The World Conquered

If Only We Were Sinners

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 15:50:00 +0000

It happens every election cycle. The candidates ascend to prominence while the public lays out their personal volume of Codes and Ethics alongside a microscope. With a disciplined, competent, well-honed and unbiased eye, we scrutinize each decision, past or present, and with the deepest humanitarian sentiment we cast our vote for that man or woman who will surely exude every moral quality necessary for the well-being and advancement of our society. After all, are these candidates indeed our Public Servants? Ought we hold them as well as ourselves accountable to the highest of standards ?

Wait a minute…what did I just write? Accountable to standards? Both myself and the candidates who run for office; accountable to standards? Well, that begs the question, “What are those standards?”

At one time that question would have evoked contemplation unless the person answering was sufficiently prudent. I’m afraid that time has long passed. The answer today from most is off-the-cuff, ill advised and (dare I say) naïve. Now naïveté may have its charm in certain areas but does not serve well in regards to how we govern ourselves.

Wait a minute…I did it again. Govern ourselves? Are we not free to think and act as we please? We will grant that actions have consequences and so we maintain civility in general. But if someone dares to suggest that we think differently, well, that private vault is a tough one to crack. To say “govern ourselves” implies that we ourselves are the standard. Our Constitution prefers self-government above the dictates of tyrants and assumes an objective standard, but prejudice and selfish subjectivity rule our day. So, many readily assimilate the mantras of self esteem and human autonomous potential (Found even in our Christian pulpits!) which is detrimental, not beneficial. How so? We are prone to an inveterate disdain for an objective transcendence which limits our autonomy. Thus, even if one should call this limiting agency “God” the disdain remains.

Now that I have so boldly written, may I reintroduce my title? If only we were sinners. Why should I desire such a thing? I find one thing profoundly absent in general daily conversation; a theological basis for our reason. R.J. Rushdoony has termed it “Doctrine For All Of Life”. Now I’m not calling for “Doony-ism” but he makes the point clear: we are subservient beings in the most positive sense and have an obligation to maintain this doctrine for the benefit of ourselves and each other. It is my personal observation of an ever-increasing vengeful scorn for sound theology. We speak of God and the bible but a god of our own making makes us idolators. Rushdoony defines this: “The mainstream of Western civilization is thus apparent, the desire to control and change others as the essence of true power. This lust for power, the pathology of all fallen men, is common to cultures all over the world. It is an expression of man’s original sin, his desire to be as God, knowing or determining for himself what constitutes good and evil.” The Death of Meaning pg. 92

This is our sin expressed in innumerable ways and thoughts. So, returning to our election theme, “Lets return America to greatness!” is the cry of the Politician and supposed desire of our general public yet, without a sound theological foundation, what could this possibly mean? As proficient syncretists, we absorb every influence around us and form them into an ever-changing philosophy. So how can we elect one who is above reproach and how can they rightly govern when there are vague and changing standards? Clever quips and cliché cannot replace a theological framework which delimits one’s political status and curbs a progressive apathy in the general population.

If only we were sinners. I recall the character Fletcher Reede in the Jim Carey movie Liar, Liar. In court, the judge threatens to hold Reede (Carey) in contempt. Reede’s classic response was “I hold myself in contempt! Why should you be any different?” Being forced to tell the truth, Reede had no other option than to see himself for what he was. Todays Self-Esteem emphasis will not allow for such. True, Reede was a scoundrel who needed to be taught a lesson. Not us, though. Just read Facebook and you’ll see what we think of ourselves. And so I once again ponder that haunting question: Since I am so amazing and full of potential for greatness, for what do I need a crucified and risen Savior? If only we were sinners.

From My Own Little Corner…

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:40:00 +0000

“In my own little corner in my own little chair...” Though shortly before my time, I recall the Rogers & Hammerstein production of Cinderella with Julie Andrews and the song In My Own Little Corner. To a passerby peeping through her window, Cinderella expressed fanciful pipedreams. She had no earthly reason to think she would ever become any of the things of which she sang. Likewise, from My Own Little Corner, the world will more than likely scoff rather than open its arms to me should I ever dream of becoming a Norwegian Princess or an Opinion Shaper.

Opinion Shaper. That's the designated title I supposedly bear. I'll state right up front my scepticism regarding my own opinion let alone surmise I may sway someone else's, but with the task before me, I proceed.

My premise shall be that all opinion is derived and contingent.

Opinion is derived. The polluted rains of our forebears fill our own tainted thought-pool and we expect the product to be pristine springs. Opinion is contingent. By Providence or Preference, seeming random events and influence planted in our preconditioned soil produces that which sways us in unfathomable and incalculable ways. However, everyone believes themselves to be right.

I'm sure we've all heard the adage “Opinions are like armpits; everyone has them.” Yet, this truism fails regarding a person's competent, sure-founded erudition while their own armpits may indeed stink. It is proper, sensible and beneficial for us to trace that person's development and established credentials, leading us to perhaps not visit the auto mechanic when our body exhibits signs of needing neurosurgery. Thus qualified opinion is derived from and contingent upon quality of training, either formal or informal, the person's mental capacity and other influences to be defined later.

A truth, though, remains inherent in man to which we all agree: No one is perfect. Both mechanic and neurosurgeon make mistakes. Why do humans possess and exhibit flaws and what is to be done, if anything? Speculation on this question has proved volatile while creating lucrative professions in Psychiatry, Psychology, Psychotherapy etc. To merely consign the question as incontrovertible shortsightedly diminishes its relevancy when it ought to hold prominence. As a Christian, my answer to “Why” is decidedly derived and contingent, but this opinion is also viewed as a Cinderella flight of fancy.

Once popular in the 19^th century, Freethought Societies are re-emerging in America. FreeThought boasts that it is “unrestrained by deference to authority, tradition, or established belief, especially in matters of religion.” [Dictionary.com]

“Unrestrained” as though free from previously derived and contingent notions?

This is wonderfully elusive to them as well. It is also observed that truth is not based on popularity or pragmatism so their self-proclaimed “unrestraint” leads only to more erroneous opinion.

To whom shall I turn for help on things of such magnitude? Shall I give ear to modern entertainers who philosophize and pontificate from their platform of public popularity (as though this were qualification to speak) while leading base, degenerate lives? Shall I join in revering the Greeks as the greatest of thinkers and applaud what they have passed on, even when it has been shown to be divergent from Christian thought? History has exposed what has been valid or invalid reasoning proving that opinion is not set in a vacuum.

Shall I, from My Own Little Corner, presume myself capable of tracing Philosophy from contemporary to ancient? One may never be able to extricate himself when once entering the labyrinth of Topic and Opinion. I contend there are basic few major tenets we hold that drive, shape and color the basic realms of life: Home, Vocation, Government, Religion and History, for example, yet even these are ever-subject to sceptical, capricious amendment producing societal instability. My, how we applaud such scepticism. May I say, a degenerated philosophy born from degenerated theology produces all manner of horrific opinion and act.

There's a reason why Jelly Belly makes 1000 different flavors of their scrumptious candy yet black licorice remains a “controversial” flavor, being either loved or despised. We have come to so adore human volition that the significance of the “choice” to hate licorice or love and endorse corrupt political candidates bears equal weight, thus it seems reasonable to say that licorice-loving politicians are the cause for our multi-trillion dollar deficit.

Everyone believes themselves to be right...from their Own Little Corner.

Whatever your view...

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Tue, 27 Sep 2011 01:25:00 +0000

If you like green, not blue, like green.
If your hobby is making clay figurines rather than paper mache, make clay figurines.
If you love Italian food, not Mexican, eat Italian food.
If you dig archaeology, not gardening, dig archaeology.
If you enjoy sunrises, not sunsets, enjoy sunrises.
If you think as a Liberal, not as a Conservative, think as a Liberal.
If, in your world, the sun rises in the West and sets in the East...

Whatever your view; whatever your little hobby, enjoy it to your hearts content. Thinking it matters is a whole nother subject.

The Damage From Within

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 13:37:00 +0000

Have you ever heard the argument “With all the horrible things going on in this world, why must you be so concerned about all these religious discussions?”, the idea being that I am wasting my time and energies in this endeavor when I could help alleviate suffering and “evil”, as though one had nothing to do with another. And then there's the constant cry that “religion” is the very cause for much of the world's woes.

My interest will always be to do the work of a Berean, to test all things, to examine myself and gain a sound, working understanding of scripture that bears fruit in keeping with repentance.

This will probably prove to be the most damaging video to myself, and I may just now be venting several years of pent-up frustration at what I see occurring in the church; what is acceptable and still labeled “Christian”, but it's now old hat to endure the certain rage of those who will accuse me of heresy hunting, not loving the brethren, causing strife within the body etc...but may I ask:

IF, in our confessed belief in the sovereignty and providence of the Triune God, He brought forth both the Dark Ages and the subsequent Glorious Reformation, will His Word not hold true in declaring unto us that by similar means that produced the first, we are in danger of producing yet another Dark Age of biblical understanding?

The first was due to miserly enshrouding the Word in a dead language. (Latin and the Roman Catholic Church). Ours would be due to the unchaste, wanton lewdness disguised as intimacy purveyed by malevolent “men of God”. And we wonder at the decay surrounding us.

The church has always faced attacks from without from an unbelieving world, yet her greater challenge comes as she must identify, confront and drive from her midst those who would infiltrate and infect from within, those wolves in sheep's clothing who do “not spare the flock. Also from among yourselves men (and today, women) will rise up, speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after themselves.” Acts 20:29, 30

Who are these men? Are they amongst us today? YES! To name the more well known:
Most of The Emergents: McLaren, Bell, Pagitt, Jones, Bakker
The Seeker-Sensitives/PurposeDriven: Let's just say anyone whose preaching is heavily influenced by Peter Drucker. E.Young Jr., Noble, Shook, Furtick
The WordFaith-ers: Hinn, Copeland, Dollar, Price etc and all their progeny...and the Osteen-cult.
The Ecumenists: “Let's not let Doctrine Divide. Let's just all get along.” I hear haunting echoes of “Come to Mother Rome!”
The...Others, to put it kindly: Bentley, King, Mills, Jordan, Hagee, Roth

Though the purity of the church in both doctrine and worship is frequently spoken of in scripture, and heresy is defined and exposed by what can be proven contrary to these doctrines, the vast majority of today's Evangelical church must be unwilling and incapable of either defining or exposing these blasphemers.

I find that I am not saddened when dealing with the atheistic arguments, but when having to recognize the blatant and shameless blasphemy that passes for preaching, my heart sinks in despair and yet burns with anger. These so-called preachers are no longer declaring the truths of the historic faith. Their “gospel” is wholly unrecognizable when compared to the content of the preaching of the early and late Reformation yet they claim they are having the same effects in the saving of souls and the equipping of men!

I say, when we find them producing the type of profound and exhaustive exegetical work of the Reformation era and we find them engaging in the necessary debates of our own day, I'll relent...and repent of my very low view of their “ministries”. They've had time to assess and re-assess their false doctrines. They flatly reject correction and claim persecution “for righteousness sake”.

Again, I say when they prove capable of standing in the manner of a John Knox, a William Tyndale or the host of true martyrs for the glory of the true Gospel, I shall praise God for them. As it is, they are a blight upon the church, compounding the ridicule brought upon her in their shallow, ear-tickling theology that makes no sense to even the worst of the false-religionists of our day.

Yet we have thousands upon thousands imbibing and affirming their venomous message, but because they say “Jesus” and speak of the Holy Spirit and read an out-of-context passage of the bible that suits their blasphemy, the gullible open wide and swallow.

So while my main content of the World Conquered addresses the hostile and vocal sceptic, there is another element addressed in scripture that is just as hostile, yet even more damaging because it is done with such subtlety.

Atheistic “Righteousness”?

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 13:12:00 +0000

It would seem that to the atheist there is no such thing as righteousness. Oh, sure, there is a “rightness” and those things on which we agree men ought or ought not do and they claim that there is a universal understanding of this rightness within societies but this cannot be inherent in the individual. After all, we're born as a blank slate; atheistic by default, remember?

Where and when rightness is absent, there is need for education...on their terms, of course. “Give us your children and we'll drive out any religious notion of “righteousness” as defined by your mythological “god” in your book of fables.”

I suppose this would be like the “reset” button on a counter, or better yet, formatting a computer hard drive. So it is naturalism as the fulcrum by which they seek to leverage the weight of religious indoctrination off the individual with their so called “light of reason”. But their reason is purely anthropocentric being confident that we as men have every capacity necessary to understand and define for ourselves right and wrong in any given situation. Thus the creation of “values clarification” where a particular scenario may call for two contradictory acts, each being declared “right” dependent upon the circumstance.

Righteousness, however, belongs to God alone; is inherent in HIS nature, and is not the possession of man.

The meaning of God's righteousness cannot be inferred from the concept of justice that applies to this world. (Concise Reformed Dogmatics [CRD]J van Genderen and W.H. Velema pg 133) We are inclined to follow our own concept of what is just. We must ask ourselves what Scripture says about God's righteousness. (CRD 13.9 pg.185)

We can never separate righteousness from God's holiness, so it is here that the atheistic notion of rightness collapses in upon itself, for when rightness is applied to men, it means that one has right on his/her side, is righteous and good and in step with the law. But man's law varies and is frequently opposed to righteousness.

The biblical examples of the Prophets, the psalmists and the writers of proverbs incessantly complain about the dreadful reality that there was no justice for the poor, widow, orphans, aliens and the needy even though the right was completely on their side. (Bavinck Reformed Dogmatics BRDVol 2 pg223)

We need not look far today to see the encroachment of wavering secular rightness as they invade our private lives and tell us what we are and are not “allowed” to do.

But the righteousness of God consists in the fact that through and by the Messiah it proceeds to bring righteousness to his people; in Christ it offers a means of atonement, which proves God to be righteous; is able to justify the believer; and also grants forgiveness to 1Jn 1:9 and bestows salvation on his own.(Jn 17:25, 2Tim 4:8 (BRD Vol 2, pg 225)

God made the “Covenant of nature” with Noah and a “covenant of grace” with Abraham, acts by which he again, out of sheer grace grants to his creatures an array of rights and binds himself with an oath to maintain these rights. (BRD Vol.2, pg227)

(Now here, lest the atheist think God is bound by an external standard, recall Heb 6:13)

In scripture, these ordinances and laws are not derived from God's justice, but from his holiness and grace. God was not “morally bound” to grant these rights to his creatures. “

All laws and rights have their ultimate ground, not in a social contract, nor in self-existent natural law or in histroy but in the will of God, viewed not as absolute dominion but as a will of goodness and grace – the fountainhead of all laws and rights.”(BRD Vol 2. pg228)

Atheism: Our Default From Birth?

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 03:36:00 +0000

I have heard numerous times the claim from the atheist that the “natural and default” condition of men from birth is atheism until “indoctrinated” into religion. This assertion seemingly works from the “clean slate” philosophy and overlooks the fact that atheism is also indoctrination. A child enters this world, and evidently, whoever gets to him first “wins”. From that point, the battle rages on either side to “deprogram”.

Our tendency is not to utterly deny the existence of God, for Scripture says all men know God exists, stated specifically in Romans 1. Due to the Fall, we are born as little rebels against God; natural God-haters. Even when raised in what may be called a “good Christian home” our tendency is not toward atheism, it is toward APOSTACY and it will be until the day we die.

No one, not even the atheist, wants to come right out and admit that they rebel against some known good. While Christians affirm Romans 3:23, maybe the temptation is to say “”True, but now I’m saved. That was then; this is now” implying that our rebellion is over. Sure, we now strive to bring all our ways into conformity to the Person of Christ as well we should. But again, I am grateful to the one who posed this question to me: “If I rely on my conformity, for what do I need a crucified and risen Savior?” Did I only need Him once for “salvation” and the rest is now up to me (with the “help” of the Holy Spirit, of course.)to conform; to obey. Why? Because (we are told) obedience brings the blessing. Christian Sanctification is then based on my obedience and not Christ’s. Remember, it is Christ’s imputed righteousness unto us always and only.

Then we must come under sound teaching. (Titus 1:9…the frightening task of the Pastor/Elder) for our continual tendency is to teeter and totter on the brink of apostasy, rationalizing that “no one is perfect; God’s not done with me yet.” and by our un-admitted indifference to historic sound doctrine and Satan’s subtleties, we become more susceptible to…apostasy. Not outright atheism, for the young boy (untaught) becomes an atheist but is no different than one raised in the church who begins to question, as is illustrated in the video link.

We all have questions! But when the boy abandons the faith due to unanswered questions and claims atheism, or another boy apostatizes, what’s the difference? Is there a qualitative difference? The same lack of sound teaching produced both, only to a lesser or greater degree! Thus the exhortation to “be sober; watchful in prayer” 1Cor 16:13, 1Pet 4:6,7.

Would we be surprised to find that our presumed answer to a certain contention ends in agreement with the atheist? How much of our belief is truly derived from the doctrines of Scripture? Many helps are available, which will correct us in humility, yet are neglected. Are we stiff-necked? We do not expect the atheist to submit to correction, but will we also resist at the risk of apostatizing?

http://youtu.be/4zZytbe1a9s

The Use of Great Minds

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:08:00 +0000

A few considerate and respectful objections have been raised regarding my video “Atheists and Authority”. I have also been asked why I give the Atheist any more publicity than they already enjoy. Well, sound exposition of Scripture will enhance and reinforce our own Christian understanding and will also answer the critic. So from whichever angle, hostile or friendly, the Church has encountered innumerable threats. None have prevailed against One Absolute Standard which exposes us as fallen, sinful, depraved men who continually contrive our idolatries. Yet in God's Infinite Wisdom, these threats promote Ecclesiastical Purity – the purging of the dross that so easily permeates. “This against that”, if you will. I wrote to one critic, “When the atheist does not find absolute unanimity amongst us, they declare the whole in unintelligible shambles.” We, within the church think similarly when we say we should not divide over doctrine. This does not produce that God given Purity; this promotes the chaos we observe today.
I frequently state that I simply make use of the great men and their minds that God has given to the Church over the centuries. Personally, I must do this because I have not been trained in the original languages of Scripture. I have not been to Seminary, nor have I received even one minute of accredited Theological training. Therefore, to rely upon these is for me quite safe, for they have proven themselves capable of handling what would overwhelm and leave me apostate.
So, briefly, here is simply one response from Francis Turretin who answers why human reason alone is insufficient for a “happy life”.
I know it can be difficult to endure the reading of a text, but at least allow this to be a beginning.

Atheists and Authority

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 03:18:00 +0000

I just have to ask – how is it that atheists presume to speak authoritatively on scripture? I mean, they have such vile disdain for God, for Christians and for Scripture yet they speak as though they are absolutely correct in their views. Since we don’t kowtow and agree with them we are the most mush-headed imbeciles the world has ever known. They mangle and twist, distort and abuse any text they set their eyes upon and claim that they are simply treating the Scriptures as they would any book. But they do nothing of the sort with other texts. Oh, sure, they may raise sharp disagreement with Christian authors, engage in banter as they would within a literary club and then head off together for Lattes, Sangria and self-congratulatory accolades. But all is just jovial perusal of quaint fiction; no need for contemplation or, Darwin forbid, a deeper meaning. Scripture becomes quite like…

Broccoli. You may rather dislike broccoli because it lacks a certain color. I mean if it had little red specks in it it might be more appealing. And that dreadful texture…why, if there were a God, he certainly would make broccoli more appealing.

Or, in the spirit of the Dead poets society, will you stand upon your desks (or behind our pulpits) with your “alternative perspective”only after ripping out those pages you deem irrelevant or contrary to your preferred interpretation? This is what is realllly being said, you tell us. Trust me…

Your handling of Scripture becomes like…Chemistry. No competent Chemist would randomly mix just to see what would happen but Childish impetuosity ends with the maimed stating “Well it seemed exciting …at the time.”

Is there such a thing as a competent expositor to you? You repeatedly say of Doctrine “this makes no sense” and then go on to explain it in ways that make no sense to us either bc it’s not the way it should be explained! Yet you would rather have us believe you above those who have actually worked through the doctrinal issues. You’ve never “worked thru” anything in response to a serious formulation. You just say “I don’t get it…I don’t like it” and dismiss the whole thing and then call us ignorant, delusional morons when we call you on it.

We rebuke our own false teachers as well as you when heretical notions are introduced. Isn’t it interesting that there is a close parallel between you two?

Every Christian needs to own this book

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Fri, 03 Jun 2011 22:37:00 +0000

Seriously. Not that it is the greatest ever written or the last word on a subject, but the contents and the style will serve the Christian in ways uncommon in our day. Just do yourself the favor and buy it. Work through it. Let it reshape your understanding of the keys of scripture. Books are a dime a dozen but this is pure gold for dirt.
Westminster Bookstore - Reformed Books - Low Prices - Flat Fee UPS Shipping - Marrow of Modern Divinity (Hardcover) Fisher, Edward 9781845504793

EVERYONE HAS A THEOLOGY

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Sun, 15 May 2011 04:44:00 +0000

We as humans have many common traits even though we are all unique individuals. I won't take the time to list those traits because as many as I cite, you can cite more and we may then agree or disagree on the particulars. So, I have stated just one universal: Everyone has a theology.

By no means do I intend to envelop theology in the mere terrestrial, but qualitative assessments of proficiency or ineptitude govern our daily affairs and we give honor accordingly. The common clerk ought not profess to be a doctor. His/Her Honor the judge may give lousy advice concerning your home improvement project. Thus we admit when we are "out of our element" and so defer to the qualified - except when it comes to theology. Beyond the adage "We should never discuss politics or religion because it's all opinion and everybody has one." do most expect his/her theology to be considered the zenith regardless of any contrary position?

Theology: The field of study, thought and analysis that treats of God, His attributes and His relations to the universe.
Theologian: A person who is versed in theology
Theologize: To theorize or speculate upon theological subjects

"He that complies against his will is of his own opinion still." ~Samuel Butler (1612-1680), in Hudibras. Part iii. Canto iii. Line 547

While this philosophical quote addresses our plebeian preference, in matters of theology it is rather inane. Every inadvertent and seemingly innocuous "theological" remark betrays our view of God. Men and women who are not theologians still have no trouble theologizing as though theological fact were (to quote a friend of mine) as the Folks of the far-flung fields of Landingham: one here, one there and in between room for acres of conjecture.

Romans 1:18-23
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Chapters 3 and 4 of Calvin's Institutes Book One are entitled:
3. The Knowledge of God Has Been Naturally Implanted in the Minds of Men
4. The Knowledge Is Either Smothered or Corrupted, Partly By Ignorance, Partly By Malice

Now just because Calvin said it does not make it so. Insofar as Calvin (or anyone of us) is faithful to the Scriptures, these statements are so. Can there be any doubt whatsoever that this is the teaching of Scripture? So why am I disparaging of theologizing if all "know God" naturally?
Precisely for the reason Calvin states in Ch. 4! But this corruption must be denied in order that our conjecture not come crashing down upon our heads!

"Nobody's perfect" we say. "Everybody makes mistakes" we admit. No matter what our declaration toward God, be it affirmation, open hostility or imagined neutrality, we speak as though irrefutable or worse, that it is inconsequential.

Good / bad doctors. Efficient / lax clerks. Fair / barbarous Judges. Ethical / unethical businessmen. All contmporaries. So yes, there are also sound and unsound Theologians. I think there can be no sound theologizers because theology is not speculative.
2Tim 4:1-5
4:1 I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: 2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. 3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. 5 As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.
Titus 2

2:1 But as for you, teach what accords with sound doctrine. 2 Older men are to be sober-minded, dignified, self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, and in steadfastness. 3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, 4 and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled. 6 Likewise, urge the younger men to be self-controlled. 7 Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, 8 and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us. 9 Slaves are to be submissive to their own masters in everything; they are to be well-pleasing, not argumentative, 10 not pilfering, but showing all good faith, so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior.

11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.

15 Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.

Who is God? What is God? How do we know? We know by the full revelation of scripture and the Person and Work of Christ. If a person's explanation is mere speculation based apart from scripture, we have every right to censure their idolatrous view, for is not every false notion of God idolatrous even when it is our own? James White repeatedly says "Theology matters." But again, theology is not speculative. Sola Scriptura. Semper Reformanda.

Christianity is a Virus of the Mind

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:49:00 +0000

Today on The World Conquered, I review Chariots Of Iron. Their guest is Darrell Ray, who has written a book entitled The God Virus.

A term is used that may not be familiar to all: Meme. A meme is a mind virus. Richard Dawkins first introduced this concept in his book The Selfish Gene and since, of course, everything that Dawkins proclaims is revered, it has become somewhat of a standard in how the New Atheist addresses the topic of religion and Christianity specifically. We are no longer merely mistaken in our beliefs. No, we are infected with a MindVirus. It is the cause of every type of Fundamentalist behavior in the world ("Fundamentalist" being defined to suit their assertion) and is almost impossible to isolate in order that it may be "treated" effectively. Guess who is capable of administering this treatment and what the desired end is to be.

I have made use of classic resources in order to demonstrate how the AHE's once again distort historic Christian doctrine. I refer to Isaac Watts Improvement Of The Mind, William Balfour Establishment Principle Defended and Herman Bavink Reformed Dogmatics Vol 2 God and Creation.

I hope you find it useful.

Dan Barker's Freethought Radio Critique

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 02:24:00 +0000

NOTE: I may no longer embed the audio player, so click the Post Title for the Podcast audio!
Former Evangelical "Pastor" turned Atheist Dan Barker has a popular program called Freethought Radio. I offer a critique by making use of the great men, both past and present, and their minds that God has given the Church. In this particular edition of the Podcast, Mr. Barker even holds a major rally right on my very own street!

It is my intention to start posting the show notes so that any quotes, authors, books etc may be referenced.

Podcast #2 In the Eyes of AHE's

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:36:00 +0000

Podcast #2 is available which begins with reviews of the various interests and views held by Atheist and what they think of Christians (not much. Surprise!)

Podcast Content

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 05:26:00 +0000

For anyone wishing to know the content of my Podcast The World Conquered before having to sit through any of them:
The next one will address specific Counter-Apologetics from Atheistic perspectives. Several of the most popular Atheist Podcasts are Reasonable Doubts, The Atheist Experience, Freethought Radio and Chariots of Iron. Personally, I find Reasonable Doubts to be the most insightful regarding how Atheism actually views religion in general and Christianity in particularl. I believe The Atheist Experience has been voted the most popular along with their companions The Non-Prophets. Chariots Of Iron has some interesting guests and pull no punches either. I like that.
Freethought Radio is Dan Barker's venture. Dan Barker used to be an Evangelical preacher. An accomplished musician, some of his musicals are still ironically being used in churches. In 1984 he "lost faith in faith".

So, what is it about Atheism that provokes me to this task? I would encourage you to listen to a couple programs for these reasons:
1) They attempt to effectively wrench the Scriptures from our hands. You will hear me say frequently that if they are successful, we are done. Game over. Pack it up; let's go home.
2) They attempt to wrench the Scriptures from the mind of God.
3) Their insistence that they are not "religious", all-the-while using religious and doctrinal terms regarding their unbelief. e.g. "Evolution gave us..." Mere substitution, in my opinion.
4) Very few arguments are new and we have the whole of Ecclesiastical History from which to draw. Both sides have been argued brilliantly. To the extent that we neglect them is the extent we may be embarrassed in discussion or dispute.
5) We can learn from them. Plain and simple. If they have done their homework, as many have done, and raise valid Q's, we should at least respect them enough to review their sources for objection.

What is being said out there is serious, serious stuff. Their perception of us as sheep in isolation has been met with little objection from the great majority of "Evangelicals" over the last few decades. We prefer to parrot the more well-known names, thinking since they've done some work we don't have to. Not all their work is good, however, and now we're being called on it. There are the many who philosophize as though there were some common ground from which to make appeal, and there are those few who understand Scripture and history and won't let the AHE's wiggle away. I hope to make clear who is who over the course of the Podcasts.

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 04:10:00 +0000

The World Conquered. Why have I chosen that as the title for this Blog? The title is a segment of The World Conquered by the Faithful Christian, a work by Richard Alleine (1611-1691), a Puritan author and Pastor in England. In 170 pages, Alleine lays out succinctly and powerfully in what manner our presence and duty upon this earth ought to appear. He opens the book:
"There is a twofold description given of the true Christian by the Apostle John, 'Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God', and again 'Whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world, even our faith' 1John 5:1,4

A true Christian, then, is a conqueror, more heroic, more noble, more exalted thatn the greatest of all earthly conquerors, for he has conquered that which has conquered them-the world."

The World Conquered. That provocative title in no way produces any amount of prideful arrogance in us as Christians. While Alleine writes in order to bring encouragement for us in this fallen world, he also recognizes the depths of our depravity and draws our attention to our Crucified and Risen Savior without which we are utterly hopeless. Yes, His enemies see this as a profound weakness - our "crutch" by which we get along in this world - but by the graces granted by God to us who are in Christ, Alleine says 1. The strength of a Christian is his faith and 2. the strength of faith is Christ.

Against the allegation from Atheists that our faith is a "blind" faith and therefore mere wishful thinking, we present the Object of our faith in such a manner that "God...makes manifest the savor of his knowledge by us in every place." 1599 Geneva Bible

Upcoming

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 08:20:00 +0000

I am working on the next Podcast which should give a flavor of what can be expected. Humor me...

Podcast Maiden Voyage

noreply@blogger.com (D. Paul Grubb) — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 05:19:00 +0000

Having entered the cacophonous world of the Blogosphere and having benefited greatly over the years from numerous Webcasts and Podcasts, I have decided to try my own hand in the genre and have produced the very first edition of a Podcast bearing the same title as this Blog, The World Conquered. It will be mainly Theological Apologetics in response to the arguments and claims from Atheists, Humanists and Evolutionists whom I have dubbed "The AHE's". I hope it will be helpful. That is, if anyone has found this needle in a haystack and has listened.