Real Christianity and 'Churchianity' in Light of Hurricane

Status
Not open for further replies.

BlackCalvinist

Puritan Board Senior
From the latest Thinking Biblically Commentary:

Go listen:

http://theologicallycorrect.com/realaudio/God-WeTrustInYou.mp3

Then Go Read:

http://theologicallycorrect.com/ingodwetrust.html

Read with an open Bible. http://www.biblegateway.com if you're too lazy to flip pages.

Exerpt:
See, this is real Christianity. Not the televangelism nonsense you see paraded in bookstores and in popular media. Not people rolling up and down the aisles, barking, laughing, and talking to the air, thinking they can speak something into existence. Not the "˜feel good about yourself´ fast-food Christianity that gets sold with a smiling face in front of crowds of thousands every weekend.

It´s not me centered. It doesn´t focus on what I will do, but moreso on what God has done. It´s not focused on me and how I am this and I am that and all I have to do is say a particular prescribed mantra and it all will come to pass. Instead it focuses on Who God is and how we are to trust Him, even though some of His ways seem to be the complete opposite of what we may consider "˜good´. It´s a real song "“ it reflects various aspects of the Christian life "“ joy, sadness, tragedy and triumph. It´s not a cotton candy Christian song "“ it doesn´t demand blessings, but instead focuses on afflictions and God´s providence in them.

It doesn´t say "œWe´ll meet up for a revival tent meeting and sing blessings down from heaven", but instead realizes that both calamity and blessing equally come from the hand of God. Job acknowledged this when God allowed Satan to strike his whole family dead, afflict his body and more "“ "œThe Lord gives and the Lord takes away "“ blessed be the name of the Lord." (Job 1:20-21) and in all these things, Job did not sin with his lips (Job 1:22, 2:10). Joseph acknowledged this rightly in Genesis 50 when he told his brothers that it was not them who brought him to Egypt, but God.

Think of it.

His brothers beat him, sold him into slavery, he was wrongly accused and imprisoned for a few years and had his name and reputation besmirched. His physical being was tortured as a slave. He had nothing but the former memories of his multicolored coat and his father´s blessing upon him. But then he arose in power as an advisor to Pharoah to become second in command under Pharoah. And it was at this time that he, being warned by God in a dream, did what was necessary to preserve not only Egypt, but all the surrounding nations as well. And in both Genesis 45 and 50 when he reunites with his brothers, he reminds them that he holds no animosity toward them. Only a heart that acknowledged the Sovereign rule of God in all of his seemingly senseless calamities could forgive and realize the purpose for his being put through so much.

This is something sadly missing from most church pulpits today. It´s something missing from most bookstores today. While one author writes about "˜Your Best Life Now´ (the same author who can barely get a public proclamation of the gospel accurate) and another writes about your "˜Purpose Driven Life´, Biblical Christianity is miles away from all-upbeat and positive messages. While folks write about "˜releasing the money anointing´, "˜walking in your authority´ and other topics that give more power to humanity than we really have, the scriptures speak of the apostle to the Gentiles learning to be content in whatever situation he was placed in (Phil. 4:11-12).

You see, most of the songs we see sung in church on Sunday mornings (and I am purposely excluding most reformed churches here) doesn´t pass the reality test. Yes, a lot of what´s sung in church on Sundays can rile up your emotions, make you feel really good about being there, and give you an uplifted feeling so that you felt you´ve "œdone church" or "œhad church". My African-American brethren know what I´m talking about. ;)

But can "œIf you bind it on earth, I´ll bind it in heaven" pass the stake test ? Is it a song that you, if you were under persecution as the early church was, sing joyfully as Roman soldiers would be lighting the flames at your feet, your body being drenched in lamp oil ? Could it pass the test that many saints and sinners alike faced August 29-31, 2005 in Louisiana, Mississippi and other areas and you still sing it strongly and loudly as you see your home looking like little more than a pile of matchsticks with only a few discernable items being left ? As your loved one is swept from your hands by rushing waves of water, could you sing any of the popular gospel or contemporary worship songs with conviction of heart and clarity of mind ?

Think of the books you´ve spent time reading and the preachers you´ve listened to. Looking at the devastation in the gulf states, could you draw anything major of worth from the Christianity you´ve been exposed to on Sunday mornings, the various healing crusades and other "˜churchianity´ events ?

If you´re honest and really looked closely at it, some of you would probably answer no for the bulk of it. And if your answer is no, then you should be well aware that the "˜feel good´ Christianity you´ve been exposed to is really not Christianity at all, no matter how nice the people have been to you or how good and "˜empowered´ the messages made you feel.

If you´re consistent with a right view of the scriptures, you´d know it was blasphemous to attribute environmental calamities of this sort to Satan or think that these things were "œsomehow out of God´s control" or that "œGod was surprised by them and is just as sad as you are" as if He is wringing His hands in heaven, unable to act. No, the God of the scriptures is all-powerful and NO ONE (that includes you and your "˜confessions´) can stop His hand or question what He does (Daniel 4:34-35). So you´d have to come to the conclusion that it is the Lord who causes calamity (Isaiah 45:5-8) as well as blessing upon a city or a person.

Enjoy, be edified. I know a lot of this preaches to the choir here at PB, but forward it on to your Arminian buddies :D
 
Kerry,

I'm curious after reading your signature - do you believe that all Theonomists are racists?
 
Originally posted by OS_X
From the latest Thinking Biblically Commentary:

Go listen:

http://theologicallycorrect.com/realaudio/God-WeTrustInYou.mp3

Then Go Read:

http://theologicallycorrect.com/ingodwetrust.html

Read with an open Bible. http://www.biblegateway.com if you're too lazy to flip pages.

Exerpt:
See, this is real Christianity. Not the televangelism nonsense you see paraded in bookstores and in popular media. Not people rolling up and down the aisles, barking, laughing, and talking to the air, thinking they can speak something into existence. Not the "˜feel good about yourself´ fast-food Christianity that gets sold with a smiling face in front of crowds of thousands every weekend.

It´s not me centered. It doesn´t focus on what I will do, but moreso on what God has done. It´s not focused on me and how I am this and I am that and all I have to do is say a particular prescribed mantra and it all will come to pass. Instead it focuses on Who God is and how we are to trust Him, even though some of His ways seem to be the complete opposite of what we may consider "˜good´. It´s a real song "“ it reflects various aspects of the Christian life "“ joy, sadness, tragedy and triumph. It´s not a cotton candy Christian song "“ it doesn´t demand blessings, but instead focuses on afflictions and God´s providence in them.

It doesn´t say "œWe´ll meet up for a revival tent meeting and sing blessings down from heaven", but instead realizes that both calamity and blessing equally come from the hand of God. Job acknowledged this when God allowed Satan to strike his whole family dead, afflict his body and more "“ "œThe Lord gives and the Lord takes away "“ blessed be the name of the Lord." (Job 1:20-21) and in all these things, Job did not sin with his lips (Job 1:22, 2:10). Joseph acknowledged this rightly in Genesis 50 when he told his brothers that it was not them who brought him to Egypt, but God.

Think of it.

His brothers beat him, sold him into slavery, he was wrongly accused and imprisoned for a few years and had his name and reputation besmirched. His physical being was tortured as a slave. He had nothing but the former memories of his multicolored coat and his father´s blessing upon him. But then he arose in power as an advisor to Pharoah to become second in command under Pharoah. And it was at this time that he, being warned by God in a dream, did what was necessary to preserve not only Egypt, but all the surrounding nations as well. And in both Genesis 45 and 50 when he reunites with his brothers, he reminds them that he holds no animosity toward them. Only a heart that acknowledged the Sovereign rule of God in all of his seemingly senseless calamities could forgive and realize the purpose for his being put through so much.

This is something sadly missing from most church pulpits today. It´s something missing from most bookstores today. While one author writes about "˜Your Best Life Now´ (the same author who can barely get a public proclamation of the gospel accurate) and another writes about your "˜Purpose Driven Life´, Biblical Christianity is miles away from all-upbeat and positive messages. While folks write about "˜releasing the money anointing´, "˜walking in your authority´ and other topics that give more power to humanity than we really have, the scriptures speak of the apostle to the Gentiles learning to be content in whatever situation he was placed in (Phil. 4:11-12).

You see, most of the songs we see sung in church on Sunday mornings (and I am purposely excluding most reformed churches here) doesn´t pass the reality test. Yes, a lot of what´s sung in church on Sundays can rile up your emotions, make you feel really good about being there, and give you an uplifted feeling so that you felt you´ve "œdone church" or "œhad church". My African-American brethren know what I´m talking about. ;)

But can "œIf you bind it on earth, I´ll bind it in heaven" pass the stake test ? Is it a song that you, if you were under persecution as the early church was, sing joyfully as Roman soldiers would be lighting the flames at your feet, your body being drenched in lamp oil ? Could it pass the test that many saints and sinners alike faced August 29-31, 2005 in Louisiana, Mississippi and other areas and you still sing it strongly and loudly as you see your home looking like little more than a pile of matchsticks with only a few discernable items being left ? As your loved one is swept from your hands by rushing waves of water, could you sing any of the popular gospel or contemporary worship songs with conviction of heart and clarity of mind ?

Think of the books you´ve spent time reading and the preachers you´ve listened to. Looking at the devastation in the gulf states, could you draw anything major of worth from the Christianity you´ve been exposed to on Sunday mornings, the various healing crusades and other "˜churchianity´ events ?

If you´re honest and really looked closely at it, some of you would probably answer no for the bulk of it. And if your answer is no, then you should be well aware that the "˜feel good´ Christianity you´ve been exposed to is really not Christianity at all, no matter how nice the people have been to you or how good and "˜empowered´ the messages made you feel.

If you´re consistent with a right view of the scriptures, you´d know it was blasphemous to attribute environmental calamities of this sort to Satan or think that these things were "œsomehow out of God´s control" or that "œGod was surprised by them and is just as sad as you are" as if He is wringing His hands in heaven, unable to act. No, the God of the scriptures is all-powerful and NO ONE (that includes you and your "˜confessions´) can stop His hand or question what He does (Daniel 4:34-35). So you´d have to come to the conclusion that it is the Lord who causes calamity (Isaiah 45:5-8) as well as blessing upon a city or a person.

Enjoy, be edified. I know a lot of this preaches to the choir here at PB, but forward it on to your Arminian buddies :D

Good stuff!:D
 
Originally posted by BrianBowman
Kerry,

I'm curious after reading your signature - do you believe that all Theonomists are racists?

Nope. Just Harry Seaborn and those who think like him.
 
Originally posted by OS_X
Originally posted by BrianBowman
Kerry,

I'm curious after reading your signature - do you believe that all Theonomists are racists?

Nope. Just Harry Seaborn and those who think like him.

I've never heard of Harry Seaborn-- but I'll be sure an avoid him.
 
Wise man. :)

Phil Johnson's made some very astute comments on Mr. Seaborn (whose website is LittleGeneva.com).

Phil's comments have links in them that won't show up here (and they are links to comments from Mr. Seaborn's website):

#


# Doug Wilson notices the giant hairball called "Little Geneva" in the appalling category of my blogroll and does some out-loud thinking about why the peculiar brand of racism touted by Harry Seabrook (AKA "Kunta Kinist") is so sick and twisted.
Speaking of "Little Geneva" and Harry Seabrook's "skinism" (credit goes to Doug Wilson, I think, for coining that term)"”people occasionally ask why I include a link to that blog at all, since I find it so appalling. The answer is that Harry and a few of his pals have inexplicably managed to garner a following that includes several people who link to my websites. If any of the Kinist homeboys wander in here, I want it known that I consider their view on life and culture repulsive. Infrequently, but with disturbing regularity, some otherwise rational person will write to ask me, What's so wrong with Harry Seabrook's opinions about race? After all, he denies that he's a racist or a white supremacist; he says he's a "kinist." Why do you find him so appalling? (After all, in this age of postmodernism, it's not polite to tag people with labels they don't apply to themselves. Ergo, Harry's not really a racist.)
My short answer: Because he is the worst kind of racist: someone who continually, deliberately, and openly defies the Second Great Commandment in his public dealings with neighbors of different races and cultures. And he glories in it.
Now, before the postmodern thought-police suggest there's a moral equivalence between that sort of thing and every expression of public disagreement, allow me to remind you we're not talking about someone who is critical of others' ideas and attitudes. We're talking about someone who regularly seethes with sneering contempt for others solely on the basis of their race. He is clearly obsessed with the issue. And since he claims to be a Christian, it is the duty of other Christians to confront and expose the inconsistency of Harry's worldview with the plain teaching of Scripture. See also 1 John 3:14-15.

See the original here with links to previous articles and comments by Seaborn:
http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/2005/09/dont-tell-darlene-about-this.html
 
Thanks for the info Kerry,

These guys are definitely "on the fringe" and I happen to know someone who (at least at one point) considered themselves members of the so-called "Christian-Identity/America-is-Israel Movement". This is very sacry stuff because Jesus Christ would never be identified with them.
 
just checked out that website. littlegeneva.com yikes. "reformed confederate theocrats".

I think the reformed community needs to have a public censure of this guy.

This was on the first page, "We agree that justice should be impartial, but it does not logically follow that all races are equally aggressive. Wishing it does not make it true."

Assumption, Race does dictate morality to a certain degree.

[Edited on 9-13-2005 by Slippery]
 
Originally posted by OS_X
Wise man. :)

Phil Johnson's made some very astute comments on Mr. Seaborn (whose website is LittleGeneva.com).

Phil's comments have links in them that won't show up here (and they are links to comments from Mr. Seaborn's website):

#


# Doug Wilson notices the giant hairball called "Little Geneva" in the appalling category of my blogroll and does some out-loud thinking about why the peculiar brand of racism touted by Harry Seabrook (AKA "Kunta Kinist") is so sick and twisted.
Speaking of "Little Geneva" and Harry Seabrook's "skinism" (credit goes to Doug Wilson, I think, for coining that term)"”people occasionally ask why I include a link to that blog at all, since I find it so appalling. The answer is that Harry and a few of his pals have inexplicably managed to garner a following that includes several people who link to my websites. If any of the Kinist homeboys wander in here, I want it known that I consider their view on life and culture repulsive. Infrequently, but with disturbing regularity, some otherwise rational person will write to ask me, What's so wrong with Harry Seabrook's opinions about race? After all, he denies that he's a racist or a white supremacist; he says he's a "kinist." Why do you find him so appalling? (After all, in this age of postmodernism, it's not polite to tag people with labels they don't apply to themselves. Ergo, Harry's not really a racist.)
My short answer: Because he is the worst kind of racist: someone who continually, deliberately, and openly defies the Second Great Commandment in his public dealings with neighbors of different races and cultures. And he glories in it.
Now, before the postmodern thought-police suggest there's a moral equivalence between that sort of thing and every expression of public disagreement, allow me to remind you we're not talking about someone who is critical of others' ideas and attitudes. We're talking about someone who regularly seethes with sneering contempt for others solely on the basis of their race. He is clearly obsessed with the issue. And since he claims to be a Christian, it is the duty of other Christians to confront and expose the inconsistency of Harry's worldview with the plain teaching of Scripture. See also 1 John 3:14-15.

See the original here with links to previous articles and comments by Seaborn:
http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/2005/09/dont-tell-darlene-about-this.html

Doug Wilson's blog post on skinism that Johnson was talking about.
 
Originally posted by Slippery
just checked out that website. littlegeneva.com yikes. "reformed confederate theocrats".

I think the reformed community needs to have a public censure of this guy.

This was on the first page, "We agree that justice should be impartial, but it does not logically follow that all races are equally aggressive. Wishing it does not make it true."

Assumption, Race does dictate morality to a certain degree.

[Edited on 9-13-2005 by Slippery]
Ahhhh.... Yeah... Caucasians have such an outstanding record in the area of "aggressiveness" to stand on. Stalin's gulags. Hitler's concentration camps. The crusades. World War 1 and World War II (driven primarily by our fellow caucasians). Need anyone go on? Yes indeed. Our record is one to be proud of... How about just reading the Bible and recognizing that we're one blood and all by nature children of wrath due to our sin and rebellion? Is it that difficult to understand???
 
Point is..... red and yellow, black and white, we're all sinners in His sight.

Every 'race' has their history of aggression, immorality, murder, theft, etc.....

and the whole concept of 'race' as promulgated by folk like Seaborn (and there are some black racist folk too - don't think I excuse them either) and even well-meaning folk is unbiblical.

Acts 17 is pretty plain that God made ALL nations from one blood. All descendents of Noah and one of his three sons, all descendents of Adam, born in sin and in need of a Savior. None better than the other spiritually, morally, intellectually or otherwise.

The really bad part is, if I'm correct, Seaborn is in the PCA. I do believe the Reformed Community as a whole does need to decry this nonsense immediately - swift church discipline.

Things like this put a visible rift in the body of Christ - and like it or not, your African-american brothers and sisters aren't able to easily 'just get over it' anymore than you'd expect a Jew who has been through a concentration camp to 'get over it' or the widow of a 9/11 victim to 'get over it'.
 
Originally posted by OS_X
The really bad part is, if I'm correct, Seaborn is in the PCA. I do believe the Reformed Community as a whole does need to decry this nonsense immediately - swift church discipline.

Didn't realize that. If his congregation and presbytery doesn't bring charges, can others in the PCA from a different presbytery? I'm rusty on my BCO.
 
Seabrook (its Seabrook btw), is definiately a hatefilled racist. His words and his attitude on LG condemn him as such. But, do not dismiss his beliefs outright because he uses them as a cloak for his hatred. There may be a little truth to what Seabrook calls Kinism, what the Afrikaners' called Christian Nationalism, and what some of Kuyper and the Neo-Calvinists seem to anticipate. When Seabrook is challenged for his offensive comments he will readily admit that all humans are of one blood, fallen sinners in need of salvation, and all are equals in Christ, but Acts 17 also points out that the one humanity is a pluriformity, ie, God has unfolded mankind in a diversity of peoples and alloted to them seperate bounds of habitation, and I think all that these "skinists" believe is that clan, as an extension of family, owns some degree of our loyalty and love.
 
Where'd I get Seaborn from ? :lol:

Never mind. I have students on the brain. :lol:

I'm not completely dismissing him, Peter. Thanks for the elucidation on him, though.

Unfortunately, I can't seem to read his page for more than 1 minute without becoming angry - and then I need to head elsewhere because my anger wrapped in unredeemed flesh can produce some non-Christlike comments.

I've seen God's justice work - QUICKLY - recently. So I'm not too worried. Seabrook will have his day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top