Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Reading Clinton Cash

Debating if I want to go see the new Avenger movie "Age of Ulton". I note from a posting on Facebook that my nephew has already seen it.  Listening to the review of the movie on Issues, Etc which is a internet Lutheran talk radio type show.  They refer to it as Greek mythology with Christian window dressing.  Also I listen to "The Briefing" by Albert Mohler but he rarely does movie reviews. The bad guy in the movie quotes the Bible in a one liner fashion, sort of like a Christian Fundamentalist.  However, no evidence that the bad guy in the movie is anymore born again from above than the average Evangelical.  The fact that the bad guy quotes the Bible means what?  I guess I need to see the movie to see if the bad guy uses the out of context Bible verses in a Fundamentalist or Evangelical way.  Is the bad guy a Biblical Fundamentalist or a Evangelical?   

Reading "Clinton Cash" and it is difficult to believe Hillary can get elected President but few voters read books so she probably as a good chance of being the next President.  As President she is very likely to get more rich than Bill Gates, especially if she serves two terms.

The problem of Mother Day Sundays, "He Remembers the Barren" book. This issue was discussed on Issues Etc. 


Monday, May 11, 2015

My Journey in the American Religious Forest of Restored Christendom

By the providence of God, I was born and raised in a Disciples of Christ church (First Christian Church) which later changed its name to "Church of Christ" when it joined the Independent Branch of the American Restoration (Stone-Campbell) Movement.  The split from the Disciples of Christ per the Independent Branch was over water baptist, is it really necessary for salvation.  Per the Disciples of Christ the split was over if the Disciples of Christ was simply a denomination in Christendom or The Church of Christ.  The Liberalization of the Disciples of Christ was an issue too.  Due to the Winds of Change and the International Churches of Christ controversy; water baptism in the Stone Campbell Movement is now a complex issue.  

Having researched the history of the Stone Campbell Movement and being told by members of it that I know too much for my own good.  I made the mistake of asking members of the Stone Campbell Movement discussion group if they desired a discussion of Barton Warren Stone's strange ideas about the Trinity, the silence to my request spoke much.  Contrary to the revisionist history of the book "The Pilgrim Church by E. H. Broadbent"; Barton Warren Stone didn't leave the Presbyterians over his anti-Calvinism; but his teachings on the Trinity.  I found it funny that Dave Hunt promoted a book on church history that whitewashed the Stone Campbell Movement.  Broadbent beyond question is no true historian of church history.  Just do a Google search and you can find what Barton Warren Stone taught about the Trinity.  

A Mormon sect historian knowing the Campbellite connection to Mormonism asked me about Trinity beliefs in the Stone Campbell Movement to which I responded since Stone and Campbell never agreed on the Trinity and the movement was anti-creed; members of the movement have the freedom of creating the god of their choice.  It was not the response he expected.  Due to Liberalism the Independent Branch recognizes the Apostles Creed but tend to have issues with the Nicene Creed since it doesn't use words found in the Bible.  Most of the anti-Trinity sects (Church of Christ of Latter Day Saints, Christadelphians) of the Stone Campbell Movement left the movement so the movement tends to be sort of Trinitarian. 

 To be a true Christian Only in most of the Stone-Campbell Movement you have to worship the The Church of Christ as it is the true body of Christ. As to if Walter Scott or Alexander Campbell was the true restorer of the Primitive First Century Christian Church, both made the claim and wrote a book about it.  Being a member of the Independent Branch, I will burn in Hell for eternity for vain worship due to instrumental music being part of the worship service per the mainline Church of Christ.  If you think that Evangelicalism is a mess, don't even think of getting involved in the Stone Campbell Movement as it was a mess long before the Evangelicalism became total chaos.  Keep in mind that the Stone Campbell Movement has experimented with every possible heresy long before those heresies appeared in Evangelicalism.  If you think that Open-Theism is a new heresy, the mainline Churches of Christ experimented with it first.  The Church of Christ of Latter Day Saints and the International Churches of Christ are both cults that split from the Stone Campbell Movement.  The Winds of Change in the Stone Campbell Movement has resulted in the Disciples Renewal Movement a merger of John Calvin with Alexander Campbell which strangely is more Calvinist than Campbellite and many other strange unthinkable things.  The International Church of Christ mess has made many cult research groups put the complete Stone Campbell Movement under a microscope.  As for myself, I love to satire the Stone Campbell Movement and my jokes are not appreciated.  I tell Mormon missionaries that they need to repent and rejoin the Disciples of Christ.  I tell those that still believe that Alexander Campbell restored the true Christian church that Joseph Smith did much more restoration.  If only Joseph Smith had not been killed, Sidney Rigdon would have been possible eventual leader of the Saints rather than Brigham Young.  I tell Mormon Missionaries that they need to thank Sidney Rigdon for much of their theology which is basically Campbellite.  Joseph Smith and especially Brigham Young added to the Campbellite teachings and even altered it some.  I know too much of the Saint history to join your church and the Mormon missionaries think I am the strangest potential convert that they have ever encountered.  Mormon missionaries are clueless about the Campbellite connection to Mormonism. 

Per my research of American Christendom, I understand the British joke about go to America and create your own religion.  In the USA, you have the freedom of religion to restore the Christian church of your choice as long as you can find sufficient followers and that typically is not difficult. 

When the Discovery 1 teacher at GHCC (Golden Hill Community Church) made a statement that GHCC was a restored church, my response was can I escape the American dream of restoring a Christian church?  He was clueless on my satire but that is typical.  Naturally there is that AnaBaptist dream to restore a Christian church with no Roman Catholic connection; lots of luck but keep dreaming.

As for me, I believe in the Christendom that the Stone Campbell Movement claimed that they reformed. 

Keswick Theology

In addition to the Decisional Regeneration and Free Will Gospel, one of the men in the GHCC CORE Men's Bible Study was into Keswick theology.  Not that he called it that but that was what he believed in  and I got as tired of his Keswick Gospel message and all the other false gospel messages present in that group.   

Being very much a student of Theology, I know all about Keswick theology from Ligonier Ministries.  OK, I am a fan of R. C. Sproul in addition to Martin Luther, John Piper, Tim Keller, John MacArthur, Greg Bahnsen, and many others.  

It was a sin to critique any false Gospel message as GHCC is basically a big tent MegaChurch full of many diverse individuals with different points of view.  There really is no unifying gospel message as some don't confirm the GHCC statement of faith as being their statement of faith.   

My Discovery 1 leader didn't believe in eternal security being very Pelagian even if the GHCC statement of faith includes eternal security.  He actually seemed to brag about being tried as a heretic by the church leadership which ended up taking no action as they allowed him to continue to be a leader of a Discovery class.  

The bottom line is the GHCC statement of faith is a worthless document as you don't have to believe it to be a teacher or member of GHCC.  Which raises the question why GHCC has a statement of faith?


Sunday, May 10, 2015

Faith in Making a Decision for God

The CORE Men's Bible Study at GHCC shocked me when one of the men lead the other men in the group into a cheer for FREE WILL about three times in response to Acts 2:47 : "Praising God, and having favour with all the people.  And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." I was the only man present of about twelve that that didn't cheer "FREE WILL".  Unfortunately I was too shocked by the worship like celebration of MAN's FREE WILL to cheer "PRAISE GOD" OR "GOD'S SOVEREIGN GRACE".  By the grace of God none of the men present including me was hit by lightning for giving praise to MAN's FREE WILL and not God.

Welcome to the GHCC Twilight Zone where man worships FREE WILL as if it is part of the Godhead.  Not the Trinity but the Quad of Father, Son, Holy Spirit, and Man's Free Will.  After awhile I got tired of the Free Will sillyness and dropped out.  

I and others in the group was taught by several men in the CORE Men's Bible Study that decisional regeneration saves you!  You ask Jesus into your heart and automatically you get the Holy Spirit. I pondered if Free Will could automatically get other gifts from God, but had no desire to ask the question to find out. 

No decision no salvation, a total lack of trust that anyone that cannot recall asking Jesus into their heart can really be saved.  After-all, God is a respecter of Man's Free Will. 

No trust in the finished work of Jesus on the cross (Atonement) alone as it is faith in a decision to accept the gift? of salvation.  It was all too much like the baptism transaction of Campbellism without getting wet. 

God's Unconditional Love of All Mankind?

The Discover 2 class had the relationship of Hosea and Gomer as being an example of the main theme of the Old Testament. Most Calvinist I know would pick the Covenant between Abraham and God as being an key to understanding the Old Testament.  However, all covenants in the Old Testament was mentioned except one.  Yes, the one not mentioned was the Covenant between Abraham and God.  I found this strange and pondered why Free Will Evangelicals with a Dispensationalist viewpoint would not mention the Covenant in the Old Testament so much referenced in the New Testament?   

Beyond question, the Covenant between Abraham and God is one of God's Sovereign Grace and there is no way to put a God picked Abraham due to Abraham's Free Will Choice in Chosing God. Sure, Abraham had Faith but his Free Will Choice record in making Holy decisions was not all that impressive but it did improved with time.

The relationship between Hosea and Gomer is a type with Hosea being like Jesus and Gomer being like a typical Christian.  Actually it is a prophecy about Israel and God's covenant with Israel.  It is hardly an example of God's unconditional love for all of mankind unless you put a Abrahamic Covenant spin on it.  However, that would result in a mixing of God's promises to the Jews with the Christian Church which is something that a true Dispensationalist doesn't do. 

Since the attempt was to put a decisional regeneration decision choice spin that if only you will chose God, you too can have this unconditional love relationship.  God over and over again makes it clear that He chose Israel and Israel didn't chose him.  Clearly God's Sovereign Grace but hardly Man's Free Will Choice.  To the Lutheran, this is Law and Gospel about God's Grace to those that trust in God's grace and not their Free Will.  God's Sovereign Grace is clearly unconditional love but it is a love that exist for the chosen ones, the elect, the drawn ones,  His sheep, those that hear Him, and the chosen remnant.  

What does Free Will have to do with it?  Well, I had to have the Free Will to believe that Free Will is the key to getting God's unconditional love.  Yes, before the foundration of the world my Free Will built a time machine and I had a meeting with God and asked him to give me the Free Will to chose him.  If Repentance and Faith is a gift of God, why not Free Will too? 

If someone has the Free Will  to be born again, why not have the Free Will to fly like a bird?  Like Augustine and Martin Luther; I have the desire to mock Free Will as it is amazing that something not found in the Bible is key to understanding the Bible. 

Easy Holiness?

After so much Free Will is the key to Christian Life, Understanding the Bible, and valid Christian Apologetics at GHCC (Golden Hills Community Church); I am listening to and reading the following books:

  • Justification by Charles Hodge
  • Election by B. B. Warfield
  • Augustine & the Pelagian Controversy by B. B. Warfield
  • The Plan of Salvation by Charles Hodge
  • The Plan of God by J. I . Packer
  • The Discipline of Grace: God's Role and Our Role by Jerry Bridges
  • On Grace and Free Will by Saint Augustine
  • The Doctrine of Sanctification by Arthur Pink
  • Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace? by James Montgomery Boice
  • Christ Upon the Cross by J. C. Ryle
  • The Cessation of Miracles by B. B. Warfield
 Currently listening to "Five Things Every Christian Needs to Know" by R. C. Sproul.

In additional to teaching Easy Believe-ism, GHCC is much into Easy Holiness.  The application is it is so extremely easy to be Holy as man is basically good.  Having read "Holiness" by J. C. Ryle which is a Reformed Faith classic about sanctification shortly before once again being exposed to Easy Holiness because man has the Free Will to just do it.  I just told the Discovery 2 teacher that J. C. Ryle was my teacher on this Christian issue. 

Monday, May 4, 2015

Many Gospel Messages but it is Basically Free Will vs God's Grace Per My Understanding of Bible Message

Some Free Will persons promote Universal Atonement because their gospel message is Jesus died for you.  They have a Heaven ticket gospel message that all you need to do is reach out and take the ticket and you have life in Heaven.  The ticket is the blood of Jesus as it is compared to being like a train ticket with the destination of Heaven.  

Alexander Campbell the main founder of the strange Free Will group that by the providence of God that I was born and raised in compared becoming a citizen of Heaven to becoming a citizen of the USA.  Not abnormal for this Free Will group to claim that Biblical election is Satan voting against you, Jesus voting for you, and your Free Will casts the deciding vote.  Great to know my vote is equal to both Satan and Jesus in the Biblical election voting for my predestination to Heaven over Hell?  My Free Will is insufficient to believe that Alexander Campbell and his like-minded followers have any clue as to what the Bible has to say about election and predestination.  Other than Alexander Campbell claiming to have restored a church more Primitive Christian than either Lutheranism or Calvinism; well he makes that claim but I find it a claim very difficult to believe.  As to why my grandmother left the Lutheran church to join the Disciples of Christ is a mystery to me as I find it difficult to believe I would have made the same Free Will choice.  I never did understand my grandmother on religious issues which raises the question if somehow the wrong baby was taken home from the hospital.  I ponder if I was really born to Lutheran parents and accidentally sent from the hospital to a non-Lutheran home.  I very much believe in the Lutheran gospel message of Law and Grace plus Christian Liberty on non-essential issues.  Maybe Lutheranism is genetic?  I read Martin Luther's "The Bondage of the Will" and totally agree with his position.  

Golden Hills Community Church doesn't give out free will tickets for predestination to Heaven but desires that you make a decisional regeneration decision to ask Jesus into your heart  Since this is basically a water-less version of the baptismal regeneration gospel of Alexander Campbell which I have always lacked sufficient Free Will to find in the Bible; I end up rejecting it.  The Billy Graham sinner's prayer is marketed to those that believe this method has more biblical support than the just ask Jesus into your heart.  I find it nice that Golden Hills Community Church is open minded enough to have two Free Will gospel messages but I believe in the Lutheran gospel message of Law and Grace as it has extreme support in the Bible per my Free Will choice.  If I really do have Free Will, I demand Christian Liberty in picking the gospel message that I find to have the most in context Bible verses that supports it.  

Since C. H. Spurgeon is claimed to be loved by many Free Will Evangelicals that fail to realize he doesn't believe in Free Will anymore than Martin Luther and myself.   I post links to two sermons to show that I am in agreement with Charles Haddon Spurgeon.

"Law and Grace" Sermon Link

"Free Will - A Slave" Sermon Link




Universal Atonement - God's Desire for All to be Saved

I got exposed to so much questionable teaching at Golden Hills Community Church that I got tired of what appeared to be creative use of out of context Bible verses. A. W. Tozer mentions the problem of Evangelical Popes and it appeared at times that I was dealing with the teaching of some unnamed Evangelical Pope that was favored by the teacher at Golden Hills Community Church.

Jesus atoned for the sins of all mankind as God desires to save everyone.  This is Universal Atonement which I don't believe in.  Even if I was not a Calvinist and I was only a Lutheran; if God knows who has the Free Will before the foundation of the world to chose those that would chose Him.  God being the respecter of Man's Free Will to the point that He gives to the Son those that by His all knowledge He knew would chose God.  Why would the Father make the Son pay for the sins of those that God knew would reject His unconditional love offer of Salvation? 

A Lutheran says this is God's secret will and the Free Will Evangelical and the Calvinist shouldn't speculate on the extent of the Atonement.  It is sin per the Lutheran to try to figure out God's secret will on such matters as the Atonement.  Thou shall not speak where the Bible is silent as if you have figured out something that is part of God's secret will.  Being in agreement with the Lutherans that the Calvinist and Free Will Evangelicals love to fight on issues that the Bible is not clear; I have to believe that God is not the great child abuser that the Atheist desire to make him.  Therefore, in response to the Atheist, I must point out that in my opinion God has enough love for His Son that He doesn't punish the Son for the sins of those that God knows will not accept the offer of Salvation.   As to the reason the offer of Salvation is not accepted I don't desire to argue but I believe the Father loves the Son and finds no need for the Son to Atone for sins that unbelievers will spend eternity in Hell paying for.  Calvinist say that God doesn't ask for sins to be paid for twice, one by the Son and then again by the Sinner.  This makes sense to me even if the Lutherans say this is still speculation even if Bible verses appear to speak of the Son saving all that the Father gave Him.  Of those You gave Me, none were lost.  Jesus is the perfect Shepard of His Sheep and the Sheep know His voice. 

As to why Jesus must pay for the sins of all mankind when Free Will Evangelicals admit not all will be saved and God knows those that have the Free Will to be saved before the foundation of the world is the grand mystery to me.  I can only assume that one or more Free Will Evangelical Popes teach this as being God's truth and their parrots teach what the Free Will Evangelical Popes have taught them to teach.  I hate to agree with the Atheist that the Father is the Cosmic Child Abuser of His poor Son.  I prefer to believe that the Son will rejoice in saving all that the Father gave Him as that is what the Bible clearly states.  I therefore reject the teaching of any Free Will Evangelical that Jesus paid for the sins of all mankind on the cross.  

One of my many supports for my viewpoint is the book "The Forgotten Trinity" by James White. 

The Discovery 2 teacher at Golden Hills Community Church is the cause of this blog posting.

Charles Spurgeon on Atonement link 

Christ’s Limited Atonement by Charles Spurgeon

Some persons love the doctrine of universal atonement because they say, ‘It is so beautiful. It is a lovely idea that Christ should have died for all men; it commends itself,’ they say, ‘to the instincts of humanity; there is something in it full of joy and beauty.’ I admit there is, but beauty may be often associated with falsehood. There is much which I might admire in the theory of universal redemption, but I will just show what the supposition necessarily involves. If Christ on His cross intended to save every man, then He intended to save those who were lost before He died. If the doctrine be true, that He died for all men, then He died for some who were in hell before He came into this world, for doubtless there were even then myriads there who had been cast away because of their sins.
Once again, if it was Christ’s intention to save all men, how deplorably has He been disappointed, for we have His own testimony that there is a lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, and into that pit of woe have been cast some of the very persons who, according to the theory of universal redemption, were bought with His blood. That seems to me a conception a thousand times more repulsive than any of those consequences which are said to be associated with the Calvinistic and Christian doctrine of special and particular redemption. To think that my Savior died for men who were or are in hell, seems a supposition too horrible for me to entertain. To imagine for a moment that He was the Substitute for all the sons of men, and that God, having first punished the Substitute, afterwards punished the sinners themselves, seems to conflict with all my ideas of divine justice. That Christ should offer an atonement and satisfaction for the sins of all men, and that afterwards some of those very men should be punished for the sins for which Christ had already atoned, appears to me to be the most monstrous iniquity that could ever have been imputed to Saturn, to Janus, to the goddess of the Thugs, or to the most diabolical heathen deities. God forbid that we should ever think thus of Jehovah, the just and wise and good!
There is no soul living who holds more firmly to the doctrines of grace than I do, and if any man asks me whether I am ashamed to be called a Calvinist, I answer—I wish to be called nothing but a Christian; but if you ask me, do I hold the doctrinal views which were held by John Calvin, I reply, I do in the main hold them, and rejoice to avow it. But far be it from me even to imagine that Zion contains none but Calvinistic Christians within her walls, or that there are none saved who do not hold our views. Most atrocious things have been spoken about the character and spiritual condition of John Wesley, the modern prince of Arminians. I can only say concerning him that, while I detest many of the doctrines which he preached, yet for the man himself I have a reverence second to no Wesleyan; and if there were wanted two apostles to be added to the number of the twelve, I do not believe that there could be found two men more fit to be so added than George Whitefield and John Wesley. The character of John Wesley stands beyond all imputation for self-sacrifice, zeal, holiness, and communion with God; he lived far above the ordinary level of common Christians, and was one ‘of whom the world was not worthy.’ I believe there are multitudes of men who cannot see these truths, or, at least, cannot see them in the way in which we put them, who nevertheless have received Christ as their Savior, and are as dear to the heart of the God of grace as the soundest Calvinist in or out of heaven.



The Pelagian Captivity of the Church

Being tired of Free Will which at times appears a more important concept to believe than God's Grace, I have left GHCC (Golden Hills Community Church).  The application deal I got tired of too.  Quote a few Bible verses about God's Holiness and then quickly apply that man must be Holy and it is so easy as it is nothing more than making good decisions.  This combined with just asking Jesus into your Heart means decisional regeneration as God is such a unconditional lover that it is so easy to get born again from above as there is nothing miracle about it.  There is such little understanding of Original Sin that man is so basically good that being born again and living a holy life is nothing more than a decision.  After-all man's will is free in that it is more than capable of being neutral enough to make good decisions that very little grace is required from God.  There is so little difference between the Holiness of God and the Goodness of Man that it appears that the blood of Jesus maybe the biggest mistake that God has made in trying to get mankind to make that free will choice to choose God.  As for the Bible verse that states that God makes the choice, actually God chooses them who He knew would chose Him; making God the great respecter of Man's Free Will.   Being tired of Man's Free Will is the key to understanding everything in the Bible; I leave as I am tired of hearing so much about something that exists in Greek Philosophy.

It was the Men's Bible Group and the Radical Free Will Teachers of Discovery 1 and 2 Class that caused me to seek a church that believes more in God's grace and less in Man's Free Will.  I prefer hearing more about God's grace and much less about Man's Free Will. 

I give this link to what R. C. Sproul has to say on the matter.