“Believe the whole Bible? Yeah right, if you did that you would be stoning gays. You’re not stoning gays so you’re a hypocrite…it’s amazing how Christians don’t even understand the Bible.” - countless YouTube comments
“
Christianity is often repudiated on the ground that it is circular: The Bible is authoritative because the Bible authoritatively says so. But this objection applies no more to Christianity than to any philosophic system or even geometry. Every system of organized propositions depends of necessity on some indemonstrable premises, and every system must make an attempt to explain how these primary premises come to be accepted.Gordon Clark (via monergism)
(via mikestoleyobike)
The Evangelical/Fundamentalist Cold War (Long but worth it, I hope.)
Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism are two movements within Protestant Christianity in North America. They are similar in many ways, including their disapproval of modernism and liberal theology and their emphasis on orthodox Christian doctrines. Fundamentalism began as a movement within evangelicalism itself. Despite this, by the 1940’s fundamentalists and evangelicals were cutting ties. While there is overlap, the gap between the groups has widened significantly. There are many reasons for this split. But at the heart was the doctrine of “ecclesiastical separation”.
Evangelicalism is a movement within Protestant Christianity that began during the late 1600’s among the Methodists and Lutherans in Scandinavia and Germany. Evangelicalism discourages ritualism, instead emphasizing personal holiness and evangelism. Evangelicalism denies the office of a priest as practiced in the Catholic Church. Instead evangelicals adhere to the “priesthood of the believer,” which makes every Christian accountable not to a priest, but directly to God. Evangelicalism is not a denomination, but contains many denominational and non-denominational churches.
Evangelicals place high value on the inerrancy of Scripture and the doctrines of Christian orthodoxy. Like fundamentalists, evangelicals believe in separation from the world. Unlike fundamentalists, they tend not to separate from other orthodox Christian movements and denominations.
Evangelicalism came into its own in the 20th century, overtaking Roman Catholicism and mainline Protestant denominations in the United States. As of 2004, 28.8 percent of Americans describe themselves as evangelicals, while 22 percent are Roman Catholic and 13.9 percent are members of other Protestant denominations. About 10 percent of Americans attend an evangelical church service on any given Sunday.
The fundamentalist movement was a movement within evangelicalism early in the 20th century. In 1909, Lyman Stewart, a wealthy oilman, decided that the basic truths of Christianity needed to be defended against the onslaught of modernism and liberal theology. The result was a series of books titled The Fundamentals, from which fundamentalism gets its name. Sixty-four authors contributed to the series, which emphasized five basic doctrines of the Christian faith: the sinful nature of man, his inability to be saved apart from God’s grace, the centrality of Jesus’ death for the regeneration of the individual, and the authoritative revelation of the Bible. If a fundamentalist is one who affirms these five basic doctrines, then all evangelicals are fundamentalists. Indeed, at first this was true. But soon fundamentalism diverged from these teachings, and the fallout was tremendous.
Fundamentalism came to be characterized by its spirit of confrontation. As Jerry Falwell, perhaps the most influential of all the evangelical fundamentalists, put it, “A Fundamentalist is an Evangelical who is angry about something.” Soon evangelicals began distancing themselves from the fundamentalist movement. At the same time fundamentalists began to separate from the evangelicals. There were 3 main points of contention, with the last being the most significant:
(You’re a fifth of the way done! Continue reading after the break.)
The Power of the Resurrection
Most of us are content to say that Christ was resurrected. We say with the congregation, “He is risen indeed.” But it is more than this.
“I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.” - John 11:25
Christ is not just risen, Christ is the resurrection. It is true that he was “powerfully raised from the dead by means of the Holy Spirit.” But he is become the means of resurrection for all mankind. It is as if all the saints, past, present, and future, were resurrected with Christ on that morning, just as they died with him on the fateful Friday before. We died with him, we are raised with him, and we live with him.
Paul says in Philippians 3 that we wishes to be in Christ, not his own works, so that he may experience firsthand the power of his resurrection. What is this power? It is the power to raise the dead, the greatest and most glorious act of an perfectly loving Father. In Christ, that power can be ours.
In a way, believers walk about with a little slice of the resurrection inside of them.
“He died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again….Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” - 2 Corinthians 5:15,17
Our lives are now to be representations: we are living sermons of the resurrection. Indeed, the resurrection is the cornerstone of our salvation. As Paul said,
“If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.”
For if Christ is not raised, neither shall we be, we are in our sins, and moreover we are wretched.
“But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.”
The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
Just spent some time on the fundamental fringe of the internet.
KJV-onlyism is really starting to get on my nerves, I may have to vent on here pretty soon.
“This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.”
Before the infamous battle of Agincourt on the fields of France, the British nobles discuss their predicament. Realizing they are outnumbered five to one, one noble wishes aloud that more Englishmen could join them. Overhearing this, Shakespeare’s Henry V replies, “If we are destined to die, the fewer, the better for our country, and if to live, the fewer men, the greater share of honour. I pray thee, wish not one man more!” He then launches unto one of the greatest military speeches in history, one that would inspire countless British troops 530 years later during another British invasion of France. Henry uses the ideas of honor, brotherhood, and devotion to God to inspire his men to victory.
First, Henry appeals to his men’s sense of honor. “If it be a sin to covet honor,” he says, “I am the most offending soul alive.” In these strong terms he establishes his righteous desire to obtain honor on the field of battle. From Henry’s point of view, the less men fighting with him, the more opportunity for valor. He bids all cowards depart, for he “would not die in that man’s company that fears…to die with us.”
Henry also preaches the immaterial rewards of courage. “This day is called the feast of Crispian.” He goes on to describe how, on every future Saint Crispian’s Day, those few who chose honor will stand more erect, showing their scars with pride. “Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter, Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester” will become household words, their names flowing like the wine on Saint Crispian’s Day. Henry succeeds in using the value of honor to stiffen his men’s resolve.
Second, Henry inspires trust by becoming his men’s equal. Notice the personal pronouns in the most famous line from the speech: “We, we happy few, we band of brothers. For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.” In Henry’s eyes, all his men are on equal footing, whether kings, nobles, or commoners, as long as they all fight with honor. In invoking brotherhood, Henry enables his men to view him fondly as a family member, instead of a distant military commander or monarch. This sense of camaraderie and brotherhood will strengthen their hearts in the coming battle.
There is another meaning behind Henry’s use of brotherhood that may not be obvious. Saint Crispian’s Day celebrates the martyrdom of the brothers Crispin and Crispian. They were killed together, but because they were doing the will of God, they were rewarded in the next life. Thus, Henry gives his men hope in the face of death. Even if they die, they die with honor, they die as brothers, and they die fulfilling the will of God.
The will of God is foundational to Henry’s speech and the war as a whole. In the first scenes of the play, Henry seeks God’s approval before embarking on his invasion of France. Despite being deceived by the Bishop of Canterbury, Henry and his men truly believed that they were fulfilling God’s will by taking back what was rightfully Britain’s land. With the conviction that their cause was just and that God was on their side, the small band of brothers could battle the invincible foe with courage.
In conclusion, we find that Shakespeare’s Henry V understood the power of convincing rhetoric. Employing the ideas of honor, brotherhood, and devotion to God, he created a convincing speech that has inspired patriotism in millions, whether British or not.
Trinitarian Universalism
While I haven’t posted much recently, I have been reading everything in my stream, and there’s one thing that has caught my attention: the amount of universalism I am seeing. I am going to summarize Christian Universalism, then at the end I will give my opinion. Remember, it’s just that, an opinion. I’m not trying to judge anyone or make anyone feel guilty.
Universalism began to take root in America in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. One important founder of Universalist thought in the United States was George de Benneville. He translated the first German Bible in America. What made his version unique was that all verses supporting universalist doctrines were bolded so that they would stand out!
Trinitarian or evangelical universalism is the type I will discuss. Unlike other forms of universalism, trinitarian universalism holds to Jesus Christ being the Savior of mankind. They are conservative and reformed in most of their beliefs, except in their understanding of hell. Instead of eternal punishment, trinitarian universalists believe in eventual universal reconciliation with God. According to trinitarian universalists, all mankind will be glorified and reunited with God at the end of time.
Now, I realize that there is an incredible amount of variation within the evangelical/trinitarian universalist camp. I would say that there is greater difference of opinion within trinitarian universalism than there is within conservative reformed/fundamental theology, with their five hundred year old (but still unresolved) debates concerning election, limited atonement, millennialism, and covenant versus dispensational theology. I am not intending to misrepresent universalism. I am intending to summarize some of their core beliefs, beliefs that are common to most universalists.
At the core of trinitarian universalism are beliefs that conservative Christians find familiar and fundamental.
- They believe that God is a trinity.
- They believe that God is love. They also believe that His holiness is an aspect of His love, one could call it “holylovingkindness”. This comes into play a little later.
- They believe that mankind is reconciled through Christ.
Well, that wasn’t so bad! These are all doctrines that conservative Christians affirm and rejoice in! But hang on, we aren’t through yet. Many beliefs of universalists contradict highly valued teachings of conservative Christians. Many Christians react violently when these doctrines are denied. So take a deep breath as we venture deeper into the mind of a universalist.
- Universal atonement of sins.
This statement elicits two distinct reactions from Christians at first glance. Calvinists balk, because it contradicts their belief in limited atonement, that Christ died for the sins of only the elect. Those who believe in free will smile, because they believe Christ died to give all the opportunity to be reconciled to Him.
But that’s not the universalist’s idea of universal atonement. Take the universal nature of the non-calvinist’s atonement, and splice it onto the Calvinist’s election. The result: an atonement that is, well, really universal. As in, you can’t escape from it. All mankind is atoned, all mankind is forgiven, and all mankind is saved. A truly lovingkind God cannot allow His creation to be separated from Him.
“
You’re just a conformist if you’re drunk; and naked; driving around in a loud motorcycle; smoking cigarrettes; breaking commandments; getting pregnant out of wedlock. Everyone’s done that. That’s so tired! If you really want to be a rebel get a job, cut your grass, read your bible, and shut up. Because no one is doing that.Mark Driscoll
Anonymous asked: Why do you write satan with capital "s"? Do people write it so as a general rule? Is that his name? Sorry I'm not English so I might not be aware of some language rules. But I thought that satan means something like demon or evil spirit, and the proper name is Lucifer? And how do we know the names of devils anyway?
Lucifer is just another name for Satan, who is a fallen angel. We know the name of Satan because the Bible calls him it. A lot of people feel like capitalizing Satan’s name is wrong because it acknowledges his existence and gives him power. If that’s the case, Satan sure gets a lot of power from the Bible, as he’s mentioned there by that name almost 50 times.
Anyway, the reason I capitalize Satan is because it’s a proper name, and these things were beat into me as an elementary school student. It’s too late to change my ways.
Anonymous asked: Can you please explain why we don't obey the following verses? : (Leviticus 11:7 ) (Leviticus 11:9-12) (Leviticus 20:18) (Leviticus 25:44-45) (Leviticus 19:19) Sorry, I can't quote them all because there's a character limit on the ask box :P
I created a quick video response for you and everyone else with this question.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNACVu4hsBU
And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you. (Lev 11:7)
These you may eat, of all that are in the waters. Everything in the waters that has fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers, you may eat. But anything in the seas or the rivers that does not have fins and scales, of the swarming creatures in the waters and of the living creatures that are in the waters, is detestable to you. You shall regard them as detestable; you shall not eat any of their flesh, and you shall detest their carcasses. Everything in the waters that does not have fins and scales is detestable to you. (Lev 11:9-12)
If a man lies with a woman during her menstrual period and uncovers her nakedness, he has made naked her fountain, and she has uncovered the fountain of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from among their people. (Lev 20:18)
As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their clans that are with you, who have been born in your land, and they may be your property. (Lev 25:44-45)
You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material. (Lev 19:19)
Because New Testament Christians are free from the law. I really can’t say it enough times! The Old Testament laws were God’s standards for the Israelites. We have a New Covenant, so we don’t have to obey them any more!
