Encouragement for those facing opposition!

Consider these blessed words -

John 15:18 If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also. 21 But all these things they will do to you for My name’s sake, because they do not know Him who sent Me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin. 23 He who hates Me hates My Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father. 25 But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, ‘They hated Me without a cause.’

Not that any of us are Jesus, but He did say that we would suffer persecution for He and His word's sake. So remember, it is not that they have a problem with you, they have a problem with Him!

Pray for them and keep the faith!

"Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved."

How will Barack Obama respond to being referred to as "lord and savior"?

I was shocked to receive a link to a story in which Jamie Foxx refers to Barack Obama as "our lord and savior" at the Soul Train Awards.

Click on the link below to view the story and video -

Obama as lord and savior?

How has God dealt with leaders who accept the worship of men in past times?

Acts 12:20 Now Herod had been very angry with the people of Tyre and Sidon; but they came to him with one accord, and having made Blastus the king’s personal aide their friend, they asked for peace, because their country was supplied with food by the king’s country. 21 So on a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat on his throne and gave an oration to them. 22 And the people kept shouting, “The voice of a god and not of a man!” 23 Then immediately an angel of the Lord struck him, because he did not give glory to God. And he was eaten by worms and died. 24 But the word of God grew and multiplied.

"Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved."

Oprah and Joel, together in heresy!

Wretchedradio.com had this posted on their site. It is one of the worst cases of taking scripture out of context and then teaching something totally at odds with the text that I have ever seen.

 

 

 

Christianity Today - Modern Liberalism and Theological Ignorance!

I read an article in the November issue of Christianity Today written by singer, songwriter and author, Carolyn Arends. The article, God Did It, was a retelling of a discussion between the author and her son as he was considering what college to attend. The young man was interested in attending a Christian college to avoid the teaching of evolution, while his mother suggested that may not be best. Her reasons for encouraging him to consider a secular college were rooted in her belief that evolution may be true and the Bible/Christianity can still be true if it is. The issue of whether evolution is true is not something I am prepared to discuss at length here, although I believe the six-day creation story of Genesis is literal and has not been refuted by scientific data. What I take great exception to is the author’s suggestion that evolution and the Bible/Christianity could be reconciled and her lack of theological understanding regarding the implications.

Her reasons for accepting the possibility of evolution being true in the article are not a discussion of whether science has proven it, but centered on other issues. The first reason given for why evolution and the Bible/Christianity may be compatible is that Billy Graham once said he would see no problem for the Bible/Christianity if evolution were true. The quote she shared with her son, from 1964, from such a well known Christian, led her son to respond, "Maybe you’re not a total heretic". Is Billy Graham a famous evangelist? Yes! Is he a theologian who is known for his deep and thorough understanding of theology? No! Just because someone is well known does not make them an expert. The place to go to see if someone is a heretic is the Bible!

The second reason given for saying evolution and the Bible/Christianity may be compatible is the teaching of some un-named Hebrew scholars, who are said to believe in the authority of Scripture, but have no problem with seeing the Genesis creation account as less than literal. I have several problems with this, not the least of which is, who are these scholars and what do they mean by authoritative? The reasons specifically given from these scholars for the non-literal/non-scientific reading of the creation account is that the Bible was not written to us as the original audience, so we can't know what it is teaching us, unless we are sure what it meant to them. This is a reasonable hermeneutic principle, but should we not err on the side of believing it was teaching exactly what it says, unless given strong evidence from the Bible to think it is teaching something different?

The next reason attributed to the Hebrew scholars is that "the Bible is not a book", but rather a collection of books written at different times and in different genres. Somehow this means that what is in Genesis can be misleading and totally contradictory to reality, and that is somehow okay because it is a genre that was used in that time by that author. When considering genres in the Bible, it is sometimes easy to see or suspect it is using non-literal language based on the context. However, when you see things presented with very specific time frames and given as God's direct words/actions, as we see in the creation account, it is hard to believe any God- fearing person/people would have felt comfortable proclaiming such things so specifically, unless they believed it was literally true.

However, even though the author presents these reasons for the possibility of reconciling the Bible and evolution, I think her real motive comes out in her last argument, which is not scientific or biblical, but pragmatic. Following a brief discussion of why young people are leaving the church, it is said, "the cognitive dissonance between the empirical data and what we are asking them to believe is too great". So, is this a search for truth from the Bible and true science? No, it is a capitulation to the culture out of fear of losing people from the church.

Much like the liberals of old, we are being told to bring our beliefs in line with those of the age we live in. As John Shelby Spong suggested we must ditch the violent God of Jesus and the crucifixion if Christianity is to survive, Carolyn Arends’ bottom line is that we must be willing to reconsider the creation account's truthfulness, if we are to keep people, especially young people, in the church.

This is a grave error!

You can't have it both ways. You can't remove the offense of the scriptures to get or keep people in the church and still have the subject of the scriptures and the basis of the church, Jesus Christ, end up in His true and proper place. Spong’s liberalism makes the cross a fairytale, while Carolyn Arends’ liberalism leaves us with a Jesus who comes to redeem a people with no literal Adam, Eve, original sin or fall from which to redeem us. The reality is that the Bible is one book. Yes, it was written over thousands of years, by many authors and contains different literary genres, but it is one story, with one subject and everything in it points to Him, including the events surrounding creation!

I am very concerned that Carolyn Arends and her publishers at Christianity Today would feel comfortable publishing this article. She says she still believes the creation account, but wants to be sure we aren't being too dogmatic in case it isn't true, and so we won't loose young people from the church. OK, but if the creation account has not been proven wrong, do you really want to be telling the world, especially our young people, that there are good reasons for rejecting it? Dare anyone named a Christian handle God's Word so lightly?

Why does the government not want to call terrorism, terrorism?

This video below was on the Wretched Radio Blog. It seems weird that the U.S. government was slow or reluctant to call the attack on the embassy in Libya terrorism and even weirder that they would refuse to call the Fort Hood massacre terrorism.

Why, I don't know, but watch this video and be shocked!

Stoned, but not dead!

No, I am not talking about the residents of Colorado and their recent vote to legalize marijuana. I am talking about the apostle Paul.

Acts 14:19 Then Jews from Antioch and Iconium came there; and having persuaded the multitudes, they stoned Paul and dragged him out of the city, supposing him to be dead. 20 However, when the disciples gathered around him, he rose up and went into the city. And the next day he departed with Barnabas to Derbe.

A multitude at Lystra was manipulated into killing Paul, by a few influential people from out of town who saw him as a threat to their way of life.

However, Paul was not dead!

What those who attempted to murder Paul and silence his message didn't realise, is that Paul could not be killed until God was finished with Him on earth. Paul, like the church as a whole, is safe eternally and only suffers what accomplishes God's plans on earth now.

God is not dead, we are His in Christ, and there are other believers who care about us! So, until God takes you home - get up and continue His work!

"Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved."

James White, post election thoughts.

Shocking! John MacArthur shares insight into the political party platforms.

I saw this on Wretchedradio, pay close attention to the quote from Planned Parenthood and the statistics on abortion. Incredible!



Is "bait and switch", an acceptable church growth practice?

What do I mean by "bait and switch"? I am referring to the age old marketing ploy where you offer something much desired at an irresistible price to get people into your store, but once they arrive to grab the great bargain, you surprise them by pushing a different product, the one you intended to sell them all along.

Is this practiced in some churches? I think we would have to say yes. Many churches offer programs that are intended to get people into the church, so they can hear the gospel and hopefully get saved. I know folks have been saved through sports programs like Upwards and although I have never heard of an actual instance, I would assume at least someone has been saved at one of the thousands of "Fall festivals" held at churches over the Halloween holiday.

Also, music is certainly used to attract people to churches in hopes that they will stay and hear the word. I have seen several examples of rock concert type church services lately and have even heard it suggested that they are necessary if you are going to get folks into your church, especially young people. Have folks come to see the show and stayed to hear the gospel and get saved, I would assume so.

Here is a possible example of giving in to worldly music preferences, as a church celebrates its tenth anniversary -

Finally, sermons are often crafted to be as engaging to the unbeliever as possible. This is done by including much reference to pop culture, cleaver videos, humor and topics which even the lost might see as helpful, such as money management. Do people ever come to a church services to hear a message crafted to get folks in the door, hear the gospel and get saved, it is certainly possible.

Here is a sermon that I received a direct mail flier for at my house (aimed at getting new folks to their church) and then watched online, it is based on a popular movie - Avatar sermon

So what is the problem with using non-spiritual things like sports ministries, music that mostly entertains and messages that are aimed at getting people in the door, so the gospel can be shared with them? I would suggest at least two. First, all too often I have listened to messages meant to get people in the door that never got around to the gospel, let alone having the proclamation of the word be prominent (Avatar sermon above for example). Also, even if the gospel is touched on during the message, does the tendency to emphasise everything but the scripture, create church attendees that are hungry for the word or hungry for more of what got them in the door in the first place?

Scripture says -

1 Pet. 2:1 Therefore, laying aside all malice, all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and all evil speaking, 2 as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby,  3 if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is gracious. (NKJV)

Does the seeker oriented church, with it's programs, entertaining music, and relevant sermons, tend to promote a desire for the word or a desire for more of what the people got last week?

If you look at what is happening, it probably isn't a case of "bait and switch" at all. In reality the church is offering what people want on the first day they attend and continue to offer it on an ongoing basis. If lost people want a church experience that isn't structured around teaching the word and equipping the saints for the work of the ministry (Eph. 4:11-16), then you can certainly do church in a way that is more appealing to them, the question is, is that the church? 

2 Tim. 4:1 I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: 2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. 5 But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry. (NKJV)

How far should a church go to get folks in the door? Maybe that is the wrong question, maybe we should ask, how can the church teach the whole counsel of God, equip the saints for the work of the ministry and then send them into the world to be witnesses of Jesus Christ and bring others to salvation?

"Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved."

Identifying a disciple!

The Pyromaniacs Blog has been discussing discipleship recently. The following two paragraphs are from a current blog post by Dan Phillips. Read them and I assume you will want to read the rest at the link above.

A disciple never feels he knows his Bible well enough. A disciple knows that he is on a learning-curve that literally has no upper extremity. A disciple never forgets that God has expectations, that privilege obliges, that he is morally obligated to be heading to the point where he himself both practices and can explain the deeper truths of God (Heb. 5:11-14). Further, he is vividly aware that it was failure to advance in just such a way that gave birth to one of the most terrifying passages of Scripture (Heb. 6:1ff.).

"I will never need to know that" is the thought of a non-disciple. It means, "This doesn't interest me right now, so I won't make any effort to strengthen my grasp of what the Word says about it." It signals a willful ignorance of the implications of passages such as Prov. 2:1, that wisdom requires that we treasure up what we are taught right now, even though the application may not be right now. The disciple is like the hardworking, forward-looking ant (Prov. 6:8), not like the aimless sluggard (Prov. 20:4).