is unable, or unwilling, to explain why his moral pronouncements are self-evident, or why we would want to adopt them for ourselves.

That is, he engages in the very same moralizing he opposes in religious people. That would be hypocrisy, sir.

Today he asserts that religious people are hypocrites regarding women. Oddly, he will never discuss or identify any hypocrisy. We think he meant to use the word "misogyny" rather than "hypocrisy." This can easily happen with leftists because they continually recycle talking points, slogans, and buzzwords. He probably forgot which talking point he was using.

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

Living the Cessationist Life - by JOHN DIVITO

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We have commented on many false teachings from supposed Bible teachers in our blog, and previously thought that it couldn't get any worse. Well, it has. 

This is a new low. The author engages all of the bad teaching techniques we have observed elsewhere, and takes them to the nth degree;

• No Bible quotes
• No Bible references
• Undocumented claims
• Misrepresenting the Bible 
• Misrepresenting the beliefs of opponents
• Obtuse prose
• Bad doctrine

There are some thoughtful cessationists out there, but this author isn't one of them.)

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

Should We Celebrate Baptism and the Lord’s Supper at Youth Group? - By Will Standridge

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author will attempt to explain why we should not engage in communion or baptisms outside the Sunday morning gathering, but he will not quote a Scripture in support of his belief. Not one.

Probably because there isn't one.

What the author does not seem to understand is the Sunday morning meeting of the saints is no different that the Friday night meeting of the saints at Camp Kenochee-wa. The gathering of Christians is the gathering of the church. The building is irrelevant. The day of the week is irrelevant.

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

What is Biblical Worship? - by publisher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

It seems the nameless author actually wanted to write a criticism of churches he doesn't like, while pretending to explain worship. When he sticks to the topic he does relatively well. But when he wanders off to blast the churches he doesn't like, well...

This is the typical quality of teaching from disntr, (see also here, here, here, and here) too often shallow, error filled, or even flat-out unbiblical. 

We should note that we are not here to defend any and every manifestation of contemporary worship of these unnamed churches, we want to examine the author's presentation.

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

Bad worship songs: Highlands (Song of Ascent)

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 good 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 as many as possible of 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
• A certain amount of profundity
• A singable, interesting melody
• Scripture quotes or coherent allusions to Scripture
• Doctrinal soundness

Further, a worship song should not:

• contain lyrics that create uncertainty or cause confusion
• be excessively metaphorical
• be excessively repetitive
• imply that Jesus is 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 today's song, "Highlands." 

Audio link.

Does God have Emotions? - By Wyatt Graham

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We must  admit, up until recently we had not heard of this "doctrine" in the 40 years of our Christian experience. We put the word in quotes since the author doesn't quote a single Scripture in support of it. He quotes theologians and statements of confession, and ancillary Scriptures to document minor claims, but when it comes to citing an actual verse that teaches impassibility, well, he doesn't bother. 

It is a mystery how one can explain a "doctrine" but never quote a Scripture that describes it. Probably because there isn't one.

He could perhaps have discussed this verse: 

Nu. 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfil?

Or,

1Sa. 15:29 He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind.

Further, it seems to us this is one of those arcane parsings of theology that has no fruit for the Christian walk. It does not speak to the way of salvation, holiness, or Christian service. It holds no benefit to the worshiper, preacher, or evangelist. It does not come to bear on Christ-likeness, the fellowship of the saints, or even the Gospel itself.

In our opinion, the issue is barely worth discussing. But since it is coming up rather frequently, we shall address the author's points.

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

The mailbag asked and answered, 7 - by Michelle Lesley

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.

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

Here is another micro-doctrine, one of dozens Ms. Lesley has derived from misunderstanding 1 Timothy 2:12. See our thorough explanation of this here.

Today Ms. Lesley incorrectly answers a reader question, while studiously avoiding the quoting of or referencing Scripture.

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

Dear Conservatives, I Apologize. My "Team" was Taken in By Full-Spectrum Propaganda - Dr. Naomi Wolf

Found here. No comment needed.

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

There is no way to avoid this moment. The formal letter of apology. From me. To Conservatives and to those who “put America first” everywhere.

It’s tempting to sweep this confrontation with my own gullibility under the rug — to “move on” without ever acknowledging that I was duped, and that as a result I made mistakes in judgement, and that these mistakes, multiplied by the tens of thousands and millions on the part of people just like me, hurt millions of other people like you all, in existential ways.

But that erasure of personal and public history would be wrong.

I owe you a full-throated apology.

Disorder in the churches! - By Elizabeth Prata

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Some more false and superficial teaching from Ms. Prata. Frankly, we have a hard time understanding how someone can so poorly understand the Scriptures and still be regarded as a teacher. Not only that, she calls herself a "Discernment Minister."

Ms. Prata simply parrots the party line about the issue of women teachers. She adds no new information, insight, or even attempts to persuade.

It's a waste of time.

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

Doing what is right without needing a new word from the Lord - By Simon Van Bruchem

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

There's no shortage of bad teachers out there. The trouble is, they too often fancy themselves as authoritative commentators on doctrine and practice. They don't seem to be answerable to anyone, for if they did submit their writings to a critical eye, much of it would never make it to publication.

This article may be the worst biblical teaching we've ever read. It is at least in the top ten. The author starts with his doctrinal presumption and looks for Scriptural support, however vague and unrelated. So the author cites an isolated story in the Bible and extrapolates it to the present day church, for the sole purpose of confirming his own doctrine that God does not speak today. 

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

Revival at Asbury: A Cold Take - by Tim Challies

Found here. A refreshingly honest and balanced approach. We do have a few brief comments, but nevertheless a bravo is directed to Mr. Challies.

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

The trouble with 1 Timothy 2:12: Women teaching men, elders and deacons

 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.

A Review of Rising Contemporary Christian Music Artist, Iveth Luna, and Her Popular Music - Disntr

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The unnamed author levels the same accusations over and over against Ms. Luna, as if by sheer repetition they become true. He insists she's narcissistic and overlooks key doctrines, and she's narcissistic and doesn't sing about key doctrines. Singing about one's experiences is narcissistic, and she violates the doctrine of salvation. She doesn't sing about salvation by grace through faith, and, narcissism and grace and sanctification and, and...

Did we mention narcissism?

But we have read the lyrics. And we consider ourselves to possess a rudimentary level of comprehension. But we are unable to ascertain what the author is talking about. He makes a big stink about some egregious heresy, but never identifies it. 

We have reproduced all the lyrics, since the author only quotes part in an effort to bias the situation. But the full lyrics actually counter some of the author's objections.

[Verse 1]
Who says "I'm with you there in the dark
It won't always be this hard
I'm holding your broken heart"?
And who says "I'm not scared of your fears
All your doubts, bring 'em here
I'm wiping all of your tears"?

He does, He does

[Chorus]
It's just like Jesus
To give me strength when I need it
Hope when I cannot see it
When I'm falling to pieces
It's just like Jesus
To put me back on my feet when
I was out past the deep end
You wanted me when nobody wanted me
Now I just wanna be

Just like Jesus

[Verse 2]
Who is a friend to all of the friendless
Fighting for the defenseless
Merciful in the messes?
And who can make a sinner feel worthy
Lift the head of the hurting
Walk with those who are searching?

[Bridge]
His hands, His feet His arms reaching
He wanted me when nobody wanted me
Now I just wanna be, Now I just wanna be
His hands, His feet
His arms reaching, He wanted me when nobody wanted me
Now I just wanna be Just like Jesus, oh

Just like Jesus

Lastly, we should say that we are not here to defend Ms. Luna. Personally, we don't think the song is particularly interesting. We are here to examine the unnamed author of this article.

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

So, You Want to Be a Pastor? - By Sean DeMars

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is bad teaching and bad advice. The author gets absolutely nothing correct about the biblical role of pastor. He piles onto pastors the very things that make them fail, as if enduring the negative impact of being a pastor is something noble, expected, and part of the job. In other words, the work of pastoring is definitionally failure.

Even worse, the author doesn't quote a single Scripture. Not even a snippet. Astounding.

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

What Exactly is Saving Faith and How do We Know We Have It? - Disntr

Found here. Our comment in bold.

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

The author is so beholden to his reformist doctrine that he cannot see past its limitations. He goes to great lengths to restrict salvation to an arcane process that he doesn't explain. He barely acknowledges the Holy Spirit's role in anything. It amounts to a near deification of the Bible.

The thing the author so assiduously avoids is that salvation is supernatural. Regeneration is supernatural. New life in Christ is accomplished supernaturally. We know we are saved supernaturally:

Ro. 8:16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

This does not appear on the author's radar, and as such we must deem the author's presentation as bad Bible teaching.

In addition, the author will eventually come down on the side of faith, versus intellectual process and reason. But what might he think of Dr. MacArthur?

We use reason to solve a math problem, read an engineering schematic, or diagnose an illness. In the same way, Scripture is understood according to the normal patterns of human reason.

If we want to know Him and understand what He has revealed in His Word, we must approach Scripture rationally, following the normal processes of logic and reason with sound hermeneutics to come to a true understanding of its meaning.

Dr. MacArthur thinks that access to the truths of Scripture is subject to human reasoning.

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

Touch Not My Anointed? - by Michelle Lesley

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

There's a lot of bad teaching here. Ms. Lesley misrepresents anointing, leaves out crucial facts, and completely omits the Holy Spirit's role in setting apart people for His purposes.

And a critical junctures her documentation completely disappears. Frankly, it reads like Ms. Lesley simply copied the major points of some Bible teacher that she agreed with.

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

Gov. DeSantis: You're a history grad. Tell me when systemic racism ended - By Jeff Cohen

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

What's notable here is the author's continual effort to reframe the debate, which is what the Left always wants to do. So according to the author, this is simply about teaching black history. And DeSantis opposes this, which means DeSantis hates blacks and supports white-washed history.

The Left has always debated this ways. They never, ever discuss the issues or even want a back-and-forth. They always will avoid the issue, or attempt to make their position seem innocuous, while simultaneously trying to make their opposition into haters and racists. 

Therefore, 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. 

In fact, the Left has no interest in education in Florida. They are not interested in Florida students. Black history doesn't matter. They don't even really care about DeSantis except for how they might use him as a tool. They are solely interested in promulgating The Narrative in service to The Agenda. 

The Narrative is the Leftist talking points of the day, the factoids and verbiage that always appear simultaneously all over the media landscape, designed as a barrage to overcome the intellect so as to facilitate The Agenda. The Agenda is the elimination of the current system to install Marxism.

The Agenda. The goal of every leftist is to dismantle the system and install Marxism. That's it. That's the agenda. 

The bottom line is, systemic racism hasn't ended, because it will never end. It cannot end, because the system is the problem. It must be overthrown and replaced. That's the whole point. The problem cannot and must not be solved.

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

Should Fallen Pastors Be Restored? - by John MacArthur

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

While we share Dr. MacArthur's concern when these sinning pastors so quickly re-appear in the pulpit, sometimes after very serious sin, we reject the idea that there is no possibility for restoration to the pulpit. We would embrace a broader criteria, since sin of every kind is present in the Church and potentially disqualifying for every person (1Co. 9:27, Col. 2:18), not just pastors.

Dr. MacArthur lists two disqualifiers, failure to be above reproach, and failure to be a one-woman man. He derives these from 1Ti. 3:2:

Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife...

So, a pastor who falls into sexual sin violates these criteria, according to Dr. MacArthur. And from that he concludes that it is a permanent disqualifier. But that is a leap, because there is no Scripture that tells us this. 

In fact, the Bible is replete with examples of leaders who sinned and stumbled, even severely, yet were not disqualified from leadership. David, Samson, Paul, Peter, Noah, Abraham, Jacob... it's a long list. Murders, adulterers, hypocrites, and liars. Yet God used them powerfully. They are historical giants of faith.

Perhaps Dr. MacArthur thinks that the dividing line is when a man is saved. That is, a grievous sinner, once saved and having grown to maturity of faith, is qualified to lead. Like this man, a former porn star who is now a pastor. Or maybe not. Maybe Dr. MacArthur believes that any serious sin in someone's history disqualifies them. But every man who comes into the Kingdom has a past, so it seems clear that past sins should not necessarily disqualify.

What does the Bible tell us about restoration? Dr. MacArthur never tells us. In fact, he manages to quote only a single Scripture in his whole presentation. It seems important to discuss restoration as a concept in an article questioning restoration, particularly the biblical case.

We find that the church has a responsibility to restore:

Ga. 6:1 Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.

The word "restore" means exactly fit (adjust) to be in good working order, i.e. adjusted exactly "down" to fully function. So a leader or pastor or any Christian who sins needs to be put back to full function, if at all possible. The person needs to be restored to "good working order." That must always be the goal. No sin should disqualify any truly repentant person to return to their God-given gifts.

This requires repentance, counseling, examining of subsequent fruit, and continued accountability and evaluation. It is not done quickly or casually. But there is no hint that restoration isn't possible or isn't permissible.

We should also mention that the Bible does not teach that pastors lead churches, the elders do (1Pe. 5:1-3). We therefore think the greatest problem is not that pastors fall, it's that pastors are placed too high. They occupy unbiblical positions at the top of the pyramid. They have too much power, they are subject to too many expectations, and they carry a burden God never put on them. Of course they would tend to fail in such an environment.

Churches are to be led by a plurality of godly men, not a CEO pastor. This fact could be a least a part of the solution to pastoral missteps.

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