Tag Archives: Virgin birth of Jesus

Opposites

One of my irritations with the “Christian” Left and their theology is that it pretends to be slightly different from orthodox Christianity while it is usually 180 degrees away on the essentials of the faith and any current hot topics.  Please note that by “Leftist theology” I don’t mean the theology of political liberals.  I am referring to people who call themselves Christians but deny the essentials of the historic faith (i.e., the kinds of things countless martyrs died for — Jesus’ divinity and exclusivity, the authority of scripture, etc.).  If you want to debate the disputable matters, go right ahead.  I’m flexible on those.  But words mean things, and far too many people use the term Christian in error.

For example, claiming that Jesus is one of many paths to God isn’t a little different than saying He is the only way, it is the opposite.  There is either one way or there is not one way.  The Bible has over 100 passages teaching directly or indirectly that Jesus is the only way to salvation.  If you don’t agree that it is your prerogative, but please don’t claim to be a Christian.

Claiming that Jesus isn’t God isn’t a little different than saying He is God, it is the opposite.  He is either God or He is not God.

Claiming that the original writings of the Bible were not inspired by God isn’t just a little different than saying they were inspired by God, it is the opposite.  The Bible is God’s Word or it is not God’s Word.  It makes roughly 3,000 claims to speak for God, so if liberal theologians think those are all false then why do they bother with the Book at all?  Their claim is that the authors of the Bible were blasphemous pathological liars because they falsely claimed to speak for God countless times.

Claiming that miracles never happen (Virgin birth, loaves & fishes, healings, the physical resurrection, etc.) isn’t just a little different than saying they did happen, it is the opposite.

Claiming that marriage can be for two men or two women isn’t a little different than saying it is between a man and a woman, it is the opposite.  It is claiming that marriage is not just between a man and a woman and that “marriage” is now whatever we want to define it to be.  The Bible couldn’t be more clear about God’s ideal for marriage and sexuality.

Claiming that Jesus approves of killing children up their first breath isn’t a little different than saying, “Don’t murder,” it is the opposite.

The “Christian” Left claims the opposite of what historic, orthodox, biblical Christianity does regarding the essentials of the faith.   They are entitled to their opinions, of course, but it is disingenuous and misleading for them to call themselves Christians while espousing those beliefs.

They have invented their own religion, which is their right.  It would just be less confusing if they would give it a new name.  And it would be more intellectually honest to stop taking money from people who do believe in the essentials that those denominations were founded upon.

They appear to worship a fictional Gandhi-Christ.  The most accurate description would be that of a Hindu sect (nothing personal, Hindus!).

Run, don’t walk, from the wolves of the “Christian” Left.

Advertisements

Opposites

contradiction.jpg

One of my irritations with the “Christian” Left and their theology is that it pretends to be slightly different from orthodox Christianity while it is usually 180 degrees away on the essentials of the faith and any current hot topics.  Please note that by “Leftist theology” I don’t mean the theology of political liberals.  I am referring to people who call themselves Christians but deny the essentials of the historic faith (i.e., the kinds of things countless martyrs died for — Jesus’ divinity and exclusivity, the authority of scripture, etc.) and are indistinguishable from the world on sexual ethics.  If you want to debate the disputable matters, go right ahead.  I’m flexible on those.  But words mean things, and far too many people use the term Christian in error.

For example, claiming that Jesus is one of many paths to God isn’t a little different than saying He is the only way, it is the opposite.  There is either one way or there is not one way.  The Bible has over 100 passages teaching directly or indirectly that Jesus is the only way to salvation.  If you don’t agree that it is your prerogative, but please don’t claim to be a Christian.

Claiming that Jesus isn’t God isn’t a little different than saying He is God, it is the opposite.  He is either God or He is not God.

Claiming that the original writings of the Bible were not inspired by God isn’t just a little different than saying they were inspired by God, it is the opposite.  The Bible is God’s Word or it is not God’s Word.  It makes roughly 3,000 claims to speak for God, so if liberal theologians think those are all false then why do they bother with the Book at all?  Their claim is that the authors of the Bible were blasphemous pathological liars because they falsely claimed to speak for God countless times. Here’s an example:

evans

Claiming that miracles never happen (Virgin birth, loaves & fishes, healings, the physical resurrection, etc.) isn’t just a little different than saying they did happen, it is the opposite.

Claiming that marriage can be for two men or two women isn’t a little different than saying it is between a man and a woman, it is the opposite.  It is claiming that marriage is not just between a man and a woman and that “marriage” is now whatever we want to define it to be.  The Bible couldn’t be more clear about God’s ideal for marriage and sexuality.

Claiming that Jesus approves of killing children up their first breath isn’t a little different than saying, “Don’t murder,” it is the opposite.

The “Christian” Left claims the opposite of what historic, orthodox, biblical Christianity does regarding the essentials of the faith.   They are entitled to their opinions, of course, but it is disingenuous and misleading for them to call themselves Christians while espousing those beliefs.

They have invented their own religion, which is their right.  It would just be less confusing if they would give it a new name.  And it would be more intellectually honest to stop taking money from people who do believe in the essentials that those denominations were founded upon.

They appear to worship a fictional Gandhi-Christ.  The most accurate description would be that of a Hindu sect (nothing personal, Hindus!).

Run, don’t walk, from the wolves of the “Christian” Left.

Roundup

Ben Witherington III on the virgin birth / conception – it has huge theological implications

The reason Jesus’ death was sufficient to atone for the sins of the world, is because his was a perfect self-sacrifice, an unblemished sacrifice. And in the Jewish schema of things, in the Biblical scheme of things, this was exactly what was necessary, and all that was necessary to atone for sins. So way back at the beginning, the Son of God came into the world by means of virginal conception, by passing our fallen human nature passed from one generation to the next by normal human intercourse.

Also see The Virgin Birth – it still matters, a piece I did a couple of years back.

Interestingly, theologically liberal Christians typically deny the virgin birth and even seem embarrassed by it (as if the creator of the universe couldn’t do such a thing!), yet cults like Mormonism and false religions like Islam do believe it is true.

Do unemployment benefits encourage people to avoid working? – of course they discourage some people from seeking jobs.  I’m very sympathetic to people being unemployed, but unlimited unemployment benefits will send the wrong message and harm the economy further.

Fred Phelps, Democrat – yep.  The Westboro “Baptist” pastor ran as a Democrat several times, among other things.  Be sure to note that when you refer to him.  As one commenter noted:

. . . if this Phelps [“character”] had even voted republican ONCE for local dog catcher it would be the lead story for NYT, WP, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, et al. The headline would read: REPUBLICANS SPREAD HATEFILLED MESSAGE WHILE PICKETING ELIZABETH EDWARDS FUNERAL.

Ethanol Subsidies Show Why Washington Is Broken – even Al Gore knows these are not only ineffective but counterproductive, yet we keep wasting billions of dollars on them.  Billions!

Coming soon to a country near you: Belgian archbishop targeted by gay activists over AIDS remarks – Even though the CDC reports that the risk is nearly 50 times higher for gays, the archbishop is accused of being a “homophobe” for stating the obvious.

Edgar’s book review on “Why Evolution is True” – good stuff (the review, not the book).

Evolutionary Theory is Lacking
Having read Coyne’s Evolution, I’m still not persuaded naturalism (i.e. Darwinism) is true. If anything, Darwinism as defined by Coyne might be a way of trying to explain how diversity (common ancestry) evolved on planet earth. That is, how we went from a single living cell to a full grown man.

We’re still missing lots of details. Consider these four points:

  • Origin: How did we get to the 1st living cell? From inOrganic to Organic?)
  • Morality On page 230 – Coyne, speaking of humanity says, “The world still teems with selfishness, immorality, and injustice), but in a Darwinian world absolute moral values do not exist. If what he says is true, there most be an absolute moral code giver.
  • Meaning Why me? Why now? Think: How do we counsel a young victim of rape? should we lie to the child? or should we tell the truth? Well that’s how nature works. Sorry. NEXT.
  • Destiny Where did we get this idea that we’re going to die (self-awareness)? And why do we care that we die anyway? why is life preferred over non-existence?

Ten Things You Need To Know About ‘DREAM Act’ S.3827

Kinda convicting – Why are Christians so reluctant to share the life saving and life changing truth of the Gospel?