Richard Dawkins: How to successfully avoid a question by not answering the question.

Richard Dawkins is dumbfounded after being asked to “give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome” – quite a reasonable question that one would expect Oxford University’s Professor for the Public Understanding of Science – so adamant in his belief in evolution – could and would provide an answer for. He then responds but DOES NOT answer the question that was asked of him. Why? Because he has no idea when it comes to processes that add information to the genome – the very premise of what he proclaims!! His writings claiming that he was not stumped are a desperate endeavour to cover his cowardly tracks (and on a further note, his writings don’t cover any of these “information adding” processes either).

Time line of the interview.



Sermon of the week: “A Scriptural Critique of Infant Baptism” by John MacArthur.

John MacArthur completely obliterates the erroneous doctrine of infant baptism in this week’s sermon of the week: A Scriptural Critique of Infant Baptism. This can be considered a follow-up to Coram Deo’s original posting (the transcript of this sermon) found here.

If you are curious about the doctrine of infant baptism: why it’s practiced in so many churches (even in Reformed Churches), and why many others don’t practice it at all, then you must listen to this sermon.

Quotes (522)

A Christian not yielded to the Spirit does not manifest the Christ-life.  The Spirit of God has to permeate a life if that life is to radiate Him.  We cannot do anything apart from being filled with the Spirit.

I have a glove.  If I say to the glove, “Play the piano”, what does the glove do?  Nothing.  The glove cannot play the piano.  But if I put my hand in the glove and play the piano, what happens?  Music!  If I put my hand in a glove, and glove moves.  The glove does not get pious and say, “Oh hand, show me the way to go.”  It does not say anything; it just goes.  Spirit-filled people do not stumble and mumble around trying to find out what God wants.  They just go!

– John MacArthur

Bezel333: “21st Century signs and wonders”

Once again, Bezel uncovers the truth using a little thing called “Scripture” to debunk the claims made by the Satanic signs and lying wonders crowd who take God out of the box and make Him dance like He’s their own little puppet.

The preaching of the cross is foolishness . . . to Mormons.

garden-of-gethsemaneThe Mormon organization has no problem with Masonic symbols, occultic symbols, and even inverted pentagrams adorning their temples, but they draw the line when it comes to that offensive cross. The two most common ‘excuses’ they provide for their aversion to the cross are:

1). “The cross is a pagan symbol.”

And the pagan symbols in Mormonism are not pagan? Not to mention the pagan practices that go on inside.

2). “We wish to focus on Jesus’ life, not His death.”

Ah, in this one statement Mormons reveal that they have absolutely no idea the true purpose of Christ’s coming to earth nor what it meant for Him to become a propitiation for the believer’s sins. Neither do they understand the fundamentals of the Christian faith or the very Gospel itself. For the Gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and it is the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes. How can you possibly “focus on His life” at the exclusion of His death . . . the very reason He came to earth (Mark 10:45)?

The preaching of the cross is a stumbling block to the Jew and foolishness to the Gentile (1 Corinthians 1:23) but it appears to be both to the Mormon.

Mormons not only have an aversion to the symbol of the cross like a vampire to a crucifix, but Mormons have an aversion to what the cross represents. Just like Satan who desires nothing more than to avert the sinner’s gaze away from the redemptive work accomplished by Jesus on the cross, Mormons attempt to direct the attention of their followers away from the redemptive work accomplished by Jesus on the cross as well. For example:

In the Garden of Gethsemane, Christ took upon himself the sins of all mankind.

Gospel Principles

Page 70

1997

The night preceding His crucifixion, Jesus Christ . . . . took upon Himself the burden of the sins of mankind from Adam to the end of the world.

Milton R. Hunter

The Gospel Through The Ages

Page 182

1945

Jesus, therefore, preceding crucifixion, had His last great struggle, while in mortality, with Satan and with death and came forth victorious.

Milton R. Hunter

The Gospel Through The Ages

Page 183

1945

If you’re believing in a “savior” that bore your sins in the Garden of Gethsemane, then you’re believing in one of the many false Christs that the True Christ warned us about, and you are still dead in your sins and will face the righteous, holy, and eternal wrath of God when you die.

Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins (Hebrews 9:22), but Mormonism would have you believe that the Garden of Gethsemane was where Jesus bore our sins and that His ‘sweating’ (not ‘shedding’) of blood had something to do with our redemption. The context of ‘shedding of blood’ is not an expelling of some blood in your sweat, but that of death. I am in no way diminishing the suffering of Christ in the Garden, but it was not the place where He atoned for our sins.

The foreshadow of Christ throughout the Old Testament was of the death (shedding of blood) of a worthy substitute (e.g. the animals killed to ‘cover’ Adam and Eve’s nakedness, the ram in the thicket in place of Isaac on the alter, the blood of the lamb on the doorposts in Egypt, etc.). All of these required the death of an animal, not merely the loss of a little of its blood.

If this corrupt doctrine of LDS were true, then the Mormon “Jesus” could have essentially atoned for the sins of mankind the first time He scraped His knee playing as a child, or the first time He cut His hand while working as a carpenter.

Although nowhere in Scripture can even the idea be found that Christ paid for our sins in the Garden of Gethsemane, this doesn’t stop Mormonism from teaching this heresy.

But what saith the Scripture?

And He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. – 1 Peter 2:24

crucifixion

But Mormonism is not content with diverting your attention away from the finished work of Christ on the cross; they also blasphemously attack the very efficacy of the sacrifice of our precious Savior!

Are you aware that there are certain sins that a man may commit for which the atoning blood of Christ does no avail? Do you not know, too, that this doctrine is taught in the Book of Mormon?

Joseph Fielding Smith

Doctrines of Salvation

Volume 1 Page 133

Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their own blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf. This is scriptural doctrine and taught in all the standard works of the Church.

Joseph Fielding Smith

Doctrines of Salvation

Volume 1 Page 135

But under certain circumstances there are some serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men then have their own blood shed to atone for their sins. Murder, for instance, is one of these sins; hence we find the Lord commanding capital punishment.

Bruce R. McConkie

Mormon Doctrine

Page 92

1966 Edition

We must believe that this same Jesus was crucified for the sins of the world, that is for the original sin, not the actual individual transgressions of the people; not but that the blood of Christ will cleanse from all sin, all who are disposed to act their part by repentance, and faith in his name. But the original sin was atoned for by the death of Christ, although its effects we still see in the diseases, tempers and every species of wickedness with which the human family is afflicted.

Brigham Young

Journal of Discourses

Volume 13 Page 143

1869

It will be necessary here to make a few observations on the doctrine set forth in the above quotation, and it is generally supposed that sacrifice was entirely done away when the Great Sacrifice [i.e., the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus] was offered up, and that there will be no necessity for the ordinance of sacrifice in [the] future: but those who assert this are certainly not acquainted with the duties, privileges and authority of the priesthood, or with the Prophets.

Joseph Smith

History of the Church

Volume 4 Page 211

It is not to be understood that the law of Moses will be established again with all its rites and variety of ceremonies; this has never been spoken of by the Prophets; but those things which existed prior to Moses’ day, namely, sacrifice, will be continued. It may be asked by some, what necessity for sacrifice, since the Great Sacrifice was offered? In answer to which, if repentance, baptism, and faith existed prior to the days of Christ, what necessity for them since that time?

Joseph Smith

History of the Church

Volume 4 Page 212

Christ did his part to atone for our sins. To make his atonement fully effective in our lives, we must strive to obey him and repent of our sins.

Gospel Principles

Page 75

1997

Christ’s atonement makes it possible to be saved from sin if we do our part.

Gospel Principles

Page 75

1997

It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit.

Brigham Young

Journal of Discourses

Volume 4 Page 54

1856

There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world. I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is a strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not destroy them.

Brigham Young

Journal of Discourses

Volume 4 Page 53

1856

I do know that there are sins committed, of such a nature that if the people did under the doctrine of salvation, they would tremble because of their situation. And furthermore, I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them and that the law might have its course. I will say further; I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.

Brigham Young

Journal of Discourses

Volume 4 Pages 53-54

1856

No matter how current LDS apologists try to spin it, the fact is they do not believe that Christ’s sacrifice (in the Garden of Gethsemane or on the cross) was sufficient to cleanse you from all of your sins. They continue to believe the blasphemous doctrine that you must still do something on your behalf to merit God’s favor. Former LDS prophets have even gone so far as to teach that the shedding of your own blood is required for remission of sins. This is known as the Doctrine of Blood Atonement and is one of the many LDS doctrines that modern-day Mormons have tried desperately to distance themselves from (you can find out more about this utterly Satanic doctrine here and here).

However, one only needs to look as far as Holy Scripture to see the error and folly of this false gospel of Mormonism. The same God who can redeem Israel from all her iniquities (Psalm 130:8) can surely redeem sinners from all of their iniquities. In spite of Mormonism’s claim that there are “some sins” that men can commit that the blood of Christ cannot atone for, the inspired Word of God tells us the exact opposite:

But if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. – 1 John 1:7

Jesus gave Himself to redeem us from every lawless deed (Titus 2:14) as we are justified and saved from the wrath of God by His blood (Romans 5:9). Reconciliation was accomplished by the shedding of Christ’s blood on the cross (Colossians 1:20) and we are redeemed not by perishable things, but by the precious blood of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1:18-19).

In spite of what the false teachers of LDS would have you believe, Christ’s sacrifice was not only sufficient to put away sin (Hebrews 9:26) and obtain eternal redemption through His blood (Hebrews 9:11-12), but it was done once and for all (Hebrews 7:26-27).

So when a Mormon comes to you bringing their long laundry list of things you must do to be saved, remember that Jesus paid the debt, it was sufficient, it is finished, and “there is no longer any offering for sin” (Hebrews 10:10-18)!

Jesus came in order to take away sins (1 John 3:5) and yet Mormons say He did not accomplish this. Who are you going to believe? A false organization led by false prophets, rife with false prophecies all pointing to a false “Jesus” and a false “gospel,” or the holy and inspired Word of God that has stood the test of time?

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. – 1 Corinthians 1:18

See related: The preaching of the Gospel is foolishness . . . to Roman Catholics

Should All Christians Witness?

Preaching the gospel

Preaching the gospel

I have been challenged by a commenter on this post to explain why I say every Christian has been commanded to proclaim the gospel. I appreciate his challenge, because it has motivated me to further my understanding of what the Bible teaches about evangelism.

The Great Commission
I had been faced with the objection that the Great Commission was only to the 11 disciples in the past. If you think it through, and take what Jesus said in context, you’ll see that this commission was given to every Christian.

Jesus commanded the 11 disciples to go and make disciples. Then, He told the disciples to teach the new disciples to obey everything He commanded them to do.

Here are some of the things Jesus commanded the disciples to do:

  1. Believe in Him (John 6:29).
  2. Take up your cross (Matt 10:38).
  3. Seek first the kingdom of God (Matt 6:33).
  4. Go and make disciples (Matt. 28:19).
  5. Teach the new disciples to do everything on this list (Matt 28:20).

Clearly, the new disciples should be taught to make disciples, unless someone can explain why the command to go and make disciples isn’t included in everything Jesus commanded them to do.

The Office of Evangelist
The commenter made another point that evangelists are the only ones who should preach the gospel among the unsaved. One problem is that there are only three verses in the New Testament that use the word evangelist: Ephesians 4:11, 2 Timothy 4:5, and Acts 21:8. There is very little explanation offered as to what an evangelist specifically does, and to be dogmatic about one’s favored explanation seems presumptuous.

One thing we do know is that the job of the evangelist is to prepare God’s people for works of service (Eph. 4:11–12). This would indicate to me that one of the principal jobs of an evangelist is to lead God’s people in their evangelism efforts and train them in evangelism.

One Body, Many Parts
It’s true that not every Christian holds the office of evangelist. Does that mean that only those who are evangelists should evangelize? Think about it this way: We’re all commanded to pray. No one can say that he or she shouldn’t pray because that individual doesn’t have the gift of prayer. Likewise, we’re all commanded to evangelize. There is no such thing as the gift of prayer, and there is no such thing as the gift of evangelism. We have the privilege of both prayer and evangelism.

Did All Christians in the Bible Witness?
There are a limited number of stories of lay Christians preaching in the New Testament. Most of the accounts of evangelism involve Paul, Peter, Philip, and other early church leaders. However, this doesn’t mean that they were the only ones who spread the gospel.

In Philippians 1:14, Paul says, “And that most of the brethren, trusting in the Lord because of my imprisonment, have far more courage to speak the word of God without fear.”

After Stephen was stoned, persecution was on the rise, and all except the apostles (Acts 8:1) were scattered from Jerusalem. “Therefore, those who had been scattered went about preaching the word” (Acts 8:4).

How Can You Keep the Gospel to Yourself?
Those of us who have had our sins forgiven by God’s grace and mercy and will spend eternity in heaven have understood the greatest news in the history of mankind, and we have been made eternal beneficiaries of it. If we have truly received such a glorious gift, how can we keep it to ourselves? The joy it inspires must be evident in our lives—and spread to others. In Luke 8:16, Jesus said, “Now no one after lighting a lamp covers it over with a container, or puts it under a bed; but he puts it on a lampstand, so that those who come in may see the light.”

We will spend eternity with the One we pray to, the One we worship, and the One whose Word we read. This short life is our only opportunity to tell the unsaved about the glorious gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Quotes (520)

voddie-baucham If man is merely the result of a cosmic accident, there is no inherent dignity or value in human life. In fact, it was this type of evolutionary thinking that led to the atrocities of the Nazi regime in Hitler’s Germany. If there are races of people who represent a higher level of evolution than others, then it is incumbent on the more evolved race to dominate and/or exterminate the less evolved. While most secular humanists would abhor such thinking, my question to them would be, on what grounds?

– Voddie Baucham

Quotes (519)

Richard Baxter

For myself, as I am ashamed of my dull and careless heart, and of my slow and unprofitable course of life, so, the Lord knows, I am ashamed of every sermon I preach; when I think what I have been speaking of, and who sent me, and that men’s salvation or damnation is so much concerned in it, I am ready to tremble lest God should judge me as a slighter of His truths and the souls of men, and lest in the best sermon I should be guilty of their blood. Me thinks we should not speak a word to men in matters of such consequence without tears, or the greatest earnestness that possibly we can; were not we too much guilty of the sin which we reprove, it would be so.

– Richard Baxter

1615 – 1691

HT: Soli Deo Gloria

Young Girl With More Guts Than Most Christian Men

There is little doubt that it takes guts to step out of our comfort zone to proclaim the gospel. Several men in my church have admitted to me that they’re just too scared to go out witnessing. It’s all right to be scared. It’s not all right to let your fear cause you to be disobedient.

If a little 13 year-old British girl can witness to college kids, surely the rest of us can. Here’s a documentary on a big British family. Deborah is able to get the gospel out on British national television several times.

It’s about 45 minutes to an hour long, but it’s worth watching. You can watch the remaining portions by clicking on “Continue Reading »

Continue reading

Sermon of the week: “Seeing the Risen Christ” by Jonathan Sims.

jonathan-simsYour sermon of the week is Seeing the Risen Christ by Pastor Jonathan Sims of Shelbyville Mills Baptist Church in Tennessee.

Unlike the unbiblical foolishness masquerading as “Christianity” among the Laodicean landscape this past Resurrection Sunday (e.g. AC/DC Sunday at New Spring) this message by Pastor Sims was all about Christ and Him crucified; true Biblical preaching. This is a message that most of those attending the entertainment-driven churches would turn away from it because it’s too hard (John 6:60-66).

Film review: “The Boy In The Striped Pajamas”

the-boy-in-the-striped-pajamas

I don’t usually do this–in fact this is a first (and probably a last) for DefCon–but I have a secular movie recommendation. Before you think I’ve lost my mind, hear me out first.

I gave up secular movies over two years ago for obvious reasons (sex, violence, profanity, etc.) in addition to the fact that Hollywood’s story telling capabilities lacked depth, and frankly, oftentimes insulted my intelligence.

One of the genres of films that I enjoyed when I used to watch movies was WWII films such as Saving Private Ryan and Schindler’s List (I have always been intrigued by the level of evil that a society could collectively attain to under on man’s leadership).

Sadly, I could never bring myself to watch these films ever again, not because I find myself in conflict with the portrayal of the dramatic historical events of war itself, but due to the unnecessary content such as the excessive profanity and use of my Savior’s name as a cuss word.

Well, for those of you out there like me who enjoy great films about WWII, but are not willing to set the wickedness before your eyes that Hollywood feels for some reason needs to inundate every film they produce, I have great news for you!

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas contains:

– No profanity.

– No sex.

– Very minimal violence (much less than The Passion of the Christ).

What happens when the 8 year-old son of a Nazi soldier who runs a prison camp befriends an 8 year-old boy inside the prison camp? Their friendship between the electric, barbed wire fence is chronicled in this cleverly crafted tale with superb acting that concludes with an ending that will leave you stunned.

This is truly a tale that your children can watch that will help to educate them on the horrors of what took place in Nazi Germany.

The only questionable scenes in the movie are when the one little boy lies to his mother a few times (once to sneak food to his friend in the prison camp). However, those lies do not rest without the boy reaping the bitter results. The other scene to be cautious about for younger viewers is when an SS officer takes a man into the kitchen and batters him. Although you do not see the violence you hear it and know it’s happening. Make sure you view the film before allowing your kids to, in the event you feel it’s not suitable for them.

Even with these scenes I was shocked at how this film portrayed the story in such a powerful way without the use of even one profanity (can’t even say that much for some preachers). I will not soon forget this film, and I highly recommend it.

I especially think this film would benefit home schoolers who are currently studying or planning on studying WWII. This movie is not a war film, but it’s more of an insight into the personal side of those affected by the horrors of WWII and Hitler’s Germany–a perfect example of a Darwinian worldview followed through to its logical conclusion.

Book Review: “The Robber’s Cave” by Charlotte Maria Tucker.

the-robbers-cave Yet another fine book from the Lamplighter Series of Rare Books. Written in 1887 by Charlotte Maria Tucker under the alias of A.L.O.E. (A Lady of England), The Robber’s Cave is a good read for all ages. It is suspenseful, reflective, and entertaining. Furthermore, Tucker is not afraid to show Roman Catholicism (the religion practiced by the book’s antagonists) as the idol-dependent false religion that it is.

The hills of Calabria, Italy are home to bands of nefarious thieves, but a single light can shine so brilliant in the darkest places. Why would a talented, skilled, and very innocent believer dwell purposefully with the cruelest villains? Perhaps you will learn the answer as you get to know Rafael, the Improvisatore. Ungrateful Horace Cleveland gains the answer to this question under the harshest of circumstances. The unfortunate opportunity is given to young Horace to learn the true value of things lost that he had taken so much for granted.

You can purchase this book at Family Faith Books.

Another example of Mormons “not attacking” another religion.

Anyone who tries sharing the true gospel of Jesus Christ with a Mormon will eventually (if they haven’t already) run into the tried and true LDS tactic of pulling the victim card. They’ll say, “We have never attacked anyone’s religion, why are you attacking us?”

Well, not only has this claim by Mormons been proven to be an outright lie (see the post What Mormons Really Believe About Christians), but here’s a video showing just how sensitive to other people’s faith some of them are, and with some questionable racial overtones too.


John MacArthur on Mark Driscoll – Part 2

As a follow up to the original piece John MacArthur on Mark Driscoll there has been a flurry of recent activity on several fronts addressing what seems to be fast becoming a latter day Great Downgrade Controversy of sorts.

Recently Phil Johnson, director of Grace to You, editor of several of John MacArthur’s books, co-pastor of the Grace Life Pulpit at Grace Community Church, webmaster of The Spurgeon Archive, and blogmaster of Pyromaniacs preached a scathing Biblical indictment against the “pornification of the pulpit” entitled “Sound Doctrine, Sound Words” at the 2009 Shepherd’s Fellowship Conference.

Now Dr. John MacArthur has weighed in on this important and timely issue in a series of four articles entitled “THE RAPE OF SOLOMON’S SONG” which zeroes in on the gross, heinous, and wholly unbiblical perversion of scripture perpetrated by Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church.

Continue reading

Perry Noble’s message from AC/DC Sunday

perry-noble

Well, I went and did it. I took the plunge and listened to Perry Noble’s message from this past AC/DC Resurrection Sunday. Nah, I wasn’t surprised. Just the kind of ear-ticklingly good pop-psychology pep-talk I expected. With a little bit about Jesus thrown in. Here’s the summary:

  • 1st 4 minutes–Talked about American Idol. Not a word about how Satanic music relates to what he is going to talk about.
  • Talked about how salvation is “Not a program, or a process, but a person.”
  • Tells us how Jesus can make our life exciting and fun this side of eternity…and after we die, too.
  • Funny story about Sunday School teacher at NewSpring, and how his kid had to pee at the mall. I kid you not.
  • Reads Matthew 7:14-15. Still no mention of how joining the temple of God with idols is relevant to his message.
  • Tells funny story about driving around Buckhead (Atlanta) and a traffic cop telling him to get out of the intersection–and how he wanted to “run him over.” I kid you not.
  • Displays firm grasp on the obvious by spending about 3 minutes talking about how we’re all going to die.
  • Spends about a minute and a half talking about how Hell is real and it’s hot. Misses chance to use Scripture that talks about fire never being quenched and worms never dying, or even the purpose of Hell.
  • Mentions how God doesn’t compare us to other people but to Christ. OK, maybe things are looking up.
  • Or not. Goes into discussion about popular movies (A Time To Kill, Ransom), and that we’re all bad guys. Includes funny story about his daughter running in to his study and counting to 10. I kid you not.
  • Mentions Romans 3:10, 3:23. Misses chance to talk about how we are God’s enemy, about sin, or repentance.
  • Talked about how salvation is “Not a program, or a process, but a person.”
  • Tells funny story about dead chickens in Kenya. I kid you not.
  • Tells us that Jesus left Heaven to come here, asking us “Can you imagine leaving that kind of comfort?” Yeah, comfort. Nothing about Jesus’ perfect communion with God. Nothing about the glory He shared with the Father. It’s all about comfort. I kid you not.
  • Tells us that “Jesus came to rescue us and set us free.” Free from what? Hell. O………K. Still no mention of sin. Still no mention of repentance. Still no mention of how rehearsing and performing Hell-glorifying music is supposed to glorify the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
  • Talked about how salvation is “Not a program, or a process, but a person.”
  • Spends 7 minutes describing the physical aspect of the Passion Week and the crucifixion. No mention of WHY JESUS HAD TO DIE.
  • 30:00 until the end (about 20 minutes in all)–invitation, slow music, guilt-laden manipulation, and 300 people “met Jesus.” Still no mention of how rehearsing and performing Hell-glorifying music is supposed to glorify the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

In all, the Lord Jesus Christ merits about 10 minutes out of 50. Hell gets about 90 seconds. The rest of the time is filled with fluff about movies, little girls counting to ten, and kids peeing at the mall–with a couple Bible verses sprinkled here and there. No mention of how our sins grieve the heart of God. No mention of WHY Jesus had to die to rescue us from Hell (Because, you know, it’s all about us). No mention of what is required on our part after we “Know Jesus” (You know, all that repentance and sanctification and holiness stuff we Pharisees are so worried about). No mention of whether they told people, “Yeah, we know we played Satanic music in our service. But that was just to get you in the door. Now that you’re here, don’t listen to it, OK? Yes, that’s right. Do as we say, not as we do. Sin? Ah, don’t worry about it. You know Jesus, you don’t have to worry about all that stuff.”

He had a platform to present the Law, to warn people about WHY we need to be rescued from Hell, to provide chapter and verse from the LIVING WORD OF GOD, and to let the Holy Spirit speak from the word He spoke to the holy men of old. And instead he filled people’s time with a happy little pep talk about movies, kids, and cops.

And Satanic music.