Author: Uri Brito

Posted on

Memo to Robert F. Kennedy

For those who have lately followed politics, you realize that liberals are in a great dilemma. They need to convince the nation that they are a religious people. Wow, what a task! But in order to do so they will have to re-write the Bible. Oh, let me give you a proof of this. Sandlin deals masterfully with exposing one of the greatest liberals in America after John Kerry.


By Andrew Sandlin
Thursday night, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. was on Bill O’Reilly’s FOX News “Factor.” In light of the Democrats’ very public and very painful anxiety that they are losing the “values” debate with the American public, we should not be surprised that they’ve ramped up their Bible reading and Jesus-quoting to stay apace with the more Christianized Republicans.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., whose flaming political liberalism would make Howard Dean blush, is Exhibit A.

O’Reilly was pointing out that Kennedy’s uncle (President John) and father (Attorney General) adopted policies quite consistent with the present policies of George W. Bush that Kennedy, Jr. (nephew and son) so loudly excoriates: a preemptive strike (Cuba), big tax cuts, frequently invoking God’s name in speeches, and employing the Justice Department to aggressively uproot domestic crime.

Kennedy, Jr. responded not by defending his uncle and father but by quoting the Bible and church history. Namely:

Jesus defended those persecuted for their sexual practices (the woman taken in adultery); ergo, Christians should defend homosexuals today persecuted in being forbidden marriage.

Jesus said, “Judge not that you be not judged”; ergo, Christians shouldn’t judge the homosexual lifestyle.

The Pilgrims escaped religious persecution to come to the United States; ergo, Americans should be sympathetic with the homosexuals persecuted by eleven states that have refused to allow them to marry.

When flaming secularists start invoking Jesus and quoting the Bible, you know that orthodox Christianity is making cultural headway. But more to the point:

Jesus was quite willing for the woman taken in adultery to suffer the consequences that God’s law imposed (Jn. 8:7). However, there were insufficient witnesses who were without sin, i. e., the sin of which they were accusing her. Jesus forgave the adulteress and warned her not to sin again. This has nothing whatever to do with identifying as persecution the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Jesus warned us that if we judge, we would be judged by the same criteria (Mt. 7:1-2). He did not suggest that we are forbidden to judge, but rather that we are to judge righteously (Jn. 7:24). Jesus spent plenty of time “judging” people (Mt. 23!). And in affirming every jot and tittle of the Mosaic law (Mt. 5:17-18), he implicitly judged homosexuality to be a grievous sin (Lev. 18:22).

Now to the Pilgrims. They indeed came these shores to escape religious persecution. They were English separatists who broke with the Puritans, who, the Pilgrims believed, did not follow consistently the principles of Biblical Reformation. They were persecuted because they refused to be a part of the established church. To equate the persecution they endured at the hands of the ecclesial establishment with homosexuals’ inability to legally redefine (i. e., eviscerate) the meaning of marriage is not so much monstrous as laughable.

But we cannot expect Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to know any of this. He is a self-respecting secularist.

Ergo, he should quit quoting the Bible and church history.

Posted on

The Last Disciple vs. The Left Behind

Someone has just sent me an interesting article on the current debate over the “eschatological novels.” After nine years of amazing success, The Left Behind Series, which has sold over 42 million copies, has found competition in the market. The same publisher that put out Tim Lahaye’s best-sellers is now putting out an alternative novel that runs completely against Tim Lahaye’s pre-tribulational stance. This new series is called The Last Disciple by Hank Hanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer.

This new series espouses the idea that John’s letter was written before the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Contrary to Lahaye’s assertion that the book of Revelation was written in 95 AD, and therefore is entirely futuristic in nature, Brouwer and Hanegraaff assert that Revelation was written for a specific generation that endured the torment of persecution in the 1st century church.

Novels can be a very helpful source in understanding not only eschatology, but an ideology. There was nothing inherently wrong with Tim Lahaye’s idea to publicize his views through novels, but it is inconsistent for Lahaye to criticize someone else for doing the same thing.

If you would like further information about Dispensationalism or Partial-preterism (the position espoused in The Last Disciple) please e-mail me at: apologus@hotmail.com for links and articles on these topics.

Posted on

What is a Worldview?

Worldview thinking seems to be almost exclusively a task of the intellectual elite, however, the truth is, that all of us have a worldview whether we know it or not. Worldview thinking is rare today because very few in the pews are willing to deal with it. In fact, to think to establish a Biblical worldview we must learn to understand what it is.

Here is a simple definition for all of us as we seek to establish a coherent thinking that submits completely to the Lordship of Christ. My definition may have variations, but I find it helpful nevertheless:

A worldview is a set of glasses that everyone has from the time a person is born. As a person grows in age and in knowledge a person’s focus becomes narrower, not that he limits his ideas, but that all the ideas and concepts in his life (which he has been bombarded with in school, work, family gatherings etc.) are put together into a coherent system. Hence, he now sees the world from a selective pair of glasses, and everything he sees he will be able to determine whether it is good or bad, useful or not useful and so on.

Of course, the main reason many people do not have a coherent worldview is because there are many difficulties that hinder God’s people from thinking about it.

*Lack of clarity in academia and society, Example: I think this but you think that.

*People have not learned how to think critically, but rather accept all things without questioning authorities.

*Churches bore people with messages, which they have all heard.

*People don’t consider the context or environment in which they live.

*People are bound to only the New Testament and treat the Old as a story book with no relevance to contemporary life.

*People have lost their joy in the beauty of Creation, redemption etc.

It is my contention that unless we learn to deal with these issues first we will not even begin to think about thinking Biblically.

Posted on

James White versus Dave Hunt

Many of us have probably accompanied James White in the last few years as he has been an able defender of the Doctrines of Grace. Though I have strong disagreements with James (doc) on issues of ecclesiology, sacraments and probably several other issues; however, I am in strong agreement with his exegesis of Scriptures when defending Calvinism. Once again today he and Dave Hunt debated on the topic of Calvinism. It is unfortunate that the moderator was so unfair and spent the first three minutes giving a silly, unlikely and foolish illustrations in order to prove how Calvinists prefer to worhsip Calvin than Jesus. Oh, by the way, if you ever find one of these guys that worship Calvin more than Jesus please let me know.

I don’t want to give a summary of the debate since I still have not heard all of it. However, I think Arminianism is summarized by Dave Hunt’s summation of his position. Here is the direct quote:

Is God sovereign? Of course He is sovereign!  Was He sovereign when Satan sinned/rebelled? When Adam and Eve rebelled? Of course! The fact that God is sovereign does not mean that everything he desires is going to happen.

Suddenly, I think I have been misled on the definition of sovereignty… or have I?

Posted on

5 minutes after Jeopardy…Ken Jennings finally loses

The rumors were true! After winning over 2.5 million dollars, Ken Jennings finally lost. I don’t remember exactly the question, but the magic answer was H&R Block. With 74 victories, this makes Jennings the greatest winner in the history of televised game shows. As Alex said in the end of the show, ” all good things must come to an end.” Tomorrow morning ABC will air an interview with Jennings on “Good Morning America.”
For those of you interested here is a paragraph from the blog page that leaked the info:

Set your TiVos and VCRs…it looks like Ken Jennings will finally lose on Jeopardy on Tuesday, November 30. His 72nd appearance aired yesterday (he won another $50,000), the 73rd will be today, and his final win will come on Monday. As reported here back in September, Jennings loses his 75th game after winning $2.5 million. No one from the show has confirmed this, so it may be wrong**, but we’ll find out on Tuesday. (If it ends up being wrong, I will commit seppuku by falling on my TiVo remote for my role in misleading everyone.)

** Just to be more specific, I have recently received confirmation from a very reliable source that Ken has indeed lost, but that source didn’t confirm (or deny) the specific timing.”

Posted on

4 quick updates

#1 For anyone interested in a great movie to rent in the next few weeks you will be pleased to watch: Man on Fire. Undoubtedly, this has made my top 10 list. Denzel Washington takes on Mexico City’s corrupt police in a thriller that will blow you away. This is a must!
#2 James White will be debating Dave Hunt in a radio program this Wednesday. The topic will be Calvinism… I am sure you guessed that one. Check Dr. White’s homepage for information.
#3 With three rounds left to go in the Brazilian Soccer League, things are getting less clear. With Atletico PR (#1) and Santos’ (#2) unfortunate ties yesterday, Sao Paulo (#3) benefited tremendously by defeating Internacional 2 x 1 on Saturday. Here are the top four with three games left to play:
1) Atletico PR – 82 points
2) Santos – 80 points
3) Sao Paulo – 78 points
4) Sao Caetano – 77 points
Next round will be played this coming weekend.
#4 Are you looking for a good introduction to Systematic Theology that kinda runs against the flow? See Professor John Frame’s first classic : The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God. This classic reflects a growing trend in Reformed circles to see theology as perspectival. Frame, of course, has pioneered this camp bringing a vast richness to Reformed Theology in the last 10 years. Check bestbookbuys.com for best deals

Posted on

Happy Thanksgiving!

I will be gone for the next few days, so there may not be any blogging. Anyway, I thought James White’ s posting of George Washington’s Yhanksgiving proclamation was appropriate, so here it is for those who have not read this great founder:
George Washington’s 1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:

“Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted’ for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have show kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d day of October, A.D. 1789.

(signed) G. Washington

Posted on

America’s Neo-Gospel by David Alan Black

As the church struggle in the United States continues unabated, the witness of Bible-believing Christians to the necessity of biblical law and constitutional government remains alive and well. Their message that Americans – “Christian” Americans included – need conversion will continue to be heralded. American Christians might not think of themselves as needing conversion, but this is precisely the situation in which the church in the United States finds itself.

It is not easy to challenge the status quo in the manner adopted by some of these individuals. They are compelled, however, to proclaim the radical implications of the kingdom of God for society. This is nothing new. Church history is replete with instances where prophetic movements have arisen to challenge both the church and society in ways similar to that being done today. 

Posted on

Sabbath Sermon: Mark 7

This morning at St. Paul’s Presbyterian, Rev. Mike Malone continued his series on Mark 7. Today he suggested that we look at Fallujah as a metaphor for our internal conflicts. We  shift our attention to our own lives and realize that we are always inclined to inflict pain on others. Just as the internal conflicts in Fallujah, we have our internal conflicts as well.
The question asked is, “Does change come from the outside in or inside out?” According to Mike Malone the gospel of Mark chapter 7 serves as a mirror to our lives. In verses 1-8 it starts at the surface of hypocrisy. It exposes the Distortion of the Law. The Pharisees sought moral reform in the nation. They wanted to apply the law. They sought to emulate the practices of the holy men in the Old Covenant. At first it began as a noble goal, but soon they began to abuse the law of God by redefining the law by imposing their own interpretation. Their purpose was to use their “version” of the law to exalt their lifestyle and further exalt themselves.

In verses 9-13, there is a Disregard for the Law leading to disobedience. The Scribes and Pharisees betrayed the commands of God for their own tradition. Finally, in verses 14-23 there is a Depth of the Corruption of their own hearts. The application of this penetrating text is that the defilement is in the heart; it is internal. It is what comes out that defiles the heart.

There are at least 2 measures to be taken in this text that directly applies. First, we must stare at Mark 7 right in the face. We must face the truth about our needs. We are desperate beings who are constantly in need of grace and mercy. Our hearts are troubled. Secondly, we must recognize that only Jesus can heal us. We are told to seek Jesus as the only One who can deal with our sins. We heal this virus by relentless confession and consistent trust in Christ.

Posted on

Why I am an Augustinian

In Alister McGrath’s Historical Theology there is an entire section on the Donatist vs. Augustine controversy. Let me explain the issues that caused this controversy in the early church. One of the great dilemmas for the early church was how to deal with those Christians who had lapsed during persecution, that is, those who gave in and bought the libellus or who just simply offered sacrifices to idols in order to keep their lives. The Donatists believed that the Church was a body of saints within which sinners had no place. They argued that the “traditores” (lapsed) had to be excluded from the Church. This began the Donatist Controversy into which Augustine poured so much effort. Augustine responded by saying that the church was a mixed body with both sinners and saints. This initial concept of a mixed Church would be incorporated centuries later by the Westminster Divines who brought about the distinction between the Visible and Invisible Church.

According to Augustine, the Church was no place for saints alone and was not established by saints alone. It was made by all who partook of the Sacraments. Augustine’s idea of the Lord’ Supper led to even more division with the Donatists who believed in “ex opere operantis” which teaches that the validity of the Sacraments are based on the integrity of those who administer it. Whereas for Augustine “ex opere operato” was a more accurate approach to the Sacraments since the validity of bread and wine does not depend on the one administering them, but depends on the One who bestows the grace to the elements. This reveals a stark contrast between both views spoused in this controversy. The Donatists in the tradition of Pelagianism, believed that Christianity is a religion of autonomy where man in and of himself can accomplish his salvation outside of any intervention by God. Augustine, of course, believed that man could not do anything without God’s grace (John 15:5).

My commitment to Augustinianism is the commitment of the Reformers who stood entirely with the necessity of grace in all of human existence, in life and in death.