Archive for the ‘ Random Stuff ’ Category
Much has been said, but I like what Abraham Piper said best:
Every religion includes offensive fringe freaks. Only one religion that I’m aware of makes the whole world scared for its safety when it gets insulted by one of these freaks who happens to have made it on the news.
How can we condemn Jones’s actions without also condemning the religion that makes his actions so dangerous? Sure, Jones is not being kind or prudent–He’s an absolute fool.–but the fact that he is causing legitimate worry about the safety of our soldiers, missionaries, expatriates, etc., is not his fault. It’s Islam’s.
It’s difficult to maintain the “religion of peace” argument when faced with this sort of reality. Tim Prussic elaborates further:
The “Religion of Peace” is historically a blood-thirsty, take-dominion-by-the-sword, death-to-the-infidel religion. Say it ain’t so. It’s so. Islam started that way. Islam has grown that way. Islam is still that way. Now, your Muslim neighbor maybe friendly as the day is long. Love that neighbor, speak the Gospel to them and pray for them. However, two things must be noted about westernized Muslims: 1) They don’t accurately reflect historic Islam any more than the lesbian, eskimo, bishop lady down the street at the United Methodist Church accurately reflects historic Christianity…
And finally, if the Qu’ran burning does happen, it won’t be the first time, nor will anyone be burning a whole Qur’an:
My wife & I had been leaning towards homeschooling when we realized that we couldn’t afford a private school. As we studied the ins and outs of homeschooling and investigated the advantages and (perceived) disadvantages, we came across a DVD by Voddie Baucham called the Children of Caesar. It seems to have been out of stock for a while, but Monergism Books has it available again.
I think this DVD does the single best job of debunking a number of home school myths along with laying out the case for the superiority of home school as a model of education & development in general.
Here’s a helpful post by Justin Taylor that details the theological differences that spell out why Mormons are not considered part of Orthodox Christianity. Their denial of the the Trinity & monotheism couples with an unbiblical view of eschatology (among other things) to create a theology that can be called many things, but ought not be deemed Christian.
The reason the issue gets muddle in the minds of many is because Mormons (like liberal mainline “Christians”) use orthodox and biblical terms, but completely change what the terms mean. Sort of like what an SBC armenian does when he preaches a sermon on Calvinism. So if a Mormon says “I believe in Jesus”, what they mean to say is “I believe in Jesus.”*
*By Jesus we mean the literal offspring of God the father, who also sired Satan, Jesus’ brother. Jesus is a god, but not the only God. He’s a member of the polytheistic godhead. In the OT, Jesus & Jehovah are the same God, while God the Father is referred to as Elohim.
So that’s a problem. If I promise you some ice cream, but then fill a waffle cone with Brussels sprouts, you’ve got good reason to consider me as a liar.
I might insist “No, no, no. See ‘ice cream’ really is another word for Brussels sprouts, but people like Ben & Jerry corrupted the word so that it’s associated with a decidely un-Brussels sprout product & I just found out the truth last year.” If you know anything about ice cream at all, you can call me on it and move on.
The problem today is too many people have at best a vague idea of who Jesus is, but don’t invest in reading what He has revealed about Himself. So when Mormons talk about Jesus, they assume that we’re all on the same page. They’re a big lot of folks who don’t actually know what ice cream is. That’s why there’s even a conversation about whether or not Mormons (or any other Jesus denying group) should be considered Christians. They aren’t.
If you’re further interested, here’s an article written by one of my professors on how DNA evidence refutes central Mormon claims.
I had the opportunity to read an advance copy of Jonathan Weyer’s upcoming book The Faithful. The book itself is a fun & compelling piece of Christian horror (an emerging genre, I’m told). It’s a ghost story written from the perspective of a young reformed Presbyterian pastor. An interesting conversation in the book deals with a passage from Deuteronomy:
“When you come into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD. And because of these abominations the LORD your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God, for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do this. (Deuteronomy 18:9-14 ESV)
A character in the book then suggests that these things are forbidden, because they are real. Necromancy is something that can be pursued, wickedly mind you, but should be left alone by the command of God. So while there’s a standing order in Scripture not to actively pursue such things, the Bible is silent about what to do if ghosts reach out to you. It’s an interesting thought, and one that works well in the book.
I think on this topic every time I read the Biblical account of the witch of En-dor communicating with what appeared to the ghost of Samuel (1 Samuel 28:6-19).
So what’s your opinion on ghosts? No such thing? Demonic manifestations? If you’re a denier, is there a biblical reason you believe this? Is the denial of ghosts a reflection of a hyper-materialistic society?
Oh, that whole Glenn Beck not-a-political-rally-nor-a-doctrinal-rally rally over the weekend wherein he called people back to God and/or Jesus.
The satirical twitter account @XIANITY chimed “BREAKING NEWS: After months of resisting, lone hold-out American Evangelical receives Glenn Beck as his lord & savior.”
For a more substantial analysis let me refer you to Russell Moore’s post. Mark from HereIblog.com does a nice job of detailing the differences of the Mormon Jesus and the actual Jesus over here.
My thoughts:
Brief and undeveloped, to be sure. What are your thoughts on the issue? Are you as uncomfortable as I am? Do you marvel at the number of people demanding a return to God who won’t take the time to actually look into what God has said about himself? Has hyper-republicanism in the church set this in motion?
I am looking for some serious apologetics from the Armenian side – no straw men requested. Having recently discussed election during a study of 1 and 2 Peter and hearing an attendee express complete disdain for the idea, I want to know the strong points of the ‘free choice’ side and the verses that support it. Who would be blowing the trumpet on that bandwagon and why?
Ultimately, I believe all discussions of election eventually return to the debaters’ views of who God is and what he does in the process of salvation, but for the time being, what are the specific arguments that favor free will?
Known and investigated verses-
John 3:16 – emphasis on ‘whosoever’
2 Peter 3:9
Ezekiel 18:23
Ezekiel 18:32
Ezekiel 33:11
1 Timothy 2:4
Are there other verses that seem to promote a free will offering to all?
Jed Hansen is a regular contributor of the TBPC Men’s Forum. He has served as a short term missionary throughout the world through UPI.
Mark Driscoll wrote an article on the predominant tendency of boys to just stop maturing and never become men. They become guys instead. Michael Kimmel wrote a book called Guyland about this very issue. It’s worth reading if you’ve ever found yourself wondering how we reached a point where the High School graduates (regardless of whether they’re class of ’89 or ’09) still act like they never left. A generation of Woodersons if you follow my meaning.
Driscoll talks about the various manifestations of the guys, paying some attention to guys (read: neither boys nor men) in church:
Men in the Church: Cowards and Complainers
What happens if you walk into the church and try to find out what a man looks like? First of all, you’re not going to find a lot of guys in most evangelical churches. The least likely person to see in church is a single, twenty-something male. He is as rare at church as a vegan at a steak house.
In the world, boys who can shave are children who are consumers. In the church, boys who can shave are cowards who are complainers.
A buddy of mine calls them evangellyfish because they have no backbone. They don’t declare a major, church, theology, or fiancé. They don’t want to fail and they think if they don’t try, then they can’t fail. And by definition, that’s a failure.
They are, however, endowed with the spiritual gift of complaining. They say, “I hate the church. The church just wants my money.” As if the church wants his futon, Xbox, light beer, and computer filled with free Internet porn.
Here’s the cold hard truth: it’s a lot harder to do something than it is to complain about those who are doing something. The notorious sin of Christian guys is complaining about guys who are doing something rather than doing something.
I know these guys. They’re not exact replicas of the guy Driscoll is writing about, but there are similarities. Especially the points about complaining and avoiding marriage. You can read the entire article here. Tell me what your elf-eyes see about this.
One of the things I most enjoy about homeschooling is the fact that we can give the arts the attention it deserves. I remember the regular hacking & slashing of arts & music when I was in school… which is just too bad. Anyhow, I’m playing the role of art & art history teacher this year. This is the book we’re using, Discovering Great Artists. It takes a look at art history & explains the processes used. The student then imitates the methods employed by the original artists. So to appreciate Giotto you not only look at his work, but then you make your own egg based paint and get to work on the style. Even if you don’t home school, you may want to pick this book up just to use with your children on the weekends. It’s that good.