tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post2700023072543914117..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Hello, Out There #2: are Christians arrogant?Phil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger64125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-68878554173683995532007-09-21T11:40:00.000-07:002007-09-21T11:40:00.000-07:00If Doug Pagitt is a "Christian" then yeah, Christi...If Doug Pagitt is a "Christian" then yeah, Christians are arrogant.terriergalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08801794520433439408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-79166908676460079642007-09-21T10:22:00.000-07:002007-09-21T10:22:00.000-07:00GREAT post.GREAT post.Aspiring Girlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669945568051191274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-87747002393144510062007-09-20T08:21:00.000-07:002007-09-20T08:21:00.000-07:00"This ain't no party..this ain't no disco..."Ahem...."This ain't no party..this ain't no disco..."<BR/><BR/>Ahem. Now, where was I? <BR/><BR/>I have one tiny concern in this discussion, and it relates to election and "technique" in sharing the Gospel. We know that God draws people to Himself, and we know that He chooses to do so by the power of the Holy Spirit and through the foolishness of preaching. <BR/><BR/>We also know that the Apostle Paul (Mars Hill) quoted pagan authors in an effort to show some commonality with his hearers. So far, so good. But I am very, very suspicious when we begin to get so caught up in "marketing" approaches in a well-intentioned effort to share the Gospel with this culture. In some of this discussion, it seems like whether someone receives and believes the Gospel depends on how slick and savvy we make the message. I don't believe that for one minute and I'll oppose it to my dying day. <BR/><BR/>I have no problem with understanding a culture, and finding ways to make the Gospel understandable. However, sometimes the Gospel gets lost in the Madison Avenue polish it's given these days. In some cases, it's not even really the Gospel, but a load of warm fuzzies. In the end, the message must be the same, and as clear as crystal. We are all sinners deserving God's judgment. God commands us to repent, and believe in the Lord Jesus, who died on the cross for our sins and rose again from the dead for our justification. Game, set and match.Solameaniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09869424956571944997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-67038261682493491032007-09-19T12:03:00.000-07:002007-09-19T12:03:00.000-07:00DJP is Dan Phillips. "dan" (all lower case) is Da...DJP is Dan Phillips. "dan" (all lower case) is Dan Kimball.<BR/><BR/>For the record.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-81702545799857961582007-09-19T09:22:00.000-07:002007-09-19T09:22:00.000-07:00The post responding to Shyguy is up now. Please ma...The post responding to Shyguy is up now. Please make any responsive comments on its meta, instead of here.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-17207730536841064132007-09-19T08:06:00.000-07:002007-09-19T08:06:00.000-07:00Shyguy,You said: "The more I read on the topic, th...Shyguy,<BR/><BR/>You said: "The more I read on the topic, the more I try to get my faith back, the more I see the faultlines in the Bible."<BR/><BR/>I would be interested to know what articles and books you have been reading on both sides of this issue. <BR/><BR/>Regards,<BR/>SteveSteve Lammhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06994451968247281749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-74427443724797958832007-09-19T07:47:00.000-07:002007-09-19T07:47:00.000-07:00because I find myself becoming slightly arrogant f...<I>because I find myself becoming slightly arrogant for being chosen to believe.</I><BR/><BR/>Desia, I've struggled with this too, especially the first two years or so after I had been saved.<BR/><BR/>They key is to remember that you were indeed <B>chosen</B>, as you say, and that based on <I>nothing</I> you did. So really, what did you do to get chosen? Nothing. If you did nothing, what is there to be arrogant about, right? It's kinda like 1Co 4:7, though I know it's easier said than done. I've found it helpful and very comforting to pray for faith to believe this truth of God.Mike Riccardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06748453197783538367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-2588336929512390162007-09-19T07:37:00.001-07:002007-09-19T07:37:00.001-07:00I don't know if this makes sense: Sometimes I have...I don't know if this makes sense: Sometimes I have to go back and remember where, who and what I was before believing, because I find myself becoming slightly arrogant for being chosen to believe.Desiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10905591143279290656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-70610299384572687812007-09-19T07:37:00.000-07:002007-09-19T07:37:00.000-07:00Candy... very funny.I do a talk show every other w...Candy... very funny.<BR/><BR/>I do a talk show every other week here in Pensacola and my bumper music for the top of each hour is <I>Burning Down the House</I> by the Talkin' Heads.<BR/><BR/>So many reasons to like Team Pyro... Big Bible truth, Comics, Posters with cool graphics, Posters with cooler text, and now David Byrne references. Ahhhhh...<BR/><BR/>al sendsAlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02659402617723892967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-6289945154089972972007-09-19T06:57:00.000-07:002007-09-19T06:57:00.000-07:00Frank, you mean not "Dan" who you refer to in your...Frank, you mean not "Dan" who you refer to in your previous comment, but username "Dan," right?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-56182458762353342982007-09-19T06:52:00.000-07:002007-09-19T06:52:00.000-07:00I plan to respond to Shyguy in a separate post.I plan to respond to <B>Shyguy</B> in a separate post.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-7186192607321925802007-09-19T06:32:00.000-07:002007-09-19T06:32:00.000-07:00For those who aren't tracking here, btw, generic "...For those who aren't tracking here, btw, generic "dan" is Pastor Dan Kimball.<BR/><BR/>I gotta hand it to him: he's a persistent guy.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-53485744691503564062007-09-19T06:29:00.000-07:002007-09-19T06:29:00.000-07:00BTW, I don't want to steal Dan's thunder here beca...BTW, I don't want to steal Dan's thunder here because he's going to post on the front page about this, but I had some notes I thought might context this for Shyguy and other people who have reasonable questions about faith in Christ.<BR/><BR/>| Speaking of unspoken premises, Dan, <BR/>| there's one thing that I simply can't <BR/>| get over, and it's the core assumption <BR/>| in both of your "Hello, Out There" <BR/>| discussions. Your assumption is "the <BR/>| Bible is true."<BR/><BR/>This would be the most ancient belief in the Scriptures of the Hebrews and then of the followers of Christ, SG. That may not prove anything, but it evidences where the belief comes from. It's foundational to having faith in Christ, so at least you and I are on the same page.<BR/><BR/>| The more I read on the <BR/>| topic, the more I try to get my faith <BR/>| back, the more I see the faultlines in <BR/>| the Bible. It just seems to make too <BR/>| much sense to examine Christology as <BR/>| a sort of mythological emergence; <BR/>| nothing was even really written about <BR/>| him for some 40 or 50 years after his <BR/>| death (a date I base on the current <BR/>| earliest known scrap of New <BR/>| Testament writing).<BR/><BR/>Again, I don't want to rob Dan of his post tomorrow, so let me suggest something: there are no examples of "mythological emergence" in all of history where a real man was transformed into a god apart from political decree in (as you say) 40-50 years.<BR/><BR/>However, you may have a different view of this subject which would be interesting to read.<BR/><BR/>| It makes sense to <BR/>| me that the apostles, for reasons of <BR/>| their own, took a few unexplained <BR/>| things around Christ's life, magnified <BR/>| them, added many stories of their <BR/>| own, and built a mythology, a sort of <BR/>| rallying figure that might hold out <BR/>| promise to the fracturing Jewish <BR/>| nation. How can you believe all that <BR/>| as the divine revelation of God?<BR/><BR/>Let me be honest to say that if this is all that is in evidence, I would agree with you: no reason to call something like that "divine revelation".<BR/><BR/>| I don't mean this arrogantly, it's just my <BR/>| biggest stumbling block right now (in <BR/>| fact, it has destroyed my faith; I no <BR/>| longer consider myself a believer). <BR/>| How can we believe that the Bible is <BR/>| true?<BR/><BR/>I leave that for Dan's post tomorrow, my friend, but let me ask you a question in the meantime: when was the first book of the NT composed, and how do we know this?FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-38083054734977646812007-09-19T03:56:00.000-07:002007-09-19T03:56:00.000-07:00Candy—that was wonderful; first chuckle of the day...<B>Candy</B>—that was wonderful; first chuckle of the day. Thanks.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-6471033472943777632007-09-19T01:34:00.000-07:002007-09-19T01:34:00.000-07:00Speaking of unspoken premises, Dan, there's one th...Speaking of unspoken premises, Dan, there's one thing that I simply can't get over, and it's the core assumption in both of your "Hello, Out There" discussions. Your assumption is "the Bible is true." The more I read on the topic, the more I try to get my faith back, the more I see the faultlines in the Bible. It just seems to make to much sense to examine Christology as a sort of mythological emergence; nothing was even really written about him for some 40 or 50 years after his death (a date I base on the current earliest known scrap of New Testament writing). It makes sense to me that the apostles, for reasons of their own, took a few unexplained things around Christ's life, magnified them, added many stories of their own, and built a mythology, a sort of rallying figure that might hold out promise to the fracturing Jewish nation. How can you believe all that as the divine revelation of God? I don't mean this arrogantly, it's just my biggest stumbling block right now (in fact, it has destroyed my faith; I no longer consider myself a believer). How can we believe that the Bible is true?ShyGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03658851761391295885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-43344541686120048942007-09-18T21:49:00.000-07:002007-09-18T21:49:00.000-07:00Doctrines are neither humble or arrogant.Hi Greta ...<I>Doctrines are neither humble or arrogant.</I><BR/><BR/>Hi Greta - I'd say true doctrine is never arrogant. Even if we make doctrine a book on the shelf over there - what is in the book - if it's true doctrine could we describe it as arrogant? Doctrine communicates something - it isn't neutral.<BR/><BR/>And then - while I see what you are saying - ontologically can you split it off from the source? Is it ever really separate from the source?<BR/><BR/>And then - don't we live doctrine? How does that look?<BR/><BR/>So I would say, it can be described as more than neutral. False doctrine, and Dan describes some in his post, is arrogant. From his post:<BR/>"In fact, the truth of the matter is that all other positions are necessarily and inherently arrogant. All other positions necessarily exalt [Photo]some non-God — self, experience (which is self), journey (which is self), rationalism (which is self), decision (which is self), choice (which is self) — over against God's self-revelation. All other positions say that the infinite-personal God is wrong, and they are right.<BR/><BR/>Now, that's arrogance."<BR/><BR/>That's doctrine - arrogant doctrine. And in his post Dan describes this too:<BR/>"So, you see, the Biblically faithful Christian position is violently anti-arrogance."<BR/><BR/>That's talking about doctrine as I see it - anti-arrogance. Humble, which doesn't mean wimpy. So I think saying "doctrine is doctrine" is too limiting - doctrine isn't neutral. Doctrine takes and describes a position in a particular spirit and attitude.Catezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14514176885131945814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-48210458576855031292007-09-18T18:54:00.000-07:002007-09-18T18:54:00.000-07:00Dan. Even though we are talking heads here, and bu...Dan. Even though we are talking heads here, and burning down the house is an option, we remember that once in a lifetime we may ask ourselves...<BR/>Where does that highway go?<BR/>And we may ask ourselves<BR/>Am I right? ...am I wrong?<BR/>And we may tell ourselves<BR/>My God!...what have I done? <BR/><BR/>Because we can be foolish. And God still uses the foolish things to confound the wise. Just don't wear big suits with big shoulders k cuz that might be arrogant. (David Byrne fans, you know what I am talking about).candyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06088593538648596769noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-33363151127018423832007-09-18T16:31:00.000-07:002007-09-18T16:31:00.000-07:00Dan, We're obviously operating on some different f...Dan, <BR/><BR/>We're obviously operating on some different foundations and frameworks here. Some of the points you make are dealt with in my previous comment.<BR/><BR/>I do have to run. I have a meeting at 8pm (eastern time). One such story that I have for you, Dan, can be found in Acts 2:14-42. Further comment will have to wait.<BR/><BR/>I'd be interested, though, in the biblical support for your understanding of evangelism, adaptation, trying to put every Christian in the category of called missionary, etc.<BR/><BR/>Thanks.Mike Riccardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06748453197783538367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-75713356027794571382007-09-18T16:16:00.000-07:002007-09-18T16:16:00.000-07:00hello again.i do disagree with the way someone res...hello again.<BR/><BR/>i do disagree with the way someone responded saying that different individuals don't need different approaches in sharing the gospel. <BR/><BR/>if you are talking to a Moslem, they do believe already in one God so the conversation can move from a monotheistic conversation about who is this "God" - and who is Jesus, a prophet or Son of God? But if you were talking to a Hindu, the conversation is about pluralism and many gods etc. <BR/><BR/>Most suburbanites aren't exclusively Hindu or Moslem unless they were born into a Hindu or Moslem family. So the conversation is more about mixing beliefs.<BR/><BR/>But, I talk to people and have seen people repent and trust in Jesus, because their questions were specific and we spoke about their questions and the presuppositions they had - which were different than others. The gospel explanation is still the same, but the ground and conversation which precedes it definetly depends on the person. <BR/><BR/>This is not from theory, this is from seeing people become followers of Jesus, understanding their need of a Savior, repenting of sin etc. but apologetics are a good thing and different for each person.<BR/><BR/>Scripture says always be ready to give answers for the hope we have to those who ask --- (it does say those who ask)--- and who asks and what questions differ all the time depending on the background of the person.<BR/><BR/>It is nothing different than missionaries who go to Buddhist China and study Buddhism and the worldview that comes from that as to best know how to approach someone and what their presuppositions are - may be different than going to a Moslem part of China or going to a Hindu in India. <BR/><BR/>But this also takes asking questions. I have had no resistance when I ask someone who I have built trust with, what do you believe? and listen... and then as I share what I believe and about the gospel - they may reject the gospel, but I know they don't say that Christians are then arrogant. <BR/><BR/>For Mike R. - are you seeing fruit? That would be a question I would like to ask of your approach and thinking. Can you share the last time somoene trusted in Jesus that you shared with? I would like to hear the story (stories) from you, and what you are saying and how the SPirit is using what you are doing.<BR/><BR/>Thank you!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-23314726921263843182007-09-18T15:52:00.000-07:002007-09-18T15:52:00.000-07:00Sewing,I appreciate your questions. I'll do my bes...Sewing,<BR/><BR/>I appreciate your questions. I'll do my best to answer you biblically.<BR/><BR/><I>Wouldn't it be reasonable to say that different lost folks have different misapprehensions about the Gospel?</I><BR/><BR/>I understand your point here, and it certainly does seem like different unbelievers stumble over different points, and don't believe because of those. But really, we know that it's not because of a philosophical point that doesn't mesh with their own philosophy that they don't believe, but because God has not revealed Himself to them or given them His Holy Spirit that they might be saved. "For this reason they could not believe, for Isaiah said again, 'HE HAS BLINDED THEIR EYES AND HE HARDENED THEIR HEART, SO THAT THEY WOULD NOT SEE WITH THEIR EYES AND PERCEIVE WITH THEIR HEART, AND BE CONVERTED AND I HEAL THEM'" (John 12:39-40). Perhaps the best I've ever heard this explained is by Mark Dever at the 2006 Shepherds' Conference, General Session 3. The actual wording of your question sounds to me like: "People are dead in all different ways." It's not like, "People have died in all different ways," but "They're being dead in different ways." But again, we know that dead people are all dead... period.<BR/><BR/><I> [...] don't they all need to hear the Gospel in different ways?</I><BR/><BR/>No.<BR/><BR/><I>Arthur needs Socratic questioning to see that something's "out there,"</I><BR/><BR/>This is the position of Classical Apologetics, which I really haven't done a ton of research on. I'd like to get quite refreshed some time soon. Ah, but on so many things!. Classical apologists say that you start arguing for the existence of God first. Once you demonstrate (from what I see is evidentially) that there must be a deity, you work on proving that Yahweh of the Bible is that deity. I don't think this is the right way to go. The why is afterwards.<BR/><BR/><I>while Beatrice needs to learn about salvation by faith alone, Charlie needs to know the exclusivity of Christ, and Diane needs to see the sufficiency and inerrancy of Scripture.</I><BR/><BR/>I reject the "different pieces of the Gospel for people in different places," precisely because the notion that they're in different places is false. If Beatrice is unregenerate and harps on Sola Fide not being true, an air-tight case for Sola Fide -- even a Holy Spirit inspired case for Sola Fide -- won't save her. It very well may be the case (and often is) that once you demonstrate the reasonableness of the Biblical position that demolishes their concern, they move to another one, or just dismiss it altogether. This is what they have to do, 1Co 2:10-14. <BR/><BR/><I>Or could we say that they all need to hear the whole package, and in this way they're all the same?</I><BR/><BR/>This is exactly right! They need to hear the whole package because it's the whole counsel of God that saves people. People don't get saved just be recognizing the absolute reasonableness of Sola Fide, or the exlusivity of Christ, or the fact that God can be known as He has revealed Himself in Scripture. It's not any of those things in isolation that saves; it's all of them working together. They're all inextricably linked -- and it's tough for me to even conceptually separate them as I write this. <BR/><BR/>All of these imaginary people (you did a good job of that by the way... nice concrete examples) need to be confronted with their sin. Arthur, with a refusal to acknowledge and honor God as creator (Rom 1:19-21ff). Beatrice, with her not esteeming God's righteousness properly and thinking she can establish her own (Rom 10:2-4). Charlie, with not confessing God's own Son as Supreme (John 3:18, 1John 2:22-23, 4:2-4). Diane, with accusing God of muddling the message (John 3:18, Heb 1:1-3). <BR/><BR/>Now, here's the kicker. You wanna take them to all those texts. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit. You need to get there. But you need to start with the universal need for salvation because of the holiness of God and the sinfulness of man. When you have a biblical theology proper, a biblical anthropology, harmartiology, and soteriology, you'll have a biblical missiology... and not before.<BR/><BR/>Hope this helps. Let me know if I haven't been clear. Sewing and others, let me know if I'm wrong anywhere. I'd certainly like to grow from this.Mike Riccardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06748453197783538367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-51273484271540054552007-09-18T15:32:00.000-07:002007-09-18T15:32:00.000-07:008%?...try 4%...same as it ever was, same as it eve...8%?...try 4%...<BR/><BR/><I>same as it ever was, same as it ever was...</I>Even So...https://www.blogger.com/profile/14208866122431178938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-88850895605160477352007-09-18T14:19:00.000-07:002007-09-18T14:19:00.000-07:00D'oh—it was a film, not a song. Back to "co...D'oh—<A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Making_Sense" REL="nofollow">it was a film, not a song</A>. Back to "cool school" for me. (See how pathetic it is when we Christians try to be culturally relevant? Even botching 20+ year-old pop culture references....)Stefan Ewinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05530690016594029847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-88663618538068537142007-09-18T14:15:00.000-07:002007-09-18T14:15:00.000-07:00Well, given the impression I get of the average ag...Well, given the impression I get of the average age of commenters 'round these parts, quite a high percentage get the <I>Stop Making Sense</I> allusion.<BR/><BR/>I'm sure I've heard the song (though don't recall), but the title alone seeped willy-nilly into my unconscious back then, like K-Tel commercials for Cyndi Lauper, or Ziggy Stardust videos.Stefan Ewinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05530690016594029847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-14039770278924753682007-09-18T13:39:00.000-07:002007-09-18T13:39:00.000-07:00LOL, that took me a second. Payoff was worth it! B...LOL, that took me a second. Payoff was worth it! But I think now we're getting down to about 8%.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-43532367025803859572007-09-18T13:37:00.000-07:002007-09-18T13:37:00.000-07:00DJP,Two things... First of all, this is a very tim...DJP,<BR/><BR/>Two things... <BR/><BR/>First of all, this is a very timely post for me. We are moving our church onto the campus of our local university. I was working on a post about how to engage a culture of "no God - no truth" and this will come in quite handy (expect a pingback). Very well done.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, I've got a girlfriend that is better than that. Proud to part of the 18%<BR/><BR/>al sendsAlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02659402617723892967noreply@blogger.com