TTP Reclaiming the Mind Offers More Poison

TTP has yet again offered poison to Christians. While seeming to offer the "question" of the Emergent Church Movement and what its about, clues show they hardly neutral, but rather one sided.

Clue #1: Bradley Nassif, Eastern Orthodox "theologian". There is no common ground between the sister of Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, and biblical Christianity. They do not have a biblical ecclesiology as Patton seems to think. Patton says:"The greatest weakness of Evangelicalism is our ecclesiology and our “historical amnesia.” I agree."

Such an ecumenical view merely makes the point I've held to for a long time: true biblical Christianity does not share its history with Rome, her sisters, nor her daughters.

Patton goes on to encourage his readers: "Don’t forget to check out Dr. Nassif’s excellent podcast called Simply Orthodox."

Excellent? By what standard?

For a treatment of the Eastern Orthodox Church go here:

"The inclusion of pagan priests and the infiltration of Greek philosophers led the church to become seeker-friendly, or as Dr. Morey notes on pg. 20, “the first emerging church.”...With an extensive section on the Hellenization of Eastern Orthodoxy, Dr. Morey provides documented proof that is beyond refutation that from its beginning, Eastern Orthodox theology was molded and shaped by pagan doctrines and rituals. Dr. Morey describes how the worldview of Origen and those who followed him was thoroughly pagan. He illustrates how instead of Christianizing the dominant Hellenistic philosophies and religions around them, they succeeded in Hellenizing Christianity (pg. 41). "

I wonder if they will invite Dr. Robert Morey to discuss why the EOC isn't biblical--you know, to be fair and irenic?

Clue #2: Nassif pushes the Emergen Church Movement. On the same "Simply Orthodox" that Patton thinks is "excellent", Nassif teaches on the Desert Fathers of Rome. These Desert Fathers are making a comeback in ECM circles, fostering the use of Eastern Mysticism.

They were Roman Catholic monks living in the desert and were heavily into mysticism, using breath prayers, labyrinths, all of which we see in the ECM's "Contemplative prayers" and "Contemplative Spirituality" and all of which were borrowed from the pagans.

Clue #3: Nassif and McKnight are on the faculty of North Park University. This school calls itself "Christian" but it is proud to be called "ecumenical" and indeed it is: "We are a Christian university, committed to relating faith in Jesus Christ to the aims of higher education. Ours is not a conformist environment; acceptance of diversity and ecumenism is the spirit of our campus." Translation: tolerance is our middle name!

North Park University has women teaching and leading at the seminary level (this is anti-biblical and the very definitive example of feminism), as well as offering "Spiritual Formation" classes.

Clue #4 : Future Guests:

March 13 - Greg Koukl (this man denies the sufficiency of Scripture and says not all of Scripture is God-breathed) will be dialoguing with liberal C Michael Patton about the Emergent Church. Do they come from a neutral view point? No, as I already showed, their recent guest, Nassir, is part of the ECM thinking--he endorses Contemplative Prayer via his own push of the Mystic Catholic Desert Father.

But in case you still have doubts, TTP's line up cements their positive view of ECM:

March 10 Dan Kimbal - ECM leader - feminist, pro-RCC. He pushes the Easter Mystic practice of lectio divina as well as silent meditation (emptying your mind) and prayer labyrinths. More on Kimball here.

March 27 Mark Driscoll - ECM leader and one of the founders. Also known as the "Cussing Pastor". In January 2006 Driscoll distanced himself from the ECM he helped to create. It turns out he hosted the very emergent National Pastors Convention dubbed "emergence 2007" at his church.

This annual conference pushes the ECM agenda and is chock-full of ECM leaders. He's not distancing himself at all. He's still at it, joining hands with Doug Pagitt and other leaders of the ECM.Here's a list of speakers for the June conference in Seattle:Seattle: Mars Hill Church – June 1-2, 2007Host: Krista Tippett Krista's Journal Speakers: Mark Driscoll, Dan Kimball, Doug Pagitt, Karen Ward (woman "pastor")."

The 2007 NPC (of which there are women "pastors" who join) boasted: "Join us for a unique weekend conversation that will feature many of the key leaders in the emerging church movement. This event will provide you with a first-hand experience with people who are reimagining what the church can be for a post-Christian world. Come and interact with key leaders about the beliefs, practices and ways of engaging culture in the way of Jesus. "

John MacArthur also decries Driscoll's use of inappropriate language and felt. MacArthur states:"Some of the things Driscoll talks freely and frequently about involve words and subject matter I would prefer not even to mention in public, so I am not going to quote or describe the objectionable parts." Driscoll rebels against the commands in Eph. 5:3-7.

For the bridge between Driscoll and John Piper, go here.

April 3 Scot McKnight - Return guest. ECM friendly - feminist and also on faculty at North Park University with Nassif.

He’s “Friend of Emergent” – he’s got this graphic at the bottom of his homepage. This in itself should make all who read and listen to him to be cautious considering the heresy coming out of the Emergent Church Movement.

He’s got 12 links to sites on “Daily Prayers”, and most if not all, are Anglican (akin to Romanism), Eastern Orthodox (again, akin to Romanism), as well as a Celtic Prayer site (self-proclaimed “ecumenical” that is demonstrated in a “new monasticism'). One such link goes to a site about “Divine Hours": Divine hours book and suggestions. "The Divine Hours" by Phyllis Tickle. Marcus Borg (of the heretical and liberal "Jesus Seminar" group) is also on the ExploreFaith editorial board with Tickle.

Who is this author that McKnight suggests reading? “Tickle is a member of the Episcopal Church and served as a Lay Eucharistic Minister and Lay Reader as well as, from time to time, a vestry member and teacher...

There 37 links to Emergent websites on McKnight’s website.

McKnight is pro-women pastors/teachers. Of course this violates clear commands given in 1Cor. 14; Titus 2; 1Tim. 3.

McKnight perverts Mary into a feminist of his own imagination:

In a Christianity Today article, McKnight turns the Mary of Scripture into an activist for political and social justice. This is troublesome because this simply is not what Scripture declares of Mary or Jesus for that matter (Scripture commands believers to submit to their governments—Romans 13, Titus 3:1; 1Peter 2:11-18, except when they tell us to disobey God’s command).

What McKnight does is to take the Emergent Church Movement/RCC’s Liberation Theology , and twists Mary into it. Mary was neither “subversive” (Webster defines this as “a systematic attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or political system by persons working secretly from within”); rebellious, or concerned with Herod as McKnight tries to paint her. Quite the opposite: she submits to God, Joseph, and later to her son Jesus Christ at the wedding in Cana.

It is clear that TTP and Reclaiming the Mind is set out to offer deception for Truth, as if anything is optional. God demands purity in worship of HIM as well as in doctrine. This is precisly why Scripture ALONE is the sole authority for the biblical Christian, for His Word alone is pure, uncorrupted, infallible, sufficient, living and active, as well as life-giving.

Jas 3:17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.

2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? 2Co 6:15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? 2Co 6:16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.17 Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you,

Mat 4:4 But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Psa 138:2 I bow down toward Your holy temple and give thanks to Your name for Your steadfast love and your faithfulness, for You have exalted above all things Your name and Your word.

Is. 8: 20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.

Psychology's Demonic Origins

What are the origins of psychology?

They are humanistic and occultic. Here are a few samplings on Freud and Jung, the fathers of moder psychology.

The follow are exerpts from "The End of 'Christian Psychology" book available online:

Freud

Freud and Jung each turned his own experience into a new belief system called psychoanalysis. Freud denied the spirituality of man by identifying religion as an illusion and calling it a neurosis. Jung attempted to debase spirituality by presenting all religion as mythology and fantasy. Many contemporary psychotherapists have not moved very far from these two positions. They often present religion as an illness at worst and as a myth at best. " p. 104 -105

Freud believed that the unconscious portion of the mind, rather than the conscious, influences all of a person’s thoughts and actions. In fact, he believed that the unconscious not only influences, but determines everything an individual does. p. 126

Freud invented psychoanalysis as a method for treating mental-emotional disorders and particularly for investigating what he considered to be the unconscious.

The psychoanalytic method supposedly exposes the unconscious through the process of free association and dream analysis. In free association, the central activity in psychoanalysis, the patient reveals both his thought life and his dreams. p. 127

Carl Jung (Jung's quotes are taken from Jung's "Memories, Dreams, Reflections")

"After Jung repudiated Christianity he became involved in idolatry and the occult. He renamed and replaced everything having to do with biblical Christianity with his own mythology of archetypes. As he developed his theories, his archetypes took shape and served him as familiar spirits. One such personal familiar spirit that helped Jung develop his theories was Philemon.18 Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, op. cit., pp. 170-199.

"Jung also participated in the occult practice of necromancy. Jung mythologized Scripture and reduced the basic doctrines of the Christian faith into esoteric gnosticism. Freud was also involved in idolatry and the occult. He collected a large number of ancient Greek, Roman, Oriental, and Egyptian artifacts, including rows of statuettes arranged on his desk and around his office. One person who knew the family said that for Freud, “The artifacts weren’t only decorative. He used some of them to help him to write.”19 One writer suggests: What Freud may have been practicing . . . was an ancient form of magic in which consecrated statues representing spirits or transpersonal powers would engage the magician in imaginal dialogues and supply him with invaluable knowledge. Such magical practices were well known in ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome, and the very statuettes that Freud owned may have been used for such practices by their contemporaries.20

Many Christians have probably never heard of C. G. Jung, but his influence in the church is vast and affects sermons, books, and activities, such as the prolific use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). A current, popular example of Jung’s legacy can be seen in Robert Hicks’s book The Masculine Journey, which was given to 50,000 men who attended a Promise Keepers conference. Christians need to learn enough about Jung and his teachings to be warned and wary. They may incorporate his notions regarding personality types, the personal unconscious, dream analysis, and various archetypes inp. 149

Other Christians have been influenced more indirectly as they have engaged in inner healing, followed 12-step programs, or taken the MBTI, which is based on Jung’s personality types and incorporates his theories of introversion and extroversion.

As a young child Jung had difficulty distinguishing between Jesus and a monstrous figure encountered in a nightmare, which he later identified as a huge phallus.2 Besides Jung’s father being a Lutheran minister, all eight of his uncles were pastors as well.4 p. 152-153

Because Jung turned psychoanalysis into a type of religion, he is also considered to be a transpersonal psychologist as well as an analytical theorist. He delved deeply into the occult, practiced necromancy, and had daily contact with disembodied spirits, which he called archetypes. Jung describes having his whole house “crammed full of spirits” crying out to him. He said that was the beginning of writing “The Seven Sermons to the Dead,” which he says flowed out of him.24 Just prior to that experience he wrote about a fantasy of his soul flying away. He said: This was a significant event: the soul, the anima, establishes the relationship to the unconscious. (footnote 24Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, op. cit., pp. 190-191)

Much of what Jung wrote was inspired by such entities. Jung had his own familiar spirit whom he called Philemon. At first he thought Philemon was part of his own psyche, but later on he found that Philemon was more than an expression of his own inner self. Jung says: "Philemon and other figures of my fantasies brought home to me the crucial insight that there are things in the psyche which I do not produce, but which produce themselves and have their own life. Philemon represented a force which was not myself. In my fantasies I held conversations with him, and he said things which I had not consciously thought. For I observed clearly that it was he who spoke, not I. . . .Psychologically, Philemon represented superior insight. He was a mysterious figure to me. At times he seemed to me quite real, as if he were a living personality. I went walking up and down the garden with him, and to me he was what the Indians call a guru."27

Jung’s exploration into what he thought was his unconscious opened him up to demonic influence, which he at first thought emanated from his own unconscious but which existed quite independently from him. He even described himself as having demonic strength and as having a demon in him. He wrote: "But there was a demonic strength in me, and from the beginning there was no doubt in my mind that I must find the meaning of what I was experiencing in these fantasies. When I endured these assaults of the unconscious I had an unswerving conviction that I was obeying a higher will, and that feeling continued to uphold me until I had mastered the task.28 There was a daimon in me, and in the end its presence proved decisive. It overpowered me, and if I was at times ruthless it was because I was in the grip of the daimon.29" p. 156-158

Inner healing

"Inner healing beliefs and techniques continue to deceive many Christians. A central belief is that we are the way we are because of past hurts that need to be healed through reliving the past and bringing Jesus into past events. This is a deceptive combination of Freudian psychology and occult visualization. The inner healer is convinced that present problems are expressions of past wounds that must be healed before the person can overcome problems of living and get on with life." (PAL V8N2 * March-April 2000 from Psycho-Heresy Awareness)

Unholy Alliance : The dangers of mixing pop psychology with Christian Truth (by Dr. Lois Chan) book review:

"Chan describes channeling as "the act of receiving communication from the spirit worlds" and says, "As virtually all Christians understand, the Bible forbids us to communicate with the spirit world (Deut. 18:10-2; 2 Chr. 33:2-6; 2 Cor. 6:14-16)" (p. 19). She therefore warns:

'When we bring psychology into the church, we risk bringing in the New Age elements of psychology. If we bring in New Age psychology, we risk bringing in demonic (channeled) teachings. In that case, the integration of Bible and psychology will turn out to be the integration of biblical teachings and demonic teachings—an unholy alliance '(p. 19)."

Regarding early childhood influences, Chan quotes Dr. Paul Meier, James Dobson, Dr. Henry Cloud and other Christian psychologists, as well as channeled spirit guides. She also shows similarities between psychological and occult teachings regarding the unconscious, dream analysis, projection, human potential, and the self-concept. (PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, July-August 2006, Vol. 14 No. 1)

2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?

2Co 6:15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?

2Co 6:16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

2Co 6:17 Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you,

Jas 3:17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.

1Jn 2:21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth.

It is an impossibility to think that we can name Christ Jesus as our Master and mix Him with demons, Truth with Error, Scripture with the occult, and be pleasing to Him in anyway. HE demands purity in doctrine and practice and He is a jealous God.

The Failure of Prozac

I saw this breaking story first in the UK papers....It seems that the US newspapers were very late on this crucial news regarding psych drugs:

The UK Independant newspaper reported:

They are among the biggest-selling drugs of all time, the "happiness pills" that supposedly lift the moods of those who suffer depression and are taken by millions of people in the UK every year.

But one of the largest studies of modern antidepressant drugs has found that they have no clinically significant effect. In other words, they don't work.

The finding will send shock waves through the medical profession and patients and raises serious questions about the regulation of the multinational pharmaceutical industry, which was accused yesterday of withholding data on the drugs.

According to the UK Guardian:

Prozac, the bestselling antidepressant taken by 40 million people worldwide, does not work and nor do similar drugs in the same class, according to a major review released today.

The study examined all available data on the drugs, including results from clinical trials that the manufacturers chose not to publish at the time. The trials compared the effect on patients taking the drugs with those given a placebo or sugar pill.

When all the data was pulled together, it appeared that patients had improved - but those on placebo improved just as much as those on the drugs.

"Given these results, there seems little reason to prescribe antidepressant medication to any but the most severely depressed patients, unless alternative treatments have failed," says Kirsch. "This study raises serious issues that need to be addressed surrounding drug licensing and how drug trial data is reported."

Newspaper The Financial Times is also running a story on this.

For more information on the horrors of psychology, I suggest going to Psychology Debunked
and Psycho-heresy Aware.

The best thing for any person who is dealing with depression or stress is to turn to Christ Jesus and repent of their sin. Only the Creator knows our deepest issues and in His Word He tells us how we are to think and do:

Php 4:6 do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Php 4:8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

If you are not Born from Above, trusting in Christ Jesus alone for salvation from your sin and God's wrath, you need to do so now. It is ONLY in Christ and through Christ that a person can fully lay down his worries, anxieties, concerns, a pain, and trust in the Sovereign God to care for him in every way. The God of Scripture is an all-wise God, knowing our secret sins and our deepest pain, but there is only one way to deal with them: trust fully in HIM. He is the God of all comfort (2Cor. 1).

Psychology will fail every time because its starting point is doctrines of demons centered on sinful and rebellious man. Truth starts with Jesus Christ who is the only Truth (John 14:6), and His Scripture which is Truth (John 17:17). Better to know the Truth and deal with the sin and pain, then to live the lies of psychology which is demonic and poisonous.

Bush Thinks the Conservatives Should Support McCain

They're at it again.

When will these guys GET IT? I'm NOT interested in their compromising politics. They can't win my vote, nor will the GOP get me back.

Today Bush said, according to Bloomberg:

``Soon we'll have a nominee who will carry a conservative banner in this election and beyond,'' Bush said at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. ``This is an important election. Prosperity and peace are in the balance.''

Bush, in speech running almost 45 minutes, told the group that ``the American people support our points of view'' and ``share our philosophy.'' He outlined differences between Republicans and Democrats on issues such as taxes and judicial nominees."

1. McCain is not a Conservative and neither is Bush. Both are moderates and mere RINO's.

2. Saying you are Conservative and actually BEING Conservative are two different things. I'm not buying their song and dance routine. Their records, which ARE their actions, speaks for themselves. Collaborating with the Democrats means you are not Conservative. Quit lying to us and quit acting like we're a bunch of mindless moronic robots. Its because of leaders like you two that I left the GOP.

3. Money and peace isn't happening now and it won't with McCain. As long as the Moderates and Democrats claim Islam is a religion of peace, we're sunk. Nothing but white flag wavers, these guys are. When the government forces people to give up their homes for a hotel, that's no way to prosper. Bet the Founding Fathers would roll over in their graves if they saw that.

4. McCain and Bush don't share my views and I certainly don't share their philosophies of holding hands with the enemy, whether its the drunkard named Teddy Kennedy, or the head of the PLO terrorist gang. Big government, bloated budgest, big spending ---none of these are in line with the GOP platform nor with me. Then again, the GOP plateform is nothing but platitude and useless rhetoric--means nothing anymore.

This No-Party Girl Ain't Going To Buy What McCain THINKS I Want

Sen. McCain said today that "The quote 'independent' voters and frankly the old [Ronald] Reagan Democrats will come our way because I think we will have a message that will appeal to all of them."

I'm a non-partisan voter now, fomerly a Republican, and always a conservative. The GOP left me in the dust some years back and I finally had enough and couldn't take it anymore.

It left me, I left it.

I won't stay in a party that is, in all practicle terms, no different than the Democrat party. Its a disaster. Better to have a Liberal party and Conservative party, I think.

I left the GOP precisely BECAUSE of men like McCain who are nothing but RINOS. So, nope McCain, not going to buy into your broad road blather. You have NOTHING to offer me but compromise and deceit. Trying to please all men, you ARE compromising. Period.

Have fun trying to persuade everyone else. But you won't persuade me. I must answer to Christ Jesus.

Most Americans Don't Want A Biblical Leader As President, Contrary To Zogby

I read an article today that claimed “most Americans want a biblical leader as president” and I just refuse to believe that.

First, what the statistics claim: quote:

About six in 10 Americans likely to vote say they would be more likely to vote for a presidential candidate who speaks publicly about following the example of admirable leaders from the Bible and who uses the Bible for guidance in both public and personal matters, found a nationwide Zogby Poll conducted for the American Bible Society.

According to the survey, more than three-quarters (78 percent) of respondents – 86 percent of women and 68 percent of men – view candidates citing Scripture when explaining political positions as positive.

Out of the polled respondents aged 18-29, 84 percent said a candidate’s servant-leader attitude would impact their vote. Interestingly, only 62 percent of older respondents, 50-64 years old, said it would influence their decision. In addition to Biblical leadership qualities, many likely voters are affected by the simple question of whether the candidate believes in God.

Nearly half of likely voters indicated that they would not vote for a presidential candidate who did not believe in God, while 20 percent said they would vote for such a candidate. Another 20 percent said this factor would not affect their voteBut by far, truthfulness and integrity – characteristics often emphasized in the Bible – topped the list of qualities respondents feel are most important in a leader.

The poll was conducted Jan. 25-27 on 1,008 adult respondents from throughout the United States. Nearly all respondents (95 percent) said they have some interaction with the Bible, ranging from well aware to exploring the contents of the Bible. Close to a quarter of participants said they were born-again Christians.

End quote.

Well, according to this, they’d be peachy-keen with a Mormon, since the above is so vague, a cultist could easily agree with it.

And that’s the problem.

What they really want is a religious guy, not a BIBLICAL leader. Why? Because a biblical leader tells people what they DON’T want to hear.

A biblical leader will not compromise on essentials of The faith such as (this is not an exhaustive list, mind you): the deity of Jesus Christ and His sinlessness and physical resurrection; the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture; the Trinity; a literal 6-Day Creation and Hell; biblical roles for men and women (and nope, they aren’t the same); church discipline; election; predestination; believer’s baptism; salvation by grace through faith alone in Christ Jesus alone; the true Gospel of Jesus which includes the wrath of God and the sinner under His wrath (not a warm and fuzzy feel-good gospel);and also the Lordship of the Lord Jesus Christ. Remember this isn’t an exhaustive list, but these are some major doctrines not held to by most Americans, let alone most proclaiming Christians. Go here for more on how ignorant "Christians" are.

A biblical leader won’t look to the majority to decide what he will do.

A biblical leader will not use Scripture as a mere guide book as if it’s a map or text about neat suggestions; rather he will see and use Scripture as the true and living Word of God---sufficient to give wisdom in dealing with all the issues of life and full of commands that are to be obeyed by those who claim HIS name.

A biblical leader will be willing to go it alone in the face of unbiblical obsticles, even when such obsticles are labeled “biblical” or “for God’s glory”, because quite frankly, they are neither. This calls for wisdom and discernment.

A biblical leader is truly Christ-centered, not man-centered. His view of God is high and view of man is low.

A biblical leader is not pragmatic, but Scriptural.

So if most professing Christians would not either know about some of these doctrines, or outright reject them, what makes Zogby or those polled, think they want a biblical leader as president? They don’t even want one as a pastor!

Think I’m broadbrushing? Ok, but it’s the truth. I’ll tell you why.

Scripture says that the way to eternal life is narrow. Secondly, many will be deceived by false teachers who creep into local churches, sounding pretty good, but truly are rotten and dead to the core.

Mat 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

Joh 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Jud 1:3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. 4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

2Thes. 2: 10 and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

We live in a post-Modern society that has infiltrated most, if not all, churches today. This is reflected in professing Christians’ view that Truth is not knowable, absolute truth doesn’t exist, that each individual can determine what is right in their own minds; that Scripture is not clear and we can all have our own interpretation of it; that Scripture is a good book, but not absolute Truth nor is it living and active.

These same “Christians” are feminists, pragmatists, and man-pleasers. They are spineless and without discernment, thinking that tolerance of evil, sin, and deception, is truly love. They think calling a person to repent of specific unrepentant sin (Matt. 18; Gal. 6) is judgmental and unloving.

Why else do you suppose Rick Warren sells so many copies of his books and is on t.v. so much? He appeals to the masses.

Look at the best selling books in your local “Christian” bookstore. Authors who are humanists (psychologists), modalists, Roman Catholic, and New Age abound in them. And believe me, publishers and bookstores will not put on the shelf what won’t sell well, because it’s a money- making business.

Because Truth is by its nature, exclusive, it rejects everything that is false. It is not tolerant. That is why the road to eternal life is narrow: God is the God of Truth and HIS Word is Truth. Jesus is Truth. We are sanctified by Truth and saved in Truth. Truth defines what sin is.

Those doctrines I listed above are not tolerated by most people. They don’t rejoice in the Truth, which is how Scripture defines love : 1Co 13:6 it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.

When faced with the biblical doctrine of women staying home and not being leaders, is there rejoicing in that truth?

When told that God hates the wicked, do “Christians” agree or do they recoil at that truth?

When confronted with church discipline, do most professing Christians embrace that as biblical and for the welfare of the sinning “brother” and the local church, or do they find it offensive?

Where is the rejoicing in Truth when “Christians” are confronted with it?

Its missing.

So do people REALLY want a biblical leader as president?

Well, they don’t even want one as a church leader. So the answer is no, they don’t.

Besides, a biblical leader would never be able to appease the masses to garner the wider audience, precisely because they hold to Truth and Truth will not change for anyone.

Fear God
Vote Biblically
Don't Compromise ©

Most of all, yearn for God's clear Truth.

Public Schools Can Expose Children to Offensive Ideas--Let's Test that Theory By Bringing in Scripture Against Homosexuality

World Net Daily is reporting here about how the appellate court in Massachusetts has upheld a judge's immoral decision to expose kindergartners to homosexuality teaching despite the protest from parents. In part the articl says:

In a case that could wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court, an appeals panel upheld dismissal of a lawsuit by Massachusetts parents seeking to prevent discussion of homosexual families in their children's elementary school classrooms. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday agreed with a judge's decision last year that a school can expose children to contrary ideas without violating their parents' rights to
exercise religious beliefs.

"Public schools," wrote Judge Sandra L. Lynch, "are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, particularly when the school imposes no requirement that the student agree with or affirm those ideas, or even participate in discussions about them."

Ok, then, so the next time an Atheist or Muslim decry the teaching of Christmas, Easter, Creation, Jesus Christ, Hanukkah, or biblical marriage (one man wed to one wife), we can quote from Judge Lynch. Let's see how suddenly its not applicable for conservatives and/or Christians. Let's see what happens in Mass. when a teacher or a student, brings in the Bible and reads from it regarding how homosexuality is a sin. Will they also say that the school can allow it because "the school is not obliged to shield studentds from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive"?

Cedarville University Offers Religious Poison to Students

Psa 1:1 Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; 2 but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.

I read this article from Ingrid over at Slice of Laodicea, but you can go directly to Lighthousetrails if you want. Both sites are excellent.

In part here's what it said:


One of emerging spirituality’s pied pipers, Shane Claiborne, is scheduled to speak at Cedarville University. The present leadership of that institution is apparently failing to hold the line on contemplative and emerging influences. Lighthouse Trails Research is reporting the following:


"On February 11th, Cedarville University will be hosting an evening with emerging church activist Shane Claiborne. The evening is titled after Claiborne’s book, The Irresistible Revolution. Lighthouse Trails spoke with John Purple (Cedarville’s Dean for Student Life), who said the event was open to both students and the public.

Lighthouse Trails told Purple that in the back of Claiborne’s book he lists a number of “Local Revolutionaries and Ordinary Radicals” to which proceeds of the book go. One of those is the church Brian McLaren founded - Cedar Ridge Community Church 1 Another is Rob Bell’s church, Mars Hill Bible Church2. Bell is a New Age sympathizer who tells readers in his book, Velvet Elvis that they should study the teachings of mysticism and tantric sex promoter Ken Wilber (p. 192) (see Wilber’s website with discretion). Bell also resonates with a Dominican sister (whom he invited to his church) who is from a spiritual center that promotes the occultic healing technique called Reiki (see March 29, 2006 teaching at Mars Hill).

Claiborne’s book has a foreword by liberal political activist, Jim Wallis. While Cedarville’s Dean of Student Life (Purple) told Lighthouse Trails that Cedarville is “very conservative,” pointing students to a book that is partially written by Wallis seems to give a different message. Wallis is the founder and director of Sojourners magazine, a widely read publication that gives a voice to mystics, emerging leaders, and New Age proponents. Sojourners would not represent the views of a “conservative” Christian college by any means, and it is a dichotomy for Cedarville to call itself conservative Christian then introduce students to a book written by Wallis and Claiborne in a favorable light, which CU is doing when it says that Claiborne is “rooted in the values of the Christian faith.” 'Source here.

In addition, Ingrid noted that Cedarville's President Book List also promotes ECM guru Leonard Sweet's book "Soul Tsunami". You can read about him at Lighthouse Trails as well.

This "Christian" university is falling down the Down grade fast, exposing its students to religious poison via the ECM. Its not surprising but pathetic that a "Christian" college would tout themselves to be conservative when in fact they are denying the Truth so they can be "open-minded".

Notice how in academia over 100 years ago, is like today: indulging in the ungodly notions, considering their worth, gleaning something from the putrid garbage of the world, and saying they are gaining wisdom. Utter nonsense. Its sitting in the seat of scoffers, asking "has God said?"

2 Tim. 2: 16 Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly. 17 Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18 who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some.

The Down Grade SECOND ARTICLE April 1887 Sword and Trowel

http://www.spurgeon.org/s_and_t/dg02.htm Robert Shindler writes:


"He says:—"In my time the academy was in a state peculiarly favorable to the serious pursuit of truth, as the students were about equally divided upon every question of much importance, such as liberty, necessity, the sleep of the soul, and all the articles of theological orthodoxy and heresy; in consequence of which, all these topics were the subject of continual discussion. Our tutors, also, were of different opinions, Dr. Ashworth taking the orthodox side of every question, and Mr. Clark, the sub-tutor, that of heresy, though always with the greatest modesty. Both of our tutors being young, at least as tutors, and some of the senior students excelling more than they could pretend to do in several branches of study, they indulged us in the greatest freedoms. The general plan of our studies, which may be seen in Dr. Doddridge's published lectures, was exceedingly favorable to free enquiry, as we were referred to authors on both sides of every question. In this situation I saw reason to embrace what is generally called the heterodox side of every question."'

"But in too many cases sceptical daring seems to have taken the place of evangelical zeal, and the husks of theological speculations are preferred to the wholesome bread of gospel truth. With some the endeavor seems to be not how steadily and faithfully they can walk in the truth, but how far they can get from it. To them divine truth is like a lion or a tiger, and they give it "a wide berth." Our counsel is—Do not go too near the precipice; you may slip or fall over. Keep where the ground is firm; do not venture on the rotten ice. "

Shindler goes on to say:

Quote:

The first step astray is a want of adequate faith in the divine inspiration of the sacred Scriptures. All the while a man bows to the authority of God's Word, he will not entertain any sentiment contrary to its teaching. "To the law and to the testimony," is his appeal concerning every doctrine. He esteems that holy Book, concerning all things, to be right, and therefore he hates every false way. But let a man question, or entertain low views of the inspiration and authority of the Bible, and he is without chart to guide him, and without anchor to hold him.

But when, on the other hand, reason has been exalted above revelation, and made the exponent of revelation, all kinds of errors and mischiefs have been the result.

...Human reason is exalted to a higher office, and what is not comprehensible by its grasp, is not readily received. The mind of the Socinian feels still less veneration for the Word of God; for, according to his sentiments, some parts of it are not inspired; mistakes occur in the reasoning of the apostles; not a few passages are unauthentic, and what remains is interpreted with a latitude as to the expressions and language of Scripture, which would not be tolerated in expounding the sense of any other writer." ("History of Dissenters," by Bogue and Bennet.)They run in 'the course of this world,' follow every fashionable folly, and family and personal godliness seems in general to be lost among them. There is scarcely any appearance of life and zeal in the cause of religion, which demands and deserves the greatest.

End Quote.

Col 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.

2Co 10:5 We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ,

Pro 9:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.

Emergent Church Movement Leader Applauds Pro-Wiccan "Pastor"

A post-modern thinking (really, non-thinking) continues to rear its ugly head. This time it was in the form of a "reverend" named Phil Wyman. He's a pro-wiccan, pro-pagan (the actual religion), and supposedly a reader of dreams.

The article I read can be found here.

In part the article says:

A little over a year ago Wyman was excommunicated from his church, accused of getting too amicable with the city’s Wiccan community because of controversial missionary tactics that included operating a pagan-Christian discussion forum, offering Web site links to pagan sites and fostering personal friendships with witches.

Today the church continues to operate, although it no longer has a parent church, and has about 45 members. Wyman’s mission is to break stereotypes about Christians and Wiccans. He says many Christians don’t realize Wicca is a nature-based religion.

Since October 2006, when Wyman was cut off from his church, not much has changed. He hasn’t lost any members of his congregation and, if anything, his newfound freedom has allowed him to offer more experimental programs at his Essex Street church, The Gathering — things like Lectio Divina, a type of ancient meditation using the Bible, meant to build two-way communication between the reader and God.

And Wyman is still running the same program he began when he moved to Salem from California with his wife and son eight years ago, an e-mail discussion group between pagans and Christians called Circle and Cross Talk.

He’s continued to grow his church’s array of controversial street theater events, offered during the month of October, things like dream interpretation; psalm readings, where a costumed monk confesses the ancient sins of the church; and the Brimstone Chronicles, where participants “travel” through Dante’s heaven and hell and are forced to face their own mortality.

Instead of preaching about heaven and hell, Wyman chooses to explore wider topics and compare the spiritual basis of Wicca and Christianity. “Why should we as Christians be limited to talking about heaven and hell?” he asks. “Jesus didn’t say ‘follow me or go to hell,’ he had many other things to say. It’s not that it’s not a part of what we say, it’s just not everything.”

“If ever there was a person that could make me want to become a churchgoing Christian it would be Phil,” Day says. “Not because he’s tried to convince me that witchcraft was evil, or hell is fire and brimstone, but because he leads a life of honesty. He’s one of the most honest people I know … and I’m a psychic. I look at people and I see their dishonesty.”

Pagans, both biblically and literally, are comfortable with this guy, and he has no clue as to what and how Jesus and the apostles, not to mention the prophets, dealt with unbelievers.

1Jn 3:13 Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world hates you.

Joh 15:18 "If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you: 'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours.

Jas 4:4 You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.

Emergent Church Movement (ECM) leader John Armstrong embraces Wyman and his methods.

Here he says:

One such woman, who joined Phil’s congregation, says of him, “He lets people figure out their own spirituality.” Phil is careful to not approve the practices of these witches and does not join their rituals, saying, “It’s their worship, not mine.” But, and this is the important point here, he does not attack these people as the children of the devil.

It is amazing, but not surprising that Armstrong and Wyman both haven't a clue as to how Jesus and John the Baptist dealt with some folks. Indeed, both told unbelieving leaders they were of their Father the devil, for that IS what they were. Telling people the Truth is now called "attacking". How utterly pathetic and damning of them...even if they are oh-so-politically-correct.

Joh 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.


1Jn 3:9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.

Armstrong goes on to say:

" I found both his spirit and his missional perspective refreshing and Christ-centered. There is every reason to conclude that Phil is both orthodox and evangelical."

Considering I've just listed Scripture that speaks against what Armstrong has said, I wonder what he means by "Christ-centered" and "evangelical"? Certainly the ECM is neither. And "orthodox" by who's definition? Rome's? Ok then, maybe Wyman is orthodox (al la "Lectio Divina" breath prayers of RCC, but that's also pagan and NOT evangelical).

The Gospel says that unless they repent of their sin and worship of idols they will go to Hell. Jesus is the only Way, Truth, and Life, and NO ONE goes to the Father but by HIM. Unless they put all their faith and trust in the Person and Work of Jesus Christ, who is God the Son, the Resurrected Master, they will die in their sins and go to Hell. This is the MOST loving thing a person can proclaim to anyone.

To not tell someone they are headed for hell is hate, not love. Love has the best interest of the other person in mind;more than that, they love God and His Word so much they proclaim it and stand clearly by and in It.

Wyman and the ECM are made for each other. But neither have the Truth and are emotionalizing (yes---I made up a word, because what they advocate isn't love) people straight to hell as they themselves go with them. To their own condemnation.

Believers Old and New Are Clueless about the Claims of Christ and Other Biblical Doctrine

From The Christian Post:

"The preaching to questions posed by young believers [in Q&A Emergent churches] comes at a time when Christians are increasingly addressing the failure of churches and seminaries to equip believers with the truth and how they can defend their faith. In a culture where truth is relative, more Americans are abandoning a traditional view of God and the Bible, according to The Barna Group, with only nine percent of the "born again" population holding a biblical worldview.

Focus on the Family launched The Truth Project last year to introduce believers to the Truth claims of Christ and tackle the pervasive problem ill-equipped Christians. Also, more Christian authors and leaders have published books answering some of the most common questions both believers and nonbelievers have about God and Christianity."

The Emergent Church Movement is HARDLY equipped to answer with sound biblical doctrine as their heart is one of rebellion against one VERY fundamental doctrine: the Lordship of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Barna's definition of a Christian isn't even biblical. How would he even know what is a "biblical worldview" when he can't even biblically define a follower of Christ (he assumes Roman Catholics can be Christians for one thing, not to mention how he defines "Born again Christians" at his site]?

There is no room for error on what we believe about Jesus Christ. What we believe about Jesus has eternal consequences.

Joh 8:24 I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins."John 8: 58 “I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” See Ex. 3:14.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Joh 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made.

Col. 2: 9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

2Jo 1:9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. [See Matt. 28:19-20 below--this is part of the Great Commission.]

Another problematic quote is FOF's goal through their Truth Project is to "introduce believers to the Truth claims of Christ and tackle the pervasive problem ill-equipped Christians"

What makes people think these are believers?
What gospel did they hear and trust in?
Could it be that the "ill-equipped Christians" aren't even Christians if they aren't saved in Truth and by Truth (John 8:24, Romans 10:9-10)?

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

Rom 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.

Why aren't the local churches teaching the truths of Christ?
Why are "Christian leaders" writing books instead of preaching to their flock?
How are these para-"church" organizations such as FOF and miriads authors (there's no unity of faith and knowledge of Christ even among them) being held accountable?
Why does FOF speak for Christians?
Where's the discipleship of new believers?

Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

The role of the local church IS to equip each believer until we are unified in the faith (not a false unity, but one set upon Truth AND Knowledge of Christ), and are a MATURE MAN, no longer being children tossed around by every wind of doctrine that comes our way. The local church is where teaching and accountability meet. Not a seminary where there is little accountability and where the faculty has no clue who is coming or going.

Eph 4:11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.

Easy believeism, mass alter calls, and a gospel without the proclaimation of Christ Jesus' deity, sinlessness, death on the cross for sinners, repentance of the sinner, the resurrection from the dead on the third day of Jesus, the wrath of God on sinners, is not gospel. Its no wonder that so many people think they are saved but have no clue about Jesus. The Lord, however, commanded us to declare HIS Gospel, make disciples by investing in their lives, baptizing them in the name of the Triune God, and teaching them all He has commanded us in Scripture.

Taking God's Name in Vain and Postmodernism

I read today on Parchment and Pen a post that I found interesting.

Speaking of Ray Comfort and how he points out taking God's name in vain to those who are lost to show their sin is "Emphasizing on non-essentials. Making the focus of his evangelistic persuasion to convince people of their sin is not the problem. This is a necessary part of the Gospel. The problem is focusing on the trivial sin of saying G-D. Well, let me correct this. He is focusing on listening to someone say G-D, not actually saying it yourself! If that is not straining out a gnat while ignoring the camel, I don’t know what is. "

How does God see His name being misused in any fashion?

Exo 20:7 "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.

Vain: H7723 BDB Definition:
1) emptiness, vanity, falsehood
1a) emptiness, nothingness, vanity
1b) emptiness of speech, lying
1c) worthlessness (of conduct)

It can mean swearing to do something by His name. Ecclessiastes says this in chapter 5 I think it is, as does James. Roman Catholics (they are not Christians) blaspheme God when they call mere men "Holy Father" which is a title reserved ONLY for God the Father (John 17:11; Matt. 23:9). It would include mouthing "Jesus is Lord" and all other phrases "Christians" spout off all the time in a trivial manner. But it also includes swearing His name as an exclamation of unbelief or cursing....because its not from a humble heart crying out to God for mercy and in prayer, but rather rattled off from a pagan who hates the very Person and Name of God Father and God the Son.

God places HIS name and Word above all else:

Psa 138:2 I bow down toward your holy temple and give thanks to Your name for your steadfast love and your faithfulness, for You have exalted above all things Your name and Your word.

Mat 6:9 Pray then like this: "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your name.

God places great importance on His name, for His name carries His character. His name and character go hand in had. To take His name in vain, however the “manner”, is to trivialize not “just” His name (let’s not forget how many unbelievers take the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in vain, too) but the very Person of God.

Psa 115:1 Not to us, O LORD, not to us, but to Your name give glory, for the sake of Your steadfast love and your faithfulness!

In fact we often see how God’s name, such as Jehovah Jireh, was born out of God’s very character and faithfulness. He is the God Who Sees; The God of Hosts; the God Who Provides, etc.

Exo 3:13 Then Moses said to God, "If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' what shall I say to them?" 14 God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"

Joh 8:58 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

Mat 1:21 She will bear a son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins."

Mat 1:23 "Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call His name Immanuel" (which means, God with us).

If it is wrong to God, then it is a sin and it should bother us as well. Even one sin earns a person death and Hell (which is why every person needs the only God and Savior, Jesus Christ). This is not a trivial matter. Its God’s character and our sin that is the issue.

With such a low view of Scripture ( denial the inerrancy of Scripture here and says the Cannon of Scripture is NOT closed here ), its no wonder taking God's name in vain in any capacity doesn't bother their conscienceThey oppose God's declaration in Ps. 138:2 where HE says He holds His NAME AND HIS WORD ABOVE ALL THINGS. Pretty hard to do when you think God's word isn't inerrant nor completed. I won't even link to the other post on taking God's name in vain, because its riddled with swearing and using God's name in vain (with the cute and sarcastic note that those who are offended are just too immature to handle it).

Even to remove taking God's name in vain and thus making it useless and trivial, even unbeliever's speech will be judged:

Mat 12:36 I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, 37 for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."

Parchment and Pen goes on to say, "Our postmodern culture is smarter than this. Not only can they smell hypocrisy from a mile away, they are on the hunt for it. All this does is serve to confirm the postmodern suspicion that Christians live in a naive world that has no real depth or understanding."

The Postmodern culture wouldn’t know truth if it bite them on the nose. They are the epitome of hypocriscy, so really, they have no “moral authority” much less any absolute truth to make any distinction on anyone else’s behavior. They are the very ones who defy absolute truth. They ask along with their father Pontus Pilate, “What is truth?”, and abhor anyone who dogmatically claims to know truth. They are the group who clamours about being oh-so-tolerant, until you tell them they are wrong or are in sin. Suddenly they have an absolute! So really, without any foundation of the fact that Truth is knowable and God has revealed it to us in His Word and to some extent in our consciences (Romans 2 about simple right versus wrong issues), its not the Christians that have a lack of real depth or understanding, but rather the Postmodernists who claim there is no Truth or that Truth is unknowable.

Jude spoke of Postmodernists when he penned his letter:

Jud 1:10 But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively.

Jud 1:14 It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his holy ones, 15 to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against Him."

Jam 5:12 But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your "yes" be yes and your "no" be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation.

Eph 4:29 Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. 30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

For more on Postmodernism's error and how to combat it go here.

"I admire him for doing what he is doing, but he really needs to understand what he is talking about before he hits the street....Forgive me for being simplistic with such satire, but that is what people are hearing when the focus of peoples rebellion becomes such things."

I thought they were supposed to be Irenic? This post was hardly peaceful, rather it comes out running with a kitchen knife at Ray Comfort who at least is out there proclaiming the Gospel. Where's the peaceful way of looking at opposing view points that Reclaiming the Mind prides itself on, here? Its missing.

Unity

Unity has been an ongoing issue at my church in recent months. There’s been a plea for unity on the current church building project. My pastor even switched from his current series of going through the Gospel of Mark, to jumping into Eph. 4:1-3, as his call to unify and not divide, on the church's building fund (first they showed a DVD, then had a pep talk by some guy to rally around this project, then this topical message).

I noticed C. Michael Patton also wrote about unity at his blog.

Something is missing from both men, and its this: unity, true biblical unity is always based on Truth.

What my pastor failed to do that Sunday, was to start with the doctrines proclaimed in Eph. 1-3, which is Paul’s basis for going on to discuss how to live out the truth and thus have unity. I know for a fact, had he done that, it would have caused DISunity, simply because even our elder board, let alone many people at church, do not believe in Sovereign Predestination as Eph. 1 clearly proclaims. Its easier to get on the bandwagon for a building I guess.

Patton goes beyond that and says in his post:

I believe that it is a real possibility—even likely—that God does not want absolute doctrinal unity. In fact, practically speaking, I think it would do more harm than good.

What I am saying is this: it may actually be God’s sovereignty that brings about division over the doctrine of God’s sovereignty!

[If this is true, why does God declare His sovereignty on every page of Scripture--and clearly in entire CHAPTERS of Scripture? Genesis 1:1 makes it clear HE IS SOVEREIGN and between that verse and Romans 1:18-21, for example, HE says HE has made HIS sovereignty known to all men by virtue of His creation. Psalms 33 also screams out HIS Sovereignty over creation and all men and their plans as does Is. 40, etc. The list is HUGE.]

He also says:

I believe that doctrinal disagreements are healthy for the church. When there is conflict between opposing options, the issue at hand is understood at a more profound level than is possible in the absence of the conflict. Conflict, in the end, can bring about a deeper conviction of the truth. When there is no conflict, there is no iron sharpening iron.

It is often said that heresy is God’s gift to the church. Why? Because when a false option is presented the truth becomes much clearer. In contrast there is clarity. In clarity there is conviction.

It is for this reason that we must be continually engaged with alternative options. As hard as it is to engage in beliefs that go against our present convictions, we need to recognize the value of the struggle.

Here’s the problem with that post-modern thinking.

There was no Scripture to support his view. Knowing Patton has a very low regard for Scripture: he denies the inerrancy of Scripture here and says the Cannon of Scripture is NOT closed here. Its no surprise he didn’t include it.

Unity is imperative according to Scripture.

Scripture says God wants believers unified based on Truth and is reflective of the Godhead:

Joh 17:21 that they may ALL BE ONE, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that THEY MAY BE ONE even AS WE ARE ONE,

Is there disunity among the Persons in the Godhead? No.

1Co 1:10 I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ALL of you AGREE and that there be NO DIVISION among you, but that you be UNITED in the SAME mind and the SAME judgment….IS CHRIST DIVIDED? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

This seems clear to me. There is to be some division? NO! There is to be NO DIVISION among you, BUT (in contrast to division) be UNITED in the SAME MIND. This could not be CLEARER.
But wait, there's more...

Eph 4:3 EAGER to maintain the UNITY of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is ONE body and ONE Spirit–just as you were called to the ONE hope that belongs to your call– 5 one Lord, ONE faith, ONE baptism, 6 ONE God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Eph 4: 13 until we all attain to the UNITY of the faith and of the KNOWLEDGE of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ,

1Pe 3:8 Finally, all of you, have UNITY of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind.

This isn't a suggestion. God is commanding us to have unity of MIND.

Phi 1:27 Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in ONE spirit, with ONE mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel,

Phi 2:2 complete my joy by being of the SAME mind, having the SAME love, being in FULL ACCORD and of ONE mind.

This is just as clear. Unity is commanded. Same mind, one mind, FULL ACCORD.

Oh, you thought I was finished? Not yet.

To say that disunity is pleasing to God is to reject clear Scripture.

Joh 8:31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you ABIDE in my WORD, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you WILL KNOW the truth, and THE TRUTH WILL set you free.”

1Jo 2:21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT, and because NO LIE IS OF THE TRUTH.

Unity is to be based on the Word of God and God Himself. Not some man-made notions of philosophy or a church building scheme. And not about whether someone agrees with ME. I am not the issue. Scripture is. We need to be unified on Truth for then we will be like-minded and of one spirit in one faith.

Patton and other philosophers say that through considering error we come to know truth clearer. Is that biblical? I find Scripture saying we come to know the Truth by the Spirit of Truth and Scripture; we know Truth and what is right and what is wrong by going to Scripture and thus going to the Lord as we dwell on His Word.

Isa 45:19 …I the LORD speak the truth; I declare what is right.

Joh 8:32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.

Joh 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

1Jo 2:21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth.

2Co 4:2 But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God

2Ti 2:7 Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything.

Luk 24:45 Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

Is. 8: 20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn.

Psa 1:1 Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; 2 but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.

Psa 119:104 Through your precepts I get understanding; therefore I hate every false way.

Not done yet. There's more Scripture on how to know Truth.

1Ti 6:3 If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, 4 he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, 1Ti 6:5 and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.

2 Cor. 10: 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

Phi 4:8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

Eph 5:17 Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.

Heb 5:13 for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. 14 But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.

Psa 19:9 the fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the LORD are true, and righteous altogether. 11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward.

Psa 119:99 I have more understanding than all my teachers, for your testimonies are my meditation.

Psa 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple;

1Co 2:1 And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. 2 For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called "knowledge," 21 for by professing it some have swerved from the faith. Grace be with you.

2Ti 2:23 Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels.

2 Tim. 2: 16 Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly. 17 Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18 who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some.

Act 17:11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

Truth IS knowable, and Scripture has clearly stated what unity is and how it is achieved. Its only those who have a low view of Scripture and a man-centered mentality that are the dividers from Truth and seek to infest His Body with error, while calling us who stand for Scriptural Truth “divisive” “judgmental” and “hyper-critical”. Yet its not US who bring in the error and man-centered philosophies. Its them. To their shame. God still is in control, but such division FROM Truth, calling that which is evil, “good” and demanding unity on materialistic things instead of Truth is DISOBEDIENCE and SIN. God will not be glorified in that.

"Evangelical Leaders" Fear A Woman Rather Than God

Pro 29:25 The fear of man lays a snare, but whoever trusts in the LORD is safe.

Fear God
Vote Biblically
Don't Compromise ©

This is the window sticker I created for my car and it is a good guide for how I need to vote in elections. It was born out of a need to voice the true issues in voting in our country.

Its something that "evangelical leaders" would learn from. Instead these guys, along with their followers, are man-centered pragmatists, and have sold their "principles" for a Republican victory.

Allow me to explain.

Arnold Schwarzenegger

When Arnold Schwarzenegger ran for governor of California, I look on his website and found he was pro-abortion and pro-homosexual rights. I warned as many Christians as I could, especially at my church, about his positions and challenged them with this:

"Are you a conservative because you say you are or because you really are by voting accordingly?"

The resounding fear was that the leading Democrat, Carlos Bustamonte, would beat the Republicans and the "only one who could win" was Arnold Schwarzenegger .

It wasn't a matter of weeks before I got the first email of how the GOP would have to deal with Arnold's abortion stand. Hello? YOU voted him in! Now you want to deal with his position that you KNEW was adamently opposed to the GOP's platform?

Now the Republican Conservatives / so-called-Christians are whining about the laws he's passing that allow boys to use the girls' restrooms, as well as banning the use of "mom and dad" and "husband and wife" from California school textbooks because its discriminatory against sodomite couples.

This was the fear of man. They feared a Democrat and gave up on the very principles (not even truly principles, since they are cast aside as optional) that defined them as Republican, Conservative, and Christian. They voted pragmatically, not biblically. They compromised.

I have said for three years now, that what happened in California would go national.

It has.

Pat Robertson

Pat Robertson, the face of "conservative Evangelical Christianity" has now endorsed Rudy Giuliani. Why? Because Giuliani is "fiscally conservative" and also is good on the war.

How about morals, Pat? Is Rudy conservative morally?

Rudy Giuliani is an adulterer, home-wrecker, liar, pro-abortionist. He's been married repeatedly and his current wife was his mistress. He lied to his wife, to his children, and to the public as he kept this dirty secret, until it came out in the open and he had to admit it. Adulterers are good liars usually. So are politicians.

Giuliani is also pro-abortion and pro-sodomite rights. His record and his own words prove this. The Christian Coalition is against abortion and sodomite rights.

"Ultimately, a woman should make that with her conscience and ultimately with her doctor. "
Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate Aug 5, 2007

Federal tax returns show that he and his then-wife, Donna Hanover, made personal donations to national, state and city chapters of Planned Parenthood totaling $900 in 1993, 1994, 1998 and 1999. The returns have been on the public record for years, but the detail about Giuliani's support for Planned Parenthood was provided to The Politico by aides to a rival campaign, who insisted on not being identified. -Source: Jonathan Martin on Politico.com May 7, 2007

To the question:

Q: Would the day that Roe v. Wade is repealed be a good day for America?

ROMNEY: Absolutely.
BROWNBACK: It would be a glorious day of human liberty and freedom.
GILMORE: Yes, it was wrongly decided.
HUCKABEE: Most certainly.
HUNTER: Yes.
THOMPSON: Yes.
McCAIN: A repeal.
GIULIANI: It would be OK to repeal. It would be OK also if a strict constructionist judge viewed it as precedent and I think a judge has to make that decision.

Q: So it would be OK if they didn't repeal it?

GIULIANI: I think the court has to make that decision and then the country can deal with it. We're a federalist system of government and states can make their own decisions.
TANCREDO: After 40 million dead because we have aborted them in this country, I would say that that would be the greatest day in this country's history when that, in fact, is overturned.

Pat Robertson of the Christian Coaltion wants that kind of man to be president?

“I’m pro-choice. I’m pro-gay rights,” Giuliani said. He was then asked whether he supports a ban on what critics call partial-birth abortions. “No, I have not supported that, and I don’t see my position on that changing,” he responded. Source: CNN.com, “Inside Politics” Dec 2, 1999

GIULIANI: The reality is that I support the Second Amendment. I clearly believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, although I did support domestic partnerships and still do, a contractual relationship. And [we should] put our emphasis on reducing abortions & increasing the number of adoptions. - Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate Aug 5, 2007

National Republicans can lump it if they don't like his new domestic-partners bill, Mayor Giuliani said yesterday. "I really haven't thought about what the impact is on Republican politics or national politics or Democratic politics," Giuliani said. The bill he submitted to the City Council would extend the benefits city agencies must grant to gay and lesbian couples. "I'm proud of it," Giuliani said of the bill. "I think it puts New York City ahead of other places in the country." Source: New York Daily News, reprinted in 3/25/05 NY Observer May 13, 1998

So why is Roberston such a hypocrit? Because he fears man (or in this case a woman) rather that God.

A false teacher and prophet, such as Pat Robertson is, wouldn't fear God anyway. He's a mere pragmatist who thinks he's something when he's nothing. He doesn't know God, His Word, and certainly has no biblical values. Values are what we hold to in the MIDST of conflict and trials and hazy situations. For the Christian, our values better be directly from Scripture or they're just mere opinion and will change at any time. Like Robertson. Seems to me his views are mere opinion because he dumped them when he feared a woman rather than the One who can destroy both his body and soul in hell.

Bob Jones III

According to Greenville Online (and AP):

Dr. Bob Jones III, chancellor of the fundamentalist Christian university that bears his name, is looking past his religious differences with Gov. Mitt Romney and endorsing the Mormon for the Republican nomination for president, he told The Greenville News today.

"This is all about beating Hillary," Jones said. "And I just believe that this man has the credentials both personally and ideologically in terms of his view about what American government should be to best represent the rank and file of conservative Americans.
"If it turns out to be Guiliani and Hillary, we�ve got two pro- choice candidates, and that would be a disaster."

Wow. A "conservative Christian" is supporting (pushing) for a future Mormon god to be presiden! Why? Well, he says why: he fears a woman.

So what makes Jones conservative or Christian? You got me.

But he's fearing man, not voting biblically (see Romney's record here on abortion and sodomite rights here), and compromising what defines a person as Republican, Conservative, and Christian.

John Hagee

John Hagee proclaimed recently on Glen Beck's CNN show that he too, along with 11 other men in leadership at his church, would vote for a future Mormon god if it was between Romney and Hillary:

BECK: We`re back with Pastor John Hagee, author of "In Defense of Israel." When we went to the break, I gave you a second to think about it. Would you vote for a Mormon?

HAGEE: I asked that exact question to the 12 leaders of my church at the Christmas banquet last year. I said, if it comes down to a Mormon presidential candidate, would you vote for that one, or would you not vote for him because it was Hillary Clinton or someone else? Eleven out of 12 said, "We`ll vote for the Mormon."

BECK: Were you the one?

HAGEE: No, it was not me. I said, I would vote for him, because I know him to be moral, I know him to have high principles, I know him to believe in a work ethic, I know that he has a family orientation that`s very devout, and very pure, and that is basically the social problem that`s destroying the fabric of this country right now. The family is coming unraveled.

End quote.

Clearly Hagee's looking at moral issues here (Pat Robertson does not). However the problem is that Romney isn't that morally upstanding: he's a cult member (of LDS) that lies about Jesus Christ and God's Word, he's protected abortion while in office and he's for benefits of sodomite couples.

"As governor, I indicated that I would not change the law as it related to abortion. I would keep it the same."

"I've always been personally pro-life, but for me, it was a great question about whether or not government should intrude in that decision. And when I ran for office, I said I'd protect the law as it was, which is effectively a pro-choice position." -Source: 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library, hosted by MSNBC May 3, 2007

"In New Hampshire on Thursday, he deflected conservative concerns about his record on gay marriage and abortion. He said he now describes himself as "firmly pro-life," despite citing his tolerance for abortion rights during his 2002 gubernatorial campaign, after researching the embryonic stem cell issue." --Source: CNN.com, "Inside Politics" Dec 22, 2006

Romney endorsed legalization of RU-486, the abortion-inducing drug.--Source: Boston Globe review of 1994 canpaign issues Mar 21, 2002

"When I ran for the first time, I said I was personally pro-life but that I would protect a woman's right to choose as the law existed. Two years ago, as a result of the debate we had, the conclusion I reached was that cloning and creating new embryos was wrong, and that we should, therefore, allow our state to become a pro-life state. I believe states should have the right to make this decision, and that's a position I indicated in an op-ed in the Boston Globe 2 years ago." --Source: 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library, hosted by MSNBC May 3, 2007

So as a Mormon purportedly high up in his church, he was pro-abortion until he saw where the opinion polls were going in 2005 and suddenly switched? This was not part of his "values" at all. He was against pro-live before he was for it? Man, where have I heard that before? Voting pro-abortion but being pro-life. What makes a person pro-life if they vote against it? Because they say they are?

Do you see the problem here?

Three "conservative Christians" are not truly conservative and only one who I consider might be a believer is Bob Jones, but I'll wait and see. The other two are heretics and false prophets/teachers (Hagee has recently said that Jesus did not come to be Messiah; he also doesn't believe the Jews need the Gospel of Jesus Christ; and also promotes heretical teachers of the Word of Faith movement). But certainly these men are NOT conservative. They are pragmatists who fear man (a woman this time) rather than God.

I saw this coming when Arnold Schwarzenegger ran for governor. Its now gone national, this compromising and fear.

Fear God, not man.
Vote biblically, not pragmatically.
Don't compromise.

I'll stand by this. We MUST be like Daniel who did not fear man (the kings) and live pragmatically. He could've bowed to the statue in order to keep his job so he could "have more influence over the nation", but he didn't. He served and feared God, trusting Him to take care of whatever happened to his life or job. And it was his very life at stake...not just a mere job. He stood prepared to loose his life for not obeying the king's order to bow to the golden statue. Because Daniel was faithful to the Lord openly and in secret (he kept praying three times a day with his window open), God blessed him in many great ways.

Let us be like Daniel.

Fear God.
Vote biblically.
Don't compromise. ©


Jer 17:5 Thus says the LORD: "Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart turns away from the LORD.

UPDATE: Now Mitt Romney has found support with Moral Majority co-founder Paul Weyrich. Wow, holding hands with cultists....just absolutely amazes me. Next thing we'll see are "Christians" holding hands with Muslim candidates. Oh wait, that's already happening.

VCY Radio Network Cancels Swindoll for Inappropiate Language (Appropriate for the EMC however)

VCY America, home of Slice of Laodicea, has apparently dropped Insight For Living's Chuck Swindoll from its radio broadcasts. If the below is an accurate report of the press release, I can understand why. Swindoll has been increasingly courting liberalism.

In part it says:

“Since 1979 VCY America has aired Insight For Living. Increasingly over recent years, VCY has been concerned about the content and direction of the IFL broadcasts with Chuck Swindoll. Through the years we have had multiple conversations with IFL regarding objections to content in their broadcasts. It is VCY’s position that certain language and illustrations used have been crude, vulgar, and from the gutter and have no place on Christian radio.

While the listing below is not exhaustive, it does give a representation of VCY’s objections that have resulted in the termination of the broadcast.

The decision to bring termination to the IFL program arrived on March 5, 2007. VCY and listeners were highly offended by Chuck Swindoll’s use of crude and uncalled for language. His message was entitled, “Male Leadership 101” which was a presentation given to men at his church. Although a disclaimer was given at the beginning of the program, Swindoll had a sustained laugh as he stated had he known this would be on radio at the time of speaking he probably would have changed things around because he tends to be “a little loose and a little free.” But he says he found “people appreciate that”. The specific area of offense came when Chuck stated:

“The sons of Issachar understood their times, they were men who had discernment and the sons of Issachar were men who had direction. They could make decisions. They saw through all the fluff of that culture. They stood strong when others were fading in the shadows. Patton would say they had guts. You’d say at work, they had balls. Or maybe that’s a Greek rendering of another verse.” (Laughter)

It is VCY’s position that this language is gutter talk, is crude, and vulgar. VCY stated to IFL that such language is uncalled for, is unbecoming a pastor, and is inappropriate for our listeners.
Within moments of this broadcast, a businessman contacted VCY who uses this station as a witnessing tool. He keeps VCY playing in his office so those who visit him will hear. He told VCY he was very upset by this IFL program and if he wanted vulgar language he would put on secular talk radio. VCY can only agree with this anger and frustration.
Knowing this was Part 1 of a message, VCY pre-listened to the March 6, 2007 broadcast. In this message Chuck Swindoll addressed accountability, sensitivity, purity and integrity.

These virtues were compromised when he spoke the following:

“The battle still goes on. It will never end. In fact I had my physical the other day and Cooper who has a finger that long (pause and lots of laughter), that long (continued laughter). And while he was up in there said, ‘Now that’s your prostate.’ I said (Swindoll yells) ‘I know that’. Was this anatomy class? (Laughter). He’s a very sick man. (Laughter). Got through prostate, checked out great. I bragged about that to Cynthia about three hours. ‘I’ve got a great prostate.’ She said, ‘get a life, honey.’” (Laughter)

VCY finds it unacceptable to broadcast Chuck Swindoll’s re-counting of the length of the finger of his doctor and describing it in his body while checking his prostate. This is both crude and offensive.

While the issues presented on the March 5th and 6th broadcast brought the ultimate decision to terminate the program, these were not the only concerns VCY has expressed to IFL. Beginning in the year 2000, there was a national boycott of Disney led by the American Family Association, Focus on the Family, Southern Baptist Convention, etc. Christian broadcasters all over the country were giving warnings regarding the homosexual promotion such as gay days, gay-friendly issues and other depraved issues being promoted by Disney. While this boycott was going on, Insight For Living took another position. The November 20, 2000 IFL program promoted “The Lion King” (produced by Disney) using it as an illustration. Chuck Swindoll stated on this broadcast,

“Now I could ruin the rest of the story for you, but rather than doing that, I’ll urge you to go down to your local video store and rent for yourself, ‘The Lion King’”.

At that time VCY addressed concern to IFL pointing out that researchers who reviewed this movie stated that the one who anoints Simba as king, was Rafiki, who happens to be a witch doctor. Rafiki carries his magical pack on the top of his staff. Viewers are taught throughout the movie that you can align yourself with witchcraft to overcome evil. It is also pointed out that the movie promotes talking to the dead (necromancy). VCY questioned IFL why they would be promoting Disney when so many Christian ministries were warning against it and were participating in a national boycott. No official response came to VCY’s inquiry, only that “the comment would be passed on.”

On the January 3, 2001 edition of IFL Chuck Swindoll used an illustration of Art Linkletter talking to a boy whose father is a police officer. Art asked if the boy’s mother was bothered by this, the boy responded and Chuck emphasized, “Heck, No!”. A couple moments later Chuck again made great emphasis, “Heck, No!”. VCY contacted IFL stating “heck” is slang for “hell” and that listeners were offended by this. The IFL representative assured VCY they’d pass our comment on.

Again VCY contacted IFL on February 5, 2001 regarding that day’s program. Chuck used an illustration from a regular column he reads from “Sports Illustrated” magazine written by Rick Riley. This particular issue’s column was entitled, “Speaking of Class to the Class of ‘98”. Chuck’s illustration dealt with the topic of “perspective”. Before he read the quote he said, “I won’t read it all, but it’s really worth these excerpts.” The offense came when Chuck quoted this portion of the magazine,

“Be careful with your money, write your own checks, none of this power of attorney crap. Get an agent and a lawyer and tell each, the other is a crook. (Laughter) That’s perspective.”
VCY alerted IFL that day that the word, “crap” is crude, uncalled for and offensive and should not to be used in a Christian’s vocabulary, let alone come from a pulpit and broadcast all over the country. VCY stated to IFL that this term Chuck used did not pass the test of Ephesians 4:29.

On February 11, 2001 a personal meeting was held between members of VCY and those which represent IFL to review the various concerns raised. This was followed up by a personal visit of an IFL representative to VCY in late February of 2001.

On August 23, 2001 again VCY brought to the attention of IFL an offending illustration. On that program, Chuck told of the fun they were having on Ben Yahuda Street in Israel and said,
“One of our men said the funniest things that I heard on the trip. He said, ‘I don’t know what the big deal is about all the clothes people bring with them on a trip.’ He said, ‘I’ve solved the underwear problem. In fact, I now carry 1/4th the underwear I used to carry.’ He was telling us things we really didn’t need to know… He said, ‘Actually you can get four times the wear out of every pair of underwear. So simple.’ And, we of course were hanging on these words wondering what he had in mind. He said, ‘Look, it’s simple: right side out, wrong side out, frontward and backwards. You can just wear the same one for’-I noticed toward the end of the second week, no one was sitting next to this guy. (Laughter) There’s just something about it that turns you off.”
Chuck continued with his clothing illustration to bring the point that “clothing polishes the image, but it doesn’t polish the character.” It is VCY’s position that this illustration had no business being on this national Bible teaching program.

On September 5, 2001 VCY again contacted IFL regarding that day’s program on which Chuck Swindoll calls into question a literal interpretation of Genesis for a six day, 24-hour day creation. On that program he stated,

“On what day did He make the sun? It was the fourth day. So for three full creative days or eras of days, however you might handle that. For three solid periods of time there was light, but there was no sun…But what’s interesting to me is that the light that came upon this earth, for a period of who knows how long, did not come from the sun. Where did it come from?”

In this message IFL called into question a literal six-day, 24-hour day creation. IFL responded that he wasn’t teaching on creation at this point and that his “brief comments are to be taken in the context of an illustration rather than a doctrinal teaching.”

End.

Considering what Swindoll's been up to, all of this is no surprise. According to Lighthouse Research Swindoll's bought into the Contemplative Prayer Eastery Mysticism, reading and quoting and offering its pagan leaders to Swindoll's own sheep:

Swindoll favorably quotes and describes the spirituality of Richard Foster, who is a disciple of Thomas Merton. Another Christian leader who has succumbed to the new spirituality that is permeating the church.

Quotes the following:Richard FosterHenri NouwenDallas WillardEugene Peterson (the Message)Philip Yancey

Henri Nouwen ... longed to get away from all those words ... So how do we pull it off? How, in a world bent on distracting us from growing deeper? ... How do you and I become more godly? ... The word is discipline. The secret lies in our returning to the spiritual disciplines." p. 9, 10.

"I have sensed a genuine need—in my own life —for the cultivation of intimacy with the Almighty.... God requires spiritual disciplines ... essential in our pursuit of godliness. ... I came across Dallas Willard's excellent work The Spirit of the Disciplines." p. 12

"Richard Foster's meaningful work Celebration of Discipline ..." p. 15

It is Swindoll's church, Stonebriar Community Church, along with Dallas Theological Seminary, that puts out "The Theology Program" through "Reclaiming Your Mind" ministry, headed up by Michael Patton. More here on the problems with their ministry "Conversing with Scholars".