Jim says The Simpsons is a fine TV program?
And other things I question about the value of Jim and Casper Go to Church
John Lieberman recently reviewed our Book and both Casper and I agree that it is by far the most thoroughly researched review thus far
After politely affirming what little he could find of value “We do need to be friendly to those that attend and try and put ourselves in a visitor’s shoes.”
John moves on to his real agenda which is to question any number of things we had to say. “I don’t feel like I have to make an apology for the church (Intro., xxxiii) every time I explain the church to seekers/friends (except when I share Jesus with Jewish people and have to deal with so-called Christians and church bodies and denominations that for 19 centuries treated the Jewish people with contempt and persecution.)” Apparently John is comfortable making space for his fellow Jewish seekers but not for other kinds of seekers (who also have suffered contempt and other forms of persecution at the hands of Christianity)
We thought his insights were so well articulated that we wanted more people to be able to interact with them.
Enjoy- John seems to be a really bright and passionate Christian
Comment by: Helen
1 01/19/08 2:38 PM | Comment Link |Here’s a copy of all John’s comments on Jim and Casper go to Church
I have read the book “Jim and Casper Go to Church” and have some feedback that I believe will be helpful for the church to consider in the following areas:
(1) The take away for any church in practical areas of our “first impressions” to seekers and other Christian visitors
(2) Theological implications of statements made by Jim and Matt
(3) Our first impression of the book itself!
I can summarize my response as follows:
Pros/Positives
• We don’t want to appear too professional, though we at the same time want to pursue excellence and diligence, and that we have given thought to the content and planning of each service. The danger, it appears, is that it could appear like an event, a program, rather than a “family” gathering for teaching, fellowship and personal ministry for every day people. We don’t want to send the message that only professional singers can sing in the choir.
• We do need to be friendly to those that attend and try and put ourselves in a visitor’s shoes.
• Our messages need to be clear on what we are to do. The sermon/message need not always be an admonition to build a house for the poor or even reach out to the homeless. It may include that specific direction, but the “to do” portion of the message may also be “forgive our enemies,” “die to sin and resist temptation,” pray without ceasing,” “fellowship with one another,” “surrender control of your life to God,” or a number of other Pauline directive words to the church body. (I dare not let an atheist define what he believes my/our marching orders are to be.)
• I like Jim’s statements, “…we protect our relationships with non-Christians — they’re real people to us, not targets. (Intro. xxxv)
• I agree with Matt’s observations that it seems condescending when a Christian says, “Oh, we have some atheists here like you.” (Also, page 108)
Cons/Negatives:
• Every book has an agenda of some sort and thus loses pure objectivity (which the book appears to be claiming by its first real impressions “survey” approach), and the author, Jim Henderson, has some of his own personal biases (which we all have).
o He questions the assurance that a believer can have re: his salvation
o He takes the social gospel approach that our judgment in the end of time will be based solely or mainly on Matthew 25. (‘There are various interpretations of that passage and one shouldn’t base their salvation/works theology on that text.)
• The Matt Casper type of ‘atheist” is not the every day typical seeker-church attender that is taking a 2nd look at Christianity, possibly at the suggestion of a friend that has invited her/him to try their church, i.e. GCC. Matt Casper may be a seasoned atheist (Introduction, xxvii), but he is also a hired hand and, in my opinion, has to “play the role” even tougher to fulfill his obligation to give the non-believer’s view of the church. I even wondered as I continue to read through the book if Matt himself represented anyone I have talked to or invited to church over the last 10 years. I have heard so many powerful “first time” testimonies of those visiting Saddleback and Willow Creek that I wonder if Matt is in a category all by himself. And, thus, what really is the long term value of his whole critique.
• One-time visits. Obviously, we all realize that in the seeker’s fist trip to church, he/she will not get a complete picture of what the church is like. It will take several visits, and even then it is important to find out what the church “believes.” We often act as if to confidently believe something/anything is to be narrow, intolerant, and judgmental. Our “behavior” is influenced by what we believe, whether that belief is about homosexuality, hell, the kingdom, the 2nd Coming, the Holy Sprit, or any aspect of Christian belief. But just looking at the size of Willow Creek, a great number of people have decided to “come back” based on what they saw the first time. Thus, doesn’t that speak contrary to the book’s thesis.
• I don’t feel like I have to make an apology for the church (Intro., xxxiii) every time I explain the church to seekers/friends (except when I share Jesus with Jewish people and have to deal with so-called Christians and church bodies and denominations that for 19 centuries treated the Jewish people with contempt and persecution.)
• It would have been helpful if Matt, an atheist, as Lee Strobel did, investigated the beliefs of Christianity, as written in the Scriptures, and then tried to see if the church, week in and week out, lived it out. But Matt had no idea what the Bible taught as truth.
• It is not fair to assume that in a seeker church everyone will be friendly. With many seekers attending, on that first trip, the seeker may very well be sitting next to another seeker waiting for the prison next to him (a seeker) to initiate a conversation.
• The questions at the end appeared to be sincere questions proposed by the church themselves (that would have been a good idea to get the pastor’s actual responses like Rick Warren). The questions were like straw men that were debunked and further substantiated the book’s thesis in every situation. I never read one time where either Jim or Matt say, “Well, that’s a good critique of the book, and something we probably were a little bit too unforgiving of.” Maybe a better exercise for covenant community members would have been for each one to not just read the book, but to come prepared with their personal critique of the book and write their pros and cons.
• Matt critiques his one friend on cocaine that couldn’t tell his church buddies his problems, as if that is representative of all people that struggle with sin. It is a problem with people, not just Christians. He also is very judgmental himself of his friend—“..he lacked resolve, chose the wrong people or both.” (Page 70)
• Matt makes an unfair comparison of a black church (Potter’s House) with a basically suburban white church (Saddleback) in the “way” they worship. (Page 81)
• Matt’s Mantra major critique of the content of the messages is that they weren’t telling people “how to make the world a better place.” (P. 99) Is that what Jesus came to do? To clean up the environment? For us to be ecologists? I do think that Matt completely misses the point that by changing people “within” that you change their relationships (as parents, citizens, students, children, etc.) which does change the world. Matt, if he is honest with himself and his “project,” must realize that people have felt needs that need to be addressed.
• The following is taken from a review of the book I found on the internet. (See below). It echoes my beliefs. I found this statement of Jim’s quite shocking and, in my opinion, it reveals a person that is very unsure of his faith and what he believes.
“Even more disturbing and indicative of Jim’s emergent bent is his message of uncertainty (pp. 110, 145, 166-167, 169). He summarizes his thoughts:
There is a difference between certainty, and confidence or hope. As followers of Jesus, we put our faith in a set of beliefs that we choose to think of as real. We cannot prove any of them – that is why it is called faith. What bothers nonbelievers is when we assert that we “know” something, when they know that none of us can know anything until we die. I am very comfortable asserting my faith and my hope and my confidence that Jesus is God, but I will not say that I know he is God in the way I say I know there is gravity. I hope the story I have bet my life on is true, but neither Casper nor I will know for sure until both of us are dead.” (emphasis added by me).
I would like to ask Jim, “Are you 100% sure that a born again believer can’t be assured that when he dies he is going to heaven or hell or that there is even a heaven or hell? Jim, how do you interpret the following verses:”
1 John 5:13 “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life”
John 20:30 “Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”
1 John 5:19 We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.
1 John 3:2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.
Romans 8:16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. (not going to be).
NIV Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
NLT Hebrews 11:1 What is faith? It is the confident assurance that what we hope for is going to happen. It is the evidence of things we cannot yet see.
And there are too many other verses in I John and The Gospel of John re: belief and assurance of eternal life to enumerate them all.
On Page 110, Jim expresses again his assurance in one thing – his uncertainty and says, (when comparing himself to his atheist friend)
“I only wish that I could be as humble when it comes to admitting that I can’t prove the things I claim to be true about life. For Christians, it is wrapped up in hope and faith, and well… a divine hunch. And yet I’m often tempted to act as if I know (author’s emphasis), when in fact I trust (author’s emphasis), and that is all that I know for sure.
Is what we believe and are taught at GCC just a divine hunch? (emphasis added) I think not! or hope not!
I have a real problem with an author/speaker that we bring in to teach us that is so unsure of his faith. I may be unsure of certain interpretations of various passages of the Bible, but in no way am I relying on a divine hunch to get me through the roughest times in life, and prepare me especially for eternity and my final inheritance and rewards for faithfulness to Him and service to Him and others.
In answering a question on Page 158, Jim says, “I have openly discussed the free offer of salvation and heaven we Christians claim to finding Jesus with Casper.” It would have been better said,” what we Christians share re: who Jesus claimed to be? Who cares about what “I” claim. It does matter what “Jesus” claimed re: his mission and person as “written” in the Scriptures. Jim needs to focus more on what we Christians say the Bible teaches re: a specific subject.
Jim said, “Going to heaven is icing on the cake and I expect Jesus’ first words to me upon arrival to simply be “Nice Try” (p. 168).
Has Jim not read the Lord’s clear statement of Scripture made to those that were true obedient Christ followers:
Matthew 25:21 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
2 Peter 1:11 “and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”
“Nice Try” is a rather weak pathetic response from our wonderful gracious Lord that desires to bless and reward those that have suffered and endured to the end, and some via martyrdom. Their “welcome” (entrance) into the kingdom and their whole life can not be characterized by a whimpy “nice try.”
Matt focuses on the question, “Is that what Jesus told you guys to do.” It is one thing to treat believers casually and indifferently, but he acts as if we believers are beholden to him, an atheist. On Page 102 when comparing Imago Deo with other churches, he says, “How can two groups of people that follow the same guy have such radical fundamental differences? Is Jesus just a “guy?”
• The book seems to imply that small, edgy, unstructured, churches (that appear more like home groups) are the only “authentic” churches, while big well organized churches (which would include Grace) are superficial, wasteful of their resources, and inauthentic.
• Matt complains about camera cranes. (page 20). Maybe he would recommend doing away with all of the sound systems, micro phones, and possibly just build a simple warehouse with no aesthetics. That would “save” money. Does modern technology “help us work with people?”
• Matt questioned any sentimentality or what he calls a theatrical voice. (p. 23) I’m concerned about that also. But isn’t there a genuine “being touched by God.” I wouldn’t expect Matt to understand this as a non-believer, and thus I shouldn’t be so hard on him.
Matt’s most bizarre theological statement is that John Milton invented the idea of Hell! (P. 159)OH, well, what can you expect of an atheist. I don’t think that response would be the typical one of a seeker.
Jim says The Simpsons is a fine TV program? (Page 118). I guess he is expressing his practical theology right there. :-)
Comment by: Helen
2 01/19/08 2:55 PM | Comment Link |John wrote:
John, I don’t really understand how these two comments go together. If first time visits are meaningless then why point out there have been lots of powerful ‘first time testimonies’ from churches Matt visited? These presumably are meaningless.
John, what can I expect of a Christian? I keep expecting more grace than this from Christians towards outsiders but I keep being disappointed. Are my expectations too high?
Comment by: Eliza
3 01/19/08 4:47 PM | Comment Link |I applaud Matt, Jim, and Helen for the grace with which they have responded to John’s review.
I don’t think I could kept from responding to his comments & tone about atheists & about certainty, if his comments had been directed at me, and it would not have come out so civilly.
You guys are such good role models!
Comment by: Jordan
4 01/19/08 7:42 PM | Comment Link |Wow the dialogue on this site is certainly very entertaining. While I certainly was not shocked by Casper’s response to John’s statements about how there really can be no certainty, I am still very curious to here Jim’s response. I, like John, am a bit floored when I read or hear a Pastor say that they are not certain of their own faith. But as Casper eluded to maybe it is because I come from the McDowell/Strobel school of thought. But, there are absolute truths in this world and God’s existence and Christ’s existence as my savior I unapologetically (no pun intended) hold as truths. After looking long and hard at the historical, scientific, archaelogical data I can say this with certainty.
For a better explanation regarding absolute truth listen to a two part discusion Ravi Zacharias gives here.
As Christians we should be very sensitive with those who do not share our beliefs, and be very careful not to come across as arrogant (and I am sure that I am probably coming off as just that) but this to the point of not being able to belive in truth? If I was uncertain in God’s existence and Christ as my savior would I be a Christian? Isn’t that what the term “Believer” implies. Someone one who believes in this as truth. Christ was either a liar, lunatic or Lord; I am certain it was the latter.
Eliza, I certainly didn’t feel like John was being overtly rude or had a “tone” that was inappropriate. But as someone who invested both his time (reading the book) and money (buying the book), just as John did, I think that John earned the right to state his opinion. I am not worried about Casper or Jim’s abilities to see that although John disagrees with them he is probably still an ok guy.
Eagerly waiting for Jim’s response:
Comment by: Jordan
5 01/19/08 7:47 PM | Comment Link |P.S. I do agree with Jim in one area, the Simpson’s can still get me laughing out loud! :)
P.S.S. I didn’t spell check or proof my above post so I will apologize in advance for in gramatical or spelling errors.
Comment by: Helen
6 01/20/08 6:39 AM | Comment Link |Jordan wrote:
With all due respect, Jordan, I do find your certainty arrogant, because it implies there’s something superior about you compared to people who didn’t come to the same conclusions as you.
Either your knowledge of the ‘evidence’ is superior to those other people, or your ability to analyze the evidence is superior. Or maybe it’s that God likes you more than them so he revealed ‘the truth’ to you and not to them.
In which of these ways are you superior to those who don’t believe? What do you have that they lack?
Comment by: Jordan
7 01/20/08 12:28 PM | Comment Link |Helen,
I think that you and I might not be able to reach common ground in this matter. I certainly agree that truth hurts sometimes and it can make those who are unwilling or unable to believe feel isolated. It might make the person who holds onto that truth feel isolated. I am sure that when Copernicus or Pythagurus (I am not sure which) came out and said that they had proven that the Earth was not flat but round they were disagreed with heavily and had to stick with the evidence that they had compiled and stay true to what they believed in order to change others minds.
If you would have included my entire quote you would have shown that I admited that it can come across as arrogant. However, I shouldn’t have to apologize to a fellow believer for having convctions in a belief that we supposedly share. God either exists or he doesn’t, the evidence, in my opinion leads me to the conclussion that he exists. I am confident in that just as I am confident that the evidence that President Lincoln was killed by John Wilkes Boothe is fact. Was I there, no. I didn’t see it happen I have to rely on the first hand accounts and the history available to come to what I feel is a reasonable deduction that this is a fact. If I agreed with your line of thinking I might not be able to ever come to a conclussion about anything ever occuring in history as truth.
It is not that my knowledge is superior (as you say I am supposing) it is as Ephesians states that it is by the grace of God that I have been saved (not through any works of my own) so that I may not boast. I am certainly not stating that personal evangelism should begin with one “presenting a case” or “showing all the evidence.” That was actually my big takeaway from Jim and Casper’s book and their visit to the church I attend. We should have space in our lives for non-believers. We should certainly treat them and their views with respect. We should build open and honest relationships with non-believers that facilitate open dialogue about Christianity and the church. I think Casper has definatly helped me to look at how our church is viewed by sceptics/non-believers/atheists as so forth.
However, that does not mean that I am required to be “uncertain” that Jesus Christ died to pay for my sins so that I may have a personal relationship with the creator of the universe.
Do I begin my discusions with my non beleiver friends with these statements not at all.
Let me show you why there is and must be certainty in life:
Let’s say Helen that you are choosen to be a member of a jury for a murder trial. There is a heap of evidence that implicates the defendent as the person who committed the murder; i.e. three eye-witnesses who say that someone fitting his description left the scene around the time of the murder, the defendents DNA at the scene of the crime, and so on and so on. Now it is up to you to come up with a verdict. If you “beleive” that the evidence “proves” that he is guilty than you must give that verdict. You cannot have a reasonable doubt. I believe that if I used your line of thinking I could always find a reasonable doubt (the police could have planted the DNA, the eye-witnesses have a hidden agenda, etc.) There would never be a convicted criminal every without certainty.
I feel at this point I have rambled way too long. My point in the initial posting was to get a response from Jim as to why it feels that he cannot be certain of his own beliefs. I will still eagerly await his posting.
Thanks!
Comment by: Jim Henderson
8 01/20/08 2:53 PM | Comment Link |Jordan
For me faith is not based on facts but on trust.
I believe Jesus lived, died and rose from the dead. I believe he died because of and for my sinfulness. I believe he is God and there is no other.
I trust what I believe is true. I can’t prove nor do I feel any need to.
I have no need to be “certain” of these things. I willfully trust them to be true. However I could be wrong ( like those who denied the world was round because it “feels” flat.
The worship of certainty has replaced trust in Jesus. It has made us into arrogant and oftentimes cold hearted people.
We have become comfortable dismissing people who dont believe what we believe by simply saying “too bad” - Which sounds eerily simlilar to Taliban sayings.
I know all the scripture passages and could of course bring out my own.
I think the reality is that Christians have always continue to disagree about this issue. I am fine with that.
If that is dissatisfying to you or others I reccomend they write a book proposal and get published. That way others will be able to interact with your ideas
Thanks for taking time to share your thougths - you guys have spent a lot of time thinking about this.
Turns out I disagree with Christians as well as Atheists
Comment by: Jim Henderson
9 01/20/08 11:14 PM | Comment Link |Just so you know - Casper already knows the positions of Ravi Zacharias, Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel.
and continues to find them non compelling.
I dont understand why Christians think he has never heard or read the same stuff they read.
Comment by: Helen
10 01/21/08 7:57 AM | Comment Link |Jordan wrote:
Jordan you seem to be saying you’d convict someone of murder even when there is reasonable doubt he committed the crime. That scares me. I hope you don’t ever get picked for jury dury.
Comment by: Jordan
11 01/21/08 1:30 PM | Comment Link |Jim,
Thanks for your time and your opinion. I can appreciate your stance, even though I disagree with it. I do however take exception to your insenuation that I am worshiping some kind of “certainty” idol. Nor do I feel that I am a cold hearted person in anyway. As I mentioned before holding onto a belief in absolute truth does not mean that one uses that as there means of personal evangelism. Unless I heard your stance on evangelism incorrectly I tend to agree with you that it is more about building relationships with all types of people and allowing God’s grace and love to shine through us. It is by his Grace that anyone will come to have faith in Christ not by any well thought out “argument.” I still don’t think that a belief regarding this type of evangelism interfers with a stance on absolute truth. I also did not really appreciate your insenuation that Christians who have a belief in absolute truth should be compared in anyway to the hate breeding of the Taliban. I disagree with you Jim but surely wouldn’t attempt to comapre your beliefs in anyway to something like that. That seemed a bit unnecessary.
I do agree that we just both have different opinions on what is truth and what makes a fact a fact; which I am sure that philosophers always have and always will argue with one another about.
Other than that I think we probably have a lot more in common than differences as far as what it means to be a Christ follower and what Christians today need to do to emulate the love of Christ to a fallen world and how to be more open, accepting, and sensitive of non-believers attending our churches.
My link to Ravi’s site was not intended for Casper, but for fellow believers who might find his arguments regarding absolute truth compelling. I have no intention and have not attempted to persuade Casper in anyway. I was more curious as to the differing opinions of my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. Your’s in particular. Thank you for letting me know your opinion.
Casper, I certainly hope that was not how you took my link to Ravi’s site, as an attempted to convert you. I will just have to keep hope that you have the pleasure of meeting a great evangelist like a Kurt Cameron who will be able to quickly put you through a witty line of questions and bring you over from the dark side. Obviously, I am kidding and poking fun at that type of evangelism you both seem to slam. You never know though it’s probably worked on someone.
Helen, I think you missed my point entirely. I apologize that I didn’t more clearly state my argument for you. Maybe someday a smarter man/or woman than I will be able to formualte a better example for you regarding absolute truth. Sorry if my stating my opinion has, in anyway, caused any offense. That was never my intention.
Thanks a million one and all.
God Bless!
Comment by: benjamin ady
12 01/22/08 12:22 AM | Comment Link |The comment about the Taliban made a lot of sense to me. Recently some of the leading christian purveyors of “absolute truth”, an organization called “Focus on the Family” (maybe you’ve heard of it?) came out with a very strongly worded critique of Christians who had chosen to respond graciously to a a group of Muslim scholars and clerics who had graciously proposed a dialogue which could start with our similarities, not our differences.
It seems clear to me that FOTF and those other “absolute truth” Christians who helped elect the current administration and have supported the ongoing brutal war against Iraq are in some ways very similar to the Taliban. No doubt the Muslim leaders who chose to reach out for gracious dialogue with Christians were also strongly criticized by the Taliban and other such “Absolute truth” muslims for their “sellout” and “betrayal”.
Do you remember Tevye, in Fiddler on the roof, and the way he couldn’t bend his “absolute truth” for his beautiful third daughter, Hodel, and thus treated her shockingly, causing such enormous pain for her and the whole family? Seems to me that the more certain we are of our absolute truth, the more likely we are to wage war or destroy families over it.
Does that make any sense? Can you see it?
Seems to me like Jim is saying maybe there’s a better way.
Comment by: Matt Casper
13 01/22/08 4:14 PM | Comment Link |I think every Christian who calls the bible true must also empower non-Christians with the ability to call a book they like “true.” For Muslims, it’s the Koran that’s true. For Scientoligists, it’s “Dianetics” that’s true. For Jews, the Torah.
And for me…? Well, truth is just plain old hard-to-come-by. In America, where profiting off each other is our way of life, dishonesty and deception are our main currency, though we’d never admit it (being dishonest and all).
It dawns on me all the time: in the workplace, where we hide our salary info; in the classroom where it’s more important to agree with the teacher than honestly speak one’s mind; in government, where our leaders say what they think more than 50% of us wants to hear.
Comment by: pamhogeweide
14 01/22/08 8:45 PM | Comment Link |well stated, jim. when are you gonna write your next book on beliefism?
Comment by: benjamin ady
15 01/22/08 9:28 PM | Comment Link |Jordan,
just wanted to say you have caused any offense at this end. Thank you for engaging in dialogue.
Comment by: pamhogeweide
16 01/23/08 10:53 AM | Comment Link |did you mean to say NOT caused?
Comment by: Matt Casper
17 01/23/08 2:36 PM | Comment Link |Jordan and I agree: Kirk Cameron is a heck of an evangelist. :)
I think we’re all learning that “Truth” (with a capital T) is subjective. Jordan, like many Christians, calls his belief system true. And I understand that. After all, for him and all Christians–especially the pastors, church staff, etc.–there’s a lot riding that belief system being true: earthly rewards, heaven, God’s favor, (employment, in the case of the pastors), and so on.
I guess I would just ask Christians to remember that their truth is merely one among many in the world. Just because they have chosen to personally believe it, does not make it universal as there is no objective way to test that truth as being The Truth.
Maybe we’d all be better served by focusing less on what’s true and focusing more on what’s constructive…? True/false, right/wrong, good/bad… looking at our world through these filters only creates divisions (after all, for Jordan’s truth to be The Truth means that the world’s 1 billion Hindus are false/wrong).
That’s what I have been learning throughout this process. A belief system is neither right nor wrong as it’s a choice made by an individual. But how that belief system impacts others is where the work is. Is it constructive (making the world a better place for all people) or destructive (excluding some based on sexual preference, flying planes into buildings, killing those who do not share it)?
This approach is working for me. I’d love to know if would work on a larger scale…
Comment by: Helen
18 01/23/08 8:09 PM | Comment Link |Matt, I’m all for constructive belief systems - great idea!
Comment by: nobody
19 01/29/08 10:07 PM | Comment Link |Helen wrote: “In which of these ways are you superior to those who don’t believe? What do you have that they lack?”
Answer: Eternal life.
Jordan, as a Christian, you should love Casper. Therefore your heart breaks at the thought of him facing facing eternal condemnation for rejecting Jesus as the Way. So, you would want to try to convert him if you loved him. Don’t apologize.
This book and this whole conversation baffles me.
Comment by: nobody
20 01/29/08 10:52 PM | Comment Link |There is a subversive arrogance on this forum cleverly disguised as overt humility. It seems like this forum is mostly a mutual admiration society for those who have a distaste for anyone who believes and advocates the Bible or Jesus as the Way.
The following comments demonstrate arrogance on the parts of those posing as humble true believers. These same people reduce the Truth(Jesus)to just another way rather than The Way.
“If that is dissatisfying to you or others I reccomend they write a book proposal and get published. That way others will be able to interact with your ideas”
“Apparently John is comfortable making space for his fellow Jewish seekers but not for other kinds of seekers”
“I think we’re all learning that “Truth” (with a capital T) is subjective.”
Casper, Truth is not subjective. Jesus is Truth and He is Absolute. Call me arrogant if you want. I make no apologies for standing for Truth.
Comment by: Helen
21 01/30/08 7:31 AM | Comment Link |“Nobody”, how can I take your God seriously if you can’t even trust him enough to use your real name on a website?
Don’t you think he’d protect you if you did?
Comment by: nobody
22 01/30/08 8:15 AM | Comment Link |He is not my God, as you say. He is the one true God. I am nothing and my (or your for that matter) belief in Him is of no consequence to His existence.
Just like an atheist chooses not to believe in God and is respected for that choice on this forum (as he should be), I should be respected for choosing not to use my real name. According to your purported standards, I should also be equally respected for choosing to believe Jesus is the Way the Truth and the Life. Why does this premise immediately exclude me from the realm of respect all of you humble true believers extend to everyone else? Instead, you immediately discredit and dismiss me because I claim Jesus as Truth…which is no surprise…the world did the same thing to Jesus.
What is so wrong with believing?
Comment by: Jim Henderson
23 01/30/08 8:26 AM | Comment Link |Im sure Jesus is proud of you for taking the heathen bullets that fly around this site
Hey,have you seen the most recent new translation of I Cor 13 (MEV modernist evangelical version)
“Now remain faith hope and love but the greatest of these is truth”
Comment by: nobody
24 01/30/08 8:52 AM | Comment Link |Funny joke if this weren’t so serious.
They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 2 Thess 2:10
ah, but I discredit myself already.
Why do you continue, as a pastor, to fail to show love for those who choose to believe? Instead you are snide and cynical towards your brothers and sisters in Christ…speaking in the tone of the accuser of the brethren.
Yes, the greatest of these is love…but not in the absence of faith and hope. You assume because I have faith and hope, that I have no love. If my comments reflect this, I truly apologize. Yes the greatest is love look at the last words of Stephen.
Comment by: Nobody
25 01/30/08 12:49 PM | Comment Link |1 Corinthians 13:6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.
2 Thess 2:10 They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
1 John 2:15-16 15Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.
For what it’s worth…or not.
Perhaps in your caricature of me, Jesus is proud I can recall these scriptures.
I was posting in passion and from the bottom of my heart and was met with cynicism and outright rejection.
My heart breaks for the members of the church as well as seekers being robbed of the blessed hope in Jesus Christ. The “church” is no longer professing the gospel and is now professing relative subjective truth. Where is the hope in that?
Shaking the dust from my sandals. I’m praying for you, Jim and Casper and all who sit under the teaching of relativism. Goodbye.
Comment by: Helen
26 01/30/08 1:17 PM | Comment Link |Nobody wrote:
You came here and insulted us. What were you expecting in response: a hug? Congratulations?
I asked you a serious question. Why didn’t you answer it? I seriously would like to know why you feel afraid to post under your real name if God is in control and watching over you.
Comment by: Helen
27 01/30/08 1:42 PM | Comment Link |Nobody, I apologize - I didn’t realize you DID answer my question (or you responded to it, anyway).
How did I discredit and dismiss you? I simply asked a question based on not understanding why a believer in an all-powerful God would not use their real name.
If you want respect then why didn’t you start by showing us respect? Isn’t that what Jesus said: do to others as you would like them to do to you?
Comment by: Kathy
28 01/30/08 3:40 PM | Comment Link |Helen,
I also felt that your response to “Nobody” was imappropriate. He/she was making a legitimate point and the only answer you can come up with is some flippant “Why don’t you use your real name? Surley an all powerful God will protect you”. So far I have not seen any of your posts as thought provoking or useful for correction I did not think anything Jordan or Nobody said as insulting. Yet you came off at both of them. It also seems to me that this is the “mutual admiration” book club for “Jim and Casper go to Church”.
John brought up many useful and thought provoking scriptures and he too was chided. Practice what you preach, Helen. (Is that your real name?)
Comment by: Helen
29 01/30/08 5:32 PM | Comment Link |Kathy wrote:
It’s the name on my birth certificate.
Comment by: nobody
30 01/30/08 7:23 PM | Comment Link |If I believe in an all powerful God, why don’t I use my real name….or just throw myself from the top of a building? Not that using my real name is equal to throwing myself from the top of a building, but your clever question is not an original challenge. See Matthew 4:6-7.
Has our love waxed so cold?
Comment by: Helen
31 01/31/08 3:49 PM | Comment Link |Nobody, as you said, using your real name is not equal to throwing yourself off a building.
I’m familiar with the Bible passage you mentioned (I studed it in Bible Study Fellowship). Are you implying I’m the devil? (Or inspired by him?)
Comment by: nobody
32 01/31/08 6:05 PM | Comment Link |Helen,
I know you’re not the devil. You’re Helen…it’s the name on your birth certificate :)
But you don’t know who I am. hahaha. That was an evil laugh.
Here….my name is Jeannie, honestly. I have been out of church for about 10 years now. I was just too busy living for myself….Going to law school and trying to start a career. Then I had babies and felt my mission was to be home with them. So that’s what I do now.
I love the Lord dearly and came to repentance for putting myself first all those years. The Lord then opened his Word to me in an amazing way. I truly began to feel His presence in my life. I wanted desperately to find a church home and make friends with fellow believers my age.
What I have found in the “church” since my return is a total upheaval. Truth is now relative. The gospel is not preached. Intellectualism and philosophies of men dominate the messages given from the pulpit. Hope in the saving power of Jesus is not proclaimed. Works are the focus now. Everyone’s doing mystical prayer (which is a totally different topic we won’t get into). And there’s this whole emergent conversation about changing the Gospel and Christianity altogether.
Long story short, I came back to church and church wasn’t there anymore. When I bring these things up to my “church” friends, they just don’t see it. I feel very alone, but that’s ok. I know I am not really alone.
I hope in the Truth. I have faith in the Truth…and I love the Truth. How can we believe in anything if we don’t claim anything as absolute truth?
I’ve opened up to you so you can see where I am coming from. I am not a suicide bomber Taliban pharisee. I am just a woman who has been cleansed by the blood of Jesus and rejoices in His saving power and His Word. I am sad to see the church wandering around in such darkness.
I would love nothing more than for Casper and everyone else to experience what I have truly experienced in Jesus and come to a love for the Truth.
Yours in the love of Christ,
Jeannie
Comment by: Helen
33 01/31/08 7:35 PM | Comment Link |Thanks Jeannie.
It sucks when your friends don’t understand. I know what that’s like - I’ve been there.