Archive for the ‘culture’ Category

We have been told to be discerning in terms of what types of secular music to not assimilate into our minds if it is degrading, anti-Christ, and vulgar, to name a few.  But what about the call to be discerning concerning the Christian music world?  If you have not seen some of the news feeds, more and more disclosures of secret sins and a myriad of false teachings are coming out from the Christian music world–from people who claim to be followers of Christ.  Much of what these people say falls in harmony with human autonomy rather than Sola Scriptura.  Their beliefs are unorthodox. Here is a list below for your discernment when you encounter them:

Does worship matter anymore?  Does the holiness of God bring about any concern to these singers and to the church? Many who called them out on their sin and false teaching are labeled as haters, homophobic, unloving, Pharisees, and many other unbiblical slanderous names.  These individuals who are condoning abominable sexual lifestyles and false teachings have no business whatsoever by singing in churches or concerts that will bring about detrimental effects to the church.  It is an assault and insult against God. 

The church must not be lukewarm with it comes to biblical integrity.  Yes we are to approach them in love, but we must also be fearless defenders of the truth during times like these.  Apostasies and false teachings are spreading like wildfire, while some in the church are more infatuated with their type of music that feels good to the soul.  The enemy is attacking in many forms.  He truly is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.  He will use the world, professing Christians, and the idolatry of sentimentalism to extinguish our efforts.

Many of these professing believers want to promote change in order to bring about the utopia that the LGBT, humanistic, or the charlatan communities want, but they will never ever change God’s Word and His perspective towards truth.

Many of these poor souls who tolerate this lifestyle have missed the whole mark.  The Gospel did not come so that sin or false teaching can be tolerated.  One of the reasons why the Gospel came was to bring about obedience and change in one’s life.  They are more concern about their money instead of about being in a right relationship with the Lord and to His Word.  According to Vicky Beeching, although some of the royalties have diminished, she states that some royalties still come in because of the songs that are sung in many of the mega churches.  Hmm, I wonder what mega churches those are and I wonder if they are aware about her public acceptance of a gay life.  Do they know about her lifestyle?  If so, how are they biblically handling the situation (2 Corinthians 5:11, “But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler– not even to eat with such a one”).  Beloved, even as believers, we will give an account to God when we die in terms of whether we were faithful to His Word or not (1 Cor. 3:11-15; James 3:1-9; Romans 14:12).  And what better way to apply it during this time.

Beloved, we must be more discerning during these times.  We must not only worship with our heart, but we must also worship with our head.  Worshiping with our head is a fundamental and focal importance in the Christian life.  Romans 12:2, “And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.”  Christ also expects us as the church to be discerning of spirits and teachings: Philippians 1:8-10; Hebrews 5:13-14; Galatians 1:6-10.

Read Full Post »

Cell Sin

This past summer I enjoyed some great vacation time with my wife of fifteen years, Grace, and our five children. We went to the high desert and spent most of our time enjoying the sunshine by playing catch, swimming in pools, inner tubing down rivers, going for walks and the like. For the first time in my life, I actually did not turn on my cell phone and did not take any calls or emails while on vacation. I made it a full three weeks of fasting from digital demons such as my BlackBerry, iPod, and second cell phone. Within a few days I also stopped wearing a watch and stopped really caring about time and instead enjoyed my wife, kids, and vacation. In short, it was wonderful. Unplugging my technology and simply having nothing on my body that required a battery seemed like a new kind of spiritual discipline for our age that refreshed and renewed me more than I could have imagined.

Being unplugged from my technology also made me more aware of how much lords over us as a beeping, ringing, and vibrating merciless sovereign god. I was grieved when I went to the pool every day with my kids to swim and play catch in the water and looked around the pool only to see other parents not connecting with their children at all but rather talking on their cell phones and dinking around on their handheld mobile devices while sitting in lounge chairs. When we went out for meals we saw the same thing. Parents with children were commonly interrupted throughout the meal by their technology and spent more time talking on the phone than to their family. To make matters worse, these people were actually quite loud and were incredibly annoying to the rest of us who do not want to hear whether or not their friend Hank’s nasty inner thigh rash had cleared up.

Sadly, the trend continued even late into the evenings. At night my kids like to go for bike rides and walks before heading off to bed so we spent our nights doing just that. At the resort where we stayed, it was amazing how many other families were doing the same, but the parents were not speaking to their children but rather chatting on the phone via their wireless headset (which I keep expecting to include an option to be surgically implanted into one’s head between their ears since there is apparently a lot of extra space there).

A recent article confirmed this is actually a tragic national trend and a cell sin to be repented of. An AP-Ipsos poll found that one in five people toted laptop computers on their most recent vacations, while 80 percent brought along their cell phones. One in five did some work while vacationing, and about the same number checked office messages or called in to see how things were going. Twice as many checked their email, while 50 percent kept up with other personal messages and voice mail. Reasons vacationers performed work-related tasks included an expectation that they be available, a worry about missing important information, or in some cases the enjoyment of staying involved (Source: Associated Press, June 1, 2007, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18983920/).

I know in years past I too have been guilty of these same digital sins against God, my family, and my own well-being. Now that I see it as a sin that destroys silence, solitude, fellowship, prayerful listening, and meaningfully and attentive friendship, I am deeply convicted that there is a new spiritual discipline of fasting from technology to be mastered. In this way, we can enjoy the life and people that God puts in front of us rather than ignoring them while we peck away with our thumbs and chat about nothing, which in the end is rarely as important as the people we are ignoring all around us.

by Mark Driscoll



Read Full Post »

In California, Conservatives have been cheated once again with Governor Arnold


The word “MOM” and “DAD” is now banned in schools in California

Talk about stupidity

Read Full Post »

James White.

An Open Letter to Dr. Lee Carter

Dr. Carter Responds

A Second Open Letter to Dr. Lee Carter

Read Full Post »

This is from http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20070919/us_time/whychristopherhitchensiswrongaboutbillygraham&printer=1;_ylt=Arw4dhAqrUg3nCC.uS75pDY7Xs8F

 Why Christopher Hitchens Is Wrong About Billy Graham


Wed Sep 19, 1:40 PM ET

Christopher Hitchens once devoted an entire book to portraying Mother Teresa as a phony, so perhaps Billy Graham got off easy when Hitchens described him, in a recent C-Span appearance, as “a self-conscious fraud,” who didn’t believe a word of what he preached, but was just in business for the money.

The celebrated atheist, whose latest polemic, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, is firmly entrenched on the bestseller list, also called Graham a power-worshiping bigot who made a living by “going around spouting lies to young people. What a horrible career. I gather it’s soon to be over. I certainly hope so.”

Graham, now 88 and in failing health, was recently hospitalized for two weeks for intestinal bleeding.

Over the course of his long public ministry, Graham has certainly acquired his share of critics – a group which includes Graham himself. In our hours of interviews with him – while researching our own book, The Preacher and the Presidents – he was quick to find fault with his own conduct and quite willing to explore the reasons behind the mistakes he admitted making. The odd thing about Hitchens’ attack is not that he assaults an ailing icon – that’s both his specialty and his right – but that the evidence he cites actually proves him wrong.

Hitchens calls as his main corroborating witness a Canadian contemporary of Graham’s, whom he misidentifies as “James Templeton.” Hitchens explains that as a young firebrand preacher, Templeton (whose name was actually Charles), found his faith faltering; but when he challenged Graham, Hitchens claims, the evangelist told Templeton that it was too late to stop now – “We’re in business” – and proceeded to spend the next 50 years as a kind of religious racketeer.

The true story of Graham’s encounter with Templeton is fascinating and critical in understanding the ministry that followed – just not in the way Hitchens describes. Like Graham, Templeton was young and handsome; he was also the more talented preacher. But his growing spiritual questions led him to leave the sawdust trail in 1948 for Princeton Theological Seminary to put himself through a kind of theological boot camp. He tried to talk Graham into coming with him; Graham’s unquestioning faith in the literal truth of the Bible, he said, amounted to intellectual suicide. He tried to phrase it in Graham’s own terms: “You cannot disobey Christ’s great commandment to love God with all thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind.” They continued to debate all year whenever their paths crossed, until finally in the summer of 1949, as Graham was preparing for what would be his breakout crusade in Los Angeles, Templeton confronted him one more time. “Billy, you’re 50 years out of date,” he said. “People no longer accept the Bible as being inspired the way you do. Your faith is too simple … You’re going to have to learn the new jargon if you’re going to be successful in your ministry.”

Templeton was actually pressing Graham to modernize his ministry, make it more commercially viable. What could be more tempting – to a rising preacher trying to reach young people, a preacher who stressed being approachable and relevant – than to tailor his theology to the tastes of the times, especially if the latest scholarship allowed wider appeal? But for Graham this was not an option. He felt that he could either believe the Bible or leave the ministry. “It was not too late to be a dairy farmer,” he concluded.

In the end, as the story was told many times over the years, Graham says he took a walk late at night and prayed. He didn’t understand everything in the Bible. But he decided to accept it, and preach it, without apology. In years to come critics like Reinhold Niebuhr would challenge his preaching as too simple, too far removed from the complexity of the human condition. But not even Niebuhr questioned the sincerity of Graham’s faith or motives. And neither, contrary to Hitchens, did Templeton. “I disagree with him profoundly on his view of Christianity and think that much of what he says in the pulpit is puerile nonsense,” Templeton wrote in his memoirs. “But there is no feigning in him: he believes what he believes with an invincible innocence. He is the only mass evangelist I would trust. And I miss him.”

The charge that Graham went into ministry to get rich is just as easily refuted, both by what he did and didn’t do. Well aware of how easily a famous preacher could be destroyed by financial or sexual scandal, Graham took pains early on to protect himself from both. He insisted that crusade accounts be audited and published in the local papers when the crusade was finished. Having founded the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association in 1950, he took a straight salary, comparable to that of a senior minister of a major urban pulpit, no matter how much in money his meetings brought in. He was turning down million-dollar television and Hollywood offers half a century ago. He never built the Church of Billy Graham, and while he lived comfortably, his house is a modest place. If he had wanted to get rich, he could have been many, many times over.

Hitchens is on more solid ground when he attacks Graham for his comments about Jews in a 1972 Oval Office meeting with Richard Nixon. That conversation was indeed vile, and since it was disclosed in 2002, Graham has apologized repeatedly for his part in it. “I cannot imagine what caused me to make those comments, which I totally repudiate,” he said. “Whatever the reason, I was wrong for not disagreeing with the President … I don’t ever recall having those feelings about any group, especially the Jews, and I certainly do not have them now.” When we asked Graham about the conversation, his shame was obvious, and he confessed to the other fault at work that day – his sycophancy, the courtier’s habit of trying to win favor with the king by embracing even his most odious ideas. “I think I was just trying to agree with what he said or something,” Graham told us. Hitchens may reject Graham’s many apologies if he chooses, and discount his remorse more evidence of fraud. But rational people should have a hard time accepting Hitchens’ characterization of Graham as “a disgustingly evil man.”

Gibbs and Duffy’s book, The Preacher and the Presidents, was published in August.

Read Full Post »

You might be suprise…


Read Full Post »

Latest Trinity Review feature portions from a new reprint of Gordon Clark’s “In Defense of Theology” that is now published by John Robbins of Trinity Foundation

See the Trinity Review in PDF file here:


Read Full Post »

The book will be out later in the fall and is critical against the Evangelical Right.

Its like the trend always to bash Christianity or Evangelical Christians.

What is interesting is that the author is Frank Schaeffer, son of the famous Francis Schaeffer.

Gary DeMar wrote a review of it here:


FOr more background about Frank, Gary North wrote an interesting polemical piece back in 1992 at


Read Full Post »

Olkahoma Atheists and Religious Neutrality by Jimmy Li


Read Full Post »

Have you notice how some of these health and wealth gospel preachers act more like ‘pimps’?

Well, here’s a list of fifteen things on their latest blog entries which has a survey of how “You might be getting pimped if…”

The link is as follows:


Read Full Post »

Food for thought from http://www.americanvision.org/articlearchive2007/06-14-07.asp

We’re fooling ourselves if we think that passively watching a colorful box of lights for hours every night doesn’t have an effect. Advertisers are just one group that bets big money that it does. When over half of the nation is mindlessly staring at a lighted piece of glass for hours on end each night, how can we be surprised when they start believing what they are watching and hearing? 

Thought that was interesting…

Read Full Post »