‘Perhaps you, like me, as a Christian, pay attention to certain celebrity conservatives, who take many of the same or similar viewpoints as you. You know there are differences. Where is the overlap? In diagnosing a worldview, there are various components to understanding it, as some people have or might put it, to see the map of the world. Some of them are knowledge, ethics, purpose, and epistemology, but among the others, I want to explore two of them, reality and truth, as they relate to celebrity conservatives versus true Bible believers. In general, very often true Bible believers are interested in the celebrity conservatives without their being interested in them. Part of their “fan base” are Christians, who listen to their podcasts and watch their shows. One of the celebrity conservatives, Jordan Peterson, the famous PhD professor, author, and public intellectual and speaker from Canada, doesn’t even call himself a conservative. Celebrity conservatives today might call themselves classic liberals (you can look up classical liberalism). Maybe he really isn’t conservative, but you also shrink your audience if you call yourself one. As well, “liberal” might mean you keep your job and other opportunities. Peterson does resonate with true Bible believers and they listen to, watch, and read him. When I write, celebrity conservatives, I’m especially saying, Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Charlie Kirk, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, the late Rush Limbaugh, Dennis Prager, and Candace Owens. There are many others. There is overlap between their worldviews and the worldview of a true Bible believer. Before Covid hit and also before he had major health issues, my wife and I and another couple got tickets to hear Jordan Peterson in person in San Francisco, sponsored by the Independent Institute. As I was listening to him, I enjoyed many things he was saying. However, I knew he and I did not have the same worldview. I was glad he could say what he did in public, but it wasn’t nearly enough for me either. The celebrity conservatives like him are disappointing. In the last week, I was thinking about the difference between the worldviews of celebrity conservatives and true Bible believers. Even as I write this, I think about how a true Bible believer could even be a celebrity in our world. I don’t think it’s possible. The greater the celebrity status, the more you must be doing something wrong, and that includes evangelical leaders who have their own celebrity. They in part got there through capitulation and compromise. Their greater celebrity doesn’t speak well. The common ground in worldview, I believe, is that there is more proximity between celebrity conservatives and true Bible believers in their view of reality. I would say that they both attempt to function according to reality, even if it means abandoning the truth. The truth and reality do go together. They overlap completely for a true Bible believer, but they don’t for celebrity conservatives. Even actual reality and the reality of celebrity of conservatives don’t overlap identically. To stay a celebrity, like everyone else who isn’t a true Bible believer, celebrity conservatives forsake actual reality and even more so, the truth. Let me explain. I want to use Jordan Peterson as an example. Jesus either rose from the dead or He didn’t. Jesus can’t be the greatest figure who ever lived if He wasn’t truth and He lied about the resurrection. Peterson says that he’s not sure if he believes Christianity, but he tries to live like one. He’s also saying, he’s not committing to the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, while living like Jesus did resurrect from the dead. He borrows a reality based upon the truth without actually believing the truth. Other conservatives do that, and it’s easy to see. The world we live in is the real world. Celebrity conservatives more than the mainstream culture try to explain positions according to reality, even if they deny much of the truth or many truths, depending how you want to put that. You may live a reality of Jesus and defend a life that fits His existence and deny the pivotal truth of His resurrection. Peterson does that. Complementarianism is the truth and celebrity conservatives borrow from a complementarian reality without the truth of complementarianism. Gender fluidity proceeds from egalitarianism. God designed men and women differently. That’s the truth. Celebrity conservatives deny complementarian truth while defending a complementarian reality. Let me get more simple. Whether you think he’s a conservative or not, let’s consider President Donald J. Trump as if he were a conservative. Trump operates according to a certain Christian reality that results in Christian support, including from true Bible believers. Trump thinks that one thing is better than another. Certain behavior is wrong. He believes that America as a standard of living better than other countries, which can be and should be protected at the border. This is one of the most fundamental conservative beliefs and it is a reality that borrows from the truth. Former President Trump doesn’t believe the truth, but he functions as though there is truth. He is a realist in that we must have standards. Things won’t be better when we can’t discern the differences of one thing from another. This is a reality according to a Christian worldview. The truth is more important. However, people who eject from reality are much further away from the truth. These either practical or positional nihilists must be rejected for something short of the truth, if that’s the choice. The path to the truth won’t come through their relativism. It can come through someone who at least embraces reality, even if it doesn’t mirror actual reality. The answer for humanity is still the truth. It isn’t the reality of celebrity conservatives.’https://kentbrandenburg.com/2021/09/12/reality-and-truth-celebrity-conservatives-versus-true-bible-believers/
When preachers have to submit a letter to the leader of the nation for the religious freedom they once knew before the Wuhan Flu that nation is in trouble! However, that is exactly what has occurred. The Australian government is initiating a Health Passport for only those who have submitted to two shots of the trial Wuhan Flu vaccines before they are allowed the freedom to go to church. Hitler would be proud to call Australia Home!
‘To the Honourable Scott Morrison,
As Christian leaders, you should be aware that in accordance with scripture we regularly pray for “and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Timothy 2:2).
We do write, however, to you regarding a matter of significant concern. Namely, the proposed introduction of ‘vaccine passports’ into Australian society. For many Christian leaders and Christians, this is an untenable proposal that would inflict terrible consequences on our nation.
We should initially note that we are not the first generation that has been confronted with the question of ‘vaccine passports.’ Writing in 1880, aware of the challenges that a smallpox epidemic brought to society, the Christian theologian Abraham Kuyper wrote,
“Vaccination certificates will therefore have to go… The form of tyranny hidden in these vaccination certificates is just as real a threat to the nation’s spiritual resources as a smallpox epidemic itself.”Kuyper, A. 2015. Our Program: A Christian Political Manifesto. (p. 249). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press; Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
Between 1901 and 1905, Abraham Kuyper would hold the office of the Prime Minister of the Netherlands. He evidently understood that a ‘vaccine passport’ would represent a measure that was equal to if not worse than an epidemic itself through the oppressive control over people’s lives. As Christian ministers, we would also agree with Kuyper’s analysis on such a measure, and for several reasons.
First, the government risks creating an unethical two-tiered society. While some individuals will receive the vaccination with thanks, others may have good and informed reasons for declining. One such reason is highlighted in the statement of the health minister Greg Hunt:
“The world is engaged in the largest clinical trial, the largest global vaccination trial ever, and we will have enormous amounts of data.”Australian Department of Health
Free citizens should have the right of consent, especially when the vaccine rollout has been labelled as a ‘clinical trial.’ Imposing a ‘vaccine passport’ when the nation is already divided on the matter risks the creation of medical apartheid. The result being that those who decline the vaccine are ostracised and alienated from aspects of public life. History has never reflected well for those who would promote segregation. As there has been no discussion that the precautionary measures will be retracted once the pandemic has concluded, there is a real concern that many of these measures will remain permanent. A ‘vaccine passport’ would therefore represent the dangerous precipice of a therapeutic totalitarianism that does not promote liberty and human flourishing, but would rather only dehumanise and control its citizens all under the cloak of personal health and safety.
Second, a good portion of the population are already burdened to the point of despair. Granted, we understand why our leaders felt compelled to lockdown in March 2020. The threat was unknown and our ability to withstand it, untested. However, it is now 2021, and the adverse effects of perpetual lockdowns are now being revealed. We understand needing to respond, but we are concerned with heavy-handed approaches that exceed people’s capacity to live a normal life. We are compelled to speak out on behalf of struggling people, the needy, the destitute, those being harmed by such strong measures (Proverbs 31:8-9).
The adverse effects of lockdowns are especially highlighted in the rise of people considering suicide. The ‘Journal of Psychiatric Research’ published a paper in July of 2021 based on research done on Melbourne’s extended 2020 lockdown, some of their findings are as follows,
“In September-2020, among 1157 Victorians, one-third reported anxiety or depressive disorder symptoms, one-fifth reported suicidal ideation, and one-tenth reported having seriously considered suicide in the prior 30 days. Young adults, unpaid caregivers, people with disabilities, and people with diagnosed psychiatric or sleep conditions showed increased prevalence of adverse mental health symptoms. Prevalence estimates of symptoms of burnout, anxiety, and depressive disorder were unchanged between April-2020 and September-2020. Persistently common experiences of adverse mental health symptoms despite low SARS-CoV-2 prevalence during prolonged lockdown highlight the urgent need for mental health support services.”Czeisler MÉ, Wiley JF, Facer-Childs ER, Robbins R, Weaver MD, Barger LK, Czeisler CA, Howard ME, Rajaratnam SMW. 2021. “Mental health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during a prolonged COVID-19-related lockdown in a region with low SARS-CoV-2 prevalence.” Journal of Psychiatric Research 140 (August): 533-544.
One in ten people considering suicide is a tragedy. As these lockdowns continue, it is evident that people are getting more desperate, with many people considering suicide as their means of escape. People are inherently social creatures, meant for human interaction and contact, not long-term isolation. But these policies are causing many people to feel lonely, and increasingly isolated.
In Japan, according to Japanese research, during their second lockdown “suicide rates increased by 49% among children and adolescents, and 37% among women.” The reason this information from Japan is relevant is because it shows that their second lockdown was far worse than their first on people’s mental health. We have been in cascading lockdowns for about 18 months now, this will be taking a toll.
This psychological effect is not theoretical. Another recent ABC news report documented the effects of lockdowns on alcohol consumption.
“1 in 5 Australians increased alcohol use during the lockdowns, “We know the statistics. We know that 93 per cent of hospital admissions at the weekend are alcohol-related. We know domestic violence is hugely related to alcohol consumption. We know it’s bad, and people are realising that.”ABC News
By changing the goalposts from the original objective of ‘two weeks to flatten the curve’ to now requiring a proposed ‘vaccine passport’ in order to live a normal life, the government is putting immeasurable pressures on ordinary people. If the ABC is correct and 20% of Australians are drinking more during lockdowns, What will be the societal cost of adding a ‘vaccine passport’ which will potentially alienate already desperate Australians and turn them into second class citizens.
Jesus tells Christians to count the cost, “For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it?” (Luke 14:28). Jesus is here using a secular principle to make a spiritual point, and whether you are making a spiritual or secular decision you must count the cost. There are many people in our communities, not just in our churches, who are facing the costs of these policies and growing increasingly concerned about them.
Much more can be said on this point, the effects on missed cancer diagnoses and other illnesses by people staying home from the doctors, the effects on children’s missed and inconsistent education, youth graduating into a closed economy finding it difficult to find work. Poverty is the leading cause of poor life outcomes, and these lockdowns are pushing people financially to the brink. The addition of a ‘vaccine passport’ into Australian society may be the nail in the coffin to many people who are already at the point of desperation.
Third, conscience should never be coerced. The conscience is one of the innermost expressions that animates an individual, and that allows them to worship God as well as obey a legitimate governing authority. The conscience is the immediate contact of God’s presence in a person’s soul, and so an individual forced to act in a way that is objectionable to their conscience will never be at peace, either before God or before the state. A government that endeavours to force or coerce an individual who is striving to honour God, will find that they only encounter resistance. Regarding the need for a free conscience, Kuyper writes,
“Conscience is therefore the shield of the human person, the root of all civil liberties, the source of a nation’s happiness.”Kuyper, A. 2015. Our Program: A Christian Political Manifesto. (p. 73). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press; Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
A government should never coerce conscience, but rather respect the important function that it carries in aiding a person to worship God freely and live obediently before the state. As we have noted, Jesus commands Christians to count the cost, and many believers do not feel that we have all the information necessary to make a decision on this vaccine at this point in time. We respect that many people have made this calculation and decided it is best for them to get the vaccine that is their right, and we do not seek to abrogate it. But those who are not ready, or hesitant, are so for very valid reasons. Their conscience binds them to wait, and their Saviour advised them to not make decisions before they have counted the cost. This is a principle of wisdom, that everyone applies to many aspects of their lives. We would therefore ask that the Government not coerce the conscience of many Australians through the use of a ‘vaccine passport.’
Fourth, making vaccination the basis of participating in normal life would make no logical sense in terms of protecting others. A “CDC study shows 74% of people infected in Massachusetts Covid outbreak were fully vaccinated,” especially noting that four of those who were vaccinated were admitted to hospital. As we have said, we respect people’s right and choice to be vaccinated. But this type of data, published by America’s leading body of disease experts, causes people to wonder about the effectiveness of the vaccine along with concern about coercive measures by which to have it administered. As it is evident that vaccines do not prevent infection, to restrict a person’s access to society based on a medical choice is questionable.
Fifth, we as Christian leaders find it untenable that we would be expected to refuse entry into our churches to a subgroup of society based on their medical choice. Only our precious Saviour, Jesus Christ, has the authority to regulate the terms of corporate worship. These terms tell us that we are to make no distinction between those who call out in faith, neither on race nor medical choice. We are also under obligation to proclaim the gospel to all men. Our strongest conviction is that this gospel message is the greatest news ever to be pronounced, and includes nothing less than God’s free gift of saving grace, and the offer of eternal life to all who would respond in repentance and faith. To refuse people access to this message would betray our Saviour and everything he calls us to uphold. We can not imagine a situation in which we would refuse someone whom Christ has welcomed (Romans 14:1-4).’https://caldronpool.com/ezekieldeclaration/
In this day of BIG Government and BIG churches meeting at multiple sites God is still in the business of doing His work with the few.
“The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people.” (Deuteronomy 7:7)
‘Modern people—even Christians—tend to measure success in terms of bigness. God’s measure, on the other hand, is based on quality, not quantity. There were undoubtedly millions of people on the earth, for example, when the Flood came in the days of Noah, but only “few, that is, eight souls were saved” as the waters lifted up the Ark (1 Peter 3:20).
A few centuries after the Flood, populations had again increased, and great nations developed in Egypt, Sumeria, and elsewhere. But God called one man, Abraham, to establish a new nation, and he obeyed. Many great nations (Arabs, etc.) came from Abraham, but again God chose only one, Israel, to inherit the promise. Israel did grow, but as our text shows, even this chosen nation was nearly always insignificant compared to other nations.
In Israel’s history, many instances are recorded when God used just a few to battle many. God used Gideon’s 300 men to defeat 135,000 Midianites (Judges 7:7; 8:10). Similar deliverances occurred in the days of David, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and others.
In the New Testament, the Lord Jesus told His disciples that “where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20). He also said to them: “Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom” (Luke 12:32).
God’s criterion is that of motivation rather than multiplication. “Strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it” (Matthew 7:14). But those few will be faithful servants and will someday hear Him say: “Well done, thou good and faithful servant…enter thou into the joy of thy Lord” (Matthew 25:21).’https://www.icr.org/article/12943/?utm_source=phplist9543&utm_medium=email&utm_content=HTML&utm_campaign=September+4+-+The+Doctrine+of+the+Few
‘Three evangelical pastors, along with several Jewish congregations, have filed a joint lawsuit with the Australian Federal Government, seeking an injunction against the New South Wales and Victorian Government’s current COVID-19 lockdown measures.
The lawsuit, filed on Wednesday in the Federal Court, argues the state governments have selectively discriminated against religious groups in denying citizens the ability to congregate in Houses of Worship by arbitrarily deeming them “non-essential,” while allowing the public to gather elsewhere, such as in supermarkets and liquor stores.
The lawsuit will argue that Houses of Worship provide significant spiritual, psychological, and emotional support for communities, especially those who are suffering financially and psychologically from the impacts of the state government’s lockdown policies.
Furthermore, it will be argued that the governments’ indiscriminate selection of “essential” and “non-essential” venues under the Public Health Order is not supported by robust scientific or medical evidence.
According to the complaint, neither the NSW nor Victorian Governments have the constitutional or common law power to deny citizens their religious freedom which includes their ability to fulfill particular religious obligations and practices in their designated House of Worship.
Internationally renowned COVID-19 expert, Jayanta Bhattacharya, Professor of Medicine at Stanford University in California has also provided an independent expert report in support of the action brought forward by the plaintiffs.
Lawyer Tony Nikolic said his clients were forced to appeal to the courts after the matter had been repeatedly ignored by the NSW state government, in particular.
“My clients have attempted to engage with the NSW and Victorian Premiers and their Ministers as well as various NSW, Victorian, and Federal Parliamentarians to have their grievances addressed in a diplomatic and respectful manner.
“Unfortunately, in the context of NSW, the NSW Government has been unwilling to engage with my clients in any meaningful dialogue. As a result, our only last venue for relief is the courts.”
Pastor Robert Ayoub, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said they have exhausted other options to no avail.
“Now we have. a legal option, where we take the matter to the courts and have it heard by a court,” Pastor Ayoub said in a recent interview. “We believe this is a respectful way to do things, and importantly, a legal way to do things.
“We’re not here to be vindictive, or dishonouring towards the government, we’re just seeking to be able to practice our religion freely, and we’re appealing to our government to allow. us to love our God and also love our neighbour, to love our community.”
The plaintiffs in the case have also backed The Moses Statement, an open letter to Prime Minister Scott Morrison and the State Premiers, urging a reopening of churches across the nation.
The Moses Statement can be read and signed here.
The case will be heard in court later today.’https://caldronpool.com/breaking-religious-leaders-file-huge-lawsuit-against-state-governments-to-restore-freedoms/
“And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.” (Acts 4:33)
‘There are multitudes today who believe that Christ’s resurrection was a “spiritual” resurrection, insisting that the idea of a dead body returning to life after three days in the grave is completely unscientific and impossible.
This was not what the apostles preached with great grace and great power, however. They would hardly have been excited about any kind of spiritual resurrection, since everyone— both Jews and the pagan Gentiles—believed in life after death. If that was their message, no one would have doubted, and no one would have cared. Even when the disciples saw the resurrected Christ, they first “supposed that they had seen a spirit” (Luke 24:37). Christ even had to urge them to “handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have” (Luke 24:39).
When the disciples finally became convinced of His bodily resurrection, they were quickly transformed into courageous evangelists, willing even to die in support of their glorious message of salvation. The resurrection was, indeed, contrary to scientific law and all human experience, and this very fact proved to them that their Lord was Himself the divine lawgiver and author of all human experience. All other founders and leaders of human religions, ancient or modern, are themselves subject to death, but He alone has triumphed over death. Only the Creator of life can conquer death, and the resurrection proves that Jesus Christ is Creator as well as Savior.
Therefore, when we today, like the apostles of old, proclaim the resurrection of Christ, we know that His name is above every name, and this enables us also to witness with great power, in great grace.’https://www.icr.org/article/12914/?utm_source=phplist9521&utm_medium=email&utm_content=HTML&utm_campaign=August+25+-+Preaching+the+Resurrection
“He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.” (Deuteronomy 32:4)
‘Here in the song of Moses, which God instructed him to write for the children of Israel as they were about to enter the Promised Land (note Deuteronomy 31:19), is the first of at least 40 references in the Bible to God as the Rock. There are four others just in this song. In verse 15, He is the “Rock of [Israel’s] salvation.” In verse 18, He is “the Rock that begat thee.” See also verses 30 and 31.
Note some of the other wonderful metaphors picturing God as our great foundation stone. He is “my strong rock” in Psalm 31:2 and “the rock that is higher than I” in Psalm 61:2. In Psalm 62:7, He is “the rock of my strength” and “the rock of my refuge” in Psalm 94:22. Isaiah calls Him “a great rock in a weary land” and “the rock whence ye are hewn” (Isaiah 32:2; 51:1).
During the wilderness wanderings, the Israelites were supplied continually with water from the rock, and the apostle Paul tells us “that spiritual Rock that followed them…was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:4). And, of course, Christ told His disciples that Peter’s confession of Himself as the “Son of the living God” was the Rock upon which He would build His church (Matthew 16:16, 18).
But to unbelievers He is “the stone which the builders rejected” (Matthew 21:42), “a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word” (1 Peter 2:8). “Therefore,” said Jesus, “whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock” (Matthew 7:24-25).’https://www.icr.org/article/12913/?utm_source=phplist9520&utm_medium=email&utm_content=HTML&utm_campaign=August+24+-+Our+Rock+of+Salvation
“For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” (2 Corinthians 4:6)
‘The light that shines in the soul of a lost sinner when he first comes to know Jesus Christ can only be compared to the light that Christ called forth on Day One of the creation week. We met this God of glory spiritually when we first beheld in our hearts the face of Jesus Christ.
But the face of Jesus Christ was not always deemed so glorious. We read of a time when ungodly men “did…spit in his face” (Matthew 26:67), then took a blindfold “to cover his face” (Mark 14:65), and finally with a rain of terrible blows “struck him on the face” (Luke 22:64). Once His “countenance [was] as Lebanon, excellent as the cedars” (Song of Solomon 5:15), but when they finished their assault, “his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men” (Isaiah 52:14).
“The face of the Lord is against them that do evil” (1 Peter 3:12), however, and the time is coming very soon when all those who have turned their faces from Him will call “to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb” (Revelation 6:16). When finally they will have seen the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ in all its consuming strength, not even the world itself could stand, “from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away” (Revelation 20:11).
For those who have looked on Him in faith, however, this will not be a time of judgment but blessing, for “they shall see his face” (Revelation 22:4). The face of Jesus Christ, fierce as devouring fire to those He must judge, is glorious in beauty and love to those who believe.’https://www.icr.org/article/12911/?utm_source=phplist9518&utm_medium=email&utm_content=HTML&utm_campaign=August+22+-+The+Face+of+Jesus+Christ
“In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.” (Ephesians 1:13-14)
‘From very ancient times it has been the custom to confirm and guarantee an agreed-on purchase by sealing the contract with a seal that could only be broken by the buyer when he was ready to take possession of his purchase.
The marvelous transaction seen by John at God’s throne in heaven was in reference to this practice. There, only the Lamb is found worthy to open the seven-sealed scroll on which is recorded the title to the whole creation. “And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the [scroll], and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood” (Revelation 5:9). The purchase price had been paid on Calvary, and the resurrected Lamb had come to claim His possession.
And we are part of that possession! The price has been paid for our redemption from sin’s bondage, but we have not yet entered on the inheritance which our great Redeemer has promised us. In the meantime, our individual title deed, as it were, has been sealed by none other than the Holy Spirit. He is not only the seal, but also the “earnest”—that is, the down payment, the earnest money—who guarantees the total “redemption of the purchased possession.”
His personal presence in our lives is our assurance that the full promise will be fulfilled, and we are urged to “grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption” (Ephesians 4:30). He “hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts” (2 Corinthians 1:22).’https://www.icr.org/article/12910/?utm_source=phplist9517&utm_medium=email&utm_content=HTML&utm_campaign=August+21+-+Sealed+by+the+Holy+Spirit
“Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?” (Romans 9:20)
‘Whenever one begins a question with “why,” he should realize that the answer must necessarily be theological, not scientific. Science can deal with the questions of “what” and “how,” sometimes even with “where” and “when,” but never with “why”! The “why” questions have to do with motives and purposes, even when dealing with natural phenomena. (“Why does the earth rotate on its axis?” “Why do we have mosquitoes?”) Even though we can partially explain such things by secondary causes, we finally encounter a “first cause,” and then the “why?” can be answered only by God.
The wise thing to do is simply to believe that He has good reasons for everything, whether we can discern them now or not. “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Genesis 18:25). God the Creator “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will” (Ephesians 1:11), and it is our high privilege simply to trust Him, not to question Him.
On the other hand, He often asks us: “Why?” “Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith?” Jesus asked His disciples when they thought they were in great peril (Matthew 8:26). “If I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?” (John 8:46), He would say to those who question His Word.
Then, to those who doubt His deity, the apostle Paul, speaking in His name, asks: “Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?” (Acts 26:8). As the popular chorus goes: “God specializes in things thought impossible!” Our God is omniscient and knows what’s best; He is omnipotent, so He can do it. He is all-loving and will surely do what’s best for those who trust Him.’https://www.icr.org/article/12903/?utm_source=phplist9510&utm_medium=email&utm_content=HTML&utm_campaign=August+14+-+Questioning+God
Here’s a good question! ‘Are Fundamentalists deplorable, despicable, even dangerous people? Well, one must first realize that there are all kinds of fundamentalists. There are Muslim Fundamentalists, so one must consider what they believe and practice. There are Jewish Fundamentalists, and even many Jews find them a little weird. Then there are Christian Fundamentalists whom many consider odd. But then, that decision was made without considering complete information, and that is the definition of prejudice.
While Christian Fundamentalists should never be weird or odd, the Bible requires them to be peculiar. A biblically peculiar person reminds people of Christ. However, most secular people could never comprehend the daily lifestyle of a biblical Fundamentalist.
One must also understand that fundamental simply means going back to the origins or the basics. A college basketball team loses 20 games in a row, so the coach gets the team around him and says, “Guys, we must get back to the fundamentals. This is a basketball. That is a basket, and the purpose is to get this ball in that basket without getting fouled.”
I believe all Christians need to get back to the basics of Christianity, discarding the nonsense, the lies, the false traditions, and the heresy—back to barebones Christianity, i.e., Fundamentalism.U.S. Fundamentalists (a term from the 1940s), including many who identify as Evangelicals, comprise about 30 percent to 40 percent of the U.S. population. They are simply Christians who take the Bible seriously and are willing to stand alone if necessary for their beliefs. Their stand is usually conspicuous for its responsible militancy, and that militancy has occasioned slanderous accusations that they are mendacious, mad, or malicious in their stand. It seems opponents find it easier to accuse Fundamentalists of being mad and mean rather than discuss and debate their militant positions. Biblical militancy will always result in help and will never harm anyone.
And no true Fundamentalist will seek to force his view on anyone. That accusation has been made by people who interpret a loving yet militant statement as “trying to force his ideas down my throat.”
The critic simply cannot refute what he has heard.
Because of Fundamentalists’ high view of Scripture (it is inspired, infallible, and inerrant as well as invaluable for proper living), they adhere to the fundamentals of the faith. Their core beliefs—Christ’s virgin birth, virtuous life, vicarious death, victorious resurrection, and visible return, as well as the validity of miracles and the veracity of Scripture. Of course, at one time, all orthodox Christians believed those doctrines!
So, who changed?
Furthermore, most Fundamentalists insist on the independence of each local church, refusing any religious hierarchy or authority over a local congregation. Therefore, they refuse to belong to any denomination. Each local Fundamentalist congregation must be judged on its own merits. Most are tender and compassionate, while some are tyrannical and cold.
There were exceptions to the anti-denomination position in the early 1900s when many highly competent Fundamentalists were in the Presbyterian U.S.A. and the Northern (later American) Baptist Convention. During that era when the Fundamentalist/Modernist battle was raging, many great preachers refused to recognize the theological corruption in their groups or, if admitted, they refused to leave their beloved denominations. Such a move would have had a significant impact on their family, friends, finances, and future. Many others did leave and became what they should have always been—unaffiliated or independent Christians, as were the first-century Christians.
Fundamentalists are not the new boy on the block. Resource books are wrong when they call Fundamentalism a phenomenon of the 20th century. While the name is new, the movement goes back to an empty tomb in a beautiful garden outside Jerusalem.
Harvard Divinity School Professor (and Church Historian) Kirsopp Lake wrote, “Fundamentalism is virtually synonymous with orthodox Christianity.” He added, “It is a mistake, often made by educated persons who happen to have but little knowledge of historical theology, to suppose that Fundamentalism is a new and strange form of thought. It is nothing of the kind: it is the…survival of a theology which was once universally held by all Christians.”Dr. Lake continued, “The Fundamentalist may be wrong: I think that he is. [No, if we are original Christians, then Fundamentalism is not wrong.] But it is we who have departed from the tradition, not he, and I am sorry for the fate of anyone who tries to argue with a Fundamentalist on the basis of authority. The Bible and the corpus theologicum of the Church is [sic] on the Fundamentalist side.” (Kirsopp Lake, The Religion of Yesterday and To-morrow, (Boston, New York, Houghton Mifflin, 1925), pp 61-62.)
It is a fact, recognized by all, that the best support for your position is the positive comments by your critics as per Lake’s above.
To repeat, even unbelieving scholars teach that the original Christians were Fundamentalists called by different names—Christians, Disciples, Believers, Followers, Arnoldists, Donatists, Waldensians, Hussites, etc. As years passed, some got loose in their beliefs and took on spurious views, which exploded into the world’s religious mess today.
Fundamentalists eschew formalism, anthems, vestments, and repetition and usually prefer, even demand, simplicity in worship, doctrinally sound hymns, and serious Bible teaching and preaching. They meet in massive megachurches, smaller “churchy” buildings, storefronts, or even homes. They are also known for their independence; consequently, some Fundamentalists will fuss with me for “speaking for them.” Of course, I speak for myself, prompted by my knowledge of church history and current events.
The very suggestion that modern Fundamentalists (those who adhere to the basics) are the same as original Christians causes heartburn, palpitations, and hot flashes across the fruited plain. After all, aren’t Fundamentalist Christians uncouth, unsophisticated, and uneducated louts responsible for dandruff, sunspots, drought, and partly responsible for global warming? Aren’t they blamable for the declining population of copperheads and rattlesnakes in Kentucky, West Virginia, and Tennessee? Didn’t they organize the Flat Earth Society? Don’t their children live in constant fear, and their wives are usually pious, plump, put-down—and pregnant?
Well, maybe the above charges are outrageous, but surely, Fundamentalists are legalistic and pharisaical! No, all these accusations indicate that the critic is desperate and devious, if not dishonest.
Or, maybe just simply dumb.
The world generally has a silly, untrue caricature of Fundamentalists. A Fundamentalist has recognized himself as a sinner, repented of sin, and received Christ as Savior based upon His sacrificial death and physical resurrection. Following his salvation, he seeks to honor Christ in every respect. He takes the scriptural commands seriously to live godly, separate from compromise, and he lovingly rebukes those who stray from the truth. Moreover, he will try to pass to his children those same characteristics.
That means Fundamentalists are obligated to obey the Ten Commandments, treat others the way they want to be treated, respect the dignity of all people, show genuine love in response to hate, generously give to help others, stand for biblical truth against all odds, whatever the cost, even to correct but not coerce those who do not stand for truth.
To an informed Christian, the truth cannot be sacrificed on the altar of a bogus tolerance. Tolerance is often used as a smokescreen to secretly and safely retreat from orthodoxy. We are told repeatedly, all views have equal merit, and none should be considered better than another.Practically everyone believes that lie. All persons are considered equal, but not all positions are. Anyone can have odd ideas, and he has a right to them, so I respect him and recognize his right to express his views. However, while he is equal to me, his ideas are not necessarily sane, scholarly, or scriptural. His ideas can be foolish and unsound, but he must realize that he should support his silly views with facts. To say we must be tolerant of all people and give as much equivalency to all ideas is nonsense.
However silly, a person may believe what he wants, and he may espouse those beliefs, but that does not mean his behavior must be accepted. There is no right to do wrong. Modern philosophy says that you can’t disagree with anyone since it will hurt his feelings. So? Such is life in the real world. If one takes that senseless position, then one can never disagree with anyone about anything. What a crock!
The Christian must always seek to do right in all circumstances, realizing it is never right to do wrong.
A Fundamentalist is incensed when lies are presented as truth, when evil is presented as good, and when the young and innocent are harmed. He is there when the depressed need a friend. He keeps his word at all costs and is known for his kindness, gentleness, and faithfulness. He eschews anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, and filthy communication.
He is known for his humility of mind (esteeming others better than himself), meekness, longsuffering, blamelessness, and harmlessness. He lives in a crooked and perverse nation, among whom he is supposed to shine as a light in a dark world.
However, that light is flickering almost to extinction.
The Apostle Paul records a command for all Christians in Philippians 4:8, “Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.”
I have gladly accepted the term Fundamentalist knowing my critics and the ignorant have perverted its original meaning. They have done so because they cannot reply and are highly unkind, unfair, and uncivil when dealing with Fundamentalists. After all, tolerance only goes so far!If I am a devoted Christian (a Fundamentalist), I will be careful about my morals, manners, and militancy. Bible Fundamentalists are known for their love of people, principles, and precepts—all with passion.
I have tried to live as a genuine Christian Fundamentalist (not always successfully) for more than 70 years. Moreover, I just published my memoirs, Reflections of a Lifetime Fundamentalist: No Reserves, No Retreats, No Regrets to, among other things, further enlighten those who don’t know that all genuine Christians are biblical Fundamentalists. Christian Fundamentalists are not deranged, deplorable, demented, or dangerous but gentle, gracious, and generous people.’https://donboys.cstnews.com/are-fundamentalists-deplorable-despicable-and-dangerous-people