Casting Pearls, or When Argument is Pointless – Part 2


When is it pointless to engage someone in argument or debate?

A lot of times, it’s difficult to tell the difference between someone who has legitimate objections to the faith and someone who’s simply throwing up a smokescreen. This is especially difficult on the internet. How do we know when to make the effort and when to ignore them?

Well, first we need to recognize that there are some folks to whom we should not make any effort. Jesus specifically commanded us:

“Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”

– Matthew 7:6

In this passages, He singles out two classes of reprobates: dogs and swine.

In our previous post, we discussed the attributes of dogs. Briefly, Jesus was refering to the meat offered as holy sacrifice in this passage and that dogs don’t care whether their meat comes from the altar or the garbage can. They make no difference between the holy and the profane. We noted that this is most often applicable to those who see God’s revealed Word as the flawed work of man, or those who think God’s Word must be translated according to man’s current word on the matter [without regard to his antiBiblical biases on the subject]. In short, the Bible is not their ultimate authority, though they may give lipservice to it. In regards to science, they do not ascribe to Sola Scriptura [“by Scripture alone”] but rather to Scriptura sub scientia [“Scripture under science”]. They do not say, “Let God be true and every man a liar.” They say, “Let the God’s Word be re-interpreted to suit the current opinion of man, no matter what sort of logical gymnastics and Scriptorture are required to accomplish the feat; Let no man be called a liar lest Christianity be seen as peculiar!”  They do not believe that God meant what He said. He must have meant something else if science that seeks to exclude Him from all consideration makes any counter-claim.

Think that through. They really suppose that it comes down to one person’s interpretation over another. When the current consensus of science [a largely godless lot if statistics are to be taken into account] disputes the Scripture, they suppose we must listen to men who largely reject God, the supernatural and revelation at all costs. So the interpretation of the Bible these well-meaning fools trust is the interpretation of men who suppose the Bible is all bunk to begin with!

Of prime importance to these men [and I am speaking of teachers and clergy more specifically here] is that Christianity not be seen as out-of-step with the wisdom of this world. The enemies of the Church are, of course, perfectly willing to use these willing patsies to undermine the tradition and authority of the Church. For the praise of and affirmation of men, these compromisers strain at the gant of a historical Creation Week and a world-wide Flood in the days of Noah, but swallow the camel of the Resurrection, Virgin Birth, fulfillment of Messianic prophecy, deity and miracles of Christ which these godless men also dispute!

Let me give you an example of how they help to undermine Christendom:

Most of my readers will know how I feel about Dr Michael Zimmerman’s Clergy letter Project. To date, over 12,500 clergy have signed a letter affirming evolution is true while the first several chapters of Genesis are “teaching stories” like Aesop’s fables. The letter goes on to state that religion and science are different, but complementary truths. It’s exactly the sort of apologetic public relations project that Biblical compromisers seek out to demonstrate how in touch with the wisdom of this age they are. Now, the subtext of the Clergy letter is that God and evolution can co-exist and Zimmerman gratuitously pats his compromising signators on the head for being so broad-minded in the face of a segament of Christendom that has a deplorably narrow view of Genesis. Zimmerman misses the irony that God sees the terms broad and narrow in a different light:

“Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.” Matthew 7:13, Compare to Luke 13:24

Now if you accuse atheist Dr Michael Zimmerman of duping these men, he will deny it. He will note that they signed the Letter of their own request. But he has duped them. Not into signing it. They signed it eagerly and willingly to show they were not out-of-step with the wisdom of this age. But Zimmerman did dupe them.

Remember: the subtext is that God and evolution can get along just fine. Would these clergy teach children that God exists? Yes. Would the majority of them preach from the pulpit that God created by evolution? Probably. How else could a Creator God and evolution both be true? [And the Clergy letter does affirm a “Creator.”]

Yet in their eagerness to please men, these foolish clergy signed away their birthright for a pottage! How so? At the end of Zimmerman’s damnable Letter, they affirm that evolution be taught in classrooms as a “core component of human knowledge” and specifically rebukes the teaching of evolution as one theory among others: so children are to be exclusively taught evolution as a core truth in classrooms. But how is evolution taught in USAmerican classrooms? Do public schools teach that a Creator God could have used evolution? Um, no. They teach that everything came about without the need for a Creator. They teach a completely naturalistic history of life and the universe. What they teach in indistinguishable from atheism or agnosticism on a practical level.

The foolish clergy who added their names to the Letter founded by atheist Dr Michael Zimmerman, who admits he cannot get his head around why anyone would ever believe in a God, affirm that God and evolution can co-exist but then affirm that our children should never, ever, ever be taught this [except perhaps on some occasional Sunday in church]. And Zimmerman uses the Letter as a weapon to convince school boards that God and evolution can co-exist… see how many clergy agree! Now let’s teach evolution in a godless fashion and claim the Constitution [which also mentions a Creator] mandates that in the science classroom. He’s duped them all to help him further his own atheist, humanist agenda, NOT to further the kingdom fo heaven!

The Bible commands us to “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” [Proverbs 22:6] It also warns that it would be better for a millstone to be tied about our neck and to be cast into the sea than to make one of these little ones stumble [Luke 17:2], yet evolution as taught in public schools causes an inexcusable number of kids to reject religious truth wholesale!

Have they not learned from Europe, where clergy compromised the clear teaching of God’s Word in Genesis for long ages and evolution? Look at the spiritual wasteland it has become! How few Christians reside there! How many churches are abandoned or nearly empty! This is the path these well-meaning fools would have us travel down here in America.

Recognizing their stance towards God’s revealed Word [or the traditional interpretation of it as expressed by Christ and the NT authors, no less] as imperfect is key to recognizing the futility of engaging them. Can two walk together except they be agreed? But do not fall for the ploy of laying down your Sword, of engaging them without the Word. Do not go into that fight unarmed! Remember: It’s not your Message, so deliver it as the Master has delivered it to you, completely and without apology. If they reject the veracity of His Word, we have done our job. Only one thing remains to our account: to rebuke these false teachers openly!

I think we’ve become too polite about this subject. We’ve allowed a cancerous teaching that undermines the foundational basis of the Gospel – and a different Gospel altogether I suspect – to coexist with us in the Church. What has Christ to do with Belial? What has truth to do with error?

No man can have two masters [authorities] in his life.

I set out to discuss how we should deal with dogs. It didn’t turn out as I expected, but it resonates with what we know from experience. What comes naturally when a dog approaches the holy? You rebuke it. You drive it away. Yes, that sounds harsh, but I would not have error and compromise taught from our pulpits and Sunday school classrooms when our children’s eternity is at stake!

I shall end by noting that there is hope for the dog after all. I freely admit that when I came back to the fold, after leaving it largely because I accepted evolution as taught in public schools, I supposed God could have used evolution. The Holy Spirit guided me into truth and I no longer hold to that error. But for those who willingly rebel against God’s revelation for the affirmation of men, may God rebuke them [Titus 1:10-16] before its too late. And certainly before they lead still more astray!

Luke 17:3 commands us to rebuke a brother who sins, but forgive him and restore him if he repents of his sin. 

In the next part of our discussion, we will identify the swine of Matthew 7:6.

-Rev Tony Breeden

See also Part One and Part Three of this study.

Advertisements

4 Comments Add yours

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s