Love Wins chapter 1

Assuming you're not living under a rock, most Christians are somewhat aware of the "firestorm" that ROB BELL'S new book, LOVE WINS, has stirred in Christian circles on the internet and elsewhere.  Even before the release of the book, many were weighing in because of the provocative TRAILER VIDEO.  Though some were critical of the critics, it is beyond dispute that Bell's video was questionable.

Though my review will pale in significance to many well known reviewers and bloggers, I figured it would be beneficial for me to have some familiarity with these important issues as they relate to Rob Bell.  That is, I have no intention of adding anything to the fire.  Instead, I hope to have the opportunity to provide clarity to those who might feel lost after reading Bell's book.  In addition, I would hope to offer warning and correction to my friends, co-workers, family, etc. who might buy into some of Bell's ideas.

In a way, this review is more for me than anything.  If I can write about it, then it is likely that I will be able to explain it to others.  And if i didn't take the time to read this book, why should others listen to me when I seek to offer correction?

With that said, i'd like to review one chapter at a time.

As I anticipated, Bell offered his fair share of skeptical and provocative questions as they relate to heaven, hell, and salvation.  One can only assume that Bell felt he covered all the bases.  However sincere Bell was in his efforts, I found them to be severely lacking.  Though Bell was only "asking questions," I didn't think he offered anything short of a strawman in his representations of various beliefs.  What's worse is, I never found my view to be questioned or mentioned.  Putting hell aside for a moment, I saw no attempt on Bell's part to even attempt to ask accurate questions concerning Reformed Soteriology.  I don't want to assume too much as Bell might have purposefully avoided this perspective.

I say all this because I felt like Bell's questions could have been far more smart than they were.  If Bell had offered more sophistication and accurate representation in his questions, I would have been far more provoked.  Instead, I read through this chapter thinking, "these questions are easy!"  If I had to guess, Bell's book seemed to be geared towards ones who are not quite as theologically astute as they could be.  Perhaps these are ones that grew up in a back-woods southern baptist church and heard "fire and brimstone" sermons all the time.  Or these could be persons who grew up in a "seeker-sensitive" church where the gospel was reduced to, "believe in Jesus and you'll go to heaven."  Whatever the case, there are many who could easily relate to Bell but I am not one of them.

At this point it is difficult to know where Bell is going in all of this.  After all, he is just "asking questions," even though its obvious that his questions are, in a sense, meant to be objections.  However, as obvious as they are, these questions can only provide impressions though I will be hoping for clear thoughts and little ambiguity as I continue reading.

Sometimes you just have to give credit where credit is due

As always with Benny Hinn, watch with extreme caution.

Derek Webb's controversial song

Above is a controversial song by Derek Webb who is part of the group, Caedmon's Call. Personally, I don't care much for "Christian music." Musically, its almost always about 10 years behind the times and seems to want to rip off U2 riffs that were written decades ago. But besides this, I thought Derek Webb's song was pretty controversial to say the least.

Having sat under teachers to the likes of Jay Bakker, i've heard it all when it comes to evangelical fundy's who have wrongly treated homosexuals. And to an extent, I agree with them. Denying homosexuals jobs and other discriminatory acts is something that I cannot stand for. Nor can I stand for the outright hatred some evangelicals have shown the homosexual community.

Apparently, this is what Derek Webb's song is about. But there is something else that is rather peculiar in this song. As Fred Butler has rightly pointed out, why are homosexuals being singled out in being shown such "hatred?" If homosexual behavior is a sin, then why not go after the other sinners that are treated far more harshly, such as the porn industry or much worse, child molesters? Am I saying child molesters are the same thing as homosexuals? No, i'm not. I'm simply suggesting an irony that homosexual behavior is being singled out. Is it because homosexuality has become trendy and more socially acceptable? Do we treat other sinful lifestyles like this? Hasn't adultery become rampant as well? What happens when these lifestyles become trendy? Is Derek Webb going to write songs about how these people are mistreated?

For me, the bottom line is not so much how we shouldn't treat homosexuals, but how we should treat them. Thus, we have a dilemma:

A) Homosexual behavior is a sin.

B) Therefore, we need to treat it as such.

When are these people who keep telling us, "stop mistreating homosexuals" going to inform us on how we should treat them? And if you are going to try to make the impossible case that homosexual behavior isn't a sin, then be prepared to do some biblical exegesis. Otherwise, let's start talking about how to treat sinners as opposed to how we have mistreated a very specific group of people. In other words, let's make a more general and positive approach on how believers should spread the gospel, which includes pointing sinners to their sinful standing before God. And when we do that, there should be no basis for saying, "oh, just make sure that you don't be too harsh to this one particular sin."

Already Gone?

In a recent Answersingenesis.org Article, the following was discussed:

Nearly two-thirds of students will one day walk away from the church. You’ve read these well documented statistics from Ken Ham and Britt Beemer in the book Already Gone. But what can Christians really do?

For many, the answer is just as scary as the numbers: let youth ask questions. Children and adults alike are seeking answers to the issues confronting them. Is there really a God? Can dinosaurs be explained by the Bible? Why should the Bible be believed? Hasn’t science shown the earth to be billions of years old?

Answering those questions, however, is essential to engaging the culture. And Answers in Genesis wants to help.
As a part of the redesign and expansion of the Answers Outreach web presence (previously Events), we are excited to announce the launch of our new DareToAsk.org website for our youth “Q&A Live” presentations. The site itself is designed with young adults and youth in mind, which is why the look is edgy and relevant. But it’s not just about looks.

You’ll also find video answers to some of the common questions all of us have asked. There are links to free resources and even a free DVD download.

Beyond that, you’ll also hear why singer Mark Hall (Casting Crowns) and actor Kirk Cameron (Fireproof) believe AiG’s “Q&A Live” sessions are so important in reaching young people with the message of biblical authority. And that same message can come to your church.

I checked out the Daretoask.org Website and found it to be pretty impressive. The videos are extremely professional and contain some of the most commonly asked questions about creation, evolution, and the age of the earth by some experts in those fields.

I have the same hopes that ministries like Answers in Genesis have in being equipped with answers to the questions of our day. And I pray that more will jump on board with this rather than contributing to some very unfortunate statistics.

I didn't believe it until I saw it

Surely, western nations aren't banning respectful, public, moderated dialogues on important issues concerning religion? Think again. I was absolutely blown away by this. If you are a thinking individual who actually cares about your freedom of speech, then you must watch this video. I was honestly laughing out loud (I should have been crying) at the complete and total absurdity of the U.N. "hate speech policy" defender. This is unbelievable. It really is time to wake our nation up and encourage interaction on the public square. Too many are becoming apathetic in the name of "political correctness." And if we keep burying our heads in the sand, you can watch our freedom get flushed right down the toilet. Please pray for our leaders, that we not lose our most precious freedoms.

You can watch the video HERE.

Book Review: "Pulpit Crimes" by James White

In "Pulpit Crimes," James White seeks to expose those things which bring shame to the proclamation of God's Word. In order for something to be a crime, there must be a law in place. And that is what the author seeks to prove in this short but powerful book.

Some of the chapter titles include, "Prostitution," "Felonious Eisegesis," and "Body Count." Though I found the titles to be a bit on the cheesy side, I found the content to be compelling. To anyone reading this book, prepare your traditions to be challenged. What the author focused on as crimes, there were clear biblical commands to define them as such. One of these that I found to be most valuable was the pulpit crimes related to the preaching work.

Few Christians realize that the Bible has some very specific commands in regards to the preaching work. While I was hoping the author could spend some time discussing topical vs. expository, he spent most of the time in dealing with the pulpit crime of not preaching the full council of God's Word. I suppose this might have been a defense for expository preaching, but I think his main point was to point out that too many pastors choose to speak on those topics that they want to speak about, while trying to avoid those "difficult" subjects like doctrine.

One thing I appreciated about this book was that it covered churches from every end of the spectrum. So whether you are a part of a solid Reformed Baptist fellowship or a leftist Episcopal one, the author covered topics from the most liberal to the most conservative in terms of their pulpit crimes. Topics like pluralism were tackled, as well as the women's role in the church. In other words, it seems like there was something in here for everyone!

Overall, this book is worth reading because I don't think our traditions are challenged enough. There is always the potential danger or falling into a man-centered time of worship that is focused more on the show than on God. So its always good to be reminded of what's most important in our time of worship; and that is God!

Question from a reader

A reader of this blog recently asked a question about "money and the church." I thought it was a good question, even for apologists, because it is a common "stumbling block" for many. Although it is more of a pastoral question, it is one that we should be ready to give an answer for, as 1 Peter 3:15 would have us do. The question is this, "Why do churches ask for money?"

Thanks to many money-hungry TV evangelists (which is the only "christianity" that most people unfortunately get to see), a lot of people view the church as a greedy organization that just wants your money. And in many cases, this is unfortunately true. This is just my opinion, but I believe that the vast majority of these churches fall into the Word of Faith movement. The reason is, a lot of these Word of Faith teachers teach false doctrine regarding money and giving. Its not my intent to get into this at the moment. If you want to know more, typing "prosperity gospel" or "prosperity theology" in google should pull up enough to give you a glimpse at what this line of thinking entails.

Aside from all of this, many churches who do not teach prosperity theology ask for money. Why? Is it because the pastor needs a newer car or needs to remodel his bathroom? If anyone is interested in wanting to know what a church does or doesn't spend their money on, all you have to do is ask. I couldn't imagine even a Word of Faith church denying the request to view a monthly financial statement. Unfortunately, most people assume without asking. That's the first step.

The second step is, how do you judge on whether the church is wisely spending its money? Simple. How much money is going towards personal incomes? If the pastor is making more than enough money to support a stable and comfortable income, then you might want to ask the church why the pastor is getting paid as much as he is? This is where things get touchy and i'm not sure where I draw the line on how much pastors should be getting paid.

But I think these things goes beyond what the questioner wants to know. Why do churches ask for money? Think about what would happen if they didn't. First, would there even be a building? Would there be electricity? The bare essentials would have to be covered. Secondly, the pastor needs an income. Why? Because pastoring a church can be one of the most time consuming jobs out there. If a pastor had to work a full-time job, how would he have time to adequately study, prepare sermons and bible studies, council members, perform wedding and funeral ceremonies, etc. etc.? Some may disagree with this, but I see absolutely nothing wrong with providing a pastor an income in order to better perform his duties.

Personally, I think there is a right way and wrong way to ask for money. Currently, my church doesn't nor has ever "asked for money." Occasionally, they point out that there is an offering box in the lobby if anyone chooses to donate. But that's it. I think as long as people know where to give, then they can choose to do so or not. That's why I really don't like the offering plate deal.

I'm not completely set on any of this, but these are my general thoughts at the moment. What do you all think about this issue?

Some thoughts on postmodern America

Sorry my blogs have been a been scarce as of late. There have been lots of things on my mind that I want to write about, but my internet access has been pretty limited. But I saw something recently that got me thinking about the religious state of our country. At the House of Blues in San Diego, California was a large sign which read "Unity in Diversity." Surrounding these words were various religious symbols. Some might think that this was simply a statement of "why can't we all just get along?" Of course, I agree with this. No one should be killing or fighting anyone because of their religious differences, and we should all be able to believe whatever we want. But is this the only thing that the sign was portraying? I don't think so.

You see, in postmodern America, there is no one absolute truth. God can be found in whatever religion you choose. It doesn't matter if its Jesus or Muhammad; both will lead you to God because there is no "one" right way. Though the ancients thought differently, truth is progressive. What may be true for you may not be true for them. Who are you to say that your religion is the only way? This is the thinking of postmodern America. And sadly, it it seeping into modern "evangelicalism."

How are we, as Christians, supposed to counteract this way of thinking? By pointing out the errors of postmodernism. First, we have to establish the exclusive claims of Christianity. Jesus believed there was only one way when he claimed,

"I am the way, the truth, and the life. And on one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)

If no one can come to the Father except through Jesus, then one must believe in Jesus to be saved. Once this is pointed out, you will notice the response from the postmodernist to be something like, "even if Jesus claimed this, he still isn't the only way. There are many ways to God."

Here's how I respond to this pluralistic way of thinking.

CLAIM: There is no one right way to God. All religions lead to God.

ERROR: This claim is exclusive in and of itself. They claim that the "one right way to God" is by following any religion. So the claim is self-refuting. Logically, you can't claim "there is no one right way to God" and then say, "following any religion will lead you to God." It is like being absolutely sure that there is no absolute truth.

As postmodernism pervades our culture, it is imperative that Christians be able to not only counteract their claims, but to clearly and effectively share the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Wow, can you say "culture wars?"

Wow, this is going to strike up some interesting conversations amongst conservative evangelicals!






ht: Fred Butler

Anyone wanna start a mortuary ministry?

Not to minister to those who have to be around dead bodies all the time. No way. Let's get radical and minister to the dead bodies! Think i'm kidding?



I wonder if they pray over cremated remains as well?

The Lord is leading me to...the Lord is telling me to...

You all have done it, and so have I. Maybe you still do it. And you know exactly what i'm talking about..."The Lord is leading me to do missions work in China" or "The Lord told me that this is who I am to marry."

Many believe that as you grow closer in your relationship with God you become more sensitive to the voice of the Holy Spirit so that you can listen to where He leads you. Thus, you can make similar statements to the ones above. But have you ever thought to question whether or not its biblical? If it is, what are those people missing who do not believe in such a thing? If it is not, what implications would this have on your life.

Let me ask you an important question. Before the 20th century, did anyone teach such a thing? Ok, i'm sure you could find someone out there who believed this, as there have always been mystics who molded their beliefs with the Christian worldview. But has there by anyone who was at least a semi-prominent figure in church history (modern ones like Spurgeon, or ancient like Augustine) who not only believed this, but taught it as well? If no one in church history believed that God is "speaking" or "directing" or "leading" people in the way that modern evangelicals think that He does, then how in the world did Christians live the Christian life?

Why didn't he just sue the Holy Spirit?

I was wondering when these lawsuits were going to start happening.

KNOXVILLE — A man says he was so consumed by the spirit of God that he fell and hit his head while at a Knoxville church.

Now he wants Lakewind Church to pay $2.5 million for medical bills, lost income, and pain and suffering he says he's endured from his injuries.

Matt Lincoln, who is 57, says he decided to sue the church after its insurance company denied his claim for medical bills.

Lincoln has had two surgeries since the June 2007 incident but says he still feels pain in his back and his legs.

The Sevier County man says he was asking God to have "a real experience" while praying at church.

He says he has fallen from the force of the spirit before but has always been caught by someone.

Lawyers for the church say other congregants saw him on the floor laughing after his fall. They say he failed to look out for his own safety.

On a serious note, when are people going to start realizing that the practice of slaying in the Spirit is one of the most absurd and ridiculous things that the "church" has ever come up with?

You think this is bad? Just wait 15 years...

This lawsuit might happen, or it might not. If such a thing is even being considered in our courts, what do you think is going to happen in 20 years? My friends, our days of free speech are coming to an end.

Lawsuit against Zondervan complains about Bible statements on homosexuality

CASCADE TOWNSHIP -- A Canton man is suing Zondervan Publishing and a Tennessee-based publisher, claiming their versions of the Bible that refer to homosexuality as a sin violate his constitutional rights and has caused him emotional pain and mental instability.

Bradley LaShawn Fowler, 39, is seeking $60 million from Zondervan, based in Cascade Township, and another $10 million from Thomas Nelson Publishing in the lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

Fowler filed the suit against Zondervan on Monday, the same day U.S. District Judge Julian Abele Cook Jr. refused to appoint an attorney to represent him in his case against Thomas Nelson, a Tennessee publisher. Fowler filed a suit against Thomas Nelson in June. He is representing himself in both claims.

"The Court has some very genuine concerns about the nature and efficacy of these claims," the judge wrote.

Fowler alleges Zondervan's Bibles referring to homosexuality as a sin have made him an outcast from his family and contributed to physical discomfort and periods of "demoralization, chaos and bewilderment."

The intent of the publisher was to design a religious, sacred document to reflect an individual opinion or a group's conclusion to cause "me or anyone who is a homosexual to endure verbal abuse, discrimination, episodes of hate, and physical violence ... including murder," Fowler wrote.

Fowler's suit claims Zondervan's text revisions include and then delete the reference to homosexuality without informing the public of the changes.

The other suit, against Thomas Nelson and its New King James Bible, mirrors the allegations made against Zondervan for "manipulating" Scripture.

Read the article here

New survey results

These survey results are pretty alarming to me, and should be to all born-again believers. Here's a few things to note:

71 percent are "absolutely certain" of their belief in God. 5 percent "don't believe."

57 percent of "evangelical protestants" believe that "many religions can lead to eternal life."

61 percent of "evangelical protestants" believe that "abortion should be illegal in most or all cases."

64 percent " " believe that homosexuality should be "discouraged by society."

With regards to point 2, I want to ask something. Is this decline due to the fact that churches aren't being "creative" enough? Or perhaps they aren't being "loving" enough?

The church is declining in its affirmation of absolute truth and the gospel. If you are one of those who think the church needs to focus on methodology more than its message, think again. We have a problem; adding drums and being more creative with "topical sermons" isn't the answer.