In a desperate attempt to remain relevant after a period of being out of print, Newsweek Magazine's Christmas cover story by Kurt Eichenwald titled "The Bible: So Misunderstood it's a Sin" claims the Bible is corrupted and that Christians, having never actually read it nor understood it, are "God's frauds, cafeteria Christians who pick and choose which Bible verses they heed with less care than they exercise in selecting side orders for lunch."
For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Atheists Demand Ban: Bible Says Kill Gays & Non-virgin Women
California School Bans Books by Christian Authors
Marquette University Bans Conservative Professor, Like a Terrorist
Liberal Media Pounce on Evangelical Liberty University
Also read about the latest myriad attacks on Christmas in schools around the nation.
And read about an Iowa newspaper editor who was fired for being Christian, and about a University of Iowa journalism professor who said "ignorant Iowa Jesus Freaks" have no business choosing presidential candidates.
And read New York Farmers Guilty & Fined for Being Christian
In addition, read President Obama's Christmas: Behold, a Message is Born
-- From "Newsweek finds Christianity again with its latest cover" by Tom Kludt, CNNMoney 12/30/14
Newsweek's latest cover story represents the first time in a year the magazine gave top billing to an examination of Christianity.
Critics have contended that Eichenwald was out of his depth. RedState editor-in-chief Erick Erickson, who enrolled in seminary earlier this year, said that Eichenwald "displays staggering ignorance to attack Christianity."
Eichenwald, for his part, told CNNMoney that he had been working on the story "for basically three decades." He said he pitched the idea to Newsweek in October and that personal matters dictated the piece's Christmas publication.
Eichenwald also brushed off the criticism of the piece.
"There is no doubt that fundamentalists would not accept this, particularly since the point was, many of those Christians who say the Bible is the unerring word of God pick and choose what they want to believe," he said. "Which is why the primary part of the piece is asking questions."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The Bible: So Misunderstood It's a Sin" by Kurt Eichenwald, Newsweek 12/23/14
They wave their Bibles at passersby, screaming their condemnations of homosexuals. They fall on their knees, worshipping at the base of granite monuments to the Ten Commandments while demanding prayer in school. They appeal to God to save America from their political opponents, mostly Democrats. They gather in football stadiums by the thousands to pray for the country’s salvation.
They are God’s frauds, cafeteria Christians who pick and choose which Bible verses they heed with less care than they exercise in selecting side orders for lunch. They are joined by religious rationalizers—fundamentalists who, unable to find Scripture supporting their biases and beliefs, twist phrases and modify translations to prove they are honoring the Bible’s words.
This is no longer a matter of personal or private faith. With politicians, social leaders and even some clergy invoking a book they seem to have never read and whose phrases they don’t understand, America is being besieged by Biblical illiteracy. . . .
The Bible is not the book many American fundamentalists and political opportunists think it is, or more precisely, what they want it to be. Their lack of knowledge about the Bible is well established. . . .
Newsweek’s exploration here of the Bible’s history and meaning is not intended to advance a particular theology or debate the existence of God. Rather, it is designed to shine a light on a book that has been abused by people who claim to revere it but don’t read it, in the process creating misery for others. . . .
No television preacher has ever read the Bible. Neither has any evangelical politician. Neither has the pope. Neither have I. And neither have you. At best, we’ve all read a bad translation—a translation of translations of translations of hand-copied copies of copies of copies of copies, and on and on, hundreds of times.
. . . [skipping past thousands of critical words about the Bible] . . .
So why study the Bible at all? Since it’s loaded with contradictions and translation errors and wasn’t written by witnesses and includes words added by unknown scribes to inject Church orthodoxy, should it just be abandoned?
No. This examination is not an attack on the Bible or Christianity. Instead, Christians seeking greater understanding of their religion should view it as an attempt to save the Bible from the ignorance, hatred and bias that has been heaped upon it. If Christians truly want to treat the New Testament as the foundation of the religion, they have to know it. Too many of them seem to read John Grisham novels with greater care than they apply to the book they consider to be the most important document in the world.
But the history, complexities and actual words of the Bible can’t be ignored just to line it up with what people want to believe, based simply on what friends and family and ministers tell them. Nowhere in the Gospels or Acts of Epistles or Apocalypses does the New Testament say it is the inerrant word of God. It couldn’t—the people who authored each section had no idea they were composing the Christian Bible, and they were long dead before what they wrote was voted by members of political and theological committees to be the New Testament.
The Bible is a very human book. It was written, assembled, copied and translated by people. That explains the flaws, the contradictions, and the theological disagreements in its pages. . . .
To read all of this extremely long opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
From "Newsweek on the Bible — So Misrepresented It’s a Sin" by Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 12/29/14
Newsweek magazine decided to greet the start of 2015 with a massive cover story on the Bible. For decades now, major news magazines have tended to feature cover articles timed for Christmas and Easter, taking an opportunity to consider some major question about Christianity and the modern world. Leading the journalistic pack for years, both TIME and Newsweek dedicated cover article after article, following a rather predictable format. In the main, scholars or leaders from very liberal quarters commented side-by-side those committed to historic Christianity on questions ranging from the virgin birth to the resurrection of Christ.
. . . Eichenwald appears to be far outside his area of expertise and knowledge. More to the point, he really does not address the subject of the Bible like a reporter at all. His article is a hit-piece that lacks any journalistic balance or credibility. His only sources cited within the article are from severe critics of evangelical Christianity, and he does not even represent some of them accurately.
In a predictable move, Eichenwald claims to base his research on “works of scores of theologians and scholars, some of which dates back centuries.” But the sources he cites are from the far, far left of biblical studies and the most significant living source appears to be University of North Carolina professor Bart Ehrman, who is post-Christian. Even so, he makes claims that go far beyond even what Bart Ehrman has claimed in print.
But Kurt Eichenwald’s essay is not ground-breaking in any sense. These arguments have been around for centuries in some form. He mixes serious points of argument with caricatures and cartoons and he does exactly what he accuses Christians of doing — he picks his “facts” and arguments for deliberate effect.
Newsweek’s cover story is exactly what happens when a writer fueled by open antipathy to evangelical Christianity tries to throw every argument he can think of against the Bible and its authority. To put the matter plainly, no honest historian would recognize the portrait of Christian history presented in this essay as accurate and no credible journalist would recognize this screed as balanced.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
From "Newsweek on Christianity: So Misinformed, It's a Mockery" by Kristi Burton Brown, Christian Post Op-Ed Contributor 12/31/14
The article presents a mocked and misrepresented Jesus, claiming that He would be "horrified" by thousands of Americans gathered together to pray and that, "to Jesus, family was an impediment to reaching God." . . .
The article also makes the outlandish claim that Evangelicals "don't like to talk about" the books of Psalms, Job, Exodus, and Isaiah because "monsters and magic" are present in all of them. . . .
Scripture must indeed be taken in totality…no, a person is not condemned to Hell solely on the basis of a homosexual act, just as a person is not condemned to Hell solely for adultery or solely for a lie. (Christians do commit these acts.) But Scripture is clear that our sin does condemn us to Hell, unless we rely on Christ alone for salvation. Scripture is also clear that, while we are not saved by our good works, our good works – and choices to stop sinning – prove to the world that we are saved.
Newsweek also strangely attempts to claim that "Christians are believed to have massacred more followers of Jesus than any other group or nation." But who exactly "believes" that? The facts certainly don't prove it. This can be seen on a basic level simply by evaluating who the author is including as "Christians." . . .
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Gay Agenda will be Complete when Christians are Muzzled, Say Homosexualists as well as Senator Ted Cruz Says the Gay Agenda Ends Christian Liberty
Showing posts with label mohler. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mohler. Show all posts
Friday, January 02, 2015
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
A Rabbi, Pastor & Imam at a Methodist Seminary ...
It sounds like the opening line of a joke, but it's not. Facing declining enrollment, Claremont Colleges Graduate School of Theology in California is now claiming to train and prepare new leaders with a vision of blending divergent world religions.
For background, read Methodist Seminary Trains Pluralistic Clergy
-- From "Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly Listings" Washington Post 10/21/11
Multi_Faith Theological Education — At the Claremont Colleges in California, the Graduate School of Theology has created Claremont Lincoln University, the first multi-faith theological school of its kind. As Saul Gonzalez reports, the new and controversial graduate university is teaching and will grant degrees to students who want to become Christian ministers, Jewish rabbis or Muslim imams, and it plans to include Hindus, Sikhs and others, as well.
From "Multifaith Theological Education" by Saul Gonzalez, Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly, PBS 10/21/11
SAUL GONZALEZ, correspondent: . . . California’s Claremont Lincoln University, which describes itself as America’s first interreligious school of theology, one that will train pastors, rabbis, and eventually Muslim imams all on one campus. The school’s philosophy was captured in the opening remarks of Muslim-American religious scholar Najeeba Syeed-Miller, a professor at Claremont Lincoln.
PROFESSOR NAJEEBA SYEED-MILLER: The diversity of humankind is not a curse from God. It is a sign of God’s creation, and the beauty of humanity is in our very differences.
GONZALEZ: What do you hope to accomplish here at Claremont Lincoln? What’s the grand vision?
PHILIP CLAYTON (Provost, Claremont Lincoln University): You have to get beyond the point of people defining their religions by the traditional walls. . . . When you train rabbis in one school, pastors in another, imams in another, you put them out into communities they create an “us versus them” mentality. What if we do something that’s never been done before? Let’s train them in the same classroom. Let’s let them work out their differences in their day-to-day education. When they go out into their communities you won’t find them doing the “us versus them,” but, we hope, the “we.” What that would [do] for the face of religion in America would be staggering.
GONZALEZ: Claremont Lincoln is actually the creation of a much older institution, United Methodist-affiliated Claremont School of Theology, founded in 1885. It partnered with southern California’s Academy of Jewish Religion and the Islamic Center of Southern California to form this new school. Students attending this school can get master’s degrees in divinity, rabbinic studies, and Muslim counseling.
GONZALEZ: Beyond America’s changing religious landscape, there’s another reason why Claremont went multifaith: survival. Like other schools of theology and seminaries during these tough economic times, this campus faced a declining enrollment and a tightening budget. Allowing students from other faiths to train here is one way to keep the lights on and the doors open.
CLAYTON: This is an extremely hard time for American theological schools. We could go on with a dwindling number of Methodists students, but we decided we wanted to be ahead of the curve. . . . we had a 45-year history of being edgy. We were always sort of pushing the envelope, and so we decided we would push the envelope on this one.
To read the entire interview transcript above, CLICK HERE.
From "Donation spurs multifaith university in Claremont" posted at The Christian Century 5/25/11
Looking to support "tolerance and respect among religions," a United Methodist couple has upped its total donation to $50 million to launch a multifaith university that will educate professional leaders for churches, synagogues and mosques while providing those future clergy with insights into interreligious issues.
The Methodist-affiliated Claremont School of Theology announced May 16 that philanthropists David and Joan Lincoln, who earlier donated $10 million, would be honored in the institution's name—Claremont Lincoln University—as classes begin this fall. Only the seminary will receive money from United Methodist agencies.
A week before the university announcement was made, the New York Times reported that Pitzer College, one of the seven Claremont colleges within walking distance of the seminary, will offer a major in secularism this fall. The new department of secular studies is headed by sociologist Phil Zuckerman, who has written extensively on secularism.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pastors and Rabbis and Imams" by Libby A. Nelson, Inside Higher Ed 10/25/11
Like everything about the newly established university, the vision is ecumenical and ambitious.
As the United States becomes more religiously diverse, with more interfaith marriages and families, the demand for ministers and religious counselors who are comfortable in that atmosphere is "off the charts, no question," says Philip Clayton, Claremont Lincoln's provost.
"Drawing on the wealth of interreligious partnerships is one of the most crucial things that we need to learn for the coming decades," Clayton says. "Frankly, without that resource, I don't think human civilization is going to make it."
"The majority of Methodists embrace the interreligious project as long as the Methodist members participate as Christians in interreligious dialogue,” Clayton says.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The Amazing Technicolor Multifaith Theology School" by Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 6/11/10
This move by the Claremont School of Theology illustrates what happens when churches and denominations allow their institutions to embrace theological liberalism. . . . The leftward march of liberal Protestantism is hardly news, but on occasion a development arises that serves as something of a parable of that trajectory.
Liberal Protestantism long ago grew embarrassed by the exclusive claims of biblical Christianity and the historic Christian faith. Adopting pluralist and inclusivist reconstructions of the faith, liberal theologians and theological schools have been pressing the margins for over a century now. Given that trajectory, a multifaith theological seminary was an inevitability — the only question was when and where it would happen.
Mark Tooley, President of The Institute on Religion and Democracy, said that the school’s action meant that it “seems to be moving away from its responsibility to the United Methodist Church.” He added: “It almost seems that they’re trying to fulfill the stereotype that many in the church have of liberal Methodism on the West Coast.”
In a subsequent interview, Tooley, a United Methodist, pointed out that the United Methodist Church has lost nearly half of its membership on the West Coast.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
For background, read Methodist Seminary Trains Pluralistic Clergy
-- From "Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly Listings" Washington Post 10/21/11
Multi_Faith Theological Education — At the Claremont Colleges in California, the Graduate School of Theology has created Claremont Lincoln University, the first multi-faith theological school of its kind. As Saul Gonzalez reports, the new and controversial graduate university is teaching and will grant degrees to students who want to become Christian ministers, Jewish rabbis or Muslim imams, and it plans to include Hindus, Sikhs and others, as well.
From "Multifaith Theological Education" by Saul Gonzalez, Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly, PBS 10/21/11
SAUL GONZALEZ, correspondent: . . . California’s Claremont Lincoln University, which describes itself as America’s first interreligious school of theology, one that will train pastors, rabbis, and eventually Muslim imams all on one campus. The school’s philosophy was captured in the opening remarks of Muslim-American religious scholar Najeeba Syeed-Miller, a professor at Claremont Lincoln.
PROFESSOR NAJEEBA SYEED-MILLER: The diversity of humankind is not a curse from God. It is a sign of God’s creation, and the beauty of humanity is in our very differences.
GONZALEZ: What do you hope to accomplish here at Claremont Lincoln? What’s the grand vision?
PHILIP CLAYTON (Provost, Claremont Lincoln University): You have to get beyond the point of people defining their religions by the traditional walls. . . . When you train rabbis in one school, pastors in another, imams in another, you put them out into communities they create an “us versus them” mentality. What if we do something that’s never been done before? Let’s train them in the same classroom. Let’s let them work out their differences in their day-to-day education. When they go out into their communities you won’t find them doing the “us versus them,” but, we hope, the “we.” What that would [do] for the face of religion in America would be staggering.
GONZALEZ: Claremont Lincoln is actually the creation of a much older institution, United Methodist-affiliated Claremont School of Theology, founded in 1885. It partnered with southern California’s Academy of Jewish Religion and the Islamic Center of Southern California to form this new school. Students attending this school can get master’s degrees in divinity, rabbinic studies, and Muslim counseling.
GONZALEZ: Beyond America’s changing religious landscape, there’s another reason why Claremont went multifaith: survival. Like other schools of theology and seminaries during these tough economic times, this campus faced a declining enrollment and a tightening budget. Allowing students from other faiths to train here is one way to keep the lights on and the doors open.
CLAYTON: This is an extremely hard time for American theological schools. We could go on with a dwindling number of Methodists students, but we decided we wanted to be ahead of the curve. . . . we had a 45-year history of being edgy. We were always sort of pushing the envelope, and so we decided we would push the envelope on this one.
To read the entire interview transcript above, CLICK HERE.
From "Donation spurs multifaith university in Claremont" posted at The Christian Century 5/25/11
Looking to support "tolerance and respect among religions," a United Methodist couple has upped its total donation to $50 million to launch a multifaith university that will educate professional leaders for churches, synagogues and mosques while providing those future clergy with insights into interreligious issues.
The Methodist-affiliated Claremont School of Theology announced May 16 that philanthropists David and Joan Lincoln, who earlier donated $10 million, would be honored in the institution's name—Claremont Lincoln University—as classes begin this fall. Only the seminary will receive money from United Methodist agencies.
A week before the university announcement was made, the New York Times reported that Pitzer College, one of the seven Claremont colleges within walking distance of the seminary, will offer a major in secularism this fall. The new department of secular studies is headed by sociologist Phil Zuckerman, who has written extensively on secularism.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pastors and Rabbis and Imams" by Libby A. Nelson, Inside Higher Ed 10/25/11
Like everything about the newly established university, the vision is ecumenical and ambitious.
As the United States becomes more religiously diverse, with more interfaith marriages and families, the demand for ministers and religious counselors who are comfortable in that atmosphere is "off the charts, no question," says Philip Clayton, Claremont Lincoln's provost.
"Drawing on the wealth of interreligious partnerships is one of the most crucial things that we need to learn for the coming decades," Clayton says. "Frankly, without that resource, I don't think human civilization is going to make it."
"The majority of Methodists embrace the interreligious project as long as the Methodist members participate as Christians in interreligious dialogue,” Clayton says.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The Amazing Technicolor Multifaith Theology School" by Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 6/11/10
This move by the Claremont School of Theology illustrates what happens when churches and denominations allow their institutions to embrace theological liberalism. . . . The leftward march of liberal Protestantism is hardly news, but on occasion a development arises that serves as something of a parable of that trajectory.
Liberal Protestantism long ago grew embarrassed by the exclusive claims of biblical Christianity and the historic Christian faith. Adopting pluralist and inclusivist reconstructions of the faith, liberal theologians and theological schools have been pressing the margins for over a century now. Given that trajectory, a multifaith theological seminary was an inevitability — the only question was when and where it would happen.
Mark Tooley, President of The Institute on Religion and Democracy, said that the school’s action meant that it “seems to be moving away from its responsibility to the United Methodist Church.” He added: “It almost seems that they’re trying to fulfill the stereotype that many in the church have of liberal Methodism on the West Coast.”
In a subsequent interview, Tooley, a United Methodist, pointed out that the United Methodist Church has lost nearly half of its membership on the West Coast.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, August 04, 2011
'Gay Marriage' Heralded by Psychological Assoc. APA
Representing its membership of almost exclusively liberal professionals, the American Psychological Association (APA) unanimously approved a resolution endorsing sexually deviant "marriage" for the (thus far) United States.
-- From "Citing new research, psychology group supports gay marriage" by Sharon Jayson, USA TODAY 8/4/11
The group, with more than 154,000 members, has long supported full equal rights for gays, based on social science research on sexual orientation. Now the nation's [liberal] psychologists — citing an increasing body of research about same-sex marriage, as well as increased discussion at the state and federal levels — took the support to a new level.
"Now as the country has really begun to have experience with gay marriage, our position is much clearer and more straightforward — that marriage equity is the policy that the country should be moving toward," says Clinton Anderson, director of APA's Office on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns.
[The resolution states] that "emerging evidence suggests that statewide campaigns to deny same-sex couples legal access to civil marriage are a significant source of stress to the lesbian, gay and bisexual residents of those states and may have negative effects on their psychological well-being."
Clinical psychologist Mark Hatzenbuehler, a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Health & Society Scholar at Columbia University in New York City, whose new research is cited in the resolution, says the courts tend to look at these kinds of policy statements because "they're really looking to see what social science research says about the influence on gay marriage and marriage bans on a whole host of outcomes."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Reparative Therapy, Homosexuality, & the Gospel" by Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 7/19/11
Virtually all of the secular professions that deal with sexual orientation . . . hold to an inflexible ideology that insists that there is absolutely nothing wrong with homosexuality. These groups include, for example, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the National Association of Social Workers, among many others.
In 2008, a number of these groups released a statement on sexual orientation and youth that began with the stated premise that “both heterosexuality and homosexuality are normal expressions of human sexuality.”
. . . but Christians now face the urgent challenge of thinking about these issues in a way that is fully biblical and theological — and thus faithful to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
The normalization of homosexuality simply cannot be accepted by anyone committed to biblical Christianity. The new secular orthodoxy demands that Christians abandon the clear teachings of Scripture, and Christians must understand that the sinfulness of all homosexual behaviors is not only a matter of biblical authority, but of the Gospel. To deny that sin is sin is to deny our need for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Christians cannot accept any teaching that minimizes sin, for it is the knowledge of our sin that points us to our need for atonement, salvation, and the forgiveness of that sin through the cross of Jesus Christ.
To read the entire column above, CLICK HERE.
-- From "Citing new research, psychology group supports gay marriage" by Sharon Jayson, USA TODAY 8/4/11
The group, with more than 154,000 members, has long supported full equal rights for gays, based on social science research on sexual orientation. Now the nation's [liberal] psychologists — citing an increasing body of research about same-sex marriage, as well as increased discussion at the state and federal levels — took the support to a new level.
"Now as the country has really begun to have experience with gay marriage, our position is much clearer and more straightforward — that marriage equity is the policy that the country should be moving toward," says Clinton Anderson, director of APA's Office on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns.
[The resolution states] that "emerging evidence suggests that statewide campaigns to deny same-sex couples legal access to civil marriage are a significant source of stress to the lesbian, gay and bisexual residents of those states and may have negative effects on their psychological well-being."
Clinical psychologist Mark Hatzenbuehler, a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Health & Society Scholar at Columbia University in New York City, whose new research is cited in the resolution, says the courts tend to look at these kinds of policy statements because "they're really looking to see what social science research says about the influence on gay marriage and marriage bans on a whole host of outcomes."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Reparative Therapy, Homosexuality, & the Gospel" by Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 7/19/11
Virtually all of the secular professions that deal with sexual orientation . . . hold to an inflexible ideology that insists that there is absolutely nothing wrong with homosexuality. These groups include, for example, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the National Association of Social Workers, among many others.
In 2008, a number of these groups released a statement on sexual orientation and youth that began with the stated premise that “both heterosexuality and homosexuality are normal expressions of human sexuality.”
. . . but Christians now face the urgent challenge of thinking about these issues in a way that is fully biblical and theological — and thus faithful to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
The normalization of homosexuality simply cannot be accepted by anyone committed to biblical Christianity. The new secular orthodoxy demands that Christians abandon the clear teachings of Scripture, and Christians must understand that the sinfulness of all homosexual behaviors is not only a matter of biblical authority, but of the Gospel. To deny that sin is sin is to deny our need for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Christians cannot accept any teaching that minimizes sin, for it is the knowledge of our sin that points us to our need for atonement, salvation, and the forgiveness of that sin through the cross of Jesus Christ.
To read the entire column above, CLICK HERE.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Liberal Media Use Heretic to Counter Christ
Rob Bell of the "emergent church" movement is finally being fully exposed as a "wolf in sheep's clothing" and the liberal media just can't get enough of him.
For background, read Heretical Preacher Embraced by Liberal Media
-- From "'Love Wins': Pastor's book kindles firestorm over hell" by Cathy Lynn Grossman, USA TODAY 3/14/11
Bell's new book, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, has provoked weeks of fierce infighting among pastors, theologians and anyone else who scans the Christian blogosphere where critics rage that he's a hipster heretic.
But Richard Mouw, president of the world's largest Protestant [liberal] seminary, Fuller Theological Seminary based in Pasadena, Calif., calls Love Wins "a great book, well within the bounds of orthodox Christianity and passionate about Jesus.
In Love Wins, which arrives in stores Tuesday, Bell claims:
• Heaven and hell are choices we make and live with right now. "God gives us what we want," including the freedom to live apart from God (hell) or turn God's way (heaven).
• Death doesn't cut off the ability to repent. In his Bible, Bell sees no "infinite, eternal torment for things (people) did in their few finite years of life."
• Jesus makes salvation possible even for people who never know his name. "We have to allow for mystery," for people who "drink from the rock" of faith "without knowing who or what it was."
• Churches that don't allow for this are "misguided and toxic."
Small wonder that traditionalists call him a false teacher of a Jesus-optional Gospel, leading innocents to damnation and a traitor to the evangelical label.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Hard-hitting Rob Bell interview goes viral" by Michael Foust, Baptist Press News 3/16/11
"What you've done is you're amending the Gospel -- the Christian message -- so that it's palatable to contemporary people who find, for example, the idea of hell and heaven very difficult to stomach ... That's why you've done, isn't it?" [MSNBC reporter Martin] Bashir asks Bell at one point.
At another point, Bashir asks Bell if it is "irrelevant" for someone to follow Christ in this life if -- as Bell argues -- non-Christians will be saved anyway.
Bell's evasive answers to questions have frustrated Christian leaders. Even in the interview, he denies he is a universalist, and then proceeds to make universalistic arguments.
To read a partial transcript of the YouTube video above, CLICK HERE.
From "What Happened to Heaven and Is Gandhi There?" by John Wilson, Wall Street Journal 3/18/11
Something strange has happened in evangelical churches over the past generation. Not in every congregation, but in the main, sermons devoted to the grim prospect of hell have become rare, and even talk of heaven is muted.
. . . So is Mr. Bell one more Christian liberal describing God as a mountain you can climb any way you want? Not exactly.
. . . anyone who carefully reads "Love Wins" will see that Mr. Bell is not a universalist. As C.S. Lewis did, he suggests that God grants free will to all, including those who do not want his divine company and therefore choose damnation.
Still, the account of heaven and hell that he rejects does sound a lot like what most Christians have taught and been taught for 2,000 years . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Rob Bell and the (re)emergence of liberal theology" by R. Albert Mohler Jr., President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 3/16/11
For the last 20 years or so, a movement identified as emerging or emergent Christianity has done its determined best to avoid speaking with specificity. Leading figures in the movement have offered trenchant criticisms of mainstream evangelicalism. Most pointedly, they have accused evangelical Christianity, variously, as being excessively concerned with doctrine, culturally tone-deaf, overly propositional, unnecessarily offensive, aesthetically malnourished, and basically uncool.
And yet, even as many of these [emerging/emergent] leaders insisted that they remained within the evangelical circle, it was clear that many were moving into a post-evangelical posture. There were early hints that the direction of the movement was toward theological liberalism and radical revisionism, but the predominant mode of their argument was suggestion, rather than assertion.
Rather than make a clear theological or doctrinal assertion, emerging figures generally raise questions and offer suggestive comments. Influenced by postmodern narrative theories, most within the movement lean into story rather than formal argument. Nevertheless, the general direction seemed clear enough. The leading emerging church figures appeared to be pushing Protestant liberalism -- just about a century late.
. . . Rob Bell uses his incredible power of literary skill and communication to unravel the Bible's message and to cast doubt on its teachings.
Bell clearly prefers inclusivism, the belief that Christ is saving humanity through means other than the Gospel, including other religions. But he mixes up his story along the way, appearing to argue for outright universalism on some pages, but backing off of a full affirmation. He rejects the belief that conscious faith in Christ is necessary for salvation, but he never clearly lands on a specific account of what he does believe.
. . . Yes, we have read this book before. With Love Wins, Rob Bell moves solidly within the world of Protestant liberalism. His message is a liberalism arriving late on the scene. Tragically, his message will confuse many believers as well as countless unbelievers.
To read all of the above in-depth analysis of Rob Bell's "theology," CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 5/3/13: Rob Bell and Andrew Wilson debate homosexuality & the Bible (video):
For background, read Heretical Preacher Embraced by Liberal Media
-- From "'Love Wins': Pastor's book kindles firestorm over hell" by Cathy Lynn Grossman, USA TODAY 3/14/11
Bell's new book, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, has provoked weeks of fierce infighting among pastors, theologians and anyone else who scans the Christian blogosphere where critics rage that he's a hipster heretic.
But Richard Mouw, president of the world's largest Protestant [liberal] seminary, Fuller Theological Seminary based in Pasadena, Calif., calls Love Wins "a great book, well within the bounds of orthodox Christianity and passionate about Jesus.
In Love Wins, which arrives in stores Tuesday, Bell claims:
• Heaven and hell are choices we make and live with right now. "God gives us what we want," including the freedom to live apart from God (hell) or turn God's way (heaven).
• Death doesn't cut off the ability to repent. In his Bible, Bell sees no "infinite, eternal torment for things (people) did in their few finite years of life."
• Jesus makes salvation possible even for people who never know his name. "We have to allow for mystery," for people who "drink from the rock" of faith "without knowing who or what it was."
• Churches that don't allow for this are "misguided and toxic."
Small wonder that traditionalists call him a false teacher of a Jesus-optional Gospel, leading innocents to damnation and a traitor to the evangelical label.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Hard-hitting Rob Bell interview goes viral" by Michael Foust, Baptist Press News 3/16/11
"What you've done is you're amending the Gospel -- the Christian message -- so that it's palatable to contemporary people who find, for example, the idea of hell and heaven very difficult to stomach ... That's why you've done, isn't it?" [MSNBC reporter Martin] Bashir asks Bell at one point.
At another point, Bashir asks Bell if it is "irrelevant" for someone to follow Christ in this life if -- as Bell argues -- non-Christians will be saved anyway.
Bell's evasive answers to questions have frustrated Christian leaders. Even in the interview, he denies he is a universalist, and then proceeds to make universalistic arguments.
To read a partial transcript of the YouTube video above, CLICK HERE.
From "What Happened to Heaven and Is Gandhi There?" by John Wilson, Wall Street Journal 3/18/11
Something strange has happened in evangelical churches over the past generation. Not in every congregation, but in the main, sermons devoted to the grim prospect of hell have become rare, and even talk of heaven is muted.
. . . So is Mr. Bell one more Christian liberal describing God as a mountain you can climb any way you want? Not exactly.
. . . anyone who carefully reads "Love Wins" will see that Mr. Bell is not a universalist. As C.S. Lewis did, he suggests that God grants free will to all, including those who do not want his divine company and therefore choose damnation.
Still, the account of heaven and hell that he rejects does sound a lot like what most Christians have taught and been taught for 2,000 years . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Rob Bell and the (re)emergence of liberal theology" by R. Albert Mohler Jr., President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 3/16/11
For the last 20 years or so, a movement identified as emerging or emergent Christianity has done its determined best to avoid speaking with specificity. Leading figures in the movement have offered trenchant criticisms of mainstream evangelicalism. Most pointedly, they have accused evangelical Christianity, variously, as being excessively concerned with doctrine, culturally tone-deaf, overly propositional, unnecessarily offensive, aesthetically malnourished, and basically uncool.
And yet, even as many of these [emerging/emergent] leaders insisted that they remained within the evangelical circle, it was clear that many were moving into a post-evangelical posture. There were early hints that the direction of the movement was toward theological liberalism and radical revisionism, but the predominant mode of their argument was suggestion, rather than assertion.
Rather than make a clear theological or doctrinal assertion, emerging figures generally raise questions and offer suggestive comments. Influenced by postmodern narrative theories, most within the movement lean into story rather than formal argument. Nevertheless, the general direction seemed clear enough. The leading emerging church figures appeared to be pushing Protestant liberalism -- just about a century late.
. . . Rob Bell uses his incredible power of literary skill and communication to unravel the Bible's message and to cast doubt on its teachings.
Bell clearly prefers inclusivism, the belief that Christ is saving humanity through means other than the Gospel, including other religions. But he mixes up his story along the way, appearing to argue for outright universalism on some pages, but backing off of a full affirmation. He rejects the belief that conscious faith in Christ is necessary for salvation, but he never clearly lands on a specific account of what he does believe.
. . . Yes, we have read this book before. With Love Wins, Rob Bell moves solidly within the world of Protestant liberalism. His message is a liberalism arriving late on the scene. Tragically, his message will confuse many believers as well as countless unbelievers.
To read all of the above in-depth analysis of Rob Bell's "theology," CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 5/3/13: Rob Bell and Andrew Wilson debate homosexuality & the Bible (video):
Sunday, March 06, 2011
Heretical Preacher Embraced by Liberal Media
Demonstrating its ignorance of Biblical Christianity (as usual), the liberal media is quick to refer to Rob Bell as a voice of evangelicals, but in promotions of his yet-to-be-released book, Bell refutes Jesus Christ in regards to the doctrine of Hell (for starters).
". . . but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions . . ."
-- 2 Tim. 4:3 (ESV)
UPDATE 3/15/11 Interview with Rob Bell (video):
-- From "Pastor Stirs Wrath With His Views on Old Questions" by Erik Eckholm, New York Times 3/4/11
A new book by one of the country’s most influential evangelical pastors, challenging traditional Christian views of heaven, hell and eternal damnation, has created an uproar among evangelical leaders, with the most ancient of questions being argued in a biblical hailstorm of Twitter messages and blog posts.
In a book to be published this month, the pastor, Rob Bell, known for his provocative views and appeal among the young, describes as “misguided and toxic” the dogma that “a select few Christians will spend forever in a peaceful, joyous place called heaven, while the rest of humanity spends forever in torment and punishment in hell with no chance for anything better.”
Such statements are hardly radical among more liberal theologians, who for centuries have wrestled with the seeming contradiction between an all-loving God and the consignment of the billions of non-Christians to eternal suffering. But to traditionalists they border on heresy, and they have come just at a time when conservative evangelicals fear that a younger generation is straying from unbendable biblical truths.
Mr. Bell, 40, whose Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Mich., has 10,000 members, is a Christian celebrity and something of a hipster in the pulpit, with engaging videos that sell by the hundreds of thousands and appearances to rapt, youthful crowds in rock-music arenas.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Christian author's book sparks charges of heresy" by Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor 3/1/11
Universalism, in its broadest terms, preaches that everyone goes to heaven and that there is no hell. Critics say it represents a break from traditional Christianity, which they say holds that heaven and hell are very real places. In most Christian circles, universalism is a dirty word.
Last year, Brian McLaren – a popular Christian author and a former pastor - was accused of breaking with Christian orthodoxy and delving headlong into universalism in his book A New Kind of Christianity.
But it's rare that theological arguments become top ten trending topics on Twitter, as Rob Bell did . . .
In the promotional video [for the new book,] Bell refers to the nonviolent Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi, a Hindu, and asks, "Gandhi's in hell? He is?"
"And someone knows this for sure?" Bell continues. "Will billions and billions of people burn forever in hell? And if that's the case how do you become one of the few? "
The video follows a trend in Bell's career as a pastor . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Universalism as a Lure? The Emerging Case of Rob Bell" by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 3/1/11
. . . Rob Bell and others within the Emerging Church movement represent what can only be described as a new form of cultural Christianity. Bell plays with theology the way a cat plays with a mouse. His sermons, videos, books, and public relations are often more suggestive and subversive than clear.
. . . [Bell's raises] the question of the exclusivity of the Gospel of Christ. With that question come the related questions of heaven, hell, judgment, and the fate of the unregenerate. The Bible answers these questions clearly enough, but few issues are as hard to reconcile with the modern or postmodern mind than this. Of course, it was hard to reconcile with the ancient mind as well. The singularity of the person and work of Christ and the necessity of personal faith in him for salvation run counter to the pluralistic bent of the human mind, but this is nothing less than the wisdom of God and the power of God unto salvation.
The Emerging Church movement is known for its slick and sophisticated presentation. It wears irony and condescension as normal attire. Regardless of how Rob Bell’s book turns out, its promotion is the sad equivalent of a theological striptease.
. . . Universalism is a heresy, not a lure to use in order to sell books.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
". . . but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions . . ."
-- 2 Tim. 4:3 (ESV)
UPDATE 3/15/11 Interview with Rob Bell (video):
-- From "Pastor Stirs Wrath With His Views on Old Questions" by Erik Eckholm, New York Times 3/4/11
A new book by one of the country’s most influential evangelical pastors, challenging traditional Christian views of heaven, hell and eternal damnation, has created an uproar among evangelical leaders, with the most ancient of questions being argued in a biblical hailstorm of Twitter messages and blog posts.
In a book to be published this month, the pastor, Rob Bell, known for his provocative views and appeal among the young, describes as “misguided and toxic” the dogma that “a select few Christians will spend forever in a peaceful, joyous place called heaven, while the rest of humanity spends forever in torment and punishment in hell with no chance for anything better.”
Such statements are hardly radical among more liberal theologians, who for centuries have wrestled with the seeming contradiction between an all-loving God and the consignment of the billions of non-Christians to eternal suffering. But to traditionalists they border on heresy, and they have come just at a time when conservative evangelicals fear that a younger generation is straying from unbendable biblical truths.
Mr. Bell, 40, whose Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Mich., has 10,000 members, is a Christian celebrity and something of a hipster in the pulpit, with engaging videos that sell by the hundreds of thousands and appearances to rapt, youthful crowds in rock-music arenas.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Christian author's book sparks charges of heresy" by Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor 3/1/11
Universalism, in its broadest terms, preaches that everyone goes to heaven and that there is no hell. Critics say it represents a break from traditional Christianity, which they say holds that heaven and hell are very real places. In most Christian circles, universalism is a dirty word.
Last year, Brian McLaren – a popular Christian author and a former pastor - was accused of breaking with Christian orthodoxy and delving headlong into universalism in his book A New Kind of Christianity.
But it's rare that theological arguments become top ten trending topics on Twitter, as Rob Bell did . . .
In the promotional video [for the new book,] Bell refers to the nonviolent Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi, a Hindu, and asks, "Gandhi's in hell? He is?"
"And someone knows this for sure?" Bell continues. "Will billions and billions of people burn forever in hell? And if that's the case how do you become one of the few? "
The video follows a trend in Bell's career as a pastor . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Universalism as a Lure? The Emerging Case of Rob Bell" by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 3/1/11
. . . Rob Bell and others within the Emerging Church movement represent what can only be described as a new form of cultural Christianity. Bell plays with theology the way a cat plays with a mouse. His sermons, videos, books, and public relations are often more suggestive and subversive than clear.
. . . [Bell's raises] the question of the exclusivity of the Gospel of Christ. With that question come the related questions of heaven, hell, judgment, and the fate of the unregenerate. The Bible answers these questions clearly enough, but few issues are as hard to reconcile with the modern or postmodern mind than this. Of course, it was hard to reconcile with the ancient mind as well. The singularity of the person and work of Christ and the necessity of personal faith in him for salvation run counter to the pluralistic bent of the human mind, but this is nothing less than the wisdom of God and the power of God unto salvation.
The Emerging Church movement is known for its slick and sophisticated presentation. It wears irony and condescension as normal attire. Regardless of how Rob Bell’s book turns out, its promotion is the sad equivalent of a theological striptease.
. . . Universalism is a heresy, not a lure to use in order to sell books.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Teaching Evolution is Religious Indoctrination: Lawsuit
Now in its third century, Darwin's theory of evolution resembles a religion more than a scientific inquiry, as adherents must believe by faith, given the absence of evidence.
Tom Ritter, a former physics and chemistry teacher of over 10 years, filed a lawsuit earlier this month against evolution in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, the same court that ruled that teaching of intelligent design in public schools is unconstitutional.
Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, says the theory of evolution "represents one of the greatest challenges to Christian faith and faithfulness in our times."
-- From "Lawsuit Filed Against Evolution" posted at Christian Newswire 1/27/11
Biology studies organisms. It can also explain how organisms got that way, but studying organisms does not require explaining how they got that way, and the theory of evolution is bad science.
Evolutionists cannot demonstrate that three critical points are even possible, let alone that they actually happened:
(1) No one has demonstrated that life can be created from non-life. . . .
(2) No one has demonstrated that a new "sexual species" can be created. . . .
(3) Evolutionists theorize the human brain evolved from lower forms. Over 50 years into the age of computers, machines can crunch numbers far better and faster than humans, recognize and use language and tools, and beat us in chess. Yet science has yet to build even a rudimentary computer that can contemplate its own existence, the hallmark of the human brain. . . .
If evolution is unscientific, why teach it? Because no Creator means no God. In other words, evolution taught without a possible alternative is Atheism.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Retired Science Teacher Seeks to Bar Evolution from Classrooms" by Elena Garcia, Christian Post Reporter 1/30/11
Ritter told The Christian Post this week that he didn't pay too much attention to biology before, but now in retirement he saw problems that he couldn't overlook any longer.
A local resident, Ritter wants the [school] district to stop collecting taxes from him until such teaching is halted. This is one scheme in his plan to get rid of public schools altogether, which he considers to be a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Since evolution is unscientific and teaches the absence of a creator, it is actually teaching atheism, the suit contends. Therefore, teaching evolution should be illegal in public schools because it is a religion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Mohler at center of debate over evolution & the Bible" by Erin Roach, Baptist Press 1/26/11
"Francis Collins makes the point made by so many others that we will actually lose credibility sharing the Gospel of Christ if we do not shed ourselves of the anti-intellectualism which is judged to be ours by the elite if we do not accept the theory of evolution," Mohler said.
What is most lacking in the evangelical movement today, Mohler said in the address, is a consideration of the theological cost of holding to an old earth position. The position, he said, seems to be at an "insoluble collision with the redemptive historical narrative of the Gospel."
"The cost to the Christian church, in terms of ignoring this question or abandoning the discussion, is just too high. The cost of confronting this question is also costly," Mohler said. "It can be very expensive because it can create intensity and conflict and controversy, but I would suggest that the avoidance of this will be at the cost of our own credibility."
One of Mohler's main concerns with an acceptance of evolution is how believers then can reconcile the absence of a historical Adam with the Apostle Paul's clear affirmation in Romans of Adam's headship and its centrality to the Gospel.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Tom Ritter, a former physics and chemistry teacher of over 10 years, filed a lawsuit earlier this month against evolution in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, the same court that ruled that teaching of intelligent design in public schools is unconstitutional.
Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, says the theory of evolution "represents one of the greatest challenges to Christian faith and faithfulness in our times."
-- From "Lawsuit Filed Against Evolution" posted at Christian Newswire 1/27/11
Biology studies organisms. It can also explain how organisms got that way, but studying organisms does not require explaining how they got that way, and the theory of evolution is bad science.
Evolutionists cannot demonstrate that three critical points are even possible, let alone that they actually happened:
(1) No one has demonstrated that life can be created from non-life. . . .
(2) No one has demonstrated that a new "sexual species" can be created. . . .
(3) Evolutionists theorize the human brain evolved from lower forms. Over 50 years into the age of computers, machines can crunch numbers far better and faster than humans, recognize and use language and tools, and beat us in chess. Yet science has yet to build even a rudimentary computer that can contemplate its own existence, the hallmark of the human brain. . . .
If evolution is unscientific, why teach it? Because no Creator means no God. In other words, evolution taught without a possible alternative is Atheism.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Retired Science Teacher Seeks to Bar Evolution from Classrooms" by Elena Garcia, Christian Post Reporter 1/30/11
Ritter told The Christian Post this week that he didn't pay too much attention to biology before, but now in retirement he saw problems that he couldn't overlook any longer.
A local resident, Ritter wants the [school] district to stop collecting taxes from him until such teaching is halted. This is one scheme in his plan to get rid of public schools altogether, which he considers to be a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Since evolution is unscientific and teaches the absence of a creator, it is actually teaching atheism, the suit contends. Therefore, teaching evolution should be illegal in public schools because it is a religion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Mohler at center of debate over evolution & the Bible" by Erin Roach, Baptist Press 1/26/11
"Francis Collins makes the point made by so many others that we will actually lose credibility sharing the Gospel of Christ if we do not shed ourselves of the anti-intellectualism which is judged to be ours by the elite if we do not accept the theory of evolution," Mohler said.
What is most lacking in the evangelical movement today, Mohler said in the address, is a consideration of the theological cost of holding to an old earth position. The position, he said, seems to be at an "insoluble collision with the redemptive historical narrative of the Gospel."
"The cost to the Christian church, in terms of ignoring this question or abandoning the discussion, is just too high. The cost of confronting this question is also costly," Mohler said. "It can be very expensive because it can create intensity and conflict and controversy, but I would suggest that the avoidance of this will be at the cost of our own credibility."
One of Mohler's main concerns with an acceptance of evolution is how believers then can reconcile the absence of a historical Adam with the Apostle Paul's clear affirmation in Romans of Adam's headship and its centrality to the Gospel.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
While Media Preaches Gay-Agenda Bible, Pastors Silent
"Should believers work to prevent government from foisting the homosexualist agenda on the population? Yes, very definitely so. The withholding of governmental incentives for homosexual practice is as much a civil issue as society's prohibition of incest and polygamy (even of an adult, consensual sort)." -- Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon
Are Americans hearing the Truth via Christian witness (from the church to the culture), or have Christians abandoned the lost to be led astray by the loudest voice?
Concerning the Newsweek cover story "Our Mutual Joy: Opponents of gay marriage often cite Scripture. But what the Bible teaches about love argues for the other side."
-- From "Newsweek's Heresy" by Laurie Higgins, DSA Director -Illinois Family Institute 12/9/08
I suppose Illinois Family Institute and numerous other pro-family organizations could respond to this heresy, but why should we when there are scores of church leaders and biblical scholars far better suited to the task than we are? Why are they not correcting the errors in exegesis and logic that permeate this article and will likely prove persuasive to not only the unchurched but the Body of Christ also? Why do we so rarely read editorials in our local press and national media from orthodox biblical scholars? Is it because they submit op-ed pieces that are summarily rejected, or do they simply not bother to submit them? Who better to correct the misinformation or disinformation being propagated at every cultural turn and in every cultural context than those whose vocation is studying Scripture?
An urgent plea to church leaders and theologians should go forth. Church leaders and theologians should be asked by pro-family organizations and Christians to respond to this article in their local press outlets and in major news publications. Orthodox scholars should flood media outlets with responses to this outrageous piece of sophistry. . . . These orthodox theologians and church leaders should then post the letters they send to the press on their church websites and/or personal blogs.
. . . we need an army of church leaders and theologians to leave their pulpits and ivory towers for just a moment and take their wisdom and knowledge to the culture.
From "Turning the Bible on its Head -- Newsweek Goes for Gay Marriage" by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr. 12/8/08
The national news media are collectively embarrassed by the passage of Proposition 8 in California. Gay rights activists are publicly calling on the mainstream media to offer support for gay marriage, arguing that the media let them down in November. It appears that Newsweek intends to do its part to press for same-sex marriage. Many observers believe that the main obstacle to this agenda is a resolute opposition grounded in Christian conviction. Newsweek clearly intends to reduce that opposition.
From "More than 'Mutual Joy': Lisa Miller of Newsweek against Scripture and Jesus" by Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon 12/10/08
Religious proponents of gay marriage routinely ignore or twist the major arguments in Scripture and philosophy against homosexual practice. The cover story by Religion Editor Lisa Miller in the Dec. 15, 2008 issue of Newsweek, wholeheartedly endorsed by Managing Editor Jon Meacham, is a perfect case in point.
Miller’s strategy is to argue three things: first, that the image of marriage in Scripture is so alien to anything that would be acceptable to us today that we should run as fast as we can from any appeal to Scripture against “gay marriage”; second, that Scripture has little if anything to say against caring homosexual relationships; and, third, that Scripture contains “universal truths” (concerning “what the Bible teaches about love” and family) that are serviceable for promoting “gay marriage.” In a statement that can only be regarded as delusional in the extreme, Miller arrogantly declares as if she were some sort of expert on the subject: “Scripture gives us no good reason why gays and lesbians should not be (civilly and religiously) married—and a number of excellent reasons why they should.”
To arrive at her ideological objective Miller makes a number of bad moves. She exaggerates discontinuity and downplays continuity between marriage values in Scripture and our own values. . . She engages in a distorted form of analogical reasoning that elevates distant analogies like slavery and haircuts over close analogies, with far more points of correspondence, like adult-committed incest. She shows little or no understanding of the historical and literary contexts of the texts that she treats. She ignores just about every major argument against the positions that she espouses. And she extrapolates, from certain “universal truths” in Scripture, illogical conclusions that would have appalled the scriptural authors, like assuming that generic love is a sufficient prerequisite for sexual relationships.
Lisa Miller’s article is so poorly researched and so badly (and arrogantly) argued that the editors of Newsweek should be ashamed of themselves for publishing it. But they are not ashamed.
The question must be asked: What is it with the “elite” newspapers and newsmagazines over the past decade? Are they so obsessed with promoting the homosexualist agenda that they have now given up even a pretense to objectivity, balanced research, and good sense? Do they care nothing for destroying their reputation, built up over many years, as credible sources for news and commentary? These news sources are more and more resembling a homosexualist Pravda—a different agenda but the same style of propaganda “news” reporting that would make the old Kremlin leadership proud.
Are Americans hearing the Truth via Christian witness (from the church to the culture), or have Christians abandoned the lost to be led astray by the loudest voice?
Concerning the Newsweek cover story "Our Mutual Joy: Opponents of gay marriage often cite Scripture. But what the Bible teaches about love argues for the other side."
-- From "Newsweek's Heresy" by Laurie Higgins, DSA Director -Illinois Family Institute 12/9/08
I suppose Illinois Family Institute and numerous other pro-family organizations could respond to this heresy, but why should we when there are scores of church leaders and biblical scholars far better suited to the task than we are? Why are they not correcting the errors in exegesis and logic that permeate this article and will likely prove persuasive to not only the unchurched but the Body of Christ also? Why do we so rarely read editorials in our local press and national media from orthodox biblical scholars? Is it because they submit op-ed pieces that are summarily rejected, or do they simply not bother to submit them? Who better to correct the misinformation or disinformation being propagated at every cultural turn and in every cultural context than those whose vocation is studying Scripture?
An urgent plea to church leaders and theologians should go forth. Church leaders and theologians should be asked by pro-family organizations and Christians to respond to this article in their local press outlets and in major news publications. Orthodox scholars should flood media outlets with responses to this outrageous piece of sophistry. . . . These orthodox theologians and church leaders should then post the letters they send to the press on their church websites and/or personal blogs.
. . . we need an army of church leaders and theologians to leave their pulpits and ivory towers for just a moment and take their wisdom and knowledge to the culture.
From "Turning the Bible on its Head -- Newsweek Goes for Gay Marriage" by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr. 12/8/08
The national news media are collectively embarrassed by the passage of Proposition 8 in California. Gay rights activists are publicly calling on the mainstream media to offer support for gay marriage, arguing that the media let them down in November. It appears that Newsweek intends to do its part to press for same-sex marriage. Many observers believe that the main obstacle to this agenda is a resolute opposition grounded in Christian conviction. Newsweek clearly intends to reduce that opposition.
From "More than 'Mutual Joy': Lisa Miller of Newsweek against Scripture and Jesus" by Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon 12/10/08
Religious proponents of gay marriage routinely ignore or twist the major arguments in Scripture and philosophy against homosexual practice. The cover story by Religion Editor Lisa Miller in the Dec. 15, 2008 issue of Newsweek, wholeheartedly endorsed by Managing Editor Jon Meacham, is a perfect case in point.
Miller’s strategy is to argue three things: first, that the image of marriage in Scripture is so alien to anything that would be acceptable to us today that we should run as fast as we can from any appeal to Scripture against “gay marriage”; second, that Scripture has little if anything to say against caring homosexual relationships; and, third, that Scripture contains “universal truths” (concerning “what the Bible teaches about love” and family) that are serviceable for promoting “gay marriage.” In a statement that can only be regarded as delusional in the extreme, Miller arrogantly declares as if she were some sort of expert on the subject: “Scripture gives us no good reason why gays and lesbians should not be (civilly and religiously) married—and a number of excellent reasons why they should.”
To arrive at her ideological objective Miller makes a number of bad moves. She exaggerates discontinuity and downplays continuity between marriage values in Scripture and our own values. . . She engages in a distorted form of analogical reasoning that elevates distant analogies like slavery and haircuts over close analogies, with far more points of correspondence, like adult-committed incest. She shows little or no understanding of the historical and literary contexts of the texts that she treats. She ignores just about every major argument against the positions that she espouses. And she extrapolates, from certain “universal truths” in Scripture, illogical conclusions that would have appalled the scriptural authors, like assuming that generic love is a sufficient prerequisite for sexual relationships.
Lisa Miller’s article is so poorly researched and so badly (and arrogantly) argued that the editors of Newsweek should be ashamed of themselves for publishing it. But they are not ashamed.
The question must be asked: What is it with the “elite” newspapers and newsmagazines over the past decade? Are they so obsessed with promoting the homosexualist agenda that they have now given up even a pretense to objectivity, balanced research, and good sense? Do they care nothing for destroying their reputation, built up over many years, as credible sources for news and commentary? These news sources are more and more resembling a homosexualist Pravda—a different agenda but the same style of propaganda “news” reporting that would make the old Kremlin leadership proud.
Friday, December 05, 2008
American Anglicans Form New Denomination
Attention American Christians: Consider this as instructive for all of us (how to respond to attacks)
Wednesday evening in Wheaton, IL, former Episcopal Church USA clergy announce the creation of the Anglican Church in North America, believed to include about 100,000 Christians
Nearly 1,000 Christians, including Anglican and former ECUSA clergy from around the globe, packed a loaned worship center (of the Wheaton Evangelical Free Church). To say that the atmosphere was worshipful would be an understatement!
The historic occasion included the official signing of the Jerusalem Declaration, but the hours-long gathering was a glorious worship experience that included prayers, Scripture reading, recitation of the Nicene Creed, teaching, traditional organ hymn singing, contemporary praise singing, and the celebration of the Holy Eucharist.
The congregants were visibly worshipful, and enthusiastic in their thanksgiving to God for His blessings, and bringing them out of the persecution of the apostate ECUSA, and providing for their new Bible-believing and confessing church.
So, how is this Anglican event instructive to other American Christians? These Anglican Christians have demonstrated how all Christians must react when Jesus Christ is attacked. These Anglicans in America did not cower within their local churches as their ECUSA leadership abandoned Scriptural Authority in favor of the popular culture. Rather, these Christians spoke out and took action against their heretical persecutors.
The question to American Christians is, Does it take the equivalent of a 9/11 attack to garner the attention of people who proclaim the mantel of Christ? Will the evil incrementalism be an effective weapon against slumbering churches?
As Jesus Christ is being assaulted both from within churches, by apostate and heretical leadership, and from outside the church, by pagan/secular forces, will American churches stand in the name of God Almighty despite the "risk" of persecution?
American Christians are in the position of the perverbial frog in the pot of water on the stove. Satan is very slowly turning up the heat, such that the cowering and reclusive Christians are about to be unwittingly cooked.
To quote the new Archbishop, Robert Duncan of the Anglican Church in North America: "It's time to be ready!" Mark 13:24-37
-- From "It's About Theology, Not Territory" by Albert Mohler 12/5/08
. . . conservative Anglican leaders met in Wheaton, Illinois to plan for a future province of the Anglican Communion -- in this case a province determined by theological conviction, not geographical designation.
As The New York Times reported . . . The move threatens the fragile unity of the Anglican Communion, the world’s third-largest Christian body, made up of 38 provinces around the world that trace their roots to the Church of England and its spiritual leader, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The strange part of that account is the statement that this move "threatens the fragile unity of the Anglican Communion." That fragile unity was shattered by the actions of more liberal churches in North America to bless same-sex unions, ordain homosexual ministers, and elect an openly-homosexual bishop. The lack of unity is what has prompted the establishment of this new denomination.
Indeed, this division among the Anglicans and related national churches can be traced directly back to the Anglican Communion's failure to establish and maintain doctrinal boundaries and a clear affirmation of biblical authority. Liberals and conservatives have been increasingly at odds over a host of issues related to biblical authority.
The announcement of the Anglican Church in North America is good news. The big question is just how many churches and dioceses will join this new province and depart the Episcopal Church. Officials with the Episcopal Church sought to downplay the development, suggesting that the new group was rejecting the denomination's commitment to diversity. In the eyes of those forming the Anglican Church in North America, the Episcopal Church has rejected the Bible.
Nevertheless, the fact that the establishment of the Anglican Church of North America was motivated by explicitly theological concerns and commitments is a sign of hope. The battle for biblical authority arises again and again, and it is good that these leaders recognize the centrality of this commitment.
To read Albert Mohler's entire blog entry, CLICK HERE.
Wednesday evening in Wheaton, IL, former Episcopal Church USA clergy announce the creation of the Anglican Church in North America, believed to include about 100,000 Christians
Nearly 1,000 Christians, including Anglican and former ECUSA clergy from around the globe, packed a loaned worship center (of the Wheaton Evangelical Free Church). To say that the atmosphere was worshipful would be an understatement!
The historic occasion included the official signing of the Jerusalem Declaration, but the hours-long gathering was a glorious worship experience that included prayers, Scripture reading, recitation of the Nicene Creed, teaching, traditional organ hymn singing, contemporary praise singing, and the celebration of the Holy Eucharist.
The congregants were visibly worshipful, and enthusiastic in their thanksgiving to God for His blessings, and bringing them out of the persecution of the apostate ECUSA, and providing for their new Bible-believing and confessing church.
So, how is this Anglican event instructive to other American Christians? These Anglican Christians have demonstrated how all Christians must react when Jesus Christ is attacked. These Anglicans in America did not cower within their local churches as their ECUSA leadership abandoned Scriptural Authority in favor of the popular culture. Rather, these Christians spoke out and took action against their heretical persecutors.
The question to American Christians is, Does it take the equivalent of a 9/11 attack to garner the attention of people who proclaim the mantel of Christ? Will the evil incrementalism be an effective weapon against slumbering churches?
As Jesus Christ is being assaulted both from within churches, by apostate and heretical leadership, and from outside the church, by pagan/secular forces, will American churches stand in the name of God Almighty despite the "risk" of persecution?
American Christians are in the position of the perverbial frog in the pot of water on the stove. Satan is very slowly turning up the heat, such that the cowering and reclusive Christians are about to be unwittingly cooked.
To quote the new Archbishop, Robert Duncan of the Anglican Church in North America: "It's time to be ready!" Mark 13:24-37
-- From "It's About Theology, Not Territory" by Albert Mohler 12/5/08
. . . conservative Anglican leaders met in Wheaton, Illinois to plan for a future province of the Anglican Communion -- in this case a province determined by theological conviction, not geographical designation.
As The New York Times reported . . . The move threatens the fragile unity of the Anglican Communion, the world’s third-largest Christian body, made up of 38 provinces around the world that trace their roots to the Church of England and its spiritual leader, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The strange part of that account is the statement that this move "threatens the fragile unity of the Anglican Communion." That fragile unity was shattered by the actions of more liberal churches in North America to bless same-sex unions, ordain homosexual ministers, and elect an openly-homosexual bishop. The lack of unity is what has prompted the establishment of this new denomination.
Indeed, this division among the Anglicans and related national churches can be traced directly back to the Anglican Communion's failure to establish and maintain doctrinal boundaries and a clear affirmation of biblical authority. Liberals and conservatives have been increasingly at odds over a host of issues related to biblical authority.
The announcement of the Anglican Church in North America is good news. The big question is just how many churches and dioceses will join this new province and depart the Episcopal Church. Officials with the Episcopal Church sought to downplay the development, suggesting that the new group was rejecting the denomination's commitment to diversity. In the eyes of those forming the Anglican Church in North America, the Episcopal Church has rejected the Bible.
Nevertheless, the fact that the establishment of the Anglican Church of North America was motivated by explicitly theological concerns and commitments is a sign of hope. The battle for biblical authority arises again and again, and it is good that these leaders recognize the centrality of this commitment.
To read Albert Mohler's entire blog entry, CLICK HERE.
Saturday, May 03, 2008
Homosexual Agenda Shuts Down Psychiatrists' Symposium
Panel discussion of 'The Religious Dimension' of homosexuality canceled -- free speech the loser
-- From "'Gays' shut down discussion of faith" on WorldNetDaily 5/2/08
A discussion on religion, homosexuality and therapy that had been scheduled during the American Psychiatric Association's annual meeting in Washington has been shut down following an attack by a "gay" publication on some of the people planning to participate.
The symposium called "Homosexuality and Therapy: The Religion Dimension," had been in the plans for months at the APA convention in Washington, and was to feature advocates for homosexuality including New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson of the Episcopal church and was to be moderated by Harvard psychiatrist John Peteet.
Others scheduled to be on the podium included Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton, who has studied related issues intensively, and Rev. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
But the event, scheduled Monday, has been yanked from the schedule, according to the APA, because of the "misinformation and rhetoric" that was circulating about the issue.
Peter LaBarbera, of Americans for Truth, said the reaction to a plan to talk "shows the intellectual shallowness of the gay side."
"They're afraid of a debate," he said, noting it wouldn't be correct to "paint Warren Throckmorton as the religious right."
"The gay activists don't want to admit ex-gays exist, when they clearly do," he said.
The attack was launched by the Gay City News publication, which on April 24 denigrated Throckmorton as "a psychologist without state board certification and an advocate for 'sexual identity therapy,' and quoted opponents calling him a "spin doctor of the ex-gay myth."
. . . Throckmorton had written just a day earlier when Robinson had announced his own sudden withdrawal from the event:
"Bishop Robinson provided the following explanation," Throckmorton wrote. "'Conservatives, particularly Focus on the Family, were going to use this event to draw credibility to the so-called reparative therapy movement,' Robinson told the Blade. 'It became clear to me in the last couple of weeks that just my showing up and letting this event happen … lends credibility to that so-called therapy.'"
. . . Robinson's statement to the Blade, however, made it clear that his intent was by refusing now to appear, after having agreed to do so, to shut down the discussion of homosexuality and religion.
The Washington Times is reporting that the attack launched by the Gay City News was followed quickly by the Washington Blade, which said the "panel could legitimize 'homophobic views.'"
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE
-- From "'Gays' shut down discussion of faith" on WorldNetDaily 5/2/08
A discussion on religion, homosexuality and therapy that had been scheduled during the American Psychiatric Association's annual meeting in Washington has been shut down following an attack by a "gay" publication on some of the people planning to participate.
The symposium called "Homosexuality and Therapy: The Religion Dimension," had been in the plans for months at the APA convention in Washington, and was to feature advocates for homosexuality including New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson of the Episcopal church and was to be moderated by Harvard psychiatrist John Peteet.
Others scheduled to be on the podium included Grove City College professor Warren Throckmorton, who has studied related issues intensively, and Rev. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
But the event, scheduled Monday, has been yanked from the schedule, according to the APA, because of the "misinformation and rhetoric" that was circulating about the issue.
Peter LaBarbera, of Americans for Truth, said the reaction to a plan to talk "shows the intellectual shallowness of the gay side."
"They're afraid of a debate," he said, noting it wouldn't be correct to "paint Warren Throckmorton as the religious right."
"The gay activists don't want to admit ex-gays exist, when they clearly do," he said.
The attack was launched by the Gay City News publication, which on April 24 denigrated Throckmorton as "a psychologist without state board certification and an advocate for 'sexual identity therapy,' and quoted opponents calling him a "spin doctor of the ex-gay myth."
. . . Throckmorton had written just a day earlier when Robinson had announced his own sudden withdrawal from the event:
"Bishop Robinson provided the following explanation," Throckmorton wrote. "'Conservatives, particularly Focus on the Family, were going to use this event to draw credibility to the so-called reparative therapy movement,' Robinson told the Blade. 'It became clear to me in the last couple of weeks that just my showing up and letting this event happen … lends credibility to that so-called therapy.'"
. . . Robinson's statement to the Blade, however, made it clear that his intent was by refusing now to appear, after having agreed to do so, to shut down the discussion of homosexuality and religion.
The Washington Times is reporting that the attack launched by the Gay City News was followed quickly by the Washington Blade, which said the "panel could legitimize 'homophobic views.'"
To read the entire article, CLICK HERE
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Albert Mohler Advocates Christian Exit From Public Schools
From "Mohler's New Book Advocates Exit Strategy from Public Schools" by Bob Allen, posted 1/18/08 at Ethics Daily.com
A seminary president and recently announced candidate for president of the Southern Baptist Convention says in a new book that Christians should have an exit strategy from public schools.
Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, says in Culture Shift: Engaging Current Issues With Timeless Truth that Christian parents increasingly view public schools as "prime battlegrounds for cultural conflict."
Given recent developments, Mohler predicts schools "will soon become even more hostile to the convictions of many Christian families."
"I am convinced that the time has come for Christians to develop an exit strategy from the public schools," Mohler writes. "Some parents made this decision long ago."
..."The strategy would also affirm the responsibility of churches to equip parents, support families and offer alternatives," he writes. "At the same time, this strategy must acknowledge that Christian churches, families and parents do not yet see the same realities, the same threats and the same challenges in every context. Sadly, this is almost certainly just a matter of time."
Read the rest of this article.
A seminary president and recently announced candidate for president of the Southern Baptist Convention says in a new book that Christians should have an exit strategy from public schools.
Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, says in Culture Shift: Engaging Current Issues With Timeless Truth that Christian parents increasingly view public schools as "prime battlegrounds for cultural conflict."
Given recent developments, Mohler predicts schools "will soon become even more hostile to the convictions of many Christian families."
"I am convinced that the time has come for Christians to develop an exit strategy from the public schools," Mohler writes. "Some parents made this decision long ago."
..."The strategy would also affirm the responsibility of churches to equip parents, support families and offer alternatives," he writes. "At the same time, this strategy must acknowledge that Christian churches, families and parents do not yet see the same realities, the same threats and the same challenges in every context. Sadly, this is almost certainly just a matter of time."
Read the rest of this article.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
The Self-Esteem Movement Backfires -- When Praise is Dangerous
By Albert Mohler
The self-esteem movement has transformed much of America, but this is perhaps nowhere more evident than in the schools. A brilliant article in New York Magazine provides a fascinating glimpse into why the movement is crashing and burning.
The self-esteem movement has transformed much of America, but this is perhaps nowhere more evident than in the schools. A brilliant article in New York Magazine provides a fascinating glimpse into why the movement is crashing and burning.
As writer Po Bronson explains:
Since the 1969 publication of The Psychology of Self-Esteem, in which Nathaniel Branden opined that self-esteem was the single most important facet of a person, the belief that one must do whatever he can to achieve positive self-esteem has become a movement with broad societal effects. Anything potentially damaging to kids' self-esteem was axed. Competitions were frowned upon. Soccer coaches stopped counting goals and handed out trophies to everyone. Teachers threw out their red pencils. Criticism was replaced with ubiquitous, even undeserved, praise.
Author Melanie Phillips offered a devastating critique of the movement in her book All Must Have Prizes. As she revealed, achievement in all areas was being replaced with exercises intended to boost self-esteem. Every player on the team has to receive a prize and all prizes have to be equal. She put it this way in 2003:
Surely, in the immortal words of John McEnroe, they cannot be serious? Alas, the latest pronouncement from those in charge of our exam system is truly beyond satire.
Their new idea for boosting examination success is to abolish the very idea of failure, along with the difference between the right and the wrong answer to a question.
The article indicates that older children and teenagers learn to become cynical about the undeserved praise they receive from parents, teachers, and others. They actually perform better if they receive serious and skilled criticism, rather than empty praise.Praising effort and achievement yields positive results. Praising for the sake of praising hurts far more than it helps. It is a recipe for individual and social disaster.
Read the whole article at AlbertMohler.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
