Apprising Ministries offers further background, including exclusive video of Caner’s claims, and gives you the link to the latest Dividing Line program of Dr. James White where he again addresses Caner’s comments in question.
In a 2011, Marsha West warned about the serious problems with evangelical pastor Rick Warren’s ‘Daniel Plan,’ which he taught was a biblically based approach to weight loss. As a follow-up, Warren now has written a book on what he views as a healthy way of living. The book was co-authored by two of the doctors who helped develop the plan and is set to be released soon.
In this article, Marsha reminds that both of these co-authors have New Age worldviews and promote alternative health practices that are decidedly unbiblical. Yet according to The Daniel Plan website, this latest gimmick is being touted as “God’s prescription for your health.”
Debra Rae is a writer, speaker and the host of TruthTalk radio. She believes that a new wave of anti-Semitism “has swept across America—birthed in her fast-growing Muslim community” and has also reared it’s ugly head in our Christian churches. In this article, Rae lays out the historical evidence of anti-Semitism and discrimination leveled specifically against the Jews and some of the reasons behind it.
The Strange Fire Conference, which was hosted last month by John MacArthur, was designed to expose and address wildly unbiblical excesses in the Charismatic movement at large (excesses such as angel feathers, gold dust, glory clouds, “grave sucking,” getting “drunk” in the spirit, etc.), In the aftermath of this conference, prominent blogger Tim Challies conducted a brief interview with Dr. MacArthur about some lingering questions that remain in the minds of some Charismatics.
In an effort to emphasize the cultural commonalities between Christians and Mormons, Brigham Young University has invited a number of evangelical leaders to speak to its students. Richard Land, president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in North Carolina, Rev. Albert Mohler, president of Baptist Theological Seminary, and George O. Wood, the general superintendent of the Assemblies of God are among those who have accepted the invitation and have spoken at the university. According to the Religion News Service, this prompted one man to refer to this as “The year of the evangelical at BYU.”
The writer of the RNS piece, Adelle M. Banks, wondered:
Is there a new detente — perhaps more practical than theological — between evangelicals and Mormons?
A better question is, “Should there be a new détente between evangelicals and Mormons?” When we juxtapose the essentials of the Christian faith with the beliefs Mormon’s hold to, we see that there is a wide divide between Christianity and Mormonism. Thus, many Christians believe that uniting with Mormons to “save America” is not the best means to achieve the desired ends.
Doug Phillips has resigned as president of Vision Forum following his announcement of a moral failure, which according to his resignation letter, involved an “inappropriate relationship with a woman.” Phillips has long been the face of a particular branch of Reformed Christianity which models very rigid family structures (led by the “Federal Head,” the husband), promotes the Quiverfull lifestyle, enforces strictly supervised courtship dating for youth, and also teaches a form of Dominionism (got to have lots of babies, you see, through embracing the “quiverfull” teachings, if you’re going to have any shot at taking Dominion of the world). I have personally counseled several women who have come out of this movement, and who didn’t quite fit the mold for whatever reason, and whose experiences with Vision Forum leadership ranged from neglect to outright spiritual abuse.
Brent Bozell, President of the Media Research Center, describes the ways in which Hollywood continues to promote homosexuality. He points out that radical homosexual and lesbian activists insist on indoctrinating young children with “gay” propaganda through movies and TV. The problem, says Bozell, is that “Gay characters never face any real opposition to the gay agenda on these so-called ‘inclusive’ programs.” He begins:
The media elites glowed as they reported a judge had forced New Jersey to become the 14th state to honor and celebrate the “gay marriage” concept. When homosexuals marry in Hoboken, the gay left will be — should be — thanking Hollywood.
Marsha West begins her article with a stern warning from A.W. Tozer:
No one has any right to believe that he is indeed a Christian unless he is humbly seeking to obey the teachings of the One whom he calls Lord. Christ once asked a question that can have no satisfying answer, “Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?”
Marsha then illustrates an important aspect of Christianity that is largely ignored by many professing Christians: Repentance. Sadly, believers have failed to realize that every sin we commit is first and foremost against the “One whom we call Lord.” Moreover, God is “independently, infinitely, immutably holy;” therefore our sins separate us from God and in some cases He will turn His face away from those who persist in sin.
Dr. Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, has some grave concerns over former president George H.W. Bush and his wife Barbara’s recent attendance at a lesbian wedding as they have clearly come out in support of same-sex “marriage.” Dr. Mohler writes:
The news coverage of the Bushes’ attendance at the same-sex wedding points to a reality that must be understood—and fast. Attendance at a wedding is not a neutral act. The history and context of the wedding ceremony identify all those present as agreeing to the rightness of the marriage and acting as witnesses to the exchange of vows. This is why the venerable language of The Book of Common Prayer, used in the overwhelming majority of Christian weddings, calls upon anyone with knowledge that the proposed union is invalid to speak, “or forever hold his peace.” Anyone remaining silent at that point is affirming the rightness and validity of the marriage, and all who are present are counted as both witnesses and those who celebrate the union.
A recent commentary by Marcia Montenegro of Christian Answers for the New Age (CANA) calls into question the “spirit” by which Sarah Young of the bestselling Jesus Calling claims to have written her book.
Chris Rosebrough, this morning on his Facebook announced that Chris Pinto had publicly apologized to Alan Kurschner and Dr. James White during yesterday’s Noise of Thunder radio program. After listening to Pinto’s apology, I am convinced that it was clearly a step in the right direction but that it was vague, unspecific and didn’t address what Pinto had done wrong.
Here is the audio:
Here is the transcript of Pinto’s apology:
“I want to address an issue that has occupied a certain amount of controversy in recent weeks that many of our listeners are familiar with. On august 28th, during the show in which I spoke about the faith of Andrew Jackson, that was the topic, certain comments were made after the break, and I discussed the education background of Alan Kurschner. And the fact that he has contributed to the research of Dr James White. Now without going into too many details, details which many of you are familiar with already, my comments had an inflammatory impact on some. And were taken to mean something other than what I intended and for this I sincerely apologize both to Alan Kurschner and to Dr. James White. And I want to apologize to our audience for any confusion or discord that came about as a result. Just so you know I have sent private apologies to both men, before making this announcement today. My desire is to encourage from this point forward, I hope, a God fearing approach to our discussions and I apologize for any comments that I’ve made at any point that fail to uphold that standard.”
My greatest concern after hearing Mr. Pinto’s apology is that he hasn’t specifically confessed the sinfulness of his statements but has apologized that they were “taken to mean something other than what” he intended and “caused confusion”. Rather than being a true, from the heart apology, Pinto’s words sound more like a rationalization. He didn’t apologize for what he said, which was truly slanderous. Instead, he apologized that people misunderstood him. In other words, he’s apologizing for the reaction of the people who heard his statements rather than apologizing for making them. That’s not a sincere apology but a rationalization.
To help explain the difference between true apologies and insincere apologies I would point you to an excellent blog post written by Tim Challies in February of last year entitled, Lessons in Forgiveness. In that post Challies addresses the lack of sincerity in apologies that attempt to rationalize sins. Said Challies,
Don’t Rationalize Your Sin
I try to teach my children that an apology does not include the words but or if. We do not say, “I’m sorry if I offended you.” We do not say, “I’m sorry I did it, but if you hadn’t…” We apologize sincerely and from the heart (or we try, anyway). If we cannot apologize without rationalizing our own sin, we are not truly apologizing. It is a good discipline to examine your heart before attempting to make a true and sincere apology. Do not allow yourself to make an apology that is actually an attempt to rationalize the wrongs you’ve committed. Rather, apologize sincerely and apologize from the heart, not as an attempt to clear your own record but as a step of love and obedience.
Although I think Pinto’s apology is a step in the right direction. He needs to take responsibility for what he said.
Amy Spreeman of Stand Up for the Truth shares some information about the latest church gimmick:
Are you ready for the next big state-of-the-art discipleship tool for every member of your church, including staff? It’s called RightNow Media, a slick new video streaming program that compares itself to the Netflix of Christianity, and you don’t even need to lift a finger to sell it to your membership: Its marketers have provided an out-of-the-box promotional launch package with videos, banners, enthusiastic emails (“our church has unlimited access to three awesome libraries: Bible Study, Customizable Training, and Leadership Events,” says the form letter), and a powerful announcement kit for your pulpit on the big unveiling day.
Best of all, church leaders no longer need to disciple Christians; they simply let these guys do it for you.
Sons of Korah is a Christian music group from Australia. Their music is focused on the Psalms found in Scripture. From their website:
Music is a great tool for memorizing things. The importance of knowing the Word of God is a dominant theme in both testaments, not least of all in the psalms. The psalms themselves contain, in condensed form, all the fundamental truths of the faith. Salvation history, the attributes of God, the way of salvation, the law of God, principles of wisdom, the nature of man and many more points of theology are powerfully encapsulated in the psalms. In this way the people learned about these things and passed them on. This is precisely what Paul has in mind when he exhorts the Colossians to sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs in worship to God so that the word of Christ would dwell in them richly (Col. 3:16).
One of the darkest chapters in American history occurred in the opening years of the Cold war. From 1950 to 1956 Senator Joseph McCarthy conducted what would later to become known as “the Communist Witch Hunts.” McCarthy and those on his committee were experts in the art of accusation. Their tactics included guilt by association, broad brushing, the use of the most superficial and flimsy of evidence against those whom he suspected of being Communists. McCarthy recklessly defamed his victims’ characters and destroyed the reputations, careers and lives of many. So notorious were McCarthy’s tactics that a new word was added to the English language. That word is McCarthyism and it means 1) the practice of making accusations of disloyalty in many instances unsupported by proof or based on slight, doubtful, or irrelevant evidence. 2) the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or criticism.
A prime example of McCarthy’s malicious use of guilt by association is his ruining of the reputation and career of American diplomat, John Service. The details of his case are as follows:
“Foreign Service Officer John S. Service was dismissed from the Department of State on Dec 13, 1951 following a determination by the Civil Service Commission’s Loyalty Board that there was “reasonable doubt” concerning his loyalty to the United States. Service was one of a number of so-called “China hands”—State Department officials who were experts on China and the Far East—who saw their careers ruined during the 1950s by Senator Joseph McCarthy and his cohorts. McCarthy targeted Service and several of his coworkers… for criticism and investigation. McCarthy charged that Service and other State Department officials had effectively “lost” China to the communists, either through incompetence or, more ominously, through sympathy with the communist cause…McCarthy singled out Service as one of what he called “the 205 known communists” in the Department of State. In short order, Service’s case was reviewed once again, and this time he was dismissed.
Service fought the dismissal, and was eventually reinstated in 1957, but his career never recovered from the damage.”
Chris Pinto Master of the McCarthyistic Arts of Accusation & Guilt by Association
In this portion of my article I will provide three examples of Chris Pinto employing the use of McCarthyism. One of the examples will be from his documentary, Tares Among the Wheat and two will be in response to critics. In each example Pinto casts suspicion and doubt on his victim through the use of accusation and/or guilt by association. Sadly, I could provide literally dozens more examples than these.
Exhibit #1 – Tischendorf’s Mysterious Audience with the Pope
In the documentary, Tares Among the Wheat, Pinto attempts to build a case that Codex Sinaiticus is not an authentic 4th century manuscript but is instead a 19th century text penned by Constantine Simonides. The film itself spends an inordinate amount of time discussing the sins of the Vatican and the Roman Catholic church. The reason for this is that Pinto believes that this provides the historical context that must be understood in order to properly interpret the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus by Tischendorf in 1859.
One of the “interesting” pieces of evidence that Pinto believes is critically important information regarding Sinaiticus’ authenticity is the fact that Tischendorf had an audience with the Pope and other prominent Papal leaders during one of his trips to Egypt. The relevant scene begins at the 58:26 mark and continues until 1:09:18 .
Note that Pinto believes that Tischendorf’s audience with the Pope is vital evidence pertaining to Codex Sinaiticus authenticity. Yet, all he has done is cast suspicion on Tischendorf by documenting that he is guilty of associating with the Pope. In Pinto’s mind this is proof that something sinister is a foot and that something ominous is in the air. But, this is not relevant evidence. This is McCarthyism!
The authenticity of Sinaiticus in no way hinges on whether or not Tischendorf met with the Pope, shook the hand of Stalin or had lunch with Hitler. There are no textual scholars who are struggling with doubts about the authenticity of Sinaiticus due to the fact that Tischendorf met with the Pope.
Exhibit #2 – Dr. James White Attended Fuller Theological Seminary
Recently, on Facebook, a fan of Chris Pinto alerted him to an episode of Dr. James White’s radio program in which he offered criticism of Pinto. In predictable McCarthyistic fashion, Pinto responded by associating Dr. White with that notoriously liberal, Fuller Theological Seminary as if that somehow actually proved something about Dr. White. Here is Pinto’s response.
Ironically, Dr. White who was unaware of Pinto’s comment at the time, actually anticipated this tactic and commented about it on his radio program. Here’s the audio.
Anyone familiar with the ministry of James White would never believe that Pinto had actually proved anything about Dr. White’s theology, reliability or fidelity to the truth by merely pointing out that he graduated from Fuller. In Pinto’s mind, however, just the mere mention of Dr. White’s association with Fuller is sufficient enough to cast doubt and suspicion on him. This is not evidence this is McCarthyism!
Exhibit #3 – Alan Kurschner Attended Pro-Homosexual Harvard Divinity School
This last exhibit speaks for itself. In the audio below you will hear a quintessential example of McCarthyism being employed by Pinto in order to cast suspicion and doubt on Alan Kurshner and Dr. James White.
Rather than comment on Pinto’s unsubstantiated allegations, let me instead remind you of the definition of McCarthyism which is 1) the practice of making accusations of disloyalty in many instances unsupported by proof or based on slight, doubtful, or irrelevant evidence. 2) the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or criticism.
What Pinto needs to explain to everyone is if Alan Kurschner has been somehow compromised by exposure to pro-homosexual liberalism by taking a course on textual criticism at Harvard, why does he publicly write and speak out against the pro-homosexual agenda?
McCarthyism is not scholarship nor is it honest journalism. Instead it is a smear tactic that slanders its victims without regard for the truth. It is employed by conspiratorialists and witch hunters but should never be employed in the service of Christ, His Kingdom or His Gospel. As Jesus Himself taught us, it is satan who “does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John 8:44)
McCarthyism is a tool of the devil.
I pray that Chris Pinto repents.
Yesterday, Dr. James White wrote a blog post that gave us a peak into the thinking of one who possesses a conspiratorial mindset. Aside from being a fascinating read, the post demonstrates how conspiratorialists will not – or maybe a better way to say it is, cannot – view evidence objectively and rationally. This then causes them to interpret every shred of evidence through the lens of conspiracy. On the one hand, the conspiratorialist will always accept proof that supports his conspiracy theory, no matter how flimsy the source. On the other, the conspiratorialist will automatically reject any evidence that challenges or disproves the conspiracy and, oftentimes, the conspiratorialist will retaliate against those who challenge his theory by casting suspicion on them and associating them with those whom the conspiratorialist believes are plotting the conspiracy.
A textbook example of this type of conspiratorialist retaliation was documented by Chris Rosebrough on the 29 August 2013 episode of the Fighting for the Faith radio program. In that episode, Rosebrough played audio from Chris Pinto’s Noise of Thunder Radio program, in which Pinto put forward a series of guilt by association (GBA) arguments against two of his critics, Alan Kurschner and Dr. James White. Because the conspiratorialist mindset always interprets data through the lens of conspiracy, the only plausible explanation in Pinto’s mind for Kurschner and White’s having criticized him is that they are theologically compromised and, either knowingly or unwittingly, working to promote liberal gay-affirming ecumenical apostasy. What was most fascinating about that program was that Rosebrough documented the fact that, more than a month prior to Pinto’s retaliation, he had engaged in an identical GBA argument against Alan Kurschner. At that time, Kurschner personally responded to Pinto’s allegations and answered every one of them by giving primary source testimony demonstrating conclusively that Pinto’s claims were patently false. However, conspiratorialists always reject evidence that does not fit the conspiracy. True to form, Pinto dismissed Kurschner’s evidence out of hand and re-employed the same GBA attacks one month later, expanding them to implicate Dr. James White and to cast doubt on his scholarship.
Noise of Thunder: The Lost Episode – A.K.A. Pinto’s Papal Pickle
Another fascinating piece of evidence that gives us a peak into the conspiratorialist mindset of Chris Pinto involves the missing 5 August 2013 episode of Noise of Thunder. In that episode, Pinto led off his program by reading and commenting on a news story that he believed was real, but which was in fact a satirical story from Newslo.com, a competitor to The Onion.
The satirical news story is entitled Pope Criminalizes the Reporting of Sex Crimes, and there are many offhandedly silly, off-color and outrageous statements within the piece that are clearly designed to elicit a chuckle from the reader. What is striking is the fact that these jokes were not seen as jokes by Chris Pinto, but instead as real news! Here is the audio of Chris Pinto reading this satirical story as if it were real:
Why would Chris Pinto fail to see that this was satire? Why didn’t he take the time to vet his news source and corroborate the story before going on air? If the jokes within the story weren’t obvious enough to identify the piece as satire, a simple glance at the right column of Newslo’s website reveals links to their most popular stories, including headlines such as Pat Robertson Unveils Gay-Repelling Necklace and Syrians Enjoy Day Off from Gas Attacks to Enjoy Miley Cyrus Twerk. The reason Pinto thought it was a real news story is because it fits his conspiracy. It was just one more piece of proof to add to his growing pile of carefully screened and highly selective evidence. It fit his conspiracy template, therefore it had to be true!
After Pinto posted this program, a listener alerted him to his error. As far as I’ve been able to gather, it looks as if Pinto – rather than issue a formal retraction and apologize to the Vatican for his false reporting – chose simply to delete the program.
More to come in my next article.
Postscript: Because it is highly unlikely that Chris Pinto will acknowledge his conspiratorialist mindset to be the driving force behind the slips and follies that I’m reporting, and because Pinto is most likely trying to figure out how to link me to the Roman Catholic ecumenical apostasy conspiracy, I feel compelled to inform my readers that I am not a Roman Catholic, a Jesuit, a homosexual, a pedophile, or a Mason. Neither am I a member of the Iluminati, the Democratic Party, the Teamsters, or the Council on Foreign Relations. I have never attended Harvard or any other liberal university. I am a dog lover, don’t trust cats, and have never been a vegan.
Chris Pinto, host of the Noise of Thunder radio program and documentary film-maker is a man who, as of late, has become something of a self-anointed expert in the field of textual criticism and ancient manuscripts. The problem is that for someone who thinks of himself as qualified to determine the reliability of modern translations and their underlying Greek and Hebrew texts, every time Pinto opens his mouth he demonstrates that he hasn’t done his homework and that he doesn’t know what he is talking about. It’s a lot like that scene in the movie Mr. Mom when Jack Butler, played by Michael Keaton, is explaining the plans he has to renovate and rewire his house to his wife’s boss Ron, played by Martin Mull. Ron asked Jack if he’s going to make it all 220. Jack’s answer is one of the all time great movie lines. Here’s the clip:
In almost an identically comical blunder, Chris Pinto on the 24 August 2013 episode of his radio program demonstrated to anyone who has taken a college level introduction to Biblical Greek and understands even the basic tenets of textual criticism that he has no clue what he’s talking about. Even funnier is the fact that Pinto then uses his comically erroneous evidence as the basis for casting theological doubt on the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible. Here is what Pinto said:
I will focus my comments on this portion of Pinto’s statement:
What nobody seems to want to talk about is that the ESV is based on the United Bible Society Nestle-Aland Vatican-supervised Greek text. That would be the only problem, right there at the beginning. OK, do you really want your Bible to based on something that has been supervised by the Vatican?
When a colleague of mine first played this quote for me, I asked him if it was a joke or if it was taken from a sitcom. When he insisted that it was legit and that Chris Pinto truly believes what he is saying my response was, “God help anyone who listens to this man.”
“220, 221 – Whatever it takes”
If Chris Pinto possessed the education or had taken the time to properly understand the field that he has deemed himself qualified to make such grand sweeping judgments about then he’d know that the Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, is not published by the United Bible Societies (UBS). It is published by the German Bible Society and the Institute for New Testament Research. Neither of which is supervised by the Vatican. As for the the UBS, they publish their own Greek New Testament and the scholars involved in its production come from a wide range of denominations and theological traditions which is a strength, not a weakness. The reason that this is a strength is because it provides a safeguard against theological bias.
For Chris Pinto to imply that the UBS Greek text is somehow tainted by a Roman Catholic agenda and that the Vatican is supervising its work and has to sign off on the UBS text is an ignorant and intentional mischaracterization of the UBS’ oversight committee and policies. Rather than putting forward meaningful evidence that demonstrates that Pinto possesses the knowledge and credentials to offer a substantive criticism of the texts that were employed by the translation committee of the ESV, Pinto instead played on people’s ignorance, fears and prejudices. These are not the methods employed by scholars but the tactics of propagandists and conspiracy theorists. It makes me wonder if Chris Pinto will begin casting doubt on the reliability of the Old Testament portion of the ESV because it heavily relied on the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, which as everyone knows, utilizes the work of Jewish scholars who do not even believe that Jesus is the messiah. It’s not hard to imagine Pinto saying, “you don’t want your Bible to be based on the scholarship of unbelieving rabbis, do you?”
Truth be told, Pinto’s methods are more akin to the same types of guilt by association arguments employed by the Roman Catholic inquisitors than they are to the methods employed by knowledgeable textual scholars.
The truth about the scholarship behind the ESV
The scholars on the translation committee for the English Standard Version reads like a who’s who of the most noted and celebrated living scholars that Protestantism has to offer and it is notable that no Jesuits or Vatican lackeys are listed among them.
The list includes such men as:
- Dr. J. I. Packer, ESV General Editor
- Board of Governors Professor of Theology, Regent College, Vancouver, Canada
- Dr. Wayne A. Grudem
- Research Professor, Theology and Biblical Studies, Phoenix Seminary
- Dr. Robert H. Mounce
- President emeritus of Whitworth College
- Dr. Vern Sheridan Poythress
- Professor of New Testament Interpretation, Westminster Theological Seminary; Editor, Westminster Theological Journal
- Dr. Clinton E. Arnold
- Professor of New Testament and Chair of New Testament Department, Biola University
These men have distinguished themselves in their respective fields of study when it comes to Biblical Greek and Hebrew and textual criticism. As for the texts employed by the translators of the ESV, here is what they have to say about them.
Each word and phrase in the ESV has been carefully weighed against the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, to ensure the fullest accuracy and clarity and to avoid under-translating or overlooking any nuance of the original text.
The ESV is based on the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible as found in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (2nd ed., 1983), and on the Greek text in the 1993 editions of the Greek New Testament (4th corrected ed.), published by the United Bible Societies (UBS), and Novum Testamentum Graece (27th ed.), edited by Nestle and Aland.
The currently renewed respect among Old Testament scholars for the Masoretic text is reflected in the ESV’s attempt, wherever possible, to translate difficult Hebrew passages as they stand in the Masoretic text rather than resorting to emendations or to finding an alternative reading in the ancient versions.
In exceptional, difficult cases, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, the Latin Vulgate, and other sources were consulted to shed possible light on the text, or, if necessary, to support a divergence from the Masoretic text. Similarly, in a few difficult cases in the New Testament, the ESV has followed a Greek text different from the text given preference in the UBS/Nestle-Aland 27th edition.
The footnotes that accompany the ESV text inform the reader of textual variations and difficulties and show how these have been resolved by the ESV Translation Team. In addition to this, the footnotes indicate significant alternative readings and occasionally provide an explanation for technical terms or for a difficult reading in the text.
Throughout, the Translation Team has benefited greatly from the massive textual resources that have become readily available recently, from new insights into biblical laws and culture, and from current advances in Hebrew and Greek lexicography and grammatical understanding.
This hardly sounds like the work of men who are taking their orders from the Vatican. If Mr. Pinto would like to continue challenging the texts utilized by ESV Translation Committee, I suggest that he provide us with real evidence and real scholarship and do more than make mere assertions about the Vatican’s alleged supervisory involvement in the UBS. After all, if the UBS Greek New Testament is tainted by Roman Catholic scholarship why doesn’t it contain passages supporting the perpetual virginity of Mary, prayers to the saints, indulgences, purgatory and the primacy of the Pope? What’s the point of having supervisory oversight of the UBS if you can’t flex that supervisory power to smuggle those Roman Catholic dogmas into the text?
Here is something for you consider: conspiracy theorists, propagandists and fear mongers never have to provide real evidence to back up their assertions. All they have to do is make assertions and imply associations in order to cast doubt and suspicion on those with whom they disagree. But, that’s not scholarship. That’s what the Bible calls, “bearing false witness”.
More examples to come in my next article.
Christine Pack of Sola Sisters writes:
A recent article by Lighthouse Trails blog noted that a sermon by John MacArthur of Grace To You had rather favorably quoted Dallas Willard. This article, understandably, has gotten social media all atwitter, this idea that our beloved protector of truth (John MacArthur) who has been such a wonderful shepherd and guardian of his flock would suddenly go south on us. Could it be true?
Equal rights? Tolerance? Not in 2013 England. The Spectator magazine’s website has a thoughtful post detailing yet another demonstration of the state-enforced über-rights enjoyed by one particularly intolerant minority group:
You’re at home, enjoying a summery Saturday afternoon with the bees and nasturtiums on the patio, when the doorbell intrudes. You’re greeted by an impeccably courteous, fresh-faced police officer from the Norfolk Constabulary – ‘Dedicated to this neighbourhood’, according to their website – and he’s come to speak to you because there’s been a complaint.
Not, you understand, about the troubling number of burglaries, rising car thefts, incidences of property vandalism or madhouse music accompanying balmy barbeques. No, someone has reported you for sending them two gospel tracts by email, one entitled ‘Christ Can Cure – Good News for Gays’; and the other ‘Jesus Christ – the Saviour we all need’. Some people might have simply deleted them both and directed all further correspondence from you to ‘spam’, but these people got offended. Very offended. The allegation against you is that of ‘homophobic hate’.
The officer politely offers you a choice: you can either admit your guilt there and then, accepting an on-the-spot fine of £90. Or you can contest the allegation, provide a signed statement in your defence, after which it will be for a senior police officer to decide whether or not to refer your case to the Crown Prosecution Service.
Author and speaker Nancy Pearcey examines the liberal worldview that holds that a person’s sex at birth is merely arbitrary and not a scientific, biological fact.
California has just passed a new law saying school districts may not bar transgender students from same-sex settings, like men’s basketball teams or women’s locker rooms (Assembly Bill 1266). Opponents promptly submitted a referendum to overturn the law. But it will take more than the usual political activism to stop the momentum on what some are calling the next major drive for “equality.”
It will take a serious, sustained program of education in both scientific facts and real respect.
Every law has an implicit worldview, a set of assumptions that justifies it. The worldview implicit in the transgender movement is that our physical bodies have no particular value — that our biology is irrelevant to who we are as persons.
In a piece posted at LifeSite News, Hillary White examines “homosexualism.”
I have been asked recently “what is homosexualism?” I started using the term in my writing on these issues a few years ago when it became clear that we were dealing not with a group of people, but with a particular ideology that is often held by people who are not themselves homosexuals.
A few days ago in The Guardian, Peter Tatchell wrote a pretty good description not only of that ideology’s goals but its origins. This political ideology, often called “queer theory” by its proponents in academia, is what is being pushed, quite openly these days, by the “gay rights” movement. Despite what we are told all day by their collaborators in the mainstream media, from the six o’clock news to your favourite sit-com, this movement is not about “equal rights”. It is about re-writing the foundational concepts of our entire society. I predict that it will not be much longer before the pretense of “equality” is dropped, having done its work.