All the best… Really!

 

If you don’t believe in prosperity over Christmas and the New Year, at least be happy, joyful and in good health!

Steve


71 thoughts on “All the best… Really!

  1. By Misty Harris

    National Post Graphics
    National Post Graphics(Click to Enlarge)
    A new U.S. analysis of mortality rates during different times of year found that people are more likely to die during the holidays — notably on Christmas and New Year’s Day — and researchers cannot explain the yearly spike.

    After analyzing all official United States death certificates over the 25-year period between 1979 and 2004, a trio of sociologists identified an excess of 42,325 natural deaths — that is, above and beyond the normal seasonal winter increase — in the two weeks starting with Christmas.

    In the article in the journal Social Science & Medicine, researchers David Phillips, Gwendolyn Barker and Kimberly Brewer report that mortality in general rises during the Christmas season.

    Deaths in a hospital setting increase tremendously on the holidays themselves.

    More people die in hospital emergency wards, or arrive dead on arrival, on Christmas, Boxing Day and New Year’s Day than on any other days of the year.

    “It’s not trivial,” said Mr. Phillips, a professor of sociology at the University of California at San Diego. “We looked at all cause categories and, for nearly every one, we found an excess of deaths — particularly for people who are dying rapidly, like dead-on-arrival or dying in the emergency department.”

    In general, Mr. Phillips said the team’s analysis of some 57.5-million death certificates shows the chance of dying during this holiday period increases “somewhere between 3% and 9%, depending on the demographic group you’re looking at, and somewhere between 1% and 10%, depending on what cause of death you’re looking at.”

    Less clear are the reasons behind this fatal phenomenon.

    With cancer, for example, the rise in Christmas and New Year’s emergency room and dead-on-arrival deaths is cancelled out by a drop in cancer deaths in other medical settings, such as in-patient clinics. Mr. Phillips said patients at the end of their lives are likely being transferred out of the hospital to die at home, but then brought to hospital when their conditions worsen toward the end.

    With deaths from other causes, however, the increases are evident in every medical setting, leaving researchers to wonder what mechanism causes the calendar-specific spikes.

    “It’s speculated that psychological stress can make a difference,” Mr. Phillips said. “But to make a difference so quickly and so precisely bang-on Christmas and [New Year’s Day], for a huge range of diseases, makes it seem unlikely as a broad-scale explanation.”

    Also plausible. but unlikely, is the possibility of sick people postponing death in order to reach these symbolic occasions. “If that were the case, you’d expect not only a peak on the holiday but a compensatory drop in deaths before the holiday,” Mr. Phillips said. “No such drop is evident.”

    Other explanations tested include emergency department overcrowding, winter travel, cold weather and substance abuse, none of which offered convincing evidence of driving the trend.

    “The next step is for other people to follow up and figure out the mechanisms that produce this,” Mr. Phillips said. “For now, the message is to pay attention to your health, and to your health resources, particularly on these two occasions.”

    Mr. Phillips and two other University of California at San Diego researchers found another correlation between the holidays and a spike in deaths. They authored a paper linking sudden infant death syndrome with alcohol use. In the paper, which appeared last month in the journal Addiction, titled “Alcohol as a risk factor for SIDS,” they concluded that crib death claims 33% more infants on New Year’s Day than would have been expected based on data from the days before and after. The researchers hypothesized that alcohol consumption by caregivers is to blame.

    The researchers concluded: “These comparison measures indicate that the largest spikes in alcohol consumption and in SIDS … occur on New Year; alcohol consumption and SIDS increase significantly on weekends; and children of alcohol-consuming mothers are much more likely to die from SIDS than are children of non-alcohol-consuming mothers.”

    The reseachers noted two other, smaller single-day jumps in crib deaths in U.S. data: a 14% spike on July 5, the day after Independence Day, and an 18% boost on April 20, which the authors noted is a “counterculture holiday devoted to the celebration of cannabis consumption.”

    The researchers noted no blips in SIDS cases on July 4 itself, or on Christmas Day.
    http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/12/20/christmas-the-deadliest-day-of-the-year-study/

    Be that as it may, the day of death is better then the day of birth, so rejoice and be glad, I think?

  2. Merry Christmas Steve.
    You did a great job of defending the truth with logic and the scriptures to the point that nobody had any more answers. Your input here is as important as any other ministry.

  3. Hi Q. Thanks. There are somethings which you would back down on for the sake of expedience, but why lose nerve in the face of a few distant insults when it is so important to tell truth to people who are otherwise lost?

    I’m just looking at the Non-Conformists who, in the 17th century, were terribly persecuted and ostracised for not following the Act of Uniformity, which held that all ministers and parliamentarians in England must hold to the Common Prayer Book, and was only really repealed in 2010, although now, churches outside the Church of England are called Free Churches and, of course, allowed to hold meetings.

    But the underlying sense of the separation still exists to a degree within some circles, which tells me we still have a long way to go to experience the full liberty of the Church God intended.

    I found an excellent contemporary reference to the names of many of the ministers who resisted conformity to the State controlled church, some of whom had grown what would be called mega-churches today, congregations over 1000 strong, throughout heir preaching, and who were thrown in prisons, stopped from preaching in churches, and lost income because they stood for the Bible over control by religious authorities.

    Under the Act of Uniformity all English people had to attend church or, rich or poor, be fined the equivalent of $20, all ministers ordained as an Anglican, all churches use the Common Prayer Book. It was a counter to years of turmoil after England left Rome under Henry 8, then Mary 1 restored Catholicism in a bloody purge, then Elizabeth 1 tried to restore order, albeit with a heavy hand.

    We are still emerging form some of these turbulent times, and the dust is a long way from settling.

  4. Got me into some interesting reading there Steve. Imagine not being able to go to Uni unless you were Anglican.

    Hope to make contact in real life with you some day.

  5. Next time I’m in Singapore!

    Here’s something else you might be interested in, Q. It’s an old clip from 1986 of Walter Martin, he famous expert on the cults, being interviewed on TBN. By all accounts, the proposed repeat program was pulled and he was never invited again, and when you check the content you might see why. He goes to town on all and sundry and is bold as a lion.

    It’s of interest because was having a conversation with my wife the other ay where we were wondering how people, especially new believers, would be able to handle the cults, or the false doctrine being presented all around us, the liberal, the religious and the scientifically based, devoid o miracles and the supernatural, especially as the gospel is watered down, plus, there are shorter, less scripture content heavy messages, a tendency to be overly seeker sensitive, I think, at the expense of those who seek maturity in Christ as well as Christ Himself, and general reluctance to offend anyone’s sensitivities by declaring actual, factual truth in a bold manner.

    Now, as Martin also stresses towards the end, we shouldn’t go out of our way to offend, but we certainly should not hold back from telling the truth as the Bible reveals it, or stimulating dialogue with people we disagree with, or back down from what we know to be Biblical.

    I see a great need for Christians growing up in a Contemporary environment to have the tools and weapons necessary for a defence of the gospel when it is needed, or they will be run over completely by reformist thugs like the Strange Fire mob, who have a deep interest in Sola Scriptura, but a legalistic and flawed theology.

    Anyway, check it out. I don’t gel exactly with everything he says or how he goes about it, but the general thrust is inspiring and refreshing in this politically correct age of limp wrested non-offence.

  6. Can you explain how Mary could possibly perform a miracle, Bones? In the spirit of Christmas and all that.

    Do they do it in the name of Mary? Or the Queen of Heaven? Or in the name of Mary Mediatrix?

    In your recent research on this phenomenon, for which you are gathering, apparently, much evidence as to the power of healing in Mary herself, can you explain, in your own words, in your newfound mariology, for the punters, as we approach the winter solstice, how a good Christian person could approach this personage for their miracle, and what you would tell them to do to achieve it.

    Do they have to do any chanting, candle lighting, perhaps, call out to Mary, use a rosary, confess the Fifth Mystery enchantment, or what, Bones?

    Do tell us, and bring us good cheer, this northern winter’s eve.

  7. Gee beats me.

    Maybe she’s not rotting somewhere?

    Are you saying it doesn’t happen?

    Are your tricks better?

    Maybe God’s not as small as your mind

  8. Walter Martin’s Kingdom of the Cults was essential in any library.

    Need more Walter Martin.

    Anyway, check it out. I don’t gel exactly with everything he says or how he goes about it, but the general thrust is inspiring and refreshing in this politically correct age of limp wrested non-offence.

  9. If mass means dismissal, why do people celebrate the birth of Christ at Christmas?
    Have a Merry Cheerful Christ’s death day?
    What the?
    People are so deceived about this celebration.

  10. Bones hasn’t worked out yet that healing isn’t the issue but whose name it is in and who authorised it.

    Matthew 7
    21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
    22 “Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’
    23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

    Who gives a rip if a person claims this goddess or that god or saint or pope or person is claiming healings, miracles or deliverance if they are not of God.

    I mean, Bones’ own pseudo-discernment claimants bandy about these verses ad nausium and he still hasn’t worked it out that saying Mary does this miracle, or dead pope John Paul XXXX does that miracle from the grave has as much scriptural authority and authenticity as James Hird at a Demons’ Christmas Party.

  11. What Bones still hasn’t worked out is that the questions I raised over at the other thread he mauled to pieces with his cantankerous obfuscation and detours involve the doctrinal error of claiming that Mary is Queen o Heaven, Mediatrix, Co-Redemptrix and Sovereign Ruler, all of which are deifying names which elevate Mary above her true station and create a false impression for all Catholic followers, which is exacerbated by the fact that it is a crime worthy of excommunication to even question their dogma.

    But Bones must fight on like the lone ranger on steroids and a mask without eye-holes, blundering into nonsense like it’s going out of fashion, in the desperate hope of ruining any and all other conversations involving anyone remotely connected with his pet hate, C3.

    I wonder he hasn’t yet migrated to the c3churchwatch site where people like me are banned because we know too much and are actually able to find our way around scripture. He won’t admit to this, but even he knows they are obsessive haters and baiters with feigned love for the Body.

    When Bones actually gets a grip on what the significance of these blasphemous titles are he’ll maybe come to his senses. Until then we will probably have to put up with his continual attacks on anything associated with where I might congregate with the saints.

  12. One other thought. Had Bones read the piece I addressed to Q, he would have noted some important issues I raised which could have been developed as discussion points.

    Instead he chose to prolong his hatred for Pentecostals and C3 in particular, which he has now spread over at least three threads.

    Rather than note the points I made to Q about Christians in contemporary churches potentially being unable to hold their own in a defence of their faith, which should have stimulated a reasonable discussion away from the angst of other threads, he chose to defend his own liberalism and catholic dogmatism by going, again, for a contrarian response which is totally unconnected to the previous discussion and has made it all about Bones’ personal indignation towards anyone who challenges his pet religion.

    One would have to think that Bones’ actual goal was the demise of all conversations on this blog involving anyone with a variant view to his own. Again, c3churchwatch already caters for this type. He’d be better off there, if a little bored with the content.

  13. That’s the end of it for me, Bones. If you can’t have a conversation without having to personalise everything in an attempt to attack what you perceive to be my people then there is little atone can do to establish any kind of Christian dialogue on any issue.

    You have missed an opportunity here by maintaining a spiteful attitude.

  14. I wonder he hasn’t yet migrated to the c3churchwatch site where people like me are banned because we know too much and are actually able to find our way around scripture. He won’t admit to this, but even he knows they are obsessive haters and baiters with feigned love for the Body.

    It’s pretty boring over there, the few times I’ve been there. I mean C3 is hardly an important movement. I doubt if it’s even in my state.

    Walter Martin would probably be there though if he was still around.

  15. Who gives a rip if a person claims this goddess or that god or saint or pope or person is claiming healings, miracles or deliverance if they are not of God.

    Is Mary not of God?

    But Benny Hinn is?

  16. Did you watch the Walter Martin clip from TBN I put up. I know it’s long, but he raises some good issues, and shows a completely different world-view to the one we see today, which is so fraught with threatened litigation and political correctness people seem afraid to offend with truth. That is a point he also raises.

    Don’t get me wrong, if a person offends with slander they should face justice, but when it is truth that offends it is legitimate.

    Walter would have scolded the c3churchwatch crowd for their lack of openness, accountability, and their continual tirades against people who are attempting to dialogue with them.

    His way of confronting issues would be to talk them over with the person concerned over a coffee in an open environment where all parties have license to present their case.

    He confronts the ‘little gods’ controversy quite well when targeting Copeland, whose interpretation is unsound Biblically, and when challenging Hagin’s apparent claim that Jesus was demon possessed in the grave. (I have never heard Hagin state this, so I think he got it wrong. Again, I think that was something Copeland hinted at one time, but I’ve never heard that from Hagin.) But, if he did, we should challenge that as wrong teaching. That doesn’t make his movement a cult, however.

    The thing is, he didn’t claim that everything they taught was wrong because they got some things wrong, but, rather, that they needed to deal with some issues which were clearly wrong. This would be the case for most denominations and movements.

    Calling a group a cult because they teach tithing, for instance, is stupid. Or for speaking in tongues, or believing in miracles, etc. Even teaching prosperity isn’t evidence of being a cult, but may, in some cases, be excessive if taken out of context with God’s intention. Prosperity isn’t absent from scripture, nor are tongues, miracles, tithing or healing. It is how we represent them which defines our ministry.

    I think the extreme predestination teaching of the Reformists is laced with error, but the doesn’t make them a cult. It means they teach a key area wrongly, but the main thrust of salvation by grace through faith is still within their teaching, as well as key doctrines on the Godhead and the gospel of Christ, so they are not a cult, even if they are legalistically cult-like on some issues, like, say, cessationism.

    However, if just about every key doctrine a group teaches, such as with the Mormons, or JWs, is clearly and Biblically error, then we should consider that they are probably a cult when measured against the canon of scripture, and, then, warn people accordingly.

    I have stated on other posts that I, and others, consider the dogma of Mary and proposed dogma which introduce her as Queen of Heaven, Mediatrix, Co-Redemptrix and Sovereign Ruler as extra-biblical an therefore error.

    Whether this means the RC church then is cultic, could not be measured just against these dogma and doctrines, but against whether their entire soteriology, theology and pneumology is sound and can be measured against the canon of scripture.

    Appeals to the post Apostle patriarchs cannot replace scripture, useful though they are. And it is what they teach today which is important, not just their history. Have they changed? Do they show signs of change? I say not in these key areas of dogma. How could they when they make their popes infallible?

  17. Bones,
    Is Mary not of God?

    You’re not really making much sense, in this Bones.

    Mary is dead! She died around 1,950 years ago. True, man!

    Mary is not claiming miracles, healings or deliverances. She is not the mediator. Jesus is the Intercessor. The Holy Spirit is the Intercessor. Mary is asleep in Christ! Mary is awaiting the resurrection of the saints when Christ comes for the Church.

    It is people who claim to be praying to someone called Mary who are making the claims. That is your measure, Bones. Does it stack up with what Jesus said, or with Paul or the Apostles?

    Can you find a precedent for it in Scripture?

    No. You can’t. It’s not there.

    Benny Hinn I don’t know about. I’m no fan. I have been critical of some of his doctrine in the past. I don’t think he’s changed. I think he should have stood down when his wife left him. I dunno. How will you judge his ministry, though?

    Is he doing it in the name of Benny or Jesus?

    Why are you even arguing this way? It’s pathetic and repetitive and futile.

    Do they stack up against scripture, Bones, that is all you need to ask and discover.

    It’s not a game. Not a competition. It’s a matter of who is serving God and whether it points to Christ.

  18. The Walter Martin intro you put up from YouTube is excellent. Nothing I would not agree with there.

    In fact, he confirms just about every argument I have put up, which you have opposed, regarding the importance of Biblical and Scriptural accuracy in all doctrine, in accountability structures for dealing with wrong doctrine, and for ministries to be able to produce scriptural evidence for all doctrine when challenged.

    The usual rule of thumb is two or three witnesses, that is, at least two, and preferably more, passages which confirm a truth contextually, holistically, theologically and historically.

    So, if you are saying you have now listened to Walter Martin and you have changed your mind about the importance of sound scriptural basis for all doctrine, then I would say you needed to rephrase and revise some of the claims you have made recently, especially in regard to the dogma and proposed dogma I have singled out as error, in the elevation of Mary, by successive popes, from her true station as Mother of Christ our Lord, to the non-scriptural positions of Queen of Heaven, Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Sovereign Ruler.

    You cannot now still hold to these claims as doctrinally acceptable and, simultaneously, support the basic ground rules for testing doctrine proposed by Walter Martin.

  19. “I wonder he hasn’t yet migrated to the c3churchwatch site where people like me are banned………”

    Yes, you need to reach a certain level of maturity before you can be accepted with the truth preachers over at the watch.
    There is still time to climb the ladder Steve.
    If you are still desperately trying to snuggle in at the watch, but just can’t seem to, then it may have something to do with your love for PP , and his PP(PATHETIC PREACHING).

  20. Poor ol wally martin must be rolling in his grave over kong hee and yonggi cho.

    He’d be saying i told you so.

  21. Eyes,
    Yes, you need to reach a certain level of maturity before you can be accepted with the truth preachers over at the watch.

    Ahahahahah! That’ made my day! The ‘preachers’ you say? ‘Maturity’?

    No, maturity is when you are able to hold an argument with a person who disagrees with you without running off in tears with you ball because they scored more goals than you did.

    Brethren, do not be children in understanding; however, in malice be babes, but in understanding be mature.

    The c3churchwatch crowd, in the short course of around eighteen months have been converted by Margot and her battering ram Zorro into full on Reformists, but the thing is, they do not even know it themselves.

    They actually do not know what they do believe, and couldn’t put it together for you if hey tried.

    The only thing they preach and stand for is hate.

    End of.

    And, no, I do not think prosperity is a cult.

  22. https://signposts02.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/bill-palmers-criticism-of-phil-pringle/

    I recently downloaded a recorded service from his church’s website.
    The following quote is from the 6pm service of the 12th February 06 –

    “…He (speaking of the apostle John in the book of 3 John) could pray a prayer over their lives of blessing and prosperity because he knew the truth was in their soul. And when you’ve got truth inside you, you understand the truth is tithing, the truth is giving to God, the truth being acted in our lives is actually coming to God with something more than just words – it’s substance, it’s an offering. That’s what truth is in our spirit and when we want to believe a lie it’ll take us away from that, we won’t enter into that prospering hand being upon our life that God has promised all the way through scripture…”

    You can see clearly here with this statement that Dr Pringle has NO understanding whatsoever in regard to tithing – he has not a clue what he is talking about; ironically, it is he believing a lie.

    Despite his doctorate in theology, he has clearly NOT studied to show himself approved and as a consequence he is unskilled in the word of righteousness (2 Timothy 2.15, Hebrews 5.3)

    I pray that you, the reader, have gained some insight into the truth about tithing and that you can clearly see how manipulative and deceptive this doctrine is. If after reading everything I’ve presented in this paper you still think you can justify tithing (I didn’t say giving, I said tithing) then you obviously have an idol of finance within yourself that God will need to deal with! People like Dr Pringle who endorse this teaching are robbing God’s church of truth and denigrating the word of God for profit. I strongly suggest Dr Phil Pringle take note of the criticism outlined in this paper if only for the following reason:

    Jeremiah 48:10 “…Cursed be he that does the work of the LORD deceitfully…”
    Commentary written by Bill Palmer 2006. This paper may be copied and dispersed freely.
    ——————————–

    Looks like Pringle’s’ definition of maturity is based on how good you are at manipulation.

  23. I think we’ve had enough tithing debates on here to satisfy the people who sit on their wallets in church (if they ever go), and enough articles attacking Phil (you reproduced one of several put up by Jake (specksandplanks) over the course of a few years). If you want to join the c3churchwatch club to attack the ministry, go ahead. Oh, I forgot, you are already a regular knocker over there.

    Even the post you put up here resulted in a thread completely unrelated to it, such was the lack of interest in the actual article.

    The most fascinating part of the thread, apart from 5PS (Mosco, Zorro), being hammered over his poor use of ‘all’ in a debate on Calvinism (yes they were that bored by the post), and subsequently rescued by speckandplanks (Jake), thus preparing the way for their current partnership at c3churchwatch, was a disgusting comment made by specksandplanks in response to a person who was obviously a supporter o Phil, who ticked people off for being so rude to a man who had helped restore her life to Christ.

    It is fascinating because it shows early in the piece where Jake was already heading and the venom with which he was prepared to attack anything remotely connected with C3.

    Here’s the exchange, judge for yourselves the spirit of it.

    Bekah
    You know, if you focused the amount of energy you have spent criticizing, mocking and attacking PP, and put this energy into your own life, you would see an awesome change…time after time, I have noticed that people who talk this way over money and bring up all these things, are always the ones who are being controlled by it. You know who is the real deal, by the fruit that comes out of the ministry and Phil Pringle has an incredible one. He is an awesome leader and has blessed so many. He makes mistakes because he is human, but you have stepped over the line by accusing him of false motives. I’m not arguing over the tithing thing, saying who is wrong or right, because all this article has done, has made me shake my head to see you pulling him down like that. I noticed that you did not mention anything about your own ministry or the state of your own finances etc. If you have the answer with abundance of fruit, then share that instead. If it is right, God will bless it. Quite frankly, everything Phil Pringle has taught has brought incredible blessing into my life and so many others I know, and tithing or not, whatever! I give over and above 10 percent to the house because I want to see people get pulled out of darkness, just like I once was in. And that’s what’s important. God owns everything anyway…All I read here is small-mindedness and despising comments really, nothing encouraging or constructive about it. So come on, we have minds that we can use ourselves and if we really have a relationship with God, He will change us, not you, not Phil Pringle, not anybody…peace out

    specksandlanks
    @ Bekah,

    Phil Pringle is an ‘awesome leader’ because he has done a great job in deceiving himself and misleading thousands into believing he is the real deal.

    You should browse the archives to see how far Pringle has gone astray from the gospel of Christ.

    Your ignoramus jargon reminds me that you are simply a lemming product of C3. You speak like a C3ite, think like a C3ite, defend like a C3ite and behave like a C3ite.

    Come back when you start to think for yourself. I might actually listen to what you have to say. If Phil Pringle can turn stones to bread and offer you all the kingdoms of the world, you’d still defend him. You judge a false prophet by what they teach, not how they tickle you and make you feel good.

    If you have a mind yourself, then think for yourself and don’t immerse yourself with the brain-watering teachings of Pringle. I can see you’ve allowed Pringle in to your heart (since that is what he targets every service and NOT your head). If you are judging our relationship with God by the way we speak, then that is such shallow Pringle Christianity. You’ve have proven to me very easily your brains belong to C3. Renew your mind and step out of the world and into scriptures. You will find a very different Christianity to that of what C3 presents.

    You defend blindly a heretic and a blasphemer of God. I am deeply concerned the ground you are standing on Bekah. Do you truly call no man your Father, Teacher or Leader and rely on Christ to bear those titles in your life? Do you live by that faith? Or do you take comfort in the shadow of Pringle’s wings? Is that how you discern he is right and others are wrong?

    If so you are living by sight and not by faith. The standard of our faith is the gospel in which we live, love and rightly judge. Restart with the simplicity of the gospel and reexamine what you know from there.

    Pringle needs to repent and return to the simple truths of the gospel. You should be telling Pringle to redirect his energy to the cross and the gospel, then we’d get on fine.

    5PS, of course, pitches in with his usual rebuke of anyone supporting C3, and teddy (Berean), slips in a short, pithy remark. Which is followed by a series of rebukes form some the gentler commenters, and a huge defence of specksandplanks by 5PS, who actually, then, being confronted with his callous disregard for Bekah in his defence of specksandplanks, changes the subject completely to Calvinism. LOL!

    My point is this. Here is an early indication of where Jake and Zorro were already heading.

    Ironically, I was, at this time, officially banned by specksandplanks from commenting. You see a pattern here I hope.

  24. Jake is also now attacking his new church in manly…seems he doesn’t really agree that anyone but him and his friends are believers!

    So 5PS is Zorro as well? My my!

    Jake had been told by a former commenter here, he wouldn’t say who, that signposts was about to shut down!!! Never, we are strong here because we allow for our differences.

  25. Vivre la difference!

    Jake probably walked into the perfect church in Manly! The rest is history.

    What these people don’t realise is that the spirit they so hate when they enter a local church isn’t the spirit that was in the church before they arrived, but the one that is on them and follows them into every place they go.

    The Zorro thing is a 90% sure educated guess, but he can always come here and confirm or deny, can’t he? We know they all read the blog.

  26. That’s what happens when you want to be a heresy hunter. By the same standard you judge others so you shall be judged.

  27. That is why it is better to test the spirits and examine the doctrine, because if you can’t rightly divide the Word of God you will be in trouble.

    For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

    But I agree that hunting heresy is a futility of its own. Better to deal with issues as they arise, but, otherwise, get on with living out the truth.

    You don’t have to look for heresy. It’s out there and will find you eventually. It’s how you deal with it that counts. If you have spent enough time in the Word and Spirit to see through false doctrine when it arrives at your door you will be OK. Prevention is better than cure.

    Setting up specialist sites to attack one church and its leadership is inviting judgment.

  28. “Setting up specialist sites to attack one church and its leadership is inviting judgment.”

    Oh, you mean like the WatchWatch?

  29. Spoken like a true Universalist.

    What is it that doesn’t matter?

    1. Christ
    2. The cross
    3. The Word made flesh
    4. The resurrection
    5. The New Testament
    5. The blood of Christ
    6. Salvation
    7. Grace
    8. Faith
    9. The gospel of Christ
    10. Forgiveness
    11. Sin, the reason for the above
    12. The Great Commission

    And all the rest of the Word.

    Of course, Bones and wazza believe that all roads lead to Christ, and that, no matter what religion you are engaged in, you will be saved.

    The Bible is of no consequence because you may use the Koran, Torah or Bhagavad Gita as your source. Or the RC traditions, of course.

    Kind of like Bahai’s with liberal jargon and catholic sympathies.

  30. No i don’t think any of it does. The books of the bible werent written as doctrinal statements. They are at best human interpretation.

  31. Eyes, closed,
    Oh, you mean like the WatchWatch?

    Which church is that singling out? The site c3churchwatchwatch doesnt single out any churches for criticism.

    Oh, wait a minute, perhaps you mean the group at c3churchwatch who think they are The Church but can’t tell us who they are, where they worship, what their doctrine is for fear of being… I don’t really know what? Persecuted? By whom? The ‘Accurate Blog Reporting Society of NSW’? The Journalistic Union for the poor level of reporting?

    They are flies in the ointment of the apothecary.

    No, no, Eyes, you haven’ worked it out. An anonymous site of anonymous critics is made up of no critics at all. They are, by choice, nobodies with nothing to declare.

    They might say words, some nasty, and some just very unkind, often deteriorating into nothing more than backbiting, slander and gossip, but they are a kind of secret society, rather like the Masonic Lodges.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t already have some kind of secret handshake or coded calling method between them.

    But just because they make accusations about Christians and consider themselves to be Christians doesn’t make them a church, or even part of the church. I think Jesus said something about hiding your light under a bushel, didn’t he?

    When thousands have died and been imprisoned for their faith, who were known, and whose names they were glad to reveal in the name of Christ, as hey fearlessly preached the gospel, those anonymous fairies at c3curchwatch are made to look like they are nothin more than vapour.

    The site c3churchwatchwatch was, as it declares, a tongue in cheek response to the nonsense at c3churchwatch, which I signed off from some time ago.

    It never singled out any churches or church leaders. Only nameless shrinking violets intent on sowing discord amongst the brethren.

    Dead flies putrefy the perfumer’s ointment, And cause it to give off a foul odor.

  32. Bones,
    No i don’t think any of it does. The books of the bible werent written as doctrinal statements. They are at best human interpretation.

    Well, at least that is an honest and conclusive admission. There is little point in discussing doctrine with you, is there? You neither know it or believe it, nor believe it is necessary.

    The books of the Bible were not written as doctrinal statements.

    Jesus would disagree with you.

    John 7:16
    Jesus answered them and said, “My doctrine is not Mine, but His who sent Me.

    The Apostles would disagree with you.

    Acts 2:42-43
    And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.

    Paul would disagree with you, too.

    1 Timothy 4:13-16
    Till I come, give attention to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine. Do not neglect the gift that is in you, which was given to you by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the eldership. Meditate on these things; give yourself entirely to them, that your progress may be evident to all. Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you.

    1 Timothy 5:15
    Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.

    2 Timothy 3:16-17
    All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

    John would disagree vehemently with you.

    2 John 8-11
    Look to yourselves, that we do not lose those things we worked for, but that we may receive a full reward. Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.

  33. Bones,
    So pointing out error is persecution?

    What, did you speed read it, or read it on speed?

    I said the c3churchwatch crew claim they will be persecuted if they reveal their actual names or credentials for coming against c3 and Hillsong. They hide behind a mask for fear of reprisals! True! They do.

    Try reading it again.

    Oh, wait a minute, perhaps you mean the group at c3churchwatch who think they are The Church but can’t tell us who they are, where they worship, what their doctrine is for fear of being… I don’t really know what? Persecuted? By whom? The ‘Accurate Blog Reporting Society of NSW’? The Journalistic Union for the poor level of reporting?

  34. Given that most people cant rightly divide or separate fact from fiction then yes it doesn’t matter no matter how many verses you pull out.

    God shouldn’t have chosen such a tricky book.

  35. I think the only Catholic I’ve named recently has been long dead, being pope Pius XXII, apart from Francis, who I said nice things about and hold some reservations for but displays some hope in some areas, although not in the area of Marianism, which he is pushing with a large amount of verve.

    Does he read this blog?

    As I have said countless times, and once more for the kiddies, it is always acceptable to put forward doctrine and challenge its authenticity. Go ahead. But you have been far more aggressive about people, and so have c3churchwatch.

    The folk at c3churchwatch, especially Zorro, spend far more time being obnoxious towards anyone who opposes their point of view.

  36. Bones,
    Given that most people cant rightly divide or separate fact from fiction then yes it doesn’t matter no matter how many verses you pull out.

    God shouldn’t have chosen such a tricky book.

    Well, speak for yourself, Bones.

    It does say to be diligent to study. If people are going to spend more time on their computer games and watching sport than digging not the Word of God of course they will be easily fooled by cults. The JWs rely on this, and catholics are their prize targets because they know stuff all about anything Biblical. They are easy pickings.

    Pentecostals are much harder for them because they at least have a basic grounding and love of God to know they are saved and se through JW doctrine. Evangelicals like the Baptists also have a good track record of etching their people.

    The more liberal leaning churches like the recent Church of Christ mob have basically sold out on their people, as have several Uniting Church ministries, whose seminaries are turning out liberals by the score.

    Liberalism tends to confusion, Bones. That is what you are experiencing. It is deadly.

  37. Was Nelson Mandela a Christian?

    Dunno but he’s probably the most Christlike figure in my time.

    To think he would be cast into the lake of fire because he didnt have the right ideology is obscene.

  38. Dont have problem with pentecostals.Theyre welcome to their beliefs so long as they dont think theyre better than others.

    Prosperity doctrine isnt religion though. its the equivalence of used car salesmen using religion to commit fraud especially against the poor.

  39. Bones, it’s not a matter of one belief being better than another. It’s a matter of pleasing God.

    Now if you can show this Universalist Pantheistic doctrine of yours from God’s perspective I will listen.

    However, as a Christian, I have a very good life manual which is actually very clear in its teaching on most things, certainly all the important issues for a follower of Christ.

    You say we do not need the Bible and we do not need Christ.

    Effectively you deny Christ.

    Therefore your claim to be a Christian is shot by your own confession.

    You have slipped from any faith in Christ you might have had into a liberal stream of reason which excludes the need of absolutes in faith.

    You have embraced a self-constructed areligious doctrine of pantheistic uiversalism which eliminates all necessity to approach God, please God or worship God.

    In your religion God receives all whether they deny Him or not.

    Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die – but all will be well, there is no judgment for sin.

    Yours is a religion of secular heroes where the person who does the most great and influential deeds is rewarded with eternal life and faith in God doesn’t come into it.

    So the Islamic suicide bomber who blew up the Jewish students in their street side café a few years ago in Jerusalem is something of a hero to you, because he has already gained eternal life for himself and those Jewish students because they all had a religion they believed in.

  40. and the idea that michelle bachmann and george w bush have a get out of jail card because they have correct ideology whilst mandela doesnt is pretty f**ked.

  41. is there any difference between an islamic suicide bomber and a bible believing protestant rejoicing in the death of catholics or ugandan pastors rousing their country to ececute gays?

    Some get free admission whereas others dont.

  42. You really don’t know a thing about following Christ, do you?

    I said nothing about Mandela. He was who he was. As a leader of South Africa he showed skills which surprised the world and saved a bloodbath. He wasn’t always like this, but I’m glad he changed. He made himself a man for the people.

    Thing is, works don’t count for much without faith. Like all of us, without faith in Christ, all is lost. Who knows. Maybe he accepted Christ somewhere slog the line.

    And you missed the point of what I was saying about the Islamic suicide bomber. My point was that in your pantheistic universalist world he was a hero who sent people into heaven much quicker.

    I don’t know why you’re complaining about the protestants. In your pantheistic universalist world they were right to rejoice in the early departure of your ancestors. And the Ugandan pastors re only serving your pantheistic universalism with gusto.

  43. Same goes of course with your theology. Abortion doctors do a service by extinguishing the unborn before they can sin.

  44. Bones,
    Abortion doctors do a service by extinguishing the unborn before they can sin.

    And are condemned for murder. How does that help anyone?

    You’re getting more ludicrous by the minute. And you haven’t understood the flaws in your preposterous argument.

    Of course, in your pantheistic universalist world the abortion doctors would not be condemned for murder of the unborn because they actually believe in what they are doing.

    As for your about to be revealed silliness about atheists, anyone can follow Christ, but do they say He is God? JWs follow Christ by deny his deity.

    In your pantheistic universalist world denial of Christ is acceptable, but belief in Christ is also acceptable, rejecting the Son of God, as Mohammedans do, is acceptable, accepting the Son of God is acceptable, elevating Mary to Queen of Heaven is acceptable, as is the religion of the Third Reich, Stalinism and Maoism. North Koreans can worship the Great Leader, and it is acceptable, in your world for them to murder Christians and throw them into prison.

    In your world, atheists are all included and will all be saved, even though the nature of atheism is to deny the existence of God and the one criteria for salvation is faith.

    As you say, ‘ultimately none of it matters’.

  45. Bones,
    Abortion doctors do a service by extinguishing the unborn before they can sin.

    In fact, in your liberal secular world, of course, abortion ‘doctors’ are not only permitted to perform these acts, but it is encouraged. In your world you’ve already reached the zenith of infanticide, and you do, literally, think you do the world a favour by dispatching the unborn as a matter of convenience over expedience.

    Isn’t ‘abortion doctor’ an oxymoron?

  46. I your ‘nothing matters’ world of liberal secularism, doctors who refuse to abort children for frivolous reasons or cannot refer couples to another doctor can be struck off.

    A DOCTOR risks being deregistered because he allegedly refused a referral for an Indian couple who wanted to abort a healthy unborn baby girl at 19 weeks, simply because they wanted a boy.

    Dr Mark Hobart, 55, has been under investigation by the Medical Board of Victoria for five months, accused of having committed an offence under the state’s controversial Abortion Law Reform Act of 2008.

    His patient and her husband requested a sex-selection abortion after an ultrasound determined their fetus was female.

    They only wanted a boy, the husband told Dr Hobart, who, as a practising Catholic, had a conscientious objection to providing the abortion.

    Under Victorian law, he was obliged to refer the patient to a doctor he knew would terminate the pregnancy.

    But Dr Hobart doesn’t know any doctor who would agree to abort a healthy baby for sex selection reasons.

    “The general response from my colleagues is disbelief and revulsion,” he said.

    In any case, a referral is not necessary for an abortion. Hobart’s patient independently procured the abortion a few days later. Neither she nor her husband made any complaint.

    But Dr Hobart now finds himself subject to a star chamber inquiry by the Medical Board of Victoria.

    The complaint about his conduct was generated by members of the board itself, a so-called “own Motion” .

    Yet Dr Hobart’s repeated requests for the identity of his accusers and the substance of the complaint have been rebuffed by the board and its parent body, the Australian Health Practitioners Regulation Agency.

    On Friday afternoon, Victorian MP Christine Campbell tabled a statement on Dr Hobart’s behalf to a Legislative Council inquiry into AHPRA.

    She says he “is at risk of losing his licence to practice medicine because the secrecy of the [board] is making it difficult for him to defend himself.”

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/doctor-risks-his-career-after-refusing-abortion-referral/story-fni0ffsx-1226733458187

  47. maybe that indian couple accepted jesus in their hearts once. Maybe they believed in the trinity, the deity of christ and speak in tongues. Do Christians not have abortions?

  48. Its your doctrine which doesnt matter, derp. Whether u believe jesus was god, a god, a prophet, a good man. Or if god is one or many or the great spirit or nothing doesnt matter either.

    What matters is how we treat others.

  49. Maybe they just wanted to kill the child because she was a girl.

    Does that complement your scale of goodness?

  50. Well, of course, if you are a pantheistic universalist, no doctrine matters.

    In your world all is well as long as we treat others in a certain way. So, God, if He exists (in your thinking) is only looking for our goodness and not our relationship.

    In your world a relationship with God is not necessary.

    God is not a Father. God is not the Son.

    In fact, in your world, as you have just declared, God doesn’t matter at all (‘if god is one or many or the great spirit or nothing doesn’t matter.).

    So people, in your world, can godlessly get on with life and be good and all will be well.

    But if your god is nothing, what happens to people when this life is done? No hell. No heaven in your world, so what is there?

    In your world all roads lead to God and yet no God is necessary.

    Self-religion is the standard Western secular belief system, isn’t it? “I have my own god”. “I have my own beliefs”. “I’m a good person.”

    It’s amazing how many people say these things, and when you ask what that belief system is, or how it is organised, the standard response is something like ‘I do good”, “I don’t hurt anybody”. So, it’s all about good works.

    Of course, it is just code for ‘leave me alone to my own devises’.

    What you are saying to us over these couple of days is that no doctrine matters. You have narrowed it down to mine, but, actually, at the same time, stated that no doctrine matters, because it doesn’t matter which god, or any god you believe in or don’t believe in, as long as you do right by everyone she’ll be right mate.

    So, in your world a works-based pantheistic universalism is the way to go.

  51. But you’re not really telling the truth, because, in fact, your statement that no doctrine matters, really means that all doctrines matter as long as they fit your doctrine of works.

    A Mohammedan is steeped in doctrine, and will swear by it and die for it, but you would not say, then, that his doctrine doesn’t matter since you know it does – to him.

    And, in your world, his doctrine is as relevant as any other belief system and all belief systems lead to the same conclusion.

    And you state that the main doctrine is determined by how you treat others. How do you define this? Do you have a scale, a ladder of good deeds by which to judge the goodness of men and women?

    Suppose that Mohammedan is a young man, who has known nothing since childhood but the Taliban Madras, where he has been taught that girls should not be educated, and they must be taught harsh lessons to prevent them from being educated.

    So, being a good and well versed young man, he volunteers for an assignment to shoot a girl on her way to a Pakistani school in the mountains. In his religion he is doing a good thing, and knows no better. Where does he stand on your ladder of good deeds?

    Is your good deed scale relevant to the standard of the person’s belief system, or have you devised a Bonesian code of goodness we measure our goodness against?

  52. But you know this is ridiculous, because, being Bones, we all know that your system of goodness must be flawed because you are Bones, and like the rest of us, do not have enough goodness in you, being godless, to set up the good deed scale for anyone, let alone yourself.

    I know you enough on these pages to know that sometimes you just don’t measure up. Me too. In purely human terms, I’ve never met that person.

    So who is going to set up the good deed scale, then, Bones?

    Nelson Mandela? We know, great as he was, that he was a deeply flawed man, too. As with all leaders.

    No. The only person who qualifies is someone who has made it through life and demonstrated it was possible live a flawless life.

    And it can’t be works. Because goodness can’t be measured unless there is something to measure it against. As Jesus said, “Only God is good.”

    We might be good one day and bad the next. You say you don’t believe evil is in any man, yet it is undoubtedly in any man to be evil at any given time.

    How do you measure evil? Jesus determined that hatred was at the same level as murder. Will you say you could never hate a man or woman?

    Do you actually trust yourself enough to say you will never ever do something evil, wrong or offensive to another person in your lifetime? I would call you a liar, and be right, and you would already be exposed as evil.

    And we are all in the same boat. All of us.

    Good intentions, of course, do not count. Nor do good resolutions.

    So if we say that we are saved by good works, good deeds or a good attitude, even if we are good enough to display it most of the time, the few times we slip back into bad works, bad deeds and bad attitude we disqualify ourselves.

    And what about bragging rights? if I announce myself as good enough to be saved by my good deeds yet I am found to have a facetious level of goodness which is upheld by a shaky foundation of bad works, how will anyone believe me in this life, let alone in the next?

    So, I put it to you that good works, good deeds and good attitude are not enough. There has to be some other way to end the death spiral we find ourselves in through the corruption that is clearly in the world. I need a measure of goodness. I need to change.

    Only God is good. He has to set the standard.

    But. He has said our good works do not cut it. They do not count. Our goodness doesn’t make it.

    He has said the only thing that counts is His goodness. It is the goodness of God which leads us to change.

    It is God’s goodness which offers us mercy, and grace, and salvation.

    The only way to receive His goodness is through faith, because mercy, grace and salvation are spiritual qualities only accessed through spiritual means. Works are temporal.

    The only goodness in the universe which counts is the goodness of God.

    Without it we are all lost.

  53. And what is the cut off point for the lake of fire. Trinitarianism? That leaves td jakes out. The deity of christ? I can remember when it was speaking in tongues.

    If speaking in tongues, praying to mary, allah, or buddha makes you a better human being then go for it.

  54. This deserves it’s own article.

    Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: Christ the Conqueror of Hell

    The Descent of Christ into Hades in Eastern and Western Theological Traditions

    Due too the extreme length of the piece it has been transferred to its own post here.

    (Perhaps Bones can get his act together and make contact with Greg to gain authoring rights)

  55. Did you say you had preached in churches, and you don’t know the criteria for salvation?

    You have had ample time to have denied some of the charges I made on this thread but have not. You have shown that you either do not know the gospel or have rejected it.

    Now you are preaching another gospel.

    I’m sorry, but unless you can show otherwise you have made yourself an enemy of the cross of Christ.

Comments are closed.