Paul's Passing Thoughts

Another ethical controversy is trending in Churchland, and this time it’s a big one. The following is an excerpt from pulpitandpen.org:

Sam Allberry, who still personally wallows in Same-Sex Attraction (SSA), is the founder of an organization that is fully devoted to the false teaching of so-called, “Gay Christianity.” Unfortunately, many evangelicals support Allberry and his ministry, including The Gospel Coalition and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC). The most prominent supporter of Allberry’s gay ministry is Dr. Tim Keller, who has been promoting this false gospel that cannot sanctify the homosexual. Unfortunately, it now seems that Mark Dever of 9Marks and Capital Hill Baptist Church can be added to the list of those who support Allberry’s “Gay Christian” ministry.

We recently posted an article, originally by Toni Brown at Bible Thumping Wingnut, on the sinister and gay-affirming teachings of Allberry and Living Out, which you can find here. To be clear, Allberry does not teach that practicing sodomy is acceptable, but rather he teaches that Same-Sex Attraction is not a sin, that homosexuals cannot expect to be changed by the Holy Spirit and given a nature not desirous of sodomy, and that there are elements of “gay culture” that are redeemable and should be celebrated. In Allberry’s view, virtually everything about homosexuality can be embraced except for the act of bodily penetration.

Common in the Living Out subculture, are testimonies of professing Christians who learned to love and embrace, rather than be freed from their homosexuality. Also common are accusations toward the Christian church of “homophobia” and demands that the church soften its views on the sin of sodomy. The organization is an increasingly important factor in re-branding SSA as an itself neutral, non-sinful impulse, and it heavily promotes the idea that it’s okay to be gay so long as one is celibate, going so far as to encourage churches to ordain those who are Same-Sex attracted.

End citation.

Pardon the long excerpt, but it is an apt summary of the newest kerfuffle among evangelicals. And, these controversies have taken a particular turn predicted by this ministry for a long time: those who represent the cutting edge of church will support views that clash with the plain sense of historical-grammatical interpretation. So, presently, you have well-meaning folks in the church who are much like I was for 35 years: utterly perplexed on the one hand, and out to save the church on the other. Though I applaud the efforts of good Christian men like Thomas Littleton, the church is beyond saving. In one of Littleton’s comment streams, which I can’t find right now, so I will paraphrase, someone wrote the following: “We don’t need another book to tell us what the Bible plainly states about homosexuality.”

Breakpoint.

Church orthodoxy has never been about the individual’s understanding of the Bible and how it makes one more like the Father. That’s why it’s orthodoxy. Most people in church, if not all of them, think orthodoxy and truth are synonyms. That’s not the definition of orthodoxy which has its roots in Dualism. Here is another thing Churchians believe: the historical-redemptive and historical-grammatical hermeneutics are hermeneutics; ie., two different ways of interpreting Scripture. And, both work together in order to properly interpret Scripture.

Nope. If you believe that, you are egregiously misinformed, as I was for years. What is the historical-redemptive hermeneutic, where did it come from, and how will it lead Mohler, Dever, MacArthur, Carson, and whomever else to accept homosexuals in the church? We will visit that in the upcoming parts.

Why will good Christians in the church stand perplexed, frustrated, disillusioned, and watch helplessly as this orthodoxy bus rolls down the highway mercilessly running over all discernment bloggers? We will visit that as well.

Either capitulate, or consider alternatives. But protest will accomplish nothing.  More things we will visit.

I am honored to have Thomas Littleton as one of my Facebook friends and he writes some informative stuff on this latest trend. But while reading one of his articles, I was struck by a bolt of lightening. I have read the Calvin Institutes, I have read a bunch of Luther, and did an in-depth series on his Heidelberg Disputation. Yet, what struck me was my lack of remembrance regarding the Reformers addressing homosexuality specifically. I thought that strange. I thought that VERY strange. I started doing a word search that also took etymology into account. Nothing specific turned up. I then turned to my partner in crime for help. Note what he said as a preface to the list of research he presented:

Nothing definitive in these articles, but if you read between the lines you can see they are leaving the door open. Perhaps trying to condition people for acceptance. A subtle conditioning.

It is important to note that the Reformation’s justification by faith gospel interprets sin through a specified prism. That prism, and its logical conclusions, would necessarily call for acceptance of homosexuals into the church with leeway for standards according to church authority. Those standards/arguments presented, as reported by Littleton and others, are indeed consistent with authentic Protestant orthodoxy.

This is the thesis moving forward: the latest trend is consistent with the Reformation’s justification by faith soteriology, orthodoxy, and church authority.

paul

Part 2

Why do people engage in risky careers? Answer: Love for what they do outweighs the fear. Indeed, the Bible states that “…perfect love casts out fear.” In truth, humanity has a penchant for attaining self-satisfaction in helping others, and the world offers a plethora of different careers that help people, with each possessing various levels of risk.

While helping a Hospice aide with a resident the other day, the resident asked her, “What does he do here?” The aide replied, “He is like me, he helps people.” The simplicity of her reply defines what a nurse aide is: someone who helps people. In fact, few careers help people in so many different ways.

We help with their activities of daily living, known as ADLs. According to federal law and state law, we are their advocates. In other words, anything we see or hear that might cause them harm requires immediate reporting to all superiors and confirmation that all proper authorities are contacted. We defend their dignity by the way we care for them. We defend the value of their lives and respect their contributions to this life. We assuage their guilt for being a burden to others with words like, “We ALL need help in different ways to one degree or another, and allowing me to help you helps me. It gives me self-satisfaction and a sense of accomplishment, and a paycheck.

The paycheck isn’t much for the grave risk associated with being a male caregiver in today’s cultural environment. Yet, there is a great thing about being a caregiver in the healthcare culture: gender, sexual orientation, skin color, politics, etc., are not the main focus and for the most part irrelevant. The primary focus can be found in the words of the aforementioned Hospice aide: the healthcare community is a culture of people helping other people. That’s the focus. Your acceptance in the healthcare community is determined by your quality of care delivery which defines you as one of us; a helper to others.

This mentality results in healthcare professionals looking at those in need with a narrow focus: when a new resident is wheeled into our facility, our focus is their various needs, and frankly, we don’t give a damn whether they are male, female, black, white, Asian, gay, Democrat, Republican, or any other nomenclatures attached to humanity.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t cut both ways. If we want to hang on to the career that gives us purpose in life, we must be harmless like doves, but wise like serpents. Regarding male nurse aides, we are extremely susceptible to false allegations of sexual abuse by female residents, clients, and patients because it is common. Let me repeat that: it is common.

But why? Well, female residents/clients/patients tell us: they hate men. Bless your heart, I know, it’s too simple, so I will repeat the most basic reason given by the man-haters themselves: they hate men. Is this hatred so deep that they would be a party to ruining the life and career of a dedicated person-helper? YES. That’s just the way it is. Is this a hate that would return quality caring for one of the seven things God hates the most? YES.

There are also, unnecessary, if not silly reasons. A female resident may be uncomfortable with a male aide and afraid to voice her concern to the charge nurse; especially if  the charge nurse has a strong personality. Or, the charge nurse will not give her a choice in the matter due to a shortage of staff. Or, pressure her to accept male care for the same reason. In many situations like this, the female resident will often forego care altogether or lodge a false accusation against the male aide. Good male aides are always on the lookout for this situation, and remember, we are advocates for the resident. It is the law and ritual among aides that nurses have the final word on everything except the aide’s first duty as an advocate for the resident.

Women lodge false accusations against men to escape difficult situations. There are many other reasons, but everyday hate is the primary and sufficient catalyst in and of itself. Now, let’s suppose a man-hating woman also hates conservative Republicans…well, Katy bar the door, especially when such triple deviants are judges who don’t even fetch your TV remote that fell under your medical bed.

Let’s bring this thesis more into focus with a personal example from my own life. I have been very fortunate as a male nurse aide; in my long tenure, I have been accused once. Until then, I was pretty happy-go-lucky in a venue that I was very comfortable in. Luckily, or so I thought, in this particular instance, I was never in the resident’s room that day without a nurse, two nurses, or another aide in the room with me. So, when I was informed of the accusation by the charge nurse, I actually shrugged my shoulders and said, “Whatever.” I was in for a rude awakening that day.

The accusation centered on when a very young female nurse aide was in the room with me. Let me set the table with the short version; the resident chose that particular time for the following reasons: she sized up the young aide as being a fellow female that would back her story, plus young and impressionable as opposed to the two older female nurses. In conjunction with this narrative, the resident framed the accusation brilliantly.

Shortly after talking with the charge nurse, I met with two female ADONs and the facility’s female social worker. They informed me that based on my record, they doubted the accusation. They asked me how long I had been an aide, and when I told them, one of the ADON’s said, “Well, then you know.” Get it? For male nurse aides, this comes with the territory. It’s common. When I explained that it was the first time I had ever experienced anything like that, they were incredulous. I wonder how many nurses buy into the #Me Too movement.

Nevertheless, the two ADONs and the social worker interviewed the young nurse aide, that is, well under twenty years old, for over 30 minutes. This speaks to the evil genius of the accusation. But whatever the plot was, the young nurse aide was having none of it and stood her ground. I was not even sent home, but assigned to another hall. I am an agency aide, and this was a facility that is known for being “DNR happy” (Do Not Return) in regard to agency aides, so I considered the results an unfortunate accomplishment of sorts.

We need to revisit the young nurse aide for an important reason. At times, I have the honor of being shadowed at facilities by high school students who are in a nurse aide program. I see a trend among this age group of post-Millennials; they are attentive, caring, respectful, and endowed with good commonsense. This is an up-and-coming generation that is not buying into the present cultural insanity of Identity Politics and other forms of hate. The pendulum seems to be swinging the other way.

Can this cultural trend be attributed to my good fortune of being in that room with the aide that defended me and stated the facts to four women who are each twice her age? I don’t know, but this I do know: I owe her a large chunk of my life and career. Some time ago, my grandson who was named after me was stillborn. I had a sterling silver bracelet made in his memory. Whenever I take an exam that I am nervous about, I wear his bracelet to remind me of why I am striving to be an RN. It is about the upholding of life through love, and love casts out fear. The bracelet reminds me that it is about getting a job done and fear must be driven away accordingly.

Now it is important that I add something to the bracelet. I am having a link removed from the right of the engraved plate and having it replaced with a colored link of rose gold. This is to always remind me of that aide. For a whole week after the incident I just described, I took myself off of the agency schedule and considered resigning as an aide and pursuing another career. If a false accusation of sexual assault got some traction with a witness present, what could happen if it is my word against an accuser alone! And especially in an age where hate trumps due process and a presumption of innocence. Hate is not the least bit interested in fairness. After extensive contemplation, love won, not fear. And yes, I am now a much wiser aide. And yes, I have incorporated many new practical cautions into my service to others. And yes, when I am shadowed by young men who are aspiring aides, I will teach them those cautionary skills.

When we do what is right in life as a rule, we have no idea to what extent we have influenced the life of others. That aide has no idea that she saved my career, she has no idea that because of her, she now shares and is credited with all of the care I deliver to others. As far as she knows, it was just a small moment in her life when she did something right regardless of what anyone else thought. More than likely, she will never know about the gold link. When I pass my state test as an RN specializing in wound care, I will owe much of it to her.

So young, yet so stellar as compared to the politically correct female men-haters of our day. Have hope my friends, there is a new generation of young people who are not buying into this hate. In the same way they will never know the impact of their optimism and lives marked by truth, haters will never know the depth of destruction they have sown in the life of others.

Of course, the whole Bret Kavanaugh affair prompted me to write this post, a post I would have otherwise never written because I have shared things here that were previously too painful to share, and still are. A false accusation is the climatic device of hell itself. Good people hate things like evil, but hate in the hands of the soulless is slander as their weapon of choice. The means justify the end.

Would Christine Blasey Ford knowingly level false accusations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh in order to take him out at any cost? Sure she would, and there is much reason to believe that she did. Why? Because she hates him for various and sundry reasons. Hate also leads to all kinds of illogical and irrational behavior…

…and women do it all of the time and for many different reasons.

paul

Dear Joni, someone sent me the screenshot seen here in this post last night, and though I have passed on many trending things in churchworld to post on lately, I am not going to pass on this.

Isn’t life strange? Unlike many that surround you, I am going to tell you the truth. I have included the whole screenshot because it was posted publicly and needs to be addressed publicly. Those who swoon over your statement in the comment stream are indicative of the church at large: rich in lazy thinking, and bankrupt concerning critical thinking flavored with naive trust in self-proclaimed mediators other than Christ.

First, as a healthcare professional, and a truth seeker, let me say that pain is bad and not good. Pain, and bad feelings in general, hinder opportunity to love and serve others. I understand the Protestant worldview on these things because I have actually read the foundational documents of the Reformation unlike most who go to church or lead in the church. In contrast to Martin Luther’s twisted Gnostic view of reality, God did not create pain for a Sunday School lesson, nor for purposes of spiritual growth, and pain does not goad us to return to the cross where we obtain more salvation.

God brings good out of evil, or said another way, turns evil into good, but He is not the creator of evil. Now, if you want to say that church orthodoxy doesn’t make God the creator of evil, I am sure you are a very nice person and well-meaning, but egregiously ill-informed like the vast majority of people who do church.

And by the way, church membership doesn’t equal oneness with God, and water baptism under the authority of the church does not enter one into the “race of faith” which is really a race to obtain “final justification” by being faithful to church where the “means of grace” are only obtained. Nope, that’s just a lie from the pit of hell.

And, for certain, God is sovereign, but He is not defined by sovereignty. Newsflash: God is not obligated to obey Luther and Calvin by being sovereign in everything He does. Sovereignty doesn’t define what is done well or not done well. God is all powerful, and has no need to be in control of everything. God is, yes, ABLE to create beings who choose to love Him from their own hearts. Man-made gods must create beings that are programed to love through sovereignty and for curing the god’s low self-esteem. The Protestant church god is not anything new under the sun.

I have a suggestion for you. Instead of focusing on your level of pain and praising God for supposedly predetermining your circumstances, be thankful instead. No, not church thankfulness that blames God for evil, pain, and suffering; that is, Martin Luther’s Theology of the Cross that interprets all reality through death and suffering, but rather what God has done for you, and how He has improved your circumstances. I serve people in your condition and worse who do not have your means or the storied life that you have. Many would give a couple more limbs or other body parts to be in your shoes.

Suffering is not an epistemology, and in most cases, according to my experience, the suffering of the people I serve shows who they already are, and doesn’t make them who they are. And this I know: the medical landscape is littered with suffering people lacking care while the church spends an immense amount of time doing temple worship, pandering to the perceived needs of young people, manipulating the ignorant, and attending conferences. My goodness, are there enough Christian conferences out there?

As Al Mohler rightly stated at this year’s SBC Convention, another “Christian” conference, the church religion is “confessional.” Being interpreted, especially via “Dr.” Michael Horton’s  book, Christless Christianity, church is all about the re-ratification of the gospel to the saved and unsaved alike through profession and confession, and not about doing anything, like, you know, love, and stuff like that. In fact, the doctrine of Double Imputation circumvents the possibility of any person practicing love that would “escape God’s condemnation” (Calvin Institutes 3.14.11).

Yep, that’s church.

Since I believe in the gospel of justification by new birth rather than the false gospel of justification by faith…alone apart from any love in sanctification except for stuff we say, so that the gospel is supposedly about God and not us, I pretty much worship God in everyday life. And, I fall short in that endeavor constantly, but since I am not under law as justification’s standard, I do not need temple worship to cover sin, my sin is ended because justification by new birth ended the “righteous demands of the law” that Protestant scholars admit they are under. Truly, I sit dumbfounded when I hear teachers like Phil Johnson openly admit that churchians are “under the righteous demands of the law.” Yikes! Really?

The law is now for loving God and others; it is a standard for loving that fulfills the law, not a standard that demands a weekly re-visitation of the same gospel that originally saved us. You once said the following: “It’s not our natural inclination to go to the cross every day.” Your point in the statement follows: suffering encourages us to return to the cross daily for more salvation.

Joni, if you still need the cross, you still need salvation. That would seem evident. And since you suffer more than many, does that make you more saved? And how do we have time to love if the priority is staying at the foot of the cross for more salvation? Yes, I know, as we are more saved Jesus does the loving for us. This is because perfect law-keeping must be maintained by someone until “final justification.” Sorry, I reject that notion with extreme prejudice. But, it is Protestantism. It is church.

This post was probably incited by a combination of what happened to me during church hours last Sunday, my long-term experience in caring for people in your condition and for the most part, worse, and the screenshot I was sent. I care for people who cannot do anything but pray, and they do, to my shame because I am not exactly the prayer warrior I should be. But regarding their lives as set against your life, it causes me to ponder. They are often alone, financially destitute, lacking in basic care, and have companionship limited to their caregivers.

And you are some kind of martyr for the cross? Really?

Those are the real spiritual heroes who don’t get little FaceBook hearts. And if our goal is to be shamed as much as possible, they are much more qualified than you though you get all of the attention. And my church and my honor is caring for them. I do not neglect the assembling together with other saints…

…I gather with them, and I am free to love them aggressively according to the law without fear of condemnation. And you can bet we encourage each other unto good works. That’s the purpose of fellowship, not the obtaining of more forgiveness for the “present sin” Christ ended. And if they are not Christians, let them see the love of the law in what I do, not just what I say.

Yes, you can have your “confessional” religion, but I would strongly recommend that you flee from it.

paul

Everything you thought church is—it isn’t. The belief that church is the body of Christ, the true gospel, the assembly of Christ, God’s people, the elect of God, the kingdom of God, a light for God in a dark world, the bride of Christ, the love of God, and guided by the Bible are given assumptions that go without saying…until now.

In fact, church hijacked Christianity long ago. In “The Church Lie,” Paul Dohse and Andrew Young deconstruct ten major presuppositions that define church.

Today’s church has no real doctrinal or historical connection to the New Testament assembly of Christ. Church doesn’t appear in history for more than 300 years after the birth of Christ’s assembly at Pentecost.

So, what does the real assembly look like? And how do we return to its true gospel and family mode of operation? And what should we expect if we do?

Shopify Link | Spiral Bound | $21.95

Or mail written order, check or money order, and contact information to: TANC Publishing, PO Box 583 Xenia, Ohio 45385.

The Church Lie pages 1-12