Category Archives for Front Page Posts

Biblical Inerrantist Believes Bible Patterson Sides with God and Bible Over Backslidden Bloggers

April 30, 2018

Rick Patrick, Pastor
FBC Sylacauga, Alabama
Executive Director, Connect 316
Publisher, SBC Today

In breaking news, Paige Patterson shockingly made a comment in an interview eighteen years ago exalting the timeless truth of Scripture regarding the matter of divorce. Unfortunately, Patterson’s point, when taken completely out of context, appears to call into question his sensitivity to our contemporary culture’s Me Too Movement, a development that arose seventeen years after he concluded the interview.

A hit piece in The Washington Post appears to draw from an anonymous blogger (who may or may not be Ben Cole) and the non-stop Twitter War launched against Patterson by Jonathan Merritt, a writer, blogger and news personality who was outed in a 2012 Salon article by Azariah Southworth

Writers today would be wise to restrict their application of current cultural sensitivities to today’s events. To illustrate, through the years, the term “Colored” was replaced by “Negro” and then “Black” and then “African-American.” It would be unfair to fault people for being racist fifty years ago because they did not use the term “African-American.” Any writer who would apply a six month old cultural template to an eighteen year old comment must realize that the foundation of their criticism crumbles under the weight of their misplaced historical context. 

It has been said that a man should never explain himself, for his friends don’t require an explanation and his enemies won’t believe one. But I cannot stand idly by while two backslidden bloggers take cheap shots at the greatest living Southern Baptist. Honestly, if not for Patterson, our denomination would be so steeped in liberal theology we would have pro-choice homosexual ministers embracing evolution and endorsing Hillary. Instead of attacking him, we should be thanking him.

In one anecdote from his years of marital counseling experience, Patterson urged a woman who had endured some level of abuse to pray by her bedside for her husband. She then endured more abuse one last time, only to see her husband fall under the conviction of the Holy Spirit, walk the aisle, and give his life to Christ. The abuse never continued, and they lived happily ever after in a Christian marriage. Without knowing all of the details of this specific situation, it is difficult to know what type of counsel any minister might give. Admittedly, some ministers might urge this woman to leave the home. Patterson himself admitted that on more than one occasion he had given women this very same advice. In this particular case, however, he urged her to pray faithfully, resulting in the saving of both a husband and a marriage.

Below are a few points highlighting Patterson’s response to the accusations. 

1. Misrepresentation
Patterson said he was being “subjected to rigorous misrepresentation.”

2. Never Abused or Accused
Patterson said he has never abused anyone or been accused of abusing anyone.

3. Separate From Abusive Husbands
“On more than one occasion” Patterson has counseled women to leave their abusive husbands.

4. Report Abuse To Authorities
Patterson has counseled that physical or sexual abuse of any kind should be reported “to the appropriate authorities.”

5. Supports CBMW Statement
Patterson praised the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood statement and said it reflected his view.

6. Does Not Recommend Divorce
Patterson has never recommended or prescribed divorce. “How could I as a minister of the Gospel? The Bible makes clear the way in which God views divorce.”

7. Regret For Pain Caused To Supporters
Patterson said, “To all who love me and have supported me across the years and to those who have been wounded by these accusations, I express my deepest regret.”

8. No Apology For Biblical View Of Family
Patterson said, “I do not apologize for my stand for the family and for seeking to mend a marriage through forgiveness rather than divorce.”

The most insidious false accusation against Patterson is the wrongful insinuation that he would encourage a woman to remain in a situation where she would be nothing other than a punching bag for an abusive husband. When Patterson says he opposes divorce, this does not mean he opposes a woman’s safe separation. A woman can separate from her husband and find a safe place without seeking a divorce.

In Malachi 2:16, the Lord says, “I hate divorce.” I am comforted rather than scandalized by the fact that Paige Patterson agrees with both God and the Bible in that he too hates divorce. No, there is nothing to stop Monday Morning Counselors from second guessing specific marital advice given several decades ago in which they do not possess all of the facts known by the Counseling Minister. But honestly, if I were in need of marriage counseling, I would not get on Twitter and listen to a couple of backslidden bloggers. Rather, I would seek the godly wisdom of a faithful minister like Dr. Paige Patterson, a man who believes the Bible is completely true and has been very happily married for more than half a century. 

Born Dead?

April 30, 2018

By Dr. Leighton Flowers
Apologists for Texas Baptists

The analogy of being “dead” is seen throughout the scriptures, but can it be demonstrated to mean that mankind is born morally unable to willingly respond to God Himself, as the Calvinists presume? Are we born dead like Lazarus, a corpse rotting in the tomb (a link scripture never draws), or are we dead like the Prodigal, a loved one living in rebellion? Scripture supports the latter rather than the former:

“For this son of mine was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.’ And they began to celebrate” (Luke 15:24).

Spiritual deadness seems to be equated with “separateness,”  “lostness,” or “in rebellion,” not as “total moral inability to respond.” Likewise, in Romans 6:11, Paul also teaches the believers to count themselves “dead to sin.” A consistent Calvinist would have to interpret this to mean that believers are morally unable to sin when tempted. Of course, that is not the case. Paul is teaching that we are to separate ourselves from sin, in much the same way we were once separated by our sin from God. “Deadness” here connotes the idea of being separated, like the son was from his father, not the incapacitation of the will to respond to God’s appeal to be reconciled from our separation.

Plus, if we examine the story of Lazarus more closely it reveals a truth that flies in the face of the Calvinistic conclusion.

“So Jesus then said to them plainly, ‘Lazarus is dead, and I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, so that you may believe…’ (John 11:14-15).

The lesson the Lord wishes to teach his followers is not the conclusion that Calvinists draw from this text (i.e. God effectually makes the spiritually dead alive in the same way He raises Lazarus); but instead, the Lord’s expressed desire is so that the witnesses “may believe.” Clearly, an outward sign is said to have the ability to help individuals believe, something that seems completely superfluous given the effectuality of regeneration on the Calvinistic system. The text goes on to say:

“Jesus said to her, ‘I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?’  She said to Him, ‘Yes, Lord; I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God, even He who comes into the world’ … Jesus said to her, ‘Did I not say to you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?’’ (John 11:25-27; 40).

Once again, it is the faith of the eye witnesses, not Lazarus, that Jesus seems to be focused upon in this discourse. Furthermore, the responsibility is put onto the individual to believe so as to live, not the other way around. The focus of this text is on the believing response of the witnesses to Christ’s miracle and the believers eventual resurrection from the dead. Remember, Lazarus was a believer, not Totally Depraved, so this miracle more likely represents the believer’s resurrection from the dead than a irresistible soteriological drawing of the lost to faith.

“So they removed the stone. Then Jesus raised His eyes, and said, ‘Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. I knew that You always hear Me; but because of the people standing around I said it, so that they may believe that You sent Me’… Therefore many of the Jews who came to Mary, and saw what He had done, believed in Him” (John 11:41-42; 45).

Jesus expresses a desire for the witnesses to believe based upon what they have seen, something on Calvinism that is a certainty for the Elect ones and absolutely impossible for the Reprobates, regardless of what miracle either of them witness. Notice that Jesus describes the faith of the eye witnesses as being a direct response to what they saw, not a supernatural inward work of regeneration, or an unconditional choice before time began.

No where in this passage, or any other, do we find the concept of spiritual deadness as being in reference to total inability, yet the story of Lazarus is one of the most referenced proof texts cited by Calvinists in defense of this doctrine.

Let’s consider other passages which use the analogy of “deadness.” For instance, take a look at Jesus’ own words to the church in Sardis:

“To the angel of the church in Sardis write: These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished in the sight of my God. Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; hold it fast, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.” (Rev. 3:1-6)

Clearly, Jesus fully expects this church to heed his warning and respond in repentance despite the fact that he called them “dead.”  The Calvinist may object saying, “But, Jesus is speaking to the church, not to the lost, so that does not apply to our point of contention.”  I disagree, and here is why:

1.  The point is simply to show how the analogy of being “dead” doesn’t necessarily imply “corpse-like inability.” This use of the word illustrates that point because clearly those in the church are expected to “wake up” and “repent.” The burden is on the Calvinist to produce examples where the analogy explicitly demonstrates the concept of “total inability” to respond to God’s life-giving Word.

2.  The Calvinistic teachings on “Compatibilism” equally applies to the choices of the Saints (the elect) and the Reprobates (the non-elect). According to the Compatibilist, a person will always choose in accordance with his or her greatest desire, which is determined by the God given nature and Divinely controlled circumstances in which that individual makes the choice.[1]Therefore, the choice of a Christian is as much under the “sovereign meticulous providence” of God as are the choices of the Reprobates.  So, according to a consistent Calvinist, the “dead” believers in Sardis were as incapable of response to Christ’s appeals to repent, as were the “dead reprobates” being called by the gospel to repentance for the very first time.  In other words, if Compatibilism is true, then both the “dead” believer in Sardis and the “dead” reprobate is equally incapable of repentance apart from God’s gracious work to effectuate that willing response. Thus, the burden of proof is still on the Calvinist to demonstrate that the analogy of being “dead,” in both instances, equals “corpse-like inability.”

Paul is known to use the analogy of being “dead” along side the concept of being included “in Him,” as we see here:

In Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions” (Col. 2:11-13).

Here Paul seems to relate circumcision to being made alive. Deut. 10:16 says, “Circumcise your hearts, therefore, and do not be stiff-necked any longer,” which strongly seems to indicate it is man’s responsibility to humbly repent, as seen repeated in Jer. 4:4:

Circumcise yourselves to the LORD and remove the foreskins of your heart, Men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, Or else My wrath will go forth like fire And burn with none to quench it, Because of the evil of your deeds.’”

This parallels Paul’s teaching in Ephesians 1 and 2, which likewise references the saints as having once been dead but being made alive by God. Both Calvinists and non-Calvinists affirm that we were all once dead in our sins and have been made alive together with Him.  The point of contention is over whether the dead sinner has any responsibility in his being raised up. Is the concept of “deadness” meant to suggest that mankind has no responsibility (ability to respond) to God’s appeal to “repent and live” (Num. 21:8-9; Ezk. 18:32; 33:11; John 6:40; John 20:31).

The text indicates that we are “made alive together with Him,” and it is mankind’s responsibility to be included “in Him,” through faith:

“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory” (Eph. 1:13-14).

When were you “mark in Him?”

“When you believed,” according to the text.

Clearly, one must believe in order to be marked “in Him” and receive the Holy Spirit, not the other way around.  It is “in Him” that we are “made alive” or “raised,” according to the texts quoted above.

No where in the Bible is the concept of being “dead” connoted to mean that mankind has no responsibility to humble themselves and repent in faith so as to be “made alive together with Him.” As Paul teaches in Romans 8:10, “If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.”

The theme of being “raised up,” “made alive,” “exalted,” or “lifted up” is carried throughout the scriptures, and it is not difficult to see the expectation God has for those who He will graciously raise up:

1 Peter 5:5-6:  “God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble.” Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time.

James 4:10: “Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.”

Matthew 23:12: For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

Psalm 18:27: You save the humble but bring low those whose eyes are haughty.

Psalm 147:6: The Lord sustains the humble but casts the wicked to the ground.

Matthew 18:4: Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

Luke 18:14: “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

Not once in scripture does it teach that God is the one responsible for humbling us so that we would be “lifted up,” “raised up,” “exalted” or “make alive together with Him.”

In James 1:14-15, it states, “But each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.” Likewise, Paul says in Romans 7:9-10, “I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me.” Yet, Calvinists teach that we are born dead already. So, which is it? Clearly, the analogy of “death” can carry with it different connotations, none of which can be shown by the text to mean “total inability” from birth.

Finally, if spiritual deadness is taken in a woodenly literal way by the Calvinist when it comes to mankind’s moral inability to respond willingly, then why can the “corpse-like dead man” respond unwillingly? A corpse could not “grab the life preserver when it is offered,” as the Calvinist likes to point out, but a corpse also could not actively swim away from it either, as is the rebellious response of many to the gospel. In fact, there are all different kinds of responses to the life preserver.  Some swim around it for a while and seem genuinely interested. Others mock it angrily. In fact, no two “dead” people respond in the exact same way to the life preserver, which obviously would not be true if they literally responded like a corpse.

Once again, the Calvinistic presumption is just that, a presumption they read into the text that is simply never substantiated by any explicit biblical teaching.

For more on this subject, CLICK HERE.

International Travel Tips

April 27, 2018

By Walker Moore
Awestar Ministries

I have spent a good portion of my adult life traveling internationally. As summer approaches, many church groups and individuals are hard at work raising money, applying for passports and getting visas as they prepare to serve overseas. Getting everything together is not easy, I know; I have led thousands of students to the four corners of the world. And I have made more mistakes and bloopers in these journeys than most of you have ever considered.

In other words, I have learned a thing or two about international travel that might benefit those who are preparing for a mission trip, and I thought I would share some of them with you. I can guarantee you won’t find these thoughts anywhere but here. Here are “Walker Moore’s Top 12 Plus 2 International Travel Tips.”

1) Do not eat a fiber bar or drink a Big Gulp carbonated beverage before leaving on a 10-hour flight, especially if turbulence is predicted.

2) If you can, avoid the aisle seat next to the airplane restroom—unless you’re homesick for the family farm.

3) Please do not try to raise the windows after the plane takes off.

4) Don’t tie a yellow or orange piece of yarn around the handle of your suitcase. You may not realize it, but 300 other passengers on your flight did the same thing.

5) If you drool when you sleep, bring along a dry washcloth. On my last flight, the guy next to me used one to get all the drool off his shirt after he woke up. I didn’t have the heart to tell him I was the one who drooled on him.

6) No matter how high your hotel is rated, always subtract two stars. Residents of a third-world country would rate Motel 6 as a five-star establishment.

7) Always check to see if your hotel is hosting some type of event during your stay. You might find yourself in the middle of a yodeling or ukulele convention.

8) Calling 911 in a foreign country will only get you room service, a goat or a woman named Helga.

9) If your mission work takes you to a remote place, and you find yourself sleeping in a hammock, make sure you know which is the “enter” and which is the “exit” side. Get them mixed up, and you will find yourself on the ground in a hurry. (I learned this tip from Marti Pieper.)

10) Always carry your own toilet paper unless the outhouse is a two-holer, in which case you might be able to borrow some.

11) As you enter a country, don’t try to high-five customs agents who are carrying weapons.

12) In an international location, there is no such thing as a soundproof wall. You will hear every cricket chirping and rooster crowing outside, but those don’t compare to Grandma, snoring at the other end of the building.

13) Every souvenir shop in the world buys its merchandise from the same store in China, TrinketsRUs. The best souvenirs are the friendships and the memories.

14) When everything goes wrong, and it will, pray. I hereby grant permission to use my favorite prayer: “Lord Jesus, come quickly.”

If you’re preparing to leave on an international mission trip, let me remind you: Nothing looks like what you’ve seen in the brochure. Mission work is difficult, and many challenges lie ahead. If you don’t believe me, look what happened to the group who used the Apostle Paul Travel Agency:  

Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was pelted with stones, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my fellow Jews, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false believers. I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked (2 Cor. 11:24-27).

Doing real mission work involves embracing the difficulties, the differences and the disappointments. Enduring jet lag, travel sickness, language difficulties, rough roads and customs just to tell one person about Christ—is it worth it? You had better believe it.

I could give you many more tips about traveling and living internationally, but the best tip is to make sure you are prayed up, your pride is in check and your heart is right before God. He will take you and make you a light on a hill so others can see His glory.

1 5 6 7 8 9 426