Time for Some Good Stuff

It’s again time to look not at cults and false teachings to avoid, but to look at good instruction.  

Let’s first start with a series posted at “Grace to You” concerning discernment and how to be better “Bereans.”

Meet the Bereans
Your Berean Battle Plan:  Remember
Your Berean Battle Plan:  Remain
Your Berean Battle Plan:  Reach
Your Berean Battle Plan:  Rescue

An excellent sermon by John MacArthur was also posted on Grace to You.   Titled, “We Will Not Bow,” it was given in July in response to the Supreme Court’s decision to rebel against God’s design for marriage.

There are many viewpoints about what the Bible says is allowable for divorce and remarriage.  My personal view is that divorce is permitted for marital unfaithfulness (adultery - either actual physical, or mental by indulgence in pornography, etc), abuse and abandonment.  I also maintain that biblical divorce allows for remarriage.  This article asks the question of whether there is biblical grounds for divorcing an abuser.

Do all infants go to heaven?  I believe they do, and I wrote justifying my position back in April 2011.  This article from The Gospel Coalition agrees with my assessment.

Have you even been confused about the differences in the genealogies of Jesus as presented in Matthew and Luke?  Marie has a good article to help you with your struggle.

Finally, Joe has some good thoughts about the Lord’s Supper.

A Christian’s Duty in Regard to the Law

While it appears that most people reading my post about Kim Davis understood my point, others (either in the comments, in e-mail, or on other blogs) seemed to have totally misunderstood me and feel I am against her stance — and I’m really 100% for her.   I think perhaps I confused the issue when I was trying to show different stances to take and the proper actions to take based on those stances — sort of muddied the water a bit.  So I want to revisit the issue by explaining what a Christian’s duty is if the law of the land (or any order from any authority) contradicts with the law of God.

First, let’s look at the appropriate passages which speak to the Christian’s responsibility to those in charge.

Romans 13:1-5:  Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.  For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

1 Peter 2:13-15:  Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.  For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people.

And one very important passage is Acts 5:29:  We must obey God rather than men.

In any occupation or other situation, we are to obey the rules, laws, orders, etc, of those in authority over us unless such requirements contradict God’s laws.  Period.  No picking and choosing what we want to obey, rather as long as we are under said authority we obey said authority.  Now, this does NOT preclude us from taking actions to remove ourselves from said authority so as to no longer be required to obey said authority, and if this “out” is all that is available to avoid being forced to act against God’s law, then a Christian must take it.

So what happens if a Christian is in a position from which they cannot get out from under the authority which is compelling them to act against God?  The only recourse is to refuse to obey, as did Daniel in the Old Testament and Paul in the New Testament.  Of course at that point the Christian must be prepared to deal with the earthly consequences of such disobedience, whether it be fines, prison, or execution.  

Back to Kim Davis.  And let it be known loud and clear that I am firmly behind her actions as they are playing out.  However, from all the original media reports I saw, including various videos of her speaking, although she didn’t cite the above passages it appeared they were her appeal as to why she was refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses.  She had requested accommodation and was refused by her authorities (although I think her request about removing her name really didn’t solve the issue of her responsibility for them with or without her name, but that’s another issue).  So in regard to this specific claim, and without mention of any other option, Davis really had only one recourse and that would be to resign and remove herself from under the authority which was compelling her to go against God’s law.   Again, this is IF she has no other recourse to address the same issue.  And because this was the only defense cited in the various media sources I saw, I noted that she was wrong in not resigning if this was her only defense.

The problem here is that too many people think resigning would have been demonstrating selfishness, cowardice, etc, and even that it would prevent her from making a clear public declaration of rebellion against unjust laws.  BUT, our stand for God is to glorify God and to not bring glory to ourselves for our martyrdom.

Let me give an example of the idea of removing oneself from the authority forcing compliance with man’s laws against God’s laws.  A few years back there were people (I think they were students) on the sidewalks of a public school during the Christmas season, and they were passing out candy canes with gospel tracts based on the purported Christian story behind the candy canes.  Well, local ordinances stated that nothing of this type of activity could be done on the school property, so the school authorities asked them to leave the grounds.  The individuals refused, saying that they were obeying God’s laws to preach the Gospel, and therefore were not compelled to obey man’s laws.  The police were called and the people were forced to leave under threat of arrest for trespass, and they made all sorts of protests and claims of persecution, etc.  Were they properly applying Acts 5:29?  Absolutely NOT!  All they had to do was to cross the street and continue their tracting, since, according to the article, school students used those sidewalks to go to and from the school grounds and were easily accessible to the tracters.  All these people had to do was remove themselves from the authority who had control of the school property.  There was no law from God which said they had to stay where they were!

Now while it is quite often that a Christian has no other defense than to either get out from under the authority or suffer consequences of righteous disobedience, there are times when there are other options available to properly reject the authority because the authority is actually the one acting out of their legal jurisdiction, and the person being compelled to act against God’s law is actually doing the legal thing by refusing to obey the illegitimate authority.  I have personally in the past been in such a situation and was able to appeal to a higher authority which countermanded the illegitimate authority (even the military allows subordinates to disobey those in authority if those in authority give unlawful orders).  Christians are indeed permitted to appeal to the laws of the land in their defense, and a perfect example from Scripture is how Paul was able to appeal to his rights as a Roman citizen for proper legal treatment.

So let’s look at Kim Davis’ situation.  Kim took an oath to uphold the laws of Kentucky, which would necessarily include their Constitution, which plainly states that marriage is only valid between a man and a woman.  As long as the laws she took an oath to uphold are on the books, she is bound by her oath to uphold them, and she can certainly appeal to her faith that it would be dishonoring to God if she failed to stand by her oath.  Since judicial opinions and decisions in regards to laws don’t actually change the laws, Davis would not be bound by such decisions, rather she would have to wait until the legislature actually changed the laws.  Otherwise she would be violating her oath of duty to the law.  So she would be righteously disobeying the judges and the governor who ordered her to issue the licenses.  Because she had this other option she did not need to resign in order to solve the situation with proper legal authority.

This was the point of my original article; that if she was standing only on Rom. 13 and 1 Pet 2, then her only recourse would be to resign.  BUT, since she had another option to honor God by honoring her oath to legitimate authority, to the legal protection she had, then this gave her another recourse for righteous refusal, and was the course that should have been taken if she wanted to refuse to resign.

Now, I have to admit that the media may have not properly reported the chain of events in regards to Kim’s decisions in what to claim as reasons, and it’s also possible she made statements regarding such decisions without thinking about what they actually entailed in regards to Rom. 13/1 Per 2.  With further progress of the story, it seems that the defense is being made that the laws did not change and therefore she was duty-bound to her oath of office.  I’m really happy to see this is the defense.

However, Christians need to understand that she was never persecuted for her faith (at least not yet).  We need to not claim martyrdom just because faith is involved in our everyday decisions.  This is the wrong sort of publicity for our cause unless it is 100% factual.  The stand being taken demonstrating judicial tyranny to the whole nation is what is good for all Americans and not just those who are Christian.

I do have one final thought where Davis, in my opinion, acted wrongly if she is going by her oath of office.  She refused to issue ANY marriage licenses so as to not be accused of discrimination.    However, since the law recognizes real marriage, she should have continued to issue those licenses all the while refusing same-sex licenses based not on her claims of what God does or does not allow, but on what the law she took an oath to uphold allowed!

I hope this clarifies things a bit.

UPDATE 1:50 PM.  According to the latest news, Kim Davis is NOT appealing to her oath to uphold the law, rather she is still appealing to the fact that she considers same-sex marriage to be a sin.  "Davis, an apostolic Christian, says gay marriage is a sin. She also says it would be a sin for her to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple because the licenses are issued under her authority."  Since she is not appealing to the legal option available as noted above, then she has only ONE legitimate response and that is to resign.  Her refusal to do so is wrong!

More Spiritual Junk Food

Here we go with another example of a the “Jesus Is My Boyfriend” genre of “praise and worship” music invading the Church at large from the aberrant church organization known as Hillsong.

This song was sung as a couplet with the last one I posted about (“Beautiful One”), and this one went first.  With these two songs together, it was sort of a weird, “yuck” feeling.  Notice the double phrase in almost every other line, and how long it goes before you discover it is addressed to God/Lord/Jesus rather than the boy next door. 

Forever Reign

You are good, You are good

When there's nothing good in me

You are love, You are love

On display for all to see

You are light, You are light

When the darkness closes in

You are hope, You are hope

You have covered all my sin

You are peace, You are peace

When my fear is crippling

You are true, You are true

Even in my wandering

You are joy, You are joy

You're the reason that I sing

You are life, You are life,

In You death has lost its sting

Oh, I'm running to Your arms,

I'm running to Your arms.

The riches of Your love

Will always be enough

Nothing compares to Your embrace

Light of the world forever reign

You are more, You are more

Than my words will ever say

You are Lord, You are Lord

All creation will proclaim

You are here, You are here

In Your presence I'm made whole

You are God, You are God

Of all else I'm letting go

Oh, I'm running to Your arms

I'm running to Your arms

The riches of Your love

Will always be enough

Nothing compares to Your embrace

Light of the world forever reign

My heart will sing

no other Name

Jesus, Jesus

Oh, I'm running to Your arms

I'm running to Your arms

The riches of Your love

Will always be enough

Ladies and gentlemen, this is nothing more than spiritual junk food.  Why are we putting up with the “Hillsongization” of our churches?!?  

Do You Worship Sports?

The same church members who yell like Comanche Indians at a ball game on Saturday sit like wooden Indians in church on Sunday.  

Vance Havner, cited by Leonard Ravenhill, Why Revival Tarries, pg. 84

Kim Davis Is Wrong

It’s all over the news, so I shouldn’t have to tell you who Kim Davis is.  So I’m going to get right to the point.

Kim Davis was elected into her current occupation, and is being paid to do what her job requires of her to do.  If at any time she felt that whatever her job required caused her a conflict of conscience with her Christian faith, she has the right to ask for accommodation if it can be given.  I understand in her job no accommodation can be given, so therefore she has one option open in regards to standing on her Christian faith:  She can resign.

No one is forcing her to stay on her job, so therefore she cannot claim Acts 5:29.  She can walk off the job and leave it for someone else and have a clear conscience.  Instead, she decided to defy a governor’s order and judge’s order and claim persecution for her faith, but her faith wasn’t being challenged. SHE was always wrong to say she can’t issue fake marriage licenses because of God, because she wasn’t being forced to issue them as long as she had the option to resign.  Instead, her actions have brought shame upon the name of Christ.  I think Jonathan Miles has an excellent article summing up the issue in this regard.

Now, let’s look at this from another angle and see the proper route she should have taken in defense of her actions.

When Kim Davis was elected to her office, my understanding from many news sources is that she took an oath to defend her state’s constitution and all other appropriate laws.  This does not include any judge’s opinions, because those are not laws; only legislatures can make laws, while judges can only issue opinions as to whether a law is proper; a problem with Americans is that they too often accept a court decision as a law and it isn’t!  

Kentucky’s constitution says that marriage is only valid between a man and a woman, and that same-sex unions are not to be recognized as marriage.  Therefore all Kim Davis had to say from the very beginning was that she took an oath to uphold the Kentucky law and that as long as that law is in effect, she would be violating the law by issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  Read and contemplate this article and understand the lawbreakers are the judges.

Kim Davis elected instead to make an issue of her faith, while at the same time violating Romans 13 by refusing to obey the governor and judges rather than resigning, and then everyone is misrepresenting the case by claiming she is being jailed for her Christian beliefs.

The proper defense would have been to use the law which supports her, but that wouldn’t give her publicity and it wouldn’t have been in the news, would it?

Kim Davis is NOT a martyr for her faith.

Beautiful One?

A song recently used for worship had me scratching my head, because until you get almost to the end you have no idea who the subject is, and until then you wonder if it is sung to a boyfriend or a girlfriend (oh, I guess in the 2nd line the mention of a cross is supposed to do).  Alas, it is another of the “Jesus is my boyfriend” genre.  What is it with “worship leaders” who find this junk food edifying, or even useful for worship?  Take a look at the lyrics; I see no intrinsic value in this song for corporate worship. 

Beautiful One, by Tim Hughes

Wonderful so wonderful is Your unfailing love

Your cross is spoken mercy over me

No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no heart can fully know

How glorious, how beautiful You are

Beautiful One I love

Beautiful One I adore

Beautiful One my soul must sing

Powerful so powerful Your glory fills the skies

Your mighty works displayed for all to see

The beauty of Your majesty awakes my heart to sing

How marvelous, how wonderful You are

Beautiful One I love

Beautiful One I adore

Beautiful One my soul must sing

Beautiful One I love

Beautiful One I adore

Beautiful One my soul must sing

You've opened my eyes to Your wonders anew

Captured my heart with this love

'Cause nothing on earth is as beautiful as You, Jesus

And You've opened my eyes to your wonders anew

Captured my heart with this love

'Cause nothing on earth is as beautiful as You, Jesus

Beautiful One I love

Beautiful One I adore

Beautiful One my soul must sing

Oh my soul, my soul must sing

My soul, my soul must sing

My soul, my soul must sing

Beautiful One

My soul, my soul must sing

My soul, my soul must sing

My soul, my soul must sing

Beautiful One

Am I off base here?  I just have a difficult time singing “how beautiful you are" to a man!

Random Aberrations, Apostasies, and Heresies

WOLVES ARE LURKING JUST OUTSIDE THE CHURCH DOOR LOOKING TO SNEAK INSIDE.

I’ve been gone most of the day, and am trying to catch up on news and such, and I need to check my e-mails to see if anyone took my offer from yesterday.  Meanwhile, not even a week has gone by and already I have too many things for my “Random” post of exposing the horrid stuff invading the Church at large, so I’m doing this now before I find more stuff!!!

Michael Brown has a lot of good teachings in regards to fundamental doctrines, Christian living, and even how to reason with Jews to demonstrate the truth of the Christian faith.  He is also a good conservative commentator when it comes to government policies and the culture.  HOWEVER, when it comes to many things in regards to doctrine and the charismatic ideology, Brown can get to be very aberrational, and he often lacks discernment as to association with, and support of, rank heretics like Benny Hinn!  I think Brown’s charismatic bent is foundational to his lack of discernment, as demonstrated by this article.

The Oregon Christian bakers who were sued by a couple who wanted to have them provide services for a fake wedding decided to reach out in “love” and send cakes to homosexual activists.  While so many Christians were praising the bakers for showing the “love of Jesus,” I immediately had problems with their comprising of their position they were ostensibly standing for!  I came across this excellent article this week which examines the exact questions I had!  I think the bakers were dead wrong in sending out these cakes — it doesn’t show love at all.

The Pope is on the bandwagon promoting illegal immigration into the US, and suggests he should come across the Mexican border.  Perhaps he should read Romans 13!

Even worse than that, the Pope has praised a lesbian author who promotes the homosexual agenda!

The results of such ideology from the Pope, and the lack of good biblical instruction for Roman Catholics, ends up being that most Catholics think just about any “family” arrangement for raising children is good!!!

No one will ever know how many national disasters have been averted because [Cindy] Jacobs said "yes" to God then and continues raising up generals and calling them to militant intercession well into the 21st century.
Oh my.  God used a false teacher to avert national disasters?!?!?!  Oh the hubris!!!

Herescope has a good article — a book review — examining all the nonsense about “blood moons,” “Shimitah,” and the “Isaiah 9:10 effect” propagated by various false teachers such as Jonathan Cahn and John Hagee.

It’s an older article, but still true nevertheless — we need missionaries in AMERICA!

Good reasons to NOT wear a crucifix.  Also, remember that Christ is no longer on the cross!

More proof of the completely apostate condition of the Methodist Church is a congregation approving a homosexual “marriage” proposal among the assembly.  They certainly are worshiping a different christ and a different god than what we find in Scripture.

Another excellent examination of Beth Moore and her teachings — and why she should be avoided like the plague!

Oh, dear.  Another false teacher discovered — Jen Hatmaker.   Don’t listen to her for truth!

A new Kendrick Brothers movie coming out ("War Room"), and Elizabeth Prata tells why I won’t spend my money on it either.  (I agree with Elizabeth about problems in the previous ones, problems which my wife and I discussed, but we liked them anyway — because we could enjoy the plots with discernment, and I even wrote an article about some deeper problems I had with Courageous, other than the “enough faith guarantees blessings” line of the others.)  Christianity Today Astray has a review which should make eyebrows raise a bit.  Elizabeth returned for a part 2 of her review, examining the problem with who the Kendricks cast in the movie, as well as who they are associating with — proving their total lack of discernment.

Looks like we may get a good analysis of “The Purpose-Driven Life.”  I’ve always said it was junk food with cyanide pills.  The series continues as follows:

On Identity
On Salvation
More to come with my next “RAAH” post.

More proof that Steven Furtick is a dangerous false teacher.  HT to Mary for her excellent article on mysticism, which included a link to this video. YES, read the whole article — I just wanted to highlight Mr. Popular.

Fred has his next installment reviewing “Which Bible Would Jesus Use?”

Excellent examination of “The Shack” and its rank heresy.

And, finally, Watchman Fellowship has a new profile on Sikhism available.

Never Desert Truth

The business of the truth is not to be deserted even to the sacrifice of our lives, for we live not for this age of ours, nor for the princes, but for the Lord.  

Zwingli, cited by Leonard Ravenhill,  Why Revival Tarries, pg. 76

We Need Spiritual Leadership

Until self-effacing men return again to spiritual leadership, we may expect a progressive deterioration in the quality of popular Christianity year after year till we reach the point where the grieved Holy Spirit withdraws—like the Shekinah from the temple.  

A.W. Tozer.  Cited by Leonard Ravenhill,  Why Revival Tarries, pg.76

Random Aberrations, Apostasies, and Heresies

My, oh my, oh my.  Keeping up with the collapse of the Church at large is a never-ending task.  There are so many good sites doing the same thing I’m doing, with periodic collections of news items, that you’d think we could catch most of it to warn the sheep about, but with so much false teachings out there it really is an impossible task.  Here are examples of some sites I recommend for keeping up with the latest (some of the articles I point to will often come from these sites):

Do Not Be Surprised, has weekly “This ’n’ That” roundups.

Asleep No More has “Random Bits”

Eternity Matters has taken sort of a hiatus from his “Roundup” as he’s been concentrating on examining all the abortion news as well as exposing the “Christian Left.”  Just the continual update on the latter should open your eyes to those who are bent on destroying the true Church.

Living4HisGlory has “Warning You With Tears Wednesday.”

There are more of these types of sites, but don’t be shy about visiting these for starters.

Okay, now for the news!

Along the false gospel vein, is a followup on the Mike Adams’ article I posted about last week as he now examines “The Counterfeit Christian.”

Last week I also told you about an upcoming Beth Moore Simulcast; here’s a good examination of what it will most likely be teaching — and you can see just how dangerous this woman is as a teacher!

Fred continues his review of “Which Bible Would Jesus Use?”

Last week I told you about the false prophet who invaded John MacArthur’s church; now here’s an update on this guy showing just how bad of a false prophet he really is!

A history lesson about the Cane Ridge Revival, which so many Christians hold up as a great event spreading the gospel — sounds like much of it was nothing but the same emotionalism found in today’s false revivals.

Another look at history is Elizabeth’s article about a Baptist publication list from 1870 when compared to Lifeway’s 2015 best-seller list.  The 2015 list just demonstrates that Lifeway is more about making money than protecting the flock from spiritual danger.

Lastly, some humorous truth about the teaching of Joel Osteen and what his “sermon prep” information must look like.