I finished reading The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian this last week and it brought to light how we in this country have been duped into accepting evil as normal. He made some great points about how society has demonized heterosexual marriage and the roles of each partner in a marriage, and how alternative lifestyles (such as homosexuality) are marketed as cool and hip. It gets much worse than this though and his description of what actually happens during an abortion just about made me sick. It was very difficult to even finish that section; he compared it to Nazi Germany and he’s probably right, we just don’t realize it yet (just as the German public didn’t realize what exactly was happening). I didn’t agree with all parts of the book though as he started complaining that the world’s music was being brought into the church and that our youth leaders should stop dressing like the youth of today, etc. This attitude is typical of your standard “Bob Jones” professor who doesn’t want the world to change and likes his organ music and favorite pew.

All of this got me wondering though….

1. Why should nonbelievers follow the moral rules that the Bible espouses? If you don’t believe in Jesus, why shouldn’t you try to get every ounce of pleasure you can out of this life? Why not embrace whatever you feel is right for yourself right now?
2. Is it our job to pass legislation to prohibit sins from being committed by unbelievers? Even if we have the voting power to pass laws in our favor, should we do so?
3. Do we have more sin in our culture than in other parts of the world currently? What about in Jesus’ time?
4. Are Christians called to fight culture?

What exactly is our role in society? We are called to be salt – not the main course. Is it because of fear that God will judge us like Sodom and Gomorrah if we don’t change society’s behavior? Maybe it’s because we don’t want to address our own sins like pride, hatred, selfishness, anger, dissention, envying, and strife and we’d rather take the speck out of someone else’s eye.

The below words are not mine. I found this article very interesting and thought it should be brought here for discussion. Article below as follows:

"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God" (1 John 4:7).

"And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

The first verse would seem to indicate that people who lead a lifestyle of genuine, unselfish love will have an inheritance in the Kingdom of Heaven—this could include people who have lived their whole lives never hearing the gospel. The second verse seems to indicate that these people must believe in the name of Jesus and become Christians in order to be given the gift of salvation. Because scripture never contradicts itself, I am convinced that there is always a way to harmonize passages such as these. What is the Lord most likely trying to tell us in these verses?

Here is what I have come to believe. Jesus is the only Way to the Father. No one has ever been saved apart from Jesus. This includes people from the Old Testament as well as people from distant regions who have never heard the gospel story before. This is possible because Jesus was active in the Old Testament and all around the world through his Law of Love. By truly choosing to love one another, people are choosing Christ and choosing God because God is love. "...if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us" (1 John 4:12).

I don't believe that this is detrimental to Christian theology at all. In fact, if we take a strict interpretation of Acts 4:12, it would clearly indicate that no person in the Old Testament could be saved! After all, they didn't know Jesus and could not trust in His name for salvation. This is a more serious dilemma than what I am proposing. Yet most Christians are convinced that without knowing the name of Jesus, there is no salvation. How then do they solve the problem of salvation in the Old Testament?

I thought awhile about how to discuss election on this blog. It’s WAY too big to discuss in its entirety, and it’s very emotional on top of that. I would like to limit the responses to ONLY the following things:

1. Explain how one or all the below verses make sense regarding predestination or election.

2. Agreeing or disagreeing with the ending statement. If you disagree you must prove from Scripture why you don’t agree.

Do not bring up the verses that teach predestination and election just to say “what about these?” or “these teach the opposite”.

Please review the following verses:

2He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. (I John 2:2)

4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. (I Tim 2:4)

15He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. (Mark 16:15).

9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. (2 Pet 3:9)

18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. (Romans 5:18).

Statement below:

The Calvinist who preaches, teaches and witnesses the Gospel is in reality lying to most of the people who hear him and he's doing so in Jesus' name. It is a lie to tell a man that if he will believe in Jesus Christ that he shall be saved (Romans 10:9-10) while, at the same time, believing and teaching most cannot accept Christ.

What do outsiders think of Christians?

“Conservative, entrenched in their thinking, antigay, antichoice, angry, violent, illogical, empire builders; they want to convert everyone and they generally cannot live peaceably with anyone who doesn’t believe what they believe.” (unChristian by David Kinnaman, p26).

I don’t agree with everything about the above statement but even before reading this book, I have been very concerned that we are only known for what we are against and not known at all for what we are for. It’s pretty easy to see why the church isn’t reaching many outsiders, especially younger ones. This book focused on people ages 16-29 – check out their 6 most common objections:

1. Hypocritical
2. Too focused on getting converts (we always have an agenda)
3. Anti-homosexual
4. Sheltered (out of touch with reality, not willing to deal with real solutions to real problems)
5. Too political
6. Judgmental

What was remarkable to find out what that the vast majority of this age group had been/tried church for at least a little while, but then found out it wasn’t for them. So they actually showed up looking for Jesus, but didn’t find him at whatever church they attended.

When the researchers brought their findings and asked mainstream Christians what they thought of the results, many Christians wrote it off to the outsiders being “spiritually dead”, or “the blind can’t see.” This to me confirms #4 above perfectly.

In reaction to this, some Christians have taken the opposite extreme and hijacked Jesus by making him an open-minded, never-offend-anyone moral “teacher” instead of God. This book called this a “create-your-own Jesus” mindset; although much more socially acceptable today, this is not the Jesus of the Bible.

The solution seems clear to me. That list needs to be changed to loving, forgiving, compassionate, understanding, joyful, peaceful, patient, faithful, honest, giving, etc. If our list included those items (as commanded by Scripture) then maybe we’d actually be what Jesus intended.