It started innocently enough with a simple picture created for a school project, a mere line drawing by the hand of a teenage boy. But the boy’s teacher found the work so objectionable that she refused to give the boy a grade, and the Wisconsin school stood by this teacher. The boy was also given two detentions for the objectionable artwork.
The drawing in question was submitted alongside the artistic creations of other students. Among these other works was a red-skinned demon mask complete with horns and bared fangs; a Buddha fountain; a sorcerer; an eight-armed Hindu goddess riding a giant swan.
But the work the boy submitted went over the limit in the eyes of the school. What was so offensive, so vulgar to the boy’s teacher? It was simply this: a white chalk drawing on a black background of a cross, with the caption, “John 3:16, a sign of love.” Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: postmodernism, Sermons
The biblical account of the Hebrew exodus from Egypt plays a central role in Judeo-Christian religious understanding. When a severe famine in the land of Canaan brought the patriarch Jacob and his family to Egypt, God promised that He would go with him, and bring his descendants[1] out again (Gen. 46:3-4). God’s promise to Jacob is a continuation of the “promise plan,” first made to Abraham in Gen. 12. This “promise plan,” which some would say extends even further back to Gen. 3:15, is the common thread which runs throughout the scriptures from Genesis to Revelation.[2] The plan finds its main subject in the coming of the Messiah, and has its climax in the judgment.
Since the exodus narrative is part of God’s fulfillment of this promise plan, and since the event is referred to over and over in scriptures, if one doubts the exodus, one basically doubts the Bible as being the inspired, inerrant Word of God. Being such a focus of the scriptures, the exodus has for many years in turn been a focus of much controversy and discussion. Although there are some scholars and historians who doubt the biblical exodus ever happened[3], this paper will work from the assumption that an exodus of the sort described in the Bible actually did happen, a view that is taken by most scholars. The portion of the debate that will be examined in this short paper is the question of the dating of the event. Read the rest of this entry »
The Nature of Man debate will begin tonight at 7 p.m. with an altered format. For an explanation of the format, see the Shaumburg church of Christ website. For live audio of the event, follow this link:
http://pointers.audiovideoweb.com/stcasx/3c3winlive3145/play.asx
Tags: debate
Tags: debate
In the latest edition of The Spiritual Sword, the question “What is happening to us?” is examined. Many issues that are being discussed and disagreed over are covered in the issue, including homosexuality, the role of women, denominationalism, instrumental music, and postmodernism. One issue, however, stood out and caused me a little shock.
At the beginning of his article entitled, “Is immersion a condition of salvation,” Hugh Fulford quotes Gary Holloway of Lipscomb University:
“Currently there is some controversy among Churches of Christ regarding immersion. Many of us cannot deny that there are many devout Christians who are unimmersed.”
Now, this quote was from back in 2006 and I believe came from New Wineskins. But Fulford also quotes Mike Williams, also a professor at Lipscomb and the minister at Fourth Avenue Church of Christ in Franklin, Tenn., as saying that the congregation will accept the baptisms of anyone, whether baptized as infants, for reasons other than remission of sins, as well as those who have not been baptized. He quotes Williams as saying, “And so, we have decided we will not be contentious, and we will be encompassing, and embracing all who choose to come here and walk with us.”
At what point, brethren, do we begin to notice the gradual but steady slide down the slippery slope of religious plurality and inclusiveness? If you have not read The Spiritual Sword, I encourage you to get a copy and read about the issues that are facing the church in our times.
It was announced recently that Mac Deaver will participate in a debate with a baptist minister April 27-30 at Schaumburg (Ill.) Church of Christ. The title of the debate is “The Nature of Man.” For more information, see the previous article here.
Jeffery Miller with the church at Schaumburg dropped by to tell me that the debate will be broadcast live on the internet. Follow the link below to watch each night between 7 and 9:30 p.m.
http://pointers.audiovideoweb.com/stcasx/3c3winlive3145/play.asx
Tags: debate
Here are a few realizations I have come to as a result of reading the comments on graceconversation.com:
- The format of the discussion is conducive neither to either learning nor to resolution. Although it is always good to have an “open forum” situation, an open forum where everyone is chattering non-stop and chasing rabbit trail after rabbit trail is useless. Unless, of course, one wants to promote confusion. I appreciate the attempt at dialogue, but it is not working. It has turned into a brilliant opportunity for progressive bloggers to attack and ridicule conservatives, and backslap and cheer one another on as they do so.
- Although I started reading the site with the thought that most progressives are kind and open minded, I have instead learned from graceconversation.com that the majority of progressive bloggers are just as close minded as those they accuse of the same. I have lost a lot of respect for some of my progressive friends due to their actions, language, and tone in the comments on the site.
- Finally, I have come to the realization that graceconversation.com is damaging the image of the church. I know that those who started the site desired for a good, productive dialogue to take place, but the comments section has become a place for those who are disgruntled with the church to teach everything from denial of God’s plan of salvation, to “original sin,” to religious pluralism.
To Jay Guin and Todd Deaver, I ask you: Is this the result you had in mind?
Greg Tidwell and Phil Sanders, I appreciate the great job you are trying to do. Jay and Todd, I have read your articles as well, and though I do not agree with your positions, I appreciate your kind manner.
I am sure no one is interested in my opinion, but I think you need to close down the comments section, unless you plan to moderate the way people speak to each other, and what doctrines they teach. If this does not happen, you are simply sponsoring a forum for Christians to be led into false doctrines. Alternately, what would be wrong with an actual moderated debate?
If you do not agree with the doctrine of “original sin,” why have you allowed it to be openly taught on your site? If you still hold to the biblical teaching that baptism of those who come to faith is necessary for salvation, why are you allowing those who oppose God’s teaching on salvation to run free on your site?
Just my humble opinion, but it appears what started out as an interesting way to hold a discussion, has instead played directly into the hands of those who want to change the simple teachings of the church into a more denominational form, not to mention those who come by just to ridicule the church. In the comments section, the church is being held up to open shame!
I enjoyed passing by there occasionally, but I will be staying about my own work and avoiding the site until a more useful format is implemented.
May God bless you all as you seek to serve Him according to His will,
Matt
Tags: Fellowship
He was quite convinced his view was correct. “After all, Jesus never mentioned homosexuality, therefore it must not be sinful,” he said. When he was approached with the fact that the New Testament condemned homosexual behavior (Rom. 1:26-27; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10; Jude 7), he said, “I only go by what Jesus said.” This fellow had a belief that he was only obligated to obey what was printed in “red letters” (denoting words spoke by Jesus). If Jesus did not say it in red letters in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, he did not feel bound to obey!
This story came to mind while I was pondering the fellowship issues being discussed at graceconversation.com and the myriad confusing comments passers-by are leaving following the writer’s blog entries. One of the current claims in the “progressive” camp is that since there are no passages that specifically say those who worship differently from the New Testament pattern should not be fellowshipped, that we therefore are obligated to accept any error in worship practice in full fellowship. Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Fellowship
Based upon an overview of some key New Testament passages as found in the brief studies I presented last week, below is a list of reasons for withdrawing fellowship according to the Bible: Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: Fellowship
1. Congregational autonomy, 1 Cor. 5-6
2. Babes in Christ
3. Willful, unrepentant sin
Tags: Fellowship
Recent Comments