Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Free Love Christians

Apparently my Dad is unchristian and unloving because he refuses to compromise God's Word and he actually names the names of those who do compromise. Reference the AiG article here: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2011/03/22/kicked-out-homeschool-conferences

Some Christians today are like the hippies of 50 years ago who used the word “love” to justify their fornications and sins against the word of God. The hippie culture is often pictured as a group of drug-addicted, fornicating drunks whose catchphrase “make love, not war” gave their movement a false sense of piety. But to those who know a handful of Bible verses taught to Sunday school children, their sins are as grievous as the war crimes they claimed to oppose. Just the same, these Christians like to justify their disobedience to the Bible by saying “we are supposed to love each other”. Oh, but aren't these hippie Christians godly? (I am speaking sarcastically). I mean, they actually quote John 13:35. Please note: their judgment is coming according to Proverbs 1:26.

I'll give you another hippie catchphrase: “what would Jesus do?”. Apparently, the hippie Christian culture has never heard of the following verses: John 2:15, John 6:66, John 7:7, John 7:43, John 8:44, John 8:47, John 10:19, etc. But I suppose many are too lazy to look up those verses and read it for themselves. If you do, please take notice that Jesus statements and actions are towards the religious leaders of His day. For more scathing rebukes from Jesus against religious leaders, read Matthew 23. The problem with the modern effeminate Christian is that he claims to do what Jesus would do and “love” everybody, but he hasn't read the Bible very carefully and he certainly isn't following Christ. The above are a small set of things Jesus did that the hippie Christian crowd would never follow.

These sorts of Christians are more interested in making love, then fighting the good fight of faith (1 Tim. 6:12) or standing against the wiles of the devil (Eph. 6:11) or having done all, to stand (Eph. 6:13). They would rather fornicate their idols of fame, wealth, and ecumenicalism then to read, believe, and obey the word of God.

You say, “Oh, but the Apostle Paul would never stoop to such low tactics as name calling or naming names.” Paul calls someone a child of the devil in Acts 13:10. Paul calls out Demas by name in 2 Tim. 4:10 and a couple others in 1 Tim. 1:19-20 and 2 Tim. 2:17-18 and 2 Tim. 4:14-15. Paul uses the derogatory term “dogs” in Phil. 3:2. Paul uses what some would call prejudice in Titus 1:12-13. God has always raised up a man to call sin for what it is. For every Ahab, there is a fiery Elijah. For every Herod, there is a stubborn John the Baptist. For other Biblical examples of God's people name calling and naming names, see: 2 Pet. 2:15, 3 John 9, Jude 11, Rev. 2:2,14, just to name a few.

The point is not to justify purposeful meanness in preaching. After all, Paul did say in Romans 12:18, “If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.” And in 2 Corinthians 10:1, "Now I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ".  It is right and Biblical to get along with folks, but NOT at the expense of preaching the truth! Don't forget this was the same guy who wrote the statements mentioned in the previous paragraph. We shouldn't purposely try to cause problems, but we shouldn't be afraid to stand firmly on the Word of God and to call out those who would harm the body of Christ.  We preach the word of God not only with meekness and gentleness, but also with the cunning boldness of a good soldier of Jesus Christ.


Don't be a free love Christian! Don't excuse sin and unbelief in the name of love. First read, then believe, then obey every word of the Bible. Sometimes it is necessary to name the apostates and call out the perverseness of their sin. It doesn't mean we don't love. This is true love, for loving God and loving God's words comes first (Matt. 22:37-38). May God raise up more men who will preach God's words with passion and conviction without backing down.

John 7:7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.

51 comments:

WeirdHamster said...

I like this.

Brenda said...

You are so right brother! God bless you as you stand up for the truth!

jib said...

awesome. you can check out my contribution to the authority of scripture by clicking on my name

thebloviatinghammerhead said...

Amen and amen!

Brenda said...

You are so right brother!
God bless you as you proclaim the truth!

jib said...

make sure you click on mommy's musings note that it was written before this controversy and before many of the critiques of Rob Bell's new book also

Jessica said...

Someone once called me out on a scriptural post by calling it inflammatory. And they said "Jesus was controversial, but never inflammatory".


And I had to say (kindly), that I might have to disagree with that. Jesus called the religious leaders names! (Silly brood of vipers) And he constantly chose his actions carefully JUST to challenge their hypocrisy and traditions.

Elizabeth said...

Thanks so much for this post blog!!!!!!!!! This Is what it is all about!

Dan said...

U da man! Proud of my computer science grad!!!

opalina124 said...

This is excellent - so very true. Thank you for your uncompromising position.

John Galt said...

I never questioned what I was taught about the Scriptures.

Until recently ~

I was challenged by some atheists to review some evolutionist materials and some historical data...

I agreed, after all, a Christian is sure of his salvation and is not afraid of information.

But so far - not only am I beginning to doubt Christianity, but whether Jesus existed at all, as an historical figure...

Daughter of Issachar said...

“I believe that pluralistic secularism, in the long run, is a more deadly poison than straightforward persecution” -Francis Schaeffer-

Leah said...

Thanks for writing Nathan. Funny, I wrote on my blog just yesterday on the same topic.

http://leahslabyrinth.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/christians-shouldnt-judge/

It's unbelievable how many Christians are called unloving and vicious or judgmental for simply pointing out error!

God Bless,

Leah Smith

ssmurray5 said...

Very well said. Thank you!

javamama said...

Great post! Your words speak truth.

Household Believer said...

One of the comments above mentions Francis Schaeffer, implying that Dr. Schaeffer would agree with the views posted here. You might be interested to learn that Dr. Schaeffer (as with many other sincere Bible-believing Christians) was open to the possibility of an old earth. In addition, he would never personally criticize and level false charges against another professing believer. His words and writings were always characterized by grace, not arrogance and condescension.

Pebblekeeper ~ Angie said...

Thank you for Truth.

Sue Ann said...

Thank you (and thank your dad) for standing up for biblical truth when it's become politically incorrect....in Christian circles...and among the folks we had always considered "cream of the crop"...homeschoolers. Hold the torch high! We are behind you!

Croy8forJesus said...

amen:)

Vintage Indie said...

Spiritual food for my morning. Thank you and what an awesome way to support your father, but most importantly stand up for the Word of God.

jib said...

John Galt

please read Total Turth by Nancy Pearcy, who studied under Schaffer by the way, and it might give you some better insight into the fact value split that comes into play with this and other topics. We as believers have allowed ourselves to put our faith in the realm of values and truth then becomes no longer knowable in any realm but that which can be seen and observed. Uncompromising Faith by Michael Craven is a bit easier read than Nancy Pearcy and addresses some of the same issues although not quite as indepth as Pearcy. Some of my blogs at mommyjib.blogspot.com address some of these issues as well

jib said...

Household believer

I don't get the impression of arrogance when I read anything that Ken Hamm writes. I have never had the pleaseure of meeting the man or hearing him speak but others whom I personally know have and say he is quite down to earth and humble.

We as believers need to stop with this lovey dovey wishy washy attitude toward error that is creeping into the church. Christ was not especially nice to the religious leaders of his day because they were leading the folk of God far from God. Those who are called to teach and be watchmen on the walls have an enormous responsibility. If they lead people astray or fail to warn of error and people suffer because of this God is going to hold them responsible as well.

We are called to be salt not sugar. Salt can be rather irritating and unpleasant on an open wound. Our culture and our churches have gaping wounds at the moment. Yes we can talk in a "not arrogant" attitude but it is my general experience that when you are talking to people who don't want to hear what you have to say you could be treacly sweet and they would still call you arrogant

Matthew said...

Seriously?

You're comparing an enclave of Young Earth Creationist Homeschoolers to Hippies?

And there are people here taking you seriously?

Have you ever been evaluated for signs of mental deficiency or illness Nathan? Your persecution complex combined with your delusions of adequacy are rather pathetic to see.

J.D. fisher said...

First read, then believe, then obey every word of the Bible.

Amean! Let's all start our obeying with Numbers 31:17-18:

"Slay, therefore, every male child and every woman who has had intercourse with a man. But you may spare and keep for yourselves all girls who had no intercourse with a man."

Yay!

Nathan Ham said...

Matthew, I am criticizing any christian who uses John 13:35 to justify why they don't want to hear the truth.

J.D., your ignorance of the Bible is obvious. I am not part of an Old Testament physical kingdom. I am part of a spiritual body whose fight is spiritual and against the devil, not flesh and blood. 2 Timothy 2:15 commands me to rightly divide the word. There is a difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament. You can tell that because one is called "old" and the other is called "new". Doesn't mean the Old is irrelevant though...

Three Ninjas said...

Thank you for pointing out Titus 1:12-13.

Love,

Every atheist on the internet

Aaron said...

Nathan,

I intend the below as genuine questions.

Is there a difference between the hermeneutics you apply to the first chapters of Genesis and those you apply to Numbers 31? Can you explain how and to what degree one set of passages is to be taken with a literal, face-value interpretation and which is to be taken in the metaphorical context of our spiritual fight?

Thanks!

Aaron

Human Ape said...

Mr. Ham, you wrote "I have a passion to study the Bible and teach it to others."

Translation:

You have a passion to study the Bible and infect others with your disease.

Would your father be Ken Ham? I once saw a video of him teaching innocent gullible children to hate science. Apparently you're one of his victims.

http://darwinkilledgod.blogspot.com/

d914ecf4-5657-11e0-a916-000bcdcb8a73 said...

I'm a bit puzzled. I thought they replaced Mr. Ham with Jonathan Sarfati who is just as solidly a Bible believing Christian as Mr. Ham - they are both staunch defenders of Genesis meaning a literal 6, 24-hour days.

So is Dr. Sarfati one of the "hippie Christians" who is denying scripture while "fornicate their idols of fame, wealth, and ecumenicalism then to read, believe, and obey the word of God"?

I don't know either of them personally, but as far as I can tell they are both in almost total agreement about the Bible and Genesis' meaning.

There must be something else going on here, because if Dr. Sarfati is fornicating to idols, then so must Mr. Ham since they so strongly agree with each other.

I hadn't heard of this spat until now, so maybe I'm missing something.

d914ecf4-5657-11e0-a916-000bcdcb8a73 said...

I don't know why my comment is showing up with a bunch of crazy numbers at the top.

That should be Gene Griffin. Sorry everyone.

J.D. fisher said...

J.D., your ignorance of the Bible is obvious. I am not part of an Old Testament physical kingdom. I am part of a spiritual body whose fight is spiritual and against the devil, not flesh and blood.

Here we go. Sound the retreat!

Nathan Ham said...

Aaron, in answer to your question, we are not to interpret the Bible, we are to let the Bible interpret itself. 2 Peter 1:20 says "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." In other words, it doesn't matter what I think or what I think the Scriptures are saying. It matters what the Scriptures themselves actually say. The law was given on Mt. Sinai to the nation of Israel, the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The statements in Numbers about killing the immoral and idolaters are completely literal, but it was not commanded to me, a New Testament christian who is a spiritual seed of Abraham, not the physical seed. Genesis and Numbers are 100% literal, but the historical events in the Garden of Eden and God's commandments to Israelites are 2 different things. It is a very involved and detailed answer, but the children's sunday school song "every promise in the book is mine" is not true. Again, you've got to rightly divide (2 Tim. 2:15). Those who say I don't obey every verse in the Bible and bring up Numbers 31 as an example are ignorant and wouldn't apply the same logic to any other discipline. It would be like saying that I am inconsistent because I don't obey Amos 4:4, which obviously they would have taken out of context to accuse me of disobedience or inconsistency. Very brief version of a really long answer. Let the Scriptures interpret itself and take the verse in the context it was written to whom it was written, comparing with the rest of Scripture (1 Cor. 2:13). Of course, you'd have to actually study and know the Bible to do that.

BJR said...

It is encouraging to know that there are still some Christians out there willing to stand-up for scripture and your dad is a God-ordained leader on this point. We need many more like him if we are to even have a chance to bring America back to greatness.

I first saw your dad at a homeschool conference (our first one ever) and his talks helped me become a better Christian, Husband, and Father. I downloaded some of his talks from sermonaudio after that time and have probably listened to them 50 or more times driving to work!

Jessica S. said...

Amen!!

d914ecf4-5657-11e0-a916-000bcdcb8a73 said...

Um, the more I find out about this the less I like it. Unless something new comes to light, I believe I'm going to cancel my subscription with AiG.

This convention took out one Creation speaker (Ham) and put in another one (Sarfati) because they didn't like the attitude of Ham.

Because of this, Ham calls them fornicators, idolaters, "free love" Christians, and rejecting the Bible?

That doesn't even seem close to reasonable! It appears that Ken Ham got his feelings hurt and lashed out with a rather vile set of accusations (and Nathan joined him).

I don't want to support that sort of organization.

d914ecf4-5657-11e0-a916-000bcdcb8a73 said...

And, again, my sorrys for the garbled name mess. I tried fixing it on OpenID, and it looks fien on all the other places I comment.

- Gene Griffin

Joel Martin said...

Nathan, it is fascinating that you picked 2 Pet 1:20 to prove that the Bible is not subject to interpretation. The KJV translation you cite leaves open two (literal) interpretations about who is interpreting and what is being interpreted.

The first is that the prophecies as written in the Bible are not subject to the reader's interpretation. This is the approach favored by the NASB translators: "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,"

The second is that the prophecies as revealed to the prophet were not subject to the prophet's interpretation. This is the approach favored by the NIV translators: "Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things."

Even if you are of the camp that rejects all English translation apart from the KJV, that single KVJ verse taken out of context could be interpreted either way. When I read both 20 and 21 together the most literal and obvious "interpretation" to me is the latter.

And by the way, you have clearly made your own interpretation of the passage by assuming that the use of the word "prophecy" is a synecdoche (part used to refer to the whole) referring to the entire Bible.

Joel Martin said...

The detailed translation note for 2 Pet 1:20 in the New English Translation does a much better job detailing the issues in interpreting and translating that verse than I can.

Scroll down to note #68 on this page:
http://net.bible.org/#!bible/2+Peter+1:20

The note starts with "Verse 20 is variously interpreted."

It is interesting that this very same verse has been used by Catholic scholarship to show that scripture interpretation must be handed down by the Church. I think the NET note makes a solid argument for why neither that view nor the "scripture interpreting scripture" view are the best interpretations for that verse.

Susie said...

I homeschooled my children and we belonged to two homeschool associations. I guess I missed all the pot parties and fornicating.

J.D. fisher said...

Aaron, in answer to your question, we are not to interpret the Bible, we are to let the Bible interpret itself.

It's sad that people will find meaning in this idiotic response, and even sadder that anyone could type such a meaningless statement. It is low-minded allegory and verbal prestidigitation.

The book shall interpret itself? Who is such a credulous nitwit as to think this is some kind of profound statement?

If you're going to tell believers to obey statements cobbled together by human writers over the course of 2,000 years, then just man-up and say it.

However, if you're going to say that and then, when challenged, sink back into oh, I'm not talking about the *physical* world or proclaim complete nuttery like a book should interpret itself, don't be surprised if someday someone levels the charge that YOU are a hippie.

If escapism is being a free-love hippie, then EVERY christian is a free-love hippie.

Nathan Ham said...

Um, I don't know how much simpler I can make this. It is the author of the book that can explain what he meant by a certain statement. External analysis is nothing but subjective guesswork. Ultimately, only the author of the book can tell you exactly what he meant. You have been ingrained that the "I think" of news commentators actually means something. Romans 11:34, "For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?"

Joel Martin said...

J. D., unless your point is purely self-catharsis, you would probably get more mileage by using genuine argument rather than ad hominem attacks (name-calling).

Numbers 31 is not a particular good passage to use if you are trying to argue against taking the Bible too literally. Those imperatives were for Israel at a specific time in history. Almost nobody argues that they apply directly to Israel at a later point in history, let alone that they apply to Christians.

If you are going to attack Biblical literalism, there are many passages in both the Old and New Testaments for which interpretation varies greatly even among the more strict literalist camps of Christendom.

---

The phrase "scripture interprets scripture" can be traced back to writings of Martin Luther during the protestant reformation. It grew out of the Sola Scriptura creed of early reformers. Sola Scriptura was a rejection of the Roman Catholic church as the sole arbiter of meaning in the Bible. Instead, the basic and most important truths of the Bible can be understood from the Bible alone.

The idea that basic truths of the Bible can be understood from the Bible itself is not that controversial (except to the Catholic church structure of the day that was addicted to control and indulgences/money). You don't have to believe that the Bible is unique to agree with that.

Nobody argues that to understand the primary/basic story in Homer's Odyssey you have to consult commentaries or experts. Pick an arbitrary sentence out of the Odyssey and its interpretation might be quite difficult out of context. But other sentences will "interpret" the meaning of that sentence.

But there is richness, fullness, subtlety, nuance, complexity and layers of meaning in the Bible that aren't necessarily fully captured in the Bible alone (which is true of all good books). Understanding/interpretation of the full richness of the text can be deepened or even changed by: reading a commentary, studying the history, politics, culture and geography of the events described, visiting the geographic setting, learning the original languages and reading the text in those languages, etc, etc.

Among the large numbers of Christians in the world who believe that the Bible is uniquely inspired by God (myself included), there is a fairly small minority that believe that 100% of all the truth in every verse of the Bible can be understood/interpreted by the Bible alone with no need to any outside knowledge. That belief tends to go hand in hand with the belief that the King James Bible is the only valid English translation of the Bible (or worse the idea that the KJV is the only inspired version at all).

martycaruthers said...

I do not know any of you wwho have posted on this site, but there is something that has troubled me for sometime so here it goes and I am open to here your responses.
Pride in what you think you know as fact can lead to idolatry. Your faith can not revolve around Creationism or Church Disciline. One's faith needs to revolve around repentance and obeidiance. We need to be careful not to cause others to stumble regardless if we think we are in the right. Yes Christ did call out others, but he was without sin. Unlike you and I who's righteousness is as filthy rags. I do not have to prove what I believe or disprove what you believe to feel superior and that is what I feel is happening in many situations such as this.

jib said...

in reading many of the posts I have come to the conclusion that we suffer in the church from a lack of belief in the authority of God's word-which is pretty much what AIG is about more than anything. We also suffer from to much wishy washiness of the faith because we are not grounded in God's word.

Whether another young earth creationists was invited to GHC is beside the point. AIG's main focus is actually the authority of God's word. They do focus on young earth and creationism because those are two obvious areas in which the authority of God's word has been compromised and therefore the easiest to point out. There are however a plethora of other topics in which the authority of God's word is slowly being undermined

Regarding Nathan's post-we also seem to be under the impression that as Christians we are never to be critical of others because that would be "unloving". Christ had some pretty harsh things to say to the religious leaders of the day because they were leading the people further from God rather than closer to God. While it is true He was without sin that does not mean we accept everything that comes down the pike and that we don't speak out against it. Those who hold themselves out as teachers have a much higher accountability before God for their words and teachings than the rest of us. Those who are called to be watcher's on the wall and warn others are also held to a higher standard. Do you not realize that if you are called to warn others of deception and you fail to do so that you are guilty of their failures also? Paul was certainly not sinless and yet he got in PEter's face about the error Peter was commiting with the Judiazers. Paul names names several times throughout multiple epistles of those who were false teachers and discussed how their teaching was false.

As to the moral issues that were brought up-it isn't the home school people or even Christians who are involved. It is the attitude that underlies those moral issues that seems to be invading the church and Christianity in general.

We are called to be salt not sugar. We have large gaping wounds in the church and society. What happens when salt hits a wound? it hurts but it also cleanses and perseves. Sugar does nothing for the large gaping wound. Let us not love people right into hell because we are too afraid to tell them they are wrong for fear of offending them.

martycaruthers said...

First of all yes we can confront others who are straying from the truth. The venue and the motivation is also important in how we go about this and this is in fact the arguement of the home school convention committee. Mr. Ham did not follow what he has even asked of others in regards to debate. He asked it be done privately yet he himself did not do that. I do not disagree with his theology at all I disagree with his method which leads to hurt feelings and relationships which are damaging and can cause others to stumble. I do not know his motivation perhaps it is just or maybe it is for gain on his part only God knows. I sometimes have to question my own motivation and rethink things I believe that this is a good time hor AIG to do the same. AIG can and never will prove creation to everyone only God himself through the HOLY SPIRIT can do that.

jib said...

actually Marty that is not true. If you had read Mr Ham's blog, the owner of GHC WAS sent a note and they did try to call but he refused to talk with Ken and the other person from AIG that called.

jib said...

Ken Ham not Nathan btw

martycaruthers said...

jib, I beg your pardon. Ken Ham does in fact as stated on his own page states that he does not wish to aire arguements in public for all the world to see. Let's not make excuses for such behavior and try to jusitfy him on this premise because it simply holds no weight whatsoever.

jib said...

There is nothing to make an excuse for with Mr Ham's behavior. You appear to be under the impression that he did not approach the GHC people privately when in point of fact there were several attempts to contact them before Ken Ham went public with the email. They were also told that there would be a public posting of the information. He did post the types of attempts at contact as well as who made the attempts at contact on his facebook page-open to anyone as this same issue was brought up on his facebook page and addressed at that time. I would encourage you to try to find that information-it may be difficult as it is several days back.

Being a Christian does not mean you somehow forfeit being able to defend yourself in a public forum especially when false accusations have been made against you. I beg to differ that this could be construed as arguing. The actions of GHC, since they appear to have made false accusations in writing and perhaps verbally, would be libel and slander in the secular forum and false witness in a faith forum. The company continued to advertise for several days after uninviting him that he was speaking at the convention which is false advertising.

Scott said...

Nathan, you have to make sure the messages you state are tempered with love and affection. Even Jesus knew His earthly desire was never to supercede his heavenly Father's supernatural calling on His life. Jesus knew his earthly existence was to rightly divide with the sword of the Spirit. His name is Jehovah- see, Nathan the reason Jesus knew that His earthly decisions were not to compromise the truth that extended of His very (divine) nature. One of Jesus' strengths was He knew exactly for the reason(s) He made every decision. The reason for this was Jesus knew that scriptures without looking for one verse to validate when He was saying something to someone. Jesus did not go around wanting to know if His steps/words were what he should have said-- Jesus simply knew that because His earthly responsibility was to be sensitive to the needs of the people the Spirit of God directed Him towards. Not one word that came out of His mouth was to condemn the people He was trying to build up trust with. So many Christians are asking Jesus to save them but even Jesus knew that without faith (to believe in the blessings His Word speaks about) a person can do nothing to bring any further understanding of what the scriptures teach... I hope you have a blessed day, Nathan...

-Scott

Rae Jones said...

This is exactly the kind of crap that will bring about the end of civilization and the world. And not in the good way you're hoping for. I'll never understand how people can rant and spew hate but dress it in church clothes and call it salvation. I'm guessing you feel Jesus was overly tolerant when he saved Mary Magdalen...