Witnesses say that just before he was seen to fly skyward without a rocket pack, he spread out his arms, and then up he went, shouting ‘buy my giant book which is very much like all my other less giant books or the wrath of God will descend onto your unrighteous heads… sinners…’
Witness stories diverge at this point but many swear that as he disappeared out of sight through a giant hole in the ceiling created by the hurling of his new book through it that he was received either by Chuck Norris or Ryan Seacrest.
He promised to return. Oh that we will all still be alive when he does… Meanwhile, many will come in his name, proclaiming his gospel and urging souls to follow Tom’s teachings (also known as TT). If you want to get to heaven, and spend eternity with Tom, you have to embrace TT.
Erm… “That very hour the word was fulfilled concerning Nebuchadnezzar; he was driven from men and ate grass like oxen; his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair had grown like eagles’ feathers and his nails like birds’ claws.” (Dan. 4:33).
Wouldn’t it be nice if people knew Scripture? Before they blathered about it? So I wouldn’t have to be all
No, it isn’t. God is eternal. Music isn’t eternal. Music is temporal. And if you had any theological training you’d understand that.
Who wants any of that bothersome ‘you shall be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect’ stuff getting in the way, right precious?
This is exactly what’s wrong with so much that calls itself Christian these days. The exaltation of personal desire and the abrogation of even the clearest and simplest Scriptural adjuration.
Once again Peter Leithart has shown himself to be more interested in catchy phrases than facts. Chronicles begins with Adam and in no way can Adam be described as a ‘Royal tribe’.
Leithart loves playing fast and loose with scripture just like he does history.
UPDATE: and then this happened
I’ll give him an A for dodge effort but that isn’t what his tweet said. Is it.
Maybe ‘preach the Gospel’ really should top the list instead of coming in as an afterthought…
Apparently the angels aren’t very familiar with scripture.
So, to help them out-
- … their heart contrives evil from their infancy (Gen. 8:21 NJB)
- … Sin is the oracle of the wicked in the depths of his heart; there is no fear of God before his eyes. (Ps. 36:1 NJB)
- … He hankers after ashes, his deluded heart has led him astray; he will not save himself, he will not think, ‘What I have in my hand is nothing but a lie!’ (Isa. 44:20 NJB)
- … ‘The heart is more devious than any other thing, and is depraved; who can pierce its secrets? (Jer. 17:9 NJB)
- … For from the heart come evil intentions: murder, adultery, fornication, theft, perjury, slander. (Matt. 15:19 NJB)
Maybe some of the angels ought to read scripture instead of draw.
Ok, so many problems here:
First, what does ‘useful’ even mean here?
Second, ‘So’? How on earth does the second absurd claim flow from the first? Behold, what leaps…
Third, theology is hardly useless. Not only is it formational, but by that very fact it is not only useful but essential. Someone needs to read Brunner’s Theology vol. 1 before he says something utterly unhinged.
Satan is testing me sore this afternoon by slathering my timeline with some really unspeakably inaccurate theological tweetings. Why, Satan? What have I done to you today? Why must you use twitter to make me sigh?
The sigh inducing claim:
In his Preface to the Book of Psalms, Calvin says: ‘People circulate ridiculous rumours respecting my treasures, my great power, and my wealthy sort of life. But if a man satisfies himself with such simple fare and such common clothing, and does not require more moderation in the humblest than he himself exercises, how can it be said that he is a spendthrift and fond of self-display? My death will prove what they would not believe in my life’ (Me non esse pecuniosum, si vivus quibusdam non persuadeo, mors tandem ostendet).
His salary, when he occupied the chief ecclesiastical position in Geneva as preacher in the cathedral and minister of its congregation, never exceeded about £160 in our money, and he was provided with a house and garden.*
[Calvin’s] work as pastor and professor was never lucrative. He was indeed so pressed by poverty, as his letters to Farel show, that more than once he had to sell his books. His actual salary was a florin a week (about five francs and a half). It was therefore necessary for him to take boarders. But as these pensioners were themselves poor students, Calvin’s income was not thereby greatly increased.*
Aside from those bitlets there are loads of historical evidence in the literature about Calvin’s simplicity of life and poverty. Osteen of Geneva my ____________.
*C. H. Irwin, John Calvin: The Man and His Work (Bellingham, WA: The Religious Tract Society, 1909).
And the sad thing is, they don’t even know how wrong this is or why.
It isn’t surprising that the heretic Driscoll is involved though.
The old heresies just keep cropping up because no one reads historical theology anymore.
Someone has no clue as to the history of the Reformation. Or the Church.
No, don’t worship the Bible.
When you do, you end up with absurd misrepresentations of the text- as here- where the citation from Jeremiah actually means that the people ought to LEAVE the Temple and NOT worship because they are corrupt…
Does Moltmann just make stuff up as he goes so it will fit on a bumper sticker? Because this is just absurd. It lacks scriptural foundation, it makes no sense, and it obliterates any sense of free will. In Moltmann’s disturbed view, you have no choice at all. God will force himself on you whether you like it or not.
Tune in next week when Molty says ‘Sacrifice is meaningless and God just really waved a magic wand and declared every person righteous.’
That awkward moment when you write a book about Yahweh as healer and don’t realize that ‘Jehovah’ is a word that never occurs anywhere in the Hebrew Bible and, in fact, is a total fiction, concocted in the minds of persons who knew less Hebrew than Strong’s concordance. Sure, you can’t tell a book by its cover- but you can learn a lot about what its author knows, or doesn’t know, by the title.