Who said this?

Who said this? Answer tomorrow.


"What I have seen in the past 10 years of traveling - performing at a
church one day and a casino the next - is that a lot of people in the
church want to be entertained, and people in casinos want to be
ministered to. That's hard to understand, but I see a hunger in the
world that I don't see in the church."

Give Me MY Aristotlian Logic, Please

I found an interesting passage in an article I was reading in my new issue (Nov. 2008) of Christianity Today magazine. The article tells about Christian Chinese workers, in particularly one, helping earthquake victims in Sichuan Province. Here is the passage I read, a quote from this particular Chinese Christian worker,

People in power realize the success of economic systems of the West. Intellectuals in China are aware of ties between religious prosperity and economic prosperity....But while Buddhism and Confucianism [China's dominating schemas] are fatalistic and passive, Christians have a sense of justice and social action.

I want you to see two things here.
First, I've written here before that if you take the time to objectively look at the world's progress since the late 16th century, you'll find that in Protestant Christian countries, things have gone better economically (generally) for people. In addition, women, children, the elderly and animals are treated better overall. I realize that there have been exceptions in different eras, and I also realize that it was progressive, not happening all at once. However, I am talking overall. Meanwhile, what is happening in countries that have other religions including predominantly Roman Catholic countries? I get a kick out of Americans going to Buddhist and Hindu countries to "meditate" at ashrams and other "holy" places. Then they eventually leave. Of course, they are treated as Americans. I don't see them staying in those countries and living as the common people. I wonder if these "enlightened" Westerners ever ask themselves why these people are in such dire straits? It's amazing that they never conclude it's because of their religions and their attendant belief systems.

Second, some "evangelical" leaders want to get into the synthesizing business and mesh together (or is that mush together) other religious beliefs, especially in Roman Catholic, Buddhist, HIndu and their attendant New Age beliefs with Christianity. And how do you think that might work out?

It's amazing that Chinese [atheistic] intellectuals can figure things out in the spiritual realm better than many evangelicals. Christian yoga anyone? Contempletive spirtuality? Spiritual formation? All of these have Hindu/Buddhist influences the way they are being taught today in many churches and Christian colleges and seminaries Why?. Because in our postmodern churches A AND B can be jammed together with no problem. This is being called Progressive Christianity.

I've talked now with two young Christian men who seem to have a fairly good historical conception and acceptance of what I call true Christianity. But they both loved Donald Miller's book, Blue Like Jazz. This is the book where Miller, who says he is a Christian, really thought it was "cool" to watch naked, stoned hippies have sex in the woods. What ever happened to the Holy Spirit inside you getting grieved?

I am now going to hit my head against the wall in frustraton. Methinks I am seeing an example of A and B. Meanwhile, I want back my Cartesian Aristotletian---If A and B are opposites; then either A is true and not B; or, B is true and not A, thank you very much.

Postscript note: And yes, I do realize that in some issues there can be some of A that is true and some of B that is true. However, I think we need to be careful as to where we apply this.

Christian Carnival CCLII

Welcome to this week's Thanksgiving edition of the Christian Carnival -- Christian Carnival CCLII.

*First up today is the Christian Financial blog which presents Parable of the Ten Virgins . What is the biggest lesson Christian PF learned from this parable? You might be interested in this lesson in light of what has happened to our economy lately.

* Bible Money Matters' blog presentsFeeling Weary Because Of Our Economy?. His post revolves around the key verses, Matthew 11:28-30.

*Dana has a good argument about Nebraska's Safe Haven law as not being the answer to societal's problems. What does Dana think is the root problem and the answer? Find out at her post entitled, Nebraska's Safe Haven Law at her blog, Principled Discovery.

[Note to Dana]: Check today's New York Times Op/Ed section. The editors must have read your blog....:). So, it looks like there are many others that are in ocmplete agreement with you.


*For many years, I’ve studied control and dictators. In my studies I've of course come across mind control, so this post by Athlyn was very interesting to me and I think for you too. It's entitled Cognitive Dissonance and Thought Control, and deals mainly with the dissonance in conflicting thoughts producing tension in controlled groups. Athlyn deals with Jehovah's Witnesses and how they are controlled in her blog Jehovahs Witnesses and Thought Control

*Until you lose a loved one or have gone through another type of difficult time, you might not understand what really matters. FMF guides us through this important Christian thought in the post, What Truly Matters-Part 2 presented by FMF at the Free Money Finance blog.

*Remember lay-away plans? Tom skillfully shows us God's layaway plan in his post, God's Layaway Plan at his blog, Mass Theology.

*Hooray for finally having a balanced view of the prosperity gospel without throwing out some of it's essential teachings. You've got to read Casey's post, Prosperity Flakiness at his blog, The Limitless.

*Chris B. saw the movie Fireproof and began to think of marriage and how Fireproofing Your Marriage can happen at his blog, Homeward Bound. I enjoyed reading his suggestions from the male point of view as we women don't always hear that. I especially liked his words, "thoughts on fighting for your marriage before everyone wants out. "

*Living here in California, Trevor's post of course was very apros pro. He deals with Proposition 8 and Homosexual Sleight of Hand at his blog, Save Your Sweat. He starts out like this - "The people of North America and other developed countries are being fooled." He then informs us that Prop. 8 was only one facet of the homosexual agenda. Living out here, we know this well, and I think he shows the underlying mechanisms at work quite well.

*I think more Christians should think about God's promises. Annette at Fish and Cans really gets at the root here with God's character of truth, not lying, when He gives promises. Do read her post entitled We have a sure and steady anchor - part two.

*Maybe you've heard of the 30 day sex challenges some pastors are requesting of their congregants. But wonder if a pastor would challenge a 30 day abstinence challenge. This might prove to be very interesting indeed. If I've whetted your interest, you better read Crew's post, Marriage and Intimacy: 30 Days of Abstinence at his blog, Notes From Off Center.

*Unfortunately, I have dial up and couldn't get this audio. But I am going to bookmark it and when I get DSL will certainly listen to it as the description sounds intriguing. The podcast is entitled Thanksgiving 2008 at PazNaz at the blog, Parables of a Prodigal World. Raffi gave this description: "Audio of a brief talk on the subject of Thanksgiving and The Problem of Evil."

*Many people have asked if the United States can go on much longer with it's morality morass. A Sower's Heart asks this same question in the post entitled, Will We Be Sodom?.

*If tomorrow isn't turkey day, what is it? Tiffany of Fathom Deep: Sounding the Depths of God offers some really good thoughts on this in her post, This Thursday is NOT Turkey Day! Here's one sentence from the post that I thought was really great! "Don't shortchange this holiday."

*The Weekend Fisher at Heart, Mind, Soul, and Strength relates that some scholars believe that the earliest followers (Jews) of Jesus didn't really believe he was physically resurrected, only spiritually. Hmm.....methinks this is not new at all....gnostics anyone? Anyway, Weekend Fisher has a whole series on proving that the Jews of that day did believe in a physical resurrection and so would not have trouble believing that God resurrected Jesus, in her post, Resurrection in the Talmud: The seed as analogy for death and resurrection .

*Deb now sees that she is joining a few of us Christian bloggers (like me) that are not under 40. In fact, as Deb was raking her autumn leaves she reminisces about the "autumn season" of her life in her post, Mid Life and Advent: Reflections From a Pile of Leaves at her blog, All Things Being Made New.

*Jeremy at Parableman discusses the meaning of polygamy in his post, Polygamy and "One Man, One Woman". In this post he presents a twist on what you thought polygamy was. He writes that "Polygamy, surprisingly, isn't an exception to the principle that marriage has always been between one man and one woman."

*Paul at Paul Kuritz: Opinions brings us a review of Anne Rice's autobiographical book, Called Out of Darkness, in his post, Jesus the Vampire Slayer. I hadn't read Rice's book and so didn't realize how God really pursued this ex-Catholic-turned atheist writer who returned to God again. Fascinating story. Do read Paul's excellent account of Rice's own story.

*Finally. Someone had the courage to write this, as it's not a current evangelically politically correct piece. Does our charity to the poor really help them? Or have we been snookered? This post is great and I do hope you will read it. It's by Rodney at RodneyOlsen.net. and is entitled, Charity a drag on society.

*My entry for this week is similar to Rodney's. I, frankly, am tired of the "Christian" do-gooders pretending to help the poor instead of empowering them. You can read my comments in my post entitled Helping the Poah at my blog Crossroads: Where Faith and Inquiry Meet.

If there are any corrections or ommissions, please send them to me at:
dirob@hotmail.com

Thanks.

Helping the Poah

Poah=Poor. Like in "We'se all goin' to hep da poah." That is how the poor see it. Condescending. And, basically unhelpful in the long run.

Well, let's begin by me welcoming you back to 1964. And welcome to 1960's liberal Protestantism. And welcome to the 60's children. And welcome to 1960's socialist ideas. Only this time around it's flooding into evangelical churches through the emergents (now calling themselves progressive Christians) and the New Christian Left. We are told these young ones are much wiser than most evangelical leaders and very much more wise than the Christian Right. We are told that these people are REALLY going to help the poor.
Hmmm.

I have an idea. I would tell these "new" Great Society people to read their history. Sadly, I know what they will say. The same thing as most progressive socialist types say.

"Oh, we know all about these historical programs have failed but we are going to do it right."
Hmmm.

Down to Peru to the Sendero Luminoso (The Shining Path), a Mao communist group who has made life hell for many Peruvians. But not the rich ones. No, the Sendero is just a thorn to them. The Sendero has killed thousands of peasants, the very poor that they said they were going to "liberate." The poor didn't want what little land they had to be taken away and they didn't want to be in the Sendero "army." Bang! Bang! Peasants dead.

When asked why they haven't learned from the failures of other communist nations that this doesn't work, the Sendero has answered, "We're going to do socialism/communism differently than the ones who failed before."
Hmmm....I htink I've heard this before somewhere.


Fast forward to 1964. The liberal Protestants (the then progressive "Christians") got on board fast with President Johnson's Great Society program. Today how are the poor faring? We never had this many poor before. And we've never seen this many homeless. And most black families were intact. Civil Rights would have taken care of the upward mobility chances of blacks and other minorities but we had to throw massive welfare into the stew too. Socialism.
Hmmmm.

Today the "progressive" evangelicals, mostly young, tell us that they are going to "do it right" unlike their predecessors. Didn't we hear this from communist and socialist groups like the Sendero Luminoso.
Hmmmm.

We are told, "We are going to help the poah.
I have news for these younger Christians. The poah really don't want you to meddle in their affairs. I taught many years in the inner city and when these middle class white do-gooders come they just roll their eyes. And then when the young whites leave, and they do, the poah get back to business as usual. Here is what they really want. They want you to empower them. That's right....empower THEM. But then, you won't be able to have power over them or assuage your guilty consciences of having a nice middle class life while the poah suffer. So, I know you will continue to help the poah with your "programs," many funded by the government. And like your predecessors, the liberal Protestants, you will be eventually be funded by government programs (thanks to the New Christian Left influence with the government). And you can then collect your fat $80,000 a year salaries. But you will have a dilemma just like the ones now who "study and help" the poor and homeless have a dilemma. If you really do solve the poverty problem (which you won't), they will have to shut down your government grant and you won't be able to collect your fat salary because there won't be any more poor and homeless to "study and help." And that will cause a conflict within you.

But then, maybe that is why you are so terrified about some of us evangelcials actually converting these people, which changes them inside and allows them to succeed when we empower THEM.
Hmmm.

Quote of the Week

“One of the things that should embarrass Christians is that some of these atheists know much more about Christianity than some Christians. That ought to expose a real vulnerability on the part of many Christians who simply aren’t knowledgeable enough about the faith.”


—Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary


Source: Ministry Today

What is "Truth" - Old Folks Need to Talk to Younger Ones

I want to talk about the moral of yesterday's post. If you haven't read that post yet, just scroll down to the next post after this one, or go here.

Here is the moral,

There are different truth paths, but only one truth path is the one to success and life.

Today, more than ever before, I am seeing the truth of this. The postmodern generation is picking and choosing what truth they wish to believe. And this is coming into the young evangelicals' thinking too. There are so many examples of this, but let me give you two. In a post several months ago I told about an email sent to another blog from a college English professor. She explained that the school asked each teacher to have a short devotional at the start of class. One day she read out of Proverbs 9:10 which says, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom...." The professor said that many of her students freaked out and said that God isn't to be feared because He is their buddy and pal.
(source: http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/scripture/college-instructor-writes-slice)

Another example;
Many postmodern/emergent churches do not read the epistles much or at all. They basically read the gospels and in them, mainly the parts where Jesus teaches.

So, here are younger evangelicals that build God into who they like and can accept, and read only parts of the Bible that they like and can accept. Sadly, this will be the nail in their coffin so to speak as God doesn't work effectively on our behalf when we putt our own truth in place of His. Of course, younger evangelicals aren't the only ones doing this, but I see a much larger group of younger evangelicals with these attitudes. This is why I think it's so very important for us older folks to be open to meet younger evangelicals and learn how to talk to them so we can tell them our stories (remember--postmoderns LOVE stories....not lecture). They need to hear first hand from us how our Christian life was often trying to sort out God's truth from our truth because we found out the hard way what happened when we followed our truth instead of God's. And we need to emphasize it wasn't pleasant. Then maybe, hopefully, they will listen and not mess their lives up (like some of us did)......

Great Parable

I just had to share this with you all.


The POLITICALLY-CORRECT RED RIDING HOOD
-by Bryan Hupperts.

There once was a young person named Little Red Riding Hood
who lived on the edge of a large forest full of endangered owls and
rare plants that would probably provide a cure for cancer if only
someone took the time to study them.

Red Riding Hood lived with a nurture giver whom she sometimes
referred to as "mother", although she didn't mean to imply by this
term that she would have thought less of the person if a close
biological link did not in fact exist. Nor did she intend to denigrate
the equal value of nontraditional households, although she was
sorry if this was the impression conveyed.

One day her mother asked her to take a basket of organically
grown fruit and mineral water to her grandmother's house. "But
mother, won't this be stealing work from the unionized people who
have struggled for years to earn the right to carry all packages
between various people in the woods?" Red Riding Hood's mother
assured her that she had called the union boss and received a
special compassionate mission exemption form.

"But mother, aren't you oppressing me by ordering me to do this?"
Red Riding Hood's mother pointed out that it was impossible for
womyn to oppress each other, since all womyn were equally
oppressed until all womyn were free.

"But mother, then shouldn't you have my brother carry the basket,
since he's an oppressor, and should learn what it's like to be
oppressed?" And Red Riding Hood's mother explained that her
brother was attending a special rally for animal rights, and besides,
this wasn't stereotypical womyn's work, but an empowering deed
that would help engender a feeling of community.

"But won't I be oppressing Grandma, by implying that she's sick
and hence unable to independently further her own selfhood?" But
Red Riding Hood's mother explained that her grandmother wasn't
actually sick or incapacitated or mentally handicapped in any way,
although that was not to imply that any of these conditions were
inferior to what some people called "health".

Thus Red Riding Hood felt that she could get behind the idea of
delivering the basket to her grandmother, and so she set off.

Many people believed that the forest was a foreboding and
dangerous place, but Red Riding Hood knew that this was an
irrational fear based on cultural paradigms instilled by a patriarchal
society that regarded the natural world as an exploitable resource,
and hence believed that natural predators were in fact intolerable
competitors. Other people avoided the woods for fear of thieves
and deviants, but Red Riding Hood felt that in a truly classless
society all marginalized peoples would be able to "come out" of
the woods and be accepted as valid lifestyle role models.

On her way to Grandma's house, Red Riding Hood passed a
woodchopper, and wandered off the path, in order to examine
some flowers. She was startled to find herself standing before a
Wolf, who asked her what was in her basket. Red Riding Hood's
teacher had warned her never to talk to strangers, but she was
confident in taking control of her own budding sexuality, and chose
to dialogue with the Wolf.

She replied, "I am taking my Grandmother some healthful snacks
in a gesture of solidarity."

The Wolf said, "You know, my dear, it isn't safe for a little girl to
walk through these woods alone."

Red Riding Hood said, "I find your sexist remark offensive in the
extreme, but I will ignore it because of your traditional status as
an outcast from society, the stress of which has caused you to
develop an alternative and yet entirely valid world view. Now, if
you'll excuse me, I would prefer to be on my way."

Red Riding Hood returned to the main path, and proceeded
towards her Grandmother's house. But because his status outside
society had freed him from slavish adherence to linear, Western-
style thought, the Wolf knew of a quicker route to Grandma's house.

He burst into the house and ate Grandma, a course of action
affirmative of his nature as a predator. Then, unhampered by rigid,
traditionalist gender role notions, he put on Grandma's
nightclothes, crawled under the bedclothes, and awaited developments.

Red Riding Hood entered the cottage and said, "Grandma, I have
brought you some cruelty free snacks to salute you in your role of
wise and nurturing matriarch."


The Wolf said softly "Come closer, child, so that I might see you."

Red Riding Hood said, "Grandma, what big eyes you have!"

"You forget that I am optically challenged."

"And Grandma, what an enormous, what a fine nose you have."

"Naturally, I could have had it fixed to help my acting career, but I
didn't give in to such societal pressures, my child."

"And Grandma, what very big, sharp teeth you have!"

The Wolf could not take any more of these specist slurs, and, in a
reaction appropriate for his accustomed milieu, he leaped out of
bed, grabbed Little Red Riding Hood, and opened his jaws so wide
that she could see her poor Grandmother cowering in his belly.

"Aren't you forgetting something?" Red Riding Hood bravely
shouted. "You must request my permission before proceeding to
a new level of intimacy!" The Wolf was so startled by this
statement that he loosened his grasp on her.

At the same time, the woodchopper burst into the cottage,
brandishing an ax.

"Hands off!" cried the woodchopper.

"And what do you think you're doing?" cried Little Red Riding Hood.
"If I let you help me now, I would be expressing a lack of
confidence in my own abilities, which would lead to poor self
esteem and lower achievement scores on college entrance exams."

"Last chance, sister! Get your hands off that endangered species!
This is an FBI sting!" screamed the woodchopper, and when Little
Red Riding Hood nonetheless made a sudden motion, he sliced
off her head.

"Thank goodness you got here in time," said the Wolf. "The brat
and her grandmother lured me in here. I thought I was a goner."

"No, I think I'm the real victim, here," said the woodchopper. "I've
been dealing with my anger ever since I saw her picking those
protected flowers earlier. And now I'm going to have such a trauma.
Do you have any aspirin?"

"Sure," said the Wolf.

"Thanks."

"I feel your pain," said the Wolf, and he patted the woodchopper
on his firm, well padded back, gave a little belch, and said
"Do you have any Maalox?"


Moral: There are different truth paths, but only one truth path is the one to success and life.


Source: www.sheeptrax.com

Brannon Howse on the New Wordview

Brannon Howse has written an interesting article entitled One World Sprituality: Three WorldViews Merge. The three worldviews he lists are evolutionary humanism, Hindu pantheism, and occultism. Howse then tells us the underlying theology, philosophy, biology, economic system, politics and activism of these wordview systems.

He writes that the theology is pantheism, the philosophy is pagan spirituality,the biology is Darwinian evolution, the economic system is socialism, their politics is globalism, and the activism of their worldview is centered on radical environmentalism and political correctness (cultural Marxism).


And what is the goal of all this? Howse says it's a One-World Spirituality consisting of a one-world government, a one-world religion, and a one-world economic system.

I've been writing (and warning) lately that the liberal Protestants, emergents and New Christian Left will merge making one politic-religious group-conglomeration. In fact, last Monday I wrote a post about The Progressives and how four groups are merging under this label. And the very intriguing thing about these four groups is they have the same social justice agenda. Some of these groups are also already incorporating what Howse is talking about.

To read a fuller description of the theological-political-social goals and beliefs of the Three Worldviews, go to the Howse article found here.

Great Trueman Quote

A BIG thanks to Tim Challies in his blog today for bringing us this quote from Carl Trueman:


You are, of course, what you worship, as Psalm 115 reminds us, and thus, as long as we idolize our children and the culture of youth, we can expect to - well, be just like them: pouting, irresponsible, hormonal, unpleasant and, frankly, as creepy as those sixteenth century portraits of little children with adult faces. Trapped in Neverland with no hope of escape.


Source: ala carte for 11/13-http://www.challies.com
Challies' source: http://www.reformation21.org/counterpoints/understanding-the-times/trapped-in-neverland.php

"doctrinal agnosticism"

I was reading a report in the Christianity Today Magazine Daily Report about dissention at Northwestern College. This seems to be a Christian college in St. Paul, MN started by a Fundamentalist Baptist in 1902, not to be confused with Northwestern University in Illinois. Listen to this. As I read these words, I felt they went right to the core of the problem we are facing with postmodernism flooding into our Christian colleges and seminaries as well as into our churches (usually through the church youth groups). And this is what some [dissenting] faculty members are dissenting against. They want their historic Christianity back.

The paragraph on page 2 of the report said this. The words in bold is my emphasis.

The presenters [dissenting faculty members that want historic Christianity to be taught] said the administration was

exhibiting postmodern views of truth, as evidenced by doctrinal agnosticism—an ethos where the "best ideas win" but Biblical ideas aren't assumed to be best

—and the advancement of gender and diversity agendas without biblical justification. "Our 'key' concerns are simply not complementarianism and premillennialism, but the centrality of biblical truth and doctrinal integrity," said Paul Helseth, associate professor of Christian thought, during his remarks.


That says it all--"the best ideas win, but Biblical ideas aren't assumed to be the best." Welcome to the postmodern church, folks.

The Progressives

I want you to stamp this word on your brain----PROGRESSIVES.

This is the new buzz word for at least four groups - the young "evangelical" emergents, the mostly older liberal Protestants, the New Christian Left and the liberal Democrats.

Here are places I've seen this.

1. Brian McLaren in his book, published earlier this year, Everything Must Change, calls himself and other fellow emergents "Progressive Christians."
I've also read other emergents call the people in their movement by that moniker.


2. In my local newspaper a very liberal mainline Congregational pastor was interviewed. In the interview he called himself and other liberal Protestants "Progressive Christians." It's interesting that in the above mentioned book by McLaren, he distances himself from liberal Protestants. However, now liberal Protestants want to call themselves "Progressive Christians." I wonder if McLaren will now change what he calls himself once again.


3. On the New York Times Op/Ed page today (Nov. 10) there was this,

Progressives hope that the Obama administration, like the New Deal, will respond to the current economic and financial crisis by creating institutions, especially a universal health care system, that will change the shape of American society for generations to come.

In this context it's I think we can assume that "Progressives" are basically Democrats, and I would assume, liberal ones.


4. If you read writings of the New Christian Left, you see this word used to describe themselves and their policies. In fact it is all over Jim Wallis's Sojourners magazine
(www.sojo.net)

In fact, here is just one item from it,

We are evangelicals, Catholics, Pentecostals and Protestants; progressives and conservatives; blacks, whites, Latinos, and Asians; women and men...
(www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=about_us.history)

Do you see what is happening here? Both McLaren on the theological side, and Wallis on the ("evangelical" Christian) political side wish to avoid the dreaded "L" word (Liberal). So, they are substituting this word "Progressive."

So, now when you see this word attached to anything Christian you'll know that it is just the old liberal social (read that socialist) gospel. And for the record, this blog, yes I do believe Christians should be out doing the social gospel. However, not without the atonement gospel and common sense attached to it.

On the Onward, Forward, Toward blog there is a terrific summary of why the Christian Right didn't work. Yes, any persecution that comes our way will have been caused mainly by the Christian Right with their wrong message of law over grace. But the post also asks, will the dying Christian Right be the true persecutors of the evangelical church by entering into the blame game? I don't think so. I think the new Christian Left will be as the emrgents who are/will be a part of that have already had a head start on being as nasty as can be to us. But, in case the Onward, Forward, Toward blog is correct, who cares? The Christian Right is almost dead anyhow. Now we need to move on to what we should have been doing all along.....being a witness to people about the death for their sins of Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit. Let the Christian Right or Left come on then. They cannot duplicate the work of the Holy Spirit, AND THEY KNOW IT! And that is why the persecution will come. By the way, if no persecution, then we have failed...again...and the Holy Spirit will have told us that He isn't interested in getting with our evangelical program. And if that happens, then everyone will be in a mess----Christian Right, Chirstian Left, AND us too.

This and That

From Surph's Side blog,


As time marches on, I continue to see Reformers embrace all kinds of doctrine, including Emergent Church movement junk. I believe it's because they think in terms of philosophy and not biblical truth; they rely on intellect (which some apparently think, was not infested with sin at the Fall, thus they appeal to the fallen mind to reveal Truth to the God-haters), not spiritual wisdom and understanding.


From a letter to Robert Holmes' email list,


Christians who have never truly relied upon God for their provision will shortly find out where they have placed their trust and faith. Those who have never learned to lean upon God as their very present and real source of provision, don't yet know Him. This will be their very chance to get to know the very God they say has saved them. It is a sink or swim dilemma and I am persuaded that God has allowed it to be so because He says that He is a jealous God. I too, am learning to take Him at His Word, difficult as that may be.

I also have been saying this for some time.


And, finally, another letter from that email list,

several years ago, the Lord spoke to me and said he was going to give us a christian leader and several christians in the house and senate and supreme court and that we would discover that it would not matter and that thing would continue to grow more and more liberal and less and less friendly to believers....and so they have. we cannot legislate righteousness. we have to pray for righteousness.

Amen. I've been saying this for years too.

The "Works-James" Issue

I was reading Tim Challies' reporting of a dialogue at the John 3:16 Conference between Calvinists and non-Calvinists of the Southrn Baptist Convention and came across this quote from one of the particpants (a Dr.Keathley):

James does warn us about faith as a mere mental assent, but works in James are not the basis of assurance, they are from an assured faith.


That is probably the best explanation of the book of James that I've ever heard. I hope the emergent villagers are listening.

I Told You So....The Christian Left Arises

I told you so.


I heard Gary Bauer on the radio today. He and the Christian talk radio host were lamenting that abortion is now passe because the Christian Left will be setting the agenda. This isn't about abortion by the way. It is about what I've been warning about for months. Bauer said the Christian Left leaders will be the ones invited to the next White House and also will probably be invited to lead the Prayer Breakfasts and other such events. He also said the mainstream media will now redefine evangelical Christianity in terms of the Christian Left. This is what I've been telling you for months!

As I've spent the past year studying postmodern philosophy, I am more and more alarmed to see both many emergent leaders and Jim Wallis's Christian Left following these ideas. The younger Christians seem to be ignorant of history and especially communism/socialism. Either that or they are very selective about what they "know." And most of the older Christians don't have a clue as to what is going on with the younger evangelicals. Meanwhile most of our Christian leaders including denominational leaders are playing the monkey game* with their younger denominational leaders.

Oh, by the way, I read today that emergent pastor Doug Pagitt is going to run for his state legislature in 2010 (Minnesota). The source for that is his own announcement found here:
http://dougpagitt.com/politics/i-hope-i-can-count-on-your-vote

I don't mind if pastors run for political office. But what I see here is the agenda of the Christian left merged more and more with the emergent leaders and then carried out through the government just like the Christian Right did. But this is more serious IMO because of the semi-Marxist liberation theology involved with the emergent/Christian Left.

Conversion anyone? Does anybody out there still think that maybe evangelism can change the country through changed hearts? I do hope so.


*The monkey game="I saw nothing, heard nothing, knew nothing." Denominational leaders claim this when the "house" falls on them. We saw this in the late 1980's with the Assembly of God concerning the Jims - Bakker and Swaggert. And now we are seeing it in regard to the emergents (i.e. the Southern Baptist Convention). Young denominationall pastors are dismantling HUGE central chunks of their denominations' statements of faith and their denominational leaders "don't have a clue."

Right.......hmmmmmmm. (methinks these leaders know more than they let on).

The Day After......and Beyond.....

Well, here we are, a day after the election......

While I didn't grouse against Clinton like many Christians in the 1990's, I sure didn't pray for him. And in the last five years, not only did I not pray for President Bush, but I groused against him.

I knew then and know now that isn't acceptable according to the Bible. I can read. I read Romans 13:1-8 and I Timothy 2:1-8 regularly. But see I have this problem. I hate to pray. This past year I asked God to declare war on this weakness of mine and it is improving slightly. So, hopefully, I will be able to pray for Obama at least once a week. That is good for me. It isn't Obama that is the problem as I know God is in charge, not Obama (or McCain for that matter if he would have won). It's praying for anyone that I am weak in.

I have a pretty good attitude toward Obama's presidency which surprises me as I usually am a conservative Republican. It MUST be God's working..I cannot explain it any other way.....

I do hope Christians (including me) don't make the same mistake with Obama that we did with Clinton....the constant grousing and complaining and at times outright hatred. Filling the spiritual atmosphere with that stuff really doesn't help. If you remember, we thought Clinton would destroy the country. But actually, there were some good things that happened...like a budget surplus for example? I'm not saying Clinton's policy was perfect, but let's be fair. Next we had the "Christian" president who proved to be a disaster. I hope this proves that we need to pray for every president we have and stop criticising some 100% and extolling others 100%.
I can see why many unbelivvers are fed up with us evangelicals.

Here is a great prayer to pray. It was in an email sent to me today. To give credit where credit is due I have to admit that it the email was a "prophecy" from one of the Third Wave Charismatic "prophets." But it's still good.

May Holy Spirit go before President-elect Barack Obama upon entering this new season. May Holy Spirit be a rearguard behind him in every decision made for righteousness' sake. May Holy Spirit continue to be enfolded into the history of this covenant land. May Holy Spirit triumph as this nation goes through great change.


Also, I found some good blogs today as I was reading through blogland. Here are two I found with some good tips along the lines I have discussed above


*Justin Taylor at Between Two Worlds gives this short exhortation.

*And here is a title I just love....and the blog post is good too. It's written by pastor John Piper at his blog Desiring God blog and is entitled Grateful for (Almost) Any Government.

The "New" Deism?

I thought this was interesting as more and more evangelical leaders (and non-leaders too) are cluing into the fact that liberal Protestantism and other religions including Deism are invading the evangelical church. You remember Diesm don't you? Many of our Founding Founders at the Constitutional Convention were Deists. Christian Smith has done a study of teens and their beliefs and found that Deism is alive and well. He presents a list of five beliefs of the modern version of Deism,

1. A God exists who created and orders the world and watches over human life on earth.
2. God wants people to be good, nice, and fair to each other, as taught in the Bible and by most world religions.
3. The central goal of life is to be happy and to feel good about oneself.
4. God does not need to be particularly involved in one’s life except when he is needed to resolve a problem.
5. Good people go to heaven when they die.

Then he writes,
Moralistic Theurapeutic Deism is also about providing therapeutic benefits to its adherents. This is not a religion of repentence from sin, of keeping the Sabbath, of living as a servant of the sovereign Divine, of steadfastly saying one's prayers, of faithfully observing high holy days, of building character through suffering, of basking in God's love and grace, of spending oneself in gratitude and love for the cause of social justice, etc. Rather, what appears to be the actual dominant religion among U. S. teenagers is centrally about feeling good, happy, secure, at peace. It is about attaining subjective well-being, being able to resolve problems, and getting along amiably with other people......

Fnally, Moralistic Therapeutic Deism is belief in a particular kind of God, one who exists, created the world, and defines our general moral order, but not the one who is particularly involved in our affairs - especially affairs in which we would prefer not to have God involved.

Smith explains that he puts the qualifier "Therapeutic" with Moralistic Deism because today's Deism seems to add "the distant God selectively available for taking care of needs" as opposed, I am imagining in his thinking, to the 18th century version.

This is where explaining the cross and what happened there, why it happened and so what is the significance for you, is such a good alternative to current Deism.

You can read Smith's entire article at the link below.


Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/7699752/Moralistic-Therapudic-Deism-by-Christian-Smith

R.T. Kendalll and the Lakeland "Outpouring"

When I first started this blog 4 1/2 years ago, I wrote mainly about the Third Wave Charismatic revivals (think Toronto and Brownsville). I wrote about many concerns I had, mainly the lack of centrality of the cross and the true gospel message as well as what I saw as a lot of occultism masking itself as the Holy Spirit. I was amazed at the naivete and lack of discernment among so-called Christian leaders of this movement. I was saddened at their refusal to listen to those who had been in the occult, New Age and/or Buddhism-Hinduism that were trying to tell them that what they were doing and the spirit present was the very same thing that these people experienced in those religions/movements. One of the most baffling things I saw back then was the distinguished English pastor, R. T. Kendall, becoming a follower of Rodney-Howard Browne and the Toronto movement.

However, I'm glad to see that he has discernment about the Lakeland so-called outpouring. When I opened up my recent copy of Ministry Today magazine, I found a really great assessment by him of Todd Bently and the Lakeland "outpourng-revival."

At first when I saw his name I thought he was going to probably tell us how great it was, but when I saw the subheading of his article I knew I was going to rejoice at what he wrote. And he didn't disappoint me. The subtitle was, "It takes more courage to say Lakeland isn't of God. Why, then am I so sure that's the case?"

In the article he makes the following cogent points:

1. He says he isn't hearing the clear message of Jesus Christ, except when a guest speaker preached. Yes, that is the chief reason I have problems with these revivals too. Although Bently insists that Jesus Christ was raised up in the meetings, it seems that what he means and what I mean are polar opposites.

2. Kendall says that the Trinity was trivialized. I didn't know that Bently said "In the name of the Father, the Son and "Bam! Bam!" That is as much apostasy as I care to hear. What is really awful though, is how Third Wave Charismatic leaders can support this. It's way beyond me.

3. Kendall says that on a scale of 0 to 100, the conviction of sin in Lakeland was zero. This is interesting as Stephen Strader, the pastor of Lakeland who hosted Bently, said in the same issue
(p. 40) that "One of the side effects of this outpouring has been a work of holiness and the fear of God." Since I don't have GodTV and I don't have a fast enough connection to watch the revival on Internet I haven't a clue as to who is right. Kendall watched it all on GodTV. And of course Pastor Strader was there in person. However, I am just prejudiced enough to side with Kendall. But, I am keeping what Strader said in mind.

Then Kendall listed several marks of a true revival. It would have Biblical preaching at its center. He says that the Lakeland meetings seemed to have at it's center "angels, miracles and manifestations rather than to Jesus who died on the cross."

He ends his article with this powerful proclamation:

"When one is reported to been to the Third Heaven (as the main evangelist of Lakeland has stated) and told not to preach Jesus (because everybody already knows about Him) but rather angels (which people know little about), I can only call this "another gospel" as in Galatians 1.

I would go to the stake for the gospel of salvation that Paul preached, one that emphasizes reliance solely in the precious blood of Jesus. I would certainly not go to the stake for the Lakeland message--and would be afraid to face God if I did. It comes to this: Is the Bible true? Because I believe the Bible, I can testify: The jury of my mind on Lakeland is in.

Leave Lakeland alone.


Source: Ministry Today magazine, Oct.2008 issue, pages 48;66

Societies' Evolution

I have read this before as it seems to come in my email now and then. But as someone who has studied major dictators I absolutely agree with this asessment. When I studied the dictators I always asked the question, how and why did the people get under these guys? I will give my concluding remarks after the email. Here then is the email,


"About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."

The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. >From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. >From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. >From courage to liberty;
4. >From liberty to abundance;
5. >From abundance to complacency;
6. >From complacency to apathy; (most of our country today) (2008)
7. >From apathy to dependence; (40% of population here in) (2008)
8. >From dependence back into bondage (dictatorship)


Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency & apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase, and it will increase quickly if Obama is elected.



Then the email goes on to describe an interesting historical event that may rign a bell here in recent political elections.



"Once upon a time, there was a charismatic and eloquent young leader who decided his nation needed a change and that he was the one to implement it. The people were receptive and ready for change.

He spoke passionately when denouncing the existing system and the media loved him. Nobody questioned what he believed in or who his friends were. He would help the poor and bring free medical care and education to all. He would bring justice and equality. He said I am for hope and change, and I will bring you both.

Few people bothered to ask about the change, and by the time the executioner’s guns went silent, all personal firearms had been confiscated, along with most personal freedoms.

When everyone was finally equal, they were (and are) equally poor, hungry, and miserable. Their free education was (and is) all but worthless. Their free and universal health care was (and remains) a travesty. When the change was fully implemented, the country had been reduced to Third World status. More than a million people fled in small boats and rafts.

The charismatic young leader was Fidel Castro; the nation is Cuba.

The citizens of the United States would never fall for a charismatic, eloquent young leader who promises hope and change without asking, 'what kind of change, and how much will it cost us?' – would we?"



Lest you think I am going to go on a rant against Senator Obama, I'm not. Basically, this is now happening under Bush and also was happening under Clinton. If McCain wins, it might be a bit slowed but not that much. Or it might not at all. And under Obama it might or might not be speeded up, depending on what he will do as IMO he is kind of a wild card.

The reason for this morass is the flatlining of evangelism in this country. When hearts don't change, a nation stops growing in its evolutionary process (I'm usuing the word here in its original meaning - developing in a positive way - not in its Darwinian meaning); then eventually as this email outlines so well, it enters its entropic period (meaning going down the tubes). But when the society is tricked into believing that Jesus died for "social justice," then conversions diminish. In order to enable "social justice," the church leaders begin to politicize so that the government will carry out their agendas. Sound familiar? This is what the Christian Right did but instead of social justice and the environment, they wantd to politicize morals.

AAAAh......I see the Christian Right exiting stage right, and methinks I see in the far distance (but gaining rapidly) the New Christian Left entering stage left.