Paul Washer - "BUT WHAT IS YOUR VISION?!" Um, Jesus Christ

WOTMR - Binding And Loosing

Cultural "Christianity" and the Emergent Church

Francis Schaeffer died in 1984. Even before then, though, he could see things creeping into the church that had no business being there. His suggestion? He suggests to make sure there is a line drawn in the sand; to make sure there is a differentiation between theose who hold to a full view of Scripture and those who do not and for those that do to not associate with those that don't without preaching repentance from their unbelief. I agree with the late Dr. Schaeffer.

Part 1



Part 2



Part 3



Part 4

"Jacob Have I Loved; Esau Have I Hated..."

Christian - Mormon Debate, James White vs. Gilbert Scharffs

Christian - Mormon Debate, James White vs. Potter

Part 1



Part 2



Part 3

Phil Johnson - In What Sense Is Depravity Total?

Every member of Adam's race is born utterly depraved—fallen, alienated from God, and in bondage to evil. In Romans 6, Paul calls it slavery to sin. He furthermore says in Romans 6:20 that people who are slaves of sin are utterly devoid of true righteousness. All in such a state of sin and unbelief are God's enemies (Romans 5:8, 10). They are "alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds" (Colossians 1:21).

Totally.

Human depravity is "total" in the same sense death is total. You can't be partly dead. You can be really, really sick or critically injured and on life support, but you're either dead or alive. There are no degrees of death.

In fact, when Scripture describes human depravity, it's usually with the language of spiritual death.

Ephesians 2, for example, says people in their fallen state are dead in trespasses and sins—spiritually dead (v. 1). They walk in worldliness and disobedience (v. 2). They live in the lusts of their flesh, "indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and [are] by nature children of wrath, even as the rest" (v. 3). They are "separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world" (v. 12).

In Romans 8:6 Paul, says, "To be carnally minded is death." He is talking about the carnal-mindedness of unbelief, describing what it means to be totally depraved. He goes on to say (vv. 7-8), "The mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God."

In other words, spiritual death is a total inability to love God, a total inability to obey Him, and a total inability to please Him.

Now, lots of non-Christians will deny that they are hostile toward God. But they are self-deceived. In fact, many who invoke the name of Christ and claim to love God actually do not love the God of the Bible. They love a god who exists only in their imagination—a tolerant, unholy, passive, feeble, weakling god. That is not the God of Scripture. The God of the Bible is too holy for sinners' tastes. He is too wrathful against sin. His standards are too high. His laws are not to their liking. So though they profess to love God, they do not love the one true God who has revealed Himself in Scripture. They are not able to love Him.

The inability to love God as we ought to is the very essence of total depravity. It leaves us impotent to fulfill the First and Great Commandment: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength" (Mark 12:30). So everything the sinner ever does is permeated with sin, because he's living life in constant violation of the most important commandment of all.

On the other hand, "total depravity" does not mean that all sinners are always as bad as they could possibly be. It does not mean that every unbeliever will live out his or her depravity the fullest. It doesn't mean all non-Christians are morally equal to brute beasts or serial killers. It does not mean that unconverted people are incapable of acts of kindness or goodwill to fellow humans. In fact, Jesus Himself stated that unbelievers do good to people in return for good that is done to them (Luke 6:33).

The human race was created in the image of God. Though sin has spoiled that image, even non-Christians are capable of rising to great heights of human goodness, honesty, decency, and excellence. "Total" depravity does not mean that every unredeemed woman must be an angry, slobbering hag, or that every unbelieving man is a twisted, degenerate psychopath. It does mean that unbelievers, those who are in the flesh, cannot please God.

So the word total in "total depravity" refers to the extent of our sinfulness, not the degree to which we manifest it. It means evil has contaminated every aspect of our being—our wills, our intellect, our emotions, our conscience, our personality, and our desires.

In biblical terminology, sin has totally corrupted the human heart. Jeremiah 17:9 says, "The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?" If the heart is corrupt, the whole person is defiled.

By describing our depravity as heart-corruption, Scripture makes it clear that the real problem with us lies at the core of our being. Our very soul is infected by sin. Nothing about us remains pure. Our tendency to sin is unrelenting and ultimately unconquerable. Sin therefore defines who we are.

Before a perfectly holy and impeccably righteous God we are profane, sinful, thoroughly debased—no matter how good we appear in human terms. Being truly righteous is not merely hard for us; it's impossible.

That is as true of someone like Mahatma Gandhi or Mother Teresa as it was of Adolph Hitler or Jeffrey Dahmer. The relative goodness of the world's best people is never enough to merit God's approval. His only standard is absolute perfection. The best of sinners do not come close.

Let's illustrate: suppose every reader of Pyromaniacs lined up at Point Dume (the closest good swimming beach to my house), and we all tried to swim to Singapore. Most of us would probably drown before anyone reached Catalina—just 26 miles away. One thing is certain; no one would make it to Singapore. We'd all be dead long before the goal was met. If I were a gambler (I'm not) I'd bet everything I have that no one would even get as far as Hawaii, less than halfway.

Question: Would those who died before swimming two miles be any worse off than those who died twenty-three miles offshore? Of course not. All would be equally dead. The goal was just as hopeless for the trained, expert swimmer as it was for the fat guy who did his training by sitting in front of a computer blogging all day.

That is how it is with sin. All sinners stand condemned before God. Even the best of Adam's offspring are thoroughly sinful at heart. No matter how good they might appear through the lens of human judgment, they are in exactly the same hopeless state as the lowest degenerate—maybe even in a worse state, because it is harder for them to acknowledge their sin. So they compound their sin with self-righteousness.

People are prepared to be called sinners in their sin, but they do not want to be labeled sinners in their religion. But this is crucial: Human religion does not contradict depravity; it only proves it. Human religion substitutes other gods in the rightful place of the true God. It is the very essence of God-hating. It is false worship—nothing but an attempt to depose God. It is the very worst expression of depravity.

Remember—it was the Pharisees whom Jesus condemned with the harshest invective He ever uttered. Why? After all, they believed the Scriptures were literally true. They tried to obey the law rigidly. They weren't like the Sadducees, religious liberals who denied the supernatural. They were the theological fundamentalists of their day.

But they refused to recognize the bankruptcy of their own hearts. They trusted in themselves that they were righteous and went about trying to establish their own righteousness, instead of submitting to the righteousness of God (Romans 10:3). Remember what they told the man born blind in John 9:34? "You were born entirely in sins"—as if they weren't.

In other words, they rejected the doctrine of total depravity, and it led to their utter condemnation. Jesus said, "It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners" (Mark 2:17). "The Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost" (Luke 19:10).

They thought all their good works made them righteous. But religion and good works do not cancel out depravity. Depravity corrupts even the highest forms of religion and good works. George Whitefield said that God could damn us for the very best prayer we ever put up. John Bunyan agreed. He said he thought the best prayer he ever prayed still had enough sin in it to damn the whole world. Isaiah wrote, "We are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousness are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away" (Isaiah 64:6).

Unredeemed sinners are therefore incapable of doing anything to please God. They cannot love the God who reveals Himself in Scripture. They cannot obey His law from the heart, with pure motives. They cannot even grasp the essentials of spiritual truth. First Corinthians 2:14 says, "A natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised." Unbelievers are therefore incapable of faith. And "without faith it is impossible to please [God]" (Hebrews 11:1).

Note: The key word in all of that is inability. Sinners are totally unable to respond to God, apart from His enabling grace.

That's the starting point for a sound, biblical understanding of soteriology.

Paul Washer - The Gospel

Bob DeWaay - Rob Bell “Undefines” Holiness

In Velvet Elvis, Bell lists a number of transcendent experiences that he claims overwhelmed him to be in awe of God. The first one for Bell happened as a teenager at a concert performed by Irish rock group U2, where he was “overwhelmed with the word true.” These extraordinary experiences he also describes as “holy” and “sacred.” The problem is that his usage has nothing to do with the Biblical meaning of the terms “holy” or “or sacred.”

The Bible uses the term “holy” to refer to God and whatever He sets apart for His purposes. In the Old Testament, for example, the Sabbath was “holy” because God had designated it as set apart for Him, using terminology like, “holy Sabbath to the Lord” (Exodus 16:23). Items for sacred use in the tabernacle where designated as “holy.” God is holy (Isaiah 6:3) and whatever things, places or people that God designates as holy are so because God declared them to be or caused them to be by some special action.

By definition, if something is holy it is separate from its opposite, the profane: “Moreover, they shall teach My people the difference between the holy and the profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean” (Ezekiel 44:23). God’s holy name could be profaned, which is very sinful (Leviticus 22:32 and many other passages). Jerusalem is called the “holy city” in Old Testament and several times in gospels and Revelation.

In the New Testament, the term “holy” is not used to designate things or places other than usages that are tied to the Old Testament, such as the temple and its services mentioned in Acts and Hebrews. The scriptures are called both “holy” and “sacred” (hieros is used for “sacred” only once -- 2 Timothy 3:15 “sacred Scriptures”; elsewhere it means temple or temple service). But this designation refers not to pages with ink on them per se, but to the content of the inspired writings. All other uses of “holy” have to do with the church: God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the holy law, redeemed persons, faith, prayer, and our holy calling. The term under the New Covenant does not refer to things and places other than when referring to those so designated under the Old Covenant, like Jerusalem and the temple.

Therefore, under the New Covenant there are no holy things or places. A church building is not a sacred space. Hymnals, candles, pews, or a communion table (items that might be used in a church) are not holy. No ground or land is “holy” compared to other places (other than God’s continued plans for Israel, but that has to do with past promises and their fulfillment). No special location exists where one is going to meet God like Moses did at the burning bush. And one cannot go to a Christian store and buy a holy object. God makes people holy by redeeming them through the blood atonement and cleansing them from their sins. If someone meets God in a saving way, it will be because they heard and believed the gospel, not because of some “transcendent moment” like Bell describes.

For example, Bell describes a memorable meeting with some friends in a restaurant: “And I’m sitting in this restaurant looking around the table, soaking it in, totally overwhelmed with the holiness of it all. The sacredness of the moment.” Bell then describes other experiences, such as being in a dirt-floored shack in Rwanda or at a funeral that he ends with “The ground was holy.” There was nothing uniquely Christian about any of the experiences he describes. He further describes conducting the wedding of a couple who wanted nothing to do with God, Jesus or the Bible. So they were married in a natural, beautiful place. Bell explained to them that whatever brought them together also holds all things together. They agreed to, “Call this glue, this force, ‘God.’” The resultant ceremony Bell describes as, “one of the most sacred things I have ever been a part of.”

The problem here is that only Bell’s subjective impressions distinguish the holy and sacred. When Bell uses the term spiritual (which he also used to describe how the couple wanted the non-Christian wedding to be) he uses it in the secular manner as an Oprah Winfrey would use it. He justifies his use of the term by saying that “God is present” everywhere in the world.

However, the doctrine of God’s omnipresence does not imply that “everything is spiritual” or “everything is holy.” Bell over emphasizes God’s immanence in a way that is in danger of crossing over into panentheism. God must be understood to be transcendent over and separate from the creation. The Bible says that Jesus is “separated from sinners” (Hebrews 7:27), and that before conversion we were separate from Christ and without God (Ephesians 2:12). Everything is not holy, everything is not sacred, and everything is not spiritual in the sense the Bible uses the terms. But Bell says that it is: “We throw ourselves into our work because everything is sacred.”

In my opinion, Bell is confusing common grace with saving grace. We can look at a sunset on a beautiful day and see that “the heavens declare the glory of God.” But the heavens speak this way to all people whether or not they recognize the true creator God. Paul says that this general revelation shows “God’s invisible attributes” (Romans 1:20). But Paul said that in the midst of a long litany about universal human sinfulness. Having a “transcendent moment” in which one realizes that some spiritual force exists that holds everything together, cannot save anyone and therefore cannot create holiness. Holiness only comes through the cleansing of the conscience by the blood of Jesus (Hebrews 9:14). That only happens for those who repent and believe the gospel. Bell’s teaching obscures the difference between the holy and the profane. Common grace (that God shows kindness even to His enemies and sends rain on the just and unjust) does not create universal holiness.

To demonstrate how Bell confuses the Biblical idea of holiness, let me show you how he interprets the “holy ground” incident at the burning bush. Here is the Velvet Elvis version:

God tells Moses to take off his sandals, for the ground he is standing on is holy. Moses has been tending sheep in this region for forty years. How many times has he passed this spot? How many times has he stood in this exact place? And now God tells him the ground is holy? Has the ground been holy the whole time and Moses is just becoming aware of it for the first time? Do you and I walk on holy ground all the time, but we are moving so fast and returning so many calls and writing so many emails and having such long list to get done that we miss it?

In the context of this chapter Bell intends his readers to take these questions as rhetorical with the implied answer “yes.” But his exegesis of the Exodus account is inaccurate. He confuses general revelation with special revelation. At the burning bush Moses was the recipient of special revelation. God’s theophany made the ground holy compared to any other particular ground, not some heightened awareness on Moses’ part. That God created the world can be seen through general revelation. That Moses was called by God to be the mediator of the Old Covenant could only be known by special revelation. Slowing down to figuratively “smell the roses” will not reveal “holy ground.”

This is not the end of this serious category error. Using strange terminology about Jesus being the “life force” of nature and existence, Bell concludes that the wedding planners who did not want anything about Jesus or God are “resonating with Jesus whether they acknowledge it or not.” He explains,

Jesus was up on that cliff with us that day. It is not that God is over here and real life is over there. If it is real, then it’s showing us God. It is not that passion and love and exhilaration are in one place and Jesus is somewhere else. Where you find those, you are finding God.

These statements are false, because the Bible says that if we have not been made alive from the dead through a special work of grace through the gospel, we are “without God in the world” (Ephesians 2:12). God is not found on a cliff through resonating with nature and the “spiritual.” He is found through faith in the finished work of Christ.

So, by broadening terms like, “holy, sacred, and spiritual,” Bell has made them vacuous. His usage is not Biblical and implies a heightened sense of immanence at the expense of God’s transcendence that is reminiscent of theological liberalism or panentheism. In the Bible, God’s immanence and transcendence are both preserved: “For thus says the high and exalted One Who lives forever, whose name is Holy, "I dwell on a high and holy place, And also with the contrite and lowly of spirit In order to revive the spirit of the lowly And to revive the heart of the contrite” (Isaiah 57:15). But we only experience God’s holiness in a saving way by becoming repentant sinners who are “contrite and lowly in spirit.” If we proudly go our own way and reject God’s offer of salvation, the transcendent, Creator God will be our judge at the end of the age.

Charles Barkley - "Fake Christians"

Todd Friel - WOTMR - Relevant Church's 30 Day Sex Challenge

From Relevant Church:

Gary E. Gilley - The Sufficiency of Scripture - Part 1 - Philosophy, Pragmatism...

Inerrancy is the belief that the Scriptures contain no errors in the original. Infallibility guarantees the accuracy of the recorded messages found in the Word.

The Scriptures today are under attack. Of course, this is nothing new; we can trace such attacks to the Garden of Eden. What is new in evangelical circles is the package. Let's back up for a look at recent church history. In the 1920's and 30's differences between conservative and liberal churches came to a head in America. Out of that controversy came new denominations, fellowships, schools, missions, etc., that separated from those who no longer believed in Biblical Christianity. These organizations were founded by believers who desired to hold fast and "Contend earnestly for the faith" (Jude 3). One of the big problems at that time (as it is today), is developing a consenses concerning the essentials of the faith? That is, what doctrinal truths are beyond compromise? What must all Christians who claim to be orthodox believe, and conversely what can be left to individual convictions? In other words, what are the non-negotiables of the faith? A series of volumes, published originally in 1909, known as The Fundamentals for Today were an attempt to answer these questions. Written by some of the finest conservative scholars and church leaders of the day, The Fundamentals addressed the doctrines of Christology and soteriology, but almost one third of the essays concerned the reliability of Scripture. What emerged from this is what has become known as the fundamentalist movement. A fundamentalist was one who adhered to the fundamentals of the faith, primarily as described in The Fundamentals. One of those fundamentals was the belief in an infallible and inerrant Bible. As time moved on those known as evangelicals split off from fundamentalism. Evangelicals still held to the fundamentals of the faith, but believed there was more room to compromise and work with those who deny some of the essentials. Of course, today there are many subgroupings under these titles, but that is not our subject. Our point is that by definition, all fundamentalists and evangelicals supposedly adhere to the belief that the Bible is the very words of God, without error in the original, and is correct in all that it affirms.

However, while the fundamentalist camp has continued to firmly hold this position, there has been some evidence of weakening on the evangelical side. For example, in 1976 Harold Lindsell, former editor of Christianity Today and typical evangelical, wrote a book called The Battle for the Bible. In this book, he documented the compromise taking place concerning Biblical infallibility and inerrancy in such evangelical organizations as Fuller Seminary, the Southern Baptist Convention, and the Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod. The book was not well received. So, he followed up with The Bible in the Balance in an attempt to show the danger the evangelical world was facing because of their eroding view of the Scriptures. He wrote, "Today an increasing number of evangelicals do not wish to make inerrancy a test for fellowship" (p303). His lament throughout the book was that evangelicalism was slowly losing its conviction of an inerrant Bible. However, he also believed that the fundamentalists were standing firm on the Scriptures. Few heeded Lindsell's warning, and as a result it is becoming increasingly difficult to define an evangelical. Recently, in a futile effort to define the term, one journal resigned that an evangelical today is anyone who claims to be one. There are no longer any definitions. Lindsell suggested in 1979 that all Christians who wish to maintain an orthodox view of Scripture may want to return to the term "fundamentalist" even with all of its negative connotations (Ibid p320). With this we happily agree, if by the term we mean one who stands for the essentials of the faith including an inerrant and infallible Bible.

However, we who accept the fundamentalist label have our problems in regard to the Scriptures as well. While we firmly stand for infallibility and inerrancy we have sadly compromised on sufficiency. By the sufficiency of Scripture, we mean that the Bible is adequate to guide us into all truth pertaining to life and godliness. Based upon such passages as II Pet 1:3; II Tim 3:15-4:2 and Psalm 19 we believe that the Scriptures alone (through the power of the Holy Spirit) are capable of teaching us how to live life, how to mature in godliness, how to handle problems and how to know truth. The Bible needs no help from the wisdom and experiences of men. Yet, the vast majority of both evangelicals and fundamentalists believe the Scriptures are either inadequate or incomplete incommunicating what the Christian needs to know to deal with the issues of life. Thus they believe that something is addition to Scripture is necessary.

Again, there is nothing new about God's people believing that the Bible is insufficient to meet their needs. Col 2 describes a church during the NT era that felt it was necessary to add several things to the Scriptures in order to move on to maturity. The church at Colossae apparently had come under the influence of the early stages of Gnosticism. Gnosticism taught that certain Christians were privy to a mystical source of knowledge beyond the Scriptures. If one wanted to move on to maturity, according to the Gnostics, they had to tap into this extra Biblical knowledge through the methods that they taught. The Colossians, under this influence, were leaving behind their early instruction concerning the Christian life (v1-7) and were being deluded into adding at least five things to God's Word:

PHILOSOPHY:

Col 2:8-15 warns of the danger of being taken captive through philosophy and empty deception. "Philosophy" means the "love of wisdom" and the book of Proverbs tells us that the love of wisdom is a worthy pursuit (Prov 4:6). So, God is not against the love of wisdom; He is against the wrong kind of wisdom. Paul warns of a pseudo-wisdom that can be identified by three characteristics: 1) It is according to the traditions of men. That is, this is a wisdom that comes from the mind of men not the mind of God. 2) It is according to the elementary principles of the world. This is likely a reference to the attempt to gain esoteric wisdom through mystical means, something the Gnostics loved (see v18). 3) It is not according to Christ. True wisdom is found in Christ, "In whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (v3). The Colossians were searching in the wrong place for wisdom. What they were looking for was found in Christ, through the Word, not in the philosophies of men. The 1990's church has again gone to the well of human philosophy in order to discover how to live life. This is most obvious in the attempt to integrate humanistic psychology with the Scriptures. So-called Christian psychology is a view that the Bible is not adequate to meet people's deepest personal and emotional needs. The Bible is sufficient for spiritual concerns and minor difficulties, but people who have real problems need the help of psychology. We will deal in depth with this issue in the future.

LEGALISM:

Everyone thinks they know what legalism is, and no one, including the Pharisees, ever thinks they are legalistic. Col 2:16-17 describes legalism as majoring on the minors. It is living for the shadows instead of the substance. It is the belief that the keeping of certain rules and rituals win favor with God. These rules and rituals almost always are things that do not emerge directly from the Word. Therefore, the danger lies in the fact that we have added our own ideas to God's in order to mature in godliness. We, in essence, declare that God's Word is insufficient to instruct us on how to live life; we must therefore help Him out.

ASCETICISM:

Asceticism is based on a misunderstanding of our bodies. It is the idea that God will be impressed and we will become more holy if we deprive our bodies of even those things that are good. The major flaw, as Paul says, is that it is a "self-made religion, " and thus once again is an addition to God's revelation (Col 2:20-23).

PRAGMATISM:

Pragmatism is not specifically mentioned in Col 2, but nevertheless permeates the whole passage. Pragmatism is the error of determining truth by what appears to work. If some method, or concept seems successful, if people feel better, if they respond to the gospel or go to church more often, then it must be of God. Instead of the Word of God determining how we live and what we do, pragmatism steps in and rules. Perhaps, this is most evident in the church growth movement today. As John MacArthur says, "Church goers are seen as consumers who have to be sold something they like. Pastors must preach what people want to hear rather than what God wants proclaimed" (Our Sufficiency in Christ). Far too many churches and church leaders are more concerned about what works than what is Biblical.

MYSTICISM:

The final addition to God's Word is one which we would like to spend some time discussing. Paul describes mysticism/experience in Col 2:18,19. The Gnostics taught that a few elite had received the gift of direct inspiration through the Holy Spirit. These moments of inspiration took place through visions, dreams, and encounters with angels (see The Gnostic Gospels pp49, 139-142, 163-166). This divided the church into two classes, the haves and the have nots (the truly spiritual and the unspiritual). The parallels with our modern day Charismatic movement are hard to miss. Since the 1960's, the church has been divided into two camps: those who possess supernatural gifts and receive special revelation from God and those who do not.While there are numerous errors in the Charismatic movement, the heart of their problems are found right in these verses: they are basing their theology on experiences rather than on the foundation of Jesus Christ as found in His Word. The end result is that such people are "defrauded." They are missing out on true Biblical living because of their beliefs. Unfortunately, the influence of the Charismatic movement has infiltrated many who would deny any involvement in that system. In our next letter, we want to document how the Charismatic movement's view of Scripture has subtly changed the way many evangelicals and fundamentalists view God's revelation.

McLaren - Heretic..."Quoting" Paul Washer?

I'm almost positive McLaren is "quoting" Paul Washer at the 1:45 mark of this video...



Was McLaren quoting Paul Washer? Listen to Paul Washer below...from the 3:40 minute mark - 7 minute mark.

Where Are All The Preachers?

The Tragedy Of Post-Modern Christianity

The Real Jesus DVD: An Antidote for Liberal "Christianity"(DVD Review)

HT: Lane's Blog

Liberal "Christianity". There's an oxymoron if I've ever heard one yet there are many in the land today that are professing that we can believe things like "Jesus didn't do miracles" or "Jesus didn't actually raise from the dead literally" and still be believers in the actual, historical Jesus Christ of Nazareth. It's almost as ridiculous as saying something like you can not literally send money to pay your bills yet your bills are still payed. It doesn't make any sense. It seems, however, that the Discovery Channel, ABC, etc. doesn't take that into consideration when they are looking for advice on a topic as long as the person they reference has "Dr.", "expert", or "scholar" associated with their name in some sense which leads us to the topic at hand: the Jesus Seminar. Several years ago, ABC and Peter Jennings gave a documentary called The Search for Jesus in which they looked to liberal "Christians" to try and explain some of the things that are harder to believe than others regarding Our Lord and Savior, the historical Jesus Christ.

Several years have gone by since 2000, and there have been various wonderful rebuttals. James White has even debated John Dominic Crossan on the subject of "Is the Bible True?" Still, there has been a lingering sense that the Jesus Seminar has had a "stranglehold" on Christianity for many years now. Many take their arguments as canon and still consider themselves to be believers in Jesus Christ despite the glaring errors and misrepresentations in the Seminar's "scholarship". That's where this documentary comes in...

The Apologetics Group whose documentaries include the Hell's Bells series and Amazing Grace: The History and Theology of Calvinism has come together with some of the same people from the Amazing Grace documentary including George Grant and Stephen Mansfield along with some others including James P. Holding of Tektonics Ministries and Phillip G. Kayser of Bilibcal Blueprints to give their newest one: The Real Jesus: A Defense of the Historicity and Divinity of Jesus Christ.

First, let me say that I am going to watch this documentary again in the next week, Lord willing. I took the LSAT last weekend which was between the time I first received it and finished it so I didn't get to give it the amount of attention that I would have liked to. Even if I would have not had the test, though, I don't believe that I would have been able to take it all in in just one sitting. It is so full of wonderful material not only debunking the myths put out by liberals, but also expounding upon the wonderful facts that they meet the liberal's arguments with that I believe I would have only been able to take in about 65% of it at once aside from any other responsibilities. In fact, they do such a great job of elaborating on the truths and accuracy of the Scriptures, I found myself pressing the pause button often just to take it all in. It is such a convincing piece of work that I believe it to be vital to anyone who is seriously weighing the issues proposed by liberal "scholars" and those who hold to faith in Christ.

The documentary is sectioned into 10 parts: the opening, the introduction, 7 myths proposed by the higher critics, and the conclusion. They tackle the 7 most popular myths that are being raised by the skeptics. They don't waste time with them, either. If after you watch this documentary, you are still convinced that the liberals have actual arguments, then you just haven't given this documentary an honest evaluation. Such topics include "Did Jesus really do miracles?" "Was Jesus literally raised from the dead?" and this sample clip of Myth #1 "Is the 'historical Jesus' different from the Jesus of the Bible.




The entire documentary is just as thorough as this clip if not more. It takes myth by myth and debunks each one with true scholarship and logic and not subjective opinion. On a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the highest, I give it a 4.8. It is a worthy addition to anyone's library who is looking to understand not only the historical accuracy of the Bible, but also how to answer the skeptics who wish to denounce it's claims.

You can get this HERE

and HERE.

END OF POST.

Boasting Removed By God's Sovereignty

"For He saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion." Romans 9:15

In these words the Lord in the plainest manner claims the right to give or to withhold His mercy according to His own sovereign will. As the prerogative of life and death is vested in the monarch, so the Judge of all the earth has a right to spare or condemn the guilty, as may seem best in His sight. Men by their sins have forfeited all claim upon God; they deserve to perish for their sins--and if they all do so, they have no ground for complaint. If the Lord steps in to save any, He may do so if the ends of justice are not thwarted; but if He judges it best to leave the condemned to suffer the righteous sentence, none may arraign Him at their bar. Foolish and imprudent are all those discourses about the rights of men to be all placed on the same footing; ignorant, if not worse, are those contentions against discriminating grace, which are but the rebellions of proud human nature against the crown and sceptre of Jehovah. When we are brought to see our own utter ruin and ill desert, and the justice of the divine verdict against sin, we no longer cavil at the truth that the Lord is not bound to save us; we do not murmur if He chooses to save others, as though He were doing us an injury, but feel that if He deigns to look upon us, it will be His own free act of undeserved goodness, for which we shall for ever bless His name.

How shall those who are the subjects of divine election sufficiently adore the grace of God? They have no room for boasting, for sovereignty most effectually excludes it. The Lord's will alone is glorified, and the very notion of human merit is cast out to everlasting contempt. There is no more humbling doctrine in Scripture than that of election, none more promotive of gratitude, and, consequently, none more sanctifying. Believers should not be afraid of it, but adoringly rejoice in it.

End of post.

Al Mohler, Ligon Duncan, C.J. Mahaney, And Mark Dever - Bring Worldly Philosophies In The Church Or Keep Them Out?

Paul Washer - Legalism and Modern Evangelicalism

"Everybody is wanting to do something when we ought to be wanting to be something."

Leonard Ravenhill - The Fire of William Booth

Ray Comfort - Being A Christian Is Not A Mind Set

“David W. Irish said...I think that whether or not the scriptures are true or not is irrelevant. Christianity is a mindset, a philosophy, a way of living, that depends on the practitioners/believers practicing it more than anything . . . When I was a Christian…”

David, it’s important to speak truthfully about our experiences, by using the correct terminology. Rather than saying “When I was a Christian,” you should say “When I professed to be a Christian,” or, to be biblically sound, “When I was a false convert.” Your spurious experience isn’t surprising, because you believe that being a Christian is “a mindset, a philosophy, a way of living.” That’s not the definition of a Christian. I had those things in my surfing days. Rather, a Christian is someone who knows the Lord (see John 17:3).

A false convert doesn’t know Him (see 1 John 2:3-4, 1 John 4:6-8). He fakes it, but time exposes his hypocrisy. Judas is a good example of a false convert. He faked it for 3 ½ years. He was so trusted, he looked after the finances, but the Bible says that he was a thief (see John 12:6). When Jesus said that one of the disciples would betray Him, they said, “Is it I, Lord?” They suspected themselves, rather than the trusted treasurer. When Judas went out to betray Jesus, some of the disciples thought that he went to give money to the poor. He fooled everyone but God. The Scriptures tell us that Jesus knew from the beginning who would betray Him (see John 6:70).

Judas had no idea who Jesus was, even though he ate and drank with Him (as does the false convert, in taking communion). Judas didn’t see Him as the ultimate treasure in an earthen vessel--God manifest in the flesh. When a woman broke an alabaster box of precious ointment and poured it on His feet, as an act of worship, Judas complained that the money should have instead been given to the poor. Jesus wasn’t worth it. He was only worth about 30 pieces of silver.

David, if you respond to me by saying that you were a genuine Christian, then you are admitting that you knew the Lord, that Jesus rose from the dead, and Christianity is therefore true. If you didn’t know the Lord, then you were a false convert. You were either one or the other.

The other thought is, if you were of the disposition that you could be deceived, how do you know that it's not happening again? The essence of "deception" is that the deceived person doesn't know he's deceived. That why we need God's Word as a guide.

If I had been through your experience, I would be as upset as you. Remember that Judas ended up hanging himself. So, be careful when you dine with atheists, because the sweet dishes they serve up contain undetected poison that will find its way into your very heart. They will feed you tasty Bible verses out of context, misquotes, and half-truths. The devil will give you enough rope to hang yourself. I would hate that to happen to you. Thanks for reading this.

End of post.

WOTMR - 10 Reasons to NOT Ask Jesus Into Your Heart...Huh?

James White - A Liar And Deceiver?

John Piper - How Shall We Love Our Muslim Neighbor?

There are as many answers to this question as there are ways to do good and not wrong. “Love does no wrong to a neighbor” (Romans 13:10). “Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things” (1 Corinthians 13:4). Here are some things that, it seems to me, need to be emphasized in our day.

[Update: The mention of loving our enemies is not meant to imply that all Muslims feel or act with enmity toward Christians. They don’t. They are often hospitable and kind and caring. The point is that even when someone treats us with enmity (of whatever religion or non-religion), we should continue loving.

Another clarification is needed in our context today. When I say that love calls us to do good in practical ways that meet physical needs I do not mean that this help is offered contingent on Muslim’s becoming Christians. Practical love is a witness to the love of Christ. Witness is not withheld where it is needed most. Conversions coerced by force or finances contradicts the very nature of saving faith. Saving faith is a free embrace of Jesus as our Savior, Lord, and highest Treasure. He is not a means to treasure. He is the Treasure]

1. Pray the fullest blessing of Christ on them whether they love you or not.

Luke 6:28 - Bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.
Romans 12:14 - Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them.
1 Corinthians 4:12 - When reviled, we bless.

2. Do good to them in practical ways that meet physical needs.

Luke 6:27 - Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you.
Luke 6:31 - As you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.
1 Thessalonians 5:15 - See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone.
Romans 12:20 - If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.

3. Do not retaliate when personally wronged.

1 Peter 3:9 - Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing.
Romans 12:17, 19 - Repay no one evil for evil ... Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."

4. Live peaceably with them as much as it depends on you.

Romans 12:18 - If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.

5. Pursue their joyful freedom from sin and from condemnation by telling them the truth of Christ.

John 8:31-32 - Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

6. Earnestly desire that they join you in heaven with the Father by showing them the way, Jesus Christ.

Romans 10:1 - Brothers, my heart's desire . . . for them is that they may be saved.
John 14:6 - Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
John 3:16 - “Whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

7. Seek to comprehend the meaning of what they say, so that your affirmations or criticisms are based on true understanding, not distortion or caricature.

1 Corinthians 13:6 - Love does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices with the truth.

8. Warn them with tears that those who do not receive Jesus Christ as the crucified and risen Savior who takes away the sins of the world will perish under the wrath of God.

John 1:12 - But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.
Romans 10:9 - If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Philippians 3:18 - For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ.

9. Don’t mislead them or give them false hope by saying, “Muslims worship the true God.”

This statement communicates to almost everybody a positive picture of the Muslim heart knowing, loving, and honoring the true God. But Jesus makes a person’s response to himself the litmus test of the authenticity of a person’s response to God. And he is explicit that if a person rejects him as the Divine One who gives his life as a ransom for sins and rises again—that person does not know, love, or honor the true God.

John 8:19 - They said to [Jesus] therefore, "Where is your Father?" Jesus answered, "You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also."
John 5:23 - Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.
John 5:42-43 - [Jesus said,] "I know that you do not have the love of God within you. I have come in my Father's name, and you do not receive me.”

Love will not mislead Muslims, or those who care about Muslims, by saying that they “know” or “honor” and “love” the true God when they do not receive Jesus for who he really is. We cannot see people’s hearts. How do we know if they know and honor and love the true God? We lay down our lives to offer them Jesus. If they receive him, they know and love and honor God. If they don’t, they don’t. Jesus is the test.

That is the point of Jesus’ words in Luke 10:16, “The one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” And in Matthew 10:40, “Whoever receives me receives him who sent me.” And in John 5:46, “If you believed Moses, you would believe me.”

The most loving thing we can do for Muslims, or anyone else, is to tell them the whole truth about Jesus Christ, in the context of sacrificial care for them and willingness to suffer for them rather than abandon them, and then plead with them to turn away from “vain worship” (Mark 7:7) and receive Christ as the crucified and risen Savior for the forgiveness of their sins and the hope of eternal life. This would be our great joy—to have brothers and sisters from all the Muslim peoples of the world.

End of post.

Mark Kielar - Should We Use Altar-Calls In Our Evangelism?

John Piper - Love One Another With Brotherly Affection

Romans 12:9-13

Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil; cling to what is good. Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor; not lagging behind in diligence, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord; rejoicing in hope, persevering in tribulation, devoted to prayer.


Introduction: Tender Affection

We have spoken about loving our neighbor as we love ourselves—making our self-seeking the measure of our self-giving. Taking our skin off and wrapping it around another person and seeing ourselves in them with all our longings and needs and desires. And we have talked about loving our enemies, praying for our persecutors, blessing those who curse us, returning good for evil.

Today we penetrate further into the relational experience that God intends for his people. He intends for us not merely to do to others as we would have them do to us, but he wants us to feel toward other believers a certain way. It is true that love is more than feelings. It is true that there are good ways we should treat each other even when we are feeling upset with one another. But it is not true to say that God is content with our treating each other decently while feeling hard toward each other.

Romans 12:9–10

Let's look at the Scriptures that show us this. Start in our text, Romans 12:9–10,

Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor what is evil; cling to what is good. 10 Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor.

Ponder that sentence, "Be devoted to one another in brotherly love." "Be devoted to one another," doesn't quite get the sense of the original. The RSV says, "Love one another with brotherly affection." But the word for "love" or "be devoted" refers to a special kind of love. It's used only here in the whole New Testament. But it is not a rare word outside the New Testament. It refers to "tender affection, particularly family affection" (C.E.B. Cranfield, Romans, vol. 2, p. 632). So what the verse is calling for is that Christians have "tender affection toward each other in family love."

In C.S. Lewis' book, The Four Loves, he says there are four basic kinds of love. He gives them their Greek names: agape—the God-like self-giving love even toward enemies; philia—the love of friendship and camaraderie; eros—the love of romance and desire and sexual attraction; and storge—the love of affection that arises through natural attachment, a child, a dog, a favorite old shabby sweater, a spot in the woods.

The word in Romans 12:10 is a form of this last word, storge. To be specific, it is philostorgos—tender affection, especially toward precious family members. But the key new element here for us is this affectionateness. This is what I want to focus on today.

The command for believers to love each other in the New Testament—the command for how we are to relate to each other in the body of Christ—is not merely that we bless those who curse or that we return good for evil, or that we pray for those who treat us badly or that we do unto others as we want them to do to us. There is more to this command. We are to feel an affection, a tender affection for each other.

1 Peter 1:22

Before we think about the implications of this, lets look at several other texts which point in the same direction. For example 1 Peter 1:22,

Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls for a sincere love of the brethren, fervently love one another from the heart.

Here again is something much more than treating each other well. Here is something from the heart. Something earnest, something with fervor. Something of family affection.

Philippians 1:8 and 2 Corinthians 6:11–13

In Philippians 1:8 Paul says to the church,

For God is my witness, how I long for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus.

The word for "affection" is "intestines" or "inner organs." The idea is: I long for you and love you not just with an act of will power but with deep and tender affections. I miss you. I am homesick for you. I feel. In 2 Corinthians 6:11–13 he calls for the church to share this kind of love:

Our mouth has spoken freely to you, O Corinthians, our heart is opened wide. 12 You are not restrained by us, but you are restrained in your own affections. 13 Now in a like exchange—I speak as to children—open wide to us also.

This is the command of love among believers: wide hearts open to each other, not cramped, narrow affections.

"Greet One Another with a Holy Kiss of Love"

Another pointer to this kind of love among Christians is the fact that five times in the New Testament Christians are told to "Greet one another with a [holy] kiss of love" (1 Peter 5:14; 1 Thessalonians 5:26; 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Corinthians 16:20; Romans 16:16). This raises the question whether our cultural handshake really carries what Christ means for us to feel for each other.

So I conclude that it is the will of God for his children not just to do good things for each other, and not just to pray for each other or speak decently of each other—those are crucial and demand the power of the Holy Spirit to accomplish. But God's will is for more: "Love each other with brotherly affection." "Open your hearts wide to each other." "Feel for each other a kind of tender affection and longing that would naturally be expressed in a holy kiss of love."

Beware!

Now beware of being controlled by a popular theology at this point. There is a popular way of looking at God and our own wills and emotions that says: God will not command of us what we don't have immediate moral power to perform. And since we cannot by an act of will start feeling affection for someone, God would not require this of us. It is amazing how many people are consciously and unconsciously controlled by that view of things. We read a command like, "Love one another with tender affection," and, without even thinking, we excuse ourselves on the basis of the fact that we cannot at this moment produce by an act of will such tender affection. Therefore we conclude it cannot be a real command, and we are not guilty if we don't have the affection because we are not really responsible for the spontaneous affections and emotions of our hearts.

God Commands What We Ought to Feel

This way of thinking happens so fast, that it is scarcely noticed. We just keep on reading. I urge you to stop right now and reconsider. Very seriously. This is a deeply defective way of seeing God and of understanding your own emotions. The truth is that God does have a right to command that we feel anything we ought to feel. If we ought to feel joy in the Lord, he commands, "Rejoice in the Lord" (Philippians 4:4). If we ought to feel the sorrow of sympathy, he commands, "Weep with those who weep" (Romans 12:15). If we ought to feel gratitude for a great gift, he commands, "Be thankful" (Colossians 3:15). If we should feel remorse for our sin, he commands, "Be miserable and mourn and weep" (James 4:9). If we should feel fear of sin, he commands, "Fear the one who after he has killed has the power to cast into hell" (Luke 12:5). And so on.

The fact that our hearts are so distorted by sin that we don't feel what we ought to feel does not mean that God cannot command what is right and good and fitting for us to feel. We are responsible to feel what God commands us to feel. So I plead with you, be more serious when you read these commands than you might be if you thought God has no right to tell you what you should feel toward others, and that you have no accountability for your emotions.

Why Is This So Important?

Now why is this so important? It's important because tender family affection among believers witnesses to the truth that God is our Father. The church is not primarily a human organization. It is primarily the family of God. To be a Christian means that you were born a second time into the family of God. You were born the first time into a human family. You were born the second time into God's family.

These are not mere words. They are spectacular realities. God takes very seriously the truth that all his children are brothers and sisters. They all have one Father, one homeland. And God says, there is a way that my children should feel about each other. Not just act toward each other, but feel about each other. They are to be tenderly affectionate toward each other. Why? Because this testifies to the reality of the family of God. To feel hard toward each other, to feel indifferent or narrow, not to mention bitter and resentful, toward each other, contradicts who God is and who we are. God is our father and we are his children and we are brothers and sisters in one family with the deepest common values in the universe.

So this issue of how we feel toward each other is very important. The issue is whether we will live the truth of God's Fatherhood or not. Will our affections tell the truth about God and what he has done for us to atone for our sins in Jesus and give us new birth and faith and adopt us into his eternal family as brothers and sisters of Christ? This is not a small issue. It's an issue about the truth of Christianity. Will we tell the truth the way God calls us to: "Love one another with tender family affection"?

What If I Don't Feel This Tender Affection?

But if it is so important and yet so hard, how shall we respond? Suppose you hear the command of Jesus this morning: Love the brothers and sisters at Bethlehem with tender affection. Open your heart wide to them. Feel a longing for them and joy in them. And suppose you can think of several people that you do not feel that way about. They have gossiped about you or snubbed you or let you down. And you say, "I hear you Lord. And I submit to the rightness of your command. But you see me through and through. I do not feel affection for him. My battle is just trying not to hate. But I yield. You have right to call me to this. I embrace the goodness and the authority of your call. I want to obey." Now what do you do?

1. Pray for the Spirit's Power

First, pray earnestly that God, the Holy Spirit would move in power on your heart and work the miracle that neither you nor I can work on our own. We are talking about supernatural living here. Pray that God would change your heart toward his other children—that he would create new affections, or awaken old ones.

2. Focus on the Heavenly Reality and God's Mercies

Second, keep your eyes focused on the heavenly reality not the earthly frustration. We tend to focus almost exclusively on the ways we have be hurt or disappointed. That will defeat us every time. There is a greater reality to think about and focus on, but you must make an effort. Focus on the reality of God's Fatherhood. When you think about a Christian that is hard to feel affection for, say, "God is her Father. God is his Father." When you see her, think, "God is her father." Then say, "And God is my Father. We have the same Father. Jesus is her Savior and my Savior. The same blood bought her as bought me. The same Holy Spirit indwells her as indwells me. The same love flows from God toward her that flows toward me. She is my sister. He is my brother. We will live forever in the same family. We will live forever together in joy and ecstasy in the presence of our Father on the new earth."

Preach to yourself these things. "You will know the truth and the TRUTH will set you free" from many defective emotions. Don't keep feeding those defective emotions with mere earthly thoughts about how you were wronged and how you were let down. God knows that. God will take care of that. He'll settle that account. Set your minds on the great realities that make you a Christian.

At the beginning of this chapter (Romans 12:1–2) Paul gave the key to how all these impossible commands are to be fulfilled.

I urge you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

We must be transformed by the renewal of our minds. You can't love Christians with tender affections in your old way of thinking and feeling. There must be a transformation. How? "I beseech you, by the mercies of God." Focus on the mercies of God. Focus on realities of heaven and eternity. Stop being conformed to this age and thinking only the way the world thinks when they are hurt and disappointed. They only think about their hurt and how bad the other person is for hurting them. But you are to be transformed, not conformed to this earthly way of thinking. Set your mind on the great realities that make you a Christian. Set your mind on God. He is my Father. He is her father. He is our Father. And we will be with our Father forever. We cannot go on in animosity. It is too big a lie about God.

3. Remember Christian Love Is a Growing Thing

Third, keep in mind that Christian love is not an all or nothing thing, but a growing thing. In 2 Thessalonians 1:3 Paul commends the Christians like this,

Your faith is greatly enlarged, and the love of each one of you toward one another grows ever greater.

Love is a growing thing. So you may have some of it and be a real Christian and not have enough of it. You may feel some affection toward a fellow believer, but also wrestle with other negative emotions. That does not mean you are not a Christian, or that God is not pleased with you. It means that you have been touched by the Spirit of your Father and he is touching you again now and saying, "There is another step to take. There is another level of love to move on to. Move now. Let the word of my imperfect servant, Pastor John, move you, as I am moving him, to go on to more affection for more of your brothers and sisters. Don't give up because of a false all-or-nothing mentality that does not recognize the new things God has really begun to work in you."

4. Don't Be a Relational Fatalist

Fourth, do not be a relational fatalist. What I mean by that is the feeling that it's hopeless, and you could never change. You may say, "I don't feel affection for anybody. Our family did not feel or show affection." Well God did not say, "Do this, if your family did it." Or: "Feel, if your family felt." He knows your weakness and your woundedness. The angel Gabriel came to Mary and told here that as a virgin she would get pregnant with the Son of God. She balked, like you may be balking now—that God might birth in you affection for God's people. But he said, "Nothing will be impossible with God." Do not be a fatalist. Do not deny the power of God in your life.

Conclusion: An Analogy

Consider in closing the analogy in marriage. Do you think that married couples always feel tender affection for each other? Always feel tender and warm? They don't. But such affection is the ideal. That is what God calls us to. And one of the reasons he makes marriage unbreakable and seals it with an oath, "For better of for worse, till death do us part," is because he knows that we need to live our lives in the circle of rugged commitment where feelings of absolute hopelessness that affection could ever be awakened again can indeed be overcome and true, new tender affections revived. I know that it can happen. It has happened.

That is not only true in marriage. It is true in the church. I call you to it. Let's pursue it together. Let's pray this summer and set our minds on the great reality of God's Fatherhood over us all and grow into a family of believers that loves each other with tender affection.