13 Things a Lost Person Cannot Do

Much is made about man’s so called “free will”.  However, the Bible has a lot to say about what fallen man cannot do.  Doug VanderMeulen posted a great article by Pastor Curtis Pugh on 13 Things a Lost Person Cannot Do. Regardless of your view on man’s “free will” I believe you will find this article insightful and meaningful.

We Must Go Back

Awesome article on worldview consequences:

We Must Go Back: Jeremy Troxler

The Case Against the R-Rated Church

Great dialog between John MacArthur and Phil Johnson:

The Case Against The R-Rated Church

Pastors: Take the pledge!

Great compilation of articles on plagiarism in the pulpit and what some are doing to bring integrity back.

ALMOST 6, 000 TAKE THE PLEDGE

Coming to a pragmatic church near you!

Church enlists Satan in advertising campaign

A Michigan church is enlisting Satan in a bid to drum up attendance at services. Metro South Church in the Detroit suburb of Trenton is posting signs saying the non-denominational Christian congregation “sucks” and “makes me sick.” The ads are signed by Satan.

The campaign even has a Web site explaining why Satan hates the church.

Youth Pastor Adam Dorband told WJBK-TV the church is trying to reach out to people and cut through the “noise.”

Dorband said Jesus “wants us to be creative and he wants us to … use whatever it takes to reach people.”

Pastor Jeremy Schossau said the campaign is meant to be whimsical and isn’t intended to upset anyone.

Source: Charlotte Observer

Looks like it started here, once again.

Warren and Purpose-Driven Deaths

As time moves forward, pastors, public & private, are unable to hide whether they ultimately worship God and are faithful to His Word, or whether they worship themselves and are faithful to their own ideals.

Chris Humphrey’s demonstrates what time is telling us about Rick Warren in: Warren and Purpose-Drven Deaths.

Praying For Gary Lamb

This news was brought to my attention by a disturbed blogger posting a comment on an old post. I thought some of what I said in response was worthy of its own post:

What Gary, his family, and his congregation need right now, is forgiveness and prayer. My hope is that regardless of other differences, all readers of this blog will pray for them as we should.

tr

Straw men cannot save us

A great article in the local paper:

A straw man argument is one that misrepresents an opponent’s position, building instead a “straw man” that is easily attacked and overcome. It sometimes works to convince the uninformed, but a straw man is a pitiful weapon in the hands of those who should know better.

That’s why I was sorely disappointed to read Leonard Pitts’ comments about Christianity at last week’s “Faith, Doubt, and the Media” event …, as reported in the Times-News… He reportedly said, “Under the definition formulated by the Christian Right movement, Christian no longer meant just one who follows Christ, but meant one who follows Reagan, Limbaugh, Bush, Gingrich, Coulter, Falwell, Robertson. It meant he or she believes in tax cuts for the wealthiest, in the dehumanization of gay people, Muslim people, African American people…”

Don’t hold back, Mr. Pitts, say what you really believe. I write this with tongue firmly planted in cheek, as the syndicated columnist continues, “If you look at what Christianity has been synonymous with for the last 20 or 30 years, why would you want to be (a Christian)?”

Finally, Mr. Pitts, who also claimed at this event that he does not consider himself particularly ideological, says, “Some of us would have the rest of us believe that Christ who consorted with prostitutes and lepers, tax collectors and women, who challenged the orthodoxy of the day, was the original conservative. It was as if God was kidnapped in the 1980s and put to work for the Republican field office.”

Let me give Mr. Pitts the benefit of the doubt: Perhaps in his comments he was bemoaning the fact that the essence of Christianity is confused today with political leanings. If that is not the case, then I would submit that Mr. Pitts badly misrepresented Christ and Christianity in his comments. He has built a straw man which is easy to blow apart, but in the process he has drawn a caricature of Christ and his followers that cannot go without comment.

Who are followers of Christ? Are they members of a particular political party? The Bible says those who will worship Christ in heaven come from “all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues.” That sounds like a big tent to me. They will have come out of oppressive socialist regimes, bloody communist countries, and struggling free republics. How will they get to heaven? The Bible says they will cry out, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.” They will be in heaven only because they are followers of Christ who have been forgiven their sins freely by the grace that the Lamb of God, Jesus, offered on the cross. He died in our place to make us his children, not to make us Republicans, Democrats, or Independents.

Why would anyone want to become a Christian, Mr. Pitts? Because He is our only hope. He was the only hope of the prostitute and the tax collector and all the other sinners of his day. He did not merely “consort” with them. He loved them enough to confront them in their sins and offer them eternal life through repentance and faith. He did not tell the woman caught in the act of adultery, “Go and join a political group that will not judge you for your sins but will give you the support you need to live your life and try and stay free from disease…” He said, “Go and sin no more.” She didn’t need a straw man, she desperately needed a Savior.

So do we.

Author: J. Mark Fox

A Bookmark of Apologetic Resources

Here is a great page to bookmark for a list of Christian apologetic resources. Enjoy!

Truthbomb Apologetics: An Apologetics Arsenal

Mark Driscoll – My Pennyworth; also

I saw this article posted by Lane Chaplin, who said,

“This is a very cordial post offering some concerns about someone who is considered to be in leadership by many. It’s written in a good spirit, yet it still effectively conveys what I believe to be important concerns.”

I agreed with Lane’s comments and thought I’d share the post with my readers:

 

ARTICLE: Mark Driscoll – My Pennyworth

 

———————
HT: Lane Chaplin

Addition Resource: 
Phil Johnson on: Sound Doctrine, Sound Words (Part 1)

Does Criticism Equate To Truth?

This is Part 4 of a 4 Part series. Here is Part 3: 

For years, the Watchtower cult of Jehovah’s Witnesses have used the argument that because their theology is criticized, it therefore means they are “in the truth.” This is a common logical fallacy often committed when someone would rather have their errors endorsed regardless of truth, rather than test them by the objective standard of the Word of God, as the Bible commands Christians to do.

This clique of “in-a-box” preachers, starting “in-a-box” churches, and preaching “in-a-box” sermons, often write on their blogs and their Twitters about how the presence of criticism confirms their tactics, and even that the absence of it makes them question if they have “lost their edge.” This logic doesn’t work in this arena for truth no more than it works for the Watchtower.

Another example is found in the first message of Tadd Grandstaff’’s “Deadliest Catch” series (@21:30). Tadd talks about receiving criticism due to success. He says that when the “dry bones” of the county start rising there will be criticism because of the success. Explaining that the blogs will get going, he says critics will say “we are preaching a ‘watered-down gospel,’ a gospel of ‘felt-needs.’” Well, that is a nice straw-man for him to build up in order to knock down. However, notice how in his public response to critics, the presence of the criticism confirms his beliefs, but he never addresses the substance of the criticism at all. Instead he uses the existence of the criticism to affirm his already held beliefs; a common tactic of these like-minded preachers.

A better response to such criticism would be to simply demonstrate their critic’s “errors” by giving a clear, non-watered down, non felt-needs gospel presentation. This they don’t do. No one is criticizing when dry bones do indeed rise, but rather, the message which they are claiming causes them to rise. Dry bones don’t rise unless the truth of the gospel is presented. What better way to demonstrate the error of your critics than by presenting the truth of the gospel? Again, criticism equates to truth in their minds, but substance is never addressed Biblically or compared to Scripture for its accuracy. 

These guys need to “grow up” and preach the Word so their congregations can “grow up” (Eph. 4:15) too. Where temporal needs are the focus and no clear and accurate gospel is proclaimed, the result is that no salvation can be obtained, but everyone is sure happy about it. Jesus described this scenario as one in which it would be better to have a millstone around ones neck rather than be involved in the proclamation of such error which leads people astray.

Further Resource: 

The Cross and Criticism

Ad Hominem (Personal Attack) Over Biblical Defense

This is Part 3 of a 4 Part series. Here is Part 2: 

A short trip around the blogosphere will demonstrate that the guys doing these things are not showing up in the marketplace of ideas with an intellectual argument for using these tactics. They aren’t showing up with a Biblical apologetic for using cultural shock value to draw a crowd. Instead, they consistently respond, again and again, with ad hominem personal attacks towards those who question their unbiblical schemes.

For example, Steven Furtick in a recent blog, doesn’t address any of the issues that some have raised, but instead judges motives, and makes the issue an “our way vs. their way,” subjective argument. It is interesting that when a substantive argument is made that criticizes them, they attack the person making the argument rather than addressing any issues that were mentioned. Ironically, they seem to be unable to see their own hypocrisy in criticizing others without imposing their own judgment of “criticism” on themselves. Does this attacking the criticizers by them, make them ”insecure,” or “medicating failures?” They can’t have it both ways. If simply criticizing makes someone “masquerading in their own insecurity,” why don’t they apply that logic to themselves when they criticize those who have raised issues?

The issue is not a subjective argument of criticizers, but is simply this: Is the criticism Biblically valid? If so, one should listen to it, learn from it, and grow and change from it. If it is invalid, then speak to the issue and explain why rather than simply attacking the person who raises the issue. This is how iron sharpens iron. They will not participate in such a dialog but only attack the personal character of those raising legitimate issues.

In the Bible, the gospel is proclaimed, truthfully, clearly, and accurately, by Jesus, the apostles, the disciples, and other New Testament writers. Never do we see Biblical examples of desires of the flesh being used to attract sinners to come to church. They do not understand this and they do not have a Biblical leg to stand on to defend these tactics, which is why they automatically retort to the ad hominem. It is a quite sad state of affairs for those who should be recognized as proclaimers of Truth.

This is Part 3 of a 4 part series. Next, I will be addressing the issue of self-deception; convincing yourself you are right, by the presence of criticism.

Part 4: Does Criticism Equate To Truth?

Pushing The Line Too Far?

This is Part 2 of a 4 Part series. Here is Part 1:

You see, when Biblical fidelity is set aside and cultural shock is the preferred method of gathering a crowd, one must continue to push the line of shock value higher and higher to keep the gathered crowd. That’s why “Hating Christians,” becomes “Pimpin’ Jesus,” becomes “Coming To Church Naked,” becomes, “Bringing Sexy Back,” becomes “Sex For Sale,” becomes, ad nauseam.

The question becomes, when is it “too far?” When the Bible is no longer the measuring stick for life and godliness, where is the “too far” line drawn? Beating up the Easter Bunny? Pimpin’ Jesus? Bringing Sexy Back? Sex For Sale?  Is the gospel of our Lord Jesus, Creator and Sustainer of the universe, in need of lowly man to use these bait-and-switch tactics to “reach those who are far from God?” There have been many who were “far from God” throughout the ages who have been brought near to God by the preaching of the Word and the sharing of faith by individual Christians, without these tactics. What Biblical precedent do we have to utilize these ends-justifies-the-means tactics?

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the Bible’s teaching from these guys, regarding why people are far from God, and how they become near to Him. The Bible teaches that the sinner is “alienated from God,” is “an enemy through wicked works” (Col. 1:21), “objects of wrath,” “gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts (Eph. 2:3), “dead in sins” (Col. 2:13), and stands before God, “condemned already” (John 3:18). The Bible also teaches that “no one seeks God” (Rom. 3:11), but rather, that God seeks man instead. In Lane Chaplin’s blog entry “The Apologetics of the ‘Seeker’ religion,” Lane puts it nicely when he explains how this operates in seeker-sensitive churches:

“Also, you ask, “How many people have you lead to Christ?” I answer, “none.” I don’t lead people to Christ. God draws people to himself. I merely proclaim the message that God uses to draw those to Him.”

He continues in the same post with a very good explanation of the erroneous premise these guys base their tactics on,

“When we work through something, we start off with a premise. If that premise is false, the entire syllogism is false. There may be true aspects of the syllogism, but as a whole, it is false because the premise cannot be false while the syllogism be true. Here is the entire “Seeker” movement’s premise:

“Unbelievers seek after God.”

That’s it. The entire movement is based on this premise. The Bible, however, states that no unbeliever seeks after God. (Rom. 3:11) The notion that unbelievers seek after God is an anti-biblical notion. If the “seeker-sensitive’s” premise were taken out of the equation, the entire movement would falter to nothing. It’s what it’s built on. It’s not even built on the fact that Jesus died for our sins. It’s certainly mentioned at time to time, but like a syllogism that says, “All dogs are black. I am a male. I used to own a black dog.” even though the two later statements are true, the first is false therefore the entire “truth” crashes. Here’s the “Seeker” movement’s syllogism: “Unbelievers seek after God. Jesus died for the sins of those who believe. Get them in the church no matter what so we can save them.” The syllogism fails.

Christian religion teaches: “Unbelievers do not seek after God.”

The “Seeker” religion teaches: “Unbelievers seek after God.”

The “Seeker” religion is an anti-biblical religion.”

Therefore, if the misunderstanding of why people are far from God, leads to a faulty premise of ”who is seeking whom,” there is no surprise that the method and message are also erroneous, regarding how one solves the problem of being “far from God,” even if their motives are pure. People who are far from God, become near to God, by first God working in their hearts to call them, and our role is to “merely proclaim the message, accurately, that God uses to draw those to Him.” This message includes showing the sinner the law of God which demonstrates his need for a Savior (Gal 3:24), and then sharing the gospel message of repentance of sins and faith, and trust in Christ for salvation. This is a message that we do not hear from these guys, and is a required message in which without hearing, the sinner cannot be saved.

This is Part 2 of a 4 part series. Next, I will be addressing the tactic of attacking the person rather than comparing what they say with Scripture in:

Part 3: Ad Hominem (Personal Attack) Over Biblical Defense

Silly Wabbit, Tricks Are For Kids! Did Gary Lamb Fix His Biggest Regret?

Slice of Laodicea posted the following video with the statement, “No commentary necessary,” which pretty much sums up, yet another attempt of juvenile pastors attempting to draw crowds with cultural relevance:

However, it was brought to my attention that Ridge Stone Church, the church doing this video, is actually Gary Lamb’s church, Revolution, by a previous name.

Which got me to thinking about a video in one of my earlier posts where Gary Lamb’s biggest regret was not clocking “that woman in her noggin’.”

Well, perhaps Gary found out that woman he wanted to clock, was actually in the Easter Bunny suit, and he had his one chance to fix his biggest regret?

Yeah, that would justify beating up the Easter Bunny in a church ad wouldn’t it?

This is Part 1 of a 4 part series. Next, I will be addressing the use of these and other tactics in:

Part 2: Pushing The Line Too Far?

Highlights From Jude, the brother of Jesus Christ:

Dear friends,

Although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord…

In the very same way, these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings…

Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals—these are the very things that destroy them…

These men are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead. They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame; wandering stars, for whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever…

These men are grumblers and faultfinders; they follow their own evil desires; they boast about themselves and flatter others for their own advantage.

But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. They said to you, ”In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.

But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit. Keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life. Be merciful to those who doubt; snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy— to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore!

Amen.”

Jude 1:3-4, 8, 10, 12-13, 16-24