Letters As November Fades to Black

Sharing Options
Show Outline with Links

Conflict Avoidance

I must thank you for your work in Collision—your debates helped persuade a Hitchens fan into Christianity.

Do you have any advice on learning how to initiate and handle confrontation for those of us who are conflict-averse?

Is it a matter of experience and trial and error? I figured you might have some insight based on your public events and your pastoral experience.

Many thanks,


John, thanks. And I would only work on the sort of situation where you avoided a conflict, and your conscience bothered you afterwards. You shouldn’t strive to have a conflict every time one is possible. But in those moments, because you have been praying to recognize them as they are arising, you should 1. notice it coming, 2. make your decision, 3. lean in, and 4. view the game film afterwards with the expectation that you will find things you could have said or done better. So yes, trial and error.

A Democracy Whiff

Regarding those who worship at the feet of Dame Democracy; Nazi Germany was democratically elected using Rank choice voting. If that isn’t a reason to vote against such a voting system…


Zeph, the point is noted.

Pomo SloMo

In the last week or two you told us about the penny dropping, and your understanding that a lot of clown-world flows from the definition of outrage. You also included in the Content Cluster a humorous ”Postmodern Drinking Song” from Jordan Peterson.

This caused my own penny to drop—at least part way, I think it’s jammed up—but Peterson said in one of his lectures that a fundamental idea of Postmodernism is that meaning is impossible, which he affirmed as a proven point. (He does pretty good considering he doesn’t have Christ’s weapons.)

So I think Clown-World is flowing from Postmodernism more generally than just the definition of outrage. I think the world is making it up for themselves because Postmodernism says they may as well. It’s the perfect excuse for something they’ve wanted to do anyway.


Craig, I think this is right, but it doesn’t nullify the point I was making about insanity (not outrage). In saying that everything is ultimately meaningless, postmodernism is actually saying there is no such thing as sanity. And because they are basically existentialist, saying that existence precedes essence, they are free to impose their own idea of sanity on an absurd world.

Children and Salvation

Quick question. 

Would you say that we should assume faith is present in our children and treat them as such?

In Christ,


Brandon, I wouldn’t use the word assume, which makes it sound like you are on cruise control. I think the biblical word believe would be much better. And it is very different.

Processing Household Complaints

What do you do when your wife goes off on a complaining fit over things you can’t change/aren’t your fault? I.e. the toilet overflowed, so she goes off on a tangent about how she doesn’t like where we live (it’s the best I can do while she’s home with the kids and we’re trying to get out of debt).

How to respond?


Kyle, if you respond to that kind of thing in the moment, the only thing that is going to happen is a quarrel. But at the same time, you don’t want outbursts of complaining to be acceptable in your home. So, after the toilet is fixed, and the situation is calm, and it is a day or two later, and the kids are in bed, you schedule a talk with your wife.

A Cluster of Questions

1) Why do charismatics attract all the supernatural drama? The casting out of demons, the “John, you will find a wife in 89 days,” and John does, and “God is telling me to tell you to join this university.” Why is it so calm in the Reformed circles?

2) Justin Peters was saved while he was serving as a pastor. From his testimony, it sounds like Arminians are not saved because they do not understand monergism. What are your thoughts?

3) Isn’t adultery or the sin of sexual immorality the greatest sin? All sins lead you to hell; but for a believer, isn’t the sin of adultery the most consequential? It is after all the sin that warrants radical amputation? Not that amputation is the final solution, but mortifying that sin does call for drastic measures, no?

4) Do you agree with Garris’s argument (in Masculine Christianity) on women deacons? If no, why not?

Best regards,


Peter, some people like drama, and so they make stuff up, but sometimes God likes drama too, and throws something in to keep everybody on their toes. I don’t know about Justin Peters, but Arminians who are saved are saved by Christ, and not by Arminianism. But nobody is saved by Calvinism either. No, adultery is not the greatest sin. It is a very grievous sin, but there are others that are far worse. I am working through Garris’s book very slowly, and haven’t gotten to that part yet. But you can find out what I think about women deacons in The Pillar of the Truth. There were deaconesses in the early church, but they constituted a separate office—there were not women on the deacon board, in other words.

Another Ground for Divorce?

My brother is not a Christian, is married and is dating a woman who professes Christ and who claims to have “deep knowledge” regarding Jewish law. I spoke with my brother in August and encouraged him to not divorce his wife. He basically told me to mind my own business. However, I did manage to tell him that there are only two valid reasons for divorce. The first is sexual immorality outside of marriage and the second is utter and complete abandonment.

His girlfriend jumped into the conversation to defend their very unbiblical relationship and she told me there were actually three reasons God allowed divorce, not two. The third is for lying. They are in counseling (online, watching videos, no actual counselor) and she attends some sort of Jewish bible study where apparently she learned of this third reason for divorce.

This woman also claims that because my brother’s wife had cheated on him (he has zero proof of that by the way and the wife maintains her innocence), he is free to not only marry but God already sees him as single due to the lying and sexual immorality.

Truth be told, this is his second marriage and he wanted out. Period. End of story. However, I am curious as to what OT law she is referring to regarding permissible divorce due to lying?

My parents are not believers and are pretty disgusted with both my brother and the choices he has made. I can’t help but think of what a horrible testimony that woman has been to my parents, the neighbors and the community at large.

Thank you.


T, if she says that the ground for divorce is lying, she is probably referring to the provision that allowed for the marriage to be dissolved if the bride represented herself as a virgin at the time of the wedding, but it turned out afterwards that she had lied about that. But the marriage was dissolved through the bride’s execution, not divorce.

Another Crowd Source Problem

I have been trying to research an event in Feminist history for my disputations with TERFs, on X. My premise is that feminism is one of the poisonous roots that produced trans-insanity. A mother who excused her son’s cruelty to family pets, shouldn’t be surprised that he beats his wife in adulthood.

Feminism destroys family, men, women & culture. These TERFs can’t use the very ideologies that produced the wave of AGP ‘womenXY’ to defend womanXX spaces from these perverts. Poisonous roots produce poisonous fruits. You mentioned in one of your posts a meeting of radical feminists in late 60’s (coven of witches) that started with some ritual of chants that they would destroy families, encourage homosexuality etc. I can’t find the historical reference to look into this issue.

I did a close search of your blog & AOMIN to see if I could find it. I failed.

Do you remember? Thank you.


SJW, I think, but am not sure, that the source is Gilder’s Men and Marriage. Does anybody else remember more clearly?

Eunuchs for the Kingdom

Problem passage. What is the point Jesus is making to the disciples in Matthew 19:10-12 about the eunuchs? Does his point equally apply to women? Resources I’ve looked at seem either sparse or they just glaze over it. Some think Jesus is saying ‘do whatever you want’ others go on about homosexuality.


Justin, no, women cannot be eunuchs. A eunuch is a castrated male. Some are born that way (birth defect), some happen to have been made eunuchs by men already when they come to Christ (Ethiopian eunuch), while others voluntarily do it to themselves.

Some More on Parenting

Just wanted to say, I’m thankful for the advice you gave my wife and me with regards to my two year old daughter repeating, “amen.” We have followed the advice you gave, and keeping in mind “its a get to, not a got to.” It’s been very helpful, thank you. Also, just finished “Reforming Marriage,” and “Standing on the Promises” books. Next up, “The Covenant Household.” A lot to apply and by God’s grace over time, those biblical ideas/practices will be enjoyed in our home.

Another ask, that I know is related to the books above.

I didn’t grow up in church. When I came to faith and the churches I’ve attended, it’s all been under a Baptist/Pre-mill context. I’m relatively new to the paedobaptist and post mill conversations. Would you be able to recommend a book on both subjects for beginners? I have the Canon app as well, so if it’s something on there, great! But if not, I don’t mind buying the right books.

I don’t have a firm conviction on Baptism, (apart from it’s important, more to that but short and sweet of it) and eschatology (apart from the conviction that Jesus is coming back.)

I really enjoy what y’all do there and I’m sold on a lot of it. But I’m also not interested in being fan boy and go with the flow of it type of guy, just because I agree with someone on “big issues” type stuff. God opened my eyes to the truths of “Calvinism” and the truths of “six-day creation” as He has done with many others through out church history. Nothing new, but it is new to me over the last 15 years. And I know now that what I believe will affect how my home will go in the future. I’m a first generation Christian (in my family) and I want to lead my wife and kids well. Like I said, I’ve learned from what y’all are doing out there in Moscow, and I’ve seen the fruit of those labors, both in your life-long ministry and currently the fruit I’m seeing in my wife and I, thanks to your ministry, to God be the glory alone. So, it’s become increasingly more important for me to delve into baptism and eschatology as I know now what I believe, or don’t believe will have an affect on what my children and grandchildren will adopt. And since you have had a positive affect on my home so far, I want to start this journey with baptism and eschatology with what yall believe first and pray God would do in those areas what He has done for me and my family with the truths of “Calvinism” and “Six-day creation.”

Long post, I guess I could have just said thank you for the advise and what books do you recommend for this or that. But wheres the fun in that?

God bless brother


Freddy, thank you. On baptism, I would recommend you start with my book, To a Thousand Generations. On eschatology, I recommend He Shall Have Dominion by Ken Gentry.

American Milk and Honey?

Do you plan to release a Kindle version of your book “American Milk and Honey”?


Daniel, yes, and here it is.

Double Predestination

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe you would hold to the classical Reformed view of double predestination, namely that God elects certain persons to salvation and that he simply passes over others, that is, he does not create evil or unbelief in the hearts of the reprobate and does not cause them to sin. In this sense, God does in a certain sense predestine the reprobate to hell, but he is not equally active in damning them as he is in saving the elect. This would be in contrast to another view of double predestination that says that God does in fact create evil or unbelief in the hearts of the reprobate and therefore God is equally active in causing the salvation of the elect and the damnation of the reprobate. I am inclined towards the first view, since the second view would seem to make God the author of sin, since he would be causing people to sin. However, I am struggling with how to understand Romans 9:19 in terms of this view. Paul anticipates the objection that “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” This comes right after Paul gives the example of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart. I have heard is said that God did not actively harden Pharaoh’s heart, but that Pharaoh hardened his own heart and that God hardened his heart only in the sense that he gave Pharaoh up to the hardness of his own heart. However, if this is the case, why doesn’t Paul say so? If Paul were teaching that God did not actively harden Pharaoh’s heart, when the objection that no one can resist God’s will was raised, why wouldn’t Paul just say that Pharaoh’s heart being hardened was not a result of God’s irresistible will but that Pharaoh hardened his own heart and God simply refrained from restraining this hardening? Instead, Paul points to God’s right as the Creator to make vessels of wrath prepared for destruction (Romans 9:22). If Paul is granting that Pharaoh’s hardening is because no one can resist God’s will, does this not imply that God actively willed and caused Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened?

The first view of double predestination in which God is not equally active in saving the elect and damning the reprobate makes better sense to me theologically and in terms of other things that Scripture teaches, but I am struggling to see how it fits with the argument that Paul is making in Romans 9.


Will, you are right that I hold to double predestination, and also that the first version is one that I would be more comfortable with. But the first version is still inadequate. When God “passes by” the reprobate, this does not make it a “hands off” sort of thing. It simply means that God does not harden the reprobate in the same way that He softens the elect. God is equally active with both, but the actions are not symmetrical.

Thank you for your tireless efforts. Your content really ministers to me. Are you familiar with Off the Kirb Ministries—a YouTube channel? When I first watched a few of his videos several years ago, they were pretty straight forward Gospel messages. Lately, he (I forget his first name. Last name is Kirby) is opening each video with something more sensational, but in all fairness, does tie in a strong Gospel message at the end.

I watched one recently that talked about mysterious holes in the earth, some of which after being dug, produced terror in the hearts of those digging the holes, and they abruptly stopped the digging, and sealed them up. Apparently, they put a microphone down in the hole and heard multitudes of people screaming in terror. Hell.

I don’t generally go for this type of fantastic occurrence, but it got me to wondering that the Bible tells us that hell is deep in the earth. Am I being just silly to think that they could have possible dug that far? Is there any reason why we should not assume that when talking about hell being in the earth, that it is not literal? When Jesus departed the earth, he went up. We assume that heaven is in the sky. There must be a literal place ‘up there,’ so why would there not be a literal place, ‘down there?’

When I heard the supposed recording, it was very chilling. So many people make fun of the seriousness of hell. I watch Ray Comfort a lot, and I am so dismayed when folks kind of laugh hell off, like it’s no big deal. Maybe a recording of this horrific type could put the fear of God in them, as Ray says. I am born again, and it has troubled me, especially because I have so many loved ones that will not hear anything related to Jesus. They shut their ears. Do you think it is reasonable to share something like this with them? I am asking because I have mixed feeling about it. On one hand it seems too out there and could be just a hoax, on the other hand, if it is real, it could give someone pause, and hopefully at least make them think.

Here is a link to the video. I know that you do reaction videos, and I often watch and enjoy them. Would you consider reacting to this?

While I’m on it, another one I would love to see you react to is Jonathan Pageau. He is Eastern Orthodox, and is becoming quite popular. Steve Turley has interviewed him (I just saw you on a Turley interview). When I have watched a few of Pageau’s videos, I find that he doesn’t present the Gospel, but is really into Symbolism. It’s all very human-centered and mystical. My son, who is not walking with God, is quite enamored with him, and it is difficult to figure out where to tackle this beast with him.

Well, thank you for all you do. I do feel that you have given me tools to be a stronger Christian in our culture. I appreciate you


Debbie, I believe in Hell also, but it is not the sort of place you could stumble into if you got lost in Carlsbad Caverns. I wouldn’t give that sort of thing the time of day. As for EO mysticism . . . that would be too much like getting lost in Carlsbad Caverns.

Muslim Dreams

Did you read that article about 200 men in Gaza coming to the faith because Jesus appeared to them in their dreams? Do you believe such stories? If yes, then how do you explain Rom 10:14-15?

Technically, that doesn’t rule out Jesus. Guess I’ve answered my own question. But what do you think?


Peter, I am not familiar with the Gaza story, but I have read similar accounts. Here is a fascinating book on it.

In Defense of Flogging

Have you ever read Peter Moskos’ “In Defense of Flogging”? Every time flogging is brought up in discussions people accuse it of being savage or inhuman, but the book presents this very simple argument: “Imagine you’ve just been convicted of a crime, and you can choose your punishment, either you spend 5 years in a prison or you receive 30 lashes and you’ll sleep in your own bed tonight. Which one would you choose?” Given that the majority of people would choose the lashes, how is flogging more savage than the current penitentiary system?

I’ve always found this one of the worst cases of untethered empathy. Flogging was practiced universally, and recommended by Scripture, but it was pietistic Christians who (in a very similar way to the spanking discussion) decided to be more godly than God and argue that what criminals “really needed” was a timeout to sit in the corner think about what they did, and thus the most impious and cruel punishment was born: The convict’s family loses their breadwinner and law-abiding citizens are forced to pay for the convict’s expenses, his children grow up fatherless, the convict is subjected to the highest rate of rape in the nation, small criminals are pushed to join gangs, the convict is subject to way more violence than the lashes could ever do, etc.

Looks like the quintessential example of how untethered empathy is way more cruel than the supposed cruelty it tries to thwart.


Joao, there is a great deal of sense in what you say. The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel (Prov. 12:10).

Lies Everywhere

“This is because to be red-pilled at all is to struggle with the fact that you have been lied to about virtually everything your entire life, and those lies were affirmed by the insider-stupidity guardians, all of them nodding solemnly. And let us be frank. The Establishment did lie, and more than a little bit. But it is no improvement to abandon your reliance on factory farm lies, and go out to the country in order chase down your free range lies.”

The thing I’ve been trying to explain to those who are near this situation is that the media zeitgeist/narrative—which I absolutely believe is demonic—is so all pervasive that those caught in it are totally convinced of everything, even as it changes moment to moment. But those who manage to pierce the bubble and get out of it are caught floundering for anything not part of the bubble that they can try and hold on to as some sort of anchor of truth. And while most of what the media says is based on lies, there are plenty of lies that aren’t part of the media narrative.


Ian, exactly so.

Recovering the Mainlines

If you haven’t already heard of it, I’d like to direct your attention to Operation Reconquista. This is a movement amongst mainline Protestant denominations to retake them for conservative, traditional theology. According to the website:

Operation Reconquista is a movement of Bible-believing Christians in Mainline Protestant denominations who recognize that our denominations have drifted away from the historic Christian faith. We are fighting to restore our churches to the true faith and revive them, because we do not want the great institutions built for God’s glory to be used against His Kingdom.

While the majority of Mainline Protestant churches have been hijacked by secular liberalism, there is a strong minority of churches in each Mainline denomination (PCUSA, TEC, UMC, ELCA, RCA, UCC, ABCUSA) that have remained faithful. We encourage evangelical Christians to join, strengthen, and revive these non-liberal Mainline churches. Since liberal churches tend to die out, the conservative minority will eventually become a majority if we keep it strong. This is how we will recapture these institutions.

I’d like to know if you support this effort and have any words of wisdom for those that do support it.



JR, it would be wonderful if it worked. But my only advice would be “don’t kid yourself.”

My pastor has kids that ended up not Christian. He was also converted later in life when his kids were already in their teens. Does this disqualify him? How or should I take parenting advice from him? Should I cause trouble by saying it was his fault . . . I was escorted out of one church and quietly left another for being Calvinist and post-millennial respectively. Now I’m at a church with many middle-aged men and women who raised terrible kids and I’m here with my wife, both 26, standing on the promises. I want to say what I actually think but, am not sure if a group Bible study is the right place or time to do it.

I get my instruction from your lessons in proverbs, reading the Bible and from a few books that Canon has published i.e. “Father Hunger”, “Men and Marriage”, “Standing on the Promises.” I’m going to go through “The Case for the Christian Home,” “It’s Good to Be a Man,” and “Eve in Exile.”

Thank you,


Dave, to your question, I would also add The Neglected Qualification.

Yes, But Language Warning

Enjoy this comedian channeling his inner Van Til in a hilarious take down of the atheist origins myth.


Rafael, yes, I saw that. Quite good. But before you gather the kids around, language warning.

I have a question for you regarding literary fare for my 3-year-old son. I also have a 1-year-old. We are coming into the period of their lives when “Bible stories for children” come into the picture. I do not like the idea of a Bible story books for children. The words of Scripture are important, their accuracy is important, and I do not feel these are preserved in said stories.

I could be overthinking an issue of little importance here, but I was relaying to my wife yesterday that what I would really love to be able to purchase for my son is a collection of illustrated Bible storybooks that draw their text directly from the text of a faithful translation of the Bible, so that my children can be raised pondering the actual life-giving words from the earliest age. (When I say faithful translation, a few that come to mind would be ESV, NASB, KJV, NKJV . . .)

By no means have I exhausted the vast literary resources of Christendom in my search, but thus far I have unable to locate something fitting this description. My default when I cannot find the Christian resource I desire would be to find out how to make it and be off. You are far more acquainted with the world of Christian literature than I. My question is—do you know of a children’s storybook fitting that description and if not, would you be willing to give me guidance in making one? Do you think it is even worth it?

Thank you ,


Judah, I don’t know of anything just like what you describe. But perhaps you should check out this.

RUF Woke?

In “The Bottom of the Empathy Hole”, you gave a list of additional groups to be called out beyond Revoice and Exiles in Babylon. As to compromise, Christianity Today and Calvin University I am familiar with, but not RUF. I would appreciate a quick summary along with links to where I can read up on the compromise being referenced here.


Zack, RUF is Reformed University Fellowship, the college ministry of the PCA. I don’t have links because I was going off various personal communications from people dealing with woke chapters. If you have experience with an RUF chapter that isn’t woke, or soft, could you please post something here? Thanks.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
3 months ago

Peter, pedophilia is definitely worse than adultery.

3 months ago

I have a friend who has a significant ministry to muslims in central asia, and by his accounts, dreams are a major way that Christ is preparing/softening the people of the muslim world to receive the message of the gospel. I have heard this too many times now, from people I trust, to discount it…

2 months ago
Reply to  Michael

Well, I believed for a long time that the means God uses to save someone is actual people sharing the gospel.

Zack Freeman
Zack Freeman
3 months ago

I’m the Zack from the last letter. I was at the RUF at Anderson University in South Carolina for 5 years. The campus minister, John Boyte, has worked there for I believe 27 years and also pastors a church in the area which I now attend with my wife and daughter. He is a biblically solid and sound teacher and minister of the Word. I had mostly wondered if there was any official statements from RUF or publications or woke campus ministers in the same vein as what you would be able to clearly point to at Christianity Today or… Read more »

3 months ago
Reply to  Zack Freeman

I was up the road at the Clemson RUF. We were caught up in the PCA racial reconciliation stuff for a while. I would consider my time there to be a good thing, but it was softly awokening

Zack Freeman
Zack Freeman
2 months ago
Reply to  Jim

The PCA seems to be dealing with soft awokening in many different areas, especially parachurch ministries. I’m praying for strong men to rise up and stand firmly against it and seek its eradication in the denomination.

Will Dole
3 months ago

On Judah’s question, and Doug’s recommendation of the DeYoung Storybook –

“The Biggest Story Storybook Bible” is quite good, and I will read a chapter with the kids, and then give them a relevant coloring page to work on while I read the biblical text of whatever story is being summarized. Good storybook bibles can be really helpful teaching tools, and give kids handles for Scripture, much the way a good sermon should as they age.

Mrs L
Mrs L
3 months ago

We have used The Bible History as Told to Our Children by Vreugdenhil, but it may be hard to get copies of. However, his church history for children (more middle school +), is available online I think, and I would highly recommend. It was my introduction to church history, and my eldest once commented ‘Until I read those books, I wasn’t sure that God didn’t just stop working at Acts.’, which astounded me, but it makes sense in the child mind. In the Bible Histories, Vreugdenhil references the scripture to read, then tells a present tense narrative to expand for… Read more »

Jill Smith
Jill Smith
3 months ago

Judah, I found this on Amazon. I think it is out of print but there were second hand copies available when I checked: The KJV Bible for Toddlers: Bible Stories for Toddlers from the Old and New Testaments Paperback – July 1, 2012. The author is Randy Kryszewski. This was the description: “It€™s never too early to share God€™s Word with your kids€”and The KJV Bible for Toddlers is the perfect starting point. This unique Bible storybook combines simple, retold accounts with the beauty of the King James Version, fully illustrated with charming color pictures. Each story starts with a quote… Read more »

Last edited 3 months ago by Jill Smith
Andrew Lohr
Andrew Lohr
3 months ago

Assume kids believe? J C Ryle in Knots Untied, ch on Regeneration, showed me any baptism assumes, until further evidence, that the baby (by extension adult) is regenerate. (I don’t insist on the word “assumes.”) No matter how careful baptists are who they baptize, or PCA/OPC who they commune, they’re gonna make mistakes they discover later. So an element of assuming has to be present. / Sure, let the elders take reasonable care who they assume. Is the baby hearing the gospel from womb on, in family devotions and talk, in church, etc? Then assume s/he believes in Christ; otherwise… Read more »

3 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Lohr

It seems the same assumptions should not be made regarding the baptism of adults vs. children. Of course, a baptized adult may be deceived about their belief….. and time will tell but, a child, at least a small child, cannot make that same declaration of belief due to their “innocent” nature, not fully understanding their sinful condition. They are not part of the decision making process. In any event, I’m not of the persuasion that we ought to baptize small children. I think it brings a dangerous false sense of security. I’ve heard the scriptural arguments and those arguments just… Read more »

3 months ago
Reply to  Rob

Curious. I would say it works the opposite way, for something I declare to be the case, that depends on my subjective experience of “full assurance”, can equally be removed if I should come to feel otherwise. If baptism stands upon my feelings, then it falls on the same basis. That was my experience, at any rate, growing up in a faithful Baptist church.

Jo of quark
Jo of quark
3 months ago
Reply to  Farinata

Per Baptist theology, baptism does not stand and fall upon feelings. It stands upon conviction and assurance (Hebrews 11:1), confession and belief (Romans 10:9), and piercing of the heart, repentence and obedience to the word (Acts 2:38, Acts 26:20b). All this as summarized by Matthew 28:19 (where being a disciple precedes baptism) and 1 Peter 3:21 (where an appeal to God is present at the time of dunking).

3 months ago
Reply to  Jo of quark

Of course, officially, you are correct. And there are objective questions (generally, good works) the observer can ask to begin to ascertain whether or not to accept Murphy as a Christian? But look at how Rob, to whom I responded, described the matter: “Let the child come to full assurance.” That is a subjective question: it means, “let us make sure the child is really sure.” Look at your own criteria: belief, piercing of the heart, repentance – none of those are readily visible to an outside observer. We have to take the prospective Christian at his word. Which makes… Read more »

Jo of quark
Jo of quark
3 months ago
Reply to  Farinata

No. Upon Murphy’s profession. Read Hebrews 1. What is faith? Is it not in part assurance? So is assurance “subjective?” Not according to Hebrews 12:2. Because assurance rests upon the objective, completed, faithful, persevering work of Christ. If you wish to continue to assert that assurance is “subjective,” then idk what point you wish to make. Certainly it’s not a point in favor of paedobaptism since the same problem would arrise in that instance. The paedobaptist position simply removes the assurance by one degree. The child is baptized based on the profession of faith of his parents. Again, the elders… Read more »

Jo of quark
Jo of quark
3 months ago
Reply to  Farinata

I’ve thought about what you’ve written. Perhaps by, “I would say it works the opposite way” you meant something like this: ‘Baptism does not rest on assurance but assurance rests on baptism.’ If so, then that would be consistent with saying that the signs that God gives are the ground for our assurance – and I do believe that is a Biblical way of looking at it. However, that is only consistent if you have the thing that the sign represents – namely the faith that makes you ‘in Christ.’ “Look to your baptism” is a common word of comfort… Read more »

3 months ago

For Judah, pertaining to his comments and question about Bible storybooks for children: Follow Me: Bible Stories for Young Children by Liesbeth van Binsbergen is very good. And it is currently on sale on the Reformation Heritage Books website. https://www.heritagebooks.org/products/follow-me-bible-stories-for-young-children-van-binsbergen.html Reviews of it can be found on Amazon. It is possible to communicate truth about God and to convey the meat and meaning of incidents in Scripture without using a direct quote from the Bible. If we are consciously living before His face and loving Him and His Word, we’re going to be talking about the Lord all the time… Read more »

Jo of quark
Jo of quark
3 months ago

SJW may have been referring to this? https://tobyjsumpter.com/the-sexual-revolution/

2 months ago
Reply to  Jo of quark

Thanks for your excellent research! I had remembered running across a similar account in a podcast and in my article reading, but I could not recall the original source. I will definitely need to save this article and its cited source of the account of the feminist gathering (https://www.frontpagemag.com/marxist-feminisms-ruined-lives-mallory-millett/) for future reference.

Last edited 2 months ago by Radio