Don’t count on the courts to save democracy - By Ryan D. Doerfler and Samuel Moyn

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

What an odd title. The courts have nothing to do with democracy. Their job is to rule on matters of law. Apparently the problem is the Left thinks that the courts can fix democracy, so the authors want to convince their fellow leftists of the folly of this thinking.

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

The Cessation of the Sign Gifts - by Prof Thomas R. Edgar

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is a long slog, almost 6300 words. Yet we were only able to find four words actually quoted from the Bible. Just these four words: In the last days... That's it.

It takes the author a little over 1000 words to mention his first Bible verse. And, another 2500 words pass by before the author starts to address the actual biblical case, where he opens with this:

No Bible verse specifically states that tongues, signs, and wonders will continue throughout the Church Age. Nor is there a verse that specifically states they will cease at the end of the apostolic age. 

This is astounding. How can a supposed Bible teacher, a professor no less, write thousands of words while admitting there is no actual proof verse for either point of view? How can he provide a Bible teaching without quoting the Bible? How is it possible to explain something this important while admitting his beliefs are really not stated in the Bible?

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

The Big Chill - by Robert Reich

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Dr. Reich lists four pillars of a civil society: universities, science, the media, and the law. The Society for Peace would say scholarship, service, leadership, and character. She owns it lists family, social enterprises, faith institutions, and entrepreneurs. Human rights careers, with a decidedly leftist tilt, lists access, equity, participation, and human rights.

In other words, there isn't a recognized list of the four pillars of society. Dr. Reich simply makes it up. He has a penchant for this sort of thing, where cherry picking facts, misrepresenting events, and misquoting people, is almost a habit for him.

In our view, the four pillars of a civil society are Christianity, family, individual liberty, and limited government. Our list is as good as anyone's.

So Dr. Reich wants to warn us all about the supposed illegal actions of the Trump administration and the imperiled four pillars of a civil society. He worries that Trump is a tyrant who is going to silence dissent. He is concerned for the safety of people who might speak up in opposition. He thinks government employees are going to keep their heads down in fear of losing their jobs.

All this rings hollow, since we as conservatives have had to endure increasing leftist tyranny for the past two decades and Dr. Reich happily joined in. We have actually lived in what Dr. Reich is thinking as only a possibility. Now that the political tides are turning against he and his ilk, he's concerned that this monster of a government the Left has created is going to be used against them.

Well, good riddance.

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

Does God Withdraw His Presence from Me? - by John Piper

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------

Pastor Piper dedicates most of his reply to background information. In these first two sections he brings Scripture quotes and references about God's omnipresence and steadfastness.

But the third section (the manifest presence of God) is what we might call the "money" section, because it is the actual substance of Piper's answer. He writes, "so, here’s my answer to her question." 

But doesn't answer the question. All he can manage is to appeal to the Puritans and then make some assertions:

I don’t mean that we are forsaken by our covenant God. I mean that the manifestations of his presence are limited. He doesn’t withdraw his covenant commitment to us or his sustaining grace from us. What he withdraws is the sweetness of his fellowship from time to time, or the conscious sense of his power. 

This may indeed be true but it's nothing more than opinion at this point, because he has abandoned biblical documentation. Then, astonishingly, he punts on the answer: 

I think maybe there would be another time for us to talk about that. 

Wait. Why in the world would he take up the question only to decide not to talk about it? This article is over 1300 words including the introductory remarks!

We must consider this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Bad Worship Songs: It's Always Been You - by Phil Wickham

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, It's Always Been You.

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

Prophecy and Tongues: A Compilation of the Best Cessationist Arguments - by Lee Irons

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.

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

These are the best, according to the title. We would expect them to be devastating, the last word on the cessationism debate.

But they aren't good arguments at all. They aren't even biblical arguments, they're mostly assumptions and deductions from preconceived ideas about what someone has said about certain Scriptures.

They aren't really even arguments. They are assertions. Claims. 

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Why ‘God Told Me’ Isn’t Biblical - By Elizabeth Prata

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Over 1200 words, yet Ms. Prata cannot bring herself to explain why (from the Bible) contemporary prophecy is unbiblical. 

So that the reader would understand, Mr. Prata, like a lot of cessationists, falsely believes that everything God says must be included in the Bible. The Bible doesn't tell us this, but that's what she believes. 

Towards the end of her article she writes,

The canon is closed. 

We certainly agree. But what does the closed canon have to do with contemporary prophecy? She continues:

God’s new revelation ended with Revelation 22. 

"New revelation" for her means anything God says after the closed canon, all of which must be put in the Bible. However, there is no biblical standard that requires this. Next:

I’m not saying God CAN’T speak now, of course He can. It’s just that He closed the Bible with a warning not to add to the book nor take away from it. 

Again we find her premise that God speaking is synonymous with adding words to the Bible. And finally:

He said that at the present time, He would not be speaking. 

Thus her unbiblical conclusion based on a false premise. 

The Bible tells us that God is still speaking today: 

He. 1:3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.

We have written detailed explanations about contemporary prophecy and the closed canon, here and here.

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

Helping my son tile his kitchen: from flooring to structure to electrical ***updated 4/7/25

My son bought a cozy little house several years ago. 936 square feet, two bedroom, one bath, with a full unfinished basement. Although this 1959 house needs remodeling, my son is a mechanic at heart and prefers to work on car projects. 

But a few months ago he finally got the motivation to start on his house again. A dozen boxes of ceramic tile, obtained very cheaply, have been sitting in his living room for a long time, so he decided to tear out the ugly and worn kitchen floor and install the tile.

Now, we did do some work on the house prior to this latest binge, which involved moving the basement stairs out of the dining room and into the living room. We also demolished the scabbed together basement and started framing out a basement bathroom. But this was 3-4 years ago.

Here's a floor plan to help you understand the things we were undertaking:

The NKJV: A Deadly Translation - By Pastor James L. Melton

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This article is written by a "KJV onlyist." This is a sect of the Christian community whose adherents believe the KJV is the only true translation of the Bible and all others are corrupted. 

The author doesn't explain, but the "Textus Receptus" manuscripts of the NT are regarded by "onlyists" as the only authentic texts from which to translate, and the KJV is translated from these texts. But all other translations are corrupt because they are based on inferior "Alexandrian" (Westcott and Hort) texts.

So the author's premise is that all other Bible translations are heretical and evil, which includes the NKJV. Unfortunately, rather than articulate valid reasons for his position, he only manages to demonstrate nit-picking. None of the issues the author discusses represent a risk of departure from true doctrine or saving knowledge. 

Not one.

In addition, the KJV is also a revision of earlier translations, and has in fact been changed many times over the centuries. Here's an interesting discussion about this.

We also should mention that we are not writing to defend the NKJV, we are focused on examining the author's presentation.

Lastly, the author never quotes the Bible. Not once. We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

One Baptism or Two? What Are We to Make of the Spirit Baptism in Acts 8? - by Guy Waters

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author is a cessationist who doesn't accept the charismatic teaching on the Holy Spirit, specifically, the baptism of the Holy Spirit. He doesn't actually come out and tell us this, but we are able to deduce it.

Why? Well, he spends a good deal of time correctly teaching on the various events in Acts, but it will be late into his presentation where he finally tells us his purpose for writing. The money quote: God does not intend for the kind of Spirit baptism described in Acts 2, 8, and 10 to be an ongoing experience of believers in every age. 

Therefore, he didn't write to explain Holy Spirit baptism, he wrote to tell us that it isn't for us. Upon what basis he asserts this is unknown, because he cites no Bible verse that says such a thing.

We certainly agree that the purpose of these events in Acts was to illustrate the far-reaching nature of salvation. But we do not agree, absent evidence, that Holy Spirit baptism is not for us.  

In fact, the Holy Spirit baptism is the mechanism of our new birth: 

Jn. 3:5 Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no-one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.

The indwelling Spirit is differentiated from the flesh:

Ro. 8:9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

We receive the Spirit by faith:

Ga. 3:2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is for everyone:

Lk. 3:16 John answered them all, “I baptize you with water. But one more powerful than I will come, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. 

But we need to continually be refilled with the Holy Spirit:

Ep. 5:18 Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. 

Without the Holy Spirit, we are not saved. Without His continual refilling, we are nothing but carnal Christians.

We discuss the Holy Spirit baptism in some depth here.

Lastly, what baptism is the "one baptism?" According to the author, it is water baptism, because he thinks the Holy Spirit no longer baptizes. Hmm.

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

Peter Strand and Melissa Romano: Attack on Department of Education is an attack on our children

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Typical leftist equations, that government funding equals solving the problem, that intentions equal results, and that cutting a government program means being against the stated goal of the program.

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

Paul and the Charismatics - the Riddleblog

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author misrepresents Scripture, redefines words, and make errant claims.

Now, we do understand that the author is writing a summary of his series of podcasts, but there are zero words here from the Bible. Not a single quote.

We haven't listened to any of these podcasts, so we don't know if the author actually quotes the Bible. 

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

1967 Pontiac Lemans #2 - budget build - Episode eleven, headlight extensions, little parts, roof ***updated 4/4/25

October 5th, 2024:

October 6th, 2024:

Episode one, introduction, here.

Episode two, disassembly and assessment, here.

Episode three, rough body work, here.

Episode four, quarters, here.

Episode five, toe panel, rockers, here.

Episode six, fenders, inner fenders, here.

Episode seven, the doors, found here.

Episode eight, tail light panel, hood, found here.

Episode nine - Hood, trunk, windshield gutter, cowl and firewall, heater box, found here.

Episode ten - Back glass gutter, grill, found here.

Episode eleven - headlight extensions, roof, found here.

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

There are a hundred little details to get done to reach my goal of a paint-ready car. Originally it was to be six months, which at this writing is only days away. 

I'm not going to make it.

Letter to the editor: Obama, Simpson gave us the road map for strategic debt reduction - by Michael Legge

Found here. 

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

Here we have another leftist regurgitating something he read on some leftist website. As is typical for the Left, the author picks out factoids about particular examples of government spending and assigns their cost to the debt, which implicitly means he regards all other spending as funded. 

So if a war costs $3 trillion but SNAP costs $120 billion, Medicare $747 billion, and Medicaid/CHIP costs $609 billion, the cost of the war is deemed deficit spending but everything else is not. This of course is completely arbitrary based on the author's political orientation.

At the end, the author is actually in favor of debt reduction, which is surprising since the Left generally views deficit spending as desirable. Thus the author concedes major ground. All that is left is to decide what to cut.

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

Why I Admire Pastors and You Should Too - by Jason K. Allen

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

The author reinforces an unbiblical expression of church leadership, the CEO pastor. In actual fact the elders are to lead the local church: 

1Pe. 5:1-3 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... 3 not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.

Astonishingly, the author will actually refer to this passage but for some reason he will miss (or avoid) the fact that Peter was describing the duties of elders.

We must consider this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

The Doctrine Of Justification By Faith - by Mike Ratliff

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.
-------------------------

The author get a great deal correct here, but makes a couple of key errors, largely because of his reformist/Calvinist viewpoint.

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

Cessationism again - by Phil Johnson

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We had hoped to find some quality Bible teaching here regarding cessationism, but no such luck. The author simply recounts the events of an email encounter he had. So he doesn't teach us anything other than how he dispatched an errant charismatic.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

God's word - guest post by Elijiah

My friend Elijah makes an important point: The Bible without the Spirit is a dead letter. 

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

Rich's proverbs, book twelve - updated 4/4/25

Book twelve here.

Book eleven here.

Book ten here.

Book nine here.

Book eight here.

Book seven here.

Book six here.

Book five here.

Book four here.

Book three here.

Book two here.

Book one here.

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

How to Partake of the Covenant of Grace - by J.V. Fesko

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is an excerpt from the author's book on covenant theology, which means he is dropping us into the middle of his discussion without giving us any background for us to understand the context. Given the amount of pre-knowledge one must possess before reading this, we cannot conceive of a scenario where the content would in any way be edifying. But even if a reader had some background and carried an understanding of these concepts, his writing remains impenetrable.  

The author purports to teach us something but cloaks it in obscure theological terms that generate much heat but little light. He makes repeated assertions about the Law and obedience, but never documents them. He goes on and on about various covenants but never really explains what they mean. 

All the while he adds layer upon layer until it's nothing short of a mystery as to what he's talking about. 

 

"How to partake of the covenant of grace" basically means, how to get saved. The "covenant of grace" is actually the Gospel: Repent, call upon the name of Jesus, and He saves you and gives you new life. 

So who is this article for? There's two possibilities. One, the author wrote this to Christians in order to explain something they need to know; and two, the author wrote this to non-Christians to explain something they need to know.

It seems unlikely that the author would be explaining how to get saved to a Christian, and it's equally unlikely, given the obtuse language, that he was explaining how to get saved to a non-Christian. 

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

When is the rapture?

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 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 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 we are not Bible scholars, but we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to understand the Word of God.
-----------------------

1967 Pontiac Lemans #2 - budget build - Episode ten, Back glass gutter, grill header - updated 3/26/25

October 5th, 2024:

October 6th, 2024:

Episode one, introduction, here.

Episode two, disassembly and assessment, here.

Episode three, rough body work, here.

Episode four, quarters, here.

Episode five, toe panel, rockers, here.

Episode six, fenders, inner fenders, here.

Episode seven, the doors, found here.

Episode eight, tail light panel, hood, found here.

Episode nine - Hood, trunk, windshield gutter, cowl and firewall, heater box, found here.

Episode ten - Back glass gutter, grill, found here.

Episode eleven - headlight extensions, roof, found here.

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

The Back Glass Gutter

This was a known issue, but the actual extent of the damage was not known. You can see below the hacked out package tray as well as the suspicious perpendicular cracks, indicating failing Bondo:

10 Mistakes I Made When Learning How to Pray - by Andrew Butterworth

Found here. A very good article.

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

I didn’t know much about prayer. But then in my second year of university, I was given about 15 books on the topic. I had recently been given the grandiose title of Prayer Secretary at my university Christian Union. So I wanted to understand the topic more. Since then, I discovered that while some books can be helpful, others can be outright misleading. I also learnt that there is nothing like actually praying to grow you in the skill and practice of prayer.

Here are the mistakes I have made—and lessons learnt—in the 20 years since my second year at university.

1. Misunderstanding How Important Prayer Is

I could have titled this one simply: never praying. But looking back at my own life, my lack of prayer was largely due to my sheer ignorance of its importance. If the gospel reestablishes our lost relationship with God, prayer is what maintains it. Please don’t mishear me. I don’t mean that our prayer is what sustains our salvation. Rather, prayer is the joyful opportunity that results from our salvation.

Think about it. We have the kindest, wisest, most generous being in the whole universe available to help and connect with us—whenever we need. Given this, then prayerlessness is surely not understanding our incredible situation. The more I have given time over to prayer, the more I have delighted in the knowledge that God cares about the small details of my life. Incredible.

2. Only Praying in Desperate Times

If Christianity is about a relationship with God, then only engaging him when you get in a mess is a sign of relational immaturity. But I, like millions of other people, have been there. And it came down to a whole host of reasons that miss out on what God is really like. Like a parent emotionally cut off by their teenager, God will respond to those rare moments of engagement with real grace. But who wants to be seen as a self-absorbed, emotionally reclusive teenager? The hope is that at some point we grow up.

You're probably a cessationist, too - by Phil Johnson

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is a little over 1000 words, but doesn't contain a single word of Scripture. Astounding. The author purports to teach us about the Bible without quoting the Bible.

Well, his actual purpose is not to teach, however. He thinks he's got charismatics in a "gotcha." His "clever" idea is to negate charismatic beliefs by claiming they're not charismatics. According to Mr. Johnson, if a charismatic believes that something, anything has changed from the apostolic era to the church age it makes the charismatic a "functional cessationist."

It is unfortunate indeed that cessationists rely on substandard arguments like this. But even worse (and ironically), these arguments they can be turned back around at cessationists.

Pay careful attention: The typical cessationist would reject the "supernatural" gifts but concede (rightly) that God is free to use Christians to heal someone if He wants. If the cessationist accepts that God heals at the prayer of a saint, or that He might give a Christian spiritual insight into a someone's personal situation, or that He might even prompt a Christian to do a particular thing, even once, then the cessationist is a functional charismatic.  

This of course means that the cessationist would agree that the Holy Spirit can momentarily endow believers with miraculous powers of healing. A spiritual gift, temporarily bestowed.

So then, the real question is not if the Holy Spirit bestows "supernatural" spiritual gifts on believers, but rather for how long those gifts abide on a Christian. If the Holy Spirit endows a Christian with power, even if for a moment, then cessationists have a problem. If these supernatural endowments various only in duration, this makes cessationists "functional charismatics." 

But more to the point, it is very clear that a lot has changed. The New Covenant represents a total shift in the way God operates. Change does not equal ceased.

Salvation is no longer just for the Jews (Ro. 11:13-17), God has no longer restricted His speaking to Israel through the OT prophets (He. 1:1-2), He has dealt with sin fully through His Son rather than animal sacrifices (He. 10:3-7). The very nature of Christ's life, death and resurrection is that of a total shift of heaven and earth. So it is very nearly puerile to suggest that agreeing that things have changed makes a charismatic into a "functional cessationist." 

This sort of argument resembles the "one less god" argument atheists make. 

It is rhetorical nonsense.

Further, Mr. Johnson makes the astonishing claim that he doesn't even have to make a biblical argument for his doctrine. No serious Bible student would assert such a thing, but here we have a supposed Bible teacher writing it.

Mr. Johnson references but does not quote this Scripture as a proof text that apostles are done and gone:

2Co. 12:11-12 I have made a fool of myself, but you drove me to it. I ought to have been commended by you, for I am not in the least inferior to the “super-apostles”, even though I am nothing. 12 The things that mark an apostle — signs, wonders and miracles — were done among you with great perseverance.

His claim from this is that there are unique "apostolic signs" that are no longer happening because there are no longer apostles. However, we can clearly see that Paul was not appealing to his signs and wonders as proof of being a part of the unique apostolic club, he was responding to the Corinthian church's charge that he was a substandard, lower level apostle, not as good as the Twelve.

Lastly, if miracles are unique a "apostolic gift," then why did Paul describe them as a spiritual gift? [1 Cor. 12:28]. Stephen wasn't an apostle, but he did "great wonders and signs." [Act. 6:8]. 

Clearly Mr. Johnson's thinking is muddled regarding this whole topic.

Oh, and one more thing. Since every spiritual gift is a supernatural empowerment, any expression of any spiritual gift requires the Holy Spirit's ministry. There is no such thing as a natural "service" spiritual gift as opposed to a supernatural "sign" gift. There are no spiritual gifts which don't depend on the Holy Spirit's power. Thus the distinction cessationists make is artificial.) 

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

Why Modern Prophecy Is False and God’s Word Is Inerrant and Sufficient: A Response to Sam Storms - by Josh Buice

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is a very puzzling and disjointed presentation. The author quotes Sam Storms twice but doesn't offer a rejoinder to either quote. In fact, the author really doesn't respond in any specific way to Mr. Storms.

Further, in writing almost 3900 words he quotes the Bible a mere three times, yet none of these Scriptures address the points he makes. 

He makes many, many claims, very few of which he explains or documents. He just repeats them over and over. Probably the most egregious example is his repeated claim that modern day prophecy impedes the sufficiency of Scripture. He never explains why.

And we should also note that the author mentions the inerrancy of the Bible in the title, but he never discusses it.

Lastly, because of these many flaws, as well as others we will note in our commentary below, we must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Can You Lose Your Salvation? What the Bible Says About Eternal Security: Justification - by Virgil Walker

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This author attempts to explain the fifth petal of the Calvinistic TULIP:

(T) otal Depravity

(U) nconditional Election

(L) imited Atonement

(I) rresistible Grace

(P) erseverance of the Saints

The perseverance of the saints (eternal security) is based upon the assumptions of these five interrelated doctrines. The author believes a Christian cannot lose his salvation, and this is because of the unstated belief that God chooses those who will be saved (the U in TULIP).

The author makes a big noise for his doctrine, but it's really an exercise in futility. First because there is no such thing as being absolutely certain of one's salvation, and second because the doctrine makes no difference in any privilege or obligation of our faith.

And the author never deals with the other side of the issue, a Christian deciding to forfeit his salvation. This is not losing one's salvation, this would be rejecting it.

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

Inspired or not inspired? Jude and the prophecy of Enoch among others

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 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 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 we are not Bible scholars, but we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to understand the Word of God.
-----------------------

What Does the Bible Say about Women Pastors? - by Guy Waters

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The quick answer is, nothing. The Bible has nothing to say about women pastors. The Bible contains very little about pastors at all, let alone women pastors. Since biblically speaking, there is no such thing as a pastor being the head of the local church, or even being a leader/elder, the idea of a woman pastor is irrelevant.

This author attempts to explain 1 Timothy chapter two, particularly vss. 11 and 12. He sort of quotes it, but it's piecemeal and spread all over his presentation. So we shall do the author's job and quote the entire chapter:

1Ti. 2:1-15 I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone — 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all men — the testimony given in its proper time. 7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle — I am telling the truth, I am not lying — and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.

8 I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing. 9 I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. 11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing — if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Now with the entire passage before us, we shall not allow the author to impose his will upon the narrative.

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

Bad worship songs - I Will Follow Jesus, by Circuit Rider Music

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, I Will Follow Jesus.

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

Should Christians Plead the Blood of Jesus? - by Wanjiru Ng’ang’a

Found here. An interesting article about a topic we had not thought about before.

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

For God So Loved the World - by Tom Ascol

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author wants to insert himself and his fellow Calvinists into verses where they don't belong. Calvinists believe that the various predestination Scriptures apply to them. They believe God choses those who will get saved, which of course must mean that Jesus didn't die for the world, only for the ones who were chosen. Thus the reason for his article.

Our position is that there were indeed predestined ones, and they lived and died 2000 years ago. They were the early believers, the "firstfruits" God chose as His inheritance (Ps. 28:9, Ps. 33:12, Ps. 74:2, etc.); they are His sheep (Ps. 79:13, Ps. 100:3). They are the children of promise chosen as a remnant from Israel (Ro. 9:8).

No one alive on earth today is a firstfruit. We who accepted their message (Jn. 17:20) were included in Christ when we believed (Ep. 1:13). No one alive today is predestined.

Interestingly, the author never quotes or even mentions John 3:16 as promised in the title.

Lastly, we must note that none of this makes a difference. It's an empty exercise. Predestined or not predestined changes nothing about our privileges or obligations as Christians.

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

The Cancer of Effeminate Worship in the Modern Church - by Publisher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

We certainly agree with the unnamed author "Publisher" that there are things to complain about regarding the contemporary church, but this article is nothing more than effeminate whining. Publisher quotes no Scripture, offers no teaching, explains no concept. He doesn't edify, exhort, or elucidate any gospel principle.

Yes it is true that some contemporary Christian music is superficial, vague, or doctrinally incorrect. This is not a new phenomenon in the Church, which has been plagued by bad teaching and bad worship for millennia.

But this isn't the real problem that Publisher has. His problem is that contemporary worship violates his taste and tradition. "It's not like my church," he mutters under his breath. His church tradition, itself the fresh and new style from the time of the Reformation, which overturned the existing tradition of that day, has become the entrenched ritual of today. Bottom line, he doesn't like contemporary worship music doing the very thing his tradition did 500 years ago.

Now, it remains to be seen if this contemporary reformation will bear good fruit. The author is convinced it not only doesn't bear good fruit, but that it is of the devil.

We shall see.

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

Only Men May be Pastors - by Tom Hicks

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is a more detailed explanation of women's roles in the church than we're accustomed to seeing. The author quotes and discusses Scripture, which gladdens our heart. However, he bases his presentation on premises which we think are false, then on the basis of these premises rejects what we think is the most obvious explanation.

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

Exposing The Biggest Lie Christians Believe After Salvation, And How to Break Free - by James Lasher

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Though we are more focused on evaluating the claims of cessationists and Calvinists in this blog, we are not reluctant to criticize our fellow charismatics when the situation warrants it. Today's article from Charisma News is one such situation.

The author leads us in with a sensational headline, tells us that what we think is a actually a lie, then goes on to term switch. Getting sin out of our lives is not the same as fixing our sin, nor is it the same as overcoming our sin

Although this article looks more substantial, the advertisements and links to other articles are just padding. It's really quite short at a little over 350 words, barely worth the time. Especially since there are no Bible references and only a couple of unreferenced and misrepresented Bible quotes.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Am I Calvinist? - by Nick Peters

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is actually a refreshing take on the Calvinism vs. Arminianism issue. The author is absolutely correct: It doesn't matter. The doctrines at stake here make absolutely no difference in any Christian obligation or privilege. 

Good job, sir.

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

If God desires all people to be saved, why aren’t they? - by Stephen Kneale

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author is Reformed, i.e. holding to the teachings of theologians like Calvin and Luther. Because of this he summarily rejects his first hypothetical reason why people don't get saved if God desires it. But to us, this one makes the most sense of the three he offers.

He rejects it because his doctrine does not permit free will. He believes that everything that happens is because God wills it. God's will cannot be thwarted. If something happens apart from His will it would mean God lacks power.

So on this basis the author must find a way to explain the subject verse in the context of his doctrine. His doctrine creates the problem and his doctrine makes finding a satisfactory answer difficult.

Lastly, we note his preferred solution isn't a biblical one. He neither quotes nor references any other Bible verse. A similar verse, 2 Peter 3:9, would have been a valuable addition to the discussion:

2Pe. 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Will the Supreme Court constrain the wild Trump? I wouldn’t bet on it. Robert Reich

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

(Dr. Reich's cognitive dissonance must be excruciating.)

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

Bad Worship Songs - Goodbye Yesterday, by Elevation Rhythm - Joshua Holiday, Madison Binion, and Mitch Wong

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, Goodbye Yesterday.
---------------------------

Which James are we talking about?

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 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 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 we are not Bible scholars, but we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to understand the Word of God.
-----------------------

3 Things You Didn’t Know About the Rapture - by Abby Trivett

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author is the content development editor for Charisma Media, and previously was The Daily Runner’s former senior editor. At that time in 2021 she was 22 years old, which would make her 26 now. She is surprisingly present all over the internet, much more so than we would expect for someone so young.

We were unable to locate her credentials, so we don't know what theological expertise she possesses. Judging by the below article, it must be pretty superficial.

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

Rich's proverbs, book eleven **updated 3/7/25 with chapter four

Book twelve here.

Book eleven here.

Book ten here.

Book nine here.

Book eight here.

Book seven here.

Book six here.

Book five here.

Book four here.

Book three here.

Book two here.

Book one here.

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

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

Despite Failure After Failure, Bethel’s Bill Johnson Continues to Sell Faux Healing - by Publisher

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

The unnamed author has nothing to say of value here. He offers no encouragement, enlightenment, or even an explanation of some Bible principle. 

This is a little over 1500 words, with about 600 of them wasted on an irrelevant tangent. And not a single Scripture quoted.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

"I'm a liberal" - essay by Lori Gallagher Witt, attributed to Actor Ron Howard

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This poor woman thinks she's being sensible and thoughtful when in fact she's superficial and trite. Regurgitating bumper sticker slogans, the author is so self unaware that it almost causes one to laugh out loud at her.

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

Letter to the editor: Depths of MAGA hypocrisy knows no bounds - letter by Cara Wilder

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

What Ms. Wilder doesn't seem to understand is that she and her leftist friends tried all this. They called Trump names, prosecuted and persecuted him relentlessly, hammered and hammered on him, yet he still was elected. None of it worked. They lost.

Yet Ms. Wilder keeps right on going.

This is because leftists like Ms. Wilder aren't creative thinkers. They are told what to think by Central Command, and they dutifully repeat the same bumper sticker slogans and tired talking points day after day. They don't have the ability to do anything else, even in the face of failure. 

Their entire ideology is constructed this way. It's simply a series of religious mantras repeated endlessly until the leftist is swept away into mind-numbed oblivion. It's a mystical reality, built on verbal formulas, reflexively offered when properly stimulated. Or, triggered.

So Ms. Wilder offers her bilge as self-evident truth even though it's a blue-pill simulation. None of it is real.

Lastly, Ms. Wilder will be unable to cite any instance of MAGA people being hypocritical. 

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

What’s the difference between a pastor and elders? - by Stephen Kneale

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author deals with an issue near to our heart, the proper and biblical way to construct local church leadership. He gets it exactly right for the bulk of his article, but blows it towards the end. He writes:

The pastor is simply a full-time elder. More to the point, the pastor has been freed up from work so that he can devote himself to teaching the Word. For this reason, the main distinction is that the pastor takes on the bulk of teaching ministry.

There is no Bible verse referenced by the author for this distinction. In fact, there are no Bible verses contained in his article at all. The author is in essence teaching Bible doctrines without the Bible.

Astonishing.

Biblically speaking, a pastor is not a full time elder. A pastor is not necessarily a teacher. A pastor is not even necessarily an elder. There are no Bible verses that describe the specific duties of a pastor, though the five-fold ministry [apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers] has a collective duty 

Ep. 4:12-13 to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fulness of Christ.

The elders govern the church and are commanded to be shepherds and overseers:

1Pe. 5:2 Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers...

The author really only manages to go half way. He correctly identifies the leadership of the church as elders, but he wants a "special," full time elder with the title of pastor. Thus he wants to traditional structure maintained while giving lip service to the biblical model of a church governed by a plurality of men.

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

Reforming Soteriology in the Sixteenth Century - by Keith Mathison

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author wants to explain how Catholics and Reformed believers differ on the doctrine of salvation. He doesn't manage to actually achieve this goal. This explanation is confusing and nearly impenetrable.

Although the author will quote a confessional several times, he will not quote or reference a single actual Scripture. We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.)

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

Is Roman Catholic Baptism Valid? - by Jim McCarthy

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

In today's post we have a pastor who will go to great lengths to explain what is a "valid" baptism. In his explanation he will quote from something called the WCF eight times but will never tell us what it is. 

The WCF is The Westminster Confession of Faith, written in the mid 1600s. 

Gotquestions explains,

The Westminster Confession of Faith is a systematic exposition of Calvinism, written from a Puritan viewpoint.

Although the author will quote from this document and quote a few Bible verses, he will quote no Scripture that discusses or even mentions baptism. Thus he will explain a Bible doctrine without using the Bible.

So how does the author know what a "valid" baptism is? He writes:

The Scriptures and our Standards require that the sacraments be performed only by “lawfully ordained” ministers of the gospel (WCF 28:2)

Here the author appeals to the Scriptures but doesn't tell us where in the Bible "lawfully ordained" ministers are described. In actual fact, it's not in the Bible. A "valid" baptism  performed by a "lawfully ordained" minister is a standard not described in Scripture, it is described in the WCF.

Further, why is a "valid" baptism important? Important to whom? What if a person doesn't have a "valid" baptism? Does God keep track of "valid" baptisms and reject invalid baptisms?

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

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

The problems with limited atonement

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 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 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 we are not Bible scholars, but we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to understand the Word of God.
-----------------------

1967 Pontiac Lemans #2 - budget build - Episode nine - Hood, trunk, windshield gutter, cowl and firewall, heater box **updated 3/24/25

 October 5th, 2024:

October 6th, 2024:

Episode one, introduction, here.

Episode two, disassembly and assessment, here.

Episode three, rough body work, here.

Episode four, quarters, here.

Episode five, toe panel, rockers, here.

Episode six, fenders, inner fenders, here.

Episode seven, the doors, found here.

Episode eight, tail light panel, hood, found here.

Episode nine - Hood, trunk, windshield gutter, cowl and firewall, heater box, found here.

Episode ten - Back glass gutter, grill, found here.

Episode eleven - headlight extensions, roof, found here.

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

This episode and episode ten are going to be a sort of catch-all for various small repairs. 

Before we move on, a status report: These parts are ready for paint:

That leaves  the driver quarter, the roof, and the rear glass area. As you can see in the pic, the hood is done, and that's covered in this episode. In addition, the lower windshield is done, which is also covered in this episode.

Mercy - by Mike Ratliff

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author cannot see past his doctrines, even when he manages to properly define the word "mercy." 

Many Christians are locked into the unbiblical idea that God sits up in heaven, holds his nose, and says, "Ok, I'll save you even though you don't deserve it." And then after we're saved, people like the author insist that God then tells us, "Yes I saved you, but you most certainly don't deserve my blessings." 

Neither idea is found in the pages of the Bible. Check it yourself, dear reader.

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

Against Executive Pastors - by T. M. Suffield

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

This article is written to refute the idea of executive pastors, and rightly so, but all the author really does is bolster the traditional unbiblical practice of pastor as head of the church. 

The author writes over 1400 words with not a single Bible verse or Bible reference. He does use the term biblical(ly) five times, however.

We therefore must label this Bad Bible Teaching. 

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

Rich's proverbs, book ten **updated 2/10/25

Book twelve here.

Book eleven here.

Book ten here.

Book nine here.

Book eight here.

Book seven here.

Book six here.

Book five here.

Book four here.

Book three here.

Book two here.

Book one here.

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

Letter to the editor: Christian Nationalists trying to control all our lives - Jack Davis

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This letter is so incoherent it almost defies rebuttal. 

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

Divine Impassibility - by Kevin DeYoung

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

Pay close attention, dear reader, as you consider the author's presentation. It comes across as thoughtful, superficially scholarly, and biblical. But there's no substance. It empty of explanations, it contains no specifics, and the logic is faulty.

The author quotes a statement of faith and the lyrics to a hymn. Not a single word from the Bible. He explains nothing, edifies no one, and does nothing to add to biblical understanding.

This is truly Bad Bible Teaching.

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

Should We Invite the Holy Spirit? - by lovesickscribe

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The Holy Spirit is certainly the most misunderstood and misrepresented member of the trinity. The author believes that the born again event is the only thing the Holy Spirit does and takes issue with the idea that He might have the ability to "intensify" His presence. However, she abandons biblical documentation for her key assertions.

Does the glory and power of God vary at times? Absolutely:

1 Cor. 5:4 So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present...

This clearly implies that His manifest power is not always "present." Also by implication, there is action that can be taken to change this.

If there is no such thing as the glory of the Lord showing forth in greater measure, then what happened here:

2 Chronicles 5:14 ...and the priests could not perform their service because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled the temple of God.

It is certainly true that various aspects of God's nature and revelation are not always as discernable. Though He never changes, the way He interacts with creation varies in power:

Ac. 19:20 In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power.

We would say that we ought to arrange our lives and our churches to please the Spirit:

Ga. 6:8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

Perhaps we might then experience the presence of the Lord.

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

How Democrats Lost the Election - By Marcelo Brazzi

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is an agitprop-loaded screed that makes several false claims, repeats bumper-sticker leftist slogans, and basically just reinforces The Narrative in pursuit of The Agenda.

We slogged through a good portion of this, refuting each point as raised, until we could stand no more. And really, we're wasting our time anyway since the author or one of his comrades with come back tomorrow with exactly the same talking points as if today never happened.

Remember, the Democrats lost using these very same talking points. But because they have no original ideas or anything at all that requires introspection, well, they'll continue with their failed strategy.

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

Trump and His Crypto Cronies Have Big Plans. Be Afraid - by Sam Gustin

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The author lets loose with every Leftist talking point available to him, irrespective of truth or even reality. Of course this is the methodology of the Left, to simply overwhelm with repeated, rapid-fire factoids. 

We have deemed this The Narrative. The Narrative is the verbiage distributed to media outlets and Leftist apologists by Central Command, used to attack opponents and further The Agenda. The Agenda is the plan by which The System is disassembled and replaced.

So the author is simply doing his duty to promulgate the daily bumper sticker slogans and incendiary rhetoric required to keep to keep the average American propagandized and uninformed.

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

Discipleship in the Reformed World - by Ryan Denton

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.

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

This is actually a rather good article on the need for discipleship. The author quotes Scripture, approaches the issue from various angles, and overall provides a good exhortation.

But because the author is "Reformed," i.e., he holds various doctrines peculiar to the Reformed perspective including Calvinism, he makes some curious statements. Twice he mentions Calvin and the regulative principle of worship, which would suggest that he considers these two things to of primary importance when it comes to discipleship. Let's first explain, then analyze.

John Calvin: He was a pastor and theologian in the 1500s, and is best known for developing what has come to be known as the Doctrines of Grace. These are roughly explained by the acronym TULIP:

• Total Depravity
• Unconditional Election
• Limited Atonement
• Irresistible Grace
• Perseverance of the Saints

We have written extensively on these, and have concluded that they are entirely useless. Knowing these doctrines adds nothing to informing one's daily Christian obligations. They do not come to bear on any matter regarding getting saved, walking out a life of obedience, service, or generosity. They are mere intellectual exercises, often resulting in division between Christians, churches, and denominations.

We have no use for Calvinism.

Regulative principle of worship: Calvin provided the most succinct definition: “God disapproves of all modes of worship not expressly sanctioned by his Word.” This actually has nothing to do with worship per se, it actually is a principle that applies to how a Sunday service is conducted. The whole premise is that there is a "proper" way to conduct a corporate worship service, and that we cannot do so outside of the specific commands of the Bible.

In actual fact, the forms and practices of a traditional Reformed church service is the true benchmark. This for example means a contemporary worship service with a band and rock songs violates the regulative principle of worship.

Now, we concede the author does mention a number of things about discipleship that are profitable, like prayer and Bible study.  But it seems like he expects that at some point a convert should embrace Calvin's teachings and the regulative principle. 

There is no fruit that comes from this.

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

A day that shall live in infamy, as should Donald J. Trump - by Robert Reich

Found here. Our comments in bold.

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

The is a letter-perfect regurgitation of leftist revisionist history. Dr. Reich recites every false claim with robotic precision. We will simply note that any claim made here by Dr. Reich which has already been thoroughly documented as false will be affixed with a "Did not happen."

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

The Mailbag: “I Speak Jesus,” Charity Gayle, and How to Vet Christian Music - by Michelle Lesley

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

Ms. Lesley takes great offense at this song because it focuses on the speaking the name of Jesus. She errantly assumes that the songwriters ("NAR," don' cha know) are using Jesus' name as a magical incantation of sorts.

It is clear Ms. Lesley has never considered the Name of Jesus as Scripture presents it. Because of her doctrinal biases it's not a teaching she's acquainted with, though the Bible talks about the Name of Jesus and its importance and preeminence repeatedly. She reacts to a Scriptural idea that is new to her by plugging her ears and screaming "heresy!" 

Ms. Lesley asks some questions she thinks cannot be satisfactorily answered. We shall do so.

• What do you mean by that?

To "speak Jesus" is when those who are "in Christ" [Gal. 3:26] appeal to and use His name and authority, particularly in prayer.

• Where, in context and rightly handled, does the Bible teach us to do that?

Ac. 3:16 By faith in the name of Jesus, this man whom you see and know was made strong. It is Jesus’ name and the faith that comes through him that has given this complete healing to him, as you can all see.

Ac. 2:38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 

 

Col. 3:17 And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

 

1Co. 1:10 I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another...

 

Ac. 4:10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed.

 

Ja. 5:14 Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord.

 

Ep. 5:20 always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

Ac. 16:18 She kept this up for many days. Finally Paul became so troubled that he turned round and said to the spirit, “In the name of Jesus Christ I command you to come out of her!” At that moment the spirit left her.

Ph. 2:9-10 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth...

Ac. 4:30 Stretch out your hand to heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” 

 

Rom. 10:13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” [Joel 2:32]

• What is that supposed to accomplish, or what will the result of that be so I can watch for it?

See above Scriptures for examples.

The name of Jesus is powerful when used by those who belong to him, and dangerous to those who do not [Acts 19:11-19].

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

"Eat the meat and spit out the bones" meme

 Found on some Calvinist/reformist website somewhere:

It seems like a doctrinally sound teacher is simply a teacher the memewriter likes. Or maybe it's a sliding scale. A teacher can get one or two things wrong and that's fine. Maybe that's a "rounding error" for the 100% standard. So how much error is too much? Unknown. 

Letter to the editor: Trump inauguration will make a mockery of Constitution - by Kenneth Allen

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

It's rather astonishing to us that the Left persists in their narrative no matter what. They get refuted every day but this does not dissuade them. They are proved wrong at every point but the very next day they repeat the same old bumper sticker slogans. Even though they lost the election using this blather they keep it up. Trump still must be blasted as an authoritarian, a fascist, a threat to democracy... and, an insurrectionist.

This is The Narrative, the daily talking points regularly disseminated to the faithful, the sole purpose of which is to further The Agenda. The Agenda is the overthrow of The System to make way for the people's utopia, Socialism.

So, Kenneth Allen's letter to the editor appeared in the local paper, in service to The Narrative. He is gravely concerned about supposed violations of the Constitution, you know, the document written by old white guys, misogynists, and imperialistic xenophobes. 

In actual fact the author doesn't care a bit about the Constitution, except for the momentary value it has to impugn Trump. He even quotes it, which likely puts his Google search into the FBI terrorist database. 

The author is correct that the Constitution forbids those who have engaged in insurrection to hold federal office. In the author's mind this disqualifies Trump. Because The Narrative. 

However, insurrection is a crime. So first, there must be an insurrection, and there wasn't. Second, one must be tried and convicted of insurrection to be an insurrectionist. Didn't happen. 

For a long time we thought the Left was simply being cynical, tossing around their accusations but not really believing them. It seems, though, that the author really believes this claptrap. A sobering situation, indeed.

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

UPDATE – Research: New Apostolic Reformation - by Marsha West

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

We've had some exposure to the "NAR," so we're familiar with many of their doctrines, practices, and ideas. So as we read the below article we thought the author was discussing some other group. Very little of what's written here aligns with our experience.

It seems the author simply lumps together all charismatics, pentecostals, and continuationists into the "NAR." This is lazy, because a great many charismatics don't believe in modern-day apostles, the majority of continuationists are not dominionists, and most pentecostals don't go to "NAR" connected churches.

In fact, the moniker "NAR" is nearly useless, except to use a a bludgeon against those with whom the author disagrees. This is not to suggest that various charismatic churches are blameless, for they make mistakes, teach error, and engage in excesses just like any other church. 

Including conservative, cessationist churches.

Further, the author only manages to quote three partial Scriptures. We must label this Bad Bible Teaching.

Lastly, we don't intend to defend the "NAR," we are here to examine the author's presentation.

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