Nazarenes For Biblical Holiness

Discipleship in a Post Christian Culture

2011-11-07T20:44:00.000-08:00

What is your reaction to this video? Please visit the website listed in the video toward the end. Upon getting to that site look for the 16 page document called the "white papers".

The Evangelical Rejection of Reason- NOT

2011-10-25T17:49:00.000-07:00

I am going to keep this simple and straight forward. I am an Eastern Nazarene College graduate who had Professor Karl Giberson as a professor. I have witnessed over the last several years his digression away from the bible, the holiness heritage of the Church of the Nazarene (COTN) and sound biblical doctrine. I have personally written to him and appealed to him, the President of the College and even our General Leaders about this wayward professing evangelical member of the Church of the Nazarene. Fortunately, he finally resigned and moved on, but only to still bring upon the COTN great shame in his latest Oct 17^th New York Times article.

Many of the articles and books Karl and similar faith abandoning professors have written do no earthly or heavenly good. Karl has taught at ENC and has brought the greatest shame upon the institution in it’s over 100 year history.

I trust that in the silence of those in position of authority something is being done, said or considered to set the record straight about who Nazarene’s are and where they stand on these issues. I am not in a position of leadership with ENC, the board of trustees, the current President or this present professor named Randall Stephens, but I do feel confident that the recent article named “The Evangelical Rejection of Reason” in the New York Times opinion section of October 17^{th 2011}does not reflect and represent the majority of the members of the COTN around the world.

These men who wrote this article are out of line and touch with the doctrines and position of the church. They indeed bring shame upon His glorious Church when they dare refer to themselves as evangelicals. They obviously rely exclusively upon science and reason than the Anointed One and His revelation. Christianity is a relationship built upon faith in Jesus Christ and the recorded miracles of the bible. All miracles defy reason, logic and science and therefore called miracles.

The supernatural order always has and always will overstep the natural order of science and the material order of creation when the Creator wants and decides and it takes faith to believe and receive that as a higher reality than the natural order of creation.

These men should either make a retraction on their article or public recordable statement of correction or move their association and membership out of the COTN. If they choose not do so, I think they would make a far better match with Richard Dawkins new non believing clergy groups then the believers of Christ within the COTN. Is there any science to the fact that this article was published on the same day as the article published by Richard Dawkins? The article at hand is a testimony of their abandonment of true biblical faith in Christ unless corrected soon. If not corrected they are shipwrecking their faith and perhaps the faith of many others as well.

Weak Pond Water Anyone?

2011-08-23T09:16:00.000-07:00

It has been sometime since I posted a blog on any subject. It's just been a busy summer. Today I was finally able to read a book I've had since February 2011 that I picked up at the M11 Conference on evangelism. Within a few hours my local Missions president called me to ask about a missions lesson she was disappointed with. In our conversation she said, "pastor there is no scripture in the lesson plan and it's all just social work stuff". We discuss what we can do to teach people the Word and get what we could out of the lesson. I have heard one leader say our leadership has become as " weak as pond water".

After I finished my book I did a review on Amazon and left a quote from one page in the book. I can you tell we have a publish crisis. I will not drink pond water being passed off as Holy Water and I hope you will not either.

Listening Inside Out: Conversations with Twenty Somethings About Faith, Culture, and the Church (Paperback)

The book title is interesting and a few of the chapters had a few good thoughts. However, the entire book as a whole was one of questions and not that of conviction or persuasive answers. I believe the twenty something generation is looking for solutions and answers and what this book does is confirm that those answers are not being delivered by many leaders who should have good biblical answers for this generation. Most of the chapters became a repeated pattern under a different title. I find it refreshing when writers quote scripture to give support to their perception and convictions, but very little of this is noted in this book. It was a very liberal and weak publication for a publishing House that has been known for decades as a holiness publishing house. One page in particular stood out as being extremely liberal that addressed the subject of homosexuality in the church. The author suggested that those who are openly homosexuality should be offered membership in the church like anyone else. Homosexual is referred to as an "orientation" verses a "perversion & immorality" and that alone gives enough evidence that this book wants to influence and persuade the holiness mindset to change and liberalize ones biblical standards.

Social Justice and Compassion seem to be a higher focus in this book verses the preaching of repentance and salvation for the poor and unfortunate. We should be reminded that even when Jesus fed the multiple he did so at the end of a day when he had taught the people spiritual truth first. However, many in our day try to put the cart before the horse and wonder why we are not reaching the lost as we had in previous generations. The book is more a read on the emotional feelings verses the spiritual convictions of leaders.

" on page 38 in the chapter called "Lifestyle" reads the following:

Let's say a homosexual man walks into your church. The most responsible thing a church can do is love him, regardless of what lifestyle he chooses. You just love him into the Kingdom. It doesn't always mean that man is not going to be gay anymore, but that's not up to you. All we can do is love people regardless of what lifestyle they choose. Obviously, questions will arise. That gay man might ask, 'What is your stance on homosexuality'? It's ok to have a stance, but it's not ok to tell him that he is not welcome at your church, or that he can't be a part of this or that. It's about loving him and telling him that you're dealing with it too. You're loving people regardless of background, race or orientation."

I want to press him further on this perspective. "Matt, what if that homosexual person wants to join the church? If he's in a lifestyle we don't condone, do we let him join anyway?"

"Well, yeah. I mean, I don't think it's a deal breaker. This is a really tricky question because if I say yes, then I'm saying that now we allow openly gay people to be in the community. And if I say no, then it leads to a question of what we will allow them to do.

I know that raises all kinds of questions either way you go. But ultimately, I say yes. What you're saying to that person is, 'we love you.' His thing may be homosexuality, but someone else's thing is pornography, ..................

A Realistic & Good Report on Ministry In The Church of the Nazarene

2011-05-21T14:26:00.000-07:00

Report of the District Superintendent

North Florida District Assembly

May 20, 2011

Dr. Middendorf, our presiding general superintendent; Michael Johnson, representing Trevecca Nazarene University; other special guests; and delegates, members, and friends of this 38^th Assembly of the North Florida District: I am once again honored to stand before you to report for the 11^th time as your district superintendent. Come August of this summer, Nancy and I will have been a part of this district for 20 years, and you really are family to us.

I want to begin by expressing personal gratitude to those who surround me in this assignment, and to whom I am especially indebted…our advisory board, two district secretaries this past year in Joe McNulty and Dave Pullen, our district treasurer Mark Patrick, our auxiliary leaders in Susan Day (NMI), Donna Nichols (SDMI), and Tim Hildreth (NYI), and our team of pastors and spouses. Thank you…your love, support, and encouragement.

Once again, rather than reviewing the year just past for my annual report, I am choosing to share a message with you as my district family, my flock, so to speak. But before doing so, I want to briefly mention some of our statistics. Financially, this past year has been perhaps our most challenging in our 38-year history. The plight of our nation’s overall economy is no secret, but our district had been spared its severity until this past year. In several of our churches, regardless of size, members have lost jobs, or their work or business has been greatly curtailed, or they’ve moved away seeking employment elsewhere, significantly reducing tithes/offerings. As a result, our district churches have had an overall loss of income compared to last year of more than $1 million.

In addition, we have had the added challenge of implementing a new budget system. And tomorrow morning our district treasurer, Mark Patrick, is going to walk us through once again a simple workshop on this new way of doing things, sort of a “Funding the Mission 101.”

In speaking to you this afternoon, I would like to refer to a passage of Scripture found in 2 Peter 3:11-14; 17-18:

Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be?

You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness. So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless, and at peace with him. Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen. (NIV)

In this passage, the Apostle Peter reminds all of us of the Day of the Lord. And much like the time in which Peter was writing, we, too, seem to see the ravages of evil all around us. I am not a prophet, but it would appear we are living in the Saturday night

hour of this dispensation. Yet when speaking of His return, Jesus said no one knows that day…not even the angels in heaven…except for His heavenly Father.

Though we may be living in the last days, the best way to keep prepared is to be involved with all of our energies and efforts in the extension of His Kingdom in our world. He may or may not come in my lifetime, but whether I’m caught up in the rapture or His coming is after my death, I want to be ready.

When it comes to God’s Kingdom, I’m both glad and thankful to be a part of the Church of the Nazarene. At one time who would have thought we would ever be a denomination in excess of 2 million members worldwide, as we are today? And yet in spite of that growth, some of you know I’ve expressed some sincere concerns about our church…

recent trends and directions…as have others.

I don’t want to merely voice caution, or to sound critical, for practically all of my life has been invested in and given to the people called Nazarenes. They are the ones who found my parents in Central California and were responsible for helping change their lives, spiritually, forever. As a result of that heritage, I, too, found the Living Lord for my life. I was educated in two of our Nazarene schools and have served with gratefulness in Nazarene churches. My closest and dearest friends are Nazarenes.

But some concerns linger. I don’t want to see us drift, or lose our spiritual moorings, which is not uncommon for a church in existence for more than a hundred years. I want us to continue to adhere to our cardinal doctrine.

I want us to preach it with fervent hearts and clear minds. I don’t want us to be lost in the shallowness of liberalism or drawn to the cold, sterile forms of ritualism. I want us to maintain a revival spirit that early on became synonymous with our church. And I want my own children, and your children, to be able to identify that spirit!

As I think about our church, I believe there are at least three great pluses or attributes that have been in our favor. And in this report, I want to share those with you.

I. The Plus of a Great History

First of all, there is the plus of a great history through some wonderful and godly leaders.When my parents were still living but no longer able to care for themselves on their own, my two sisters and I had the daunting task of getting them to move out of their home into an assisted living environment. During that process we discovered something in their basement we never knew existed. My mother had kept hidden away all of the love letters she and dad had exchanged during their courtship. That was when the telephone was used sparingly, and writing was a crafted art. As we came across the letters and took turns reading them aloud, my sisters began weeping at the beauty, innocence, purity, and depth of their love for one another.

But something else stood out. They were both in their twenties and had only been Christians and a part of the Church of the Nazarene a short time, but their letters also expressed a surprising maturity and growth in the things of God. For in that time they had been exposed to several of the early leaders and preachers of our church. One of them was a small statured itinerant evangelist who frequented their home church of Porterville, CA, because his daughter and her husband and their eight children were also a part of that church. His name was Uncle Bud Robinson.

Others who impacted their lives were H. Orton Wiley, the president of Pasadena College where they attended, and who taught systematic theology to all religion majors; Jay Proctor Knott, godly professor of history at the college; and preachers like C. W. Ruth and A. O. Hendricks. As dad told me one day, “All the preaching I heard when I came into the Church of the Nazarene came from powerful preachers of the Word of God, and perfect love seemed to ooze from them.”

Not once did he ever hear someone cast doubt or question the absolute authority of God’s Word. They were unique, learned, and humble servants, minus any arrogance stemming from their own knowledge and educational credentials. And God blessed!

If you read the Historical Statement in the beginning pages of our Church Manual you’ll come across the name of Mary Lee Cagle, who, along with her first husband, R. L. Harris, blazed across the cattle trails of Texas for scriptural holiness. In one county seat after another they paid the price to plant what became the Church of the Nazarene. And when her husband died, Mary Lee continued on her own to conduct revivals, one of which was in the West Texas town of Rotan. In that meeting a cowboy by the name of Henry Cagle was won to the Lord under her preaching, and later on he won her hand in marriage and joined with her in ministry.

As a 10-year-old boy I recall going with my dad to visit the home of Mary Lee and Henry C. Cagle, then retired and up in years, living in the small town of Buffalo Gap, outside of Abilene, TX. There was a sweet and godly spirit about the Cagles, including just being in their home. But there was also a certain awe about Mary Lee. She was tall and stately, with snow white hair and flawless skin, almost angelic looking. And before leaving, she would say to my dad, “Now Brother Jenkins, I want you to have prayer with us,” and the four of us would all kneel around their kitchen table.

But after dad finished praying, Mary Lee would always close in prayer. I want to tell you that even as a young boy, I knew her prayer had lifted all of us heavenward. And before saying goodbye, she would clasp my dad’s hand and say, “Brother Jenkins, if I don’t see you again here, I’ll meet you yonder just inside the Eastern Gate.”

I share this to say that those who went before us to plant our church did so, for the most

part, at great personal cost and sacrifice. They had few people, even less money, and in most places were accompanied by hardship. But in the lives of those early leaders, not only did they profess and preach heart holiness, better yet, they lived it. Their lives were transparent, they stood clear and tall for God, and they had an influence and impact because of a holiness that they themselves demonstrated.

None of our preaching is ever any better than our living.

II. The Plus of a Great Theology

The second plus in our favor is that of a great message contained in our theology…

freedom from sin by the power of the Holy Spirit, known as heart holiness…verified and confirmed by Scriptures. It became the foundation and distinction of who we are and what our early preachers and leaders unashamedly proclaimed.

Yet all too often, upon visiting a church in this assignment, someone will say to me, “Orville, we seldom, if ever, hear a message on holiness.”

If we are Nazarenes, there should be a stamp upon us that we cannot escape. Pastor, as a holiness preacher, you are marked for life. Others may not agree and give emphasis elsewhere. But you and I, as holiness people, have no options, no electives, no discount fares, and make no apologies. When you go this way, you go with a purpose, for you go God’s way, without compromise, reservation, or stipulation.

It calls for cutting some shore lines…settling some spiritual issues once and for all…living to a higher standard…and dying to the world, including the opinion and favor of others. In short, it calls for dying out to self!

But if we ignore or neglect this truth, we not only forfeit the distinctiveness that brought us into existence, we also vacate a wonderful experience that God has for each of us in which our hearts are made clean from sin and pure in love.

III. The Plus of an Evangelistic Passion

And then there is the plus of an evangelistic passion, for the Church of the Nazarene was born in revival.

The Methodist Church stands as a tribute today to one man, John Wesley, who had a passion for souls. When the Church of England forbid him to preach, he stood on his father’s tombstone and said the world was his parish. And for the next 40 years he started revival fires, often in out of the way places all across England, resulting in Methodism. During that time Wesley averaged 8,000 miles a year by horseback and 1,000 sermons a year in his zeal for spiritually lost people.

The Wesleyan revival of the 18^th century was a forerunner of the historical religious current which birthed the Church of the Nazarene, and was characterized by three components: salvation by faith in Jesus Christ; full surrender to Christ’s lordship leading to heart holiness, or sanctification, also by faith; and then the witness or assurance by the Holy Spirit. In fact, when the Methodist Episcopal Church was formed in America in 1784, its stated purpose was “to reform the Continent, and to spread scriptural Holiness over these Lands.”

Ironically, almost a hundred years after Wesley, a Methodist leader by the name of Phineas F. Bresee left a rather secure position in Southern California in order to pursue taking the gospel to the poor and needy. He did so no longer a young man, but at age 57, with the end result being the establishment of the Church of the Nazarene…not only to the poor, but to the world. For also evolving from Bresee’s sense of obedience was something he never fully realized or observed in his own lifetime…our church’s great missionary enterprise which has produced countless unsung heroes of the faith as well as an endless stream of those all over the world who’ve been redeemed by the blood of the Lamb.

And more often than not in our history, we’ve planted a church or entered a new world area by sheer faith, trust, and confidence that our God would go before us as we obeyed the Great Commission. That has been our evangelistic passion.

But now here we are, a little over 200 years after Wesley and almost a hundred years after Bresee. No organization, including the church, can rest or dwell merely on its strengths, pluses, attributes, or personalities of the past. Yes, we’ve had a great history and been blessed with wonderful, godly leaders. But now we seem to find it easy to identify ourselves with those who are either controversial or have nothing in common with our holiness doctrine…today’s liberals who were yesterday’s evangelicals…sons and daughters of those who once rejected liberalism. For if you reject the orthodox truth of Scripture and the church, whatever you call it will still be liberalism. It’s almost as if 2,000 years have gone by and now someone is telling us they’ve discovered something contrary to Scripture that no one else has ever found.

But more importantly, I want to know who among us is willing to say…“Here we stand! This is what we believe!” It is something to which the modern, liberal, emergent church is allergic toward declaring.

Who is standing in the gap, ready and willing to take the mantel of spiritual leadership in this post-modern, post-Christian era in which we live? Who will be a modern day C. W. Ruth, A. O. Hendricks, Mary Lee Cagle, J. B. Chapman, R. T. Williams, E. O. Chalfant, G. B.Williamson, M. Kimber Moulton, Lawrence Hicks, Edward Lawlor, Paul Martin, or C. William Fisher, to name only a few. To some of you, these names may not be recognizable, but they were all powerful Nazarene preachers who stood absolutely on the authority of God’s Word and from whom perfect love seemed to ooze. And they helped establish the reputation of the Nazarenes having some of the finest preachers to be found anywhere.

Who will replace the legendary names of Anderson, Beals, Browning, Depasquale, Eckel, Esselstyn, Garman, Hynd, Knox, Orjala, Prescott, Schmelzenbach, Sedat, and Carson- Winans among our long list of missionary heroes?

And who will be among the next wave of individuals to replace outstanding lay men and women, including those here on our own district, who have served faithfully and been the heart and soul of our church going all the way back to those that followed and joined with Bresee?

We’ve had the benefit of a great theology found in Scripture and brought to a new awareness and emphasis by Wesley. But who will be among our next brilliant, dedicated, and humble theologians in the mold of an H. Orton Wiley, Paul T. Culbertson, Ralph Earle, Donald Metz, Willard Taylor, Mildred Wynkoop, H. Ray Dunning, or William Greathouse, who not only taught but demonstrated the very essence of holiness?

And when it comes to our schools, I believe our tolerance should be zero for anyone who doubts or questions the creation, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection and deity of Christ, the reliability and authority of Scripture, as well as the reality of heaven and hell, or wants to impose the acceptance of homosexuality? For in reality they are not only a danger, they are an enemy to what we value, believe, and hold to dearly, including the minds and hearts of our students. I only want teaching, influencing, and impacting our young people those willing to stand boldly and unflinchingly for biblical truth, and strongly and unequivocally against sin, because the lives of those students, many of whom will be the future of our church, is far too valuable to risk with anyone less.

And who of us is going to make sure the plus of our evangelistic passion does not wane? Some of our churches will go for more than a year without one new member joining by profession of faith. Today we are graduating growing numbers of business and education majors in our church schools here in the U.S., while students who feel called into the ministry are in decline. Who will help us retain or renew a passion for lost people?

As both laity and clergy representing our various congregations, the Church of the Nazarene is now in our hands. It’s no longer in the hands of those I’ve mentioned who paved the way and have gone before us, for we cannot recall yesterday, or go back there ourselves. Neither is it in the hands of those who will come after us. But it is in our hands…yours and mine…for we are the Church of the Nazarene of this hour. And our future depends largely on people just like us who sit here today and who will be in our churches on Sunday.

Several years ago I came across an old gospel spiritual entitled, “Shine on Me.” It was the melody and words of the chorus that really caught my attention and that I loved immediately. The chorus says simply, “Shine on me, shine on me, let the light from the Lighthouse shine on me.”

The question I pose to us is this: This light from the Lighthouse of God that brought us into existence as a church…shined upon us with godly leadership…called us unto holiness…placed within us a burden for the lost…and eventually drew you and me into the church…will it still be shining brightly after you and I are gone due to the spiritual fervor and legacy we’re leaving for others?

What about your local church? If our district, or the Church of the Nazarene, depended on what is taking place in your church to sustain and continue our existence for the foreseeable future, would the light from the Lighthouse be bright enough to do so?

And I ask myself, is the light shining through my life strong enough to create the same love, loyalty, and appreciation within the lives of my own children that I’ve experienced for the church? And what am I doing where I serve to help insure that our church remains a viable influence for the message of holiness across northern Florida?

After first hearing “Shine on Me” in a mostly black worship service, I have since heard it sung by youth choirs, but with a slight variation that asks the question, “I wonder if the light from the Lighthouse will shine on me?” And as I’ve heard it sung in that manner, it has haunted me, for I hear the next generations of our church…our youth and children and young families…asking that question of us.

I wish I could answer that question in the affirmative without reservation. But I can state that unless we as a church are able to preserve our godly heritage, influence, and spiritual fervor…and unless we are able to retain our theology that is most sensible and practical when it comes to living godly and holy lives…and unless we are able to maintain our evangelistic passion for lost people…the light from the Lighthouse will gradually grow dim, no longer shining brightly enough to guide those who come after us.

In the passage we read from 2^nd Peter, the apostle asks what kind of people ought you to be? Rhetorically he answers that you ought to live holy and godly lives, making every effort to be found spotless, blameless, and at peace with the Lord (3:11; 14). But he also issues a warning when he says to be on your guard…don’t get carried away and fooled by what is in error (3:17). In other words, don’t settle for what is shallow or just not true.

And, he is speaking to you and me, in whose hands is now our church.

I close with a “homework assignment” in three parts. The first two are specifically for you as pastors, for Scripture says, “And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” (Romans 10:14). Pastors, you are the spiritual leaders of our churches, and you are to teach and preach the truth of what we believe from the authority of God’s Word.

Part One. Two years ago I asked that you preach at least one sermon a month on heart holiness. This year I’d like to see you increase that emphasis. If you don’t already have a copy, obtain the following books an immerse yourself in them for study and sermon preparation, and to feed your own soul: Exploring Christian Holiness, Vol. 1-3 (BHP); Biblical Resources for Holiness Preaching, Dunning/Wiseman (BHP); Studies in Biblical Holiness, Metz (BHP); Grace, Faith, & Holiness, Dunning (BHP).
Part Two. Read through E. M. Bounds’ book, The Preacher and Prayer. It will change your life!

Part Three. And as congregations, may I challenge you to spend intentional and specific times in prayer for the Church of the Nazarene? Pray for boldness, courage, steadfastness, and spiritual power against the forces of darkness and evil that come against us. Pray for every phase of our church, including our leadership, our missionary enterprise, our publishing and curriculum arm, our Global Ministry Center personnel, and for Spirit-filled pastors and lay leaders in our local churches. For nothing of real significance ever happens in the church if it doesn’t take place there. Pray earnestly for your own congregation, not just for the sick or the absent. But ask God, point blank, to help you engage, befriend, and win to Christ no less than at least one new person this year!

This assignment is captured in that simple request, “Shine on me, shine on me, let the light from the Lighthouse shine on me.”

Respectfully submitted,

Orville Jenkins, Jr.

Sacraments, Covenants with Biblical Sense

2011-04-29T13:39:00.000-07:00

The sacraments of the Christian faith as very special and not to be taken or experienced in any trivial manner.

The sacraments are the ‘Sacred” acts or a rituals that changes someone’s social status or renews ones present status in the Christian faith and among the community of believers.

So when it comes to the gospel of Jesus Christ we are to fulfill or continue in the Covenant of God the Father with those adherents of the faith of Abraham fulfilled in and through the grace of Jesus Christ.

1. Baby Dedication: This ritual has a historical association with offering a new born life to being raised in a godly community by both the parents and the larger body of the cooperate family.

2. Baptism: This sacred ritual is to be a one time physical expression through water of a changed heart with the outward symbol for witnesses to observe the public confession of a new life that was born again through repentance and forgiveness.

3. Marriage: is the sacrament that is also intended to be entered into once, unless it is interrupted by the death of one of the covenant partners therefore releasing the other to marry again. Marriage is an optional covenant to enter and not required for all. It has spiritual significance of being lived out in the flesh between two people to fulfill a command according to Genesis 1:28. When two people begin to walk as one in unity then much of their lives should become reflective of how two individuals can live and walk in unity as was and is the relationship of Christ and the Father as can we and Christ be.

4. Communion: This ritual can be experienced as often as one might want to experience it, but its original context was the annual observance of the Passover. Christ gave his last annual Passover a new meaning and noted that as often as they observed that Old Testament Holy Day they were to remember Him and his sacrifice as a new covenant fulfilling the foreshadowed Old Covenant. Many have taken that observance and have extracted just the new meaning out of the entire Passover celebration and participated in it as much as weekly and as seldom as quarterly or monthly.

These 4 sacraments are Holy observances of the relationship between Christ and men and community. Three of them should be seen as a rite of passage in social changes in the life of God. Communion is an annual reminder of this special covenant relationship God offers each man who walks by faith with His Son Jesus.

All 4 sacraments point to the Abundant Life we have now in Christ. Those who profess Him as Lord, Savior and King should thoroughly enjoy the Passover every year and as often as they might commune with Him with those two elements that are to jolt our remembrance of the significance of his life, passion, death, resurrection and promised return. Marriage is expression of two people becoming one in heart & unity. Baptism publically displays the death to self and identify our ones life that is to be raised in Christ. Communion is for the overall community as well as the individual & family to remind each other and to renew our faith in Christ as Redeemer, Savior and coming King. Dedication is the formal public act of committing the next generation into the covenant of God and life of a believer from the youngest of ages.

Holiness unto the Lord Petition

2011-03-28T20:38:00.000-07:00

Theistic Evolution Verses Creationism, and Can You Spot a Heretic?

2010-10-12T18:25:00.000-07:00

The title of my blog post covers three subjects that are all intertwined into one recent experience that I had in requesting a conversation with a professing Christian Scientist.

You see Creationism is under attack and many Christians and Pastors alike are buying the lie without any sense of digging into the scriptures. It’s often boils down to sentiments among family, friends, pastors, scientists and colleagues something like the following, “Please don’t argue this point anymore as it really does not matter. How God created is not as important as Who created it. Let’s all just get along and love one another in Jesus and be happy.” When it comes to Genesis chapter one I have heard about every possible theory you could imagine accept for one theory: That is, the theory of heresy.

(As you read this please note that someone accused of being a heretic does not imply that that person is intentionally evil, perverse, unethical or immoral. A heretic is simple someone who teaches wrong doctrine that leads to deception from the truth of God's Word. Someone who is heretical or becomes heretical is supposed to be warned so they may correct their error and continue in THE WAY. If no repentance or change occurs regardless of how honest, sincere, kind and loving someone may be, they nonetheless are in serious error and need to be barred from continued influence over the body of Christ. Today we have been so infiltrated with heresy that we do not even have the courage to deal with it, or for that matter, the discernment to recognize it. Please name me even one heretical teacher that in recent years was corrected, or removed from authority, in any of our Christian Universities.)

Science and Bible Truth

Pastors and leaders who know and love the sciences, and scientists professing Christ, often cannot (or just simply, will not) call white “white” and black “black,” and this may be the demise of the Church in these Last Days. I will admit that because the majority of believers have accepted the scientific theory of the earth and universe being billions of years old, I just assumed that was right myself and squeezed everything between the first two verses of the bible and then went on my merry way. Within the last few years, however, I was challenged to think about a young earth creation based on the Word and confirming scientific evidence— and it stretched me. The more I read and researched the more God’s Word became alive to me, and the more deception I recognized within those things I had accepted based merely upon the opinion of “Most People.”

Now I realize that it does not matter how many degrees “a man” has before or after his name, or how many “new discoveries” are found and written up by men around the world, who say things that contradict the Bible. What really matters is what God’s Word says. Even that became a study issue for me about the Bible “autographs.” When it all boils down to it we must be sensitive to the Holy Spirit in our hearts and not get so cerebral that we cannot see the forest for the trees when it comes to eternal truth and God’s word. After all, the supernatural is first and above the natural world and universe.

Deception in the Church

Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, Don't let anyone deceive you in any way. As believers I think we can think that we will not be deceived; but I want to remind you that in the Garden of Eden the very first perfect sinless humans were deceived. And if they could be deceived — two people who walked with God without sin — then anyone who professes Christ can be deceived as well. Is that not true? If you answer “NO” to that question (that you cannot be deceived) then I guess you will need to change some scriptures around including the one above and many others.

We need to be careful in these last days. Just because someone says they are a “Christian” (including Pastors) does not mean that they are. And even if they are genuine Christians, they could still be in a deceived state themselves and leading others in the same destructive path without being aware of such:

Should We Be Loyal to Man or Christ?

I am concerned that our “loyalty to years of friendship” may run deeper than the “truth of the gospel” in our veins. I believe many leaders may really being compromising God’s Truth for the sake of “keeping the peace” with an old friend or colleague. But Paul commanded leaders NOT to act that way at all: After all who wants to confront a life long friend or colleague about error?

Those [elders] who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear. I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality. Do not lay hands on anyone hastily, nor share in other people’s sins; keep yourself pure….

Some men’s sins are clearly evident, preceding them to judgment, but those of some men follow later. Likewise, the good works of some are clearly evident, and those that are otherwise cannot be hidden. (An excerpt from 1 Timothy chapter 5:20-25, NKJV)

So let me draw my post here to the point at hand: It is interesting to me that a scientist (especially professing Christian Scientist) will not even talk with a creationist pastor. Let me explain what happened to me over the last year…

Standing Up For Truth

I came under great attack recently by liberals within the church world. I proposed that Professor Giberson who taught me in the late 80’s, and who had since digressed into a full-fledged evolutionist, be removed from his role in a Christian College. Professor Giberson still teaches the same classes at the same College that I attended, and now has written several books and clearly deconstructs the Bible in order to fit it into the flawed and ludicrous evolutionary theory. In 2009 I wrote to one of our denominations general superintendents about my concerns, and in essence, asked for an investigation of the issue.

Please note that I assume Karl is a great guy. He certainly was when I was a student, and I have actually read great comments about his influence on other people’s lives within the last few years. But with all those great comments and accolades he is still writing and advocating heresy (false teachings).

Now back to the string of events: Three months later I received a 3-page letter back that, in summary, said, “There is room for diversity, and he is a wonderful Christian man making a difference in the scientific community. There is room for his different belief system of theistic evolutionism within the church.” The author of that letter said that he did not see harm in that professor’s books and teachings — but he also did explicitly state that he disagreed with the professor. That last comment troubles me almost as much the reality that he refused to address a foundational doctrinal issue with seriousness and integrity.

After that response from our highest authority in the church, I wrote a one-page letter to Professor Giberson directly, inquiring about his beliefs on Adam and Eve. I received a brief personal reply that in essence said, “I do not have time for personal correspondence and please see my blog and website for the answers you seek.”

Interestingly, about 3 months later, Dr. Albert Mohler rebuked Professor Giberson publicly on the Internet within a blog post (because of his previous public comments about Dr. Mohler). It was at that point I emailed Dr. Mohler and thanked him for saying what needed to be said about a heretic that my own denomination refused to deal with.

An Unexpected Reaction

In August of this same year, my college alumni organization offered pastors the opportunity to take a book study with professors over the phone (limited to the first 15 pastors). I signed up for a book study on “Coming to Peace with Science.” This is yet another theistic evolution embracing book written by a professor Darrell Falk who teaches at another Christian University. The college sent me the book and the course was to start in September. A week before the first review was to be held on the phone, I received a call from the Chaplain of the college asking me to withdraw from taking the course. The class was not full and even now the class is not full. He gave me a reason that was unreasonable; but nonetheless I withdrew on his insistence. Why was I asked to withdraw? You can make your own conclusions, but in my opinion these science professors knew I was a solid creationist and could not or did not want to handle the heat of someone who is as passionate about creationism as they are about evolution. They do not have either a biblical or truly scientific leg to stand on — and they know it.

So since I was asked to withdraw from the book study I decided to read the book anyway. I then formed my opinions about the text, and was hoping to share them with several scientists and creationists who professed Christ.

However, while reading the book I had also noticed in it a reference to another theistic evolutionary scientist who was quoted therein, and subsequently did my research and found more information about him, including his email address. So the idea came to me that I could start a live call-in recorded podcast for both creationists and evolutionists, to discuss the issue at hand. So I set the date. I then emailed this scientist—and another who professes a Creationist view—asking these two professing Christians with opposing scientific theories about their willingness to participate in my podcast project. The Theistic Evolutionist declined and the Creationist scientist told me to call him anytime.

Though I did receive a few replies from the evolutionist, he in essence refused to participate in the podcast recording. Why? If he is an academic who truly believes that his views are based upon sound theory and verifiable evidence, shouldn’t he be willing (and prepared) to defend those views within a friendly podcast?

A Remarkable Conclusion

In the light of the things I am about to share with you, I am now beginning to think that maybe evolutionists are not just evolutionists after all. Maybe they are those who have become heretics who have fallen from scriptural Christianity and are now making inroads into the true body of Christ. In the process they as unchecked teachers are deceiving believers and destroying their faith in God’s inerrant Word.

So to give you some idea how I formed such a conclusion through my research and experiences, you will find further below my original emails to this scientist, and his replies. I did remove his name and replaced it with Mr. Mystery for courtesy sake.

After that text, I have another for you to examine…

Once this scientist declined me I sent the string of emails to a minister friend that I highly respect who is a great master of the Word of God and discerner of apostasy and heretics. I wanted his unbiased opinion of Mr. Mystery and why he thought the man declined me. I think you may find my friend’s response interesting.

But before you read my friend’s reflections please make up your own mind about Mr. Mystery’s response to me as you read his original email. See if the Lord reveals to you how crafty Mr. Mystery’s deception is, and which of his points that you agree with and do not agree with.

Then you can read the same e-mail the second time below that, with my friend’s comments inserted within the text. Once you then re-read that letter in the light of my friend’s remarks, see if you agree with his rebuttal. Then post why or why not as a comment to this post; but please base your response on scripture as much as possible.

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:10:23 -0500

From: Peter Migner

To: Mr. Mystery

Subject: re: invite to discuss age of earth for podcast 

Dr. Mystery,

I am reading the book "Coming to Peace with Science" by Darrel Falk. In his books he mentioned _________ that are over 10,000 years old as one piece of many for proof of old earth age. So as I did my research and it lead to this information from you. In your paper I see that you are a professing Christian who advocates an old earth. I was also able to find another gentleman giving an interesting perspective on the ______ that refutes the reliability of leaning on each ____ to represent each year who trusts in God for a young earth. I still have not drawn my conclusion yet on that issue, but there seems to be perspective on both sides on multiple fronts on age of earth from multiple professing Christian Scientist.

As a pastor who believes in a young earth view I am by no means a scientist, but am willing to read and listen to the old age views by professing Christians in the theistic controversial issues of the day. My greatest concern is in the eventual deconstruction of all scriptures based on the old age view and making the bible fit into science.

I see the potential it has in breaking down a lot of solid doctrine and that greatly troubles me. To the best of my knowledge there are only a handful of accredited Universities left in North American that even teach and represent a young earth view based on scripture and scientific evidence. Since Christian Scientist represent both old age and YEC views it would seem only reasonable that all Christian Colleges and Universities should at least represent both theories well and with equal passion, thus my concern and passion as clergy.

In October I am planning on starting a phone / web podcast a few times a month for a few months on this issue based on the book noted above and would like to have people from both sides of the issue call in and share with me for the recorded podcast. The podcast will then be available on ITunes so that other people can listen to both sides. Instead of it being hosted by a scientist in the university setting it will be hosted by clergymen (me) from the field of ministry. If you are open to such in the future please give me a call sometime. I would love to hear your testimony of how you came to know Christ and as well share mine with you.

As I read about you I see that you have been working with NASA. I had the wonderful privilege many years ago to meet and visit with former Astronaut James Irwin of Apollo 15 to the moon. He has since passed away. I recall well looking at his moon rocks in his office in Co Springs in the early 80's and listening to his passion about the bible and creation. He shared with me his supernatural experience of grace on the moon and his return to Christ as Savior while looking at the earth. It was a moving story for sure.

God Bless

Peter Migner, Pastor

From: Mr. Mystery

To: Peter Migner

Sent: Saturday, October 2, 2010

Subject: RE: invite to discuss age of earth for podcast

Dear Pastor Migner,

I have not yet read the book "Coming to Peace with Science", but it sounds like an interesting one.

So if one is really concerned for the deconstruction of scriptures, one ought to stick with the position of the church prior to the scientific revolution: The Earth is a firmly fixed flat surface surround above us by the firmament. Of course that seems foolish today, but only because the public has completely accepted what was once heretical. We are now convinced that God was not trying to teach us in the Bible that the Earth is flat or that the geocentric theory of the solar system was correct.

I have a strong respect for those who are zealous for the orthodoxy of scriptures. However, I think we need to learn from the Pharisees. They were also very zealous for the orthodoxy of scriptures, but so much so that they could not see God's plan. My conclusion is that we need to let God be God and to remember our place, far beneath Him in our knowledge. Like the Pharisees, we will not honor God by fighting blindly for orthodoxy, but rather, we will honor God by being in awe of Him, by respecting scriptures, by hesitating to deviate from traditional interpretations but also being potentially open to them if changes to our previous interpretation are clearly needed. So I remain relatively conservative, but I clearly believe in an old Earth.

I know some of the young Earth organization leaders personally, and I have heard some of these leaders admit that the scientific evidence is stacked in favor of an old Earth, but their view of scripture is completely preventing them from accepting the weight of evidence. I know that is not the picture these leaders present to the Christian public, and this misrepresentation upsets me. However, in the end that is between them and God.

We need to recognize that these issues (method and age of creation) are not at the core of our faith. We agree that God created, that He acted in history and is sovereign, that Jesus atoned for us, and that the Bible is inspired and is useful for all purposes given in II Timothy 3:16-17. These, and our love for God and for one another, are top priority.

God bless,

-- Mr. Mystery

Now here are my friend’s rebuttal comments in blue, inserted within the original text of Mr. Mystery’s reply to me:

From: "Mr Mystery

To: Peter Migner

Sent: Saturday, October 2, 2010 6:43:43 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern

Subject: RE: invite to discuss age of earth for podcast

Dear Pastor Migner,

I have not yet read the book "Coming to Peace with Science", but it sounds like an interesting one.

You mention the slippery slope argument--that if one accepts the idea of an old Earth, one should consider giving in on other doctrinal issues. The problem with this idea is that essentially all Christians of this generation are well down the slippery slope and just don't realize it. The Bible describes a "firmament" in which stars and other heavenly bodies are fixed. [Dr. Mystery apparently does not know the meaning of the Hebrew words here, nor the work of those associated with the Creation Evidence Museum in Glenrose, Texas at CreationEvidence.org. If he did, he would not be so uninformed with his interpretation of the “firmament.” These scientists at CE have created a Creation model that includes a “crystalline canopy” as a firmament, complete with scientific data to support their thesis. Even NASA has had Dr. Baugh lecture to them on the things they discovered with their biosphere experiments, based upon that mode.] There are also Bible verses that describe the Earth as "firmly fixed", certainly implying something other than rotation and orbital motion. [This is also a very ignorant statement, as the Bible clearly says that, “He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing” (Job 26:7). In other words, the only thing “fixed” in the Bible account is the laws upon which the earth operates, but the earth itself hangs “on nothing” i.e. is NOT supported on an object, but suspended in its orbit by gravity around the sun. ] Also mentioned are the "ends of the Earth" and other phrases implying a flat Earth. [Again, he is reading his own understanding of the “implications” of such statements, as there are MANY passages of Scripture that indicate that the earth is ROUND: e.g. “When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth” (Proverbs 8:27). Compasses are round, and the “face” of the depth would be the horizon. Also, Isaiah 40:22 says, “He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth...”. Christopher Columbus said within his autobiography that these passages of Scripture convinced him that the earth was round, and upon these, he held firm during the many trials in which his terrified crew sometimes plotted mutiny for fear he would get them all killed. So the good doctor is quite ignorant of the Bible (and history) on these topics, and if he spent any real time looking at the MASSIVE amount of good science being reported in Creationist circles, he would know that.] People today can shrug these terms off as figurative, but that was certainly not the case only a few hundred years ago. That is the reason that Galileo was put on trial. [Galileo was put on trial by the Roman Catholic Church, NOT the Christian Church. The RC’s banned the Bible from the public, and were essentially themselves heretics in the light of Scripture. To blame Christians for Galileo's situation—which was not that bad anyway, as he lived under “house arrest” in a beautiful villa—is absurd, and a red herring of an argument. It is a logical failure known as an “ad hoc argument”: His effort to substantiate his point is nothing more than a desperate appeal to history, but one which actually does not support the point being made.

So if one is really concerned for the deconstruction of scriptures, one ought to stick with the position of the church prior to the scientific revolution: The Earth is a firmly fixed flat surface surround above us by the firmament. [That was the RC, not “The Church.” Further, that was also the primary opinion of MOST “scientific thought” for the day, regardless of the RC position on the topics. So again, a moot point with NO substantiation in the light of either Scripture or accurate history.] Of course that seems foolish today, but only because the public has completely accepted what was once heretical. [Again, he forgets the RC considered anything that was contrary to their own heresy as heretical...so he still misses the point terribly.] We are now convinced that God was not trying to teach us in the Bible that the Earth is flat or that the geocentric theory of the solar system was correct. [That is a true statement; but in spite of his thesis and evidence, not based upon such. He clearly is misinformed about both the Bible and supporting scientific evidence for a literal 6-day Creation as described therein.]

I have a strong respect for those who are zealous for the orthodoxy of scriptures. However, I think we need to learn from the Pharisees. They were also very zealous for the orthodoxy of scriptures, but so much so that they could not see God's plan. [The Pharisees were NOT zealous for orthodox interpretation of the Scriptures, as they interpreted the Bible according to the Talmud (which they elevated to “divine” status of authority) and their own whims. That is why Jesus rebuked them, saying, “You make the Word of God of none affect by your traditions” (Mark 7:13). This is an EXTREMELY ignorant statement made by Mr. Mystery. In logic, this is a fallacy called a “straw man augment.” Here is an interesting discussion of this type of fallacy, using a statement of James Dobson, of all people, as an example: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html So Mr. Mystery holds up a “straw man” (i.e. a false example that does not actually exist in reality, but is made up for the sake of argument). He then “tears it apart” with fine-sounding reasoning that would cause ignorant people to think that he is brilliant. The only problem is that his “target” is an illusion, and therefore, his reasoning is empty speculation about nothing that ever existed in the first place. It sounds good, but cannot hold up to either Scripture or history....once again.] My conclusion is that we need to let God be God and to remember our place, far beneath Him in our knowledge. [That, again, is a true statement; but not predicated upon his own logic or false-assertions. Again, it sounds good and even Christian, but is actually a deflection from the real issues he failed to address.] Like the Pharisees, we will not honor God by fighting blindly for orthodoxy, but rather, we will honor God by being in awe of Him, by respecting scriptures, by hesitating to deviate from traditional interpretations but also being potentially open to them if changes to our previous interpretation are clearly needed. [This is another, and rather obvious, logical fallacy called a self-contradiction: He first says in the previous sentence, “[We] need to let God be God and to remember our place, far beneath Him in our knowledge.” He then says in this last sentence, essentially, “But if we, in our own earthly human wisdom, decide that the Bible is incorrect on a topic, then we should change our interpretation to fit OUR understanding of such things.” This is his way of saying, “I like to sound as if I honor God and His Word, but in reality, my belief system is founded upon humanism and I just don’t want you to know that.”] So I remain relatively conservative, but I clearly believe in an old Earth. [i.e. “I profess to be a Bible-believing Christian, but in reality, I am not; and I don’t want to look at any evidence that supports such a literal Creation thesis.”]

To respond to your suggestion that Christian colleges teach both young and old Earth positions: this is the very big goal of the young Earth organizations. This idea was voiced in a recent issue of World magazine. In my own experience in college (a Christian college) I learned about young Earth organizations, but not in a positive way at all. A prominent young Earth organization came to our college and gave a presentation to the science faculty. The faculty had severe doubts about many of their "evidences". The tactic of the YEC organization was to use this occasion to ask how many of the faculty believed x, y, and z doctrines (i.e., literal six-day creation, age of the Earth, and other doctrines). The YEC organization had a person or persons at the back of the room who were watching which faculty members raised their hands or didn't raise their hands in response to these questions. The organization took down the names of some of these faculty members. There was later contact by this YEC organization with the board of trustees. This kind of tactic really angered the science faculty. They thought the YEC meeting was about presenting ideas, not a means toward removal of certain faculty members. The faculty certainly did not appreciate this coming from a Christian organization. I don't believe that YEC organization was ever invited on campus again, and their ideas are not being taught in that college. [Despite his experience with ONE SET of unethical YE proponents (if we can fully believe his one-sided account), that is NOT a sufficient foundation upon which he has a right to reject ANY and ALL YE proponents and their Bible-based scientific theories. Again, logically, this is a fallacy known as an “ad hoc” argument; and certainly does not raise my estimation of this man’s educational credentials one bit.]I know some of the young Earth organization leaders personally, and I have heard some of these leaders admit that the scientific evidence is stacked in favor of an old Earth, [I would like to see him name even ONE...which he does NOT. So in the light of his demonstrated ignorance of Scriptures, logical fallacies, and unsubstantiated arguments above, I just don’t believe him. There is a HUGE amount of information that supports a YE model of Creation scientifically. One particularly intriguing one is the “radio halos” found in ALL the granite rock of the earth’s crust: http://75.125.60.6/creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=36

I have read so much scientific evidence that supports a YE elsewhere—and so much garbage in Mr. Mystery’s email reply to you—that I will have to require some substantiation of his assertion that he knows EVEN ONE genuine YE scientist that secretly believes that the evidence supports an OE thesis.] but their view of scripture is completely preventing them from accepting the weight of evidence. [Given what I have read in his email, I would say it is more accurate to say that Mr. Mystery’s disbelieve of Scripture—and ignorance thereof—is blinding him from accepting the weight of evidence for a YE model. He has NOT substantiated his beliefs at all—and has produced ONLY logical fallacies for his reasoning. So I cannot accept him as being anything but intellectually dishonest (based on the evidence at hand) and I DO question whether he is genuinely a born again Christian or not, as he seems to lack reasonable revelation of God’s word also.] I know that is not the picture these leaders present to the Christian public, and this misrepresentation upsets me. [Substantiation...substantiation. He offers none, but a false front of “righteous indignation.”] However, in the end that is between them and God. [And he will find out how true that statement is one day, to his own detriment, unless he repents.

Furthermore, this is a typical “defense” response from heretics, in my experience. They are essentially saying, “Let’s not discuss the real issues, and especially my own position, and just let God sort it all out later.” However, that is NOT biblical. In essence, Mr. Mystery makes a “God is the judge” statement. Though his context implies “...and not me” it is really a distraction from his true intent. By saying, “God is the judge,” he really implies, “So leave me alone and don’t challenge my doctrine.”

Yet, the Bible actually TELLS us (yea, even commands us) to judge doctrine and to “contend for the faith once delivered to the saints” (see Jude). Since heresy is so easily disproved upon closer analysis, the heretics want to throw up a “shield” to prevent that scrutiny. Thus, they take advantage of the common misconception that the Bible admonishes us “not to judge”, when Jesus merely warned not to judge hypocritically; He never forbad it categorically, and in several places, TOLD us to judge; e.g.:

Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. (John 7:24)

Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me remove the speck that is in your eye,’ when you yourself do not see the plank that is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck that is in your brother’s eye. (Luke 6:42; and also Matthew 7:5)

If you review EVERY one of Jesus’ so-called “do not judge” passages (many of which I did not cite herein) He was only admonishing against being a hypocrite. Otherwise, how else can we “judge a tree by its fruit” if we are not to look at the “fruit” of others and judge such things? The logical absurdity of this common misconception about “judging others” when analyzed in the light of Scripture, is astounding.

Thus, in short, a common “defense” used by heretics is the “God is the judge” ploy. Yet, the Bible tells us to challenge heresy and error with God’s Truth, which ALL the apostles demonstrated for us in the NT, and the true prophets of old certainly demonstrated in the OT.]

We need to recognize that these issues (method and age of creation) are not at the core of our faith. [That is a lie (though he might sincerely believe that). John Calvin, Martin Luther, and many others, clearly understood that the question of Creation, the fall of man, and other such topics, are very much CORE issues; the deviation from which was pure heresy, as it undermined the very foundations upon which the Gospel is based.] We agree that God created, that He acted in history and is sovereign, that Jesus atoned for us, and that the Bible is inspired and is useful for all purposes given in II Timothy 3:16-17. [Yet he just spent his entire reply to you denying portions of the Bible’s inspiration....so this is again a logical self-contradiction, and pure folly. If we cannot believe in the Bible’s account of a literal 6-day Creation, how can we trust its literal account of the fall of man and justification through the sacrifice of Jesus? He is theologically a heretic, but either too ignorant to know it or too dishonest to admit it.] These, and our love for God and for one another, are top priority. [Most heretics I encounter also resort to the “love of God” distraction, just like he did here. Thus, I have to conclude he is knowingly a heretic as this one seems to be their favorite “trump card” in their let’s-change-the-subject-away-from-the-real-issues stratagem.]

God bless, [Don’t you just love it when heretics send you their blessing? Peter, my brother...I hope I have substantiated my point already within the notes above: I obviously believe you are dealing with a heretic here. That is why he does NOT want to be recorded for a podcast expressing his views, for fear you might expose the underlying heresies upon which they are founded.

Let me acknowledge here that Mr. Mystery obviously had not expected or intended his email to be so thoroughly scrutinized and dissected. Nevertheless, we can certainly conclude that he is truly expressing his own paradigm on these issues. So his use of logical fallacies, poor theology, and unsubstantiated facts, to support his thesis in a reply to you, betrays the unsustainable nature of the position that he has chosen to embrace against the Scriptures (and against the copious empirical evidence that supports those Scriptures).

Remember also: Augustine hit the nail on the head when he wrote, “Pride is the mother of all heresies.” This man’s pride is evident throughout his email response above, despite the false humility and many logical fallacies he used to cover that fact up. So unless you are willing to take the “Law to the Proud” and wear him out with the truth (like a good “spanking”) then you are likely going to waste your time on him; he can never accept grace (i.e. get delivered from his multiplied errors and, if necessary, even get saved for the first time) with such demonstrated pride in his heart.]

--Mr. Mystery.

Closing Remarks

Let me end this letter with a question or two: What you do believe about creation? Do you believe what the Word of God says? Do you doubt what the Word of God says because many scientists and theologians have agreed with their theories that question the clear and implied account of the history the creation and mankind? Are you willing to do serious study to determine for yourself what is truth, or will you throw your arms in the air and just say it does not matter and merely trust the theory that has the most adherents? If this generation does not defend the biblical creation account as outlined in the Bible what will happen to the next generation?

Were you taught evolution in school with an equal rebuttal of teaching of creationism? This generation more than any other sways the future for many other generations to come. With professing Christians now embracing evolution by renaming it theistic they are able to deceive the innocent with heresy in the name of God. Evolution is evolution, be it theistic or atheistic. Unless leaders who hold positions of authority in the church take the time to study and have convictions from God and react one way or the other we will have continued controversy among the sheep over this issue.

However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" Luke 18:8

Biblical Creationist Pastor Creates Open call in Forum to discuss "Coming to Peace with Science" by Darrel R. Falk

2010-09-23T14:06:00.000-07:00

A new book written by Darrel R. Falk called "Coming to Peace With Science" Bridging the Worlds Between Faith and Biology will be discussed in an open call-in for pastors and layman. This book is currently being discussed with a private small group of pastors and two science professors from the Eastern Nazarene College region. Please listen to this brief podcast below about the background leading up to the concern about creation verses theistic evolution in higher education and in the church. If you would like to receive information to call in and listen to the first discussion on the book please fill out the form below. This will be a call in discussion about the book & the Bible lead by Rev. Peter Migner. The discussions will be posted as well. Question can be typed in if someone prefers to not call in. The purpose of the style format is to help Christians communicate better than often the written expressions lack in books and correspondence. The attempt of the podcast will be to have Christian leaders from both perspectives call and share based on the Bible being the final authority in conjunction with evidence.

Is a New Church Denominationalism Emerging? Part 2

2010-08-16T21:35:00.000-07:00

When I first became an evangelical Christian back in the early 80's a large majority within evangelical churches believed the Word of God as the inerrant and infallible word of God to be received and believed. Today that is changing and that even among evangelical churches and many Christian Universities. I wonder how many today believe in a literal 6 day creation as the bible declares. Surprisingly more and more evangelicals seem to keep embracing evolution as biblically based and acceptable regardless of what the bible says.

One General Superintendent said the following when I wrote and complained about a professor who is teaching evolution at one of our Christian Universities. “The difficulty we face is that we must make place for a wide range of views regarding these matters within the Church of the Nazarene. We do insist on the authority of Scripture. While we may differ regarding some of the interpretations of creation and human origins, we must not differ in regard to the reliability of Scripture”.

I know one thing for certain this statement does not hold water to defend the faith well, if at all. I say that in all due respect. Granted it is just one small portion of a 3 page letter, but we cannot have such a wide spectrum on such a crucial issue as creation and the first 3 chapters of the bible. When our general leaders don’t want to declare clearly what a denomination believes in a certain area then we open wide the floodgate for multiple views that bring crisis and confusion and we will quickly be headed for trouble.

I ask why we do we have to make place for such a wide range of views regarding the interpretation of creation and human origins? This type of answer I believe is the beginning of more of the same in the post modern culture and it will likely get worse before the return of Christ.

Do you remember when believers actually carried the Word of God with them to church and bible studies? Christians used to actual follow along and let the word speak to them while it was being preached and taught. Folks back then made notes in their bibles and wrote things in the margins. Heaven and hell were real places (still are), people knew how to find passages in the bible and folks actually cared about doctrine and had opinions about what they believed the bible taught. Being born again was essential as well as being spirit filled while awaiting the return of Christ and believing the end of the age was soon.

The difference then was what distinct doctrines one might believe from the inerrant Word of God different from the other believers in other denominations. Doctrine mattered because it determined how you lived your life, raised your family and how you lived and died. Now doctrine almost seems to be the last concern on folk’s minds as we become shallow in the name of tolerance. Since we are a tolerant society of so many harmful and objective things in life, tolerating doctrine that is objectionable can also be tolerated in the name of unity, friendships and personal self satisfying preferences about any given church. The following reply from someone from my Part 1 post I found to be enlightening, transparent and confirming and allowed for reprint for my part 2 post.

“Peter,

You wrote: “It seems that the new denominationalism may very well be defined by who is biblical or not. Since emergent proponents seem to have slithered into churches of all denominations changing not only methodologies but also scripture meaning and theological understanding of the scriptures. It now becomes harder to find continuity through what denominations use to provide in sameness of doctrine, worship and even programs. Finding those who just simply believe the bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God alone seems to be a more important common denominator than what label the church has or the group it is associated with.”

As I thought about your email, I wandered back in my memory (I know, dangerous) to a time when my wife and I were looking for a church after being uprooted from my home church – where my dad was pastor. We were so theologically ignorant that we had a difficult time finding a church, for many of the same reasons you state. However, we did end up in a Christian & Missionary Alliance church.

After moving from that area to the Carolinas, we began our search again. We ended up at a church that could seat 6,600 people. It was non-denominational. After some pastoral changes there, which we were not in favor of, we left and went to another non-denominational church. This one was probably 500 to 1,000 members over multiple services. This church now holds five worship services over the weekend with thousands of members.

Again, we moved away from that area into a suburb of Charlotte. The only “big” churches in the area were Baptist. We went there because we needed a place for our teenage son to connect. What we looked for in a church was also different than what we would look for now. And that is where I believe the difference is found.

What drew us to these non-denominational churches? Programs for kids and teens, great preaching, and exciting worship. What kept us at these non-denominational churches? Nothing! There was no glue that kept us there. Eventually the glamour and excitement wore off. The lack of holiness preaching led to a lifestyle of “sinning in thought, word, and deed” on a daily basis. We were powerless!

For many, Church has become just another entertainment outlet. People don’t come to learn more than they do to socialize, be entertained, to be seen, to make themselves feel good about doing some social justice project, or to have their consciences eased in “thinking” that their kids and teens are well cared for. “Corporate church” is the norm now, and that ideology seems to be killing smaller, holiness-oriented churches. Add the “emergent movement” to this mix, and the local holiness church is impotent to defend itself against the tidal wave of feel-good theology. Denominations are imploding over internal issues. Non-denominational churches are temporarily thriving as people jettison their faithfulness to their denomination of choice. The “common denominators” that held denominations together are now being challenged by the rapid growth of non-denominational churches.

Yet, I remain optimistic. I personally believe it is in these times that we must remain firm to the message of heart-holiness and to preach it all the more. It is, I believe, the pathway through which God builds his church. Why? Because heart-holiness is centered on the love of God that fills us. Programs will come and go, new and faddish tools will excite people for a time, but in the end it is one-on-one relationships built on the love of Christ that will prevail. These relationships will carry the day when all of the glitz and glamour fade.

Relationships are key to weathering the storms that are here and now and the ones yet on the horizon. If the community of faith is not building relationships, then it will cease to exist or at least cease to impact the community in which it resides. We may not now impact thousands of lives every weekend, but the ones which God has given to our care will be best served by our confidence in the message of heart-holiness”.

Today is a different day for sure. People shop for churches like a new car, verses praying about what God wants them to do and where to serve others. When did looking for a church based on what a church believed stop? Since we are a consumer culture, folks look for programs, music, comfortable size congregations, service time options, friends, and a great communicator in a pastor and then maybe doctrine.

Many do not realize it yet, but there is a new agenda (doctrine) moving through all religious circles today including the evangelical church. It is being formed by governments, government controlled educational systems, media, political leaders and social reformers. It's a Social Gospel that uses buzz words like social justice, living justice, emergent, emerging, missional, compassion, green, environmentalism, mystic, ancient faith, paths, relational tithe, prophetic Imagination etc.

Its agenda is to transform and save the world and redeem the earth and its people collectively. Many new words within Evangelical Christianity are popping up through sermons, books and publishing house curriculum. Deconstruction and reconstruction of words and terms are happening all in the name of post modernism and emerging relativism. This is happening on many fronts beyond just religion as well, but especially there as many claim we are on the dawn of a new reformation and the revolution is coming into a new global environment. Truly a one world government agenda will require the cooperation and convergence of many groups around the world including all religious sects to come together in some form of harmony.

Recently I was reviewing a new National Geographic magazine called “Water”. The whole magazine was about how people use water and how much they use, waste and pollute. It mentioned how hard some tribes and people in different lands can’t get water. If you looked at the magazine as a whole it has an agenda. The agenda is propagating the fear of lack based on projections of the world’s population growth. It is written in such a way to cause the reader to see the world and its people and water supplies from a one world perspective to solve problems and its forthcoming programs.

I am not trying to be insensitive to people groups of other nations and lands who have water problems. It’s just that each country, each area, each location needs to work and seek solutions as it can. However, a one world government and its perspective is being painted now to condition a generation in their youth to look at everything as a whole and the best way to get folks to look that way is through all the religions of the world getting on the same page by way of teaching a social agenda for solutions.

Within Christianity this agenda is painted as a “Emergent Church” or “new gospel” or a “Social Gospel” where people are presented to solve the bigger picture as a whole. In the past the emphasis has always been on transforming the individual and now it is about transforming the society or a community as the whole. Jesus and the Gospel writers warned about what would happen in the last days before the return of Christ. They warned there would be false Christ, false teachers and false prophets. They would be ever learning and never attaining the truth. They would slip in among the believers like wolves in sleeps clothing.

So what does this have to do with a new denominationalism? Today it is all about the TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL. Folks will need to ask themselves in these last days, is the church they attend a bible believing and proclaiming church? They will have to discern the spirit of the church and look past programs, music, buildings, locations and personalities and look for bible believing people with the true gospel and beware of this new social gospel.

If church leaders are solid then they will stick to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If they are whitewashed with “another gospel” agenda then you will still find truth here and there, but it is likely polluted with a different agenda as well. The new agenda is all about transforming the culture, the community, the environment and the planet and helping folks along the way get help for their problems. It's a warped kingdom now position that many believe will eventually help usher in the Savior. The great commission has always been and always will be about going and making disciples. Yes we are to do deeds of kindness along the way by visiting the sick, those in jail and giving a cup of cold water in Jesus name. But we do it all with the soul and repentance in mind and not just for the acts of compassion alone as the end result of fulfillment.

Finding a church where the Cross of Christ is lifted up and Jesus is proclaimed and the blood of Christ is pleaded and prayed over folks may soon be a forgotten gospel among a shrinking remnant if the masses of professing Christians do not discern the times with the Word of God.

Many pulpits have become nothing more than a Jesus flavored self help pep talk with scriptures peppered in here and there to flavor there topical messages of the hour. Rarely do we here of people mourning over their sins and confessing unto true repentance. Many of our churches have become centers of entertainment verses a holiness people of worship with a fresh anointing from on high with power. Sermons are becoming more illustrated with the latest skits and movie clips to identify with the culture than introducing the lost culture to the Gospel of Jesus Christ with His timeless relevant truth that still speaks through the power of the Holy Spirit. I believe we must use multimedia as a tool that this present generally relates to, but not so much that we do not rely solely on the power and anointing of the Holy Spirit.

Unfortunately I perceive that a New Denominationalism will not be about which doctrine you believe as much as which Gospel you receive. That may be a new thought to many, but it certainly was not to the early apostles. Paul wrote in Galatians 1:8 “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that, which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed”. Now those are some stern words for us as well and especially the clergy who will answer for what we do with the Word of God in teaching and proclaiming.

Doctrine is important and far from secondary, but the shift that is emerging today is a shift from proclaiming a personal message of hope and holiness to transform lives to a message of cultural redemption and mandates to save the world as a whole. “Another Gospel” is the self help message that conveys all that God wants to do for you.

People need to know the true gospel from "another gospel" or they may be sweep away into the cultural vortex of social reform at the expense of their own souls.

I never dreamed 20 years ago when Jesus said in Luke 18:8 "However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" how this could be possible. With multimedia with its repetitive emotional impact ability deception seems far easier in the hands of the misguided, deceived and wicked than I ever could have imagined.

What does this imply about the final days before His appearing? If you find yourself looking for a church in the future you should seek God's divine guidance and throw all the marketing mandates out the window. Listen to the voice of God with your bible in one hand while maintaining a careful listening ear to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit. He promised to lead His people into all truth and He who saves is faithful to the end.

Is a New Church Denominationalism Emerging? Part 1

2010-08-15T20:46:00.000-07:00

A New Denominationalism!

A few weeks ago I attended a two day conference at Northland a church distributed in longwood, FL. I was at a Dave Ramsey sponsored conference called Momentum. At the conference there were about 50 in attendance. It was truly a great conference. I was the only one there along with a layman from my church that was from a Church of the Nazarene. Many were from different denominations and many others from non-denominational ministries.

At lunch I meet a pastor from a local church that runs 1500 between two campuses (churches). He and I discovered we both had the same theological understanding of the scriptures (Wesleyan / Armenian). Earlier I asked someone working at the conference questions about the host pastor and found out he was Methodist in his earlier training days even though he was now an independent pastor of a church running around 10,000 distributed. When a denomination name is drop It becomes a source of identity or at least it use too.

While having lunch on the second day the other pastor and I spoke about what we believed and talked about the host church and its beliefs as much as we thought we knew. Since the host church was independent then the theological belief system about the church we presumed were initially determined by the senior pastor. At least in its original formative years we would assume.

After the conference the gentleman from my church and I decided we wanted to experience a worship service at Northland. We ended up attending their Monday night worship service and it was packed. As I sat there having never heard the pastor speak before or even read about what Northland believed I wondered why all these people came here and what drew them. Was it the music, the pastor, the location, the programs or a combination of several, or could it be doctrinal clarity?

I could not determine what their doctrine was by association with a denomination because they were independent. The message was biblically sound, but his style was very different( more teacher )from how I preach and it ended without a clear invitation. People were invited to pray up front, but no specific “place” to really connect and pray was defined. I never observed anyone carrying a bible to church and nobody looked in their own bible while the scriptures were being listed on the screens from what I could tell. Searching the scriptures was not encouraged or even time given for folks to follow along if they had their own bibles. The chairs were like those of a movie theater and there were no books or bibles anywhere accept in the bookstore for purchase. To give a donation, you had to do such on your own in the foyer by credit card, check or cash.

I felt comfortable as if was at a hotel or mall, but it never really felt like a church in so many other familiar ways that I am use to. It was not that I was against it, but it just felt like any other modern everyday cultural building so that it felt normal.

So I ask, is Church supposed to feel culturally normal? Some would say yes and others no. I see Jesus as someone who leads folks to be counter cultural in so many ways and since our culture is far less Christian than 50 or more years ago I got to wonder where we are headed as the church both theologically and practically in the developed world.

In days past denominations helped you identity who believed the same doctrines, had similar styles of worship, etc, etc. In this post modern society I am not sure those same rules apply anymore or at least less frequently now then in the past. I suppose with the internet many people can check out a church well before deciding to attend an actual service. A few years ago while on vacation our family was trying to decide where to attend a local church service. Since there were not any Nazarene churches close to us I began a search online. It was very hard to decide on a church since we were looking for a holiness theologically based church over style of worship or programs.

Most of the churches were either too far left denominationally (theologically) for us to want to attend, so I started searching for the non categorized churches (non denominational). I finally found one church that seemed interesting, but very little about their doctrine was listed. We ventured out and worshipped in a building that was a former theater turned into church. The worship music was good and the preacher was good. After the service they offered a free CD to visitors of the message. On the way out I introduced myself to the pastor and mentioned I was a pastor as well who was on vacation. When I asked him what his theological background was he refused to answer directly. He kept saying we are non denominational. I told him I understood that, but just wanted to know where he stood theologically as either Calvinist or Wesley Armenian or maybe something other.

He did not answer me directly and kept saying no doctrinal position on such. I thanked him and walked to the car. My wife and I spoke about how he took a position by not declaring one through his refusal to state what he believed. Doctrine is so crucial because eventually it does carry over in our belief system at some level of growth within the church life of any church.

It seems that the new denominationalism may very well be defined by who is biblical or not. Since emergent proponents seem to have slithered into churches of all denominations changing not only methodologies but also scripture meaning and theological understanding of the scriptures. It now becomes harder to find continuity through what denominations use to provide in sameness of doctrine, worship and even programs. Finding those who just simply believe the bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God alone seems to be a more important common denominator than what label the church has or the group it is associated with.

Part 1

Why is The House Studio promoting Shane Claiborne and Relational Tithing?

2010-08-11T21:18:00.000-07:00

Many within the Church of the Nazarene may not be aware yet but there is a new Publishing arm of NPH. I have not read all the books, but I have read one so far and to be quite honest that was more than enough if that is the taste of books to come. After reviewing the titles and some of the content of the other few books I can see a theme coming forward and it is not holiness of heart and life. The House Studio is building there “House” foundation on sand as a message of a social gospel is emerging.

Recently I discovered two more books on their website by the name of “Economy of Love”. Subtitle is, Creating a Community of Enough by Relational Tithe; video sessions with Shane Claiborne.

Having been aware that Shane is a social gospel advocate who runs with the social liberal left emergent crowd, I was just blown away that NPH is allowing these type of heretical authors and messages to come forward.

Why I am so alarmed? I wish I did not have to write what I am about to write, but biblical justice must be expressed by someone who sees a fire burning in “The House”. Shane Claiborne is misguiding from the original intent of many scriptures and stories to support his own personal agenda to end poverty. If this book and video material is taught to a fairly substantial amount of people in our churches many more problems will be forthcoming and eventually the message of Holiness with be a twisted social gospel only fitting well into the landscape of a social form government.

Those who are running The House Studio are either blind, ignorant, deceived or aligned with a different gospel other than that which NPH was built on. Shane Claiborne is so confused and biblically misguided it is amazing that the Nazarene church would even associate with his name let alone his videos.

One of Shane’s quotes is “rebirth demands redistribution”. This just does not settle well with my spirit or the biblical teaching of tithes or offerings. Since the term ‘Relational Tithe’ is not in the bible as well it being a new term to me, I had to go research what it meant and found a video by Shane describing it.

Please watch his video for yourself with a bible in one hand and your finger on the pause button and really listen to what this yahoo is really teaching the next generation. If ‘The House Studio’ is trying to cause a revolution with provocative speakers and writers like Shane Claiborne then they have a mission accomplished with me. If I and our local churches were to adopt Shane’s anti biblical philosophy of ‘relational tithing’ along with the entire denomination then headquarters will shut down soon for lack of funds.

Shane says, “100% of the tithe goes directly to meet the needs of those relationally connected”. This is biblical incorrect. The tithe was originally designated to go to the priest:

"Moreover, we will bring to the storerooms of the house of our God, to the priests, the first of our ground meal, of our [grain] offerings, of the fruit of all our trees and of our new wine and oil. And we will bring a tithe of our crops to the Levites, for it is the Levites who collect the tithes in all the towns where we work. Nehemiah 10:37

Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the LORD Almighty, "and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it. Malachi 3:10

And unto the children of Levi, behold, I have given all the tithe in Israel for an inheritance, in return for their service which they serve, even the service of the tent of meeting. Numbers 18:21

Shane also teaches that the early church eliminated poverty using the text Acts 4:32-35

The truth is that that scripture was referencing the body of Christ sharing as needs arouse among the brotherhood in the church and not the entire population of all people around them as Shane implies.

“Once we really discovered how to love our neighbor as our self capitalism as we know it won’t be possible and Marxism won’t be necessary”. Shane Claiborne.

Shocked again by the another liberal release coming from “The House Studio”.

Emergent leaders Deconstructing the Scriptures into Mumbo Jumbo

2010-07-27T16:35:00.000-07:00

Keeping things simple is the way I enjoy understanding life. I realize life gets complicated, but when God speaks to me it is usually simple and easy to follow. He speaks to me from Scriptures and speaks to me by His Spirit. Thank God He speaks and by the grace of God I hope and plan to always listen.

As a pastor I find people need and want life and lessons presented with simplicity so they can grasp the wonderful grace of God. When it comes to words and there meaning I find having a dictionary handy if words get to fuzzy for me. Throw a bunch of fancy words at me and I run to the dictionary to make sure I know what is meant and where it is going. The first time I heard the phrase "Deconstruction" as it relates to Christianity I had to shake my head a couple times to make sure I heard it correctly. Then I said. “What does that mean?” I knew construction meant to build something so I suppose to "de" construct meant to take it apart and then reconstruct meant to rebuild it, right?

Well just so we are on the same page here is Webster online definition of the Word de`con`struc´tion Pronunciation: dė`kŭn`strŭk´shŭn A philosophical theory of criticism (usually of literature or film) that seeks to expose deep-seated contradictions in a work by delving below its surface meaning. This method questions the ability of language to represent a fixed reality, and proposes that a text has no stable meaning because words only refer to other words, that metaphysical or ethnocentric assumptions about the meaning of words must be questioned, and words may be redefined in new contexts and new, equally valid and even contradictory meanings may be found. Such new interpretations may be based on the philosophical, political, or social implications of the words of a text, rather than solely on attempts to determine the author's intentions

Now if you apply that word and its definition to Christianity you have a formula for heresy.

In this modern ago let's use the word house ( home) as an example of what is happening with the Word of God and the Bible as it relates to mankind.

A house is constructed for what purpose? I know it seems ridiculous to even ask what the purpose of a house is for. But for the sake of this article hang tight with me so I can show you how we must be careful in this day of post modernism. A house is for people to live in. People take shelter from the elements and live in their homes. Inside the confines of the structure they find safety from the elements, rest for their bodies and a place to eat meals together. The house structure provides many things including but not limited to safety, protection and rest. Then comes the Emergent one and they say lets "re"construct the meaning of the home from what has been the traditional purpose or intent of the home. So now the emergent one might say, here is a home constructed and what do you feel the structure is for"? How do you feel about it? How does this structure speak to you? This home can mean anything to you since its structure is all relative to you.

So in essence an emergent post modern perspective is: the house can mean whatever you want it to mean for you. If the house speaks to you as a structure designed to house hundreds of plants to stay safe from the harsh elements of the outdoors where cats and dogs can live at peace under the roof, than that is the purpose of the "house" for you. Personally I would call that a greenhouse with a formula for a mess, but if that is what someone wanted to call a house then they would deconstruct it from the original meaning and reconstruct it to mean something other than it’s original meaning and purpose.

So many today are taking this kind of deconstructive approach to the 'Scriptures". To "de"construct the Bible is for it to mean to YOU whatever it speaks to you about. Even if the original author meant one thing it is acceptable now to let it "speak to us" another meaning than its original purpose. Thus we now live in the era of ”deconstructing" the meaning of the Bible and its Words.

A good biblical example of this is the creation in Genesis chapter 1-3. Genesis 1:3-5 says and God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day.

Now right here the Word of God gives anyone with common sense the impression God just created light and separated it from darkness and now there is morning and evening – Day 1. Then he created for 5 more days and then he rests on the 7^th day. Now we have a full week.

Then in Exodus 23:12 we have this record in scripture. "Six days do your work, but on the seventh day do not work, so that your ox and your donkey may rest and the slave born in your household, and the alien as well, may be refreshed.

These two scriptures verify 24 hour cycles and a full week of time as we know it.

In order for any other understanding of scripture one must deconstruct the meaning of certain words and then reconstruct them to mean periods of time or any other assortment of meanings to have another gospel understanding of the God of creation.

Children can grasp a simple story taught about God creating the world in 6 days. But when they get older they get a deconstructed and reconstructed version of the story of the true meaning of how long it took God to create if they even leave God in the how. The original meaning that was conveyed for generations has been that God made all that is within 6 days and rested on the 7th day.

The bible story is "constructed" to convey the miracle and majesty of Almighty God creating the world as we see it and know it in less than a week. The modern man comes along and presumes they have uncovered deeper truth and proof that the world as we know it could not have been constructed in 6 literal 24 hours periods. So they begin to "deconstruct" the chapters and words of Genesis to mean something different to them than what it was "constructed" to mean to all men and therefore they "reconstruct" the meaning of the scriptures from its original intent and purpose. Within the walls of this new "deconstruction" they develop new meanings to the word 'Day ' so now it means periods of time. They place millions of years between the "days" so that God's Word can still fit into there meaning and perception of how they believe things were created or evolved and the time line of man.

The list can go on and on of how men are deconstructing the bibles in this present generation. We need to be careful that in this day and age we do not allow the "emergent mystic preachers, teachers, professors and writers to "deconstruct” and “reconstruct” the bible to mean anything other than what God intended it to mean to us.

The bible is written to easily convey Truth and Salvation to all men. When things begin to sound fuzzy to your ears then they probably are. When someone asks "How do you feel about this scripture?" be careful because they may be about to "reconstruct truth right before your eyes to mean something different than what God meant.

Since God called us to live by faith it really does not matter how any of us feel about the bible. It matters that we trust the Scriptures as the divine words of God as it was constructed to be. Thank God for the simplicity of His Word and the meaning of His Word. Remember John said in 1 John 2:26-27 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit - just as it has taught you, remain in him

Be careful what you read and who wrote it as there are many today deconstructing Christianity and then reconstructing it into heresy. If it sounds like mumbo jumbo then it probably is.

Word association – Emergent verses Biblical Holiness

2010-05-26T23:09:00.000-07:00

I am not advocating a new denomination or a new group but I see the makings of one in progress by default. In January 2009 within a month of settling into my new home and pastorate in FL I received a packet mailed to: All Florida Pastors. Since it was not personal I was not in a hurry to open it, but because it was not junk mail I was not inclined to just throw it away since it had a steep price tag for postage on it. I thought, someone has something to say to send and spend this kind of money to all the Nazarene Pastors in Florida. So one night I opened it up and started reading this well thought out research. At first when I read the adverse comments about Rick Warren and his book “The Purpose Driven Church, I was inclined to shut it down, but I continued to read along anyway. After I finished the packet I was challenged to research and verify for myself that the info about the Emergent church move was true and more widespread than one might realize.

Since I hunger for the truth and desire to follow God in holiness and all His ways, I began doing exactly that: RESEARCH. The more I read the more alarmed I was and dismayed at how I had missed so much of what was happening within Evangelical Christianity in North America and within the Church of the Nazarene. Now some 18 months later I am far more keenly aware of not taking teachings for granted because others I trust say so. I try not to be a skeptic on everything that is said or written either. I truly do measure more diligently then ever all things against the Word of God. I am ashamed to say, but I will confess that I was truly buying into things as a postmodernist without balancing it out with the Word of God.

I am thankful for the folks who spent the time and energy researching the Emergent Church movement because it helped touch this pastor's heart, and God used it to awaken me to the deception that is happening in the church on multiple fronts with regards to doctrine and teachings. Finding a balance without becoming an alarmist or extremist is such a delicate balance as well.

As I reflect on the beginnings of the Church of the Nazarene I can see how God drew conservative holiness people together from different groups and parts of the country and other denominations to those who were like minded with His passion and purpose. Then within a short time The Pentecostal Church of the Nazarene was born and named such as it merged two large groups. Within a few short years controversy arose within the modern church of that day on the use and misuse of the gift of tongues. Before they knew it they had to define themselves as Nazarenes more clearly by in 1917 by dropping the name "Pentecostal" because it had become so strongly associated with those who said one HAD TO speak with tongues as an evidence of the Holy Spirit and being entirely sanctified believers. The word Pentecost or Pentecostal was never evil or bad, but the word association became more associated with a false understanding of the gifts of the Spirit, so much so that a change was made necessary.So today Emergent is associated in the same controversial manner.

So here we are as a denomination that has crossed the great barrier of 100 years of age as a group. We are 2 million members strong in 157 counties of the world with (officially) 47 Nazarene’s who have died for their faith as modern day martyrs. God is pouring out His Spirit and anointing preachers and workers around the world for some of the greatest harvests in the entire world. The mission is still great before us all and yet the Church of the Nazarene is being infected with distractions away from the focus of the great commission, and mostly so in the more civilized world and the strongest economic hub of the Church of the Nazarene (North America). A younger generation is growing up in our midst who are being polluted by the current liberal culture and mindset with another word association in the wrong path yet again. I find so many who embrace the new thinking called Emergent. Emergent is not a new word, but by association with many liberal thinkers, philosophies and writers it has indeed become associated with the liberal agenda more than a conservative holiness one. Likewise there are many words being used and redefined in ways of bringing about the deconstruction of the Church. My wife received her masters’ degree in social work back in the late 80’s. Her minor was in "social justice". Those two buzz words together, “social Justice”, are not new today at all, but yet amongst liberal thinkers and even within the political landscape it is being used and redefined and associated with a range from social work and environmentalism, to socialism.

I still embrace the Church of the Nazarene and still believe in the her biblical teaching of Holiness. I am concerned about what many are turning to and accepting as gospel , and especially so because of the new redefining of former terms and words in this post modern day. When I hear certain terms I try not to jump to conclusions but it is difficult. Those words and terms include, Emergent Church, emerging, Social Justice, post modernism, social restoration, mysticism, spiritual formation, meditation, among others that are being redefined today. It seems that when I read about and hear these words it does end up being a liberal or compromising situation and I either confront it with biblical truth or I need to withdraw and run the other way.

Trevecca Nazarene University last year added a Social Justice major that really concerns me. Not because serving justice to society is wrong, but because of the new association the terms mean in post modernism. Who are they attracting or will attract with that major? Will the liberal post modernist start enrolling? Or will Nazarene parents who are educating themselves and aware of the new word association run in another direction with their tuition money because they perceive a more liberal university than they desire? Personally I think TNU is hurting themselves to choice that term in the heat of the battle of word means and associations if they want to be associated as a conservative Biblical holiness university.

In these last days word association and terminology is vital and we need to be constantly clear with what we mean when we label and use terms so that we associate with biblical holiness and not the modern deconstruction of the holiness church and the ever increasing heretical liberalism.

As much as the early Nazarenes probably despised having to drop the name Pentecost from their official name in order to preserve biblical holiness in those early days, we Nazarenes may need to separate or re-associate a clearer term to progress and press forward with that ever lasting message of Holiness. Around the world these issues might seem trite and divisive and even the discussion might seem like a waste of time, but in the civilized world being clear about who we are and who we are not will be vastly important to who we will continue to be. If we are not clear we could easily end up in the mainline denominational camp that is the fastest declining segment of Christianity in the world. As it is now only 4% of Generation Y (under30) can even be found in churches each week in the U.S. The Emergent movement may be trying to become all things to a younger generation to win them, but winning them to a deconstructed church and Bible will gain us nothing for eternity.

So what terms we use and label ourselves with, and our ministries and efforts including in our colleges and universities, will truly determine who we will attract and become. May God grant us wisdom with the jargon we use and define ourselves. If this even means dropping terms and names such as “Pentecostal”, by all means let us do so that we might win the lost and preserve the message of holiness in these last days.

THE FACE TIME THEORY OF CREATION

2010-05-01T07:13:00.000-07:00

In the last few months or so I have read about so many authors, scientist, pastors and theologians who have all aligned themselves with a different understanding of Genesis than what is intended from the natural reading of the Word of God. Some professing Christians are so persuaded that science has proven evolution that they find themselves in a jam trying to reconcile their decades of faith in God and His Word with Science.

Now mind you, I am not a scientist or even remotely close to one. Matter of fact it completely bores me. A few months back our family went to Epcot and Animal Kingdom at Walt World Disney. At both these theme parks the science of evolution is presented as FACT that it made me sick to think how many children and young adults will allow that theory to persuade them as it is woven into even our entertainment world. Entertainment with God creating it all would have been so much more amazing than what they threw together.

For all the theories that man says” “this proved evolution” there are equally a group of scientist who blow holes in each theory and go back to the bible and say the Word remain true.

So where do we get the theory of Creationism anyway? We get it from the Book of Genesis and the book of Genesis (meaning the book of beginnings) was written by Moses while he spent time with God in his calling and Journey. So how did Moses know what happened in the first 11 chapters of Genesis that reflect all the origins of creation? Some say it was oral traditions that were passed down. Given the age of Adam through the next 8 generations, that would make perfect sense. Perfect sense that is, if you can accept that Adam lived to be 930 years old. Or that Noah lived to be 950 years old. (Genesis 9:28-29). Which I do accept, but I don’t think even Adam would have had the details Moses writes down prior to own existence. I suppose God could have told Adam and down the line it went, but I do not get the impression that Adam walked especially close to God as Moses did. So I believe even Moses had more details then even oral tradition would have passed down. So where did the detail info come from?

Did oral tradition get passed down or did he find the family heritage album or was there another method? Maybe he just imaged it as a good story to illustrate a deeper meaning since at the time they did not have the means to figure out evolution and the scientific process. Or could it be that God actual told him all the details and as a secretary he wrote it down word for word what happened? After all, Moses was hanging out with God for at least a solid 40 days and nights two times in a row.

So what evidence is there that the Creator Himself told Moses the details of the origin of man and creation? I can not remember how I was born or came into existence accept that someone told me the details. Even if Adam did evolve from an ape and then God dropped or impressed on that first official human being a spirit and soul to live forever, would not God had made sure that story was passed down correctly?

The following verses in Numbers are such a key to trusting God’s word (numbers 12:6-8) (NIV)
6 he said, "Listen to my words:
"When a prophet of the LORD is among you,
I reveal myself to him in visions,
I speak to him in dreams.
7 But this is not true of my servant Moses;
he is faithful in all my house.
8 With him I speak face to face,
clearly and not in riddles;
he sees the form of the LORD.
Why then were you not afraid
to speak against my servant Moses?"

So of all the inspired Words of the prophets and writers of the O.T and N.T. Moses was Face to Face with God himself. If Moses writes down that Adam was created from dirt and God breathed the breath of life in his nostrils that is enough for me. If God said that He created the living creation from a void of mass in 6 literal days that settles it for me.
If science tells me there is evidence that the earth is 4 billion years old and it conflicts with God’s word then either science has it wrong or there is still something missing in science that they cannot explain. So when conflict comes based on theories or testimony I will still trust God’s living Word and the testimony of Moses and God before I will trust a bunch of men who are all fallible. Was Moses fallible in taking noted from God? NO. Face to face with God is a supernatural encounter and supernatural means enhancement above the natural world.

As I read about the lives of most of the current authors of scientific theories and even the Christian professing biologist (including Darwin) and their theories I find a common thread I observe. Most of those who have embraced evolution or intelligent design as a process beyond 6 literal days all seem to be doubters or backslidden from their Christian heritage if they even had one.

I find it interesting that those who today promote other than the biblical account as God intended have gone through doubt and abandonment to some degree or another when science became more authoritative than God’s Holy Word in their lives.

Will you choose the theories of man and science or a man who claims to have spent well over 40 solid days with God face to face? I suppose it takes faith to trust either theory. In my life time science has changed its evidence on things a number of times, yet God’s Word stays the same for several thousand years.

When you go to read about science and its theories ask yourself what the journey of the men writing about it is like. Most authors I have discovered who write about another way of looking at the beginning do not have a very strong spiritual background or anointing. However, the author of claims that I trust the most spent lots of FACE time with God himself unlike any human being since creation.

So whose inspirations and word’s should you trust? The men who spent little time with God, or abandoned God or spent no time with God or a man who spent Face to Face time with God and helped lead over 1 million people from bondage with a stick? Moses has the best testimony going and I am sticking with the testimony of the man of God who had face time.

Evolution: Does it Really Matter?

2010-04-21T06:07:00.000-07:00

Over the past year I have spoken to a number of leaders and in conversation many times I have shared my belief in the God of creation who spoke it ( 6 days of creation) into existence in a literal 6 day period. Most leaders who truly love God say. " evolution or direct creation does not matter because God was behind it all anyway" On the surface this might sound non- threatening and acceptable, but in the long run we open up to ourselves and many people along with us multiple problems based on opening the door beyond what God says about the beginning. I propose that it really does matter. Once you break away from a literal 6 day creation as noted in Genesis you give the devil an open door to question so much more about the reliability of God's entire Word. Man has a tendency to want see things as it best fits his or her worldview, but as born again believers we must hold to what God says about history or we end up in deep trouble. Professor Karl Giberson of Eastern Nazarene College is an example of someone who once held a Biblical World view and exchanged it for a Scientific Worldview and who struggles to try to mix the two together. I believe you can read for yourself how confused Karl made his own life and the lives of others who accept his view when he veered off from what God says about creation.

I used to think that certainty mattered in life. Now I
don’t. I was a pretty normal Christian kid when I headed
off to college. I had been raised in a conservative evangelical
parsonage, and as a budding intellectual, I was into Christian
apologetics. It was important to me to be able to prove that
my faith was completely true.

I had various arguments at my disposal: fulfilled
prophecy showed that God must have written the Bible;
problems with evolution showed that creation was true; our
sense of morality demanded that there be both a moral law
and a lawgiver. Other world religions had serious theological
and ethical problems; and gays and secular humanists were
obviously following the devil.
All this combined to create a powerful conviction in
the deepest part of my soul that I could have 100 percent
confidence that my beliefs were right and that those with
different beliefs were wrong.
In my college years, this certainty evaporated. By
studying science, I learned that my belief in young-earth
creationism was about as credible as my earlier belief in
Santa Claus; I learned that the biblical texts were complex,
culturally conditioned, and even contradictory. From 180 by The House Studios.
page 84 under the chapter title "Giving Up On Certainty"

I find it interesting that someone who started studying science (man's discoveries and perceptions) confesses that his certainty in God Word evaporated. Science became Karl's new reliable source of faith and not God's entire Word as he has been raised.

Above is my comments about my background and perspective and below is another perspective with much more publicity with John MacArthur.

When John MacArthur appeared on Larry King Live to address the issue of same-sex marriage, San Francisco Mayor, Gavin Newsom scoffed at the concerns some have over the “slippery slope”—i.e., if you allow same-sex marriage, why not allow people to marry children or pets? (Click here to watch the video.)

Trevecca Nazarene University Promoting Contemplative Spirituality in No Small Way

2010-04-14T18:46:00.000-07:00

Trevecca Nazarene University Promoting Contemplative Spirituality in No Small Way

What are your thoughts on these things? I say it is time to clean up shop and set the captives free and get back to sound doctrine
and biblical practices. The boat has gone adrift!

What's Next?

2010-04-02T20:44:00.000-07:00

What's Next?

Great points on contending for the faith!

Gordon College hosts lecture series in Salem's Old Town Hall - Beverly, MA - Salem Gazette

2010-03-26T06:52:00.003-07:00

Gordon College hosts lecture series in Salem's Old Town Hall - Beverly, MA - Salem Gazette

Posted using ShareThis

From Evolution to Imagination- Our Universities have lost it!

2010-03-21T22:12:00.001-07:00

Dear Rev. Jenkins,

I want to go on record with you as a pastor under your leadership that I am greatly perplexed and I am struggling with the current direction of the Church of the Nazarene and her Colleges and Universities. I do not know how many are with me and my wife on these matters or if we remain is some kind of silent fearful minority of leaders who struggle with such matters. I have spent a year reading and research trends in our church from the Emergent Movement to what is being allowed on our Christian campuses.

In the spirit of love I submit to you a summary of my resent correspondence with several in leadership of the past several months. In late December 2009 I wrote G.S. Jesse Middendorf about my concern about evolution being taught at ENC. After two months the summary reply of a 3 page letter I received was very gracious and kind but yet it was basically that I/we should have liberty (tolerance) for non-essentials and there is room for diversity within the walls of the Nazarene Church on such subjects as creation.

Unsatisfied with that response I then wrote Professor Karl Giberson directly at ENC about his position on the creation of the first man Adam. He wrote back a brief comment that I should just see his blog ( read heresy at blog) as he did not have time for personal correspondence due to the high volume of inquires he receives. Karl noted that all my questions about Adam were on the website. After careful review of the website and many other posts I have concluded that indeed Karl and several other Nazarene Professors are promoting heresy on the internet if not in the class room as well. The bible warns us of such false teachers! "But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, . . ." (2 Peter 2:1)

So now my question becomes after a few inquires: Does anyone in leadership know how to spot false teachers and prophets today? Outside of our Nazarene walls are culturally popular teachers and preachers like Rob Bell who are influencing countless people with their excellent communication ability. If you listen closely he and many other like him who are culturally relevant teachers are teaching heresy alongside other biblical truths.

Just a few weeks ago I was enraged when I discovered that TNU was hosting a retreat at a Catholic monastery in KY. Instead of writing, I called TNU and spoke with President Dan Boone directly. I did appreciate the personal time on the phone with Dan . However, after reflecting on that conversation I still stand my ground in spite of what President Boone says about his reasons in justifying a retreat at this Catholic monastery. In my opinion we should not be sending our students onto these grounds and intentionally exposing them to Catholic people, practices and icons as it is a form of silent endorsement at worst and teaching religious tolerance at best. Dan Boone’s reply to me was basically it is cheap and affordable and we’ve been doing it for 40 years. I understand thriftiness in this economy but I must still ask, ”does the end ( cheap retreats) justify the means ( Catholic Monastery) when it offends ministers like me ( former Catholic) who were redeemed many years ago from the false teachings ( heresy) of the Catholic Church?” Just this past week our Hispanic Church planter pastor led 3 adult Catholic women to Christ upon hearing the gospel preacher for the first time in a Nazarene church. They came forward to the altar of our Nazarene church. Now we must begin to teach them the truth which that the Catholic church never revealed to them.

This past week I discovered that Point Loma Nazarene University is hosting some bizarre conference about Prophetic Imagination and among the featured guest speakers are: An Environmental Activist, a Monk, a Priest, a Black Activist and then it is Emceed by the President of NTS. Among the workshops is a Muslim Iman, a Catholic Priest and professors from ENC, NNU, PNU and TNU. This is not the Holiness Church I was led to as young man from my Roman Catholic heritage. Some of the topics at this conference are just outright strange and Emergent in nature such as Sophia and Phronesis: A ‘What If’’ Question about Theology and Feminist Pedagogy as Acts of Prophetic Imagination.

I am concerned that if this continues much longer the Church of the Nazarene will be swept away into total heresy among a generation that trusted the elders who led them into these false doctrines. I wonder how many more ministers will exit the church as Rev. Rick Headley recently did in Ohio.

I truly wish that this were all just some nightmare and I will wake up soon and find that our great holiness denomination has not actually become just another tolerant people with no distinction. If you don’t believe what I am writing by all means look at these links and see for yourself.

Nurturing the Prophetic Imagination

PNC Conference Schedule.

P.S.

My oldest child is a freshman in one of our Nazarene Universities and I am not sure about her academic future if this continues. I cannot honestly imagine supporting our colleges and Universities if this is becoming the standard in our Denomination. The rest of my 4 children coming up through the ranks I will be inclined to begin to looking elsewhere unless I see hope. Maybe my only vote will be by virtue of the Gospel of money until a true stand is made by the General church.

Yours Truly

Peter Migner, Pastor

Deland Church of the Nazarene

Mythology in the Making | The BioLogos Foundation

2010-03-10T05:37:00.000-08:00

Mythology in the Making | The BioLogos Foundation

Karl,

In all due respect to your comments like this below:

( Why would the audience at a science meeting be dominated by clerics? I teach science at a Christian College but pastors do not attend our science division meetings. Scientific meetings today, no matter what the topic, are not attended by clergy. Theologians do not publish in scientific journals. I think most of us would agree with Huxley that the “parsons” should stay out of science unless, of course, they were also scientists.)

How many clergy have been invited to attend and with today’s technology I did attend Ken Ham’s lecture invitation from over 1000 miles away from my living room on a week night by way of a live webcast. Do you offer clergy the same way to attend your lectures?

And as well, how is it that scientist can enter the field of theology, yet “parsons” should stay out of Science?

I disagree with your comments here. The vast difference between a lot of scientist ( and I presume you being one) as well is that the scriptures take second place as a voice of authority in discovery whereas for most “parsons” the discoveries of man take second place to the authority of the Word of God.

Webcast your science lectures and I will attend.

Can Evolution and Creation Co-Exist?

2010-03-09T00:00:00.001-08:00

After serving the Lord since 1989 I find myself increasingly surrounded by professing believers and leaders who do not have issue with evolution. My oldest daughter is now a freshman at one of our Nazarene Universities and I am hearing bits of info about how liberal and humanistic so many of our current day professors are. When I attended Eastern Nazarene College back in the mid 80's I did not give it much concern because I was on fire to learn the bible and head out into ministry. But now some 20 years later I am discovering that not all Nazarene's believe in the biblical account as God gave it. My hope in this that this blog will help other Nazarene find a place of like mindedness in the scriptures. I hope we will all discover more fellow Nazarene's who hold to a biblical worldview and a solid interpretation of God's word.

Jesus commended the children for their simple faith to believe. Yet some how we have a generation of such brilliant professors that they must undo the simple story of creation to fit into their own understanding of man made methods wisdom.

I wrote Professor Karl Giberson who embraces both Jesus and Evolution.

Letter Written to Karl Giberson of Eastern Nazarene College 3-6-2010

Professor Karl Giberson, March 6, 2010

It has been many years since I sat in your class as a student. I graduated in the class of 87.
I am 47 years old now and have been in the ministry with the church of the Nazarene
pastoring since 1989 preaching and teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. I read sometime
back in the Christian Scholar about your most recent book "Saving Darwin" and then
read some excerpts from Amazon.

Needless to say my immediate reaction was" what? are we teaching evolution in our
Denominational CHRISTIAN Colleges that we support with our prayers and financial
budgets ?" Our very own church manual states that we believe in creationism as outlined
in the bible in Genesis 1:1. page 371 paragraph 903.8 The Church of the Nazarene
believes in the biblical account of (Gen 1:1) We oppose any godless interpretation of
the origin of the universe and humankind. However, the church accepts as valid all
scientifically verifiable discoveries in geology and other natural phenomena, for we
firmly believe in God is the creator."

So I wrote to one General Superintendent using you as an example of concern. Here was
my question to them.

“Is there an avenue or accountability structure or system in place whereby our church
colleges and universities and its professors can be held accountable to maintaining our
doctrinal heritage and purity? Many universities in our country started out Christian
and over time have deteriorated into campuses where humanism dominates.”
(the summary answer to this is below)

After reviewing your websites, articles and your critics, I find that you are indeed
embracing both evolution and Christianity. I don't see how that is possible. I would like
to understand how a science Professor finds balance with theological concepts that are
foundational to the salvation of man. This is a serious inquiry. I'm finding out that you
are very controversial among both evangelicals as well as the atheist community which
seems odd.

I realize that the Bible was not written to be a science text, but rather a revelation of God
to man about salvation which includes a lot of other information that is both historical
and scientific in nature.

The reply I received back from the general church shocked me to say the least. I was
given the following quote as a summary answer to the question above within a 3 page
reply.

"The mission of our church depends on our unity in the Spirit. It does not require a
monolithic and rigid adherence to one interpretation or another on these issues. We
rely on Dr. Bresee’s admonition in these matters: “In essentials, unity; in nonessentials,
liberty; in all things, charity.” We choose to be committed to one another, to
stand shoulder to shoulder in our attempt to “spread scriptural holiness through the
land.” I believe that is the unifying objective for all of us."

What I really got out of this reply was that our position on creationism as a church verses
evolution is a non-essential and is open to multiple interpretations. I could not disagree
with this more, but certain answers from you would help me to determine if I absolutely
agree with that comment or not. I do agree to have unity in the Spirit, so therefore I am
writing and appealing to you as brother within the Church of the Nazarene in the spirit of
grace.

I would be very open to a conversation on the phone if there is a time that fits your
schedule.

Karl, if you would please answer for me the following questions I would greatly
appreciate it and it would give more clarity on your position as it relates to evolution and
creation.

1. Do you believe God created Adam in one day (24 hours period) or something
different?
2. Do you believe there was an actual man named Adam who had a mate named
Eve?
3. If you do believe a man and women named Adam & Eve are true biblical
historical people? Approximately how many years ago do you believe they
existed?

Sincerely,

Peter Migner, Pastor

Reply from Karl Giberson on the same day

Dear Rev. Migner:

Thanks for your thoughtful letter. I am sorry that time does not permit me to engage the great number of people who seek out personal communications with me. I have written several books, and blog regularly at www.biologos.org. Any questions you have about my views are addressed in considerable detail in venues like those.

God bless you in your continuing ministry.

Karl

	New Post On Theistic Evolution verses Creationism posting soon!