Saturday, April 30, 2005

Pictures Worth A Thousand Words

One thing I really haven't had time to mention but is no less important, was our brief visit to the Oklahoma City ombing site. I really don't know what to say. It is a very emotional place. People are clearly still hurting and suffering the murder of their loved ones. The pictures of lost husbands and wives and children and...are emotional. So I thought I'd share some of the pictures I took and let them speak for themselves.

I do need to mention that the objects in the grass are chairs with the names of the slain. The smaller chairs are for the children. One had a Match Box car and another had a Teddy Bear on it. They are very sorely missed. The chairs are also set up in rows for which floor they were on and where they might have been. It was very tastefully done.

Friday, April 29, 2005

Van Wimpe Jumps Ship

NTRMinistries has reported that Jack Van Impe, the TV lame brain prophecy teacher has jumped the Protestant ship (thank the Lord), only to take his wackyness to the Roman Catholic camp (I'm sure they are just loving that). Apparently we are all brothers, even if Rome's gospel is a gospel completely foreign to the Bible.

He bought the roman catholic apologist's 30,000 denomination argument. He claims that he used to be a "right wing" protestant who thought his denomination was the one true church. He now believes that is wrong. Since when have most conservative churches claimed to be the one true church I do not know, but apparently he used to do this.

I am a little curious though. Has Rome ceased her claim to be the one true church, the Mother of ALL churches? Well, if you want to watch Van Impe jump overboard click below.

April 16 Program

April 23 Program

Thursday, April 28, 2005

The American Fighting Man

One of our friends from channel, NeedaNap (she has five children, go figure the nick), has a brother who came home from Iraq. He was emotionally greeted by his twin daughters. I was thoroughly impressed by this man's devotion for his country. To fight for freedom is an honorable thing. To leave behind our children, our wives, our parents, our loved ones to fight for freedom around the world is nothing short of Amazing Grace.

It reminds me of the words of Christ in Matt 10:37-39:

"He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it."

This man has truly found that the meaning of life is far more than material things. May this be something we all learn.

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Group Hug Not Allowed

Before we went to the debate, we went to dinner with some Prosapologian channel rat friends. LifethruJC and her dad Ken. We sat together at the debate. After the debate we found out there were two other channel rats, JohnO and Shamgar (Shamgar owns the server for the channel). It was pretty cool to finally meet so many people who hang out in channel. After the debate we managed to get everybody in a group picture.

From left to right we have Ken, JohnO (John Orlando), Shamgar (Mark), the gorgeous WifeOFhow2 (Steph), how2fish, LifethruJC (Stacey), and Dr. White.

Monday, April 25, 2005

My Favorite Part

Sometimes it is those little conversations that are the best. After the debate, Dr. Wilkin was trying to get Dr. White to admit to something he had never said about being born again. He tried to say that White contradicted himself. White then asked if he had ever read the LBCF. After a little stammering, Wilkin finally admitted "no". Then Dr. White basically said "you don't know what I believe." IE: You don't know what you are talking about. It was a great moment.

Wilkin's View of Faith

Wilkin started off by defining faith as "the conviction of something that is true." This was the most positive presentation that he gave the entire night and his entire thesis depended on this definition to work. He said Dr. White's position is illogical. He claimed that Dr. White doesn't know if he is saved. But what was amazing was that he attacked Dr. White's definition of faith as being "all of a man's life" (my summary of what he said).

He then attempted to accuse Dr. White of denying the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers. This was just stunning. At this point it started to show a pattern that this man had not read any of White's works except for possibly some "snipets" that someone may have e-mailed him. Anyone who follows Dr. White's Blog knows that he has taken a lot of heat for defending that doctrine.

Wilken then tried to show that Galatians teaches that works are not a part of salvation at all. He attempted to show that being dead in sin is not spiritual insensitivity. Atleast I think that is what he meant.

Then he asked the typical how can a man be regenerated for a time without being saved. In other words, he didn't understand the Ordo-Salutis. But I get this reaction from my SWBTS professors. So, nothing is new here.

He asked how could Nicodemus be led by the Spirit to Jesus before he was saved. He asked how could Cornelius hear the angel in Acts 10. To which Dr. White replied, "He spoke and Cornelius heard?" There were a lot of silly things like that. It was getting hard to even follow Wilkin at this point. Throwing out so many canards makes it difficult to have a real conversation.

Wilkin actually attempted to call into question John 5:25. He believed that the dead could hear simply because Jesus says the dead hear His voice. This simply was astounding that the Son of God is assumed to not be able to speak to the dead and raise them up by His own authority. Dr. Wilkin had simply jumped overboard here. For verse 29 denied the very assertion he was making.

Simply assuming "faith is simply the conviction of something being true" does not prove from the text that it is so. Dr. White demonstrated from John 2:24 that his definition was false. I only wish White had the ability and time to hammer this home. But I suppose he didn't have to. Wilken stated roughly "John's gospel is the most evangelistic. If repentance is so necessary, why does John never mention it?"

I guess Jesus' words in Matthew mean nothing, and verse 29 of John 5 means nothing either.

A Side Critique

For those of you who saw the debate and thought the second half was far stronger for Dr. White's presentation than the first half, I would agree. The first half, Dr. White's job was to explain the doctrine of regeneration. I think there are several ways that doctrine can be taught. Perhaps his weakness was not using primary texts such as John 3:1-8 and exegeting them.

Personally I think contrasting the two men in Romans 5 is another great way to explain it. Just my opinion though. John 3 is still the best text. Perhaps he needed more time to contrast the meaning of dead sinners with resurrected saints. Perhaps he needed to spend more time speaking to regeneration than particular redemption. I don't know what it was, but it did seem to be the weaker part of the presentation. I just didn't come away from the first half being convinced of regeneration, even though I already am.

After talking about the first half of the debate with my wife, I am tending to think it may have been more the listener (me) that was not quite grasping it. It was my first live public debate that I have attended. I was also taking notes and perhaps the "note taking" was distracting me. My wife on the other reminded me of the several texts Dr. White used in his presentation. But that may have been the problem. I think I have an understanding of what the other side wants. Perhaps Dr. White wasn't explaining the doctrine to their ability of comprehension (can I say that about a professor?).

The second half of the debate was far stronger because he was exegeting 1 John. In fact he got to preaching, and I think those of us who love Scripture and reformed beliefs derived from the text were quite moved at his presentation. Atleast my row seemed to be.

I also noticed months ago that there was no "cross examination" on the schedule. I only wish I had pointed that out to Dr. White then. Maybe then his first presentation would have been steered in a direction it may have needed to go.

Sunday, April 24, 2005


I thought I would Blog the debate a little at a time as I review my notes. I did ask Dr. White last night in channel if Bob Wilkins was typical of professors at Dallas Theological Seminary. He assured me with an email that DTS professors are not normally like Dr. Wilkins. Thank God.

Dr. White did open up the debate. He started with the doctrine of regeneration. He demonstrated that regeneration is the Sovereign work of the Trinity, for the Glory of God and not man.

He spoke of the deadness of man in sin and how dead men are raised to spiritual life. Therefore it is God who saves and saves perfectly in Christ. Christ is saving a people, who are zealous for good deeds. God did not make men saveable, but actually saves His people. Therefore Dr. White demonstrated the doctrine of particular redemption in Christ.

Dr. White showed four steps in demonstrating his position. First God's Grace is free and freely given. It is God's Sovereign grace. Then he showed that faith is a work of regeneration. Third, one who is regenerated and has faith is born of God.

Fourth "Why does it matter?" If a dead man can choose God and has a natural ability, then "How is God glorified?" This question was never answered by Dr. Wilkin. Dr. White showed that if man has the ability to choose God apart from the regenerating and saving work of the Spirit, then the man who is saved is either wiser, smarter, better, more sensitive or something that shows he deserved to be saved over and against someone that goes to hell.

I agree with the Reformers. Soli Deo Gloria!

Saturday, April 23, 2005

We're Baaaaack!

After 7 hours of grueling driving (one way), we found out that the debate was going to be a speech contest, no cross examination! The debate was great and we got to meet Dr. White. Well, I should correct that. The one sided blow out was great. I haven't seen a beating like that since John Pipa performed a Super Fly Snooka from the top of the cage onto Dave Hunt.

I never dreamed a professor from Dallas Theological Seminary would be such a goof (I am trying to be nice). I really don't know why people show up to debates unprepared. I would think it would be too embarrasing.

Dr. White proclaimed the gospel with clarity and passion (you almost wanted to shout "Amen"!). I will try to have pictures up tomorrow and an outline of the horrors of the anti-Lordship position of salvation. Perhaps next time Dr. White will have a more worthy opponent.

Thursday, April 21, 2005

Friday Night Wrestling

Off to Oklahoma for the debate first thing inthe morning. James White will be debating Dr. Bob Wilkins on the topic of Lordship Salvation. This is really about "Once Saved Always Saved" verses "The Perseverance of the Saints". Atleast that is how I am seeing this debate.

Does the Trinity save men perfectly or do men aid God in their salvation in some or any way at all? The topic of regeneration will be addressed. Do men choose to get "born again" or is there a change wrought by the Holy Spirit of God to give a new life.

Dr. Wilkin is a dispensationalist. He believes one only needs Jesus as Savior in order to be saved. As the old accusation goes, "Get saved for heaven and live like hell." Dr. White will be defending perseverance as evidence of true saving faith.

I am simply looking forward to the gospel being explained and defended by Dr. White. As Jesus said in John 5:26-29

"For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. "Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist will be speaking with Focus on the Family Action Chairman Dr. James Dobson on a simulcast to religious people about the "filibusters against President Bush's judicial nominees." Many democrats such as Ted (the I can drive off a bridge and drown a girl so I have the moral authority to speak here) Kennedy are "going so far as to label his participation 'un-American.'"

There is a big secret that many Americans are unaware of. If it were not for preachers, there would have been no American Revolution. "No King but Jesus" was the cry of the Colonies.

According to Christianity Today:

"Over the span of the colonial era, American ministers delivered approximately 8 million sermons, each lasting one to one-and-a-half hours. The average 70-year-old colonial churchgoer would have listened to some 7,000 sermons in his or her lifetime, totaling nearly 10,000 hours of concentrated listening. This is the number of classroom hours it would take to receive ten separate undergraduate degrees in a modern university, without ever repeating the same course!"

Preaching was one of the main ways most people received news and ideas in rural areas. In those days, God's ministers led the way for freedom to ring. If only God's ministers would do that today.

Christian Radio: Pleasing God or Men

For those of you who love the gospel and have been following the "Firing of Marty Minto" from WORDFM, will be disappointed at today's Dividing Line broadcast. Marty has shown that money drives businesses, even Christian ones.

I don't have a problem with Christian businesses. I encourage them. But if you are going to build a business that supposedly discusses the gospel, you had better be prepared. The gospel by nature is divisive and alienates those who are opposed to it.

One day Christian radio stations like WORDFM will have to give an account. Were they pleasing God or men?

Editing Art

My wife made a great point to me this morning. She was watching a TV program in which the guy from was being interviewed along with a liberal college professor. Cleanflix edits movies in order to make good movies available for children. For example, Cleanflix edited 6 minutes from Saving Private Ryan in order to get a great movie to a younger audience.

The liberal school teacher was offended that people would "edit art" and "sanitize" the real world. She also didn't believe in editing movies because of their language because that is "how people talk." So would it be appropriate for a student in her classroom to say to the professor, "F___in B__ch, May I get a drink of water?"

I seriously doubt the professor would consider that appropriate, even among "people who normally speak that way." Then again, perhaps we Red Staters are just too dull to understand the nuances of life.

Monday, April 18, 2005

Joe Bob and the Door

I know it is hard to believe, but there is this thing called Christian Satire. Being a former Bostonian suburbianite, I grew up on sarcasm. But can Christians really use humor in their messages, even sarcastic humor?

Apparently the Wittenburg Door feels that they can, and they do. A video tape series called God Stuff Videos has a tape on TV Evangelists. Showing false teachers in their most ridiculous moments is quite funny. Healing people with broken necks isn't funny when a faith healer cranks their necks around, but watching a narrator make fun of their schemes is.

For a moment I thought I was back in Atlanta watching TV (refer to Fletch Lives Post), but apparently Dallas has their fair share of false teachers too. Teachers like Benny Hinn and Paul Crouch are shown for what they are. Charlatans! But hey, if you are going to investigate something, do it with humor.

An atheistic comedian (Lewis Black), I believe is correct when he says, "Patriotism is good for America. Religion is good for America. But the both together without humor is very bad.... You end up with Islam." If we can't take a good honest look at ourselves and laugh then we might be in trouble.

The Left's Inquisition

Dr. White had in an interesting take on the radical left's view of government and evanjellyism's inability to be consistent or to be able to deal with the issues. Read his BLOG here.

Saturday, April 16, 2005

God Bless Our Brave

I received an e-mail from my pastor this afternoon. When I read it I went and checked to see if the story is true. It is. God Bless those who protect our way of life.

Maybe you'd like to hear about a real American, somebody who honored the uniform he wears.

Meet Brian Chontosh.

Churchville-Chili Central School class of 1991. Proud graduate of the Rochester Institute of Technology. Husband and about-to-be father. First lieutenant (now Captain) in the United States Marine Corps. And a genuine hero. The secretary of the Navy said so yesterday.

At 29 Palms in California Brian Chontosh was presented with the Navy Cross, the second highest award for combat bravery the United States can bestow. That's a big deal. But you won't see it on the network news tonight, and all you read in Brian's hometown newspaper was two paragraphs of nothing.

The odd fact about the American media in this war is that it's not covering the American military. The most plugged-in nation in the world is receiving virtually no true information about what its warriors are doing. Oh, sure, there's a body count. We know how many Americans have fallen. And we see those same casket pictures day in and day out. And we're almost on a first-name basis with the jerks who abused the Iraqi prisoners. And we know all about improvised explosive devices and how we lost Fallujah and what Arab public-opinion polls say about us and how the world hates us.
We get a non-stop feed of gloom and doom. But we don't hear about the heroes.

The incredibly brave GIs who honorably do their duty. The ones our grandparents would have carried on their shoulders down Fifth Avenue. The ones we completely ignore. Like Brian Chontosh.

It was a year ago on the march into Baghdad. Brian Chontosh was a platoon leader rolling up Highway 1 in a humvee. When all hell broke loose. Ambush city. The young Marines were being cut to ribbons. Mortars, machine guns, rocket propelled grenades. And the kid out of Churchville was in charge. It was do or die and it was up to him.

So he moved to the side of his column, looking for a way to lead his men to safety. As he tried to poke a hole through the Iraqi line his humvee came under direct enemy machine gun fire.It was fish in a barrel and the Marines were the fish. And Brian Chontosh gave the order to attack. He told his driver to floor the humvee directly at the machine gun emplacement that was firing at them. And he had the guy on top with the .50 cal unload on them.

Within moments there were Iraqis slumped across the machine gun and Chontosh was still advancing, ordering his driver now to take the humvee directly into the Iraqi trench that was attacking his Marines. Over into the battlement the humvee went and out the door Brian Chontosh bailed, carrying an M16 and a Beretta and 228 years of Marine Corps pride. And he ran down the trench. With its mortars and riflemen, machineguns and grenadiers. And he killed them all.

He fought with the M16 until it was out of ammo. Then he fought with the Beretta until it was out of ammo. Then he picked up a dead man's AK47 and fought with that until it was out of ammo. Then he picked up another dead man's AK47 and fought with that until it was out of ammo.

At one point he even fired a discarded Iraqi RPG into an enemy cluster, sending attackers flying with its grenade explosion. When he was done Brian Chontosh had cleared 200 yards of entrenched Iraqis from his platoon's flank. He had killed more than 20 and wounded at least as many more.

But that's probably not how he would tell it. He would probably merely say that his Marines were in trouble, and he got them out of trouble. Hoo-ah, and drive on. "By his outstanding display of decisive leadership, unlimited courage in the face of heavy enemy fire, and utmost devotion to duty, 1st Lt. Chontosh reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service."

That's what the citation says. And that's what nobody will hear. That's what doesn't seem to be making the evening news. Accounts of American valor are dismissed by the press as propaganda, yet accounts of American difficulties are heralded as objectivity. It makes you wonder if the role of the media is to inform or to depress - to report or to deride. To tell the truth, or to feed us lies.

But I guess it doesn't matter. We're going to turn out all right. As long as men like Brian Chontosh wear our uniform.

If you are as proud of this Marine as I am, then send this to EVERYONE YOU KNOW !!

Infallible Popes

An interesting story appeared in the Yahoo News. Those of you who believe in Papal Infallibility will not change your mind since the church interprets the church and history, but I thought this story would be a little revealing for those of us who do not do so.

This first papal election of the new millennium is the crowning glory in a papal history that survived enough bizarre twists to fill a dozen sequels to Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code."

"In some past elections, people behaved very badly," the Rev. John O'Malley, a noted Catholic historian, said this week from his office at the Weston Jesuit School of Theology in Massachusetts. "Right up through John Paul II, popes have been trying to tie up the loose ends of the process."

One of the most bizarre loose ends was the "cadaver synod" after the election in 896 of the insanely vengeful Pope Stephen VI. He harbored so much anger at a predecessor, Pope Formosus, that he had his corpse exhumed.

Formosus' decomposing body was dressed in papal vestments, propped in a throne and put on trial for crimes against church law, including perjury. Unable to mount a defense, Formosus' ghastly remains were convicted. As punishment, the three fingers Formosus once used to bless the faithful were hacked from his right hand. His body was dragged away and thrown into the Tiber River.

Piling crime upon crime like a modern suspense novel, Stephen soon was thrown into prison himself. Formosus' friends crept into his cell and strangled him.

Friday, April 15, 2005

Law of God For Christians Too?

Over the last few months I have had great discussions with a pastor friend in California. I have been revisiting the subject of how the Law of God as revealed in the Old Testament is aplied to believers in the New Covenant. Throughout the New Testament the Old Covenant Law is often quoted without apology and used as an authoritative source for New Testament instruction.

This morning I was listening to Greg Bahnsen debate Craig Feinberg. This is an "in-house" debate among Christians. When I first heard Feinberg, I thought I was listening to someone who had my views on the Law of God. This simply showed my ignorance of the debate topic. It was only after listening carefully to the rebuttals that I began to hear what Feinberg was saying.

All in all, I think I learned something today. If you can afford a whopping $1.99, you can download the debate here. It is worth it. It may only wet your whistle so to speak and hopefully drive us to "search the Scriptures daily" to see if this is so.

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

Is America Christian?

World Net Daily's article on Christianity says:

"With 80 percent of Americans describing themselves as Christians, 45 percent of the population attending church on any given weekend, tens of millions buying Rick Warren's "The Purpose-Driven Life" and believers making Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" one of the top-grossing movies of all time, America appears to be bursting its seams with vibrant Christianity.

There's just one problem.

Although Christians comprise the vast majority of the nation's citizens and voters, America is becoming increasingly un-Christian and even anti-Christian with every passing year – from its culture, to its laws, its public education system, its news media and most other major institutions. Whether the battlefield is abortion or "gay rights," public prayer or euthanasia, most of the fights are being won by the bad guys. Why?"

Exactly, WHY? Perhaps the problem is in the definition of Christian in the first paragraph? If watching a movie by a man who does not know what the Biblical Gospel is and reading Rick Warren's material defines a Christian nation, is it really that difficult to see why we are having problems?

Believe me when I say I welcome more movies by Mel Gibson. Rick Warren's books are not horrible, just extremely weak. Christianity should be defined Biblically, not culturally. When denominations can not define sin and question the sufficiency of Scripture, do we really wonder why America is not a Christian Nation?

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Dobson and Friends?

Perhaps I should not be amazed, but I am. Not only did Dr. James Dobson consider Mel Gibson's movie "anointed by God", but now he seems to be legitimizing Rod Parsley's ministry as if it were Biblical. Is there no boundary that defines what is and is not of the faith anymore? (Focus on the Family's Citizen Link.)

Rod Parsley is another Word of Faith teacher that evangelicals need to part ways from. A google search will show you the outlandish things this man will say and do. Perhaps you may have seen him on TBN. Perhaps you may have never heard him say anything wrong. Most TV evangelists don't on TV. It is usually that 31 minute that we miss. Sometimes they slip and air their nonsense on TV too. Click here for a critique of Rod Parsley's nonsense by G. Richard Fisher (no relation to me).

God's people be warned. There are many false teachers today. It does not matter if Dr. Dobson seems to legitimize them or not.

Sunday, April 10, 2005

Tied in Knots For Good

Well, they finally tied the knot. Paige and TJ got married. I wasn't sure, but it sure seemd like the "Spear of Destiny" had prodded TJ out into the church. At first TJ about chewed his teeth down. Then he must have swallowed that gum. It was the sternest look I had ever seen.

Once the bride came in, he seemed to relax and they both made it through the ceremony. She was truly beautiful. After a few more marital sessions, I think they'll make it. :-)

Congrats TJ!

Saturday, April 09, 2005

Muslim Apologetics

For those of you who might be having trouble understanding some of the Muslim apologist arguments against the Bible, Dr. James White has been doing a series on Muslim Apologetics that deal with manuscripts.

For years as a kid and an adult, people having been telling me the Bible is a copy of a copy of a copy...therefore you can not trust the Bible. Teaching a little bit at a time, Dr. White helps us through some of the difficult issues.

Here is the Link

Friday, April 08, 2005

Book Review of Joel Osteen

For those of you interested, I just found on a fellow blogger's site that there is a book review of Your Best Life Now by Joel Osteen. Thanks johnMark :-)

Click Here!

God's Extremists Live In Kansas

In Scott County, the Marriage Amendment passed by 87% to 13%. Statewide it passed 70% to 30%. A portion of those in the 30% were concerned supposedly not with the Homosexual discrimination, but with other inequalities. Let me explain.

One site says this, "The extremists who wrote the Kansas Marriage Amendment are telling you only half the story. The amendment, as passed by the Kansas Senate, could deny all unmarried couples, regardless of sexual orientation, the right to enter into private agreements that might "resemble" marriage. The implications of this are far-reaching and are just being felt in other states with similar amendments.

"The same site also says, "The hidden agenda of Paragraph BParagraph B is an unprecedented attack on the rights of Kansans. It takes away your right to enter into any private relationship that doesn't meet the extremists' definition of marriage. Independent legal scholars have said that Paragraph B will leave Kansas courts unable to enforce any agreements between partners, including heterosexuals, who are unmarried. This ban on all relationships other than marriage is a dangerous attack on the basic rights of all Kansans, gay or straight."

Now for those of you who don't follow the argument by those who call 87% of people in Scott County, Kansas extremists (we did know that was what the law meant), they are saying that any people who enter into a private relationship (how is a private relationship legally binding anyway?) should have the same benefits of marriage.

Proponents of the Amendment have known this all along. It is exactly this reason we wanted the law written that way. Should insurance companies be forced to recognize private relationships? Should the IRS tax single people who have private relationships the same? What about homosexual private relationships? Not writing the law in this fashion would leave the open loop hole that homosexuals have been exploiting for some time. It also does not stop at homosexuals but polygamists and other "private relationships".

"Kansans For Fairness" don't mention the above problems because that would give away their real premise and false assumptions. But wait. What about the great emotional arguments such as this one from the same site:

"In Utah, language in that state's marriage amendment is being used to deny "Protection from Abuse" orders to unmarried heterosexual victims of domestic violence ('Attorney Cites Amendment 3 in Fighting Protection Order', Associated Press, Nov. 15, 2004)."

Ahhh, you have to be married to get a restraining order against someone? Who is telling the half truth here? The lesson ought to be "Don't shack up!" In other words, we should abandon God's Law in order to accommodate some legal technicality for those who break God's Law.

The underlying assumption is this, God's Law is irrelevant to people today. We shouldn't be making laws that reflect the bible. Religion should be kept private. God may be the Creator, but He does not have the right to define marriage? It also assumes that everyone has the same rights in all situtations. Single people do not have the same rights as married people do.

Why did God destroy the pre-flood world, Sodom and Gomorrah and the Canaanites again?

Monday, April 04, 2005

"What is the Gospel?" Should Be the Question

Even though some of you have asked me for my thoughts on the Bishop of Rome's passing, I have refrained because I simply have no feeling about him one way or the other. He is not my Shepherd or Elder or Pastor. Since my co-worker owns the Spear of Destiny, he has prodded me to make a comment.

It has been amazing to me how many Evangelics have tossed out the Gospel in order to buddy up with a system of beliefs represented by a man that opposes the Gospel of Grace. Yesterday I watched Pat Robertson take advantage of the Pope's passing to sound ecumenical. You would almost think the Pope was the Protestant church's leader. Then again, Pat Robertson's gospel is a little on the watered side anyway.

It is true that John Paul II was a great man. He did great things. He lived in extraordinary times and lived an extraordinary life. There are many other "leaders" that have done the same. Does this make them Biblically sound?

I am concerned with the the nature of the Gospel. Is Jesus the Perfect Savior who saves perfectly, or does He need our "help" in whatever form that may occur? Is His righteousness "imputed" to us by faith alone? Or do we gain God's grace via some other means? Just because a great man has lived among us, does not mean the age old debate as to the nature of the Gospel has changed.

Kansans Vote on the Definition of Marriage

Our local New York Times Editorialist has made some typical comments from the left wing viewpoint again. Tomorrow Kansas will vote on the Marriage amendment to the Kansas Constitution. The liberal mind in Kansas says we do not need this amendment since gay marriage is already illegal .

I have a question. If it is already illegal, what is wrong with it being in the Constitution? Or do the liberals have some secret plans to take the law to court to declare it unconstitutional? Since other states (such as The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts) are trying to overthrow God's Law, how else is Kansas supposed to protect itself from the will of the leftist court?

What has been amazing to me though, is the amount of ministers who say God's Word and Law are unclear as to this subject. One church in my own denomination is struggling with this issue. When pastors say God's Word is not sufficient, it is no wonder that liberal churches are struggling.

This morning's KJIL news played clips of minister after minister saying that the Bible doesn't call homosexuality sin. I am not sure what Bible they are reading, but they need to stop trying to be "IN" with liberal scholarship.

The real issue is becoming the clarity and perspecuity of God's Word. If God is not clear on defining sin, then what is Grace? It is no wonder that most Evanjellycal churches today could not define the gospel, including many in my own church.

Marriage is the cornerstone of a healthy society. If God's first institution falls, so does society.

Sunday, April 03, 2005

Jack Hayford's God Is Weak

According to Jack Hayford, God has designed the world in such a way as that the affairs of this world are under man's control. Only when man sins may God "enter this world". God simply can not enter into this world otherwise.

This assumption depends heavily on the freedom of man to be his own determiner. I would love to introduce Mr. Hayford to the God of the Bible. But that would simply show man's total depravity and God's Majesty and Glory in such a fashion that he might faint from fear.

Ironic coming from a man who writes songs about God's majesty. But then false teachers use the Bible too.