August 31, 2011

Nazarene M7 Conference FAIL

What? You mean women-as-pastors isn't one of those challenges? #fail #epicfail

Well, the Nazarene church and their parent denominations (Central Evangelical Holiness Union, Association of Pentecostal Churches of America, New Testament Church of Christ, Independent Holiness Church) have been ordaining women for over a hundred years, I guess that's one of the past challenges that they pretty much didn't pass victoriously.



The link to the full video or audio can be found on this page:
http://www.m7conference.org/M7VideoStreaming/tabid/142/Default.aspx

Thank you Dr Dobson for helping to make moralism and political activism the focus of the Nazarene church. Then again, considering its parent denominations I guess he can't be mostly to blame. He was raised in it. But in any case, once you teach people how to miss the entire point of Scripture (intentionally or because you also have missed it) they will bring in all kinds of other falsehoods under that hermeneutic. Even if you don't teach them to miss the point, because the church is comprised of humans who are prone to wander from the truth, they will keep trying to bring those things in, albeit with much less, or much slower, success.

"Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth." 2 Tim 2:15

August 30, 2011

Coming Back To The Heart Of Repentance (PM Notes)

I've been pointed by our youth pastor to this blog from a Pastor Matt Richard of the Lutheran Brethren church in Sidney MT.

The top post as of today is entitled
Coming Back To The Heart Of Repentance (Encore)
and it was excellent so I thought I would share it. I am looking forward to reading this pastor's musings!

in particular this excerpt caught my eye:
"As previously stated, people in the 16th century primarily saw sin in the context of evil actions. The neglecting of teaching sin as a condition of the heart resulted in repentance not being taught correctly. Consequently this produced false repentance or what can be called partial repentance. Without considering the ramifications of the internal heart problem, people of the 16th century resorted to believing the falsehood that all they needed to do was to polish up their external actions through tireless self-effort (i.e. external repentance) and ‘bam’ they would arrive at holiness! This kind of partial repentance only scratched the surface and did not touch the fundamental issue of sin."
Being stuck in this false understanding of repentance, a moralistic repentance, is one reason why people might get tired of hearing about repentance and the gospel every week.  Just sayin'!

James Macdonald lashes out

James Macdonald is whining like a true theological liberal now... it's amazing what happens when you consort with and partner with theologically bad apples.

http://twitter.com/#!/jamesmacdonald/status/104191447959470080

WAIT WAIT! Isnt' that guilt by association?

Oh, no, that's right. That's "guilty associations" or "association of the guilty."
(added a few hours after posting):
Apprising.org has an excellent summary of Macdonald's temper tantrum which includes a great link to EBenz blog post about this on Do Not Be surprised.
Apprising.org - James Macdonald on Criticism

So I wonder if it is safe to say yet that "It is clear that the term “Reformed” is about as meaningless as the term “evangelical” or do we need to clear that with the Christian blogosphere police first?

August 27, 2011

Dr Macarthur: Are the YRR's in danger of inadvertently reversing their Revival?

These are well worth your time to listen to if you can find a computer that has sound and can play this video. It is ABOUT TIME someone said these things.

John Macarthur calls out people with Reformed Soteriology who act like Arminians (or, in some cases even Pelagians in my opinion) and specifically names John Piper and Rick Warren. FINALLY!! One of the big names is SAYING what so many uof us are thinking! R C Sproul wouldn't even say anything about his friend Piper snuggling up to Warren, to his shame.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYhmo5gabQU

part 2 of John Macarthur calling out the Reformed 'revival' for their heteroprax compromising and his plan to counteract that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6wWedCqfcM
(It's a well-meaning idea and I hope it succeeds.  But, considering he already has a seminary and the very popular graduate of that school, Francis Chan himself, hasn't been influenced to take a stand against this stuff by going through that program, I don't know that this will solve anything... but, again, I hope I am wrong).

August 18, 2011

Phil Johnson weighs in on Mark Driscoll's obscene visions

Actually he's weighing in on Doug Wilson weighing in, but that's just fine with me! It's still very good.

Let's not dance around the real issues
Doug Wilson acknowledges that Driscoll's assertions and allegations are, well, bizarre. But from Doug's perspective, it seems, the disagreement itself is an even more troubling and more pressing problem. Doug says there's wrong—serious wrong (perhaps even equal wrong?)—on both sides.

But Doug believes the whole conflict might be cleared up with a parley: "I would like to see us work out the protocols for how to talk about such things," he writes. "[And I] think it would be good if Phil and Mark could get together to work it through."

Doug recommends (and evidently concurs with) a post by Toby Sumpter, who likewise acknowledges that Driscoll's claims are "weird and goofy." But, says Toby, "I don't believe [Driscoll's misdeeds] rise nearly to the level of sin or scandal that [Phil] Johnson suggests."

Really? If it's not grossly sinful, certainly scandalous, and probably blasphemous to recount to one's congregation the play-by-play details of an adulterous couple's secret tryst (up to and including the coital position) and then claim one knows those details because God Himself revealed them through a prophetic peep show—then I wonder what kind of claim one would have to make to rise to the requisite level of opprobrium.
(read more at Team Pyro)

August 12, 2011

Homosexuality in the Evangelical Covenant seems to be moving right along...

A friend just directed me to this blog:
Coming Out Covenant (pushing for homosexuality tolerance in the Evangelical Covenant denomination)

In 2005 years ago the Evangelical Covenant Conference director Jim Fretheim, in response to me calling the Evangelical Covenant denomination liberal, insisted that the Evangelical Covenant was actually a very conservative denomination. Just "apparently not conservative enough for YOU"... and at that very adversarial meeting, our church kicked us out for opposing Purpose Driven at our church and my calling our pastor Todd Ertsgaard on the carpet for quite a few instances of manipulative and underhanded, controlling and unethical behavior.  I was ordered to recant and apologize and never speak of our concerns again in any form (phone, email, written) and then we would be reinstated to our Music (husband and me) and Sunday School teaching (husband) positions.  Needless to say we didn't recant. [That's the extremely short version of the events.  The long version is linked at the top of each blog page.]

Ironically Todd took and read Jason's paper regarding his concerns about the church and about Purpose Driven and then went ahead and immediately taught Purpose Driven Life when he went to his new church in River Falls, WI.  Some people never learn.

At that time (2005) women were already long-accepted as pastors.  People were (and probably still are) lamenting how hard it still was to get women pastors called to a church.  At the 05 ordination ceremony, Judith McCullough gave her ridiculous message all about herself, and her vivid imagination, and about breaking the "glass ceiling" in the ECov.  I dunno about anyone else but my "cr*p detector" was going off nonstop through that one.

We did not know women were accepted as pastors when we joined in 1999, or we would not have joined.  It was one thing we specifically looked for on the website.  I guess we should have asked someone.

Also at that time I found out  that there already was a growing faction working to get the acceptance of ordaining homosexuals (especially the Pietisten bunch see Redefining the Covenant parts 1-3 by Phillip Keillor).  And according to Jim Fretheim, that's conservative?

Well this blogger Nathan Albert at "Coming out Covenant" is apparently helping push that snowball down the hill.  But hey he has a theology degree from North Park, so what can we expect, I guess.

August 11, 2011

Mark Driscoll skating on VERY thin ice

This is why non-cessationists get into trouble.

Heireblog reports on:
Mark Driscoll On Prophetic Dreams and Seeing the Future

Driscoll:
Sometimes your counselee, they will see things. Ye..eh..there’s pa..I found this with people…ok, now let me…I’m going to ask the demon questions. You tell me what they say. They don’t say anything. I say, “What do you hear?” And they say, “Nothing.” They say, “But I’m seeing stuff.” Oh, oh, well tell me. What’s that? “I’m seeing..you know when I was little my grandpa molested me. I didn’t know that.” I said, “Well, let’s not assume it’s true. Go ask your grandfather.” Grandpa says, “Yeeeaah, when you were little I molested you.” Grandpa was assuming they’d be too young to remember. So he’s only molest grand kids up to a certain age. But they saw it.
Notice how he ASKS people about these messages and feels people out to figure out if he is on the right track, just like any fake psychic does (almost unintentionally, it is such a habit wih them). It's a trick almost anyone can learn and some people fall into naturally. It's a great way to take advantage of people, and it's TOTALLY HUMAN and EARTHLY.

August 4, 2011

COPOUT of the week "We aren't theologians, we are a pro family group!"

"We aren't theologians, we are a pro family group!"

I want to share with you something very observant my husband Jason just posted in regard to that answer I had heard was given to Brannon Howse regarding his objections to a pro family group participating with and promoting the Response, with heretics from the NAR and IHOP among others.

[This pro family group, I have been told, is the AFA.  Buster Wilson's silly post seems to support the AFA as the identity of the 'pro family group' which Brannon seems unwilling to name as yet.]

Jason said:
"It seems to me that a group that responds to a critique by admitting ignorance or dismissal of doctrine has forfeited the standing to say anything at all regarding anything."

"One's doctrine is revealed by action or inaction; claiming otherwise is naïve at best, and still undermines any teaching authority."

"I can respect a group which says "This issue is most specific to a secondary doctrine that isn't tied to the function of this organization, so we don't promote a specific position on it." I may not agree with their position, but if they work within that constraint, that's fine. I would say that position wouldn't support a group telling anyone else what their priorities in preaching, etc. should be, though."

August 2, 2011

Reformed Audio releases audiobook Machen's Christianity and Liberalism for free

Michael Spotts tells us:

"In case you missed it, Reformed Audio has been given permission to release an audio version of Machen's Christianity and Liberalism for free..."

http://reformedaudio.org/mache​n.html
[I note that the link to the 3rd part of the D G Hart audio is incorrect.  It should be
http://reformedaudio.org/audio/hart/Hart%20-%20Defending%20the%20Faith,%20Chapter%206%20(Part%203%20of%203).mp3
The incorrect link there takes you to a BB Warfield audio file.]

A bit from the intro:
‎"In the sphere of religion, as in other spheres, the things about which men are agreed are apt to be the things that are least worth holding; the really important things are the things about which men will fight. In the sphere of religion, in particular, the present time is a time of conflict; the great redemptive religion which has always been known as Christianity is battling against a totally diverse type of religious belief, which is only the more destructive of the Christian faith because it makes use of traditional Christian terminology. This modern non-redemptive religion is called “modernism” or “liberalism.” Both names are unsatisfactory; the latter, in particular, is question-begging. The movement designated as “liberalism” is regarded as “liberal” only by its friends; to its opponents it seems to involve a narrow ignoring of many relevant facts. And indeed the movement is so various in its manifestations that one may almost despair of finding any common name which will apply to all its forms."
Bridger works for me.
"The enemy has not really been changed into a friend merely because he has been received within the camp." (Chapter 2, pg 17)

August 1, 2011

Perry Noble admits Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Church is his inspiration

An Open Letter to Rick Warren (Perry Noble)

Huh, I thought Rick Warren didn't approve of the sorts of strong arm abusive expulsion tactics so many of his followers (like Noble) employ?
Mr. Warren acknowledges that splits occur in congregations that adopt his ideas, though he says he opposes efforts to expel church members.(Source)
Did Rick Warren inspire this, Perry?
Shut Up, they explained

Even More Beth Moore

There is a simulcast event happening locally so this topic has come up again. Normally I don't even bother following Moore, but she seems to be as popular as ever with women. I simply don't get it.

This person has done an excellent series of posts just recently after having attended a Beth Moore event.

Troubled by Beth Moore's teaching: Part 1, Introduction and Casualness

Troubled by Beth Moore's teaching, Part 2

Troubled by Beth Moore's teaching, Part 3- Contemplative Prayer

Troubled by Beth Moore's teaching: Part 4: Legalism

Troubled by Beth Moore's teaching, Part 5: Personal Revelation (This one is one I think she doesn't quite hit hard enough on but...)

Troubled by Beth Moore's Teaching, Part 6: Eisegesis, Pop Psychology, & Bad Bible Interpretations

Troubled by Beth Moore's teaching: Part 7, Conclusion


Beth Moore: reactions to Living Proof teaching in Charlotte. Part 1, The Women

Beth Moore: reactions to Living Proof teaching in Charlotte. Part 2, The Music

Beth Moore: reactions to Living Proof teaching in Charlotte. Part 3a: The Teaching

Beth Moore: reactions to Living Proof teaching in Charlotte. Part 3b: The Teaching

Beth Moore: reactions to Living Proof teaching in Charlotte. Part 4: A final word

Incidentally what I have seen and read of Kay Arthur basically strikes me as just an older more composed version of Moore.