Roundup

Those Pre-Christian Deities Aren’t Much Like Jesus After All – A popular atheist objection to Christianity is that it copied its believes from other religions.  The link thoroughly debunks the comparisons of Jesus to the mythical Mithras.  (Also see Copycats for more reasons why the atheists’ approach is riddled with errors).  The alleged comparisons are all false, meaningless or cases where the Mithras details post-date Jesus.

Claim: Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th, in a cave, attended by shepherds
Truth: Mithras was actually born out of solid rock, leaving a cave. He was not born of a virgin (unless you consider the rock mountain to have been a virgin). His birth was celebrated on December 25th, but both Mithras worshippers and the earliest Christians borrowed this celebration from earlier winter solstice celebrations. The earliest version of the Mithras narrative that includes shepherds appears one hundred years after the appearance of the New Testament; it is far more likely Mithraism borrowed the shepherds from Christianity than the other way around.

. . .

Claim: Mithras had 12 companions or disciples

Truth: There is no evidence for any of this in the traditions of Iran or Rome. It is possible that the idea that Mithras had 12 disciples came from a mural in which Mithras is surrounded by twelve signs and personages of the Zodiac (two of whom are the moon and the sun), but even this imagery is post-Christian.

Claim: Mithras promised his followers immortality
Truth: While there is little evidence for this, it is certainly reasonable to think that Mithras did offer immortality, although this is not uncommon for any god of mythology.

—

You Must Connect The Dots. Here, I’ll Help – a great explanation and critique of Liberalism by the Bumbling Genius.

—

IRS apologizes for targeting conservative groups – Would they have apologized if they hadn’t been caught?  This is a great reminder that you can’t trust those in power to be fair.  This is just a sample of what they are capable of.  More here about how they’ve known about it since 2011.

Now, President Obama, tell me again why we are shouldn’t be concerned about tyranny?  Be prepared to remind people of this when they claim you are paranoid merely for questioning the goodness of our leaders and their plans.

—

Idols of Awesome and Shibboleths of Community – A great read to help keep things in perspective.  If you really want to do something radically different because of your faith, that’s great.  But you can be an authentic believer anywhere.  Don’t let people guilt you into thinking you need to do something that is radical by their definition.  What is really radical today is a stay-at-home mom.

Every once in a while I stumble over something that opens my eyes wide to a lot of the silliness of secularism that pervades evangelicalism and, in turn, warps the whole of generations.Anthony Bradley points out that there is a crazy movement going on right now within young evangelical circles to shun the suburbs and engage in a “new legalism” of radical faith.

The best I can figure is that somehow suburbs are just bad. (Read Keith Miller on this point) I think there is something bigger than that and it goes beyond evangelicals to, particularly, millenials and those who close out the tail end of Gen X and Y. We’ve made idols of the awesome in our lives. All of us.

Each of us forms in our head an ideal. Instead of enjoying our present where, as CS Lewis noted, we are closest to God, we either look to a future that may or may not be, or we hold on to a past that maybe was not as shiny as we think. Then we surround ourselves with others and, in a culture of Baby Boomer grandparents and their offspring, decide our life will not be fulfilled unless it is in some way awesome.

P.S. Shibboleth is a term from the Bible.  It is an interesting Old Testament story that all Christians should know about.

—

9 things you should know about p*rnography and the brain – clear examples of how sin manifests itself and impacts us physically.  Too bad the “comprehensive sex ed” classes don’t teach this.  They are too busy pretending there are no consequences.

—

Homosexual man complains to NZ Human Rights Tribunal for being barred from seminary — And he’ll probably win.  This is how “gay rights” advocacy is used by Satan to try and destroy the church.  The complaint should be dismissed simply for its absurdity.  Imagine a Christian complaining about not being able to be an LGBTQ leader, even if he wants the position just so he can undermine their organization with his opposite beliefs.

—

A few important messages from Grumpy Cat.

Roundup

Jackie Robinson Had the Guts Not to Fight Back – I don’t watch many movies and probably won’t see this one, but was glad to read that the positive Christian themes were evident in the film — and, more importantly, in real life.

—

Once again, more guns = less crime but media tells people the opposite.

—

6 Ways Benghazi Proves Hillary Should Never Be President — And those are just the Benhazi reasons.  I think the fact that she lied to the faces of the victims’ parents is reason enough for her to go away for good.

It was sad that the Left actually cheered Hillary’s line, ignoring the obvious fact that every sin ever, starting with that of Adam & Eve, could be dismissed if that logic was legitimate.

—

The little boy who started a sex change aged eight because he (and his lesbian parents) knew he always wanted to be a girl – This is child abuse (the sex change) upon child abuse (putting him with lesbian parents).

—

Why do corporations ship jobs overseas? What causes outsourcing of jobs? – If you were starting a new company, all other things being equal, where would you go — a city with high tax rates or one with low tax rates?  If your headquarters was in a high tax city and you had to add production, would you consider doing it in a lower tax city?

Of course you would, or your competitors might put you out of business.  Now, replace “city” with “country.”

—

Hope and Chains: #WarOnWomen Kidnapper Is Cuyahoga County Democrat – Anyone think the media wouldn’t have blared this 24×7 if the party affiliation had been different?

—

Super freak: Guy leaves wife and 3 kids so he can dress up like a woman.  I really feel sorry for his wife and kids.  His utter selfishness, fueled by a perverse culture that will celebrate him being who he “really” is (a selfish freak), is at the root of this.

Top ABC News editor Don Ennis walked into his Manhattan office on Friday in a “little black dress” and a brunette bobbed wig and announced to colleagues that from now on, he would like to be known as Dawn.

The 49-year-old father of three said he’s splitting from his wife of 17 years to become a woman, or Dawn Stacey Ennis, as she is now known on her governmental records.

—

Teacher posts gay sex poster in grade 7&8 classroom: school board says he had ‘good intentions’ – No, his intentions were evil.

—

An exhaustive list of the verses telling us to listen for messages from God (when praying or otherwise)

[Beginning of list]

•  

[End of list]

Yep, there aren’t any.  Be cautious of leaders who claim otherwise.  Ask for verses, in context.  That doesn’t mean that God couldn’t speak to you that way, just that it isn’t normative or biblical and that the burden of proof is on the one claiming they did hear from God.  If they quote what He allegedly said to them then they are putting their words on par with the inspired Bible.  It is possible, but that’s quite a claim.

And it means you shouldn’t teach others that they must be doing something wrong if they aren’t “hearing” from God in personalized ways.  Don’t harm the faith of others with non-biblical teachings.  It isn’t loving.

If you want to hear from God, read the Bible.  If you want to hear from him audibly, then read the Bible out loud.  I suggest a deep study of the 31,173 verses He definitely gave us before insisting on a personal bonus revelation.

P.S. Please note that I am not discounting the Holy Spirit in any way.  I love him as I love the Father and the Son and He has unique roles outlined in scripture.  But again, please offer specific verses, in context, if your claim is that the Bible says it is normative to get specific communications from him when praying.

“Mars & Venus at the cross”

My youngest daughter mentioned this talk called Mars and Venus at the Cross: Toward a Crucified Vision of Manhood and Womanhood on Christian roles of men and women and I thought it was excellent.  Check it out if you want a clear and thorough overview of how these things should work.

He got a lot of great themes in. I loved his example of how women leading “just” women isn’t some lame second place thing and how it would be equally un-biblical for a guy to say he was “called” to mentor young ladies one-on-one.

He also emphasized how wives should submit to their husbands, but all women don’t need to submit to all men (except church leaders, to which all members submit as appropriate).

The only thing that might have rounded out the message would be how real wisdom and great leadership involves seeking the input of others (i.e., people like my wife). I’m responsible for the ultimate decision but it would be foolish not to get her perspective on some things. But that’s just a nitpick (you can’t cover everything in one lesson).

Prohibit, permit or promote?

J. Warner Wallace of Stand to Reason made some excellent points about the role of government in same-sex relationships.  These are very useful to help frame the argument against the government recognition of “same-sex marriage.”

Government has three options with respect to a given behavior:

1. Prohibit – Disallow it and punish offenders.

2. Permit – Allow it, but don’t offer incentives for it.

3. Promote – Actively encourage it via recognition and/or incentives.

Even though same-sex activity causes various societal problems (e.g., according to the CDC, gay men have HIV and Syphilis rates greater than 40 times the average), it isn’t practical or desirable to think that government could completely or closely monitor or prevent those relationships.

But should government promote this behavior via recognizing “same-sex marriage” and conferring benefits upon them?  No.

For the government to get involved in relationships there has to be an important reason. They have been involved in real marriages because by nature and design children are created by those units and they are the only relationships that can provide a mother and a father to children. Countless studies show this as the ideal, so the government has good reasons to encourage their stability. Nearly all the men I’ve met doing prison ministry had absent or poor fathers.

Please note that I didn’t say that they must produce children, only that children are always produced by one man and one woman. It is sad how many times Liberals trot out that straw man.  And again, only those relationships can provide a mother and a father to a child.  Deliberately denying this to a child is cruel.

While it may be logical at this point to permit but not prohibit these relationships, there are no good reasons to promote them. None.  And there are many good reasons not to promote SSM: The erosion of free speech and religious freedom and the damage done to children.  Despite what the fools presenting to the Supreme Court on Prop 8 claim, children do deserve to have a mother and a father.

More than 100!

I’m fond of pointing out that there are 100 passages teaching that Jesus is the only way to salvation.  In other words, they are far, far more passages than just John 14:6 (Jesus answered, ”I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.) — although that alone is clear enough.

The number of passages isn’t what makes it true, of course.  His resurrection does that.  But it does mean that anyone claiming the name of Christ must hold to that explicit and supremely important teaching, among other essentials of the faith.  Anyone who disagrees isn’t teaching something a little different from Christianity, they are teaching the opposite.  We have a very specific term for people like them: Non-Christians.  I have seen false teachers try to rationalize away John 14:6 when they thought that was the only verse they had to get rid of, but that is just more evidence of their being wolves.

But there are actually more than 100 passages.  Just read through Ephesians or Colossians, for example, and note how nothing makes sense if Jesus isn’t the exclusive way to salvation.

Consider this as one example.  There is no room for Vishnu, Mohammad, Buddha or anyone else here:

Ephesians 1:1–14 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

Some things in the Bible may be difficult to understand, but this isn’t one of them.  Jesus is the only way.  People shouldn’t sit in judgment of God’s gracious rescue plan and insist that there be other paths.  They should rejoice that there is a path for us sinners at all!

Responding to an atheist

A few thoughts on this sad post called why i am an atheist.  I think the person was a commenter here at some point (I had started a draft of this and never finished it until now).

religion was never a big part of my life.  when i was a young child, i believed in God because my mother did.  she was raised a Christian.

 i’m less sure about the beliefs of my father, who died when i was nine years old.  we rarely went to church, and we didn’t say grace at the dinner table.  my memories of church are only impressions now, and consist mainly of the remembrance of feelings of utter boredom and intense frustration.  my parents, especially my father, had always impressed upon me the need to ask questions and the danger inherent in unquestioning acceptance.  hence, my time in the few Sunday school classes i attended was not unlike a form of torture.  i recall intense feelings of rejection and isolation.  after one such encounter, (when i was probably about six years old) i went to my father and told him what i had been taught.  i told him that my questioning had been discouraged and asked him about the truth of what i’d been told, specifically about the business with the talking snake.  i told him i didn’t believe it, and asked him if that story was true.  ”of course not”, he replied.  and thus the seeds of doubt had been sown.

Ugh.  That is inevitable when churches are social clubs and people don’t take the Bible seriously.  How many people in the pews know it is their jobs to educate their children?  (Ephesians 6:4 Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.)

as i’ve said, we didn’t go to church often, and for that i am as grateful as i am for any other fact of my happy childhood.  i have immense respect for those who have been subject to religious indoctrination and have managed to free themselves of it.  things went on happily and peacefully until the sudden death of my father.  although i had profound doubts about the existence of a god, i decided then and there that any being that could visit such cruelty couldn’t possibly be good or merciful.

It is sad that he lost his father, but he also does what other non-believers do: Sit in judgment of God.  But if there was no God, then his father’s life was meaningless.

i adored my father.  i channeled my grief and anger into striving to learn.  the library was my sanctuary.  the following year, Carl Sagan’s Cosmos aired on PBS.  i was utterly fetched.  the beautiful explanations of the world around me and the universe beyond captured my imagination.  this soft-spoken man seemed to radiate…”goodness”, for lack of a better word.

Another irony: Without God, there is no grounding for “goodness.”

i came to see the scientific endeavors of mankind as the best expression of what goodness we are capable of as a species

That is illogical: Science deals with the material world, but things like goodness are immaterial.

(although all such endeavors have not been to our betterment), and i found in Cosmos an affirmation of my deep-seated questioning nature.   i also began to understand that there is really no need for “god”.  perhaps even more importantly, i saw no evidence for one.

Other than the cosmological, teleological, moral, transcendental, etc. arguments.

when i was twelve, i had a creationist answer my assertion that radiometric dating proves the earth much older than 10, 000 years with, “carbon-14 dating is the tool of Satan.  you are deceived.”  seriously.

So if an atheist gives a bad answer does that prove that there is a God?

as i got older, i came into contact with many believers, most (but by no means all) of them Christian.  like anything else, i found some good and some not.  i had many discussions with people of various faiths.  i sincerely tried to understand not only what they believed, but why they believed it.  i got many answers, but found only more questions.  i attended a Baptist church with my grandmother.  i listened to a grotesque litany of all the reasons that most people were going to hell.  afterward, i told the preacher exactly what i thought.  i don’t think he appreciated it much.  i read the Bible – cover to cover.  i’m not ashamed to admit that i found it one of the most boring exercises of my life, and i say this as a person who has also read James Joyce.  

Good dig on James Joyce (I had to read him in college.  Double ugh.).  But I do give the writer credit for reading the Bible.  That is always my aim with believers and non-believers.

but i really needed to see for myself what was in that book.  i found virtually nothing uplifting and much that was quite appalling.  

Yes, it lists countless sins of rebellious sinners attempting “deicide” each day by pretending God doesn’t exist or trying to take over his role by sitting in judgment of him.

i marveled at its many, many contradictions.  

And apparently didn’t study the readily available answers.

i learned about who wrote it, and also about the apocrypha.  i found that the arguments about what was to be included in the Bible as it is today were no less sordid or contentious as anything that occurs on Capitol Hill.  i’ve had believers knock on my door to give me the “good news”, only to have them threaten me with eternal torture for my failure to believe as they do.  

I wasn’t there, so perhaps those were poor presentations of the Gospel.  It isn’t about believing everything we do, but about believing the truth about Jesus.  In other words, it isn’t about us, it is about Jesus.

The truth is that the Bible never mentions torture (torment, yes).  But it is for your sins against God and not for failing to believe like we do.

during these years, i was also encouraged in my quest for knowledge by some truly talented and remarkable teachers.  i read On the Origin of Species and A Brief History of Time, among others works about the realities of our planet and universe.  everything that i learned and everything that i saw around me lead me to the conclusion that there probably is no god.  i found that i liked the idea very much.  i found it very liberating.  

I appreciate his honesty.  Sometimes atheists do admit that one thing they like best about their worldview is the (apparent) lack of accountability.

i found that it gave my life more meaning.

Now that is ironic.  If there is no God then life is truly and utterly meaningless.

i live in a very conservative area.  i don’t know very many atheists.  i’ve been asked by the few people with whom i discuss such things how i came to choose it and if i’m afraid of going to hell.  my answer is this:  i didn’t choose atheism any more than i chose my eye color.  i am simply not capable of believing in things for which no evidence exists.  because i have no reason to believe there is a hell, i have no fear of it.  i wouldn’t care to spend eternity with a deity who would punish perfectly reasonable doubt with eternal torture anyway.

He apparently misread the Bible.  Again, Hell is torment, not torture, and it is for countless sins against your creator and not for reasonable doubts.  That’s a double straw-man argument.

i’ve been asked to explain my morality, and my answer is this:  i am a good person for its own sake.  i try to treat others the way i wish to be treated not because i hope for some reward or fear some punishment for not doing so, but simply because it is the right thing to do.  i’m happy this way.  i’m comfortable with not having all of the answers.  i have no need to ascribe a supernatural answer to the unknown, simply because so many things that have been ascribed a supernatural cause have been explained by science.  i see no reason why that would change.

why am i an atheist?  because I can’t be anything else.

I hope God makes him spiritually alive someday.

Apparently only non-Christians can pray at the inauguration

Randy Alcorn literally wrote the book on grace and truth (ok, maybe not the book but a book).  Jesus had the perfect balance of grace and truth.  We do not, so it is a constant struggle to aim at that.

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Randy is one of the most balanced writers I’ve seen.  He shows it in Perspectives on Louie Giglio, the Homosexual Issue and What It Means to Be a Christ-Follower in This Culture.  It is a thorough and excellent message about how Giglio is no longer welcome to give the inaugural prayer because of an 18 yr. old sermon he gave noting that homosexual behavior was a sin.

There are some great lessons here.  No matter how hard you try to please the world, it won’t work.  Of course many of them hate the message.  They are spiritually dead and will always hate it.  If they aren’t properly offended then you delivered the message wrong.  But you honor God by speaking the truth in love.

As I listened to the message, I was struck by the gentleness and kindness of Louie Giglio’s words intended to invite in, not push away, those of homosexual orientation. He offered love and forgiveness for homosexual sin just as for heterosexual sin and every other sin. Giglio was careful to say that people with a homosexual orientation were loved and welcome in his church. Yes, the agenda of homosexual advocates was warned against, and that’s an appropriate warning. But there was no homophobia, no revulsion against homosexuals as individuals. Rather, Louie spoke with both grace and truth.

This 54-minute message is biblically clear yet careful and balanced, saying that homosexual behavior is one of many sins, and we should not hold it out as unacceptable while our personally preferred sins are ignored. It was a good sermon then, and in my opinion, still is.

If this message is “hate speech,” as it is called in some by some responders, then the Bible is hate speech, and no one can preach the whole Bible without being guilty of hate speech. Some people believe that and are honest enough to say it.

If Louie Giglio, despite his people-loving track record, is viewed as a bigot because he believes and teaches the Bible, then it’s guaranteed you and I will be seen as bigots. Unless, of course, we either outright deny the Scriptures or are so quiet about our belief in them that no one finds us out. (Imagine an ambassador who lives in fear of divulging his King’s policies.)

Many of the articles and comments concerning Louie Giglio reflected this perplexing idea that good Christians must NOT believe the Bible. And, indeed, many professing Christians agree with Jesus only when he speaks about love. When he takes moral stands and says there’s an eternal hell to punish sins, that’s a different story. They take a cut and paste approach to the Bible—when I like what it says I’ll quote it, when I don’t like it, I’ll ignore, reinterpret or deny it. That means the Bible is not my authority. Rather, this culture is my authority. I am my authority.

Once we deny parts of God’s truth, then we are no longer under Scripture’s authority. We are winging it. And if Christians try to be relevant and accepted by making up truth on the fly, then the Jesus we speak of will not be the Scripture-believing Jesus of the Bible who was full of both grace and truth. He will just be the “loving Jesus” remade in our culture’s image, in which we redefine love as tolerance.

Among the comments, I discovered some Christians who seem astonished that the world opposes many Christian beliefs. Of course we will be mocked and despised—the Bible promises us that. Jesus said “A servant is not greater than his master. If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you” (John 15:20). He said, “In the world you will have tribulation” (John 16:33). Paul said, “all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Timothy 3:12). Peter said, “Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you” (1 Peter 4:12).

If we are not opposed for our allegiance to the gospel, isn’t it because we are not living and proclaiming the gospel?

. . .

I saw comments in which several people spoke up in Louie’s defense, but then said, essentially, “Someone shouldn’t be judged for what he’s believed and said nearly twenty years ago. He’s probably changed his mind and we should forgive him. Let’s give him a chance.

But of course, for Louie to change his position would require him to repent of what the Bible teaches. It’s one thing to say “I was wrong,” it’s another to say, “God was wrong.” To do this, he would not be a Christ-follower in the historic sense. (True Christ-followers don’t deny God’s Word, they lovingly affirm it.) It’s one thing, years later, to say you would phrase some things a bit differently; it’s another to deny what the Bible actually says.

Trying to fly under the radar of our culture on moral issues is no better than the always-in-your-face method. The grace-only approach, in the end, is as deficient as the truth-only approach. Jesus came full of both grace and truth (John 1:17). So should we.

I’m convinced that we need a good, simple set of pro-real marriage and pro-life apologetics to use as segues to the Gospel.  I have come across more and more people who have bought Satan’s lie that you shouldn’t even consider Christianity because of the stances it takes on abortion and homosexuality.  The goal, of course, is to get them to the word of God as quickly as possible, but you may need to do some prep work.

It concerns me when those who profess to be Christians simply redefine what it means to be a Christian to accommodate whatever the culture currently believes. They oppose Giglio, they suppose, because they are more loving, kind and relevant Christians.

. . .

Too many Christians labor to airbrush Jesus and the Bible, to make them as attractive as possible. In doing so we distort both the Living Word, Jesus, and the Written Word, the Bible. We redefine sin, and minimize it in a misguided attempt to win people by saying what they’d rather hear.

What bothered me most as I read dozens and dozens of comments was seeing professing Christians distance themselves from Louie Giglio. These new kind of “Christians” are a mirror image of this culture, craving popularity and acceptance. If that’s you, please understand—and I am trying to be honest, not cruel—that you bear no resemblance to what it has meant for two thousand years to be a true follower of Christ. Believe what you choose to, but please, in the interests of accuracy, stop calling yourself a Christian.

Preach it, Randy!

Our job is not to be God’s speechwriters and revise his words on his behalf, but to speak his words humbly. Our job is not to be God’s PR team, but to be his ambassadors, not making policy but simply representing what God has declared to be true.

This episode, I believe, points out the futility of trying to reach the world through being acceptable to the world. If you spent any time with the Giglios, you’d probably think that they are better, nicer and kinder than you are. So if Louie Giglio’s efforts against human slavery haven’t delivered him from moral outrage, your works and mine won’t deliver us. (We should do those works, of course, but out of love for God and people, not to be popular.)

Ask yourself whether you are living for the approval of this culture, or the Audience of One. Ask yourself, “In the end whose judgment seat will I stand before?” The homosexual advocate’s? The White House’s? The news media’s? The social media’s? The church’s? Or will we stand before God’s throne, where His “opinion” (truth), as expressed in Scripture, ultimately will be non-negotiable.

Christ’s followers are full of grace and truth. They are both loving and holy. Make no mistake—an unholy world will never be won to Christ by an unholy church.

Zacchaeus & Jesus’ slaughter of his enemies

If you are paying attention you noticed the seeming non sequitur in the title.  How could anyone connect the joyful story of Zacchaeus (which many people know of from the memorable children’s song about him) with the notion that Jesus will judge those who refuse to let him reign over them?  Yet if you read closely, that is exactly what the Bible does.

First, the story of Zacchaeus.  It is truly a joyful account of a wretched, condemned sinner who repents, rejoices and gladly follows his Savior.  Remember that for the Jews this guy was the worst of the worst.  The Romans were hated, but the tax collector Zacchhaeus would have been perceived as a traitorous Jew who sided with the Romans and exploited his fellow Jews.  Yet he was not beyond Jesus’ reach.

Luke 19:1–10 He entered Jericho and was passing through. And behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus. He was a chief tax collector and was rich. And he was seeking to see who Jesus was, but on account of the crowd he could not, because he was small in stature. So he ran on ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see him, for he was about to pass that way. And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, hurry and come down, for I must stay at your house today.” So he hurried and came down and received him joyfully. And when they saw it, they all grumbled, “He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner.” And Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor. And if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold.” And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

Zacchaeus was lost, Jesus sought him, Jesus saved him, Zacchaeus demonstrated a changed life.  That’s great news.

But this is connected to Jesus’ next parable, the one about the ten minas.  I often miss transitions like this because I treat the stories as being independent, but when listening to this on the way to work today the first line stuck out to me.  Luke deliberately noted that this parable was told to the same audience.  Didn’t Jesus know that it was a time for celebration rather than warning?

Luke 19:11–27 As they heard these things, he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return. Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten minas, and said to them, ‘Engage in business until I come.’ But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We do not want this man to reign over us.’ When he returned, having received the kingdom, he ordered these servants to whom he had given the money to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by doing business. The first came before him, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made ten minas more.’ And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’ And the second came, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made five minas.’ And he said to him, ‘And you are to be over five cities.’ Then another came, saying, ‘Lord, here is your mina, which I kept laid away in a handkerchief; for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe man. You take what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.’ He said to him, ‘I will condemn you with your own words, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow? Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?’ And he said to those who stood by, ‘Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’ And they said to him, ‘Lord, he has ten minas!’ ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.’ ”

Did you catch that last part?  The same Jesus who saved Zacchaeus and celebrates at his house proceeds to tell a parable with a chilling ending.  This King has enemies who will not let him reign over them.  What happens?  They are slaughtered in his presence.

Oh, and Jesus apparently expects his authentic followers to demonstrate changed lives and to help advance his kingdom.  Go figure!

I’m fond of pointing out that there are 100 verses noting that Jesus is the only way to salvation.  The volume isn’t what makes it true, of course.  His resurrection does that. But it does mean that anyone claiming the name of Christ must hold to that explicit and supremely important teaching.  But there are actually more than 100 verses, because the passage above is one of the many that aren’t even on that list.  You will die either as a servant of the King or as his enemy.  Choose carefully, because eternity matters.

Jesus came full of grace and truth.  Grace and truth.  All grace and no truth is a lie that makes people think they don’t need Jesus.  All truth and no grace is a lie that crushes people and removes hope.  There is great grace in that awful sinners like Zacchaeus and I can be saved by the blood of Christ.  There is great truth that without Jesus we would be condemned for eternity.

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

“If Good and Evil Exist, God Exists”

Great video on how the existence of morality is evidence for the existence of God.

Also listen carefully to atheists and moral relativists.  They have great difficulty going three sentences without contradicting their worldview by assuming objective morality.

Romans 1:18-20 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Brian McLaren = false teacher

Levi has a thorough take-down of Brian McLaren’s “A Generous Orthodoxy.”  McLaren is even worse than I thought — and I already thought he was pretty bad.  I read that he just performed the ceremony for his son’s same-sex union.  Ugh.  One more reason to consider him a fraud.  I go between feeling sorry for his deceived followers and realizing that, a la Romans 1, God has just given them over to their sinful desires.  Here’s an observation that applies to McLaren and countless other false teachers:

 McLaren’s theology contradicts itself when he consistently claims that we should follow Jesus’ example but also denies the validity of the witness accounts of Jesus’ life and teaching. How do we follow Bob’s example when everything we know about Bob is written by men whose writings are decidedly fictional?

McLaren and the like think it is wrong to be sure of something, even though they are sure of what they claim about the Bible and they are sure that it is wrong to be sure.  Consistency isn’t their strong suit.

A look at the sermon of a false teacher

Reading the sermons of wolves in sheep’s clothing so you don’t have to!

False teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie took a break from taking little girls to gay pride parades to preach a “sermon” about John 18:33-37.  He is symptomatic of the theological Left and their anti-Christian teachings.

I wrote previously in Heretics ‘R Us about Chuck’s abuse of John 14:6 (Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”) and how Chuck’s key points were to claim that Jesus was not the only way to the Father (despite the Bible claiming that over 100 times), that other religions such as Islam should inform our view of the Gospel, and that the Bible is not accurate or reliable — specifically that the Gospel of John was written 100 years after Jesus was crucified for being such a nice guy.

Never minding that even Liberal scholars concede a date around 100 A.D., and the case for a pre-70 A.D. dating is very strong, Chuck is now claiming that it was written 200 years after the crucifixion.  (Note that his dating is relative to the crucifixion, not the resurrection, because “Reverend” Chuck and other theological liberals don’t believe the resurrection really happened.  We have a name for those who hold that view: Non-Christians.)

Via Thy Kingdom Come:

In our on-going Sunday night adult education group we’ve come to know that the Book of John was written nearly two hundred years after the death of Jesus and far from recording historical accounts of his life it reflects theological understandings of his ministry and existence.

Well, there you have it!  Chuck now says it was 200 years, not 100 years.  So his view is that the author(s) were complete liars, because the Gospel of John explicitly claims to contain eyewitness accounts and evidence for believing that Jesus rose from the dead and is the source of eternal life.

Chuck seems to make up things as he goes along, kind of like Benny Hinn.  But even if Chuck was right, why on earth would he do an entire sermon on a book he “knows” is thoroughly fraudulent?

Sadly, as the latest of the Gospels, it also reflects the reality that by this point in history the early Christian community is becoming separate from the Jewish community that Jesus was apart of.  With this separation comes persecution of early Christians and the narratives of Jesus death change in ways that blame the Jews more directly as a people for the death of Jesus, when the Romans where truly responsible.

Knowing all this we can sit back from our vantage point and see how it was that Pilate must have been confused about Jesus.

This lowly son of a carpenter was actually wildly popular with the Jewish people and word had reached Pilate that some referred to Jesus as King.

So Chuck seeks to absolve the Jews of blame for the crucifixion, even though all the Gospels record that Jewish people were the cause of Jesus being killed.

Luke 23 18 But they all cried out together, “Away with this man, and release to us Barabbas”– 19 a man who had been thrown into prison for an insurrection started in the city and for murder. 20 Pilate addressed them once more, desiring to release Jesus, 21 but they kept shouting, “Crucify, crucify him!” 22 A third time he said to them, “Why, what evil has he done? I have found in him no guilt deserving death. I will therefore punish and release him.” 23 But they were urgent, demanding with loud cries that he should be crucified. And their voices prevailed. 24 So Pilate decided that their demand should be granted. 25 He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, for whom they asked, but he delivered Jesus over to their will.

Chuck & Co. will claim that is anti-Semitic, but there is another more accurate term: Fact. No one claims that all Jews killed Jesus or that Jews should be persecuted.  We just point to the obvious truths of the Bible.

The church too quickly forgot the lessons of Jesus.

But wait — Chuck & Co. insist that the documents containing Jesus’ words are hopelessly flawed.  He and his (apparently former) employer the “Jesus Seminar” insist that Jesus only really said a small fraction of the words attributed to him — and of course they deny that He is part of the Trinity and on board with the entire Bible.

We spend too much time in the Christian church debating what happens to us after we die and not enough time talking about how to improve the world we live in.  Jesus was never obsessed with death and salvation the way he was obsessed with building up the Kingdom in the here and now.

Again, Chuck refers to a Jesus that he made up.  The real Jesus spoke plenty about eternal matters:

Mark 8:36 For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?

Back to the false teacher:

We pride ourselves on being places where all points of view are accepted.

Uh, sure — views like pro-real marriage and pro-life?

But I also agree with Martin Luther King, Jr. who once preached at Riverside Church that: “…I agree with Dante, that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis maintain their neutrality. There comes a time when silence becomes betrayal.”

Wait — does Chuck actually believe in Hell?

There are too many great moral issues being debated in our community today – in our state and the world – that require the attention of the church.  These issues – whether it be the coming debate over marriage equality or more life threatening issues concerning global climate change – that demand that we not be silent but take stands, not just as individuals but as a church community.

“Marriage equality” is a fiction.  ”Same-sex marriage” is an oxymoron.  Unions that can’t produce children or provide a mother and a father to children are not equal to unions that can.

As a play on the favorite line of pro-gay theologians, “Jesus never said anything about marriage equality,” so their pet issue must not be very important.

Global climate change = made-up Leftist power grab.

What would Pilate think of us?  This is a serious question.  If we dropped Sunnyside Church and University Park Church through a time warp and into Pilate’s time would we been seen as a community that was at all threatening?  Or could we easily be ignored?

He’d probably think they were a bunch of fake Christians, especially since their #1 issue in the election was forcing pro-lifers to pay for abortions, because Chuck & Co. think our biggest problem is that not enough babies are getting killed in the womb.

We need to be marching alongside workers at Wal-Mart calling for livable wages. We need to be demanding of our President and our Congress a carbon tax and other measures to dramatically shift the way we all live to save God’s creation.  We need to be demanding of our local community permanent funding sources to create affordable housing and standing with those facing foreclosure.

“And we need to do it by taking the money of other’s by force!  Because Jesus would never expect us to use our own money!  And it would take way too much work to open businesses ourselves to compete against Wal-Mart and pay those “livable wages.”  And besides, we don’t have any business skills!  We just need Caesar to solve all of our problems!”

And Sunnyside Church and University Park Church should be the first churches to Oregon to publically endorse a ballot measure calling for marriage equality in 2014.

Well, sure, go ahead and make your Romans 1 Poster Children picture complete.

If we do these things and more, we can stop being the church of Constantine and start being the movement of Jesus.  We’ll be controversial.  New people will come to worship with us and others will mock us.

Yes, some people will worship (Satan) with Chuck & Co., but not many.  Just look how much Chuck’s apostate employers (the United Church of Christ and the United Methodist Church) continue to shrink.  Why get up early on Sunday to go hear what MSNBC tells you  for free 24×7?

Here’s the final irony of Chuck’s “sermon.”  The last line of his text — you know, from the book Chuck says was full of lies and not written by John and adopted by the early church — says this:

John 18:37 Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.”

Chuck & Co. explicitly do not listen to Jesus’ voice, and they miss the self-parody of quoting that verse. By their own words they do not belong to the truth.

Make no mistake: If you follow people like this you are lost. You are like the people in Romans 1 who God gave over to their sinful desires. You are like Pharaoh, who continually hardened his heart until God finished hardening it for him. Get out of those fake churches while you still have time.

Whoa — Pat Robertson gets one right!

I do not care for Pat Robertson and his many false claims, but he is right on this one: Pat Robertson Tells Christian Viewer to Dump Muslim Girlfriend.

Even a non-religious person should see that couples should agree on the foundations of how they view the world. Do people think they can disagree on who God is, what happens when you die, how to be reconciled to God, etc., and that it won’t have a radical impact on them and their children? They plan to find agreement on where to live, how many kids to have, where to vacation, etc., but not on the key questions of life?

The message to their children will come through loud and clear: The concept of God is so unimportant to us and irrelevant to life that we didn’t find it necessary to agree on it before committing to spend our lives together.

More importantly, for Christians to marry non-Christians is forbidden in scripture.  2 Corinthians 6:14 is often cited (Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?) but you can also see all of 1 Corinthians 7.

And while God might ultimately bless the union in his radical grace, what makes anyone think He is obliged to bless a union entered into via disobedience?

Christians should not date non-Christians.  Satan has used this countless times to draw people away from God.  Heck, Muslims should not date non-Muslims, for that matter.  And so on.

Here’s an example offered by Dan:

I was speaking with a co-worker who was having problems in his marriage, and their future as a couple was not looking good at all.  It seems that him (a “Christian”) and his wife (a Jew) saw their religious “diversity” as a great positive going into marriage.  Why not?  It’s the craze of the age… right?   But then a child came into the picture and all of a sudden their diversity was an insurmountable mountain.  The religions that they had both subjected to the wisdom of a bunch of pointy-headed Utopians had suddenly risen from its bottom self status to supreme importance when it came to raising their son.  This fellow could see the writing on the wall.  He knew his choice was to raise their child a Jew, or be reduced to a weekend Dad by the courts.  A loving person could have told him this if he’d been curious or humble enough to seek council about it before hand.  Why does man insists on being so short sighted?

Roundup

Jim Wallis of Sojourners had his family interviewed about what his “new kind of Christianity” looks like.  Short version: No cross.

It reads like a spoof.  This “Christian” leader with the ear of the President makes time for baseball leagues but not church.  But what should we expect from a guy who is on record for saying that “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution?”

—–

Obama’s abortion, marriage views inspire dozens of Democratic politicians to join the GOP - Good for them!

“I’m a Christian, and my first allegiance is to Jesus Christ,” Sheriff Waggoner said. “God established marriage, and He established it between a man and a woman. Those are my beliefs. The Republican Party reflects my beliefs.” . . .

New party members sometimes become active leaders in the pro-life cause. Ohio State Representative Doug McKillip of Athens – who accepted a $500 donation from Planned Parenthood in 2006 as a Democrat – introduced a bill to limit abortions to the first 20 weeks of pregnancy earlier this year.

McKillip credits his faith with his party change. “I became a Christian in ’09,” he said. “You start reading the Bible, and you realize life begins at conception.”

—–

Freedom of religion — or freedom of choice in general — you’re doing it wrong – California Senate bans “ex-gay” therapy – Looks like those anti-choice zealots from the hopelessly politicized anti-science groups are getting their way.  This is another in a long line of evidence against the “‘same-sex marriage’ won’t impact you” lie.

Don’t believe the lies: Change is possible.  See Witness Freedom Ministries, for example.

—–

Global Warming Alarmism: When Science IS Fiction – I love Forbes.

Although global temperatures have been pretty flat despite rising atmospheric CO2 levels since the big 1998 El Nino, no one that I know disputes that climate changes. Nor do they doubt that there has been very mild warming since the mid-19th century when our planet began thawing out of the last “Little Ice Age” (predating the Industrial Revolution). And while most acknowledge that greenhouse warming may well be a contributing factor, it is also true that a great many very informed scientists believe that any human contributions to that influence are negligible, undetectable and thereby grossly exaggerated by alarmists, while far more important natural climate drivers (both for warming and cooling), are virtually ignored. Particularly consequential among these are long-and short-term effects of ocean cycles along with changes in solar activity.

The pervasive hype that we are experiencing a known human-caused climate crisis is based upon speculative theories, contrived data and totally unproven modeling predictions. Much of this emanates from politically-corrupted processes and agenda-driven report conclusions rendered by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which is trumpeted in the media as authoritative gospel.

Fritz Vaherenholt, a socialist founder of Germany’s environmental movement who headed the renewable energy division of the country’s second largest utility company, was once a big IPCC believer. Recently, however, his new book titled The Cold Sun: Why the Climate Disaster Won’t Happen, charges the organization with gross incompetence and dishonesty… especially regarding fear-mongering exaggeration of human CO2 emission influences.

Also see Confirmed: The Less You Know About Science The More You Believe In The Climate Change Hoax

—–

This Richard Leakey link claiming that the evolution debate will soon end has been getting a lot of attention.  He’s right, I think, but for the opposite reasons that he believes.

Such blind faith he has! And so naive and inconsistent. Christians have claimed for a couple thousand years that we all descended from one man and one woman, and Jews for a couple thousand years before that. I’m glad that this atheist is climbing on board the fact train! And his worldview gives him no grounding to consider extinction a disaster. If we’re all just random chemical reactions then there is no such thing as true good or evil. Like most atheists he can’t go three sentences without contradicting his worldview.

And he does the typical double speak about “evolution,” pretending that those who follow real science are denying that things change. That’s a straw man argument.

Going and coming

It is a major challenge to leave one church and join another, but there are some key success factors on both sides that can help you.

I already mentioned How to start at your new church.  We basically did these without the list when we switched churches last year and it worked well.

Also see How to leave your old church for some more good advice.  We did those things as well.  Having been there for 15 years, we had a lot of very good friendships that we wanted to maintain — even though as a matter of conscience I couldn’t worship there any longer.

I heard from a third party that our former pastor said we left in the most gracious way he had seen, which told me that I probably wasn’t mean enough .  I say that not out of self promotion but to point out the importance of a clear exit strategy.  I spent a lot of time thinking and planning how to leave without burning any unnecessary bridges.  We tried to tell our small group friends and then immediately told the pastor so he wouldn’t hear it from others first.

One thing the link mentions is to “kindly and honestly answer the question ‘Why did you leave?’”  I tried to be simple, thorough and accurate when answering that for the pastor and anyone else who asked.  I gave the pastor the full list and more context.  I didn’t want to nitpick or be spiteful, but I also didn’t want to pull any punches on the main reasons we were leaving.  It is a win-win situation when you do that: Either they take the constructive criticism and make positive changes, or they ignore it and validate why it was wise for you to leave.  With others we didn’t know as well I gave them a shortened version (some as brief as “creative differences”).

When the survey says, “X% of the people left the church because of _______” . . .

. . . just reply as follows: “No, the real reason X% of the people left the church is because they weren’t Christians.”  (Kudos to Pastor Timothy for pointing that out on the Yeah, it is worth it post.)  And I am talking about leaving the church, not a church.

Lots of surveys come out insisting that people are leaving the church over this or that, so the church needs to change.  I disagree.  If people leave the church for good then they weren’t true believers.  It doesn’t follow that you would love the real Jesus and hate his bride.

Oh, they may have claimed to be Christians but if they leave the church permanently then 1 John 2:19 applies:

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.

Churches should think carefully about everything they do and seek to be as biblical as possible.  But they should not cater to what the world thinks they should be and market themselves to non-believers based on what the non-believers want.  That just shows how little confidence some churches have in God and the transforming power of his word.  The moment you think you need gimmicks, special music or any type of manipulation then you have gone off track.

2 Corinthians 4:1-6 explains this well:

Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, we do not lose heart. But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God. And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only 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. For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,”has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.