Linkathon!
A new look at hell...the mercy of hell…the surprise of judgement.
Fathers Day for those who don’t want to celebrate dad…
More on the nonsense of David Barton…
Democracy depends on agreement on some morality…
Keeping kids safe from sexual abuse…
Volunteerism essential for missions…
Rick Warren raising 71 million for expansion…
Why Franklin Grahams boycott failed…
The child preachers of Brazil…
The torture debate and Christians…
Franklin Graham is winning at Facebook…
What to do with unused embryos…
Five things wounded Christians should avoid…
N.T. Wright speaks at Google;
All thanks to EricL for helping while I recover…
Muslims billboards….I don’t have a problem with their right to post them, as long as someone else can post another billboard where Jesus says ” I the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me . John14:6. Mohammed is NOT the way.”
Re the Tullian critique: I think Tullian is speaking to a huge group of Christians who are acutely aware of their sin…..to the point of such condemnation that they have not heard the “grace” of God. People who are heavy laden and burdened by their sin, even though they know that Jesus died for their sin, yet they feel so guilty and feeling like they have trampled upon the goodness of God through their sin. They are people who are hung up on a type of karma…basically, are my good works outweigh good enough, so that God will accept me in Christ. That is where I was for many years. I needed to hear teaching like Bennan Manning’s message of the Father’s love for me. Do I want to live a holy and sanctified life? Of course I do! Do I want to please God? Yes!! A 10000 times yes! But oh, what joy and freedom there is in knowing that in my failures, the finished work of Jesus has placed me in a position of complete love and acceptance by my Father God. I found a place of rest though the grace teaching. In that rest, my heart is filled with thankful praise and yearns to please Jesus, but is no longer fearful of God’s horrible disappointment and disgust over me.
Nonnie,
If I get to feeling better later I’m going to write more about Tullian…and the spirit at GTY that makes them hate good news.
Well said…
GFA has over $54 million in the bank. Wow!
I couldn’t finish the GTY article. The “underestimating sin” section makes me angry. I’m having a tough time not being angry with friends/family that believe this. They don’t seem to understand how the Law / Grace / Law way of thinking only leads to more despair.
Amen Nonnie
Nonnie,
And that $54M is just GFA-India. As Warren points out in his reporting, GFA-U.S. also sends money to Believers’ Church and other entities in India with a connection to GFA. Those entities combined have over $150M in the banks. And then how much more might GFA have in the banks in the U.S. along with other countries where they raise funds?
I just wish that GFA would start giving some straight answers to the questions Throckmorton and others are raising. My fear is that GFA can’t give straight answers.
well, i think… 🙂
Tullian Tchividjian does sometimes lose the balance – perhaps in attempting to counter works justification? i hope that the Church, instead of throwing stones from behind our backyard fences – our usual m.o. – can work on getting our minds around the miracle of grace over depravity (total) and the sanctifying process that is, or should be, a life-long one – the renewing of our minds in Christ gives such peace
pray for Tullian – the Church in America needs him to stay on message now IMNSHO
The fact that GTY placed Tullian in the hyper-grace movement shows they do not know what they are talking about. The article made me sick as well and I’ll being praying for the words you have to write in response to them.
On one reading, I didn’t see an attack on Tullian, but a disagreement. I’ll read it again, but I definitely saw no vitriol.
I think it is healthy to have these kind of back and forth conversations in the church. I don’t think 100% agreement is required.
I’m not a huge fan of Tullian, but for once I’d really like to hear something from GTY besides critique.
Even if it isn’t meant to be an attack, it was much more than a sensible conversation wherein one is trying to clearly define their position against another. He was also attempting to define Tullian as being something he clearly is not. He is going beyond the subject to mischaracterize Tullian. My guess is he is speaking out of ignorance and as I said before, he doesn’t really know what he is talking about.
He spends the whole 3rd paragraph defining a negative picture of not just Tullian, but others like him and describes them/us in ways that I think comes very close to attacking someone’s beliefs and character. He starts with the typical setup of a negative picture of the man/denomination/doctrine he is going to oppose and then spends the rest of the article trying to support that negative picture he defined for you in the beginning. There is no attempt at objectivity in his part of the conversation.
Sadly, this seems to be the norm for most people today on their blogs such as some Methodists I know of lately attacking reformed theology and sending round the bi-annual report that Calvin was a cold-blooded murderer.
On another front, I cannot take Franklin Graham seriously with his boycott until he removes ALL companies that support LGBT people from his life, including that MAC or PC he is using, the Ipad he probably owns, and that Twitter account. Then maybe I will take him seriously.
yesterday on Tullian’s website, “Liberate”, an article was posted that stated Jesus was a sinner. you are not allowed to comment freely on his website, but I was surprised by the article. It was stated to be written by Martin Luther. Here is a quote from the article;
“I am told that it is preposterous and wicked to call the Son of God a cursed sinner. I answer: If you deny that He is a condemned sinner, you are forced to deny that Christ died. It is not less preposterous to say, the Son of God died, than to say, the Son of God was a sinner.”
can anyone enlighten me as to the accuracy of this statement?
and I apologize for not providing the link. my skills are limited.
“For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”
(2 Corinthians 5:21 ESV)
It would be accurate to say what the verse says…he that knew no sin became sin for us.
My would probably be in reference to this…
2 Cor: 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Whoops, I guess you didn’t need me. Michael got it! : )
I have always been amazed by the irony in the GTY name when I look at how they address those with whom they disagree.
Perhaps GTY ought to be reacronymed GTYU…GTYUnless…
Rick @19, or, as Frank Burns on M*A*S*H would say, “Nertz to you!”
…ok I know that is a bit obscure…
I would say that Jesus as sinner is a dangerous overreach. He became sin, but knew no sin. He was not a sinner. A sinner sins. Jesus never did.
Great article on the torture debate and Christians. Thanks for linking to it, Michael! Hope you are on the mend and feeling much better today.
Go to the Olsen link on Mormons, and then read each successive article ending with the letter from the Mormon scholar. It is very enlightening. Olsen tries to play nice and give the Mormons the benefit of the doubt in most of the questionable beliefs. The Mormon ends up retorting, (in a very nice manner also)…”no, I basically believe all those things.”
It would probably be inappropriate to use the fourth link to address the third link, right?
Franklin graham seems to be the one guy in the world willing to resist the PC machine.
Good for him.
oh my, … it’s not about Tullian and it’s not about Grace to You… we need to be prospectors looking for nuggets of God’s truth…
the declaration: Jesus was a sinner is such a good example – can’t remember now who T.T. was quoting, but i like it… loosely quoted from memory: John baptized filthy sinners and they came up out of the waters clean, their sins were washed away – John baptized Jesus and He came up out of the water dirty, covered in the dirt of other mens sins… dunno – but, worth thinking on…
was the man Jesus an active sinner? well, no and yes – He who knew no sin became sin for us… the sinless man impaled on that cross, crying “My God… why…?” if that doesn’t make you drop to your knees in shame and tears… well, i think you might need to think on it some more
was the man Jesus an active sinner? well, no and yes<<<
No, only no.
No no no.
John baptized filthy sinners and they came up out of the waters clean, their sins were washed away – John baptized Jesus and He came up out of the water dirty, covered in the dirt of other mens sins… <<<
This is very poetic in a symmetrical sort of way, but is it true? I don't believe it is.
Was the moment of His baptism the moment when He took our sins upon Himself?
Do I believe that T. T. overstates his case sometimes for shock value, yes I do.
But I think Jesus and the Bible writers did that sometimes, in order to get people to think and in to make a point.
T.T. needs to overstate his case more often 🙂
The “Fake plastic selves” article dovetails nicely with #8 from Monday
The whole cussing thing seems to be a growing issue among Christians, but it never makes sense to me as its discussed as “cussing” as if it’s a single category. To my mind, there are clear differences between:
– body words, like crap, sh***, a**, pi**, etc. Some of these I use, others I don’t but they don’t bother me all that much.
– sexual words, like the f-bomb and references to genitals. To me, these should be avoided because they are making something beautiful into something grotesque. On the one hand our society says words are so powerful that we need to use them correctly (e.g. First Nations instead of Indians, humankind instead of mankind) but there is such a disconnect when you try and use that reasoning to say we should not cuss with sexual words.
– religions words, such as OMG, the name of Christ, or even words like hell or damn used flippantly or without the seriousness that recognizes they are real places for those who reject Christ. These are the most offensive to me, personally.
It was always interesting when I was a classroom teacher and talked my expectations regarding language, and how OMG was more offensive than the F-word. Students were always so shocked, and then someone would say “So we can say the F-word?!!!” and I would say, “No, you can’t say any of those!”
At least that’s how I see it…
With TT I think it DOES depend on your audience. Many, many Christians need to focus on their justification, as focusing on their sanctification is something they do naturally. Others (e.g. those who cuss!) perhaps need to focus on their sanctification…
I answered the article with one of my own…it’s not my best work, but it’s what I had left in the tank today.
Steve,
That was well said.
I really can’t comment much on cussing with a straight face, though…
Xenia, you’ve stated it so well, once again
and it makes my point that Tullian T. does exaggerate to make his point and he should be listened to thoughtfully… Jesus as an active sinner? only hanging on the cross was He judged covered in sin – our sin – that is probably better described as passive or at least completely submissive – submission to God the Father… do we really understand His declaration, “It is finished?” thinking, thinking … thinking … still
opportunistic people who are looking for something to crack their bats on, as in the GTY article, can do much damage
why can’t more Christians be like Michael N’s crowd? 🙂
Did anyone read the new thoughts on Hell article and what were your thoughts? I wouldn’t say I fully agree but wasn’t offended by his thoughts either. He brings some interesting points to the conversation.
ahhh … hell… i’m having trouble loading the article… but i think the man is out of his depth… i think we all are, if we try to examine hell beyond deciding that we don’t want to go there…
the author of the article as far as my browser (or something) would let me read, was wrong about one thing… the earth – it is ultimately headed for destruction as i read The Book… then God will make a new one… i think this earth is just a stage – in both senses of the term
#37 😳 that was a declaration of topic, not cussing
expanding Saddleback? it is a kind of village… does it want to become a city built on the Rock and rolling the congregation? is that doable? dunno…
is Mormonism Christian? no, of course not… but Roger Olson makes a case for them evolving slowly in the right direction… keep praying IMHO
we want them in the Kingdom – God’s kingdom that is, not one of their own making and we certainly do not joining the fray as we Protestants sort out sound doctrines … maybe that’s what got us confused in the first place, too much time spent focused on heresy? dunno
I see Mormonism as a real danger right from the pit of hell. I do not see them evolving towards the true faith but instead see many in the church embracing them as they are. The umbrella has been opened wide by many and the reality is those who do not embrace Jesus as God the Son as opposed to the son of god satan will laugh with glee.
I wish it weren’t so.
In reference to the Martin Luther comment, we must always be careful to not feel the need to sanitize Jesus – feel as if we need to protect him and his work.
To Xenia’s question, I say yes Jesus took on the sins of the world the moment he stepped into the water, this and the father’s declaration began his ministry — forgiving sins. The ministry of Jesus was not some lead up to the big act – it was the big act.
Why does Rick Warren need to expand? My church is 1.5 miles on the same street as his – we will take his overflow. We could handle another 400 per week?
Jesus took on the sins of the world the moment he stepped into the water<<<
Why at this time, especially?
I am not denying that Christ took on the sins of the world, I am just wondering why you believe this is the moment it happened.
The beginning of his ministry. I believe that each time Jesus healed someone he was taking their sin. I find it hard to believe that Jesus went around announcing that his kingdom has arrived but nothing changed.
Jesus baptism could have been his acknowledgement of his incarnation – his mortal flesh, but it was his obedience, his uncompromising obedience all the way to submitting to the crucifixion of his body … hmmm… yes, i can see where he took on our sins when he took on mortal flesh and his baptism was an acknowledgement of that condition/identity…
em, I will say that is a very non sacramental view of baptism. I have trouble that Jesus did anything to say or show – “look how obedient I am for a future deed” – as if he had to prove himself to the father, worthy to die on the cross.
No, I think Jesus did things because that is what a king does in his kingdom.
I spent the past 6 weeks teaching through Matthew 8 & 9, where Jesus performs 10 healings / miracles to show his power over, and how his actions correct – death, sickness, demons and the creation itself. He is the king and so he performs kingly actions. Read how he uses his actions to say he is forgiving sin.
That’s some crazy stuff happening in Brazil.
The Tullian article is similar to to where the discussion went on the ” We Need A New Theology of Engagement” thread last week.
MLD, you’re reading things into what i said… non sacramental? dunno
i believe that the baptisms of John were in obedience to O.T. direction… Isaiah? not sure the reference, but someone here knows it, i’m sure…
i leave you to your sacramental interpretation… but prove himself worthy? say what? … hmm… maybe to the devil…
yes, he had the power to forgive sin … perhaps, there is a need to think about the power as it pertains to application? to atonement?
now i leave you entirely – God keep
this nation is quickly going upside down… pray for the church where a guy went in tonight and killed (not sure how many) folks at prayer…
http://www.focusonthefamily.com/lifechallenges/abuse-and-addiction/understanding-emotional-abuse/emotional-abuse-in-the-local-church
When these things take place within the organized “Christian” church as a normal part of the community, then and only then will I consider being in fellowship on this level. Since abuse is rampant, even though there are said to be “some” that are not, I’m not willing to risk my well being or my walk with the Lord just to find out otherwise.