Lesson 3. Conscience

This is my third video in the Sunday School series. Due to copyright, I cannot embed it here, however, you can still follow the following link to have a look at it. 

https://youtu.be/7iB3RJ74mTE

Lesson 2 Paradox, Mysteries and Contradictions

Ten objections to the study of Theology - 4

Ten objections to the study of Theology - 3

Ten Objections to study Theology - 2

The Christian Hope of the Resurrection

Finally taking a stand against the intolerant minority that wants us all to conform to their ways

This is a great opportunity to affirm the biblical view of marriage. What gives others the right to have a "pride day", and yet, we don't call them "heterophobes" (But I do indeed some are)?

It's a great American story [i.e., the founding and operation of the company] that is being smeared by vicious hate speech and intolerant bigotry from the left.The Chick Fil-A company refuses to open on Sundays so that their employees can go to church if they wish. Despite the pressure from malls, airports, and the business world to open on Sundays, they still don't. They treat customers and employees with respect and dignity. 

I ask you to join me in speaking out on Wednesday, August 1 "Chick Fil-A Appreciation Day.” No one is being asked to make signs, speeches, or openly demonstrate. The goal is simple: Let's affirm a business that operates on Christian principles and whose executives are willing to take a stand for the Godly values we espouse by simply showing up and eating at Chick Fil-A on Wednesday, August 1. Too often, those on the left make corporate statements to show support for same sex marriage, abortion, or profanity, but if Christians affirm traditional values, we're considered homophobic, fundamentalists, hate-mongers, and intolerant. This effort is not being launched by the Chick Fil-A company and no one from the company or family is involved in proposing or promoting it.

 I don't live in the USA anymore, well, for more than 20 yrs now. But if you live over there, I encourage you to support for the right to think differently, and to hold on to values different than those of the intolerant minority.

Seven Reasons to Study Church History

Via davidnormanblog.

• It will cure our ignorance of the past.
• It will curb our arrogance of the present.
• It will conserve the faith for the future.
• It will connect us to a rich legacy.
• It will counter the claims of critics.
• It will cultivate Christian growth.
• It will clarify our interpretation of Scripture.

Understanding Mormon talk

Via Zwingliusredivivus

Good News for Australian Christians

These are good figures for those who hold on that Australia is loosing it's Christian's presence very quickly.

On Census night August 2011, 61.1% of Australians still identified as Christian, down just 2.8% from 2006. Australia's population was 21,507,717, an 8.3% increase. Females outnumbered males - 10,873,704 to 10,634,013 - and the median age was 37. One in four Australians were born overseas and 43.1% of people had at least one overseas-born parent. The leading birthplace for those who arrived since 2006 was India (13.1%), closely followed by the United Kingdom (12.1%).  (source Family Voice Australia)

Although the figures are encouraging, there are still many things to look out for. We must aim to make the christian message available to the post-modern audience we now face.

Guess what Christian Zionists, Jews don't like you

Every time I see Christians supporting Israel, it makes me feel that they don't care of the fact that many Christians Palestinians are discriminated against, are not allowed to visit their own sacred sites, and have their land stolen.

I guess that Christian Zionist don't care for those of the faith, but they love Israel, Jews, are fascinated by them. This is the same thing that Paul fought against in Galatians, Christians wanting to be Jews.

Well, now we can see that all their "loving" for Israel falls on hearts of stone.The Huffington Post reports on this.

Jewish Americans hold more favorable views of Mormons and Muslims than those belonging to the "Christian Right," according to a recently published survey on Jewish values.
The findings were part of the "2012 Jewish Values Survey," which was published on April 3 by the non-Jewish Public Religion Research Institute. For the study, researchers asked 1,000 Jewish Americans to rate how favorably they view Mormons, Muslims, and members of the so-called "Christian Right" on a scale of 1 to 100.
Of the three groups, Mormons received the highest favorability rating of 47%, followed by the Muslims at 41.4%. The Christian Right, on the hand, received a much lower favorability rating of 20.9%.

 That's right, you read right, Jews in America rather side with their mortal enemies, the Muslims!!!!

"Social views of Christian conservatives have been drawing attention in recent months as an increasingly significant part of the Republican presidential primary discourse," Nathan Guttman wrote in the Daily Forward. "Attempts by GOP candidates to prove their conservative credentials in order to win over the Christian right have had, experts believe, an adverse effect on the Jewish community, turning it away from the Republican Party."

That's right!! Just in case you didn't know, American Jews overwhelmingly support gay rights, abortion, and all the other liberal agendas, that conservatives hold so dear. There may be another reason:

We suspect that Jews' warmth toward Mormons stems from solidarity with another group that is small and subject to intolerance. Jews and Mormons are the two American groups most likely to report that other people disparage their religious beliefs.

And a fellow Mormon, gives some reasons why there may be a preference from Jews to the Mormons:

"Of course, the survey also shows that Mormons have their work cut out for them when it comes to strengthening relationships with Jews. After all, 47 points out of 100 isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement," Paredes wrote. "That said, Mormons do have a big advantage over Evangelicals when it comes to Jews: Given our belief that we are covenant Israelites, our respect for Judaism is as strong as our support for Israel. When Evangelicals can say the same, they will have more success with Jewish outreach." 

So there you go, keep on spending your time, and empty "spiritual" force on people who are so aligned against the Gospel. Once Christians start preaching the Gospel to Jews, then that kind of support is the one that they need so badly.

I've said it once, I will say again, that "Christian" Zionism, is not Christianity, period!!!!

Is Israel the only nation allowed to assassinate its enemies, and kill civilians too

Haaretz has published a great article regarding the butched (alleged) assassination attempt by Iranians against Israeli diplomats in other countries.

The assassinations of the Iranian scientists were no less terrorist, let's admit it. Terror is terror, against diplomats exactly like against scientists, even if the latter are developing nuclear weapons. There is no great difference between an attempt to kill a representative of Israel's Defense Ministry and a strike on an Iranian nuclear physicist. There are nuclear physicists in Israel too and if, God forbid, someone tried to assassinate them, that would rightly be considered cruel terror. 

And so anyone who uses these deplorable assassination methods cannot be critical when someone else tries to emulate them. And why should the world denounce Iran's terrorist acts - as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said yesterday - and not denounce others? Are there special countries that are allowed to assassinate at will, and others who are not?

Terrorism is terrorism, period. It doesn't matter where it comes from, or who commits it. 

Here people are shocked by attempted assassinations by Arabs or Iranians, but divorce them completely from the context of Israeli assassinations. How did a columnist in Israel Hayom put it this week? "Attacking Israel is in their DNA." Theirs? And what about us? The writer forgot, and made us forget, our DNA. It, too, supports assassinations, including sometimes of the innocent.Assassinations of Palestinians have scaled down in recent years and have been carried out mainly in Gaza, and so the hit lists of the Shin Bet security service and the Israel Defense Forces are now shorter. That's a good thing.But according to the data of the human rights group B'Tselem, Israel targeted and killed no less than 232 Palestinians in the territories between the beginning of the second intifada and Operation Cast Lead, a period of about eight years. During those attacks,approximately 150 innocent bystanders were killed, including women and children.

So, how about those 150 bystanders? Is anybody going to say that they didn't deserve to die? Or only Israeli people count?  Some will tell me, "in war people die". Yes, but they don't take into account that people from both sides die. They only mourn those they like.

That's why I abhor Christian Zionism, and call it a heresy. They think that by supporting Israel, even in their terrorist acts, they are doing God's will. I guess that the second commandment is not in their Bibles, and the loving of enemies is not in their Bible either. But they would say, as they usually do, "you are confusion politics with religion". Well, tell that to the Zionists in Israel, and don't tell it to me. But then again, they are extremely selective at how they also apply that rule too.

Terrorism is terrorism, period.

The United States Religious landscape

USA Today, along with the Pew Forum, have offered its readers a map that shows how religion is spread across the USA.

It is very interesting to see that the map shows you a state by state run down at how religions are present in the particular state, as you can see a sample in this entry's graphic.

If you want to start a mission, or want to target a group in your state or interstate, this is a great resource.

Thank to Jim West for the tip.

10 Pitfalls of the Foolish Apologist

via: www.apologetics315.com
A Christian ambassador desires to be tactful, persuasive, sensitive, and thoughtful. Being a good apologist and being able to give good reasons for the truth of the Christian view takes prayer, patience, study, and persistence. For those who have made it their goal to become good defenders of the faith, there are certain positive disciplines and character traits that one would do well to develop. These help you become a wise apologist.

But on the other hand, there are certain pitfalls that can appear that, when left unchecked, can become character traits and make you a foolish apologist. Although there are surely more, here are Ten Pitfalls of the Foolish Apologist:

1. The foolish apologist speaks before listening. Proverbs 18:13 says, "He who answers before listening - that is his folly and his shame." Not only does he communicate to others that he could care less about what they have to say, but he also becomes unable to give a well informed answer. The wise apologist is patient, seeks to understand, and avoids monologue.
   
2. The foolish apologist overstates his argument. The foolish apologist doesn't have "good reasons." Instead, he can prove it. He can show something beyond the shadow of a doubt. His arguments are presented with all confidence -- and of course he can't be wrong. Even when using good arguments, he exaggerates what they actually show. No modesty here, and people balk. The wise apologist argues confidently, yet with modesty.
   
3. The foolish apologist wants to win every point. When the conversation gets complex, he needs to make sure to correct every single error he sees with another person's view. Never mind that his conversation partner is getting offended by his "attention to detail." This apologist is the fallacy police, the fact-checker, and grammarian all-in-one. If he makes an error, back-pedaling is in order, with little or no admission of wrong. The wise apologist can discern what really matters in a conversation.
   
4. The foolish apologist chases red herrings. If the topic is the resurrection, just bring up evolution. The foolish apologist will happily hop down any bunny trail that appears. The conversation goes in all directions. He can't make any progress in an argument because he can't spot red herrings, distractions, and non-issues. In fact, he may often enjoy these deviations from focused dialogue, because he's proud of his expertise in his own pet subject areas. The wise apologist knows how to stick to one point.
   
5. The foolish apologist is proud of himself. He likes the fact that he knows terms that make the "novices" around him cock their heads. He secretly commends himself for reading more books in a month than most people do in a year. He enjoys the sound of his own voice, and thinks he does a pretty good job in an internet forum. Apologetics is his tool to show the world he can flex his intellectual muscle. He's received his reward. The wise apologist humbles himself before God, and looks upon himself with sober judgment.
   
6. The foolish apologist seeks popularity. He enjoys the accolades of others, speaking to lots of people, being a big name. Name-dropping becomes a normal tool to show others just how connected he is to what's happening in the scene. He doesn't choose the lowly place. The wise apologist blooms where he is planted.
   
7. The foolish apologist neglects spiritual disciplines. He finds reading philosophy more interesting than reading the Bible, so he neglects the Bible. Prayer is seldom and rushed. In fact, prayer, meditation, Bible study, worship and fellowship take the back seat to study. The foolish apologist deceives himself that he is being spiritual, all the while drifting away. The wise apologist sits at the feet of Jesus.
   
8. The foolish apologist has not love. He can speak in the tongues of philosophers and of theologians, but he has not love - he is only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. He has the gift of intellect and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge; his arguments can move mountains, but he has not love - he is nothing. He gives all his time and energy to study, and surrenders his finances to university degrees, but has not love - and has gained nothing. The wise apologist is motivated by love for God and love for others.
   
9. The foolish apologist isolates himself from others. He doesn't need their input. He doesn't appreciate correction. He has his own plans, his own agenda, and own personal ministry. He refuses to let iron sharpen iron. When he falls, he has no one to help him up. He's accountable to himself only. The wise apologist surrounds himself with godly counsel and fellow laborers.
   
10. The foolish apologist doesn't do apologetics. He becomes an apologetics junkie; a consumer instead of an enlisted soldier. He does more talking about defending the faith than actually defending the faith. Debates are a spectator sport. He forgets that souls are in the balance and doesn't even think of preaching the Gospel. The wise apologist wants to win others to Christ more than anything - and he uses apologetics as a tool to assist in this task.

Have you encountered any of these pitfalls in your own life? This list may serve as a handy reminder or even serve as a list of prayer points for your own development as a better ambassador for Christ.
*The pronoun "he" is used only for consistency.

Reading Calvin through the year

I have made a challenge to myself this year, to read John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion.

I have found many people, mainly young ones, in the internet, that are ardent Calvinists, yet, have never read Calvin.

So, on top of my bible reading, I am challenging me, and you, that we should read Calvin's theology, in order to understand the Reformer better, and not mis-represent him when one is pretending to defend his theology.

Here it is for those interested, and thank you Dr. Jim West for bringing it to my attention.
A Year through Calvin's Institutes (1559) b

Check out the Jewish Taliban

Look at the girl and her mom in the video. They are dressed well more decent than many people dress to go to some churches today. Yet, for this Ultra-Ortodox Jews, they are not "pure" enough.

This is what happens when those "hassidim" don't work, and have 8 children per family, and apparently spend their whole time in "prayer" and bible study.

For those following the heresy called "Christian Zionism", this is what you are really supporting. Shame on you.

Music at Church, a never ending issue

Via Christian Urban News

Good News Baptist Church in Chesapeake, Va., made a theological choice to offer only traditional music that expresses Christian doctrine. (Jack Gruber, USA TODAY)

In many U.S. churches today, worship musicians bang the drums for God and singers croon as if Christ were their boyfriend.
Bye-bye to Be Thou My Vision, a sixth-century Irish hymn with century-old English lyrics. Godspeed, Amazing Grace.

Nearly 50% of Protestant churches now say they use electric guitars or drums in worship, up from nearly 35% in 2000, according to the recently released Faith Communities Today study of 14,000 congregations.

But just because you don't like the tune doesn't mean it's theologically incorrect, says Rick Muchow, music pastor for the Saddleback Church founded by evangelist Rick Warren. "The Bible does not have an official soundtrack."

The nation's fifth-largest Protestant church, with nine satellite locations, runs several concurrent worship services Sunday mornings at its main site in Lake Forest, Calif., each with a different genre of music.

Muchow lists: a Gospel praise service; a "straight-ahead rock" called Overdrive; one called Fuel that's "geared to 20-somethings with more alternative music"; and a Traditions service with piano and a singer. Traditions is the only service using hymnals.

In the vast main worship center, however, the sound is "radio-style contemporary Christian with a small rhythm section," maybe an orchestra or choir now and then, and big screens beaming down the words to be sung by praise choruses, Muchow says.

"There are all different kinds of churches for different kinds of people. We don't worship music, we worship God," Muchow says.

Still, an unbending conservative guard of churches carries a flag for songs and sounds of the past. Their pastors claim people of all ages are drawn by timeless truths in classic hymns.

The fight can get fierce.

"There is an intense war being waged today for the heart and soul of Bible-believing churches, and one of the Devil's most effective Trojan horses is music," warns pastor David Cloud.

The Christian Debate Over Halloween

October 30, 2011 3:12 AM
Jim Roope

For many American Christians, Halloween is innocent, harmless and fun, and they trick-or-treat, carve pumpkins and don costumes with gusto.

For others, though - especially for some conservative and fundamentalist Christians - Halloween is a celebration of evil and has no place in the life of a believer.

"We don't endorse that or we don't celebrate that," said Joe Hernandez, pastor of Worshipwalk Church in Los Angeles, which belongs to the conservative Pentecostal tradition. "People are celebrating the devil's holiday."

Halloween's roots are believed to date back 1,400 years, to the Irish-pagan New Year's celebration. The Celtic New Year began on November 1. People would light bonfires and wear costumes to ward off roaming ghosts and evil spirits.

Some Christians, like Hernandez, believe Halloween's pagan roots can open the door to evil. That's why Worshipwalk is hosting a harvest festival in its church parking lot on Monday, with kids' games and face painting.

Hernandez calls it harvesting hearts for God.

Some conservative churches go a step further, attempting to co-opt the holiday with haunted houses - called "hell houses" - that are designed to give a glimpse of eternal damnation in hopes of strengthening faith.

"There's Satan's lies and there's Jesus' redemption and there's a message that will change your life," said Keenan Roberts, who says he is the inventor of the hell house, which people walk or call through, just as they would a haunted house.

"It's designed to reach the 'sight and sound' age," said Roberts. "The message is sacred but the method is not."

Hell houses can be graphic. In Roberts' hell house - which he markets through his Hell House Ministries - live actors depict scenes of abortion, rape, suicide and murder, though the journey through the house culminates in scenes of redemption through Jesus.

Pastor of the fundamentalist New Destiny church near Denver, Colorado, Roberts said that his ministry has received a lot of criticism for what critics say is "going too far."

But he said today's kids are so desensitized that he will do whatever it takes to get the message of salvation to take root.

Was Lewis a real Evangelical?

Kevin Deyoung has written on something I have been saying for a while now.

I am sorry if you are a C. S. Lewis follower, but that's how many of us see him.

KEVIN DEYOUNG|5:44 AM CT 

Cautions for Mere Christianity

C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity is a classic. It is a winsome, thoughtful, well-written defense of the Christian faith. Some of its better known sections–like the famous liar, lunatic, Lord, trilemma–have become part of the way evangelicals think and speak. No doubt God has used Lewis and Mere Christianity to awaken affections for Christ, engage the mind for Christ, and remove obstacles for the Spirit to draw people to Christ. I’m thankful for all this. More than that, I’ve benefited from every Lewis book I’ve read.

But C.S. Lewis was not an evangelical. Mere Christianity shows why.

Let me highlight two significant problems.

Atonement, But How?

The first caution to raise concerns Lewis’ view of the atonement. Lewis believed Jesus died on the cross for sin, but he didn’t think it was important to understand the particulars of what Christ accomplished on the cross.

Now before I became a Christian I was under the impression that the first thing Christians had to believe was one particular theory as to what the point of this dying was. According to that theory God wanted to punish men for having deserted and joined the Great Rebel, but Christ volunteered to be punished instead, and so God let us off. Now I admit that even this theory does not seem quite so immoral and silly as it used to; but that is not the point I want to make. What I came to see later on was that neither this theory nor an other is Christianity. The central belief is that Christ’s death has somehow put us right with God and given us a fresh start. Theories as to how it did this are another matter: A good many different theories have been held as to how it works; what all Christians are agreed on is that it does work. (57-58 [pagination varies by edition)

Later Lewis says that “Christ was killed for us” and “His death has washed out our sins” but “any theories we build up as to how Christ’s death did all this are, in my view, quite secondary” (59). This impatience of careful thinking about the atonement is bad enough, but then Lewis goes on to make clear that he rejects the understanding of the atonement evangelicals (and the Bible I would say) find most central and most glorious.

The one most people have heard is the one I mentioned before–the one about our being let off because Christ had volunteered to bear a punishment instead of us. Now on the face of it that is a very silly theory. If God was prepared to let us off, why on earth did He not do so? And what possible point could there be in punishing an innocent person? None at all that I can see, if you are thinking of punishment in the police-court sense. On the the other hand, if you think of a debt, there is plenty of point in a person who has some assets paying it on behalf of someone who has not. (59)

Pay careful attention to what Lewis says in that paragraph. He does believe in a substitutionary theory of the atonement, but he rejects penal substitution. He admits that penal substitution is not quite as silly as it once sounded, but he still does not accept it. Instead, he argues that Christ pays a debt (which is true), but not as a punishment for our sakes.

Lewis’ theology of the atonement is confusing (see for example this helpful Touchstone article), but I would argue his view is more like Christus victor or ransom to Satan than penal substitution. Aslan’s death, you may recall, was a sacrifice to the Witch and was explained rather ambiguously as “deeper magic.” This is not the place to defend the critical importance of penal substitution. My point is simply that Lewis does not teach it in Mere Christianity, and in fact undermines it.

An Early Inclusivist

The second problem with Mere Christianity is Lewis’ inclusivism. Evangelicals believe that Jesus Christ is the only way to God. Further, they believe that conscious faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation (assuming we are talking about sentient beings; all Christians allow that infants and the mentally disabled may be in a different category). Lewis, by contrast, believed in what we might roughly call “anonymous Christians.” That is, people may be saved through Christ without putting explicit faith in Christ.

There are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ but who are so strongly attracted by Him that they are His in a much deeper sense than they themselves understand. There are people in other religions who are being led by God’s secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example, a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain other points. (178)

No matter how much we may like Lewis, this is simply a profound misunderstanding of the Spirit’s mission (and a rejection of John 14:6). The work of the Holy Spirit is to bring glory to Christ by taking what is his–his teaching, the truth about his death and resurrection–and making it known. The Spirit does not work indiscriminately without the revelation of Christ in view. Arguably, the Holy Spirit’s most important work is to glorify Christ, and he does not do this apart from shining the spotlight on Christ for the elect to see and savor. Again, we see the inclusivist Lewis at the end on Narnia where Emeth, a worshiper of Tash, is accepted by Aslan for following him all along without knowing it.

All that to say, yes, I have some cautions when it comes to Mere Christianity. Good book. But some serious deficiencies.

How to Start Your Own Successful Mega-Church

Step by step:

1- Lie to people and tell them you're a Christian.

2- Convince gullible old women to mortgage their homes and donate the money to your 'ministry'.

3- Surround yourself with 'christians' who know less about the bible, church history, and theology than you do.

4- Adopt shady and manipulative strategies to 'grow' your 'church'.

5- Do something extremely bizarre to garner public attention, like have live animals in the service or cancel worship for the Super Bowl or Christmas or have a 'rasslin' match on the altar.  Anything at all that has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity will work here.

6- Toss out the Bible and start talking about the Spirit's speaking to you directly and without the medium of Scripture.

And finally

7- Insist on your congregation's unswerving and unquestioning allegiance.

If you follow those 7 steps, you will have a mega 'church'.  There are no mega-churches outside of these 7 steps.