Wednesday, July 31, 2013

What's So Dangerous About The House Church Movement?

Excerpts to get you started:

The “organic church” is a concept promoted by Frank Viola and his associates. Part of the larger house church movement, it has been called “church with little organization, little structure, and loose doctrine,” which is true and would be dangerous enough in itself; but there is far more to the organic church than that, and the “far more” is insidious....

I want to hasten to say, though, that the organic church is not intended to be a challenge and help to a “traditional” Bible-believing church in any sense. Its object is not to help revive churches but toreplace them. The organic church’s criticism of Bible-believing churches is not intended to be constructive. John Beardsley rightly observes that the organic church’s criticism of churches is “propaganda to mislead the reader for another agenda” (“Doctrines of Devils and Men,” Aug. 30, 2011). 

In fact, the organic church is a vicious attack upon every Bible-believing church. It is an attack upon the office of pastor/elder, an attack upon owning a building, an attack upon having a church larger than 20 or 30, an attack upon preaching, an attack upon having the Lord’s Supper less often than weekly and as a “ritual” as opposed to a full-blown meal, an attack upon restricting the woman’s ministry, and many other things. 

Frank Viola makes no secret of the fact that he wants to encourage people to leave “traditional” Bible
churches. 

Consider some statements from his writings.....


~Entire article Way of Life here

Frank Viola has other serious doctrinal issues.

An Evening Prayer

Heavenly Father, the day is gone, and we cannot recall it . . .
to amend its doings,
to correct its mistakes,
to blot out its sins,
to undo the things we ought not to have done,
to do the things we ought to have done, but left undone,
to unsay the words we ought not to have said,
to speak the words we ought to have spoken.

The day is gone from us--and is with You. We leave it in Your hands. Whatever we have done that was not according to Your will--may You graciously forgive. The things that pleased You--may You bless.

Our disappointments, we accept as Your appointments for us--better than our own way would have been. Teach us the lessons You would have us learn from the day's experiences. May we be wiser for having lived through these experiences. May . . .
our faith be stronger,
our love be deeper,
our earnestness be more intense,
and our zeal be more intense.


(J.R. Miller, "Family Prayers")

Living It Up In A Capitalist's Mansion: Obama loves the life of the "One Percenters"

It’s good to be the king … of class warfare hypocrisy. While he lectures his political opponents about their neglect of middle-class America, President Obama is headed to Martha’s Vineyard. Again. Because nothing spells populist like a $7.6 million, 9.5-acre estate owned by one of Chicago’s wealthiest corporate financiers....

Homeowner Schulte deserves special attention. If this deep-pocketed donor and private-equity whiz were a Republican, the Occupy hordes and left-wing super-PACs would have made him a household name by now. The SEIU already would have picketed his private residence. Cher, Bette Midler and Chris Rock would be tweeting furiously about this privileged white robber baron in all caps.
Schulte, you see, earned his money in much the same way the demonized Mitt Romney did: through corporate restructuring and rescuing debt-burdened companies.....
Like Schulte, Romney’s Bain record includes many successful turnarounds that saved workers’ jobs, pensions and health benefits — including Staples and Sports Authority. When Democrats do it, it’s creative capitalism. But when Republicans do it, it’s a criminal enterprise.
The double standards are rich. But Obama’s coffers are richer. Democratic demagoguery means never having to say you’re sorry for throwing stones at glass houses, while vacationing in the compounds that “vulture capitalism” built.
~Michelle Malkin, emphasis, original

Words of A Few Dead Men

"It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be to-morrow." (James Madison)
"A society that puts equality -- in the sense of equality of outcome -- ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom. The use of force to achieve equality will destroy freedom, and the force, introduced for good purposes, will end up in the hands of people who use it to promote their own interests." (Milton Friedman)
~For more random thoughts shared by Dr. Thomas Sowell, go here.

Black Self-Sabotage: Dr.Walter Williams Explains

If we put ourselves into the shoes of racists who seek to sabotage black upward mobility, we couldn't develop a more effective agenda than that followed by civil rights organizations, black politicians, academics, liberals and the news media. Let's look at it.
First, weaken the black family, but don't blame it on individual choices. You have to preach that today's weak black family is a legacy of slavery, Jim Crow and racism. The truth is that black female-headed households were just 18 percent of households in 1950, as opposed to about 68 percent today. In fact, from 1890 to 1940, the black marriage rate was slightly higher than that of whites. Even during slavery, when marriage was forbidden for blacks, most black children lived in biological two-parent families. In New York City, in 1925, 85 percent of black households were two-parent households. A study of 1880 family structure in Philadelphia shows that three-quarters of black families were two-parent households.
During the 1960s, devastating nonsense emerged, exemplified by a Johns Hopkins University sociology professor who argued.... (More here.)
~Dr. Walter Williams

Liberals Force A Private Business To Evict A Church: but they wouldn't dare try this with a mosque

A professing Christian church has been evicted from the restaurant it has been renting because of complaints from neighbors. A backlash of phone calls was the peer pressure needed to get the owners to break their agreement with a small church.

Bullied again by the Left.

Where's the tolerance?

Not for professing Christians who take a biblical stand. But they will defend the "rights" of Muslims and the Muslim religion.

Let me tell you something. Once the mosques are built and the 5 calls to prayer each day ring in these Leftists' ears continuously, and once the Muslims start demanding the local restaurants and banks and whatever else, to  comply with Sharia law or else, there won't be any bullying on their part.

Why?

Because Muslims are bigger bullies than the Liberals. They, at least, are willing to die for their cause (wrong as it is). Liberals just stomp around, whine, cry, and sue.

But Islam's got deeper pockets and they are smarter; they've been increasingly using our laws against us Americans and in their favor to get Sharia laws enacted.

Christians, true Christians, don't fight by the sword or threaten with physical harm.

That is the difference.

Sodomites Use Betty Crocker To Push Sodomite Unions

General Mills, widely known for throwing its considerable influence behind same-sex marriage, has now unleashed one of America’s most beloved icons, Betty Crocker, in the effort.

~WND

Betty Crock comes out swinging against its traditional customers.

Pushing what is unholy and unnatural in order to try to make sodomy "normal" will never ever make sodomy normal. Its a perversion that God has condemned in all ages because it goes against His established order of things. As Creator, He defines what is right and what is wrong.

Interesting how  the homosexual activists  use those "nasty" big corporations, you know, the "1% ers" these Leftists love to hate,for their own agendas.

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Forget Me Not

"Do this in remembrance of Me!" (1 Corinthians 11:24)



It appears that Christians may forget Christ! There would be no need for this loving exhortation--if there were not a fearful possibility that our memories might prove treacherous. Nor is this an empty notion. It is, sadly, too well confirmed in our experience; not as a possibility--but as a lamentable fact!

It appears almost impossible that those who have been redeemed by the blood of the dying Lamb, and loved with an everlasting love by the eternal Son of God--could forget their gracious Savior! But if startling to the ear, sadly, it is too apparent to the eye to allow us to deny the crime.

Can we forget Him--who never forgot us!
Can we forget Him--who poured His blood out for our sins!
Can we forget Him--who loved us even to death!
Can it be possible?

Yes, it is not only possible--but conscience confesses that is is too sadly a fault with all of us. Instead of Him being a permanent resident in our memories--we treat Him as a visitor. The cross--where one would expect that memory would linger--is desecrated by the feet of forgetfulness.
Doesn't your conscience say that this is true? Don't you find yourselves forgetful of Jesus? Some other love steals away your heart--and you are unmindful of Him upon whom your chief affection ought to be set. Some earthly business engrosses your attention--when you ought to be fixed steadily upon the cross. It is the incessant turmoil of the world, the constant attraction of earthly things--which takes the soul away from Christ! While memory works to preserve a poisonous weed--it allows the rose of Sharon to wither!

Let us charge ourselves to tie a heavenly forget-me-not around our hearts for Jesus our Beloved, and whatever else we let slip, let us hold tight to Him!

(Charles Spurgeon)

Saturday, July 27, 2013

The Sovereign Grace of God Is The Only Difference Between Me And Those In Hell

Lord, You know my weaknesses and follies, and what sins I am likely enough to commit--unless You hold me fast. "Hold up my steps in Your paths, that my footsteps may not slip!" Psalm 17:5

What a mercy that I have been preserved so long! How many thousands who have been born since myself, have been chopped down by the scythe of death--and where are they? What is become of them? Are not many of them suffering Your eternal wrath, as the just desert of their sins? No doubt but they are!

And what am I--that I should be distinguished from them! What was there in me--that a difference should be made between us! Lord, you know that there was nothing. It is all of your rich, free, and sovereign grace--that there is the least difference between me, and the vilest wretch in Hell!

"But by the grace of God, I am what I am!" 1 Corinthians 15:10
"Hold me up, and I shall be safe!" Psalm 119:117 

(James Smith's autobiography, "Marvelous Mercy!" 1862)

Nobel Peace Winner At War With God

1Co 6:9  Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor
homosexuals,10  nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Jude 1:7  just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Rom 1:32  Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. 


Retired archbishop Desmond Tutu speaks out for sodomy and against the Holy God he supposedly spoke for while he worked for the Anglican church.  The Nobel Peace laureate rages war against God and His Holy Word.

Desmond Tutu (26 July 2013)

"I would refuse to go to a homophobic heaven. No, I would say sorry, I mean I would much rather go to the other place," Archbishop Tutu said at the launch of the Free and Equal campaign in Cape Town.
"I would not worship a God who is homophobic and that is how deeply I feel about this."
Archbishop Tutu said the campaign against homophobia was similar to the campaign waged against racism in South Africa.
"I am as passionate about this campaign as I ever was about apartheid. For me, it is at the same level," he added.
~ BBC

Contrast that with a true Christian Pastor, Voddie Baucham
Baucham deals with the issue here in America but its pretty much the same issue as in S. Africa.
Excerpts from Voddie Baucham's article , "Gay Is Not the New Black" (please read the entire article for the full context along with all footnotes) which I originally posted here.:

The first problem with the idea of conflating "sexual orientation" and race is the fact that homosexuality is undetectable apart from self-identification. Determining whether or not a person is black, Native American, or female usually involves no more than visual verification. However, should doubt remain, blood tests, genetics, or a quick trip up the family tree would suffice. Not so with homosexuality. There is no evidence that can confirm or deny a person's claims regarding sexual orientation.

An additional problem with the "gay is the new black" argument is the complete disconnect between same-sex "marriage" and anti-miscegenation laws. First, there is a categorical disconnect. Miscegenation literally means "the interbreeding of people considered to be of different racial types." Ironically, the fact that homosexuals cannot "interbreed" shines a spotlight on the problem inherent in their logic. How can forbidding people who actually have the ability to interbreed be the same thing as acknowledging the fact that two people categorically lack that ability?

Therefore, while anti-miscegenation laws denied people a legitimate right, the same cannot be said concerning the denial of marriage to same-sex couples; one cannot be denied a right to something that doesn't exist.

It should be noted that the right to marry is one of the most frequently denied rights we have. People who are already married, 12-year-olds, and people who are too closely related are just a few categories of people routinely and/or categorically denied the right to marry. Hence, the charge that it is wrong to deny any person a "fundamental right" rings hollow. There has always been, and, by necessity, will always be discrimination in marriage laws......

It is very important for those of us who oppose the idea of same-sex "marriage" to do so not because we wish to preserve our version of the American Dream,but because we view marriage as a living, breathing picture of the relationship between Christ and his church (Eph. 5:22ff), and because we know that God has designed the family in a particular way. 

End quote. (emphasis, mine)

For the full article that includes all footnotes and more treatment of the issue, go here.


(The UN, as shown in the BBC report, is seeking to overturn sovereign countries' culture and laws.  Why is it the UN's business? Clearly one can see how a one world government will easily slide onto the global scene. Scripture talks about such things in the books of Daniel and Revelation.)

Notice the attack on God being "homophobic. God fears no one. Such a statement is one atheists use. It comes from the same source: Satan who is the Father of lies. The truth is, it will be all sinners, including Tutu himself, who don't repent of their sins in humility before God, that will cower before the HOLY HOLY HOLY God of Heaven, as they must be held accountable for breaking HIS laws. A just judge will not allow the lawbreaker to go unpunished. God is the holiest and most righteous of all judges. Therefore He must righteously judge each person for all of his or her sins. Those who have not trusted in Jesus Christ and love Him, will indeed cower before Him Who sits on the Throne of Heaven.

God opposes and condemns homosexuality in every age: in the patriarchs (Genesis 19:1-28); in the Law of Moses (Leviticus 18:2220:13); in the Prophets (Ezekiel 16:46-50); in the New Testament (Romans 1:18-271 Corinthians 6:9-10Jude 7-8). God condemns homosexuality because it seeks to overturn God's fundamental design for human relationships and  complementary order of male and female ((Genesis 2:18-25Matthew 19:4-6Ephesians 5:22-33)--as well as a picture of the relationship, symbolically speaking, of Christ and His church.


Here's the good news, however. 

The verse following 1Cor.6:9-10 about the restriction by God of who will not inherit the kingdom of the King of kings, that is, go to Heaven to dwell with God, because of their sin (unholiness), shows there is a way out; there is a way to be reconciled with God; there is hope: turning from all of one's sins and turning to Christ Jesus for forgiveness of them, for mercy from due punishment, and for eternal life:

1Co 6:11  And such  WERE some of you.  BUT you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

The good news is that not only is there forgiveness for all sins if one places all their trust and faith in the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, but beyond that, there is NEW life, blessings, cleansing from sin, removal of guilt, and true peace with the Holy God of Israel, and of course experiencing His abounding love. 


Here is a warning for Desmond Tutu:

Mat 7:22  "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' 23  "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.' 


Friday, July 26, 2013

Intolerance of the Tolerant: Another Example Of The Left Shaking Its Fist Up At God The Creator

The intolerance of those who claim to be tolerant: hypocrisy at work. Erin Bezigner reports about the latest intolerance of a pastor in Rockortm MA who wrote a biblically based article about the sin of homosexuality:

It epitomizes irony, really, to watch the reaction of those who cry, "Tolerance! Peace! Love! Unity!" when they are faced with the truth about sin, condemnation and the wrath of a holy God. The response is stunningly unsurprising, but should not go unnoticed by Christians....

Pastor Slyman's article was a response to the mayor of Gloucester raising the rainbow flag to fly under the American flag in the city square, an act that was meant to enhance the city's "welcoming gateway." Wrote Slyman:
The rainbow was given by God as a sign of His mercy upon sinful man. It signified a divine promise that “all flesh shall never again be cut off by the water of the flood, neither shall there be again a flood to destroy the earth” (Genesis 9:11). The rainbow signifies the grace and mercy of a holy God. 

Yet, in light of God’s mercy and grace, one must not forget that God is holy and hates sin with a passion. He abhors sin. In fact, it was because of sin that God destroyed the human race (save Noah and his family) with the flood in the first place. His holy anger is stated by God Himself in these words, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the earth” (Genesis 6:7). Why? Because “The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (Genesis 6:5). Wickedness is what fills the heart of man—wickedness that has infected all parts of our being, continually—the very wickedness that God hates. 

Fast forward to June 1, 2013 when Gloucester Mayor Carolyn Kirk raised the very symbol of holy God’s mercy and grace at the Gloucester rotary—a symbol that has been altered from its original meaning to one that exalts the very thing that God hates: sin (Romans 1:26-271 Corinthians 6:91 Timothy 1:9-10Jude 1:7). 

It is frightening to think, but on June 1 Mayor Kirk (representing the town of Gloucester) actually shook her fist in the face of God—supposing that God’s hatred of sin has dissipated, presuming that God’s grace will always be upon this town, thinking that God’s hatred against sin has changed. In effect, it was a mocking of the holiness of God—taking the very symbol of His grace and flying it proudly in the exaltation of sin—the very reason why God judged the earth previously.

(Source)
Even though Slyman beautifully shared the truth of the Gospel in his article, his words were not welcomed by some citizens of this city—a city that boasts of its supposedly warm, "welcoming gateway." Numerous letters-to-the-editor have been written and published by The Gloucester Times and, quite predictably, most of them were not written in support of Pastor Slyman.

End quote. Full article here where she also reports about the Gloucester Times editor, who ran the article, and his explanation for printing it, as well as the reaction of religious leaders in his community. 

Praise God for a strong brother who didn't cave! God has His remnant and He will always have the last word!

"Its Not About You"....Well Maybe It is: Rick Warren Appreciation Day

2Co 4:2 but we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God....5  For we do not preach ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your bond-servants for Jesus' sake

Thanks to Erin B at Do Not Be Surprised on this one:

THANKS to radio KKLA and KFSH for tons of kind notes from listeners on your RW Appreciation Day.I wept


This self-promotion and praise from the author of the "Purpose Driven Life" who claimed on p. 17 "Its not about you" and then wrote an entire book as well as dedicated that book to "you".

Yes, its about him. Warren's focus has been on on Warren. How many baptisms he's had at his church; how much he "reverse tithes", his books, his PEACE plan, his critics, his methodology, his superior love and tolerance, his good works, his Rick Warren Appreciation Day. Yes, it is all about him. What's missing? Something is missing. Dreadfully. Something that should be evident to all true Christians.

Sometimes a heretic is evident by what is being omitted.

Like the risen Lord Jesus Christ.

Does 2 John 9-11 Exist In Your Bible? Then You Must Live It

Over at Grace To You Blog, Fred Butler addresses Michael Brown's attack against the upcoming GTY conference "Strange Fire" and John MacArthur in particular. I haven't read Brown's criticism and I'll leave that for now, but my concern is with Butler's fence riding.

This is an issue I've addressed repeatedly for years now and am growing quite weary with it and it is this: it is becoming impossible for "solid men" to outrightly reject an entire man, ministry, book, organization, movement, or church any more.

They won't have it. They won't dare to do it. They see no need for it.

2John 9-11 doesn't exist in most Bibles it seems. Or at least, its not applicable to those who seem to have some things "right", especially those who are in "their" circle (academics, theology, whatever); you know, those who "otherwise" "seem solid".

It appears on the surface to be "balanced" or "measured"  or "reasonable" or "logical" by finding and "appreciating" the "good" of a teacher who is unfaithful to the Scriptures, instead of "rashly" or "unreasonably"  rejecting him or her.

Typically the complaint against my challenge is "well who's perfect" or "who has perfect doctrine"?

Scripture does. And Scripture always will. Scripture is knowable through the Holy Spirit's work in us. Truth is knowable. And God expects us to know His Word. That's why growth is part of the true Christian's life:

2Pe 3:17  You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness, 18  but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

We can't afford to accept and think we benefit from a dead tree with dead fruit even if it looks green. Foliage is NOT fruit. To be "right" on some things is nothing new: Satan is right on many things, after all. Mormonism is right on many things. But its the error that makes what is "right" to be in fact entirely wrong. This has been my biggest concern for years now. We are to reject an entire man, ministry, book, church, school, author, speaker if they deviate from the Truth in regard to the nature of God (including the Holy Spirit), the Gospel, soteriology, and/or are  in association with heretices (2John 9-11)etc. We are not talking about a brand new baby Christian in these instances (remember when everyone was excusing Driscoll's potty mouth (and increasingly his association with false teachers and doctrine) by saying he's just "immature"? I was pleading that  such is  not the case with Driscoll at all! By his position he claims maturity.  Finally at least John  MacArthur said the exact same thing: it isn't about a maturity issue--its a sin issue!

Is there truth in error? Can we find good fruit from a bad tree? Just as Brown finds good and truth in the Charismatic movement and its leaders, Butler seems to also find good and truth in Brown! 

Jas 3:11  Does a fountain send out from the same opening both fresh and bitter water? 12  Can a fig tree, my brethren, produce olives, or a vine produce figs? Nor can salt water produce fresh. 13  Who among you is wise and understanding? Let him show by his good behavior his deeds in the gentleness of wisdom. 14  But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your heart, do not be arrogant and so lie against the truth. 15  This wisdom is not that which comes down from above, but is earthly, natural, demonic. 

Mat 7:15  "Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16  "You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17  "So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18  "A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19  "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20  "So then, you will know them by their fruits. 21  "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 

2Pe 2:1  But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 

Who lets in the wolves who are dressed as sheep? How do they secretly sneak in among you? Is it not by leadership itself? The very "learned" ones who are supposed to be guarding the flock, protecting them and feeding them? 

Act 20:28  "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. 29  "I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30  and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. 31  "Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears. 

Are we therefore, to accept a leader/expert who welcomes, promotes, or defends false prophets? Are we to say that a man who has prophecies about Jesus correct, but yet defends an utterly blasphemous movement and many of its leaders(the very ones who are indeed bringing in all manner of doctrinal error and immorality) can  be of spiritual benefit to those who seek the pure milk of the Word?  What's the point in being alert then?  Or is it that prophecy is merely an academic endeavor--so that whether the source of knowledge is a believer or pagan, doesn't really matter?

The words of Bob Morey continue to ring in my ears:

Quote:


The main problem is that many religious leaders today say one thing and teach another. If you ask Gregory Boyd or the other “Open View of God” heretics if they believe in the “omniscience” of God, they will say, “Yes.” Dumb Christians are satisfied at this point and go their merry way deceived and hoodwinked. But if you force them to define the term “omniscience,” they end up denying that God knows all things! They claim that God does not and cannot know the future.

Just because someone says, “I believe in sola scriptura,” does not mean he really believes in it. If he elsewhere says that the Bible is not the final authority in faith and practice, he has denied in substance what he supposedly affirmed as a slogan. Heretics have always done this. What they affirm with the right hand is what they deny with the left hand. It does not matter what doctrine is at stake.

In the early 1980s, those who denied the inerrancy of Scripture did not begin by openly denying it.
They redefined it until the term “inerrancy” meant errors!

Those who deny the bodily resurrection of Christ often pretend to believe in it by tricky words and
double talkBelieve me; I have heard some slick theologians in my day!

Apostasy in Scripture is of two kinds: doctrinal and moral.

A heretic can be a good person who is very moral. Yet, he can also be an anti-Christ. The monk Pelagius was according to all a good man, morally speaking. Thus when I point out some teacher as a heretic, evanjellyfish usually respond, “But he is sooo nice! He is a good man. How dare you attack him!”

They assume that heretics are always mean and vile. A nice heretic who says that right phrases and theological clichés cannot be a heretic in their mind.The problem with heretics who are “nice” is that we tend to let them get away with the most outrageous teaching because they seem to be so nice.

End quote.

What does Scripture say about men who promote false teachers and teaching? It says to reject them as men who are guilty of wicked deeds:

Psa 26:4 I do not sit with deceitful men, Nor will I go with pretenders.

1Co 5:11  But now I am writing to  you NOT TO ASSOCIATE  with anyone who bears the name
of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or
swindler--not even to eat with such a one. 

Eph 5:6  Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. 7  Therefore do not be partakers with them;8  for you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light 9  (for the fruit of the Light consists in all goodness and righteousness and truth),10  trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord.11  Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them;12  for it is disgraceful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret. 

2Co 11:4  For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully.

Rom 16:17  Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them. 18  For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting. 

2Co 6:14  Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?15  Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?

We are called to separation; yes first and second degree separation according to Scripture.

2Jn 1:7  For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8  Watch yourselves, that you do not lose what we have accomplished, but that you may receive a full reward. 9  Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. 10  If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; 11  for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds


1Jn 2:20  But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know. 21  I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it, and because no lie is of the truth. 

1Th 5:19  Do not quench the Spirit; 20  do not despise prophetic utterances. 21  But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; 22  abstain from every form of evil. 

We are never called to sift through the garbage looking for the pure milk of the Word. We are not told to sift through the darkness to find the light. We are never called to sift through the error to find the Truth. Rather, we are commanded to examine everything, hold tightly to that which is biblically good, and shun EVERY FORM of evil. This verse is not saying look for the good among the evil, but rather the opposite: there is nothing good in evil therefore we are to reject it in all its forms entirely.

What form does evil take? Many, of course. But the most dangerous of all is the subtle kind. The kind Satan seduced Eve with. He did not outrightly attack God and His Word; rather he used truth AND lies and Eve went looking for the truth among that which would only bring death.

Evil (including error) is seductive. Its form can be that of "truth", of "light"; after all the Father of lies presents himself or his minions, as "angels of light", does he not?  The most effective and powerful form of evil is the kind that masks its lies with a bit of truth. Gullible souls gobble it up and even defend it. In the end, however, it leads to ungodliness, away from the faith, and away from Christ (Col. 2-3, James 3).

Its time to start rejecting entirely a man who promotes blasphemers, heretics, false teachers, and false teaching, even if he himself doesn't outrightly teach them himself. Why? Because in his justifying such error, he is promoting it, as 2John 11 clearly states. It means that something is GROSSLY, DOCTRINALLY, and  SPIRITUALLY wrong with such a man...a "learned" man. It means that what he SAYS elsewhere is contradicted by his other words and clear actions.

A person can have an academic knowledge of the Bible and apologetics or prophecy, and yet be lost. The fruit that continues to be borne is what gives lie to the reality of that "expert's" true spiritual condition. In other words, where their true loyalty is eventually becomes evident and THAT tells us where they truly are, despite being right on some doctrine or historical or prophetic fact. If they are friends with or defending or promoting an entire movement or leader(s) that are blasphemous and are at war with Christ, then its not merely a matter of a lack of discernment (which by the way, they should have if they are so learned, yes?), then they too are to be shunned because they have now become an enemy of not only us but of Christ and His Gospel. Truly, the doctrine of the Holy Spirit cannot be considered a matter of opinion, a secondary issue, something to "agree to disagree" on! Jesus never  agreed to disagree with any of the religious leaders. Ever.

Such men and women are an impediment to the Cross of Christ and should have no accolades or praise from those who seek to be loyal to Christ alone.

In closing, I'd like to leave you with Spurgeon's sharp but insightful words from almost 150 years ago:


Quote:We are grateful to the editor of Word and Work for speaking out so plainly. He says:—
    "In The Sword and the Trowel for the present month Mr. Spurgeon gives no uncertain sound concerning departures from the faith. His exposure of the dishonesty which, under the cover of orthodoxy, assails the very foundations of faith is opportune in the interests of truth. No doubt, like a faithful prophet in like evil times, he will be called a 'troubler of Israel,' and already we have noticed he has been spoken of as a pessimist; but any such attempts to lessen the weight of his testimony are only certain to make it more effective. When a strong sense of duty prompts public speech it will be no easy task to silence it.
    "The preachers of false doctrine dislike nothing more than the premature detection of their doings. Only give them time enough to prepare men's minds for the reception of their 'new views,' and they are confident of success. They have had too much time already, and any who refuse to speak out now must be held to be 'partakers of their evil deeds.' As Mr. Spurgeon says, 'A little plain-speaking would do a world of good just nowThese gentlemen desire to be let alone. They want no noise raised. Of course thieves hate watch-dogs, and love darkness. It is time that somebody should spring his rattle, and call attention to the way in which God is being robbed of his glory and man of his hope.'


End quote.

Thursday, July 25, 2013

Panoramic View Of The Scene That Awaited William, Kate, and George

The 360 degree image of what awaited William and Kate as they came out of St. Mary's with their new son.

Weep Not For Me!

(The following was written by Matthew Henry, and was found after his death.)

Would you know where I am? I am at home in my Father's house--in the mansion Jesus prepared for me there. I am where I want to be--where I have long and often desired to be. I am no longer on a stormy sea--but in a safe and quiet harbor. My working time is done--I am resting! My sowing time is done--I am reaping! My joy is as the joy of harvest!

Would you know how it is with me? I am perfect in holiness; grace is swallowed up in glory!

Would you know what I am doing? I see God; I see Him as He is; not as through a glass darkly, but face to face. The sight is transforming, it makes me like Him! I am in the sweet enjoyment of my blessed Redeemer, whom my soul loved, and for whose sake I was willing to part with all. I am here bathing myself at the spring-head of heavenly pleasures and unutterable joys; and, therefore, weep not for me. I am here singing hallelujahs incessantly to Him who sits upon the throne, and rest not day or night from praising Him!

Would you know what company I have? Blessed company--better than the best on earth; here are holy angels, and the spirits of just men made perfect. I am here with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of God; with blessed Paul, and Peter, and James, and John, and all the saints. And here I meet with many old acquaintances that I fasted and prayed with, who came here before me.

And, lastly, would you consider how long this is to continue? It is a garland that never withers; a crown of glory that never fades away; after millions of millions of ages, it will be as fresh as it is now; and, therefore, weep not for me!

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

George Alexander Louis: So What's In A Name?

St. George is of course Patron Saint of England and there have been 3 Scottish Kings by the name Alexander.


Alexander male version of Queen's middle name. Louis Prince Charles beloved uncle and Will's middle name.
Victoria Arbiter is a royal contributor to CNN,CTV, and Entertainment Tonight



Louis was a surprise for me but a name shared by Pr Charles' mentor Mountbatten, Pr William & also Earl Spencer's son Louis Viscount Althorp

Off to Bucklebury With An Announcement To Follow

Off to Bucklebury to be with the grandparents.....while the baby's name is announced!

Photos below from Hello!











From Daily Mail:

Very happy: Kate and William both smiled and waved to crowds outside the gates, but Kensington Palace would not reveal where they were heading

His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge

Kensington Palace said in a short statement: "The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are delighted to announce that they have named their son George Alexander Louis.
"The baby will be known as His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge."
The couple announced their decision to the world two days after he was born.

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge smile after showing off their baby son
(Sky News photo)

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Welcome To the World, Little Prince

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge leave hospital with their baby son

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge smile after showing off their baby son
Royal baby born
Duke and Duchess of Cambridge leave hospital with their baby son
"We're very emotional," said Kate, dressed in a bespoke cornflower blue crepe de chine dress by British designer Jenny Packham. "It's such a special time."

"He's got a good pair of lungs on him that's for sure," William joked. "He has got Kate's looks thankfully.

"I'll remind him of his tardiness when he's a bit older," he told the assembled media. "I don't know how long you guys have been here now, hopefully the hospital can get back to normal."

"He changed the first nappy," said 31-year-old Kate...

With the precious little boy safely strapped into his car seat, William drove his wife and son back home in a Range Rover. New aunt Pippa Middleton and her boyfriend Nico Jackson were waiting at Kensington Palace to meet the the baby.


My prayer is that all three of them might come to the saving knowledge of the risen Lord Jesus Christ for salvation.

31 years ago: