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.

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

1967 Pontiac Lemans #2 - budget build - Episode eight - repair tail light panel ***updated 1/22/25

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, 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 parts on the car that simply need replacing. The tail light panel is one such part. It was hit in two places, it's got significant rust, and it's misshapened. But, it's not available as a reproduction. 
 

That means I must fix it.