Oh, Jackie!

Ian Elsasser says:

Michael, it’s lamentable that nothing is said in her piece about loving one another, a command of Jesus, reinforced repeatedly by apostles throughout the New Testament scriptures and produced by the Holy Spirit. They will know we are His disciples by our love for one another.

Ian Elsasser says:

Michael, if I understand you correctly, they do not permit room for legitimate differences of interpretation yet they disregard a crystal clear command to love one another. Got it (yet don’t get it).

Kevin H says:

Did anyone watch the live stream of this Wednesday night meeting? Did Jackie ride through the meeting on a horse yelling, “The Calvinists are coming! The Calvinists are coming!”?

Reuben says:

I listened to the radio show on my way into work this morning. Brought back memories of me.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

I think the direction of the past 2 threads about the CC situation is a farce. The CC group and Jackie use Rick Warren as a misdirect to cover up the most dangerous “so called” Christian teaching – which they themselves hold.

The most dangerous teaching in the church is not emergent, purpose driven or even universalism. The most dangerous position in the church today is dispensationalism and it’s popularized version – rapture theology.

I think they purposely point at others – any others – so that no one looks at their heresy.

Andy says:

Have to agree with Jackie on this one. Henderson might not be a calvinist, but teaching from Sproul isn’t something that would have happened under the old regime. CCCM will go in a direction that I wouldn’t personally want to be any part of. Not that anyone at CCCM will care.

Gary says:

“They believe that those outside the camp are not truly in the family and thus are unworthy of Christian love.”

This is my experience with my CCCM brother. Can you say N-i-c-o-l-a-i-t-a-n?

Nonnie says:

I am very hopeful for CC as we now begin to see the church through a gospel lensrather than an us against them lens

Gary says:

Andy,
You’re right. Nobody at CCCM will care because Chuck won’t be there to tell them to care. They won’t even notice if it’s a different shade of brown.

Nonnie says:

I have found that CC folks who leave the bubble and start ministering with a variety of Christians on the mission field quickly discover that the us against them life of church is a stench in the kingdom. We may not agree on certain doctrines but we are united in the belief that Jesus is Lord and the world needs Him. We preach Christ has come, died, risen and will come again.

Solomon Rodriguez says:

When I was a heretical pentacostal (sarcasm) I was going to PCC and took a philosophy class on religion. The only other Christian besides me was a Calvinist and when he learned of my charisma he ribbed me about my camps way of barking like dogs and rolling around on the floor. In turn I gave him the nickname “Legalistic Lenny”. However when our atheist teacher and the rest of the class were deriding Christianity and trying to prove it false, me and the Calvinist closed ranks and defended the gospel and the name of Christ. So yeah in the end we need to have love and avoid the clanging cymbal thing which is an easy trap.

Bryan Stupar says:

“If there is a move away from eschatology in CC, it is toward being more focused on the Gospel…and not on end time speculation.”

This is a perfectly accurate statement/observation, IMO…praise God!

“End time speculation”; (as distinct from Bible prophecy…NO, they are NOT one in the same)
sells books,
draws crowds,
packs out conferences,
increases blog traffic,
makes pastors feel intelligent & important (by observation, superior),
makes congregants feel intelligent & informed (by observation, superior)…

…and ultimately is a distraction from the gospel which Paul warns, there’s a potential for drift.

Andy says:

“…and ultimately is a distraction from the gospel which Paul warns, there’s a potential for drift.”

What a silly statement.

Eschatology is a distraction from the Gospel? C’mon. It was eschatology that got me interested in studying the Bible, and led me to the Gospel. I know of countless other people that have the exact same testimony. That might bother you, but God won’t stop using that method anyway.

Andy says:

“The shelf life on preaching the near return of Jesus has run out.”

So talking about Jesus returning, as they talked about even in the Bible almost 2000 years ago, suddenly is not relevant today? It is just as relevant today as it ever was, and that will never change.

Andy says:

By the way, despite Babylon’s Dread’s statement about the “early 70’s as the heyday of eschatology”, I was saved through eschatology in 2000. I wasn’t alive in the early 70’s.

Andy says:

Papias, I go with John 3:16 to get to heaven. That’s a done deal. As for walking with the Lord, walking with the Lord includes helping people today, and also warning them that the world will not always go on as it is today. Things will change. The person will either die, or face the end times. Whichever comes first.

Bryan Stupar says:

Andy, #25 …
I never said, “Eschatology is a distraction from the Gospel?”

I did say: ““End time **speculation**”; (as distinct from Bible prophecy…NO, they are NOT one in the same)”…”ultimately is a distraction from the gospel which Paul warns…”

Eschatology is NOT a distraction from the Gospel, if done w/ Jesus as its central climax.
Endless “speculation” about eschatology is.

Andy says:

“Eschatology is NOT a distraction from the Gospel, if done w/ Jesus as its central climax.
Endless “speculation” about eschatology is.”

Let me guess… what you believe about eschatology, is never “speculation”. Only what people like me believe, is “speculation” 😉

Andy says:

Papias, then my going to heaven by what Jesus alone has done for me, will have to remain as a “problem” for you. 🙂

Dread is totally wrong, but we’ll agree to disagree on that as well.

PP Vet says:

My, MN sure has become more and more inclusive.

Find your “Inclusivity Quotient”:
How many of the following do you consider part of the “family” of Christians?

Pope Francis
Greg Boyd
Rick Joyner
Thomas Monson (LDS)
Amy Grant
Joel Osteen
David Bernard (Oneness)
Todd Bentley
Kenneth Copeland
That gay guy who says he’s a Christian but still seems pretty gay

Ricky Bobby says:

Jackie unfriended me, too…but for a vastly different reason…though I’m sure she would have defriended me eventually b/c I’m sure she and many others would say I’m possessed by satan.

I like Jackie, I can’t help myself. She’s quite a character and she has a very good side to her, despite all the stuff you point out that is valid IMO. She was very kind to me once about the situation with my mom and she even stepped in and tried to call them etc. That spoke volumes to me. It was very “Good Samaritan” despite our differences. She saw “right” and “wrong” despite our theological or philosophical differences.

Xenia says:

I think rapturism has probably lost its appeal, mostly because you can only maintain the required panic state for so long. But what is it being replaced with, this oh-so-cool hipster cynical “most Christians except us” are such troglodytes and we will blog endlessly about our beer and cigars and so on and so forth. Frankly, prefer the rapturists.

Andy says:

Dread, I guess the answer to all of that is, Chuck was a slight bit of a date-setter, of course that Doug guy would remove the words “slight bit of”.

That doesn’t change what the Scriptures say about the last days. Chuck can’t change it, CC can’t change it, amil people can’t change it. They say what they say.

I hear people all of the time, talking about the rapture, the end times, the coming of Jesus. And I’m not even spending much time in CC anymore. But I hear it all the time, I see it all the time, it’s everywhere. Someone above even posted something to the effect of, “teaching end times stuff is big $$$$!”

So which of you is right? I don’t believe you are right. And I don’t believe he’s right either, just because a few people are making big coin on it, people do that with parts of the Word of God all the time. That doesn’t invalidate the Word of God.

Bryan Stupar says:

Andy,
I think you may be jumping to conclusions. God has used many things to provoke saving faith in his people…for you it sounds as if the instrument he used was eschatology…to that I say praise God!

All bible students especially in the area of eschatology have a fair amount of speculation…this in itself isn’t necessarily wrong, so as long as the bible student/teacher clearly communicates this, and thus holds on to these loosely. The problem as I see it is there are many who raise those speculations to the level of ‘proper interpretation’ and then carve hard lines in the sand so as to call others errant (or heritcs) for not believing their particular angle. When in reality all they’re doing is dividing the body of Christ over their “speculations” of eschatology.

Ricky Bobby says:

Stupar said, “God has used many things to provoke saving faith in his people…for you it sounds as if the instrument he used was eschatology”

Do you think that provocation was intentional? Was it refutable? Does God provoke some and not others?

Ricky Bobby says:

…every Calvinist, when you strip away the layers, is a Determinist/Fatalist, they just refuse to be intellectually honest and run from the conversation (to its ultimate end).

jamesk says:

Funny thing is, most CC pastors I know are 2.5 or 3 pointers.

Kevin H says:

“The problem as I see it is there are many who raise those speculations to the level of ‘proper interpretation’ and then carve hard lines in the sand so as to call others errant (or heritcs) for not believing their particular angle. When in reality all they’re doing is dividing the body of Christ over their “speculations” of eschatology.”

Amen.

babylonthegreatfallen says:

Yay! God is on Jackie’s side. The matter is settled.

babylonthegreatfallen says:

Bob,

I am a pointless Calvinist

Jim says:

“abomination”, “your lackeys”, etc…

She sounds like a lovely person.

Steve Wright says:

the majority of the church, both historically and today…does not hold to dispensational eschatology
———————————————-
True, but I wonder if the majority of today’s conversions come in churches or from missionaries that hold to it

Of course, when churches get to count all the babies, it’s tough to say… 😉

Andy says:

Michael, that was my point to Bryan. We all “believe the Bible”, but in the effort to get unity, we supposedly have to hold back. All this talk about unity, but I’m not afraid of the division. As Jesus Himself said, many will have called Him, Lord, Lord, but He will say that He never knew them.

PP Vet says:

I resent being called Michael’s lackey. I would prefer “flunkie”.

Yes, BD, considered adding myself to the IncQ list. Probably should have substituted Rick Warren in there somewhere, too.

I think my IncQ is high, maybe 9.2 or so. That’s probably too high.

Ixtlan says:

@63
LOL!! It may be the case that evangelism is more prominent within the dispensational camp than others; I don’t know for sure. I do know that the Jesus Movement was largely fueled by the message of “get right or get left”.

Fast forward that mentality 40 years and you see an aged generation among who a number (don’t ask me to quantify) are still holding out for the rapture because they don’t want to experience the difficulties that our latter years can bring. In reality who does? But what is under the surface is a characteristic that has plagued the hippie-turned-yuppies-turned middle-class republicans all their lives, and that is a latent sense of selfishness. They don’t want to gather their thoughts and wisdom with a heat of love to address important issues of the next generation any more than their parents wanted to deal with them. Rather than letting their light shine in addressing all the problems and challenges to the church and sound doctrine,they curse what they perceive as the darkness and inadvertently pull up some wheat along with the tares. In a culture that worships youth, they struggle with the ideal of experiencing what Paul would call “this light affliction” and are insisting that the Lord returning to deliver them from eventual old age, sickness and death. But then again wasn’t it Roger Daltrey who in “Talkin’ ’bout my Generation” said; “I hope I die before I get old”?

covered says:

That “2.5 or 3.0 pointers” is funny coming from a Calvary guy.

babylonthegreatfallen says:

Andy

I kind of agree with Andy that eschatology is central to what is the real Gospel. But for different reasons.

Andy says:

Michael, I see the lines you have drawn. Just for comparison, my lines are that Jesus is God (the incarnation, as you said), Jesus died for our sins and rose again (as you said), but I’d also add that it must be faith alone in Jesus without works. That’s a part of the line that I draw. Am I “hateful” for drawing that line, because it will exclude a lot of people? But if I really believe that line (and I do), then I’d be lying to myself to ignore it for unity, and I’d be doing a hateful thing by not telling people about it as a requirement, since I do believe it is a requirement of the Gospel and salvation.

I don’t add eschatology into it at all. But as I had said, a person’s eschatology can possibly tell you about what they think the Gospel is. I will never be at the great white throne judgment. But a person that thinks they are going there, isn’t believing that they are saved by faith alone in Jesus without works. At best, they are going there to test their post-salvation life, to see if they committed/served/walked/etc., “well enough”.

Which is why that is part of my line that I draw, and it does exclude people, but I’m not drawing that line just for the sake of excluding people. I’m drawing that line because I believe that is what the Scriptures teach.

Ixtlan says:

” I could argue that the most distant history, the Bible itself, always taught dispensational eschatology, and many people went off the track.”

Really? I’d love to see that argument. For starters, I think the ideal of the Kingdom makes more sense than different dispensations. I am not aware of any good arguments for dispensaltionalism being taught throughout the church age, and like Bob, I have a Masters degree from an evangelical seminary. Perhaps you could write something up for us and ask Michael to publish it.

Andy says:

Ixtlan, I never went to seminary, so I can’t speak for what’s being taught there. What they are teaching, doesn’t affect me at all. I don’t expect a seminary’s account of supposed “history”, to teach dispensationalism. I expect them to make claims that would fit catholic and reformed opinions on supposed “history”.

This is one of the things that got Chuck Smith nailed by all the seminary grads over the years. Chuck would say, go back to the Book of Acts for church history, not to supposed “church history” found in seminary. And I believe he was 100% right about that.

Andy says:

Ixtlan, you sound like someone looking for a “notches on a bedpost” kind of debate, with the “that’s the best you got” thing. I’m not interested in that kind of foolishness 🙂

jamesk says:

@73 I am as much of a calvary guy as you are.

Andy says:

Michael, I don’t know Ixtlan at all, so I don’t know if I need to learn from him, or if he needs to learn from me. The piece of paper from seminary doesn’t tell us the answer to that. 😉

Jim says:

Andy needs to do a little historical homework. My understanding is that pre-trib rapture theology is a modern doctrine, younger than our nation. I slept through high school, and have 3 credit hours from a community college, so I’m open to correction in this regard.

covered says:

James or “fundy drive by” or whoever you are today, you know darn well I left that tribe because your mentor is a womanizer who refuses to repent. You also know that I am not a Calvary guy and haven’t been for years and you also know that you have taught and done worship at your mentor’s church. Let’s keep it real James.

Andy says:

Jim, shall I do homework with people that claim it showed up with Darby and such, or should I do homework with the Holy Spirit and see if the Bible teaches it? I believe the people that claim it showed up with Darby, are giving you a biased, agenda-driven false “history”. But that is just “mindless nonsense” from a self-appointed “Berean”. 😉

Xenia says:

I’m going to be one of the lone voices here, but I have an admiration for Jackie A. For one thing, she doesn’t change her theology every time a hip new book is published and she’s not trendy. She stays the course of what she believes to be the Gospel Truth. That’s the kind of person who will willingly go to the lions rather than offer up a pinch of incense to Ceasar.

Ixtlan says:

Andy,
Go back to the early church fathers if you want interpretation on what the apostles taught. The book of Acts is narrative and you will serve yourself better by going to the epistles for doctrinal instruction. Read the account of Polycarp, Iranaeus, Hippolytus of Rome, take a look at the Didache (it may be older than the book of Revelation). Premillenialism was apparent in their writings, pre-tribulationalism was not.

BTW, if you understood history, particularly church history, you would understand that dispensationalism is a relative late comer on the scene. I used to think that the ideal of progressive revelation was true, that is, the things of the Bible were not able to be understood until man progressed in his understanding. I no longer feel that is an accurate approach. The ancients understood far more than we give them credit for and to think with all our technology that we are superior to them is just plain arrogant and stupid. That doesn’t give them a free pass on everything (for example, I have real issues with Ortho and Catholic soteriology), but if we are going to be humble students of Scripture, we must recognize that the did possess a piece of the puzzle.

Steve Wright says:

My this is an active thread.

Going back to my earlier post – my conversion comment in response to the “newness” argument is a simple one.

God is actively using dispensational churches and missionaries to bring the elect to saving faith today….even if those elect later leave such churches believing they are wrong (as so many on this blog have done)

We have the same gospel, same Bible, but different hermeneutics, that is clear.

However, if “new” is defined as “wrong” simply because it is “new” (and I am not saying that was your point Michael, but I do hear it that way all the time)

then it is worth pondering why God is doing what He is doing with the churches He is using…and no, not just in the 70s Hippy Movement either.

Andy says:

Michael and Jim, I don’t agree that Jim is correct. The only thing that is correct, is that the established view would concur with him. That doesn’t mean he’s right, it just means the majority sees it his way. So that assertion about when it came about, is debatable.

Ixtlan, the “early church fathers” sometimes contradicted one another. They are, at best, a commentary (and not good commentaries, I say that running the risk of being called a CC-kool-aid drinker). The assumption that a person just doesn’t get it until they study these things, is a false assumption.

Winston Churchill said, “History is written by the victors” (ironically, it is a debate as to whether Churchill really said that or not, which tells you how much you can trust supposed “history”). I know this will get me the “ignorant” label, but I don’t trust “history”, and I don’t believe there wasn’t anyone that taught the rapture prior to Darby and that whole story. I believe Paul taught it in 1 and 2 Thessalonians. 🙂

Xenia says:

If it’s new, it ain’t true.

Xenia says:

the “early church fathers” sometimes contradicted one another.<<<

Andy, do you know this for a fact? That is, have you read all of the ECF's, not just excerpts carefully chosen by somebody else to prove a point? They are not infallible and some are better than others but tell me, have you actually read them for yourself?

Ixtlan says:

“Ixtlan, the “early church fathers” sometimes contradicted one another. They are, at best, a commentary (and not good commentaries, I say that running the risk of being called a CC-kool-aid drinker). The assumption that a person just doesn’t get it until they study these things, is a false assumption.”

It isn’t a false assumption, but you are getting to the heart of the matter, and that is, the question of how we interpret scripture? All of us, you included read the Scriptures with presuppositions, and we all in many respects write our own commentary with our interpretations. How would we even understand these things had we not sat and listened to our pastor’s verbal commentary aka his sermon?

To be more specific in addressing your comments @103, Paul is talking about some type of rapture in 1Thessalonians 4, although he does not indicate the timing…. and I’ve studied that passage backwards and forward. As to 2Thessalonians 2, you cannot make an air-tight, exegetically sound case that Paul is talking about the rapture (v.7). That is an eisegetical reading of the text which cannot be exegetically proved. It is an educated guess that may be correct, but you cannot prove it.

Andy says:

Xenia wrote: “They are not infallible and some are better than others but tell me, have you actually read them for yourself?”

I have read some, but I suspect that I have not read them to the extent that you have. If you agree that they are not infallible, then I don’t have to run to them as a source of truth anyway. It was Ixtlan that brought them up. This is why I love to go back to the Bible. Another poster questioned my having been influenced by (admittedly) infallible CC. Then we also have to open up everyone’s having been influenced by infallible early church fathers as well.

Ricky Bobby says:

Xenia, is the earth “flat” in your world?

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

“Jim is correct…it was unheard of until the early-mid 1800′s.”

Yes, it started at the same time along with Mormonism – Jehovah’s Witnesses – Christian Science and the 7th Day Adventist.

Coincidence? I think not. Just another deranged view of scripture coming out of that time period.

Ixtlan says:

Coincidence? I think so……

In other news, did CCCM “ratify” Brodersen last night? God bless him.

It’s been fun , I gotta go to work. Thanks for conversation Andy. Blessings to all.

Andy says:

Michael wrote: “Tommy Ice tried that and ended up looking silly”

I don’t know who Tommy Ice is, but I suspect that the sources I will bring up, will likewise be called silly. 🙂 That’s why I prefer to not post them. If I wanted to post the sources, I’d post them on my own website (which I don’t have anyway), where they wouldn’t be dismissed as silly.

Ixtlan, so you have to at least agree that it is an issue of interpretation. And the seminary is just interpretation, nothing more. Your statements about 1 and 2 Thess are also interpretation, an interpretation that I do not agree with.

Ricky Bobby says:

My personal take on Jackie: She’s very passionate, very stubborn, very strong-willed, very opinionated and very sincere. She has no or little guile. She puts her cards on the table.

Now, I think she is delusional in her End Times emphasis and “I have the correct Doctrinal Purity that saves you! Believe this and be saved or you’re going to hell!”…but she’s a lot like many of us, me included, in terms of strong personality and pushing her take hard…and a more black and white less political approach to her view/belief system.

filbertz says:

MLD,
there you go again, this time guilt by association. keep it up and you’ll erode what credibility you have. Using your rationale, dispensationalists should also favor slavery, prohibiting women’s right to vote, and support placement of native populations on reservations.

Ricky Bobby says:

It’s also what I like about you X. I may disagree, but you’re a straight shooter, not a politician like Steve Wright and some of the others.

Andy says:

Ixtlan, give me an email address to send it to, and I will do what you are requesting.

Steve Wright says:

Jim, I meant to say it..but simply in the delegation/transfer sense, not in some greater to lesser sense.

Just because I can type fancy words, doesn’t mean I understand them… 🙂

Steve Wright says:

I would agree. But I don’t see a pre-trib rapture in those Old Testament prophecies either. However, there are some good reasons why they would be absent.
———————————————————
Of course not. If the Body of Christ is absent, why would the rapture be there? Of any timing…

I’ve said this many times, this is first and foremost a hermeneutical issue.

And the issue is far more ecclesiology than eschatology.

Stupar’s remarks above are excellent – in noting the difference between Bible prophecy and endtimes speculation.

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

“Stupar’s remarks above are excellent – in noting the difference between Bible prophecy and endtimes speculation.”

So, is what they do on His Channel (Don Stewart and them) and Pastor’s Perspective, is that Bible Prophecy or is it end times speculation?

Steve Wright says:

MLD playing the guilt by association card I see.

You’ve learned well here…

Scotty0 says:

Rick Bobby: You really believe that demon possession is now really just mental illness, chemical imbalance or drug use? How do “we” know that? So, should we replace everything in the Bible where Jesus cast out demons and replace that with mental illness/chemical imbalance/drug use?

I can’t fly with you on that one. If Jesus said it was a demon, it was a demon. I don’t care what modern science says. People are still getting delivered of demons (although much of the church denies it) and getting set free. It happens all the time but the church, for the most part, chooses to ignore it as some kind of fringe craziness.

covered says:

Hey James don’t flatter yourself, we are in a very small town and I believe in keeping friends close and enemies (back biters etc), closer.

Anne says:

LMAO – folks trashing hipsters is such a flashback of the old fogeys in churches trashing hippies back in the day. And the beat goes on………

babylonthegreatfallen says:

G-man strikes a chord

Mark says:

Sorry- I double posted. My machine closed out and I thought my earlier post didnt go through.

Ricky Bobby says:

I think the Emo folks with the androgynous look and piercings and skinny jeans etc are today’s “hippies”. I think “hipsters” are today’s yuppies. Just my opinion.

Ricky Bobby says:

I sure hope “God” is G and Chuck Jr’s version. Very sincerely so.

If God is like Jackie, Michael’s and CC’s and Reformed etc’s version…well, then God is a lot like I am…and we’re all screwed (or at least the vast majority of us).

Ricky Bobby says:

Me, I want to nuke my enemies, I want to torture them in hell forever, “vengeance is mine” etc etc. I don’t like to “turn the other cheek”…and I don’t like to forgive unilaterally and unconditionally. I require conditions. I require something. If you don’t agree with me, if you don’t repent in the manner I prescribe etc then you are an “enemy” to be nuked.

That is how most Selective Fundamentalists say their God is, no?

( |o )====::: says:

“But the Lord may be erasing it and writing “Well done, good and faithful servant.”

Not likely since He is the One Who gives the self-realization assignment.

Ricky Bobby says:

One big mythology expressed by Selective Fundamentalism is the different Standard presented of God in the OT and Revelation and Jesus of the Gospels.

It is evident to most outside the bubble when you take a plain read of the bible (in whatever translation you choose, with whatever Canon you choose).

There are conflicting messages. When I example the God of the OT, Revelation and much of Selective Fundamentalism, I am rebuked and called “damaged” etc…for exampling the same manner in which your God marks “enemies” and then deals with his “enemies”…

…yet, Selective Fundamentalists have no problem expressing and accepting a God who acts in the same manner as I do (in essence) when it comes to marking and treating “enemies”.

Your version of God does not unilaterally forgive, your version of God does not unconditionally forgive…he requires something for the forgiveness.

Your version of God does not “love his enemies” and does not “turn the other cheek”…he supposedly comes back on a horse with a sword and slaughters his enemies…and then he takes it a big step further and then tortures his enemies in hell forever with no end.

Seems your God is “damaged”…no?

Papias says:

For RB –

“I’ve taken my look around
And all I’ve seen leads me to believe
That if I was God,
Heaven would be nearly empty
And Hell would be overflowing.

So thank God that I’m not God,
And praise Him for being nothing like me.
I would have forsaken man.
So praise Him for being nothing like me,
‘Cause I would have let this world burn.

If I was God, I would do unto you things unthinkable,
Far beyond cruel and unusual.

So thank God that I’m not God,
And praise Him for being nothing like me.
I would have forsaken man.
So praise Him for being nothing like me.

For those who ask,
He gives His grace kindly.
His forgiveness is beyond me.
I would have let this world burn.
And even to the most perverted man,
And even to the most wretched man,
His glory and mercy is given.”

Sinai Beach – “The God I Would Be”

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

RB,
Wrong again – I find God’s actions to be consistent throughout the scriptures – from the Gospel – “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

In the end, it doesn’t matter what you feel or what you want.

( |o )====::: says:

Andy,

Um, no, because she is in complete opposition to the Jesus Christ she claims to represent, which is fine because He’s quite patient with us all as we muddle along.

I was there. I’m stating the facts that she singled out ChuckJr and Barry Taylor and picketed our church, while she also tried to cause trouble between ChuckJr and his dad, something neither of them would let her do.

She never practiced Jesus’ confrontation style of face to face then slow escalation.
Funny how you have nothing to say about that.
It’s been years and we’re all waiting for her to step up.

Read her blog, listen to her on her Internet radio program. She is a one-woman-out-of-control sad excuse for an apologist-wannabe.

Anyone who strings together the epithet “pro-calvinism-emergent is blatantly an uneducated and unsophisticated ignoramus. One cannot be “Pro-Calvinist” while being “emergent”.

Honestly, Andy, pull your head out of your backpack.
No one is denying her the right to speak.
We’re simply taking to task her Westboro Baptist style of stupidity.

Andy says:

“She never practiced Jesus’ confrontation style of face to face then slow escalation.”

I don’t know, I look through the Bible and I see Jesus lambasting the Pharisees in public in Matthew 23 (He didn’t check with them beforehand to see if it was okay with them), I see Paul naming names of false teachers in several epistles, I see John calling out a man who was abusing people in a church.

I’ll give you this… You can string together silly and ungodly insults as well as she can. You two probably have more in common with one another than you’d like to admit. At least she’s standing up for Biblical standards. I have to give her that one.

( |o )====::: says:

Biblical standards?
Horse poop.

( |o )====::: says:

Andy,
How quickly you glossed over the very clear words of Jesus on how to handle disagreements between His disciples. Are you really going to play a silly game that because He took to task the same evil practices and mindsets that Michael & Rickey Bobby have criticized that it therefore invalidates His clear teaching on how to deal with conflict?

Really?

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

RB, of course I believe in hell – but because being separated from God is likened to torture, that what people choose by sin and unbelief..

Look, wouldn’t it be just a torturous to make someone who hates God spend eternity with Him?

Andy says:

“You are acting the fool and buffoon”

See, I can take criticism, and smile about it 🙂

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

One other thing RB – God never said that he had to love his enemies, he only said he would die for his enemies – he told us to love our enemies.

Xenia says:

Mr. Toleration “All paths lead to God, just go paint a picture” is not very tolerant of opposing views, it appears. G is just as doctrinaire as the worst/best of them.

Andy says:

Xenia, yes.

Steve Wright says:

You come up with wild stuff when you exclude all of the epistles….

babylonthegreatfallen says:

Food fight!

babylonthegreatfallen says:

Lots of love for Jackie here, she doesn’t spread much herself. As for being locked in a cell in the gulag with her… gender matters aside… sounds positively purgatorial from here. Jackie hardly needs defending.

Andy says:

“Are you really going to try to tell the readers here that Jesus’ unmistakably clear teaching is mitigated and to be ignored as Jackie has done”

Ahh, now Steve’s post makes sense to me. Of course again, it’s all interpretation. If “all Scripture” doesn’t mean all Scripture, then a person has a chance to parse the Word of God that way. But ironically, “all Scripture” is found in the epistles. 😉

The words of Paul are not Paul, they’re Jesus speaking through Paul 100% as authoritative as the red letters (which also ironically, are quoted through Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John).

Xenia says:

Jackie doesn’t need to “get a pass from me” because I don’t know her side of the story. And I am not her judge. You seem to have set yourself up as her judge, however. What was that “unmistakable teaching” of Jesus? Judge not? Love your enemies?

Solomon Rodriguez says:

“I think the Emo folks with the androgynous look and piercings and skinny jeans etc are today’s “hippies”. I think “hipsters” are today’s yuppies. Just my opinion.”

I’ll buy that take

( |o )====::: says:

Xenia,
Same rationale Chuck SmithSr used when dealing with CCV & BG.

Way to go.

Let’s try this a different way.

A pastor is being accused by “Person A” of being heretical and inviting heretics to teach.

Based on what Jesus told His disciples in Matthew, would it be ideal, commendable, perhaps even advisable that “Person A” should go to the pastor 1 to one? 1 plus others to 1? The after that escalate?

In this hypothetical based completely on reality, does Jesus teach “Person A” that the best course of action is to do what He taught His disciples as recorded in the boble your church believes to be The Word of God?

Solomon Rodriguez says:

G,

Do you know whether or not Jackie tried that approach?

( |o )====::: says:

SolRod,
yes, she was encouraged to and completely avoided it

( |o )====::: says:

“The words of Paul are not Paul, they’re Jesus speaking through Paul 100% as authoritative as the red letters”

So you believe in some automatic writing approach to the scriptures, like these individuals were pretty much taken over by the Holy Spirit?

Are you sure you want to actually maintain that view of inspiration?

it’s not what the church has classically taught

Esther says:

For what it is worth:
I attend a Baptist Church in Australia.
My pastor is a Calvinist. I am not.
I love him, and I recognise Jesus in him.
He tends our Lord’s flock with care, and he feeds them the meat of the Word.
He fulfils the office he was called to, and I know beyond a shadow of doubt, that we are family.
I don’t know why the fact that he is a Calvinist doesn’t bother me, it just doesn’t.
I look forward to spending eternity with him.

Xenia says:

I am gathering from G that he believes it’s Jesus-like to call people names (fool, buffoon, sad, unsophisticated, ignoramus) on the Internet (where the whole world can read it- after all, the PhxP is in the top 250!) but just about the unpardonable sin if one protests a false teaching on the sidewalk in front of a church.

babylonthegreatfallen says:

I am thinking that

G-man is drinking
Xenia is off her meds
Andy is out on parole
Ricky Bobby just wandered in from the Burning Man gathering
Steve is nodding napping and chuckling from his study
Michael is hibernating
and I am

Left Behind Dread

Solomon Rodriguez says:

I’m at the point where if I disagree with a Church or Pastor enuff then I just leave, I ain’t trying to start a revolution. I say warn one time and if not heeded move on. I like ODM’s but some of them do beat a dead horse. I warned a couple Pastors, they didn’t heed it so I left. No biggie I ain’t gonna change them or what they teach. Don’t know the situation with Jackie but she should warn and then move on if not heeded. After that you can still warn others of false teachers and false church systems but as far as expecting Church’s to comepletely overhaul their theology is foolhardy at best.

filbertz says:

lottaheat

nottalottalight

tackylackeyfil

Ricky Bobby says:

Good and lively thread…and I haven’t been blamed for killing the blog or been moderated. Woohoo! There is a God 🙂

Derek Thornton says:

BD, you have quite a few interesting things to say.

RB is like the ringing in my ears. I only hear it when I think about it being there. 😉

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

RB, your #204 just throws together a bunch of unrelated verses and you think that makes your point.

I have often wondered why people like you have not gone out and hanged themselves. Your lovey dovey type Jesus has commanded you to do so.

Matt 27:5 – the Bible says speaking of Judas “Then he went and hanged himself”
Jesus then in Luke 10:37 said “Go and do likewise.”

What cha think?

Bob says:

Others have pointed out that Paul identified and called out false teachers and that Jesus “lambasted” the Pharisees and while I might not use the same wording I basically agree they did do these things. But, what teachings did Paul identify as false and why? What issues did Jesus bring up against the Pharisees and why?

It seems to me many are quick to point out these “revolutionary” men and their quest, but really never say what it was they opposed.

Let’s see…

Paul – A continued issue with how Jewish non-Jewish followers of Jesus were to be.
Paul – Issue with confusion about resurrection and eschatology.
Paul – If you can work you have to work.
Paul – In a Greek culture, which gender can teach.
Paul – Sexual mores for people of a Greek culture.
Paul – Safety of traveling buddies.
(Man this guy Paul, the self-proclaimed Jew amongst Jews and Pharisee of Pharisees, has a lot of controversy amongst both Jews and Greek, maybe he was a heretic.)

Jesus – Hand washings.
Jesus – Healing days.
Jesus – Selling stuff in the court of the Gentiles (where non-Jews were supposed to be able to come and worship the Jewish God).
Jesus – You’ve seen me you’ve seen God the Father.
Jesus – If you listened to Moses you would have heard of Me.
Jesus – How to live righteously (alms giving, prayer, and fasting).
Jesus – Marriage from the beginning.
Jesus – Making converts.
Jesus – Living water.
Jesus – I have to die.

I’m sure there’s more so feel free to add to the list.
But what do we really care about what they really said because it is so much simpler to say, “Jesus came down on the religious people of the day” or that “Paul warned others of false teachers.”

Bob says:

RB:

Oops there ya go again:

“If there’s one thing I know…it’s how humans tick”
“MLD, no, you have a major problem with your belief system…”
“There are clearly two different Narratives presented in the bible”
“what is self-evident in the bible…which is the “Two Gods”
“I’ve accurately expressed above.”

Are you really this arrogant in real life or is this a blog persona?”

Xenia says:

The idea that there are two God presented in the Bible is not knew. Much of Gnosticism is based on this idea as well as the fascinating heretical group, the Cathars.

Xenia says:

So, Ricky Bobby, the thing for you to do, if you are interested, is to read good old Ireneus of Lyons, who wrote many, many pages refuting this idea.

Xenia says:

I did answer your question. I said I needed to hear BOTH SIDES of the story before I could make a judgment and then I said I am not called to judge her anyway.

Bob says:

Solomon

It’s OK I’m not directing this at you but at all of us (especially me). Over the years I have found when it comes to religion and belief systems we are all immediately experts. Yes there are warnings to be made and watchers on the wall but what and who are they and is recorded in the scriptures for us to consume.

Of course I do find everyone else is wrong and I’m right!

Really I kind of think most of us are close relatives of Lamech and his poem of authority from Genesis chapter 4. Bring on the vengeance!

Ricky Bobby says:

Bob, the truth is no one knows what the heck the bible really says as much of it is paradoxical, has competing narratives, contradiction etc.

We have no one doing real miracles today to validate their Apostleship.

It’s anyone’s guess as to who has the “correct” doctrine, “correct” theology and correct formula to be officially saved, etc.

My faith is in a universally “good” and “loving” God who has free will and isn’t bound by some sort of eternal contract that he can’t overcome that says he has to torture his enemies in hell forever (most who never even had the opportunity to hear the gospel, let alone a “correct” one or didn’t get the proof they required to believe like the Apostle Thomas).

Ricky Bobby says:

Dread, you’re a pretty straight shooter when you want to be.

What’s your take? Is it “good” and “love” to send your enemies to perpetual torture?

Is the “new law” and “love your enemies…as your father in heaven is perfect”…something that only applies to humans or does it apply to God? Different Standard for one not the other?

How do you resolve this?

babylonthegreatfallen says:

Ricky Bobby,

As you might know I do not believe the Bible teaches eternal conscious torment for anyone but the devil and his angels. I believe good exegesis leads to a belief that in the end the evil are no more. And yes I believe that to be good, loving, just and merciful.

Ricky Bobby says:

I’ve read, listened to, studied these issues…obsessed over them actually. I have pried open all the major Christian* Boxes…hashed stuff out to the n’th degree. Always left with a burr under the saddle as Dread metaphorizes above.

Toss it all out. Start from square one.

What is it to be “good” and to “love”? What is the universal definition of “good” and “evil”…and “love” and “hate” etc? For every Yin there is a Yang. “Light” and “Darkness”, etc.

If God exists, if God is a real entity or force or being or essence…what would God be?

Would God be a mix of Good and Evil? Would God be a mix of Love and Hate? Light and Darkness?

If God is singular, would he/it be either one or the other? Could God be “both” Good and Evil? Love and Hate? Light and Darkness?

Humans are certainly dualistic, capable of good and evil, love and hate etc.

But, what about God?

We know in our conscience and intellect and human sensitivities what is “good” and what is “evil” generally speaking (unless one is a sociopath or has a severe retardation or other severe defect).

We know that it is universally “evil” to kill innocent women, children and infants (depending on your definition of human life and when it begins).

We know it is universally “evil” to torture someone….let alone for an eternity with no end. Even our secular courts don’t torture forever. They attempt to be humane in exacting the death penalty (though some cultures are pretty barbaric, but no one has the ability to torture a person forever…and if they did, we would certainly accept it as “evil” if they did so).

If God is not dualistic, if God is only “Love” and only “Good” and that his Justice and Holiness don’t violate his “Love” and “Goodness” and cross over into making him “Evil”…then Selective Fundamentalists have a problem with their professed Belief Systems.

One cannot resolve this issue and keep God as “Good” and “Loving” when God (assumed) is omnipotent and has Free Will and has the Power to save “all” and to redeem “all” and is not bound by some sort of internal and eternal contract that forces him to torture people in hell forever.

You are forced to either, as Piper does, say “well he’s God and can do whatever he wants, even if it is evil for us to do” or…well there really is no other “or”.

Ricky Bobby says:

Dread, thanks. I think that is possible…and keeps God “Good” and “Loving” etc…if he gives folks a second chance on the other side, once they are faced with the truth/reality…as Thomas the Apostle got what he required to believe. If a person/soul at that point still gave God the middle finger, then “poof”…OK, I don’t think that violates “Good” and “Loving”.

babylonthegreatfallen says:

http://www.amazon.com/Evangelical-Essentials-Liberal-Dialogue/dp/0830812857

Start here

( |o )====::: says:

This is the question I’m still waiting for an answer…

A pastor is being accused by “Person A” of being heretical and inviting heretics to teach.

Based on what Jesus told His disciples in Matthew, would it be ideal, commendable, perhaps even advisable that “Person A” should go to the pastor 1 to one? 1 plus others to 1? The after that escalate?

Ricky Bobby says:

“Universalist press their point on very literal meanings of words. The real meat is simply in the essence of the message that there is something from which to be saved and there is clearly something at risk to those who fail to believe.”

Fair point for many Universalist arguments I’ve reviewed. I agree, however, that “the real meaning is in the essence”…but from the position that there are some Absolutes…otherwise everything is relative. You have to have, at minimum, some things that are Absolute Truths or you have nothing to peg to. There has to be a hierarchy as most things have a Yin and Yang relationship to them. “Good” and “Evil” seems to be the biggest of those dualities..even the bible seems to loosely assert such in the Genesis narrative and elsewhere.

Essence is key. I believe God is more essence than he is jot and tittle on a written page. God is not the bible, is not the jot and tittle, never was…that is not “the Word”…the word is God’s “essence”…God is “Good”.

Ricky Bobby says:

“Hard for me to believe that martyrs die and apostles pressed forward for a universalist agenda. It just has no moral force.”

Again, God can still be “Good” and not exact vengeance on those who martyred and killed etc.

God can still be “Good” and the martyrs died and the apostles pressed forward.

God cannot be “Good” and must necessarily be “Evil” by our universal understanding of “Good” and “Evil” and their essences….if God chooses to torture his enemies in hell forever…and possibly if God chooses to zap them “poof”…but I am more open that it is possible for God to remain “Good” while saving some and simply zapping the rest vs. torturing them forever….but still a tough pill to swallow.

Ricky Bobby says:

Ya, I’ve read similar. My beef with that angle is it doesn’t acknowledge the supposed sacrifice of Jesus as the payment for sin. It does the “Limited Atonement” shuffle and asserts a dicey “well Jesus only died for the sins of the Elect” or “Jesus only died for your sins, if you believe in him (in whatever manner we say is correct) before you croak” vs. Jesus died and paid the penalty for sin.

( |o )====::: says:

“Theodicy” is a huge issue, yep.

Ricky Bobby says:

OK, I’ll read it and get back to you. Thanks Dreadly.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

RB, I just don’t understand where you ever got the idea that GOOD = No punishment.

Ricky Bobby says:

I get killing someone to protect another life. If someone is killing my wife, it is “Good” of me to stop the threat and “Evil” of me to stand by and let it happen when I have the power to stop it.

However, it serves no good purpose to torture someone in eternity or to kill them if they pose no threat to another…especially since the blood sacrifice required for mankind’s sin was supposedly paid in full on the cross.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

“However, it serves no good purpose to torture someone in eternity”

So it’s just the time period that bothers you. Torture of God’s enemies say for 1 million years is OK as long as it is not for eternity?

Xenia says:

To G, as I said (this makes three times now) whether we are talking about a real person or your hypothetical Person A, I would need to hear both sides of the story.

Xenia says:

One thing I have learned over the years: I may think I know all there is to know about a situation but that is seldom the case.

babylonthegreatfallen says:

stupid that was brilliant

brian says:

I had a long discussion concerning universalism but did not post it, I may later in this conversation. My main reason for being a universalist I do not see any other consistent understanding when considering the people I work with. I get God sending me to hell, He would be doing me and the world a favor. I got that in spades as a Christian. But I just cant think he would do that to those that I love so much. Granted that is emotional, thus useless and that is on a good day. You know when I was burned as a kid I had constant nightmares about being fried in hell, Im sure even at that young age I had it coming, but it always bothered me when applied to others. I cant express the profound effect this had on me as a person, it should not have and I get that, but it did. Add it to my many vile sins. Im still trying how to repent of being human. I call God father and I love Him, I just dont understand why He would cast me into eternal perdition I dont deny I have it coming. The fact I am human is enough reason but well no I dont get it.

I know I sound like a broken record and dont mean to, but from the cheap seats, it really does not sound like good news. I often wonder why they call it that. Want to hear something even more pathetic, I actually think it is and I hope in Him.

Ricky Bobby says:

“would it not be eternal torture to force a god hater to spend eternity with God?”

Big flaw in this one. Most of the Atheists/Agnostics I know or even Mormons (who see as being able to claim Christian* as any of the other 9,000 to 30,000 Denominations and flavors)…are really sincere. They don’t “hate” your version of god…they just don’t see things the way you do.

If they were proven wrong in the next, they’d gladly believe in your version of god and worship him or whatever is required to keep from being tortured forever or zapped or whatever.

MLD, are you asserting that God cannot save people once they die a physical death here on earth? God is limited as to what he can do? He is not truly omnipotent?

Martin Luther's disciple says:

“MLD, are you asserting that God cannot save people once they die a physical death here on earth? ”

Regardless of what God can or cannot do, the promise is that he will do exactly what he has promised to do. Read the end of Matt 25 – Jesus cannot say it more clearly – some are destined to heaven and some to hell.

You have your own spin – I will stick with Jesus … don’t take offense.

Ricky Bobby says:

“RB’s god made a rock so big RB can’t pick it up. Don’t crush that verse. Hand me the scissors.”

False analogy. Some of your other stuff has been funny. This one is pretty lame.

Ricky Bobby says:

Well, sources say BG is going on and on about “trials” and “tragedy” etc. Chuck got the cancer right after cursing me. Sharon Ries has stage 4 liver cancer and Raul is BG’s go-to guy and was on BG’s board and ignored our pleas and has helped BG with advice/lawsuit etc according to sources…and BG’s right hand man was diagnosed with some sort of potentially fatal hypertension after the lawsuit.

Now BG is going on about some sort of “trial” and “tragedy”…I wonder if it’s a health issue.

Hey, like I said, if there is a God who does intervene sometimes in situations like Ananias and Saphira and “touch not God’s anointed, do my prophet no harm” etc…then I did have this “feeling” I described when Chuck called down the curse. I felt he had called down a curse on himself and Camp BG.

It’s probably my imagination, but the coincidences keep piling up…and for a Group that touted “Touch not God’s anointed!” for so long and reads every tea leave as God acting on their behalf…you’d think they’d have a little holy fear…but nope, “just coincidence, just random chance!” when the shoe is on the other foot.

Nonnie says:

I admire Jackie’s conviction, but not her style. As Christians can we not disagree yet still pray for and want the best for others? I pray for God to bless…believer or not….because I believe God’s true blessing is that people walk in the truth of Christ. I’m messed up enough to not be trying to straighten out others.

stupid says:

How about “Touch not God’s little ones. Do the innocent no harm.” If the millstone fits- wear it. The unrepentant will get theirs, universalism notwithstanding.

Xenia says:

And regarding her picketing of G’s church, about which I know practically nothing, at least she’s up and off the computer and out doing something physical. She is more than a blog warrior.

Muff Potter says:

MLD wrote @ # 272:

Can your god make a square circle? My God cannot.

It’s as easy as pie MLD, if you know about pi.
Make your own application.

stupid says:

You can never finish baking pi. When you’ve eaten it you keep repeating …yourself.

babylonthegreatfallen says:

Xenia,

There was a different tone in you on this post. Either someone hijacked your computer or you have something going on that has riled you. Usually you have been the most pleasant Orthodox voice I have known. The other voices are often completely intolerant of diversity… like Jackie. It takes no courage to spew venom on other people. I never need courage to be unfriendly or unkind.

Michael,

Jackie unfriended me because of this thread, I looked back for evidence of why… I was pretty mild I think. Those who rant daily should expect some push back and probably should not get touchy. Saying someone is a pain in the asterisk is a bit different from announcing incessantly who God loves and hates.

I rethought my point about not sharing a gulag cell with her. It would be interesting to have her pleading my case on the grounds that she and I do not belong in the same category as people of faith.

Ricky Bobby,

Apparently from the evidence YOU are God’s anointed. So I will be nice.

Wormhead Dread

stupid says:

from= for
for him.

Steve Wright says:

She seems to have gone through and unfriended anyone she thinks may be associated with the blog.That not having the courage of her convictions, it’s cowardice birthed from ignorance.
————————————————————–
For the record….Jackie has not unfriended me, and I have certainly expressed disagreement with her before…of course I have expressed agreement with her before as well….as I have with just about everyone here.

Solomon Rodriguez says:

“And regarding her picketing of G’s church, about which I know practically nothing, at least she’s up and off the computer and out doing something physical. She is more than a blog warrior.”

Amen to that! Too nany peeps live at the fingertips and not in real life. There are a lot of Internet tuff guys

Steve Wright says:

If Jackie truly wanted to influence people for the Lord, she would maintain a relationship
——————————————————————–
Linnea, I know you are talking about the specifics of certain situation – and forgive me for using your innocent statement here to make a larger point, but I sort of wince a little at the premise.

Sometimes a relationship gets abusive and it must be ended. To try and influence someone for the Lord can be a guilt trip used on someone to keep them in that abusive relationship. Especially if others are getting some of the fallout from the abuse and chaos to their detriment.

The Lord is capable of reaching people using others besides us too.

I’ve heard this a lot over the years. People feel guilty about cutting someone loose from their life because they think that person will never connect with the Lord as they wish them to do. So they stay in the abusive relationship.

I hope that makes sense.

Ricky Bobby says:

stupid said, “What would be evil for us is holy”

Yes, some honesty…like Piper.

Yes, the bible clearly presents in part of its contradictory Narrative that “what is evil for us, is holy for God”…or one higher Standard of conduct for us…and God can do whatever evil he wants and it isn’t evil, it’s holy when he does it.

…that’s a big burr under my saddle and it doesn’t appear to be right…but that is essentially what the bible says if you take it in total and don’t spin and lie about it.

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

RB,
” the Israelites slaughtering the women, children and infants of the Amalekites…”

Why don’t you go picket a nearby synagogue tomorrow morning, and ask them why they believe in such a God – and why they daily publish those stories?

Do they allow Jews in your state? 🙂

Ricky Bobby says:

MLD said, “Why don’t you go picket a nearby synagogue tomorrow morning, and ask them why they believe in such a God – and why they daily publish those stories?”

LOL, well I love my Jewish brothers and sisters and I think it’s “evil” to want to burn down their synagogues like Luther said to do.

MLD said, “Do they allow Jews in your state?”

They sure do. We have a lot of diversity here in Ideeeho, lots of different shades of white: Jews, Mormons, Catholics, Evangelicals, Granolas, Yuppies, Rednecks, Nazi Skinheads, you name it.

Ricky Bobby says:

In the OT and NT we supposedly knew who the real Prophets and Apostles were. They did supernatural s**t, called down fire from heaven, walked on water, real stuff.

Today we have no clue (if it’s in fact real). We don’t have any Prophets that do the stuff of the OT and NT, no Apostles that do legit supernatural miracles.

What we have is a bunch of dudes from 9,000 to 30,000 different flavors of Christian* saying they’re special and they hear from God…and that what God tells them to do is the right thing, etc. They view themselves and anything they do (in general) as “Holy” b/c God is authoring it (in their deluded minds).

It’s a big part of abuse and corruption in the name of God. It removes the Absolute Truth of what is “good” and what is “evil”. If “God” told them to do it, it’s “good”…even if it’s evil.

…it’s a dangerous cult-like mindset, but it is essentially what Selective Fundamentalism teaches and believes if you peel through the layers.

Ricky Bobby says:

“Right now, flowing off of Jewish printing presses all over the world, they are printing and selling the story of their evil god and you fail to raise a concern.”

Well, it is possible they are worshipping a false image of god. He resembles nothing of the essence of Jesus of part of the Gospels…but even so, I think that if God is real and is “good” and “love” etc…then he’ll redeem the whole of his creation eventually.

Steve Wright says:

The difference is, when the distancing is based in self-righteousness, I’m not sure the Lord is pleased with it.
————————————————–
That is a good distinction. 🙂

The thing about facebook, Jackie’s or any of ours, it’s one thing to get into discussion and difference of opinion, but another thing to be insulted.

So if someone is unfriending because they don’t want to be insulted (abused) on their own page – I get that.

Ricky Bobby says:

So, MLD, you’re saying that the Jews worshipped the same God you do…before Jesus came on the scene? And, since Jesus, they worship a different God?

Jim says:

RB,

Faith is a gift that no man can steal. I really don’t understand what you’re trying to do here. You’ll never bring up a supposed gotcha that I didn’t think through thirty years ago.

Believe what you like, but your attempt to shake the faith of others is in vain.

stupid says:

Nobody takes the time to consider how it hurt God and Christ to be on that cross for us. What is that worth?

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

Perhaps it’s the troublemaker in me;
“To think that the child molester enjoys the same eternity as the faithful parent who lived sacrificially for their children says there is no justice on heaven or on earth…”

What if?? What if the child molester is repentant and the good parent is not? hmmm -I guess they still wouldn’t share the same eternity – but reversed of what you would think.

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

stupid,
“Yes, it’s the troublemaker in you. Do you believe in exorcism? What if??”

You should have seen me before the exorcism. 🙂

Martin Luther's Disciple says:

My baptism was an exorcism – it drove the devil right out of me.

stupid says:

I hope it’s not the diet of worms.

stupid says:

Start with a Erfurt salad, then on to Gotha sandwich, and a side of Eisenach toast. Finish with Imperial cake..

stupid says:

Dread hit more than 1 Homer today.

Derek Thornton says:

So much sinister spirituality going on on this blog!
Shame, shame everybody knows your name…oh wait no, cause she never named the blog. Nevermind.

Xenia has now become Xena.
Does that make her a warrior princess? Time to change that avatar.

Side note: She is really boring. Don’t know if I can suffer through this too much longer.
Oh wait, almost through anyways. Thank you, Jesus!

erunner says:

It’s odd Michael. Through all of the turmoil and the reboots of this blog it seemed you were destined to post with about 20 views each day!

You were pulling away from reporting things and were the target of a lot of mean spirited stuff.

Yet here you are smack dab in the middle of things again.

The thing I’ve taken from this blog through the years is the disdain for infighting among brothers and sisters of the faith. I loathe it.

For some you’re an easy target but I’ve seen the change in you over the years. I’m sorry others don’t know you the way some of us do.

The thing is I’m so different from you and it means nothing to me. Life is too short and precious to waste time on what some label as God’s work when He never offered a seal of approval.

To be clear this is not a shot at Jackie. Thanks for sticking around.

stupid says:

*listening* Jackie, do you have a persecution complex? Just curious. What you describe isn’t what happened here today and yesterday. To say you oversimplify would be understating you.

I agree that Jesus died for the whole world. (Looking for something to agree with Jackie on.)

Many stripes here but not every stripe. I’m not Calvinist or emergent. Sola scriptura. God-breathed. Not barbaric. I don’t deny the gifts.

Not sinister, just an open forum (without old weird Harold). Not ecumenical. No way.

I don’t believe the rapture is heresy but some misinterpret it.

Villianize is working both ways tonight. Sweeping generalizations…

What’s wrong with McCarthyism? I liked Charley McCarthy. I’m sure he wasn’t a communist.

Starting to sound like TBN.

Jackie- I don’t know you. I don’t judge you at all.

babylonthegreatfallen says:

I got a lobotomy and came back.

Just Need Love Dread

brian says:

LOL I am glad I have made it to the A team, and mind you the only one mentioned by name, yes it is my real name (takes a bow then flagellates (there is a pun there) himself for being proud metaphorically speaking. Also me and mld being singled out, talk about pulling from different teams. Oh Jackie I was not even talking about you, it was one of my norman, hopefully to end rants about hell.

They come out when I find a new box of pictures I need to get rid of because I most likely will have to move when I lose the house I actually paid off. Long story. So yes when I see the many memories I spout off, it is a very raw nerve.

Channelling my inner passive aggressive here, sorry Jackie if I hurt your feelings. What I dont get Jackie is you say you are not a Protestant, Catholic EO or what ever but you are part of the “remnant” church? Given what you say on your podcast about people castigating you about your beliefs is it not strange that you basically castigate 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of all other Christians?

ps do you have irony meter insurance, thanks. Must be nice to be so sure, God I pray I never am.

Xenia says:

Derek, that’s a Roman Catholic painting, portraying their idea of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I think, recalling the prophecy of Simeon when he said that her heart would be pierced with sorrows.

brian says:

Yes Xenia I do believe this is true.

Derek Thornton says:

It was an antique mall, but not Peter the Great kind of antique. 🙂
May have been Russian Catholic, cause I would say nothing in the booth was older than at least the 1960’s to the 1980’s.
Still wish I had picked up a Soviet medal with the hammer and sickle and CCCP on it though.

brian says:

MLD you and me are on the same list. Actually MLD you make me think and give a good kick in the pants at times, I may not agree with you but I am thankful for your input. I hope you and your family have a blessed weekend, and Lords day.

stupid says:

Jackie, whoever she is, got her 15 minutes of fame here, and brian and Xena, Orthodox warrior princess got their 15 minutes of fame somewhere on the radio. Isn’t that special!

Ricky Bobby says:

My current Belief is that the probability is greater that a God exists, some higher intelligence, a Creator…but we have no real clue about much else and appeal to the jot and tittle of the bible as “this is God!” is a fool’s game…as evidenced by the broad disagreement on many many issues and the inconsistencies, contradictions, incongruity that is self-evident in the texts.

I hope in a Jesus…I’m not sure which Jesus…b/c all of you and many others present so many different ones (if the logic holds that the Jews worship a “different” God and that Mormons worship a “different” God, etc…then I have to assume that any difference in “your” version of Jesus as a Lutheran or Catholic or Calvary Chapel or Calvinist or any of the other 9,000 to 30,000 flavors of Jesus…is a “different” Jesus/God as well).

The direct commands and actions attributed to “God” in the bible that include many universally “evil” things…if you and I do them…is testament to the fact there is a major Problem in the Selective Fundamentalist Thesis.

We are forced to redefine and Relativize completely the meanings of “good” and “evil” which has serious Philosophical implications that aren’t good (Determinism/Fatalism is one such bad outcome, another is that God is not truly “good” and that’s a frightening outcome)….or we are forced to rethink our Selective Fundamentalist Belief System and show a little humility and acknowledge there’s a big Problem that we can’t resolve, other than to let go of a “Jot and Tittle of the Bible is God!” mythology and move far more Liberal in our Christianity*.

You have the ability to know and to judge “Good” and “Evil”. I believe that the bible imparts some Truths, I don’t believe it authored those truths, I believe it reported those Truths in many areas. The Metaphor that humans “ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil” is the human expression and acknowledgment that we have a Conscience and we know (generally, generalizing here) what is “Good” and what is “Evil” in most cases.

We know Slavery, Concubines (sex slaves), Executing Children and Infants, Beating your Child with a “rod” and leaving “stripes” which are bloody bruised wounds, torturing someone forever, etc are “Evil” and not “Good”. The go-to “well God only PERMITTED those things” is an intellectually dishonest assertion when the text clearly states that God “commanded” those things through Law and fiat by what we are told is his Prophets speaking on his behalf, so that explanation doesn’t hold.

This Truth expressed above makes God either a mix of Good and Evil, like we are…and then we truly are made “in God’s image”….or the bible is much more mankind’s working through the Concept of God (from the Hebrew/Israelite perspective) and full of man mixed with God and thus the “Evil” we find that is self-evident in the texts. God being Evil is then a function of Man imposing on God his own characteristics, desires, emotions, flawed view of morality, flawed view of Right and Wrong, Good and Evil at that Stage of Human Development.

The Truth lies somewhere between Evolution/Science/Reason and God/Spirit.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

RB, to your #360,
“My Agenda is to filter out b.s. from Truth.” – I believe you here 100% – however, you have clung to the BS and tossed the Truth. Your self characterization is so cartoonish. You are like the cartoon character who pulls the pin on a grenade, throws the pin and is left holding the live grenade.

I think I read this quote once in a Waco TX newspaper 20 yrs ago “I see it clearly, b/c my brain is wired that way.” – David Koresh

Ricky Bobby says:

MLD, my comment is in the context of Logic/Reason applied to particular Premises/Theses/Positions. Koresh believed he heard special for God, like CC pastors and others in Christianity*. I simply apply Logic/Reason to everyone’s Belief System, even Atheists…and find the flaws and illogic.

Ricky Bobby says:

Hmm, well I must not be “Ecumenical” b/c I don’t really want everyone to get along and hold hands and sing kumbaya and sing from the same song sheet. I think it’s fine that everyone pretty much believes what they want. I think Jackie has as much right and probably as much responsibility to go with her Conscience and continue in her delusion as MLD or Michael or CC or anyone else does….as long as they don’t abuse and hurt people with Cult-Like stuff or go Taliban and Jihad.

I just acknowledge that there is a high probability that Jackie and pretty much all of you who hold such a certain Position that is based on Jot and Tittle Perfect Bible are out to lunch and don’t really know much of anything…but knock yourself out. It is quite entertaining most of the time.

Ricky Bobby says:

Woohoo! One of my comments got on the Jackie Show!!!! 🙂

Jim says:

RB,

I have what is probably a hyper-something view on God’s sovereignty, and use the word “allow” when I’m speaking someone else’s language or just being gentle. My God can do whatever He wants, because He alone knows everything. A lot of people pray “God use me”, but no one wants to be Job.

I believe God broke my neck 27 years ago and ordained a life of pain for me. It’s not the worst of my ‘problems”. I don’t need to understand why, and my head would have exploded if God would have answered many of the questions I used to ask.

Bottom line, He gets to be God, and we don’t. If you want Santa Clause to be your God, go for it.

Doctrinal debate is one thing, and most of us have heard it all before, but I honestly think that you willfully insult your maker and my God, and I find it offensive.

I’m sorry bro, because I like you a lot, but I really wish you’d cut the crap. As I said before, my faith is unshakable, because it’s a gift. When you drift away from doctrine and start questioning the character of God, I sometimes think, “dude, just shut the hell up”.

I won’t question your motives, but I don’t understand your gig at all because I firmly believe that you have received the same gift of faith. You’re a believer, so….believe.

Again, I’m sorry for the harsh words, but I need to get this off of my chest.

Ricky Bobby says:

“I don’t like to be judged by what other people say”–Jackie Alnor

Yet, she is judging Michael for what others say on his blog (partly, it was a big part of her deal).

Ricky Bobby says:

Jim, I completely understand those sentiments…and I was once a hyper-calvinist, Double-predestination, Determinist/Fatalist the whole 9 yards…heck 5 pointer? I was a 9 pointer LOL.

I am sincerely unsure. Dread said it best, I have a burr under my saddle. I am compelled to question and to test and I believe there may be some truth to “work out your own salvation” if that is in fact a true dynamic.

I would love for some real sort of supernatural manifestation like Thomas the Apostle got…but instead I have the flustercluck that is the 9,000 to 30,000 flavors of “this is the right way!” Christianity and then all the other religions and philosophical belief systems etc.

Unfortunately, I can’t turn off my brain and just claim one and blindly swallow it.

I do believe in God (in whatever form) and I hope in a Good and Loving God and on faith I believe in Jesus (though I’m not sure who has the “correct Jesus” as there are differences in every Jesus presented by Christians*).

Ricky Bobby says:

MLD asked, ““is executing all the women, children and infants” always Evil?”

In the context presented in the Old Testament Amalekite example where the Israelites were commanded by God (it is assumed) through their Prophet to not just conquer the Amalekite people but to commit Genocide, then yes, I think that is always Evil.

I think Genocide and wiping out a whole people is Evil, even when you’ve conquered them already and are no longer under any direct threat…. do you disagree?

Ricky Bobby says:

Jim, how do you know you are not actually besmirching the “character of God” by saying God commits Evil?

Martin Luther's disciple says:

When we dropped the bomb on Japan we had taken great consideration that all women, children and infants would die – and we did it anyway. Good? Evil? I think neither.

But we were going to win the war – it was just a matter of time. So the question was do we let them kill 1 million more of our people while we wrap it up or do we just do it and get it over with?

Both situations were war.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

RB. you talk about how your brain is wired – how did you come up with this?

“MLD, you stated earlier that you don’t worship the same God that the Jews do, since Jesus came on the scene.”

That is not even close to what I said. Replying to your question, I said that “Jews today and me do not believe in the same God.”

I believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit who are the God of the Bible … well to be technical they are the God of everything and we read about them in the Bible. I said nothing about “when Jesus came on the scene” – and in fact said that the Jews have not believed in the God of the Bible since the captivity.

So, that is the God I believe in. make your own application.

Jim says:

My answer to most “why did God?” questions is, “I have no idea”, so RB and I won’t be having a RB/MLD dialog.

Xenia says:

Did you all not hear the beginning of her radio talk where she clearly said she believes people in all kinds of churches will go to heaven? Curious that you would selectively choose not to hear or remember this part of her talk.

Andy says:

Michael wrote: “The reason that places like CCBC use Reformed textbooks is that there is a a dearth of scholarship in their own camp.”

So being in-development “reformed” automatically makes it “scholarship”???

I’ll stop there, since you were polite with me, I’ll return the favor. 🙂

At least I do understand now why the Lord stopped me from going to CCBC years ago when I so desperately wanted to. I don’t agree with the reformed positions, and I would have been trying to get a refund from CCBC if I had ended up getting those positions in any class. A refund that we know would never have been given.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

Xenia,
She may have said it, but one time, either here or on FB she made it clear that if you did not believe in the rapture, you could not go to heaven. She did not mince words.

So, perhaps a Calvinist can get in on a visitor’s pass, but not us, the heaven sign read “Amillers Not Welcome.”

Ricky Bobby says:

Personally, I’ve got zero beef with Jackie holding firm positions, expressing her take (Free Speech, as long as it doesn’t incite violence) and responding to criticism.

I just wish she’d engage her critics and hash it out. But, that’s hard to do for most Gurus. I think they are afraid that their Faithful Followers will see them undressed.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

Like RB, I have never had a problem with Jackie. We differ, but I differ with a lot of people in life and still get along and live life together.

To be clear, Jackie is the typical pre mill – dispensationalist – rapture theology believer. I have never met one that does not believe and say exactly what she says – so it’s not her but the bad theology.

I could and would do coffee with her anytime. 🙂

Ricky Bobby says:

MLD said, “When we dropped the bomb on Japan we had taken great consideration that all women, children and infants would die – and we did it anyway. Good? Evil? I think neither.

But we were going to win the war – it was just a matter of time. So the question was do we let them kill 1 million more of our people while we wrap it up or do we just do it and get it over with?

Both situations were war.”

False Analogy.

God, supposedly, did not tell the Israelites to just take out a small portion of the Amalekite People to stop further bloodshed and bring an end to the war…God supposedly told the Isrealites to commit Genocide and wipe them all from the face of the planet.

Big difference and not equivalent.

stupider says:

atupid (or stupid?) thank you for the compliment, in think. 😉
I’m not from Jersey…are you stupid?…or atupid?

Hank is a caricature of Maritn.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

You should be glad that you have the luxury to go to Gods R Us and pick one from the shelf.

Ricky Bobby says:

Bob, so your position is that “God” commanded the Israelites to commit Genocide, but b/c they disobeyed and didn’t do it (and then God killed some of them for not obeying the command to commit Genocide) then that makes it okey dokey and not evil?

…that’s an interesting position. Yikes.

The ‘bible’ says that God punished Saul and the Israelites for not following all the way through on the Genocide.

16 And Samuel said, “Why then do you ask me, since the Lord has turned from you and become your enemy? 17 The Lord has done to you as he spoke by me, for the Lord has torn the kingdom out of your hand and given it to your neighbor, David. 18 Because you did not obey the voice of the Lord and did not carry out his fierce wrath against Amalek, therefore the Lord has done this thing to you this day. 19 Moreover, the Lord will give Israel also with you into the hand of the Philistines, and tomorrow you and your sons shall be with me. The Lord will give the army of Israel also into the hand of the Philistines.”

Seems odd to me:

God: “Commit Genocide! Do this in my name!”

Saul: “Um, we mostly killed them”

God: “You didn’t kill every last one of them like I told you to you disobedient King, so you’re now my enemy and I’m going to punish you harshly”

…and, Bob, you seem to assert this lets your version of God off the hook. Pretty dicey.

Bob says:

RB:

Let’s see…. hmmmm did I say this?

“Bob, so your position is that “God” commanded the Israelites to commit Genocide, but b/c they disobeyed and didn’t do it (and then God killed some of them for not obeying the command to commit Genocide) then that makes it okey dokey and not evil? ”

Dude one of your problems (beside your great overwhelming arrogance and false sense of superiority) is you write junk like this.

You still think the bible is a book full of rules and that by breaking any of those rules one gets sent to hell. Well buddy old boy, of superior whit and wisdom, you really need to start reading a bit more and expand your library. I might also remind you there is only one Jesus just like there is one AG (in spite of RB).

But you could be possessed I guess (if you believe in such a thing) and your head actual spins around and vomits Starbucks Lattes.

BTW I don’t have a version of God because I am unable to do make God in any image.

What I do have is a view of humanity, which the bible clearly speaks of from the begging to the end.

And what does it mean to be made in the image of God? You seem to be a bit confused, so I guess God, or is it god, is also confused.

So you clearly believe you know what God said to Saul, what do you think He would have said to you?

Let me ask you this:

“How many trees make up a forest?”
“If you don’t know the answer then how do you know it’s a forest?”

An old Rabbinical saying has something to do with “hearing and hear, and seeing and seeing.” (PS it’s very ancient Hebrew to have a lot of “ands”).

You’re and expert of superior intelligence and brain power which is wired correctly (as you’ve told all of your readers many time) you’ll figure it out.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

RB,
I only know of God by what has been revealed in the Bible.

But anything you claim to know about 99% of the stuff you know, comes from 2nd hand knowledge also.Probably 100% of your claims of science etc, you have zero first hand knowledge and it probably comes from books that have been rewritten, revised, translated and re-translated – well, if you were a real student. So I am sure that all your knowledge comes from Google and Wikipedia.

Bob says:

RB

You must not be as smart as you think or you would get it. The subject isn’t your question at all and when ever you ask anything it isn’t about any of those questions either.

Of course riddles are for the riddler and not those hear them at all.

Captain Kevin says:

417 comments?!! Oh, Jackie!!!

Ricky Bobby says:

Samuel be like: “Saul you need to murder all the women, children, infants and animals of the whole Amalek People! God TOLD me!!!! Do it or else!”

Saul be like: “Um, I’ll kill most of them, but I’m gonna spare a few”

Samuel be like: “You sinned against God and now your’e an enemy of God! You shoulda killed all the babies!!!!”

MLD be like: “Genocide is good if God does it, bible says so! You can’t prove it’s always evil!”

Ricky Bobby be like: “Well, in my world, Genocide is always evil, gee I hope you don’t get power and be like ‘God told me to kill all you infidels! and go Taliban on us”

God be like: “Don’t blame that barbaric s**t on me! Samuel was smoking ancient crack and was talking out his arse”

Derek Thornton says:

Oh snap!

Ricky Bobby says:

MLD, hardly.

The definition of Evil is pretty simple, the opposite of Good.

As to “guns”…they are inanimate objects, they are not actions or behaviors. Guns can be used for “good” or “evil”…they are not inherently good or evil.

Ricky Bobby says:

Now, MLD, your interpretation of the bible in its contradictory and errant-ness says in one breath that objects/things/beings are “good”…then it calls them “evil” later on.

Genesis: God calls his creation “good”

Genesis: God calls his creation “evil” and wishes he’d have never created man.

Ricky Bobby says:

…this line of questioning always illustrates and calls out some other whacky contradictions in your Belief System.

Ricky Bobby says:

I’m done for the night, sorry for all the posts. It’s nothing more than it takes back-and-forth to really hash out issues and I’m not trying to “dominate”…I’m trying to explain why I believe what I believe and support my claims.

Thanks for the discussion MLD. Have a good evening sir.

Derek Thornton says:

Honestly, I used to have a shallow understanding of technology like RB.
This book will truly make you think.

Bob says:

PS to RB

If evil was as simple as the opposite of good then human life would be swell.

The intent behind much of your postings could be described by many as “evil” and yet not one hair on animals head was harmed in them.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

RB,
“MLD, was man created “evil” or created “good” according to the bible you claim as inerrant?”

Before I answer, let me just say you never accept an answer and just move on. But the answer to this should stop you questioning in it’s tracks.

When God made Adam it was good – in fact he said very good. After that his creation was not so good – so he described it differently. There is no contradiction, no misplaced terms. The circumstances changed.

So you are still wrong. The score The Bible 100 – RB 0

Bob says:

MLD wow I agree 100% with your last post about RB. Does that make me Lutheran? 🙂

Jim says:

Guns can be used for very good or very evil purposes. Guys like RB serve society by selling guns to law abiding citizens, all of whom have to pass a background check.

Comparisons to heroin or porn are ludicrous.

Steve Wright says:

Jim, I am arguing on his turf – I am not against guns in any way. That turf being that inanimate objects are morally neutral. Thus my comparison to other sorts of inanimate objects. .

Just because you or RB (or me for that matter) say guns can be used for “good” – does not negate that there are many people who don’t believe that. So who has a moral standing? RB is tossing around words of moral value, but on what basis other than his own opinions?

Most of the good guns do is to counter the guns held by the bad guys. So if they were all gone, then self-defense would be practiced in another way, right? And that’s why so many people want to outlaw them all – not just ownership but production.

I am not one of those people.

Jim says:

I don’t believe guns are morally neutral. I believe gun ownership is either very good or very bad, depending on the owner. Heroin may have at one time been in the same category, but no longer qualifies (I don’t know anything about the history of heroin). Morphine is certainly certainly in the same category. Porn is pure evil.

Martin Luther's disciple says:

When I brought up the ‘guns are evil’ in my #420 – I was making a joke to counter what RB was saying. Guns are like hurricanes – they can cause damage but they are morally neutral

Derek Thornton says:

I realized you were joking, but…

The “guns are morally neutral” argument always seems to imply that it is only the acts of the person behind the technology that matters.
All technology, from a shovel to a gun to a computer affects, shapes and ultimately changes us by its use.
This is a dangerous way to view technology, because then we tend to overlook the effects the technology has on us.

Again the book says it better:

“When technology has distracted us to the point that we no longer examine it, it gains the greatest opportunity to enslave us.”
and
“Technology, then, is the means by which we transform the world as it is into the world that we desire. What we often fail to notice is that it is not only the world that gets transformed by technology. We, too, are transformed.”

Derek Thornton says:

RB said:
“As to “guns”…they are inanimate objects, they are not actions or behaviors. Guns can be used for “good” or “evil”…they are not inherently good or evil.”

True in part. They are not actions or behaviors.
But, they can be the cause of actions or behaviors.
This is why this argument is far too simple.

stupid says:

Guns kill people. Guns also save people. A gun in the hand of a killer can kill a room full but another gun in that room can kill the killer and save lives. Thieves don’t break in homes if they think there’s a gun inside. Even stupid knows this.

not stupid this time says:

Blessed are the brians for there’s is the kingdom of heaven.

Ricky Bobby says:

“MLD wow I agree 100% with your last post about RB. Does that make me Lutheran?”

Nope, just makes you about on par with MLD, which I wouldn’t get too excited about LOL…and I agree you are similar to him in how you process things intellectually (probably not something I’d wear proudly 😉 )

Ricky Bobby says:

It’s now Sunday, so I followed through on my promise above LOL. There will be a lot of consecutive comments b/c a lot of folks chimed in and I want to respond to each b/c these are important issues IMO and they give me a good opportunity to contrast our Views and Belief Systems and I think we all benefit when our Belief Systems are tested and challenged…mine included. That and not many are on here right now so it’ll be a bunch of Ricky Bobby in the sidebar. I’ll try to do it in bigger chunks vs. breaking it up so much since that seems to ruffle feathers with number of posts.

1. Derek’s book he appeals to about Technology is a classic Luddite argument and has been debunked many times over. Research Luddite and Neo-Luddite. Pretty weak stuff and riddled with logical fallacy. Rather than posting a long argument that debunks it, I trust an interested party can quickly see the flaws in this one…which is why the Position is so broadly panned in favor of new Technology. Inanimate objects are not good or evil, it is the people behind them. A rock is not good or evil. Putting a rock in a sling shot is not good or evil. Using the slingshot to kill someone in cold blood is evil.

Rocks have been used by throughout history, even today, to execute/kill people (stoning).

I have Rocks in my garden and all over my yard. OMG, I’m surrounded by EVIL!!!! It has changed the dynamics of my home! I need to get rid of all the Rocks!!!!!!

Derek responded to my comment that guns are not inherently good or evil here:

“True in part. They are not actions or behaviors.
But, they can be the cause of actions or behaviors.
This is why this argument is far too simple.”

No, objects do not “cause” actions or behaviors…internal motivations and “evil” desires cause them…which is, ironically, something that Atheists deny…and I point out…which is a strong argument against Strong Atheism that denies there is such a thing as Evil in men.

A Nuclear Bomb is not inherently Evil unless it is used (in many contexts)…no more Evil than a large pile of rocks capable of killing a bunch of humans in the hands of other humans…or a match that is capable of lighting a fire and destroying homes and killing a bunch of folks in wildfires etc.

Technology may increase the efficiency of Evil acts, but Technology is not inherently evil. Cain had no problem committing Evil without Technology according to your own bible allegory.

2. Bob said, “MLD I think you nailed it with this, “your bible…”. and your comment about RB and atheist. What you missed is to ask, which bible he uses?

RB is a really messed up person. He can justify almost anything he writes.”

Bob, “which bible” is quite a conundrum as there are so many versions of it and several Canons. I generally read the ESV or NIV or King James (I like the King James sometimes b/c it is hilarious: “privy member” instead of male sex organ and “begat” or “knew” instead of sexual intercourse etc. The KJV comes up with some pretty funny ways of describing things.

I’m not an Atheist. I argue with Atheists all the time. I think they have an improper Belief System and World View. They assert the nearly certain (and sometimes certain) belief that God does not exist in any form. That there is no supernatural. Only what we can observe with our sense is real and true etc. I don’t believe this to be philosophically logical or correct.

As to being a “messed up person” well, I’ve been called that before. “Damaged”, “messed up”, “crazy”, “mentally unhealthy” etc. I’ve been evaluated and while there is some degree of truth to the ongoing effects of the child abuse, I think your comments are typical of those who can’t deal with the arguments so they resort to name-calling in their frustration and inability to overcome the objections. I am no more “messed up” than anyone else…and, if pressed, you would end up acknowledging that your Belief System says you are “messed up” too which is why you’d claim you need to walk forward at an altar call or get baptized as a baby or something similar.

Bob said, “If evil was as simple as the opposite of good then human life would be swell.”

Evil is the Yang to the Good Yen. They are polar opposites in most Belief Systems…even according to the bible you claim as authoritative. Atheists assert what you stated as well. Atheists say that Evil doesn’t exist and that Good doesn’t exist. That it’s all a function that is relative to a particular culture or society and that Good and Evil are purely psychological constructs of mankind and that Good and Evil do not exist outside of man’s own mind and that the concepts of Good and Evil are Evolutionary phenomena in human social development and psychology.

Bob, are you an Atheist? Do you deny the existence of Good and Evil? Are there ‘forces’ at work in men or is it just our imagination and nothing is really Good or Evil?

3. Steve Wright’s stuff:

Steve says: “Isn’t heroin an inanimate object that one could use for a good purpose on occasion. Why not sell it then if it’s all just morally neutral?”

Ricky Bobby says: Heroin is morally neutral, though the intent of manufacturing it from the poppy flower is generally for Evil purposes. Heroin, however, is not inherently Evil anymore than naturally occurring things like Coca leaves or Marijuana leaves or Fermented grapes etc.

Steve says: “How about p-rnographic movies created by consenting adults? Morally neutral?”

RB says: Now we’re crossing into human behavior and morals/ethics and away from inanimate objects like Rocks, Guns, Poppy Flowers, Coca leaves, Hydrogen Atoms etc.

Apples and Oranges.

P-rnography is a function of human behavior and is not an inanimate object. P0rn is very ‘animate’ LOL.

Morality/Ethics are defined by Conscience and the Consensus of Cultures. Again, my assertion is that Right and Wrong and Good and Evil are a function of Conscience and Reason and Consensus applied to actions and behaviors from animate sentient beings.

God is sentient according to you, “he” is a living animate being according to you…Beings are capable of Good and Evil, not inanimate objects. Actions and behaviors are “Good” and “Evil” not the inanimate objects used in those actions and behaviors.

A rock is not “Good” or “Evil”. If God tells you to take the rock and kill someone in cold blood…that is universally “Evil” according to Conscience/Reason/Consensus…yet you and MLD seem to state that it is “Good” if God told you to do it.

brian says:

and old adage I often hold to From your mouth to God’s ear. In a old hippy phrase Keep the faith. Take care.

brian says:

A rather simple response, the enlightenment was a desperate attempt to stop the wars of religion and politics where the armies of true believers marched over the graves of their own fathers. Our founding fathers were not perfect at all, but they did not want a Europe 2.0. They wanted a land that maybe held a hope apart from divine fiat. Good on them, any group that claims supremacy in morality or truth should be well. Repented of. Some of our “founding fathers” were nutcases, and some were deists and many were Christian, but they did not want a theocracy. Maybe that is good, maybe not. I dont know theocracies and divine right of kings has a rather miserable track record. Actually they have a pathetic record.

When they signed onto We the People they hoped to drive a death nail into the heart of divine fiat outside of the individual soul. In every single contact Jesus had with others it was personal, one to one, not kingdom nor national. It was personal. You would thing they would have gotten that. Again offered for what its worth.

Ricky Bobby says:

brian, well said above. I very much agree.

Ricky Bobby says:

Steve said, “Just because you or RB (or me for that matter) say guns can be used for “good” – does not negate that there are many people who don’t believe that. So who has a moral standing? RB is tossing around words of moral value, but on what basis other than his own opinions?”

Yes, correct, many people disagree with the “guns are inanimate objects and amoral” argument.

No one “has the Moral standing”….that is part of my thesis. It is up to Conscience/Reason/Consensus.

Consensus Principle rules the day in practical terms in an open and free society…something our Founding Fathers recognized.

Morals and Ethics “change” depending on Culture and Cultural Context. The bible asserted that it was one time “Good” to do very barbaric and “Evil” things…and now it’s no longer “Good” today.

Again, you and MLD and the others are only affirming my Argument more and more about the Bible as “Not” Absolute and not to be the Jot and Tittle God and Jot and Tittle definer and Absolute with regards to Morality/Ethics and Right/Wrong and Good/Evil.

The bible does not provide an Absolute with regard to “moral standing” or it would have been consistent from Old Testament barbarism and smite thine enemy to part of the New Testament Narrative which says not to smite thine enemy but to “Love” thine enemy etc.

The bible presents competing narratives and Relativizes morality depending on which passage you read.

If you read the passage that commands the Israelites to commit Genocide and it is “Good” since God told them to do it…then that sets one Moral Standard.

When you later read that Jesus said there’s a “New Law”…”Love your enemies” which implies don’t commit Genocide, it’s now Evil…then you have a different Moral Standard.

Two Moral Standards, same bible.

J.U. says:

This has been one of the best threads on PxP in a long time. It has plenty of conflict, but some light comes from the friction. Maybe a lot of smoke, but some light.

Brian, I used to consider a lot of what you wrote repetitious. Interesting, but you were a bit of a stuck record. I think you’ve added a lot of new thoughts to your recent posts, and I really enjoy your point of view and conclusions.

RB, You continue to fight the good fight with logic and facts. I often don’t agree, but you do use logic and facts to make your points. I think you’ve made a boogeyman out of Steve and hold him up to all your ridicule and distaste for CC. I think you’re smart enough to realize that. Some times that obvious prejudice blurs your message. I tend to ignore all your responses to Steve for that reason. I assume you recognize that Steve does try hard to meet with you and to argue your points in a fair and intellectual way. I personally hate ad hominem arguments. You know better, yet you often indulge. Your comments to MLD are much more of a playful or comical way. You should consider that many of your arguments against Steve go beyond the intellectual point and simply mirror your feelings about CC.

Personally, I know nothing about CC. Never attended. But I don’t like to see ALL Republicans or ALL Democrats or ALL CCers painted with the same broad brush.

Again, a really great thread that did show we don’t have to all sing Kumbaya to have a decent discussion.

J.U. says:

It is such a beautiful day here. The sun is shining (as is the “son”), and I think I might walk downtown. Before I go, I had a couple more thoughts to share.

First, regarding Jackie Oh and the discussions and disagreements on this web site and this thread, I’m reminded of the description of conflicts and politics at the university. Some say that the politics is so intense and nasty precisely because the subject is so trivial.

Contrast that with the importance of a Christian discussion. Most do not feel it is trivial at all. One aspect most all Christians share in common is a belief in an immortal soul and an afterlife. Heaven is a common belief from the RCC to Evangelical to even many “cults.” Perhaps not every Christian believes in hell as an eternal torment, but most all believe in heaven as an eternal reward.

That’s even at the crux of the Universalism vs. Chosen Few discussion.

That is part of the motivation for Jackie Oh and for Ricky B.., as well as Steve Wright and Dread and MLD and on and on and on. This IS a serious discussion with very serious consequences.

Again, I think this thread has been productive in that very important discussion.

Jim says:

JU,

I blame the booze. Prohibition didn’t work, and the 2A isn’t going away. Freedom is dangerous.

I think those who are opposed to gun rights for law abiding citizens should move to safe, restrictive environments, like Chicago.

J.U. says:

The high murder rate in cities and states with very restrictive gun laws is a fact that shoulod be included in any discussion on limiting gun rights. You are correct. Another silly, simple statement is true: “When guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns.”

That’s why I’m neutral on the debate. I personally don’t like guns. But I also see the limits to gun regulation and the second amendment. The problem is “gun violence” and the word to focus on is “violence,” not “gun.” If we could only legislate “niceness.”

Yet that is also the subject of conversation on this web site: “Christian Love” vs. “violence.”

Ricky Bobby says:

J.U. says:
November 17, 2013 at 8:40 am:

I think you’re right and that is a remarkably fair and accurate assessment IMO. I think your critiques of me are valid and reasonable as well as your positive observations.

Jackie says:

Hey guys – This thread is pretty full – why not take your guns and annihilations over to the open blogging thread and end all this useless wrangling? – what does any of that have to do with the guileless woman of God Jackie?

Ricky Bobby says:

Muff, LOL! Yes, “roosters”, “donkeys” LOL, not what the bible says literally in the KJV! They’ve added to the bible and are in danger of the Judgment!!! 🙂

Jim says:

I guess if my name was in a post, I’d want all the comments to be about me, because blog threads always stay on topic.

Ricky Bobby says:

I don’t think it is “guile”…I think it’s laziness and partly fear…not just Jackie, but most religious gurus…and even you to some degree.

Bob says:

“I challenge mine all the time and take on all comers, Atheists and Fundamentalist Christians*…and I’m able to defend my Belief System quite soundly no matter the Group or individual and when I am shown to be wrong from a philosophical logic perspective or shown to be incorrect regarding a point of fact, I make the adjustment.”

Wow – tells all!

Bobi says:

Oh well HTML won’t format

1 – I
2 – mine
3 – I’m
4 – my
5 – I
6 – I

Word count approx 57, so about 10% of the words mention I and the rest are all about how great I is. Wheww!

Ricky Bobby says:

MLD said:

1.) made up your own god and admit it

Nope. I don’t claim to know all the particulars of God with certainty like you say you do…but is contradicted by the same book you appeal to and the fact that 9,000 to 30,000 other Christian* denominations disagree with you on many issues of your version of God is quite telling.

2.) Believe nothing for sure

I believe in Gravity. I believe in Math. I believe that the computer I am typing on is real. I believe that when I am hungry, that eating will likely satiate my hunger. I believe that Genocide is morally wrong, as well as executing children with stones for being rebellious. I believe that “love thy neighbor” is good as well as helping the orphan and widow. I believe there is a higher probability that God exists in some form than that he doesn’t.

3.) Tell others they can know nothing for sure

False. You can know lots of things for certain or nearly certain.

4.) But still be able to tell everyone, regardless what they believe, that you are right and they are wrong.

False. I believe that my Belief System is much more logically sound than yours and I am able to demonstrate such…while you contradict yourself all the time and have a very shoddy track record when it comes to logic and reason and supporting your claims.

5.) Have pronounced that you are the smartest man in the world.

Nope. Not nearly. Smarter than you maybe, but not a Rowan Williams or a Richard Dawkins etc.

6.) and no one can process thought like you.

Plenty can and do, they tend to be higher up the IQ ladder and more liberal in their theology in general…but there are many exceptions.

Ricky Bobby says:

Bob, whatevs, I think you’re pretty funny actually…not very bright, but pretty funny.

Xenia says:

“If” logic is the transcendental rule that governs heaven, RB would be correct.

But since God transcends logic (which is only a tool [training wheels] to help us puny humans think), then RB would be mistaken.

Logic is a useful tool when you are tying to figure out what kind of car to buy. It is woefully inadequate concerning the things of God.

John Schmidt says:

I remember Ms. JA and a friend at Capo Beach, standing on the sidewalk, trying to hand everyone who drove out the driveway one of her flyers. Something about apostasy and candles. I will forever be grateful that the fine folks down there took me in as a temporary visitor after my own CCCM misadventures (hi Mr. G!). I should go down and visit some time.

By the way, does anyone remember a KWVE radio program, I’m pretty sure it was in 2005, where two guys I’m pretty sure were Hunt & Oakland spent an entire half hour ripping Rick Warren in every way possible? Mostly what I remember was a lot of cynical snickering from these two men, all in the name of “discernment” and “warning the flock”.

I remember learning about the Diet of Worms in 4th and 5th grade in Lutheran school.

[For those who don’t know, “Diet of Worms” is actually pronounced ‘dee-it ( or dye-it) of vurms’. Worms is a city in Germany and a diet is an imperial assembly, convened by the emperor, of the princes and other leaders under him. Martin Luther was summoned before the 1521 diet to answer questions about his teachings. Although Luther had been promised safe passage to and from the diet, a German prince, fearing for Luther’s safety, arranged a fake kidnapping and had Luther whisked away to his castle. There Luther, in hiding, translated the Bible into German.]

stupid says:

Oh good grief! brian, hand me the sandpaper. First, the best excuse Dawkins can come up with for his beliefs is that life was brought here from elsewhere. How lame is that? Very lame. Second, people are not to own guns for self defense. Ok, I’ll steal one. A stolen gun can save just as many lives. Immorally of course, so perhaps those people should not be saved. Aaaaarrrrgggghh!!

Ricky Bobby says:

Jim, yup, you nailed it.

Ricky Bobby says:

Who says guns are evil?

Guns have brought some unity and brought some peace and love between a Calvinist (Jim) a CC guy (Steve W.) and a devil-possessed spawn of satan liberal agnostic Christian heathen (me). 🙂 LOL

Jim says:

Some of my best gun buddies are big govt dems. One has the largest arsenal I’ve ever seen, although he’s only shown me a portion. This guy has everything, including some full auto stuff. He shoots in a league, and does his own reloads. Full-blown “gun nut”. Life long dem, who clearly states that he’s pro big-big govt.

non CC Bob says:

RB:

Dude I thought you were smarter than this, “I learned that from someone you worship.”

I don’t worship any man, respect many yes, worship NO!

Just so you know I am in no way a CC guy. Wow there are limits to your intelligence after all.

I might also add I believe Williams was the Archbishop of the Anglican Church during the Church’s moved to legitimaize gay leadership and marriage. A great thinker and mind? Yes probably true. In the right? Depends on personal and cultural views.

So is percieved good always good or can it be evil? Remember good and evil are normally not nouns they are adjectives.

Lgmt Pastor says:

I listened to the audio of the vote online – at one point there was a guy who apparently made some kind of objection. Does anyone know what he said?

brian says:

Just an aside about my point about the enlightenment it was a very broad brush but not intentionally revisionist. One view from my limited reading was the Europe was tired of war of religion, maybe not tired of war unfortunately. Granted there were huge differences between the philosophies of the time, say john Locke and Voltaire to some degree and the next generation where the philosophy that drove the French revolution. Again a very simple rendition. I hope to follow up more on this. We are all children of the enlightenment as well as the great awakenings.

brian says:

What I struggle with and frankly get frustrated with is when folks use science to try to “prove” supernaturalism. Science can’t do that from my very limited understanding. A miracle transcends science. It does not mean there can not be evidence that a miracle took place, but it is outside of nature as we understand it, though I think some of our technology would be outside the understanding of first century people and they might see it as a miracle. That is a whole other can of worms.

Ricky Bobby says:

I’m going to give up drinking and blogging for month just to see if I can do it and see what affects it has pro or con.

See you in a month! Don’t let illogic get too out of hand while I’m gone! LOL 🙂

Xenia says:

Brian, #511, yep.

stupid says:

I give him 3 days and those not consecutive.

stupid says:

On the other hand I commend RB for quitting drinking (if that wasn’t a joke).

Jim Jorgensen says:

When I read Romans 8 and 9, as well as John 10 and Eph 1, I can only see the sovereign hand of God doing what He pleases. It’s not complicated. It’s not troubling. It just is the way He chose to save some. If anyone should say well I wouldn’t have done it that way or God surely God wouldn’t do it that way is like being told surely God didn’t say that or surely He didn’t mean that or that can’t be right. Jesus said if you abide in my word then surely you are my disciples. That’s for when it seems right to us and when we struggle with it.