Saturday, April 11, 2015

The Law of God & Those Who Love It

The influence of antinomianism and of antinomian sympathy in the new American version of Christianity represents a significant threat to how well the Christian Church gives honor to her LORD. False inferences about the place of the Law of God within the New Covenant have led many to create a radically unbiblical dichotomy between genuine Christian faith and commandment keeping. Today, in most American churches, and in the mind of the overwhelming majority of those who profess to know and follow Christ, there is essentially no sense of obligation whatsoever to keep the commandments of God, to know and understand the commandments of God, or to even consider the commandments of God in any way whatsoever. But the New Testament Scriptures, those that come from the pen of God, the Holy Spirit, that originate in Christ, tell a far different story about the place of the Law of God and the commandments of God in the life of the true disciples of Christ. Those who love God will not only love God’s commandments, they will keep them. And those that despise God’s commandments, those who ignore them, those who live a life defined by commandment breaking are described in Scripture as hating God. Those whose lives are defined by commandment breaking, who claim to love God, Scripture says quite emphatically, are liars. What does living the law of God in the life and community of grace actually look like?

 The translation, “commandment” appears 145 times in 138 verses in the NASB. In contradistinction to that, grace appears 122 times in 114 verses. I think most people would find this fact stunning since modern American Christians are prone to talk about grace at a ratio no less than 1000:1 in my experience. In fact, if you pay close enough attention to people, even in our conservative, reformed churches, they often recoil at examples of the harshness of divine wrath. But words like righteous, holy, and just are still words that accurately describe attributes of the God revealed in Scripture, the God that is. Contrary to the pop-Christianity of American culture, God is still very interested in whether or not men are keeping His commandments and He is especially concerned when those who claim to love Him hardly give the divine fiat a wink and a nod, all in the name of grace. The notion that Jesus Christ came to correct the Old Testament’s picture of God is modern propaganda at best and a most pernicious deception hoisted on churches by mostly unregenerate pastors hired by mostly unregenerate congregations to tickle their unregenerate ears.

The Greek Imperative

The Greek imperative is used 1621 times in 1198 verses. As I pointed out to “Ted” in my recent exchange with him, the sheer volume of imperatives appearing in the New Testament documents indicate that at the very least, the authors thought they had some sort of authority and they expected their audiences to submit to these imperatives. There isn’t a single book in the entire NT Canon that does not have imperatives in it. The imperative is used 845 times in the gospels. Paul uses it 420 times. The Catholic Epistles employ the imperative 144 times. The Apocalypse uses it on 88 occasions. Finally, Acts contains 124 instances of the imperative. In light of such basic information, it is impossible to read the New Testament without recognizing that these documents consider themselves to be binding on the reader. The Greek imperative, while not always a command, was still the most common use of the imperative in the New Testament. The imperative expresses an attempt to bring about a desired action through the agency of another, that is, to impose one’s will on another or to give another direction. (Young, Intermediate New Testament Greek) Moreover, there were several other constructions used in the New Testament to express the concept of command.
Μη with the aorist subjunctive and ου with the future indicative are two other examples. Suffice it to say that the power, authority, and binding nature of Scripture is clearly expressed by Scripture itself. In other words, we don’t need a complex philosophical argument or a logical syllogism to see that the nature of Scripture is that it stands over us with full authority in every sense of the word. Moreover, we do not argue with young believers that the Scriptures are authoritative. We simply teach it ipso facto from what Scripture teaches about itself and expect them to embrace it. We also graciously help the young person understand the consequences of rejecting such basic teachings. 

The Commandment and the Christian

With this information in hand, how should Christians understand the divine commandments? How should we view the practice of commandment keeping? I will ask you to do your best to ignore most of what you have heard from modern evangelicals and engage the Scriptures to see what they say about the subject.

Matthew 5:17-20 makes it abundantly clear that Jesus did not come to abolish, destroy, or do away with the Law, but rather to fulfill it. The Law of Moses is to be interpreted through the Christ event for it was to Christ that Moses pointed. Jesus said that the great and foremost commandment is “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” And the second great commandment is like it, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matt. 22:37-39) As we study the commandments in Exodus 20, we realize that they are essentially, an explanation of the two great commandments referenced by Christ in the NT. From this we conclude that Jesus was not hostile toward the practice of commandment keeping and in fact, kept the commandments of God and expected His disciples to do the same. Much more could be said about Christ’s commands to His followers, but the nature of blogging just doesn’t support further elaboration on this point.

Finally, we turn to Matthew 28 and Christ’s great commission, which was given directly to his immediate disciples. These original disciples turned apostles with all the author that such a term carries, were commanded to make disciples of all nations as they went out, or as they were going along their way. Second, they were to be baptizing these disciples in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Third, they were to be teaching these new disciples to obey and keep every single commandment He gave them. When was the last time you heard a teacher, preacher, or pastor inform his audience that every Christian has an abiding and urgent obligation in all places and at all times to obey every single commandment that Christ gives us in the New Covenant? Commandment keeping is just as much a part of Christian life as missionary work and as baptism and as Christian teaching. But because of false teachings promulgated by false teachers, grace has been abused and perverted to the point that commandment keeping is no longer part of the Christian culture in most modern American churches.

Paul wrote 13 of the documents that make up the NT Canon. In those 13 documents, he employed the imperative mood 420 times. In 1 Corinthians 7:19, Paul said, “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God.” When was the last time we heard that what matters is that we fear God and keep His commandments? Paul thought it was important. Jesus taught that it was a non-negotiable. Timothy knew that Paul was serious about commandment keeping when he read, “I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who testified the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you keep the commandment without stain or reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Tim. 6:13-14) There is a lot more to this conversation and space dictates that I save that for another time.

If the Scriptures are not authoritative and binding, and they are not the infallible Word of God, then Christianity reduces to just a component of one’s worldview. It may even reflect a large component of a person’s worldview. But it cannot actually be their worldview. It can only be a part of their greater worldview. And that is precisely what we see in men like “Ted.” Men like Ted actually reject God’s word and along with, those commandments that dictate Christian behavior.

  • We allow young Christians to question whether or not a commandment is a commandment.
  • We tolerate people who argue that the Bible is not the Word of God, that it is not authoritative, not binding, and not infallible.
  • We debate people over the issue same-sex perversion without communicating that we reject their faith as genuine and view their arguments as a reflection of the spirit of antichrist in nature.
  • We even debate whether or not murdering a baby in the womb is a woman’s right as a Christian.
  • We tolerate people living together without being married.
  • We wink at at-will divorce and refuse to bring discipline to bear on the sin of it.

I know God is a God of grace as much as anyone. I have sinned against God since I was regenerated 36 years ago in awful ways and far more often than I care to think about. But that is no excise for me or anyone else to toss the ancient non-negotiable Christian practice of commandment keeping out the window. To love law breaking is to hate the law. To love violating God’s commandments is to hate God. Yet, we find ourselves in these quibbles with men like “Ted” who obviously have no use for the God revealed in Scripture, for God’s word, or for the sacred commandments. It is this attitude that we must embrace toward all those who seek to weaken to destroy the grip of Scripture on the life of the Christian.        
Spurgeon spoke of this element in his own day, “As for those whose ungodly lives stare them in the face, so far from being saved by their pretended faith, they are trees twice dead, plucked up by the roots. If they say they continue in sin that grace may abound, their damnation is just. The salvation of Christ is not a salvation in sin, but a salvation from sin. They who would be saved by him must come and trust him just as they are, and he will enable them to forsake their sin; but while they continue to say, "We will take pleasure in sin," there is no salvation possible for them. God bring us to Christ, and nail our sins to his cross, and give us life in our Savior's life. Amen.”

Jude warns his readers, “For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.” (Jude 4)

Returning to Paul, he wrote in another place, “I am afraid that when I come again my God may humiliate me before you, and I may mourn over many of those who have sinned in the past and not repented of the impurity, immorality and sensuality which they have practiced.” (2 Cor. 12:21)


  1. I'd email you this personally, Ed, but you don't appear to have any contact info listed. For your personal consideration, but please delete, since this message is for you...

    The irony of your dire words about people not caring about God's Ways, given your recent blatant falsehoods, bald-faced lies (which continue into this post, at least the falsehoods), is amazing.

    Some commands to remember, Ed...

    Thou shalt not bear false witness.

    Don't slander.

    Don't gossip.

    Pride cometh before a fall.

    God hates lying lips and proud hearts.


    Indeed, there are things that are wrong and you really should not engage in them. It's not too late to repent, though, brother.

    Humble yourself before the Lord.

    In Christ,


  2. Perhaps a detailed expose of that club you hang out with over there in KY would make a good blog post.

    No slander, no gossip, and no lying here Dan. Although I confess that pride is a monster that seems to lurk in my shadows relentlessly.

  3. Do you realize the almost-funny irony between your first and second paragraphs?

    You threaten my church - a group of Christians you do not even know with an "expose" that will almost certainly (given your repeated false witness and slander in my brief encounters with you) be filled with false witness and slander and, by definition, gossip (talking about people behind their backs in an effort to demonize them). All of which breaks these laws you are giving lip service to.

    Ed, my church family is filled with people who are amongst the most beautiful, powerful, loving, just, truth-seeking of Christian folk. They are a true family of God. You would be welcome to come for a visit any time to actually meet the people you so callously and frivolously threaten with your words. If you did visit, you would have to be impressed, I am sure, by our great love of God and for God and for God's people... not speaking of myself here, but my friends and church family. You may disagree with us on some questions of theology and that's fine, but you couldn't fault our sincere devotion to God and God's Ways and living out the Christian life by God's grace. Thank God for Jeff St and her witness. Please, do visit if you're ever in Louisville.

    But keep any false claims coming from a place of complete ignorance (seeing as you don't know any of us) to yourself. My deeply conservative mother always used to say, "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all..."


    1. I am Sure your church is filled with Jesus loving people who hate Jesus' truth. That's why they are there. That little club of misfits all love Jesus so much that they believe the same things you do.

      To call a gay person a Christian is to slander Christ. To say they are viable members of the body of Christ is to slander the Church. To say they are God's elect is to slander God. To say they possess the Holy Spirit is to slander the Holy Spirit.

      To say that Scripture is no authoritative or binding is to slander divine revelation.

      To say that God does not eternally judge all sinners to include the young teenager is to slander God's righteous character and to slander God Himself.

      Enough with your use of the word slander. You sound like a broken record. To call sin, sin, is NOT slander. To call evil good, and good evil is slander, or as Scripture calls it, blasphemy.

  4. Ed...

    I am Sure your church is filled with Jesus loving people who hate Jesus' truth.

    And that is a falsehood from the fires of hades.

    Ed, do you understand that disagreeing with Ed on the Internet is NOT the same as disagreeing with God? Do you understand that we at our church rightly do not conflate Ed's opinions and hunches and false claims with God's Word?

    The very worst you could accuse us of is being sincerely mistaken. We do NOT hate Jesus' truth, we have dedicated our lives to following Jesus' truth. Now, is it POSSIBLE that we, being human, could sincerely believe we understand Jesus' teachings and the Right Way on some points? Of course it is, we're humans - all of us, you included, Ed - and capable of being mistaken. I don't think we are on any of these topics you and I disagree upon, but it is always a possibility. We, Ed, are NOT inerrant or perfect.

    But being mistaken (even if we were, and I don't think we are) is NOT the same as "hating Jesus' truth..."

    Here is your ultimate blasphemy: You are making the suggestion, if you think about it, that one must have perfect knowledge in order to be saved. You are teaching a heresy of a salvation by works.

    You are saying, in other words (and correct me if I'm mistaken), "EVEN IF these people have repented of their sins and made Jesus the Lord of their lives and dedicated their lives to following Jesus, trusting in God's grace for salvation daily... EVEN IF they do that, IF they are mistaken on some points, then none of that matters. God's grace is NOT sufficient to cover their sincere mistakes..."

    And when you say that, you are saying that Ed is doomed, that ALL of us are doomed, because none of us perfectly know everything.

    Do you see how blasphemous that is? To suggest that you are saved because YOU have this perfect knowledge and can't be mistaken... but others who sincerely make an error/errors... that they are NOT saved because they do not have perfect knowledge... that is to conflate yourself with God and "god" with one that demands salvation by perfection, not by God's grace.

    And that, dear Ed, is a serious error on your part, and not the least bit rational or internally consistent.

    Your reasoning would undo even your own salvation, along with everyone else.

    Thank God for God's grace and that Ed is not in charge, can I get an Amen?


    1. From what I know about your social club up there in Louisville, KY Dan is that you welcome AND affirm people living in the gay lifestyle. Hence, you claim you church is filled with Jesus loving people while hating Jesus' teachings. No Church that affirms that gay lifestyle love Jesus Dan. Your group is not a true church, but a group to whom Jesus will say in the end, depart from me you workers of iniquity, I NEVER knew you.

      You must place your faith in Christ, take His Word as it has been given, and following on that, you must forsake your sin and apply the commandments of God you whole being. Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand, as Jesus said.

  5. I repeat, Ed...

    You are saying, in other words (and correct me if I'm mistaken), "EVEN IF these people have repented of their sins and made Jesus the Lord of their lives and dedicated their lives to following Jesus, trusting in God's grace for salvation daily... EVEN IF they do that, IF they are mistaken on some points, then none of that matters. God's grace is NOT sufficient to cover their sincere mistakes..."

    Can you answer that question...?

    ARE you saying that one can not be mistaken on some number of ideas and be saved and IF you are saying that, then how is that NOT a salvation by works heresy?

    What if YOU are mistaken, Ed? Does that mean that you can't be saved?

    "But I'm not," you'll say, "cause I'm sure of my beliefs..." But I am sure of my beliefs, too. But we both can be mistaken. What if it's you? Are you doomed because of your imperfect knowledge?

    If you won't/can't answer this question (and you can't), then please, take just that minute of doubt in your own wisdom to humble yourself and recognize the heresy you are espousing (for those who are into calling mistakes "heresies...").

    Repent, indeed.

    With Christ's love for you, Ed,


    1. Yes, Dan. There are certain things a person cannot be mistaken about and still be in possession of genuine saving faith as God's gift. That is correct. Homosexuality, adultery, polyamorous relations, etc. Commanding keeping, Scripture's binding authority, the divinity of the Son of God, the Trinity, etc.

      You see, Dan, Jesus Himself told the religious leaders of his day that the reason for their damning error was because they did not know the Scriptures. To know the Scriptures is to understand them. To understand them requires the regenerating power of God the Holy Spirit. Christ must OPEN the understanding.

      Does this mean you have to know ALL things and that you cannot be mistaken about some things? No, we do not have to know ALL things as proof of genuine faith. New Christians must be taught. We do grow in our sanctification. But if a New Christian (professing of course) starts out rejecting the basics and refuses to repent of error, it is right there, in the obstinance, that unbelief is most truly noticeable.

      Church discipline is the process whereby the body of Christ grows in its sanctification, which includes beliefs as well as behavior. A homosexual or adulterer or fornicator will be confronted, corrected, encouraged, and if they refuse to repent, they will be excommunicated, not for their sexual sin, but because of their obstinance. If a group of them go out and start a club of their own, like the group in 1 John did, that does not make them a church. It makes them a bunch of obstinate hypocrites who claim to love Jesus with their mouth but their hearts, their true beliefs and practice, are far from Him.

  6. There are certain things a person cannot be mistaken about and still be in possession of genuine saving faith as God's gift. That is correct.

    So then, given your heretical "salvation by works" theology, how do you know that YOU are not mistaken on one of these mythical points on which you can't be mistaken?

    What IS the list of ideas about which one cannot be mistaken and saved? Does it include false witness? If so, then, aren't you doomed already?

    With your theology, you have no assurance of your salvation because YOU could be genuinely mistaken and damned. Yours is a whimsical, emotion-based anti-grace "theology, based upon the whims of Ed, not grace. Doesn't that concern you?

    1. I know that I am NOT mistaken on the apostolic tradition, having it's source in Christ, that which we now refer to as the Bible, because the Bible says I cannot be mistaken as one of God's elect, having been gifted with the Holy Spirit to that end. Christianity is a supernatural event top to bottom from the very start. That's how I know Dan.

    2. So, if you can't be mistaken, why can't I not be mistaken, as well? Or, what if you are mistaken about being "God's elect..."? Doomed to hell?

      Where is your list of ideas about which one can't be mistaken?

      Is it the case that you don't have an authorized list from God?

      If not, on what basis should we take you at your word that you are correct and I am not?

      Your reasoning is full of holes and unholy, to boot, man.

      If you can't answer these questions - and clearly, you can't - then you should humble yourself and admit as much and take some time to prayerfully reconsider your anti-grace positions.

      In the meantime, since you have now demonstrated a complete inability to answer these holes in your human reasoning, perhaps it would be the better part of wisdom and humility to begin with some apologies for your arrogance and gracelessness.

      Repent, Ed, it's a very good thing to do.


  7. Where in any of your creeds does it ay one can't be mistaken and saved?

    1. This is replica of your fallacious argument that I have previously refuted. I don't dance in circles Dan.

  8. I'm researching and can't find any place on the internets (and of course, it's not in the Bible... AT ALL) where anyone says that perfect understanding without mistakes is required on some beliefs/ideas. Is there anyone who stands with you on this one or are you all alone in this anti-grace heresy?


    1. I wonder if you actually believe that anyone can believe ANYTHING and still be saved? If so, then Christianity is meaningless nonsense by your definition. If not, then you and I agree that there are SOME things that demonstrate proof of UNBELIEF.

    2. Answer the questions, Ed. Or be man and humble enough to admit you are unable to answer the questions. Don't be emotional and defensive, just admit you can't answer them and move on.

      Pride cometh before a fall, brother.


    3. Ed...

      I wonder if you actually believe that anyone can believe ANYTHING and still be saved?

      Can someone believe something that is NOT Christ-ian? Sure, something that is contrary to the teachings of Jesus is not Christian.

      But Jesus did not teach us that we can't be mistaken on some points and still be saved. That's a fact.

      Jesus did not teach us that two gay folk marrying is wrong. That's a fact.

      Jesus did not teach that one must affirm Genesis as literal history in order to be saved. That's a fact.

      You are adding all manner of rules to people that Jesus did not teach and trying to call that Christ-ian. You know who else did that? The Pharisees, Ed.

      Be careful when you claim to speak for Jesus, Ed, because you ain't.

      Respectfully submitted, hoping you will stop.
      Take a breath.
      Recognize the arrogance of your words.
      Recognize you can't answer these questions.
      Admit your mistake and your arrogance.
      Prayerfully reconsider your positions, in light of Jesus' grace and his actual teachings.

      In the name of Jesus, my Lord,


  9. ...for insance, the Chicago Statement on inerrancy says...

    We affirm that a confession of the full authority, infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture is vital to a sound understanding of the whole of the Christian faith. We further affirm that such confession should lead to increasing conformity to the image of Christ.

    We deny that such confession is necessary for salvation.

    So, where you insist that one must take the Bible as you do, taking Genesis as literal history, in order to be saved, these people (who agree with you on inerrancy, authority and these other human ideas) recognize the anti-Christian nature of saying that agreeing with these human ideals is necessary for salvation.

    So, please...

    1. Provide a list of creeds, statements, etc, where someone agrees with your anti-grace theory that one must have perfect understanding of some topics in order to be saved;

    2. A list of the topics on which one must agree with you and not be mistaken (in your view) in order to be saved;

    3. Where in the Bible it insists that one must affirm your beliefs and not be mistaken about it in order to be saved;

    4. Address whether or not you understand the inherent rational inconsistencies and unsound logic in the theory of "perfect knowledge of THESE topics is required in order to be saved..." - that by such a criteria, YOU could be the one that is mistaken and therefore, doomed... you understand that, don't you?

    That is, if one has to be "right" and can't be mistaken on some list of topics in order to be saved, what if the list YOU believe in is a mistaken list, itself? What if you left off one of the topics about which you, yourself, are mistaken? Are you then doomed to hell?

    According to your reasoning, yes.


    1. Scripture speaks for Scripture Dan. Your contention and quibble is with Scripture not with me.

      Refusal to adopt the creed or confession very often resulted in excommunication as it should today. You have no right to believe whatever you want about Scripture. No one has EVER had that right.

      A person who comes to our Church and says they reject Scripture as binding for whatever reason will be instructed otherwise. We are convinced a true believer will receive such instruction with all humility and grow in Christ. Those who reject the instruction will continue to be subjected to increasing efforts as the instruction moves to correction, and then to rebuke, and eventually excommunication as they should be.

      Those who refuse to receive instructions from their elders on the true nature of Scripture must eventually be removed from the community.

    2. Okay, Ed, and I have READ Scripture, seriously, prayerfully, studiously for nearly 50 years now. I've let Scripture speak for Scripture and I have reached my conclusions, just as you have.

      On what basis is your conclusion the "right" one and mine the "wrong" one?

      And why won't you answer the questions, Ed? Is it because you can't? Because there are no good, biblical, rational answers for your positions and these questions point to the holey-ness (not holiness) of your personal human reasoning?

      If you have no list of ideas about which we can't be mistaken, how do you know such a list exists? On what basis? Your say so alone?

      Where does the Bible teach that we must have perfect knowledge on some vague and unstated "list" of ideas and saved? Answer: It doesn't. It just doesn't. This is all in your head, Ed, I can find no one who agrees with you in orthodox Christianity.

      I am an elder in my church, Ed. You are refusing to heed my instruction. Does this mean that you are not saved?

      Where is the rational consistency for your position? The biblical basis? There is none.

      Humble yourself, Ed. Repenting is a good thing. Just admit the mistake and your arrogance and let God's grace rain down on you, man.

      Be a man and admit your mistakes, brother! Or at least admit that you are unable to answer these questions rationally, morally or biblically.

      In the love of Christ,


  10. And to be clear, we are not speaking of traditional Christian basics, here. That is, I agree with and affirm...

    1. A creator God
    2. Jesus, the risen son of God
    3. Humanity's sin nature
    4. Salvation by God's grace, not by works
    5. The need for repentance and accepting the Lordship of Jesus

    ie, I affirm the basics. We are not speaking of basic tenets of Christianity. We are speaking about human theories about, "Is this behavior sinful or not?" and "should this text be considered literal or not?" and "is THIS 13th Century human theory of atonement correct or not?" etc. We are speaking about differences of opinions on unproven and unprovable topics that are not Christian basics, but are human opinions.

    If one "can't" be mistaken about homosexuality and be saved, then what if YOU are the one who is mistaken (as I believe you to be, clearly)? Does that mean that you are not saved?

    Seriously, I would love to see an answer to that question. Can you rationally and consistently answer that question with anything other than a "NO, I guess I could be lost if I am mistaken on that point..." which is the ultimate rational conclusion one would reach, based on your theories of salvation.

    In Christ,


    1. If you believe that homosexuality can be practiced by Christians, then you do NOT affirm the need for repentance and you do NOT believe that Jesus is the risen Son of God because you reject His commandments concerning sexual purity. Those who are believers love God and those who love God keep His commandments. You cannot embrace commandment-breaking or call into question the reliability of God's Word and have faith in God at the same time. The god you love and serve is radically different from the God revealed in Scripture. The God revealed in Scripture commanded the complete destruction of the pagans in Canaan, man, woman, and child. That God you reject and despise. The God that righteously judges sin, even the sin of a 16 year old, you reject. You judge that God to be immoral and unjust. But that is the God of Scripture. That is the God of Christian theism.

  11. Ed...

    then you do NOT affirm the need for repentance

    Factually false. This is a false claim, Ed. I DO as a point of fact affirm the need for repentance. Thou shalt not bear false witness.

    and you do NOT believe that Jesus is the risen Son of God

    Factually false. This is a false claim, Ed. I DO as a point of fact believe Jesus is the risen Son of God. Thou shalt not bear false witness.

    ...because you reject His commandments concerning sexual purity.

    Ed, I disagree with YOUR hunches. Disagreeing with Ed is not the same as disagreeing with Jesus.

    So again, this is factually false. This is a false claim, Ed. I do NOT reject the ideas of sexual morality. Thou shalt not bear false witness, Ed.

    Three falsehoods in a row, Ed. I've just demonstrated that they are false. Repent.

    Ed is not Jesus and I do not have to agree with Ed to follow Jesus. You see, at least one of us does not conflate Ed with Jesus, and that's me.


    Repent, friend. Again, these are demonstrated errors. You made a mistake, there's no harm in that. I'm not angry or upset. I'm just concerned for you, Ed. Don't let that pride come between you and truth, just admit the mistake and move on.


    1. Dan, do you in fact affirm gay sex as an acceptable form of sexual behavior? Can a person practice gay sex and also love Jesus?

    2. Do you affirm gay sex Dan? If you don't, why do you attend a religious club that does? If you do, then I have NOT misrepresented you one iota.

    3. You reject the reliability of Luke, your dismiss the authority of Paul, you contradict the sexual ethic of Christianity, and you denounce God's creation and design of the institution of marriage and you want people to seriously consider if your faith is genuine simply based off the fact that you say so and that you attend a building that mimics a Christian community to some degree? That is sheer nonsense!

  12. I affirm all things that are true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable and loving. Marriage is a good thing, and I have no reason to believe that what's good for straight folk is not also good for gay folk. So, in the context of marriage, I affirm people - gay or straight - being intimate as a lovely gift from God.

    I've answered your question directly, Ed. I've done so because it is easy to do, and it undermines any efforts you might have for trying to insinuate something ugly or negative on my part.

    You, on the other hand, have spread repeated false claims about me that I've eliminated with the simple facts demonstrating the false nature of your claims. And when asked reasonable questions, you have repeatedly dodged them, refusing to even acknowledge them, much less answer them.

    Again, if you can't answer them - and you have demonstrated that you can't - then be a man and admit your impotency in the face of facts on my side and irrational emotional cultural bias on your part. You've been emasculated, Ed, by your refusal to address these questions. You've got nothing left but your pride and arrogance and it's only embarrassing you.

    Let it go, bro. Repent, give in.

    In Christ,


    (oh, and as in nearly everything you say, your last comments are, again, just demonstrable false claims and reality shows that they are false claims. THAT, friend, is sheer nonsense.)

    1. You forgot to click your heels together three times Dan. Saying "I love Jesus" means absolutely nothing! Saying "I affirm ABC" means nothing. You have said:

      1. Luke is unreliable.
      2. Gay sex is holy.
      3. God's design for marriage is out-dated.
      4. God's acts are immoral.
      5. God's judgment is unjust.
      6. Paul is not authoritative.

      Save it for your blind, deceived gay-affirming, God-hating, holiness despising, religious club that wants to believe they can be good and love God while rejecting His commandments and His true nature.

    2. In what world do people have the right NOT to believe God's Word? We have an obligation to take God's word as it is without turning into play dough.

      Tertullian tells there were two ways of nullifying scriptures: Marcion's way: he used the knife to excise from Scripture whatever did not conform to his opinion. Valentinus: seems to use the entire instrumentum (meaning the entire NT), but perverts its meaning by misinterpreting it.

      Dan has borrowed from both where it has pleased him and suited his perverse cause.

    3. Heretics like you Dan can make the Scripture say what you like because you disregard the "regula fidei." Tertullian experienced the same sort of twisting you and your kind do even in our own day. "Being by definition normative, the "regula" set out the purport of the gospel in a form about which there could be no debate." This is why I address you the way I do Dan. The Holy Spirit creates an attitude of humility within the believer, thus enabling them to recognize and receive divine truth when they hear it. Quibblers such as yourself stand self-condemned by the very Christ you claim to embrace.

  13. Ed, you have

    Bore false witness.
    Refused to admit it or even acknowledge it when it's been pointed out to you.
    Arrogantly refused to even acknowledge reasonable questions respectfully asked of you.
    Made false claims about what I have said.
    Made claims about the bible that the Bible does not say.
    Made claims about God that God has not said.
    Made claims against God's grace!

    And I am the one that is perverse?

    The very worst you could say about me, brother, is that I am sincerely mistaken. That I'm striving to follow God and am just confused/mistaken in my conclusions. And that you believe that one can't be mistaken and saved, some perfect knowledge is required - NOT grace, alone - for salvation.

    But you can't point to sin - the lies, the arrogance, the cowardice that you have displayed, repeatedly, flagrantly that I have calmly and respectfully tried to help you see in your own words here.

    Lord have mercy on you, brother. I pray that your eyes may be opened and your hard heart softened.

    I don't believe you intend to be irrational, cowardly, ungraceful, lacking in integrity or adult respect... I believe that you just truly don't see it. But again, I'd just ask you to recognize the reality of your complete inability to answer the questions that point to holes in your reasoning - or even to acknowledge that they've been asked! - and let that humble you.

    In Christ,


    1. Trust me Dan, I could say a lot worse than that. You quibble with God's truth, not me. Your views demonstrate that you know not the Christ. I suppose it is more accurate to say that your unwillingness to repent of your views and your lack of humility to receive divine truth and your utter inability to understand the true nature of God and Scripture display the epitome of obstinance and unbelief that would merit excommunication in any true Church of Christ.

  14. Ed...

    Your views demonstrate that you know not the Christ.

    Why? Is disagreeing with Ed's opinion equivalent to disagreeing with or knowing Jesus? Says who? On what basis?

    Now, a case could be made that Ed's anti-grace views actually demonstrate that he does not accept Christ, but prefers to rely upon Ed's own arrogant understanding. I hope that is not the case, but anytime someone says "If you are mistaken, then God's grace is INSUFFICENT to cover that error..."

    Blasphemy, man. Even if your repeated, demonstrable falsehoods does not worry you, even if your arrogant conflation of Ed's opinion with God's Word does not worry you, does this blasphemous anti-grace view you are espousing not worry you?

    God have mercy on your soul,


    1. At the end of the day Dan, everything you say to me is, by your own self-admission, just a matter of your personal opinion, your own fallible interpretation. I can dismiss it ipso facto. Additionally, every position you affirm, such as all sex, even gay sex, must be within marriage is also just a matter of your own opinion and not binding on anyone. Remember, Scripture is not binding and since that is the case, nothing is really binding because everything is just a matter of human opinion. Truth dies a thousand deaths of your foolish views. What is funny is your posts do not reflect what you claim as your convictions. You are a walking contradiction.

    2. I have pointed to Scripture repeatedly. I have illustrated that the work of the Holy Spirit on the heart is necessary to know God's truth. I have said we DO NOT stand in judgment of the Scripture throughout this conversation and yet, you blindly charge me with arrogance. What a grand display of self-deception. You are an excellent example.


The Sin of Racial Division

  Claim: It is a sin to divide the body of Christ. The Psalmist wrote, Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to dwel...