I’ve heard considerable discussion concerning political decisions, court verdicts, and society generally. Many Christians wonder where the country heads. That’s a simple answer: we’re slouching toward Gomorrah.
Why? Because a majority of people want it — promoting debauchery, drugs, immorality, greed, and rebellion against God; the 2010 decade will be known for its plunge into a cesspool of our own creation … and desire.
The 2010’s — Decade of Disgust
Not only do people want to wallow in the cesspool, they celebrate it, as Isaiah said:
What sorrow for those who drag their sins behind them with ropes made of lies … (Isaiah 5:18 NLT)
Lies in Hebrew implies vanity, emptiness, and falsehood; consider the lies, distortions, and falsehoods promoted, and often accepted, as true:
- Liberals’ big tent
- Heresy of liberal and progressive theology
- Myth of separation of church and state
- US not founded as a Christian nation
- Myth of the Clinton surplus
- Myth of stimulus and jobs created
- Myth of tolerance and tolerant atheism
We didn’t even add evolution, global warming and other pseudo-sciences which remain lacking of actual scientific evidence (using the scientific method).
All may be popular, but they’re still wrong — intended to deceive you. Anyone denying basic facts of reality lives in the Matrix of deception.
… who drag wickedness behind them like a cart!
Wickedness can translate as sin. Yuck! There’s a word to strike. We don’t want to be held accountable. Party on, dude! God isn’t looking (or caring); worse some believe God approves of their sin. But God changes not.
Wickedness? Well, open the paper — we not only tolerate it, society promotes debauchery and immorality; anyone making a stand against the filth we dwell in liberals label a blank-a-phobe.
You must remember when people personally attack you they’re not against you, but God. They seek verification whatever sin they’re trapped by God accepts. It matters not what legislation passes, what a court renders, what polls say, or what society approves of — none change reality, or the absolute authority of God’s Word.
People rebel against God, and since they can’t change God, they seek to change society and you, as if by getting approval of people, God changes His mind toward their debauchery.
Not a chance.
The Beginning — Curse of Liberal Theology
- The Bible isn’t God’s Word
- The Bible contains mistakes
- Ignoring parts of the Bible
- Jesus wasn’t authoritative
- The 10 commandments are only suggestions
Yes, liberal theology paves the path to hell.
Once you begin saying Paul didn’t mean what he wrote, the qualifications for elders aren’t for today, or this passage discussing sin we don’t have to follow, complete immorality follows; open the paper and look for yourself.
It’s time to call it what it is — liberal and progressive theology comes from the pit of hell. It’s made up garbage so people can continue to live in open rebellion against God, all while claiming to be religious.
I’ve more respect for hostile atheists than phony liberal and progressive Christians.
At least the atheist displays honesty — he wants to live as if God doesn’t exist; liberals and progressives share the atheist’s contempt for God, but seek to wear a Christian mask to hide the corruption and decay underneath.
All from corrupted liberal theology. Decay. Drifting.
The Scary Part
You must understand you can’t reason with radicals. They use value relativism where nothing can ever be wrong because right and wrong exist only as a person defines them.
Of course, nobody actually believes value-relativistic nonsense, a fact simply proven by saying you’re going to throw a brick through their car window, and go home and kick their puppy. They’ll immediately respond in horror, but hey, if that’s okay with you, their own value relativism says it’s acceptable.
Sadly they’ll immediately re-affirm — in spite of the previous point — their value relativism, simply because they wish it were true, leading to absurdities like “we live our lives intolerant only of those who don’t tolerate”. Yeah, and all Cretans are lairs too (the liar paradox).
Alinsky taught methods around a single idea: conflict. The more conflict, the better. Absurd? Of course. Research the Cloward-Piven Strategy, and understand many in Washington not only approve of Alinsky’s methods, they sat under him to learn, and taught the method to others.
It’s a base part of their character, explaining why the late 2000’s and 2010 decade has unfolded the way it has.
They lack passion for any specific cause — gay rights, global warming, worker wages, wedding cakes, flags, or anything else. No it’s much simpler: a naked power grab using methods from a book (“Rules for Radicals”) in which Alinsky admired Satan.
Two Methods Liberals Use to Survive Absurdity
The useful idiots on the left survive using two ideas: confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.
Confirmation bias makes the mistake seeing everything as proof of your idea. Consider evolution. We’re told evolution fails observation by moving at a snail pace — over billions of years.
Why (as Darwin himself asked), do we not find innumerable fossils in the earth?
The solution: punctured equilibrium. Normally evolution occurs so slowly we can’t observe it, but some time in the past, for some unknown reason, evolution raced so fast it didn’t have time to leave fossil evidence.
The lack of massive fossil evidence (as predicated) thus becomes proof transitional forms existed.
Why did this occur? No reason given, other than it must be to fit preconceived nonscientific ideas — confirmation bias.
Cognitive dissonance allows the same group to hold conflicting ideas at the same time. The puppy and value relativism problem we’ve already discussed.
The End Game
The radical liberal and progressive goal? Eliminate dissent. Eliminate free speech. Eliminate God (at least the orthodox one — the liberals and progressives god is acceptable). You can’t logically discuss with these people, first because they don’t posses logical thinking skills, and second because they don’t believe anything.
It’s Alinsky-ite conflict, using that conflict to grab power, and in the spirit of Orwell’s 1984, make God an un-person, wiped from history, speech, and (if possible), thought.
These are the people who inhabit politics and infest our churches.
Worse, liberals and progressives in the church learned from their cousins in leftist politics — using Saul Alinsky’s methods to grab power and silence the opposition (and remove God from the church if possible).
What? You’re in disbelief at what you just read — people want to remove God from church? What’s left, potlucks? Well, consider someone whose book “With or Without God: Why the way we live is more important than what we believe” Amazon’s page contains the following:
Envisioning a future in which the Christian church plays a viable and transformative role in shaping society, Gretta Vosper argues that if the church is to survive at all, the heart of faith must undergo a radical change. Vosper, founder of the Canadian Centre for Progressive Christianity and a minister in Toronto, believes that what will save the church is an emphasis on just and compassionate living-a new and wholly humanistic approach to religion.
Her blog has the subtitle “minister, author, atheist.”
She’s not the only one. “I’m a Presbyterian Minister Who Doesn’t Believe in God,” by John Shuck speaks similarly. On his blog he says:
Human beings do not have immortal souls nor will consciousness survive death. Thus there is no afterlife. There is no heaven, no hell, and no need for salvation from one realm to another.
I’ll defend their God-given right to believe whatever they want, and the liberty and freedom to speak whatever they want. But calling it Christian? When they openly admit they don’t accept God’s existence? That’s a problem. The church may argue over doctrine, but I’m sure everyone’s list contains number one: God exists.
I’ll never understand why an atheist would want to be a pastor.
So what’s the end-game? Far-left politics fused with religion using post-modern value-relativism Alinsky tactics, eliminating God from the last place He’s politically allowed to remain: Sunday morning.
It’s conflict and grabbing power, not any specific belief (value relativism and post-modern philosophy don’t allow absolute beliefs anyway). In case you deny facts, consider how offended people have become (almost overnight) over the confederate battle flag. What displayed for years overnight became so offensive people can’t stand it.
You’re left with one of two choices:
- Their value system is so weak they can be easily manipulated by the media, and lack the ability to think on their own.
- They don’t believe anything, and only use their causes to further the Alinsky end-game: conflict in effort to grab power using disruption and chaos.
Which is it?
Hey, That’s So Narrow!
Yep, Jesus said it was. If you’re on the path with many other people, you’ve got the wrong one. Christianity is hard, and you may not get a Lexus, an ice cream, or a pony, and reality exists whether you believe it or not; it’s impossible to have common ground with “Christians” who:
- Deny the virgin birth
- Deny the inerrancy of God’s Word
- Deny the authority of God’s Word
- Deny God exists
The only conclusion? Liberals and progressives must believe god lies, or they secretly live as closet atheists. Coming out seems popular today, so why don’t all atheists in the church admit their true self?
Wait a minute, I hear you say, nobody believes that, you’re making it up. Sadly, I’m not. Consider Bishop Spong. In his religion, by his own words:
- Theism, as a way of defining God, is dead. So most theological God-talk is today meaningless. A new way to speak of God must be found.
- Since God can no longer be conceived in theistic terms, it becomes nonsensical to seek to understand Jesus as the incarnation of the theistic deity. So the Christology of the ages is bankrupt.
- The biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense.
- The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ’s divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible.
- The miracle stories of the New Testament can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by an incarnate deity.
- The view of the cross as the sacrifice for the sins of the world is a barbarian idea based on primitive concepts of God and must be dismissed.
- Resurrection is an action of God. Jesus was raised into the meaning of God. It therefore cannot be a physical resuscitation occurring inside human history.
What does that gobble-gook say? Spong’s view …
- Denies the deity of Christ. (#2)
- Denies the virgin birth. (#4)
- Denies the creation. (#3)
- Denies the inerrancy of the Bible. (#2, #3, #4)
- Denies the atonement of the cross. (#6, #7)
- Denies the physical resurrection. (#7)
Does that connect at all to Christianity? Of course not. That’s liberal theology. It’s not minor disagreement over petty doctrine, it’s rejection of what makes Christianity … Christian.
Of course, others express confusion over the gospel’s definition; Jim Wallis claims social justice lies at the heart of the gospel.
What is social justice and the counterfeit gospel?
Social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice
Economic egalitarianism is a state of economic affairs in which equality of outcome has been manufactured for all the participants of a society. It is a founding principle of various forms of socialism, communalism and cooperative economic organization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_egalitarianism
Okay, that might not still be clear (it is liberalism after all), so allow the Center for Economic and Social Justice to provide their definition:
Social justice encompasses economic justice. … Within the system of economic justice as defined by Louis Kelso and Mortimer Adler, there are three essential and interdependent principles: The Principle of Participation, The Principle of Distribution, and The Principle of Harmony … The principle of participation describes how one makes “input” to the economic process in order to make a living … The principle of distribution defines the “output” or “out-take” rights of an economic system matched to each person’s labor and capital inputs … The principle of harmony encompasses the “feedback” or balancing principles required to detect distortions of either the input or output principles and to make whatever corrections are needed to restore a just and balanced economic order for all. http://www.cesj.org/thirdway/economicjustice-defined.htm
Really? That’s the heart of the gospel and critical to Christian faith? Let’s go to the booth for a review.
Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures … (1 Corinthians 15:1–4 NKJV)
Paul writes explicitly defining the gospel. He also warned the Galatians about re-defining what he so clearly stated.
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel; Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1)
The translation can be a bit confusing as they used “another” twice; Greek uses multiple words which became translated “another”:
- ”Unto another gospel” = heteros (Strongs G2087)
- “Which is not another” = allos (Strongs G243)
Vines Expository Dictionary (from blueletterbible.org) explains the difference.
Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes “another of the same sort;” heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes “another of a different sort.”
It reads simpler in the New Living Translation.
I am shocked that you are turning away so soon from God, who called you to himself through the loving mercy of Christ. You are following a different way that pretends to be the Good News but is not the Good News at all. You are being fooled by those who deliberately twist the truth concerning Christ.
Paul defines the gospel, and warns against changing it; no mention of social justice at all. So either Paul is right, or social justice warriors (SJW) are. You choose; liberal theology and its open rebellion against God infests our churches, so you must take a stand.
Liberal theology can not be reconciled with the Bible. Period. Where does it come from? Post-modern philosophy, which simply holds no absolute truth exists (except for the one absolute no absolute truth exists) — value relativism, or where everyone does what is right in their eyes (yep, we return to cognitive dissonance and liars paradox).
I know, I know, you’re thinking, wait a minute, isn’t God’s Word absolute? Not if you hold liberal theology stemming from post-modern philosophy. Here’s a quote from Christianity Today:
The third kind of emerging postmodernity attracts all the attention. Some have chosen to minister as postmoderns. That is, they embrace the idea that we cannot know absolute truth, or, at least, that we cannot know truth absolutely. They speak of the end of metanarratives and the importance of social location in shaping one’s view of truth.
I know I’ll receive hate-mail over this (people don’t like to have their mask ripped off so everyone can see their true self). Liberal theology paves the path to hell; you must recognize it. Absolute truth does exist, and we can know it.
The Coming Church Split
It’s painfully obvious a church split will soon be upon us — traditional, orthodox Christians, and the post-modern liberal progressive social justice warriors (SJW).
When people think of church and Christianity, it’s the first group they think of. Atheists as pastors most people don’t think could exist together.
Thus, Bible-believing people will migrate to churches holding the Bible as God’s inerrant Word, and atheists and namby-pamby people migrate to churches pastored by atheists, who would rather promote social justice than God and His Word.
Social justice remains a tragic distraction away from God’s gospel, but it’s not new (Satan holds very few new tools, he continues using old ones — after all, they still work). CS Lewis warned about it in “The Screwtape Letters.”
On the other hand we do want, and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything — even to social justice. The thing to do is get a man at first to value social justice as a thing which the Enemy demands, and work him on to the stage at which he values Christianity because it may produce social justice. … I have found a passage in a Christian writer where he recommends his own version of Christianity on the ground that “only such a faith can outlast the death of old cultures and new civilizations.” You see the little rift? “Believe this, not because it is true, but for some other reason”. That’s the game. (“The Screwtape Letters” page 119–120)
Does that sound like the liberal and progressive Christianity you hear about? God wants social justice, and let’s be seeker-friendly and not hurt anyones feelings with sin, accountability, and hell.
Potluck at 5PM tonight!
To most people that’s obvious (unless you’re a post-modern liberal). If I say the sky is red, and you say it’s orange, at least one of us is wrong (maybe both), but we can’t both be right. Unless, of course, you hold liberal value relativism, where everyone does what is right in their own eyes.
Value relativists can allow both of us to hold our own “truth” through a mixed-up application of post-modern philosophy, doublethink, cognitive dissonance, and confirmation bias.
All logical errors demonstrating a lack of critical thinking skills.
The Good Part
Popular opinion never determines truth. Truth is truth, and God’s Word is God’s Word no matter what polls say.
Stand firm on the rock of God’s Word (it won’t change). It doesn’t matter if you’re standing alone, because you’re still right — truth isn’t found by polling, popular opinion, Supreme Court decisions, or politicians — only God’s Word.
After all, it’s His sandbox.
Where does this leave us? Sadly, since the country wants to slouch toward Gomarrah, you can’t do much about it. Let it go. I’ve watched trends and politics for over 30 years, and the trends all move downward. Sure, the pace accelerated recently, but only the speed of change; the destination remains the same.
What you can (and must) do is simple:
- Be prepared
- Prepare others
Your personal responsibility comes first. You must be prepared. The history of the church displays almost constant persecution since its inception two thousand years ago; the United States sticks out as an anomaly in those centuries.
But don’t count on it to continue. As the country continues to abandon God and openly rebel against Him, expect to be more and more nonpolitically correct.
To thrive in a hostile environment, you must be prepared. Wimpy namby-pamby Christians relying on their pastor’s weekly spoon feeding lack the energy necessary to engage with the vigor required.
It’s time to get off the bench and get engaged. Your pastor exists as nothing more than a resource for you to use in your own study. If your strategy to survive at 3AM when the manure hits the rotating air mover relies on him, you’ll be guaranteed to be a casualty.
Liberal theology can only take hold where its victims don’t recognize the truth. Where victims don’t study the Bible for themselves. Where the pastor holds the task of weekly spoon-feedings, and pew-warmers starve the remainder of the week.
In short, liberal theology infests churches where (like society) they want to reject God.
Second, be the watcher on the wall as Ezekiel. Warn others. Don’t try and change society, it’s hopelessly past the point of know return (yes, the know is intentional. They know where they’re headed).
If I warn the wicked, saying, ‘You are under the penalty of death,’ but you fail to deliver the warning, they will die in their sins. And I will hold you responsible for their deaths. (Ezekiel 3:18 NLT)
When I stand before God, I don’t want Him saying He provided me with knowledge and a platform to speak on, and I failed to use it. So I will continue to speak, even when it’s not popular (“speak truth to power”).
Every year I file tax returns for the business, and frankly the publishing company doesn’t perform very well (my books don’t appear on the New York Times list). It’s a yearly decision — how long to continue?
Perhaps I’ve overly focused on a single area: publishing. I’ve come to the conclusion if He provides the platform to speak on, and the words to say, I’ll speak whenever, wherever, and whatever He says.
It’s not always popular, and like Jeremiah I often weary of it. Nobody wants to listen; people seek touchy-feely “Christianity” without any hard parts. But that’s not the message.
Then I said, I will not make mention of him, nor speak any more in his name. But his word was in mine heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I could not refrain. (Jeremiah 20:9)
I won’t sit down, I won’t shut up, and I won’t bow down at the altar of political correctness.
… Because it’s 2:59AM (and 57 seconds)