Tag Archives: Rachel Held Evans

About those “doubt-filled” “Christian” Leftists . . .

I have no issues with people having doubts about their faith.  My standard advice is to “doubt your doubts” and focus on what you do know, and to keep studying to address your doubts.  Be like John the Baptist was when he was in prison and go straight to the source (but leave out the part where his head gets cut off). It isn’t like there are a lot of new questions in Christendom that we haven’t analyzed over the last 2,000 years.

But the “doubt-filled” “Christian” Leftists like Rachel Held Evans are a different story.  They feign doubt over orthodox beliefs they aren’t ready to jettison completely (though probably for worldly concerns rather than theological ones).  And on their pet heretical issues they exhibit no doubts at all.

First, note how being “doubt-filled” is the sole descriptor of her faith on her Twitter page.

a

But then look at the LGBTQX topic, where the universal church had clear teachings until the last decade or two, when Leftist “churches” splintered off into the pro-perversion camp.

b

The “gcnconf” she is referring to is the oxymoronic “Gay Christian Network” Conference.  She was a speaker at a previous conference of theirs.  Are you getting the feeling that Mrs. Evans doesn’t have a lot of doubt about her theology of human sexuality?  She is desperate to be identical to the world, just like the rest of the “Christian” Left.

She also had no doubts about supporting Hillary Clinton and her pro-abortion extremism.  Mrs. Evans rationalized that supporting Hillary’s plans, which included taxpayer-funded abortions up to the child’s 1st breath, would reduce abortions — because unicorns or something.

She is a typical phony, mocking the word of God for profit and stating outright lies about  how she allegedly holds to biblical inspiration (while simultaneously saying that every passage about God telling the Israelites to take over the Promised Land was a lie).

In the same way, Jim Wallis has no doubts about how the Gospel is “all about wealth redistribution.” Mark “Jesus is not my God” Sandlin has no doubts about Jesus not being divine.  Chuck Currie has no doubts about Jesus not being the only way to salvation.  And so on.

We should have compassion for those suffering from the temptation of same-sex attraction. We shouldn’t grandstand on sins just because they aren’t temptations for us. But we should never affirm any kind of sins. That is hatred toward God and neighbor and love for ourselves.

Don’t be taken in by the faux skepticism of these diseased trees.  You can be sure that whatever they are “doubting” today is just false humility about their heresy of tomorrow.

Rachel Held Evans caught lying

Update and welcome to Twitter visitors!  I addressed one of Mrs. Evans’ Superfans here and that got a lively discussion going.  The “Christian” Leftists continue to prey on people’s biblical ignorance by insisting that I’m accusing God of genocide by agreeing with the Bible.  I am not making that up.  But anyone who just scans the OT (see all the promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the book of Joshua, and more) can see that you can’t make Evans’ claims and still hold that scripture is inspired.  There are countless verses that it was God’s idea and his doing to clear it out — including the varied miraculous accounts of how He accomplished it. Evans calls the human writers and the Holy Spirit liars.  On the “Christian” Left view the entire OT makes no sense.  It is sad but not surprising that her fans think this passage is a “dogmatic and fundamentalist understanding of biblical inspiration.”

2 Timothy 3:16–17 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

And they ignore how Jesus viewed the OT.  Friendly reminder: Jesus referred to the most controversial parts of the OT without apology: Adam & Eve, real marriage, creation, Noah, Jonah, Sodom, etc.  So, for example, Jesus had zero issues with the flood.  And he’s the same Jesus who did this:

Jude 5 Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.

I’ll let you decide whether to agree with her or Jesus on whether the OT is the word of God.


Short version: Any definition of biblical inspiration in which hundreds of verses are blasphemous lies is malicious and/or ignorant. And that’s how Rachel Held Evans and much of the “Christian” Left define it.

Mrs. Evans has been her usual passive-aggressive self on her Twitter page lately, attacking scripture and implicitly denying the divinity of Jesus. But when called out for specifics, she lied and said she “absolutely” believes the Hebrew Scriptures are inspired.

evans

But that’s not what she said in her book:

God never told the Israelites to kill the Canaanites. The Israelites believed that God told them to kill the Canaanites.

Here’s what really happened: God never got the Bible wrong. The “Christian” Left believe that God got the Bible wrong.

You cannot say things like that while claiming that the scriptures were inspired.  Just scan the Bible and see how many passages would be lies if what what Evans said was true.  And not just lies, but blasphemous lies. It wouldn’t be a little fib if you cleared out and killed an entire country and falsely claimed it was God’s idea.

Read the Bible for yourself then decide who is lying: Evans or the authors of scripture.

P.S. If that wasn’t enough, check out Jes Kast, whom Evans adores, and see if her theology is biblical.

With false teacher Rachel Held Evans as the author you can judge a book by its cover

Note: An update after her death on 5/4/2019 is at the bottom.

fake3Faux evangelical Rachel Held Evans wrote A Year of Biblical Womanhood: How a Liberated Woman Found Herself Sitting on Her Roof, Covering Her Head, and Calling Her Husband “Master” and in this case you can judge a book by its cover.  Evans sets out to mock the word of God that she claims to believe, and she succeeds before you even open the book. This is why the “Christian” Left loves her and why she gets so much Leftist media attention.

Exhibit A: The picture and subtitle of Evans on the roof relates to Proverbs 21:9 (and repeated in Proverbs 25:4) “It is better to live in a corner of the housetop than in a house shared with a quarrelsome wife.”

You don’t need a PhD in theology to see how badly — and deliberately? — she misapplied the verse.

  1. It isn’t a literal command to anyone. It is a colorful illustration teaching the wisdom of not marrying someone who is quarrelsome. It isn’t immoral to marry such a person, but it also isn’t particularly wise.  It wouldn’t be pleasant to live on the corner of your roof (they had flat roofs), but it would be more unpleasant to have a quarrelsome wife.
  2. The biblical illustration doesn’t have the quarrelsome person on the roof, it has her suffering spouse there.
  3. It was not a punishment, it was a metaphorical escape.

Evans didn’t let those pesky and obvious details got in the way of mocking the word of God.  She accomplished exactly what she wanted to in this book.  Her message is basically this: “Hey people, I am totally a Christian, but let me show you how silly the Bible can be.  If you find something there you think you like then that’s great, but you shouldn’t take it seriously.”

So before you even open the book you can know that she is a false teacher and enemy of the real God (as are her editors and publishers who approved it).  The only way to miss it is to not read the verses (false teachers thrive on the biblical ignorance of their followers) or to share her view that the Bible is a foolish, man-made book.

But it gets worse as Evans continues to sit in judgment of the word of God.  Referring to her parents, she said:

they seemed to know instinctively that rules that left people guilt-ridden, exhausted, and confused were not really from God.

Uh, sure.  Anything you don’t like or understand isn’t from God.  That’s Creating a God in Your Own Image 101.

Then there is this:

as a woman I have been nursing a secret grudge against the apostle Paul for about eight years.

Note how she tips her hand about her belief that the writings of Paul weren’t inspired by the Holy Spirit.  The Apostle Peter had her number 2,000 years ago:

2 Peter 3:15–16 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.

And like all “Christian” Left feminists, she falsely targets Paul and she ignores that Jesus only selected men as apostles.  Does she think Jesus was a misogynist, or that even though He was the creator of the universe that He was afraid to upset the Pharisees’ sensibilities?

Worse yet, she accuses the authors of the Bible of being blasphemous liars, allegedly speaking for God in literally hundreds of passages when it was “really” what they wanted.  She quoted this with her approval:

God never told the Israelites to kill the Canaanites. The Israelites believed that God told them to kill the Canaanites.

So Evans also disagrees with Jesus, who affirmed the Old Testament down to its smallest details, and insists – without evidence — that massive sections of the Bible are lies.  Or could it be that Evans is believing what she wants God to be and that she is the liar?  I suppose she thinks that the command against making a God in your own image is just another one of those passages that the writers made up.  Anyone who has actually read the Old Testament would know that passage after passage refers to the Israelites taking over the Promised Land.  Evans insists that all of those are not only lies, but blasphemous lies.  What else would it be if you falsely blamed God for what would have been unjustified mass murder and land-stealing?

Evans told people that voting for Hillary Clinton is “pro-life.”  You have to be a true Molech-worshiping ghoul to hold that view.  Hillary is inseparable from Planned Parenthood and the rest of the pro-choice extremists — including the “Christian” Left – who not only insist on legal abortions up to to child’s first breath but want more abortions via taxpayer-funding.  Yet for Evans that was the only “Christian” option.  Indeed.

Evans posted countless pictures and gushing commentary over the #womensmarch #abortionmarch but was nearly silent for the #MarchforLife — and even then she only criticized it. “Christian” Leftists really tip their hands that way, claiming to be pro-life while being the true pro-abortion extremists. If they really believed what they said they’d be opening up pregnancy centers all over. Instead, they reflexively support anything Planned Parenthood does.

And you’d think that Mrs. “Oh noes, the patriarchy!!” would find some way to criticize Islam, which has treated women inhumanely for 1,500 years.  But she was silent.

While she was quick to play the fallacious race card against Christians, don’t miss where Racist Held Evans goes on a hypocritical rant lamenting how if Roe v Wade is overturned then less minority children will be killed.  She also accused pro-lifers of being racist and not knowing that we save mostly minority lives.  Who knew?  She deleted the Tweets when people outed her but I saved them as a public service.  It was epic.

I’ll buy a Christian book by someone whose primary self-descriptor is “doubt-filled” right after I buy one from a mathematician who doubts that 2+2=4.  Having some matters you haven’t completely studied is one thing. For example, I hadn’t delved deeply into continuation/cessation particulars until recently, so I didn’t blog about it. But if you are so doubt-filled that it defines your faith, maybe you should read instead of write.

Also note how she has no doubts about abortion being legal to the child’s first breath, that you can change your gender, that LGBTQX behaviors are not sins, that women should be pastors, etc.  Oddly enough, when her views line up with the world’s she has no doubts at all.

You can also know Evans is a false teacher by those she promotes and partners with.  She works directly with Nadia Bolz-Weber, who, among other things, says there is “no shame in ethically sourced porn,” that “the Bible’s not clear about [s%#^]!” and so much more  (Just as Evans claims that “It [the Bible] fails massively at getting to the point”). This isn’t some loose pairing, either.  They co-host a freak show called Why Christian each year and endorse each other’s work..

Also check out Jes Kast, whom Evans adores, and see if her theology is biblical, or Glennon Doyle Melton, the “super mom” who left her husband to be with a lesbian.

Evans is a typical Leftist hypocrite, believing ridiculous phonies like Kristine Blasey Ford (Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser) but dismissing credible stories of abuse by the wife of prominent “Christian” Left pastor Tony Jones – who just “happens” to help with her conferences. Go figure.

As bad as the self-avowed “Christian” Leftists are, at least they own their label (sans the scare quotes).  Evans masquerades as an Evangelical while holding “Christian” Leftist views, which makes her even worse than them.

She’s been really cranky since Trump won.  She completely ignores all the sex scandals and cover-ups from Leftist politicians, celebrities and journalists and completely fixates on Donald Trump.  She won’t admit it, but I think it is pretty obvious that she planned to have a role with Caesar – er, uh, Hillary — just like she did with Obama.  Trump has false teacher Paula White, Obama had – and Hillary probably would have had – Mrs. Evans.

And her latest book is just more blasphemy, where she titled it Inspired but obviously believes it isn’t.  Typical disingenuous behavior on her part.

Run, don’t walk, from faux evangelicals like Evans. In her own words and deeds she shows how much she loves the world and not Jesus.


Update: Truly sad that she died, especially having young kids.  But I have to be candid: When I read the comments of those who supported her and were affirmed by her, I am reminded at how wicked her “ministry” was. These were typical:

Be mad at God. Be mad at the Universe. Be mad. Be mad. Be mad.

4 hours ago   I had permission to explore LGBTQ+ affirming theology & eventually come out as bisexual. She was one of the first affirming Christians I encountered in my research, & her loud support is directly tied to who I am today.

37 minutes ago The door she opened for me by saying it’s okay to be angry at the church and it’s okay to leave, led to a thousand other open doors and new pathways that created who I am now: a queer Christian woman who no longer fears the white cisheteropatriarchy.

3 hours ago   I first started exploring Side A theology, which has led to me being in a wonderful, loving, gay relationship. I’m able to be myself and live my best life because of her opening my eyes.

4 hours ago  I’m an openly queer woman serving as an elder in my church . I never could have reconciled feminism and Christianity all those years ago without her.

If that’s what she encouraged people to do then it is a tragic legacy.

Someone wrote this in response to a blog post noting Evans’ bad theology:

Rude. Heartless. So inappropriate. Can you picture Christ responding like this – calling someone an apostate immediately after their untimely death? I don’t think so. I don’t know what god you guys are serving, but it doesn’t reflect the God that I know.

The commenter was tone-deaf to the fact that that’s exactly how Jesus will respond when someone dies — either with judgment or with “well done, good and faithful servant.” Someone rightly pointed out what Jesus said about untimely deaths:

Luke 13:1–5 There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”

Not surprisingly, Evan’s fans reject what Jesus said.

Roundup

ROUNDUP TIME

GAO Report Confirms Obama Lied: 1,036 ObamaCare Plans Pay for Abortions — Wait . . . what?!? . . . are you telling me that someone who advocates the slaughter of unwanted human beings is capable of lying?  Explain . . .

We’re Winning the War on Global Hunger — Now for some great news.

If You Struggle Over an Issue… You Must Be Right! — Great post by Pastor Timothy about Rachel Held Evans’ “shocking” shift to pro-gay theology.  Why would anyone take Evans seriously on anything biblical — let alone the most divisive issue of our time — especially when she just “happened” to end up “reluctantly” agreeing with the world on the topic?  She embarrassed herself with her “A Year of Biblical Womanhood” gimmick, where she did triple fails on simple verses like Proverbs 21:9.  The verse is a simple bit of wisdom about choosing a spouse wisely yet she turned it into a bizarre ritualistic punishment.  She accomplished her apparent goal of telling the unsaved that the Bible isn’t something they should take seriously, yet she still markets herself as an evangelical.  More here.

I’m doing some research around the web and came across Rachel Held’s Evans post on God and the Gay Christian. In there she tells us that she has another post that is in the works about why she changed her mind on God and the gay Christian. Gee, can’t wait.

Her testimony and preface for this upcoming post is simply that she has struggled over the issue, she has had many sleepless nights. She has really wrestles with it… therefore, her conclusions must be sound. . .

Dear Children — Be sure to check out the new blog by the blogger formerly known as the Bumbling Genius.  Great start!

Darwin’s followers now spin the function of “vestigial” hipbones in whales, dolphins — Darwinian evolution, wrong again.  Yawn.

Middle School Bans Teen’s “Virginity Rocks” T-Shirt — You’d think they be too busy handing out condoms and taking kids to have abortions without their parents’ consent, but they found time to silence a positive message.

Study: Nightly network news covered Bush’s crumbling job approval 124 times to this point in year six — versus nine times for Obama

Mmmmmm, that’s good bias.

Wife-Beating Video of Ray Rice OK but Not Pictures of Aborted Babies

If wife beating violence is morally wrong, it’s hard for to imagine why a woman killing her unborn baby is not the worst kind of domestic violence.

Chris Christie and New Jersey’s War on Women and the Second Amendment — No consequences for Ray Rice but jail for carrying a licensed weapon?!  Ridiculous. I hope they take this to the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, McClain is working to put 27-year-old mother of two Shaneen Allen — herself a first-time offender — into jail for at least three years, maybe even a decade.

Allen didn’t punch anyone out in an elevator. She simply didn’t know that her Pennsylvania concealed-carry permit was not valid in New Jersey.

In October 2013, Allen was pulled over for a minor traffic offense. She dutifully informed the officer of her gun and presented her concealed-carry permit. She was arrested.

Allen had a gun because she had been robbed twice in 2013 and feared for her children. Following her arrest, and McClain’s insistence that she face the maximum possible penalty for her oversight, Allen reportedly lost her job.

Politics: Uh oh: Middle East allies Obama expects to fight ISIS on ground don’t trust him — This is predictable yet still stunning to see how far we’ve fallen.

Which means they’re paying attention.

Many of us focused Wednesday on President Obama’s insistence that the United States will provide air power only in the fight against ISIS, and will expect other nations to do the fighting on the ground. We talked a lot about how foolish it is to concede such an important strategic option to the enemy before the fighting even starts, and worse yet, to publicly tell the enemy you’re doing so.

We also talked about the fact that Obama obviously made this concession in an attempt to sell his plan to voters, which means he is putting domestic politics ahead of victory. Hardly a surprise coming from this president, but it’s jarring nonetheless to realize it.

What not many asked, however, is what makes Obama think these other nations will do what he says he wants them to do? We’ve all seen what ISIS does to the people they capture (and they did it again on Saturday to British hostage David Haines). We all know what can happen to anyone who is called to engage in combat.

Why would Middle Eastern allies of the United States just go along with a plan that sees U.S. forces dropping bombs from the air, while their guys have to fight on the ground? Did Obama actually secure the agreement of these nations to do so before he went on TV and told us this is what is going to happen?

I ask this because the Washington Post reported earlier in the week that Middle Eastern nations have noticed the same thing about Obama that many of us here at home have noticed. As Mustafa Alani of the Gulf Research Center in Dubai puts it: “We have reached a low point of trust in this administration. We think in a time of crisis Mr. Obama will walk away from everyone if it means saving his own skin.”

Mark Sanford breaks up with fiance, blames ex-wife — People who break up marriages to hook up with adulterers always seemed shocked — shocked, I say! — that their SOUL MATES could do such a terrible thing to them.  So predictable.  It never occurs to them that “soul mate” = “someone who seems at least a little better than the person I made a life-long commitment to.”

original

False teacher Rachel Held Evans on World Vision

As painful as the LGBTQX debate can be, there is one significant benefit: It shines a light on who the sheep and goats are in the church.  While we don’t have a perfect view of the invisible church (i.e., the body of those truly saved by Jesus), issues like this certainly make it more clear.  While people can be “saved and confused” on some topics, for “Christian” leaders to be this far off the mark is great evidence against them.

Rachel Held Evans has had a lot of squishy, creepy, anti-biblical teachings for years, but she really came out of the closet on this one.  In Who’s this child sponsorship about, anyway?, she initially harangued existing World Vision donors to stick with WV even though they had (temporarily) taken an anti-biblical view on marriage.  Their love of the world was clear to many donors, including me.  Evans insisted that it was all about the kids and that donors shouldn’t move their funds.  But she was celebratory about the change.

Then, two days later, she went into full “Oh, the humanity!” mode and noted how “betrayed” brand new pro-LGBTQX donors must feel.  Oddly, she never thought about how Bible-believing Christians might have felt betrayed by the initial change.

UPDATE:

My sources are confirming that, after pressure from evangelicals, World Vision has decided to reverse their decision on employing gay and lesbian people.

Yes, we pressured them.  I let them know that I would finish my current commitments and then shift my giving to organizations that didn’t mock the word of God.

I don’t know what to say. I really don’t.

For those of you who donated, thank you. That money will be put to good use, I assure you. But I am deeply, profoundly sorry that I inadvertently rallied these fundraising efforts in response to a decision that would ultimately be reversed.

Is Evans so naive to think that WV did that without LGBTQX pressure?  If they caved to them, why wouldn’t the cave again when faced with the loss of funds?

Though I sincerely hope everyone who sponsored a child or made a donation will continue to support World Vision, I can see how this effort would make you feel betrayed, as though it were launched under false pretense. And I’m so, so sorry for that. I’m as surprised by all this as you are, but I take full responsibility.

Full responsibility?  She’ll be giving them their money back?

Yes, betrayal is a good word to describe the initial change.

This whole situation has left me feeling frustrated, heartbroken, and lost. I don’t think I’ve ever been more angry at the Church, particularly the evangelical culture in which I was raised and with which I for so long identified. I confess I had not realized the true extent of the disdain evangelicals have for our LGBT people, nor had I expected World Vision to yield to that disdain by reversing its decision under pressure. Honestly, it feels like a betrayal from every side.

No, we are just still trusting the word of God.  And we love homosexuals too much to lie and tell them to stay in that lifestyle.  But Evans & Co. love the world and their popularity more than Jesus.

Something has to change. And I’m committed to being a part of that change. But not today.

Today, I don’t know what else to do but grieve with everyone else who feels like a religious refugee today. This sucks, and I’m so, so sorry.

I hope you take some comfort in the fact that perhaps, as a result of our petty warring, some kids were sponsored today.

So it was no big deal to change to the pro-gay view, but a huge deal to switch back two days later.  Got it.

We’ve sponsored WV children for 16 years. I will continue until they are out of the program but will move my donations elsewhere after that. The local organizations do great work (we’ve visited our Kenya child 5 times and have been really impressed with the field office) but the worldwide organization is obviously troubled.  I have plenty of other organizations I can give to.

World Vision has made a big mistake: By trying to please the LGBTQX lobby and not anticipating the reaction of Bible-believing Christians, they’ve alienated both sides. That’s to be expected when you try to please the world and take anti-biblical stances.

But the good news is that no one has to wonder if Rachel Held Evans and the like are to be trusted or not.  They have made it crystal-clear that they are wolves in sheep’s clothing.

“Useful Idiots for Baal”

Erick Erickson does a great take down of Rob Bell, Rachel Held Evans, Donald Miller, Jim Wallis, Joel Osteen and more.   We need more of this!  Via Useful Idiots for Baal:

Too many of these people, often hipster prophets, make people comfortable in their sin while trying to sell Jesus. One comfortable in his sin rarely sees the need to embrace one who will extricate him from his sin. These peddlers of pop Christianity are useful idiots for Baal because they claim their faith in Christ without ever making anyone uncomfortable in their here and now. Christ made people uncomfortable.

As a friend noted this passage from Bonhoeffer last night in email:

“The messengers of Jesus will be hated to the end of time. They will be blamed for all the division which rend cities and homes. Jesus and his disciples will be condemned on all sides for undermining family life, and for leading the nation astray; they will be called crazy fanatics and disturbers of the peace.”

— Dietrich Bonhoeffer, “The Cost of Discipleship,” 1937.

The useful idiots of Baal are not willing to go along for that ride. They’d rather their Jesus bake cakes for gay weddings.

When “pro-lifers” make pro-abortion arguments

Rachel Held Evans is a “progressive Christian” who argues for the anti-religious freedom aspects of Obamacare via Privilege and The Pill.  Along the way she makes several arguments on behalf of the pro-abortion lobby, such as this comment about when life begins:

Rabbit trail: The fact that a woman’s body naturally rejects hundreds of fertilized eggs in her lifetime raises some questions in my mind about where we draw the line regarding the personhood of a zygote. Do we count all those “natural abortions” as deaths? Did those zygotes have souls? Will I meet them in heaven? Honestly, the more I learn about the reproductive system, the harder it becomes for me to adamantly insist that I know for sure the exact moment when life begins. And it’s even harder for me to insist that everyone else agree.

But with arguments like that, “pro-lifers” like Held hand ammunition to the pro-abortion forces.  That’s a great argument, unless your opponent has the ability to see the difference between A and B:

A. Human being dies of natural causes (inside or outside the womb)

B. Human being has skull crushed and limbs ripped off by a 3rd party (inside or outside the womb)

In other words, deliberate abortions are vastly different than fertilized eggs dying of natural causes, just as murders are vastly different from grandma dying peacefully in her bed.

Held and Co. also ignore the scientific fact that the unborn are unique, living human beings from fertilization.  They have no excuse for missing that.

And even if we didn’t know when human life begins, shouldn’t we err on the side of life?  If you thought that what you are about to do might destroy an innocent human life, shouldn’t you stop what you are doing? The “we don’t know when life beings” fallacy naturally leads to abortion on demand at any stage of pregnancy.

She was also wrong about abortions and “morning after” pills:

Andrew Walker and I have published a response over at the First Things website, and we argue that her essay is mistaken on a number of levels. For instance, Evans denies that “morning-after” pills have an abortifacient mechanism. Yet somehow she misses that the FDA label on Plan B’s package says otherwise. But you don’t have to believe me. You can read the label for yourself. Notice the second sentence in bold underneath “Other information” . . .

The pro-life movement does not need any help from faux-lifers like Held who make the arguments of pro-abortionists for them.

Leftist “Evangelicals” are lying to Millenials. No surprise.

Via Why Liberal Evangelicals are Lying to Millennials — these people think it is OK to kill unwanted children and that nearly anything goes sex-wise.  They deny many essentials of the faith and are entirely worldly in their outlook.  So why be surprised with their politics disguised as religion tactics?  Stay away from these wolves.

Newark, N.J. Mayor and Senate hopeful Cory Booker is not known for proclaiming his love of Jesus or evangelizing to his fellow politicians and constituents. So as a 20-something evangelical, I find it curious that Mayor Booker is a featured key-note speaker at this weekend’s Catalyst Atlanta 2013, a Christian conference gathering together young evangelicals for worship, learning, and sharing their faith in Jesus Christ.

The mission of the Catalyst conference seems simple. So, why is Mayor Booker hoisted between speakers like Dave Ramsey and John Piper at a conference supposedly geared towards worshiping Jesus Christ, not catapulting Senate campaigns? There is an answer, but it is not so simple: Liberal Christians — despite how “apolitical” they claim to be — are feeding a repackaged version of evangelicalism to millennials for their own radical, yes political, agenda.

This year’s Catalyst conference is one such example of their crusade to spread liberal ideology, not theology. Why else would Catalyst invite Mayor Booker, whose speaker bio doesn’t even include the word Jesus, Christian, or God? Oh, but according to his political biography, as Democratic National Committee (DNC) co-chair he did advocate for no-restriction abortions and tax-payer funded abortions regardless of infringements to religious liberty.

Roundup

Obama’s Snooping Excludes Mosques, Missed Boston Bombers — This the most heinous thing of all with their un-Constitutional searches.  Just as with airport security, they deliberately avoid those most likely to be guilty.

The Art of Leading Congregational Worship — good tips.

1. If we, the congregation, can’t hear ourselves, it’s not worship. Christian worship is not a concert. . . .When the amped sound of the praise band overwhelms congregational voices, we can’t hear ourselves sing–so we lose that communal aspect of the congregation and are encouraged to effectively become “private,” passive worshipers.

2. If we, the congregation, can’t sing along, it’s not worship. … And so your virtuosity gives rise to our passivity; your creativity simply encourages our silence. And while you may be worshiping with your creativity, the same creativity actually shuts down congregational song.

Worship leaders, if you look out over the congregation and you see that we are not singing with you, something has gone wrong. Are you jamming alone up there for extended periods of time? Are you changing well-known melodies just enough to surprise us and make us hesitant to sing out, and/or adding flair that we can’t follow? Are you choosing soloistic songs with complicated melodies rather than musically simple ones designed for group singing?

False teacher spotlight: Rachel Held Evans gets a lot of play in the media posing as an evangelical Christian, but she is anything but.  I don’t care for any false teachers, but I at least prefer those who don’t pretend to be on our side.  Via A Response to Rachel Held Evans on the Today Show | Denny Burk (read it all to see how badly she mocks the  Bible and creates a god in her own image):

4. Redefinition of “evangelical.” Both Natalie Morales and the author identify Evans as an evangelical. I have already written about this elsewhere at length, but I will reiterate here. Evans’ definition of evangelical misses the mark on a number of points. Evans denies the inerrancy of scripture and says that “as a woman I have been nursing a secret grudge against the apostle Paul for about eight years.” As a young adult, she says that she stopped believing in the “Bible’s exclusive authority, inerrancy, perspicuity, and internal consistency.” She came to the conclusion that “the Bible wasn’t what I’d once believed it to be.” Evans has also pressed the case for inclusivism—the view that says people need not have conscious faith in Jesus Christ in order to be saved—and she rejects exclusivism. In a recent post, she defines the gospel without reference to the death and resurrection of Jesus and adopts the reductionism of counterimperial interpreters who say that the “good news” is “Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.” She supports gay marriage, and she has served communion to practicing homosexuals. We could go on, but that is enough to make it clear that her definition of “evangelical” is strained at best. At worse, it’s not anything close to approaching evangelical. She is not a representative of evangelical faith, despite the assumptions of the reporters at the Today Show.

The One Thing Liberals Fear You Will Do — Abandon government education.

New study: health benefits of marriage are unique to opposite-sex unions — They still aren’t equal.

Students Taught about Homosexual Foreplay Disguised As Tolerance — Oh, but they aren’t trying to indoctrinate anyone!  Right.  These people should be in jail.

An interesting thought exercise I saw on Facebook that exposes the ridiculous idea of people picking their “real” gender.

Extend the “gender identity” idea to race: imagine the outrage if someone declared their “race identity” was black or Native American and demanded, say, affirmative action in the form of scholarships, “even if it isn’t the one that matches their biological [race] at birth?”

And this as well:

Something I don’t understand: If your body actually is male and your mind says it is female, why do we assume that means there is something wrong with the body instead of something wrong with the mind?

If you have an emotional problem with your body’s gender, it seems like common sense that we need to address the emotions which contradict reality instead of the gender which is perfectly fine.
Caleb Jones

The Last Place You Look for New Members — A great post about preaching the Gospel at funerals.  I heard someone once say they didn’t want the Gospel preached at their funeral.  I thought, “Are you kidding me?  That is the last time many of those people will think about me and what I cared about.  While I’ve got their attention I certainly want them to hear the Gospel.”

I’m learning that the Word of God is more than sufficient for every occasion, including—if not especially—funerals. This is why Paul so often declared he wasn’t ashamed of the good news, for it is God’s power unto salvation (Rom. 1:16). For timid Timothys like me, it seems a bit frightening to bring this otherworldly power and wild grace to grieving family members in a funeral service. And yet, not once has someone complained to Tim. On the contrary, even unbelievers and nominal church members appreciate and admire his courage. Perhaps people respect a potent and passionate faith more than a watery and universal hope, even if they don’t agree. And maybe they are even less inclined to so easily dismiss it on their way to the graveside service.

Stan on the “least of these” — the passage actually refers to the least of these my brothers, so it is about fellow believers, not everyone on the planet.  That doesn’t mean you can’t help non-Christians, but that isn’t what Matthew 25 is about.

I saw that misquoted dozens of times (literally) at the Leftist Sojourners’ blog this week.  And of course, these people were helping the least of these with other people’s money and they were pro-abortion (i.e., they voted Democrat and none disagreed with their unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortion platform), which is a peculiar way to care for the “least of these.”

Gore Says Obama Needs To Get Serious On Dealing With Hotcoldwetdry

Alternate headline: Man with massive “carbon footprint” and lots of money at stake says other man with largest “carbon footprint” in the world needs to Do Something about no statistically significant warming in 15+ years.

The war on young girls: Obama administration approves Plan B morning after pill for young girls

Janice Crouse, also of CWFA, responded: “Once again, those who yell the loudest about caring about the nation’s children and youth applaud a decision to place our kids in a special interest experiment. Plan B, popularly called the ‘morning-after pill’ is a much-higher-dosage version of the regular birth control pill (which used to require a doctor’s prescription and continued doctor’s supervision). It is irresponsible to advocate over-the-counter use of these high-potency drugs, which would make them available to anyone – including those predators who exploit young girls. Mark my words, it will not be long before we see girls and women forced to purchase Plan B for their abuser to keep them and others enslaved. This is a pimp, predator, and pedophile’s dream – unlimited access to Plan B.”

She added: “This is a political decision, made by those who stand to profit financially from an action that puts ideology ahead of the nation’s girls and young women. Where is the scientific data and solid reasoning behind a decision that endangers minors?”

Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America also weighed in on the decision.

She told LifeNews: “President Obama is waging a War on Girls by allowing young children to get Plan B without a physician or parent’s care or knowledge. The morning after pill is a megadose of the birth-control pill, which has been categorized by the World Health Organization as a Group I carcinogen. That’s the highest possible ranking – cigarettes are also in Group I. So why are drugstores required to put cigarettes behind the counter and ask for a photo id to stop minors from purchasing them, but President Obama is now ordering the morning after pill be sold over the counter, next to candy bars and packs of gum?  This is not reproductive justice, this is child abuse.”

Just to be clear, according to the drug manufacturer, Plan B does cause abortions in some situations by preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg.

John Lennon Stopped Yoko Ono From Having Abortion of Son Sean

Equal rights!

False teacher spotlight: Rachel Held Evans

Rachel Held Evans gets a lot of play in the media posing as an evangelical Christian, but she is anything but.  I don’t care for any false teachers, but I at least prefer those who don’t pretend to be on our side.  Via A Response to Rachel Held Evans on the Today Show | Denny Burk (read it all to see how badly she mocks the  Bible and creates a god in her own image):

4. Redefinition of “evangelical.” Both Natalie Morales and the author identify Evans as an evangelical. I have already written about this elsewhere at length, but I will reiterate here. Evans’ definition of evangelical misses the mark on a number of points. Evans denies the inerrancy of scripture and says that “as a woman I have been nursing a secret grudge against the apostle Paul for about eight years.” As a young adult, she says that she stopped believing in the “Bible’s exclusive authority, inerrancy, perspicuity, and internal consistency.” She came to the conclusion that “the Bible wasn’t what I’d once believed it to be.” Evans has also pressed the case for inclusivism—the view that says people need not have conscious faith in Jesus Christ in order to be saved—and she rejects exclusivism. In a recent post, she defines the gospel without reference to the death and resurrection of Jesus and adopts the reductionism of counterimperial interpreters who say that the “good news” is “Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.” She supports gay marriage, and she has served communion to practicing homosexuals. We could go on, but that is enough to make it clear that her definition of “evangelical” is strained at best. At worse, it’s not anything close to approaching evangelical. She is not a representative of evangelical faith, despite the assumptions of the reporters at the Today Show.