I am finding a common tendency among most people who are critical of my adherence to Scripture or my "narrow" view of the Gospel. The tendency is that these people, when asked, almost always refuse to explain the Gospel in their own words. Two particular people spring to mind in recent weeks.
The first is a guy called Graeme who is an old friend from my early Christian life when I lived in Ipswich, Australia. Though I would still consider Graeme as a friend, I'm not so sure he would reciprocate after the hard words I spoke to him in the comments section of one of my posts. These hard words were, however, entirely called for due to Graeme's disgraceful cheap shot at the Creation Science community with his outrageous claim that:
Lets face it, Creationists don't don't really care about Christ. But they do care about the literal meaning of creationism (yes that is a direct quote).
It becomes even more outrageous when you consider the fact that Graeme has commented numerous times on this blog without having anything to say about the Person and work of Christ. Graeme's comment is equally insulting to ministries like Answers in Genesis who produce excellent Gospel tracts and invest heavily in evangelistic outreaches. Some of these people are people who I have met personally and found to be very Christ centered. I wouldn't have a clue about where Graeme stands with Christ because he has never said anything about it. When Graeme was asked several times to articulate the Gospel and how much He esteems Christ, he had this to say . . . . deafening silence.
"UnkleE" is another Aussie, as best as I can tell, who felt the need to comment on a recent post about Rob Bell and defend Rob Bell's heretical theology. In fairness to "UnkleE", he initially responded because he misunderstood some of my commentary (which I should have been clearer on). But as the conversation progressed, it turned out that "UnkleE" had read one of Bell's books (Velvet Elvis if I recall) and found nothing problematic or heretical in a book that is very heretical and probelematic (paging universalism). Since "UnkleE" considered Bell to be sound enough that we should just leave him alone I challenged him to explain the Gospel in his own words - in the hope of understanding where "UnkleE" was at. I was genuinely concerned about "UnkleE" due to his handling of Scripture and relaxed attitude about universalism. What was UnkleE's response:
Further discussion would be unproductive.
Well Graeme and "UnkleE" and everyone else who is unwilling to discuss this with me - please watch this video and answer my question underneath!
Obviously the woman's advice is as useful as an ashtray on a motorcycle . . . unless you WANT to go to hell! But what would you say to this man in this situation? I really want to know. Graeme and "UnkleE", hard as it might be to believe, right now I am being your best friend. This is where the rubber meets the road. And whether you respond or not (please do), you can be sure about this: one day you will either meet the man in this video or be the man in this video.
The Briefing 06-29-17
1 hour ago