Author Archives: Dan C.

How Can We Know That We Have Eternal Life?

Posted by Dan C. on

This is an interesting exchange from a blog that my friend Ed hosts. The blog post was about the book of Hebrews and its overall theme of moving on from elementary things and toward Christian maturity, which I think is a sound argument. During the conversation Ed asked me a question:

Ed:

“On the same subject, however, how do you know that Jesus gave YOU eternal life?”

Dan (me):

“It’s not because I walked an aisle, prayed a special prayer, or ‘gave my heart to Jesus’. I did however recognize that I by nature deserve God’s wrath, but knowing that God sent his son to be a propitiation for my sin and having repented and believed the gospel, I have been given eternal life. I suppose those are the same reasons all who have genuine assurance would give.”

Ed:

“You see, that is exactly what non-Calvinists do NOT believe. We believe that it did take a prayer, to ASK Jesus to forgive us our sins. Our asking is not considered a work. Talking to God is prayer. I really do not like how the “religious” folk make fun of that “special prayer”, that special conversation with God that people do. Relationship (WIFE) with Jesus (HUSBAND) is giving your heart to Jesus, putting your trust in him. I am sure that you give your heart to your spouse, and that she does the same to you, and that she trusts that you will take care of her, and her you. That putting your trust is not a work, either. In Calvinism, you lack relationship. I recently debated a Lutheran, and he does not believe in “relationship”. He only believes in “obedience”. I see the same with Calvinists, in general. I really, truly, do not believe that Lutherans, or Calvinists really grasp the whole concept of what the gospel REALLY is.”

“On that same line, Born, the Bible states that Jesus knocks on the door, and that whoever answers that door…We have to answer. Opening the door is our responsibility, our part. Jesus does not say that he knocks the door down, but that our responsibility is to open the door. Is that opening of the door a work?”

Ed’s question is a good one. I chose to answer by first saying that my assurance of salvation comes not from man’s methods, but because of Christ’s command to ‘repent (of my sin) and believe the gospel” My assurance comes from Jesus’ promise that those who believe in Him are granted eternal life and that they would never perish (John 3 & John 10).

Ed then states that what I said is precisely what non-Calvinists do NOT believe. That is simply a useless and hasty generation about non-Calvinists (Ed doesn’t care for Calvinists). . I know a lot of non-Calvinists who agree with me wholeheartedly. He then makes the point that uttering a special prayer and giving our hearts to Jesus contribute to our ‘knowing’ we have been given eternal life. I have only a couple of things to say to that.

First of all, I would admit that ‘praying the special prayer’ and ‘giving our hearts to Jesus’ can help us ‘feel’ saved, especially since there are a lot of folks that will tell you that if you have done one of those, you are in fact saved! Also, there are a lot of folks these days who ask you to pray the prayer and give away your heart so you can have a better life down here, without ever getting to the issue of sin, which is the reason Christ came to Earth in the first place (See Matthew 18). All those folks are doing is helping the lost continue on the broad path to Hell.

And secondly, there is not a single instance in all of the NT of anyone ‘praying a special prayer’ or ‘giving their heart to Jesus’. Not one! On the other hand, there are instances of God opening hearts so that they could understand the message of the gospel followed by believing the gospel that was presented to open hearts.

Concerning Christ knocking on doors, Revelation 3:20 is about Christ knocking on the door of the lukewarm church at Laodicea, not the heart of one of the lost sheep.

And of course Ed states that praying special prayers, giving away our hearts and opening doors are not works. I’m not sure how he is trying to define a ‘work’, but any of the three puts the one who is praying, giving away his heart, or opening a door as ultimately having saved himself after God has merely made it possible by the death of His Son.

I refuse to even address Ed’s notion that in Calvinism you lack ‘relationship’. That’s just too silly for words.

If you would like to comment, please do so. I will also post my reply at Ed’s blog.

Relevant Excerpts from C.H.Spurgeon

Posted by Dan C. on

NO COMPROMISE

A Sermon
(No. 2047)
Delivered on Lord’s-day Morning, October 7th, 1888, by
C. H. SPURGEON,
At the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington

“If the world will not come to Jesus, shall Jesus tone down his teachings to the world? In other words, if the world will not rise to the church, shall not the church go down to the world? Instead of bidding men to be converted, and come out from among sinners, and be separate from them, let us join with the ungodly world, enter into union with it, and so pervade it with our influence by allowing it to influence us. Let us have a Christian world.
          To this end let us revise our doctrines. Some are old-fashioned, grim, severe, unpopular; let us drop them out. Use the old phrases so as to please the obstinately orthodox, but give them new meanings so as to win philosophical infidels, who are prowling around. Pare off the edges of unpleasant truths, and moderate the dogmatic tone of infallible revelation: say that Abraham and Moses made mistakes, and that the books which have been so long had in reverence are full of errors. Undermine the old faith, and bring in the new doubt; for the times are altered, and the spirit of the age suggests the abandonment of everything that is too severely righteous, and too surely of God.
clip_image001[1]The deceitful adulteration of doctrine is attended by a falsification of experience. Men are now told that they were born good, or were made so by their infant baptism, and so that great sentence, "Ye must be born again," is deprived of its force. Repentance is ignored, faith is a drug in the market as compared with "honest doubt," and mourning for sin and communion with God are dispensed with, to make way for entertainments, and Socialism, and politics of varying shades. A new creature in Christ Jesus is looked upon as a sour invention of bigoted Puritans. It is true, with the same breath they extol Oliver Cromwell; but then 1888 is not 1648. What was good and great three hundred years ago is mere cant to-day. That is what "modern thought" is telling us; and under its guidance all religion is being toned down. Spiritual religion is despised, and a fashionable morality is set up in its place. Do yourself up tidily on Sunday; behave yourself; and above all, believe everything except what you read in the Bible, and you will be all right. Be fashionable, and think with those who profess to be scientific—this is the first and great commandment of the modern school; and the second is like unto it—do not be singular, but be as worldly as your neighbours. Thus is Isaac going down into Padan-aram: thus is the church going down to the world.
clip_image001[2]Men seem to say—It is of no use going on in the old way, fetching out one here and another there from the great mass. We want a quicker way. To wait till people are born again, and become followers of Christ, is a long process: let us abolish the separation between the regenerate and unregenerate. Come into the church, all of you, converted or unconverted. You have good wishes and good resolutions; that will do: don’t trouble about more. It is true you do not believe the gospel, but neither do we. You believe something or other. Come along; if you do not believe anything, no matter; your "honest doubt" is better by far than faith. "But," say you, "nobody talks so." Possibly they do not use the same words, but this is the real meaning of the present-day religion; this is the drift of the times. I can justify the broadest statement I have made by the action or by the speech of certain ministers, who are treacherously betraying our holy religion under pretence of adapting it to this progressive age. The new plan is to assimilate the church to the world, and so include a larger area within its bounds. By semi-dramatic performances they make houses of prayer to approximate to the theatre; they turn their services into musical displays, and their sermons into political harangues or philosophical essays—in fact, they exchange the temple for the theatre, and turn the ministers of God into actors, whose business it is to amuse men. Is it not so, that the Lord’s-day is becoming more and more a day of recreation or of idleness, and the Lord’s house either a joss-house full of idols, or a political club, where there is more enthusiasm for a party than zeal for God? Ah me! the hedges are broken down, the walls are levelled, and to many there is henceforth, no church except as a portion of the world, no God except as an unknowable force by which the laws of nature work.
clip_image001[3]This, then, is the proposal. In order to win the world, the Lord Jesus must conform himself, his people, and his Word to the world. I will not dwell any longer on so loathsome a proposal.”

. . . . .

“The Lord Jesus Christ heads that grand emigration party which has come right out from the world. Addressing his disciples, he says, "Ye are not of the world, even as I am not of the world." We are not of the world by birth, not of the world in life, not of the world in object, not of the world in spirit, not of the world in any respect whatever. Jesus, and those who are in him, constitute a new race. The proposal to go back to the world is abhorrent to our best instincts; yea, deadly to our noblest life.

. . . . .

“Why is there such spiritual death to-day? Why is false doctrine so rampant in the churches? It is because we have ungodly people in the church and in the ministry. Eagerness for numbers, and especially eagerness to include respectable people, has adulterated many churches, and made them lax in doctrine and practice, and fond of silly amusements. These are the people who despise a prayer-meeting, but rush to see "living waxworks" in their schoolrooms. God save us from converts who are made by lowering the standard, and tarnishing the spiritual glory of the church! No, no; if Isaac is to have a wife worthy of him, she will come away from Laban and the rest, and she will not mind a journey on camel-back. True converts are never daunted by truth or holiness—these, in fact, are the things which charm them.”

. . . . .

“When we lie a-dying, if we have faithfully preached the gospel, our conscience will not accuse us for having kept closely to it: we shall not mourn that we did not play the fool or the politician in order to increase our congregation. Oh, no! our Master will give us full absolution, even if few be gathered in, so long as we have been true to him.  . . . Do not try the dodges which debase religion. Keep to the simple gospel; and if the people are not converted by it, you will be clear. My dear hearers, how much I long to see you saved! But I would not belie my Lord, even to win your souls, if they could be so won. The true servant of God is responsible for diligence and faithfulness; but he is not responsible for success or non-success. Results are in God’s hands. If that dear child in your class is not converted, yet if you have set before him the gospel of Jesus Christ with loving, prayerful earnestness, you shall not be without your reward. If I preach from my very soul the grand truth that faith in the Lord Jesus Christ will save my hearers, and if I persuade and entreat them to believe in Jesus unto eternal life; if they will not do so, their blood will lie upon their own heads. When I go back to my Master, if I have faithfully told out his message of free grace and dying love, I shall be clear. I have often prayed that I might be able to say at the last what George Fox could so truly say: "I am clear, I am clear!" It is my highest ambition to be clear of the blood of all men. I have preached God’s truth, so far as I know it, and I have not been ashamed of its peculiarities. That I might not stultify my testimony I have cut myself clear of those who err from the faith, and even from those who associate with them. What more can I do to be honest with you? If, after all, men will not have Christ, and his gospel, and his rule, it is their own concern. If Rebekah had not come to Isaac she would have lost her place in the holy line. My beloved hearer, will you have Jesus Christ or not? He has come into the world to save sinners, and he casts out none. Will you accept him? Will you trust him? "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Will you believe him? Will you be baptized into his name? If so, salvation is yours; but if not, he himself hath said it, "He that believeth not shall be damned." Oh, do not expose yourselves to that damnation! Or, if you are set upon it; then, when the great white throne shall be seen in yonder skies, and the day of wrath has come, do me the justice to acknowledge that I bade you flee to Jesus, and that I did not amuse you with novel theories. I have brought neither flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, nor any other kind of music to please your ears, but I have set Christ crucified before you, and bidden you believe and live. If you refuse to accept the substitution of Christ, you have refused your own mercies. Clear me in that day of all complicity with the novel inventions of deluded men. As for my Lord, I pray of him grace to be faithful to the end, both to his truth, and to your souls. Amen.”

_________________________________

A Bibliology Grounded in Christology

Posted by Dan C. on

Daniel B. Wallace's avatarDaniel B. Wallace

The center of all theology, of the entirety of the Christian faith, is Christ himself. The Christ-event—in particular his death and resurrection—is the center of time: everything before it leads up to it; everything after it is shaped by it. If Christ were not God in the flesh, he would not have been raised from the dead. And if he were not raised from the dead, none of us would have any hope. My theology grows out from Christ, is based on Christ, and focuses on Christ.

Years ago, I would have naïvely believed that all Christians could give their hearty amens to the previous paragraph. This is no longer the case; perhaps it never was. There are many whose starting point and foundation for Christian theology is bibliology. They begin with the assumption that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God. I can understand that. Starting one’s…

View original post 2,798 more words

Why the Duck Dynasty Dust-Up Is Not About Freedom of Speech (and why Christians should stop saying so).

Posted by Dan C. on

Gideon Knox's avatarPolemics Report

UPDATE*** This post has received MUCH publicity in the last two days. JD is discussing this very article on his radio program and podcast, The Pulpit and Pen Program, on Monday (12/23/13). You can find links to this podcast (and to subscribe) under “The Program” tab. Also, if you would like updates from this collaborative blog, please click the link on the home page that says, “Become a Pulpiteer.”

A&E “fired” Phil Robertson for speaking his mind, articulating a worldview that clashes with the worldview of those operating the cable network. Technically, A&E didn’t fire an “employee,” but chose to suspend their relationship with a contractor. It appears that the rest of the Duck Dynasty cast (the Robertson clan) are choosing not to continue their contract with A&E without their father. This controversy is about a number of things, but it’s not about “free speech.”

There are lots of…

View original post 908 more words

Yes, Virginia, There IS an Agenda!

Posted by Dan C. on

When the latest ruling by a Colorado judge ordered a baker with Christian values to serve same sex couples with wedding cakes, I was saddened, but not surprised. I was saddened because homosexual behavior is sin and God did designed marriage to be a union between a man and a woman. One cannot read the Bible with even an ounce of intellectual integrity and come away with a different opinion. I am not surprised, because there is a devilish agenda afoot (no pun intended) to force acceptance of what is an abomination to God on everyone else.

And yes, Virgina, that is an agenda, no matter how much denial of that fact fills every form of media imaginable. This latest incident I think proves my point, as have other similar incidents, and here’s why.

There is absolutely no reason for homosexuals to be unable to find bakers who would be more than willing to bake their wedding cakes. And even if they could not, they could walk into the bakery and order a wedding cake without mentioning it was for a homosexual wedding and mount their own little Jane & Judy, or Bruce and Bob figures themselves. Think about it.

Yes, Virginia, there is an agenda.

Of course the issue about a wedding cake has been eclipsed by the Duck Dynasty brouhaha. If the wedding cake issue didn’t convince you there is an agenda, this one should cause the deaf to hear and the blind to see.

Phil Robertson clearly, in my opinion, walked into an ambush, which is on him. He also could have merely said he agrees with what the Bible calls sin and pulled out a Bible and read the passage of scripture he paraphrased. But he didn’t and it’s water under the bridge. So are the comments he made about what life picking cotton alongside black sharecroppers was like.

What’s not under the bridge is the agenda of those who engage in what God calls sin to force acceptance of their sin upon all of us who disagree with them and choose to agree with God concerning a series of sins delineated in a short passage of scripture. What is also clear is that the agenda of a small segment of our society seems to have worked, at least to some degree. As one article has stated:

“Macho television executives are now more afraid of gay guys armed with hairdryers and laptops than they are of men garbed in camo armed with loaded shotguns.”

I have news for those with the agenda. In the end, they are not fighting against Phil Robetson, the A&E network, or bakers of wedding cakes. They are fighting against God – the God whom they know exists (See Romans 1)

What will we see in the days, weeks and months that follow? Only time will tell. In the meantime, we who claim Christ as Lord and Savior can use the ‘conversation’ as a segue to sharing the Good News that Christ came to earth to die for our sins, no matter what they might be.

Yes, Virginia there is an agenda. However, instead of fighting the ‘agenda’ or joining ‘defend free speech’ campaigns, may we seize the opportunity to share the gospel of Christ, the ‘reason for the season”!

Food for thought on a Monday morning. . .

The Predicament of Fallen Man

Posted by Dan C. on

"The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” (Genesis 2:15-17 ESV)

"Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.

He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (Genesis 3:1-5 ESV)

Pre-Fall Adam had knowledge of what was good – and a disposition ‘bent’ toward God. Post-Fall Adam had a knowledge of good and evil and became separated from God, and ‘bent’ toward evil. That ‘bent’ has been called different things; original sin, sin nature, human inability, human depravity. Whatever it’s called, its effects are inherent characteristics of all fallen men. What are some of these?

What is the natural disposition of man toward God?

  • John 3:20 – “For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.”
  • Romans 8:7-8 – For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God
  • Colossians 1:21 – And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds

Are men at least seeking God?

  • Psalm 10:4 – In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, “There is no God.”
  • Psalm 10:2,3 – The LORD looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.
  • John 3:20 – “For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.”
  • Isaiah 65:1 – “I was ready to be sought by those who did not ask for me; I was ready to be found by those who did not seek me.
  • Isaiah 64:7 – There is no one who calls upon your name, who rouses himself to take hold of you; for you have hidden your face from us, and have made us melt in the hand of our iniquities.
  • Romans 3:10-12 – “no one seeks for God.”

Can the natural man comprehend the gospel or come to saving knowledge of God on his own?

  • 1 Corinthians 2:14 – The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
  • 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 – our gospel is veiled… to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
  • 1 Corinthians 1:18,21-24 – For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles
  • Deuteronomy 29:2-4 – And Moses summoned all Israel and said to them: “You have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh and to all his servants and to all his land, the great trials that your eyes saw, the signs, and those great wonders. But to this day the Lord has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear.”
  • Matthew 11:27 – “no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”

What about the human will?

  • John 8:34 – Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin.”
  • 2 Peter 2:19 – They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption. For whatever overcomes a person, to that he is enslaved.
  • Titus 3:3 – For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another.
  • Galatians 4:8-9 – Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods. But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more?
  • Romans 6:6,16,17,19,20 – We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey…? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed… For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification. For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness.
  • Romans 7:14 – For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin.
  • 2 Timothy 2:25-26 – God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.

Are people good deep down? What about the mind and heart?

  • Jeremiah 17:9 – “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?”
  • Titus 1:15-16 – to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled.
  • Ecclesiastes 9:3 – Also, the hearts of the children of man are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead.
  • Romans 1:28-31 – And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were… foolish
  • Ephesians 4:17-18 – you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart.
  • Jeremiah 10:7-8,14 – among all the wise ones of the nations and in all their kingdoms there is none like you. They are both stupid and foolish… Every man is stupid and without knowledge
  • Matthew 15:19 – “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander.” (c.f. Mark 7:21-23)
  • Genesis 6:5 & 8:21 – The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually… from his youth.
  • Proverbs 10:20 – the heart of the wicked is of little worth.
  • Proverbs 28:26 – Whoever trusts in his own [heart] is a fool
  • Mark 7:21-23 – “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” (c.f. Matthew 15:19)
  • Psalm 5:9 – For there is no truth in their mouth; their inmost self is destruction; their throat is an open grave; they flatter with their tongue.

Food for thought. . . .

You Have Been Warned—The “Duck Dynasty” Controversy

Posted by Dan C. on

You Have Been Warned—The “Duck Dynasty” Controversy

Al Mohler, Thursday • December 19, 2013

philrobertson

An interview can get you into big trouble. Remember General Stanley McChrystal? He was the commander of all U.S. forces in Afghanistan until he gave an interview to Rolling Stone magazine in 2010 and criticized his Commander in Chief. Soon thereafter, he was sacked. This time the interview controversy surrounds Phil Robertson, founder of the Duck Commander company and star of A&E’s Duck Dynasty. Robertson gave an interview to GQ (formerly known as Gentlemen’s Quarterly), and now he has been put on “indefinite suspension” from the program.

Why? Because of controversy over his comments on homosexuality.

Phil Robertson is the plainspoken patriarch of the Duck Dynasty clan. In the GQ interview, published in the January 2014 issue of the magazine, Robertson makes clear that his Christian faith is central to his identity and his life. He speaks of his life before Christ and actively seeks to convert the interviewer, Drew Magary, to faith in Christ. He tells Magary of the need for repentance from sin. Magary then asks Robertson to define sin. He responded:

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

Christians will recognize that Robertson was offering a rather accurate paraphrase of 1 Corinthians 6:9-10: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

To be fair, Robertson also offered some comments that were rather crude and graphically anatomical in making the same point. As Magary explained, “Out here in these woods, without any cameras around, Phil is free to say what he wants. Maybe a little too free. He’s got lots of thoughts on modern immorality, and there’s no stopping them from rushing out.”

Phil Robertson would have served the cause of Christ more faithfully if some of those comments had not rushed out. This is not because what he said was wrong; he was making the argument that homosexual acts are against nature. The Apostle Paul makes the very same argument in Romans 1:26. The problem is the graphic nature of Robertson’s language and the context of his statements.

The Apostle Paul made the same arguments, but worshipers in the congregations of Rome and Corinth did not have to put hands over the ears of their children when Paul’s letter was read to their church.

The entire Duck Dynasty enterprise is a giant publicity operation, and a very lucrative enterprise at that. Entertainment and marketing machines run on publicity, and the Robertsons have used that publicity to offer winsome witness to their Christian faith. But GQ magazine? Seriously?

Not all publicity is good publicity, and Christians had better think long and hard about the publicity we seek or allow by our cooperation.

Just ask Gen. McChrystal. In the aftermath of his embarrassing debacle, the obvious question was this: why would a gifted and tested military commander allow a reporter for Rolling Stone such access and then speak so carelessly? Rolling Stone is a magazine of the cultural left. It was insanity for Gen. McChrystal to speak so carelessly to a reporter who should have been expected to present whatever the general said in the most unfavorable light.

Similarly, Phil Robertson would have served himself and his mission far better by declining to cooperate with GQ for a major interview. GQ is a “lifestyle” magazine for men, a rather sophisticated and worldly platform for the kind of writing Drew Magary produced in this interview. GQ is not looking for Sunday School material. Given the publicity the interview has now attracted, the magazine must be thrilled. Phil Robertson is likely less thrilled.

Another interesting parallel emerges with the timing of this controversy. The current issue of TIME magazine features Pope Francis I as “Person of the Year.” Within days of TIME’s declaration, Phil Robertson had been suspended from Duck Dynasty. Robertson’s suspension was caused by his statements that homosexual acts are sinful. But Pope Francis is riding a wave of glowing publicity, even as he has stated in public his agreement with all that the Roman Catholic Church teaches, including its teachings on homosexual acts.

Francis has declared himself to be a “son of the church,” and his church teaches that all homosexual acts are inherently sinful and must be seen as “acts of grave depravity” that are “intrinsically disordered.”

But Pope Francis is on the cover of TIME magazine and Phil Robertson is on indefinite suspension. Such are the inconsistencies, confusions, and hypocrisies of our cultural moment.

Writing for TIME, television critic James Poniewozik argued that Robertson’s error was to speak so explicitly and openly, “to make the subtext text.” He wrote:

Now, you’ve got an issue with those of us who maybe just want to watch a family comedy about people outside a major city, but please without supporting somebody thumping gay people with their Bible. Or a problem with people with gay friends, or family, or, you know, actual gay A&E viewers.

By speaking so openly, Robertson crossed the line, Poniewozik explains.

A&E was running for cover. The network released a statement that attempted to put as much distance as possible between what the network described as Robertson’s personal beliefs and their own advocacy for gay rights:

We are extremely disappointed to have read Phil Robertson’s comments in GQ, which are based on his own personal beliefs and are not reflected in the series Duck Dynasty. His personal views in no way reflect those of A&E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community.

So, even as most evangelical Christians will likely have concerns about the way Phil Robertson expressed himself in some of his comments and where he made the comments, the fact remains that it is the moral judgment he asserted, not the manner of his assertion, that caused such an uproar. A quick look at the protests from gay activist groups like GLAAD will confirm that judgment. They have protested the words Robertson drew from the Bible and labeled them as “far outside of the mainstream understanding of LGBT people.”

So the controversy over Duck Dynasty sends a clear signal to anyone who has anything to risk in public life: Say nothing about the sinfulness of homosexual acts or risk sure and certain destruction by the revolutionaries of the new morality. You have been warned.

In a statement released before his suspension, Phil Robertson told of his own sinful past and of his experience of salvation in Christ and said:

My mission today is to go forth and tell people about why I follow Christ and also what the Bible teaches, and part of that teaching is that women and men are meant to be together. However, I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.

Those are fighting words, Phil. They are also the gospel truth.

_____________________________

I am always glad to hear from readers. Write me at mail@albertmohler.com. Follow regular updates on Twitter at www.twitter.com/albertmohler.

Drew Magary, “What the Duck?,” GQ, January 2014. http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television/201401/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson [WARNING: explicit language used. Citation is here for the purpose of documentation.]

James Poniewozik, “Why Phil Robertson Got Suspended from Duck Dynasty,” TIME, Wednesday, December 18, 2014. http://entertainment.time.com/2013/12/18/duck-dynasty-phil-robertson-suspended/

Catechism of the Catholic Church, Paragraph 2357. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#2357

Megan Townsend, “A&E Network Places Star on Indefinite Filming Hiatus Following Anti-Gay Remarks,” GLAAD, Wednesday, December 18, 2013. http://www.glaad.org/blog/ae-network-places-star-indefinite-filming-hiatus-following-anti-gay-remarks

AJ Marechal, “Duck Dynasty: Phil Robertson Suspended Indefinitely Following Anti-Gay Remarks,” Variety, Wednesday, December 18, 2013. http://variety.com/2013/tv/news/duck-dynasty-ae-suspends-phil-robertson-following-gay-remarks-1200974473/

Photo credit: A&E Network

Quick Quote from Van Til on Facts, Revelation and Romans 1:20

Posted by Dan C. on

SLIMJIM's avatarThe Domain for Truth

young vantil

 

Cornelius Van Til is the father of Presuppositional apologetics.  Here is a quick quote from The Reformed Pastor and Modern Thoughtpages 5-6:

All the facts of the universe are of necessity God-created, God-dependent facts. Therefore men ought to see that God is man’s Creator and his Judge. “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (Rom 1:20).”

If God has indeed revealed Himself to all to such an extent that they are without excuse, shouldn’t this shape how we engage in apologetics with those who do not believe?

It should.  And Van Til was trying to be conscious of his Reformed and biblical conviction as what should drive and shape his apologetics.

View original post

Christian left pushes for ‘peace’

Posted by Dan C. on

Exclusive: Jim Fletcher tells faithful to resist pious politics

 I’m always semi-amused to observe the bias floating back and forth in various communities, and nowhere is this more evident than in the American church. Of course, I’m presenting my bias in what follows, but at least I admit it.

Often, what I view as the “left” doesn’t admit they are biased. They simply present their view as if it were pristine wisdom from on high, in sharp contrast to the brutish, primitive views of “the fundies.” In any event, a recent blog post from Scot McKnight caught my eye (although guest blogger Steve Norman was taking McKnight’s slot that day at Patheos).

Norman wrote this (titled, “Peacemaking, the Gospel and Churches”): “I don’t know a single local church pastor who doesn’t believe in peacemaking. After all, the angels celebrating Jesus’s birth come right out and sing, ‘Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests’ (Luke 2:14). Jesus himself champions the role of peacemaker in his Sermon on the Mount and, let’s be honest, nobody’s going to challenge Jesus’s direct words there.

“And yet, there is a clear gap between U.S. church leaders’ stated support of biblical peacemaking and our actual pursuit of peacemaking in our ministry initiatives,” Norman continues. “I recently conducted a research project that collected data from 15 pastors in personal interviews and 297 pastors through an online survey. Their feedback on this issue was almost unanimous: ‘Yes, I affirm the theory of peacemaking as a biblical value. No, it’s not something our church is currently doing. Honestly, we’d have no idea where to start if we wanted to.’”

Norman then goes on to chide those pastors who don’t jump on the peacemaking wagon: “Therein lies the rub. Pastors get stuck believing peacemaking is an elective; in truth, it is the very heartbeat of the gospel. Jesus’s declaration of kingdom invites us to experience, receive, and promote peace with God, with our enemies, among our broken families, and between warring tribes and nations.”

He then says that peacemaking is “the core of the gospel message.”

It is? Is it, really?

I thought the gospel was about the reconciliation of sinful people with the Creator. When did it become a social gospel, left-wing agenda?

And we need to define what is meant by peacemaking. One can plausibly assume it means what Jim Wallis or Brian McLaren say it means, which is oddly similar to the worldview of hippies, political social engineers, and other religious leftists. “Peacemaking” is a nice sentiment, usually, but it’s hardly an endeavor with which to bully hardworking pastors across the national landscape, most of whom are trying to shepherd as best they know how. Many are bi-vocational and don’t have access to the travel and administrative budgets of megachurch leaders who manifest narcissism by browbeating through piety.

McKnight & friends, those in the so-called “Emergent” community, routinely marginalize rank-and-file Bible believers (“fundies” to the religious cocktail party crowd). Chiding them for not engaging in peacemaking is just another manifestation of arrogance from the left.

Imagine this: These poor pastors – preparing sermons while also counseling couples with disintegrating marriages, and perhaps calling a repairman to check the church’s heat pump – are expected to also spend quality time discussing/implementing strategies to engage in vague “peacemaking.” What does that mean, being a signatory to the latest Israel-bashing letter sent to the president? Marching for nuclear disarmament? Running a 5K for the oppressed in Sierra Leone?

Leave these non-celebrity pastors alone, guys. Let them continue to faithfully guide their flocks. Stand aside as they minister to families and preach the real gospel.

Leave them in peace.

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.