tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post2265692641711998427..comments2023-10-20T09:34:02.961-04:00Comments on Samaritan XP: The boy who is telling his friends about Jesus and how Jack Chick has made a mess of itKen Symeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-6171237414884527912010-10-28T10:40:48.991-04:002010-10-28T10:40:48.991-04:00Just real quick and I must end this here:
1. If ...Just real quick and I must end this here: <br /><br />1. If you believe God He will show you the truth, not in the Greek, but in English in your case (...trusting your main language is English). cf. Psm 12:6-7: God will preserve His Word to all generations. BTW, you do not have the original Greek available to you, and schools do not teach that Greek anymore. So, you might as well trust God's one English translation promised to us in Psm's 12. <br /><br />2. Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back, your blog is not very popular or influential with it's few visitors. Believe me; I am not in danger losing any business for this; God is in control here. The people that do support our ministry would agree with God's TRUE Word anyhow.<br /><br />3. Let's hypothetically take for a second that Jude 22-23 is talking about saved people, ie. "having the Spirit", God STILL encouraged fear when needed. Would He then not encourage fear for the lost? Again, cf. Mark 9 for the answer.<br /><br />4. I do love you, but, like Jesus, I hate even the garment spotted by the flesh. cf. Jude 23<br /><br />5. Oh, I never once did say you weren't saved but, though you have brought it up so many times!<br /><br />You say you are passionate, and you are, but could you have been deceived by someone? Maybe blinded by the pride of some "higher" education? Someday we will both know the complete truth when the crowds gather around the throne that were saved because someone did not stop using this Bible method of preaching in Jude; "some by compassion (ie. Samaritan woman at the well; Nicodemus; et al.) and some by fear (the audience in Mark 9 and anyone else that ever said, ‘I don't want to go to Hell!’)" The WHOLE Bible in context, pls!<br /><br />Gotta go now. Thank you for being fair about posting my comments and giving your spirited replies, although we may not agree that the method of Chick’s tracts is not wrong. <br /><br />Oh, Andy? Seems you are more influenced by Hollywood than even the Bible. You can't twist the Bible to mean what you want, or, in your case, to what you want it NOT to mean. Sorry, there is a Hell, which will be cast into the lake of fire, both of which will burn eternally.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02035566267183933302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-33836657675340242442010-10-28T09:30:32.317-04:002010-10-28T09:30:32.317-04:00(part 2)
ctwpub, the problem with Jack Chick
is s...(part 2)<br /><br />ctwpub, the problem with Jack Chick<br />is simply this: Jesus never witnesses to someone in the way that Chick does. You have yet to show me one passage of Scripture where Jesus in sharing the good news with someone tries to scare them with hell unless they accept him. That is the basic approach used in Chick tracts, but it is not the approach of Jesus. The gospels of the NT would read very differently if Jesus had told the Samaritan woman, Nicodemus, Matthew and Zaccheus that they were bound for hell unless they accepted him. People would view Jesus as a tyrant and bully, rather than as a compassionate Saviour and Lord.<br /><br />You condemn me for choosing Jesus over Jack Chick! And you condemn me for reading some Bible other than the King James which was translated into English over 400 years ago -- the other Bible I read when I studied the verses from Jude you asked me to read was the Greek New Testament. I am reading the Greek words written by Jude and you accuse me of making things up. No, it's clear that Jude is addressing believers not unbelievers -- I know that's hard because when you cut out that one little phrase it sounded good, but you must be fair with Holy Scripture and at least read it sentence by sentence. Unless you have studied Elizbethan era English, you may be finding the language of the King James Bible to be too challenging to give you a clear message. The "And" which occurs at the beginning of Jude 22 & 23 is there to show that these verses are continuations of the idea started in the sentence of verses 20-21. I guess I am saying that if you properly understand Elizabethan English, the KJV is just as clear as the Greek words written by Jude -- believers should attempt to save other believers from the fire of judgment when they begin to go after false teaching.<br /><br />Instead, you choose to condemn me and warn me of the judgment to come on me for leading my readers astray like Andy. I'm afraid you've given some of my readers a good chuckle at that idea, ctwpub. Those who know Andy and who know me wouldn't for a moment think that I have led Andy astray -- a man who is my elder and man of strong convictions.<br /><br />You have tried hard to defend Jack Chick. I'm sorry to disappoint you but I will not repent for choosing Jesus' approach to witnessing over and against Jack Chick tracts.<br /><br />Sorry if it hurts your business of selling these things, but I would recommend against people buying these Jack Chick tracts which are filled with fear, violence, threats and content inappropriate for children. The gospel as Jesus shared it is about hope, life change, becoming fully alive and living to make a difference to others.<br /><br />If you'd read other posts at my blog, you might have seen that I'm passionate about sharing the Christian faith and believe that we must do better at it. See, for example, my post <a href="http://samaritanxp.blogspot.com/2008/10/bridge-to-nowhere.html" rel="nofollow">The Bridge to Nowhere</a>.Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-35572997810347692952010-10-28T09:29:35.208-04:002010-10-28T09:29:35.208-04:00ctwpub,
I've just checked and the KJV does ad...ctwpub,<br /><br />I've just checked and the KJV does advise us to <i>walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,<br /> With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;<br /> Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.<br /> There is one...One Lord, one faith... </i> (Eph 4:1-5)<br /><br />You have been speaking <i>about</i> Jesus and yet you do not sound like him. Once again, you accuse me of not being a Christian. Why? Because I refused to accept the ideas from Jack Chick which you hold in higher esteem than the Scriptures themselves? That's incredible!<br /><br />Please try to see the risk of this position you are taking. It is not me that you are at odds with, it is Jesus. In his longest recorded speech of sharing the gospel with someone, Jesus does not tell the Samaritan woman that she is going to hell. He does not try to scare her with a message of hell so that she will believe (John 4). Instead her offers her living water. This woman comes to believe filled with hope, having experienced acceptance and love. She tells everyone in her town about Jesus! <br /><br />Now if Jesus had been more like Jack Chick, the message to this woman would've been radically different. Jesus would have told her that she was a sinner on her way to hell. He would have tried to scare her with the heat of the flames. And then warned her that the only way out of hell was by believing in him.<br /><br />While you may choose Jack Chick, I choose the Jesus of John 4. I choose the Jesus who calls Nicodemus to be born again, rather than trying to scare him with threats of hell (John 3). Jack Chick might have told Matthew and Zaccheus about those really hot places in hell for traitorous tax collectors like them, but I choose the Jesus who looks at them with compassion and invites them to follow him. (to be continued)Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-29635569626948662572010-10-27T21:34:47.635-04:002010-10-27T21:34:47.635-04:00ctwpub
In Mark 9:43, 45), that you have mentioned...ctwpub<br /><br />In Mark 9:43, 45), that you have mentioned is taken by some and as yourself to mean that the fires of hell will continue throughout all eternity. Another text shows that such an interpretation is erroneous, for the fire in Jerusalem lighted by the Chaldeans was not quenched (Jer. 17:27), though it died out when the work of devastation was accomplished.<br /><br />The same is true in Jude verse 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.<br /><br />Are the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha still burning today in eternal fire? We both know they are not, they burned until they were consumed and there was nothing left to burn.<br /><br />“Fire” is the means by which punishment for sin is inflicted (Matt. 18:8; 25:41). That “fire” is “everlasting,” does not signify that it is of endless duration. This is clear from Jude 7. Elsewhere, the Scriptures refer to the fires of the last day as “unquenchable” (Matt. 3:12), meaning that they will not be extinguished until they have burned up the last vestiges of sin and sinners.<br /><br />You remind me of Tom Cruise in the movie "A Few Good Men" when Jack Nicholson tells him "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH."Andynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-87329022381328949392010-10-26T16:33:22.169-04:002010-10-26T16:33:22.169-04:00So, you believe that these disciples would go to h...So, you believe that these disciples would go to hell if they didn't radically deal with their sin? Jesus IS talking to the unsaved, because the saved will never have to fear the fires in Hell.<br /><br />Sorry, Ken. I guess we're just talking about two different Jesus's. Mine, (found in the KJV, BTW) warned people about Hell, taught a narrow minded "do as I say" no-compromise gospel, in which you can be saved from Hell's fire for eternity. Yours comes from some man-made book (see the copyright to find out whom) and is an open-minded, do what you want to do, come-as-you-are,leave-as-you-came, compromising, neo-evangelical, respector of persons that consequently leaves wiggle room for lies and sin. It's not the one that died on the cross for you, yet you serve him.<br /><br />You are left to make things up, because you don't want to admit the truth. And, until you repent, you are leading children like Andy, and unsaved people that read your blog astray. God's Word has alot to say about those kind and millstones, and sea-depths. If this isn't you, then you have nothing to be worried about. If this is, you better do what you know to do.<br /><br />Oh, Andy? Mark 9:43-48, esp. "...where the fire is not quenched..." x3Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02035566267183933302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-80274608173729159262010-10-26T12:45:35.224-04:002010-10-26T12:45:35.224-04:00ctwpub, part 3,
Likewise, Mark 9:43-48 is spoken ...ctwpub, part 3,<br /><br />Likewise, Mark 9:43-48 is spoken to followers of Jesus, not to nonbelievers. Yes, Jesus warns of hellfire in this passage. He's telling his followers they must deal radically with sin in their lives. He warns them, "If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out." Serious stuff! Jesus uses hyperbole to make the point that we must deal radically with sin. It will affect us to cut sin out of our lives, but this is better than the alternative of holding onto our sin and finding ourselves in hell for eternity. So Jesus is clearly speaking to his followers. They've just been arguing about who's the greatest disciple and they were jealous about someone else acting in Jesus' name. Jesus tells them (and us), we need to change. Sin must be routed out of our lives.<br /><br />It seems to me that Jesus quite often emphasizes the seriousness of his message to believers by warning them of hellfire. If we have been saved from hell, why would be go on acting like those destined for hell? That is something we should fear.<br /><br />You see, though, this is backing up my point. The teaching about hell is directed toward believers NOT nonbelievers. When Jesus goes about witnessing to a nonbeliever, it is not hell that he talks about --again, see his encounter with the Samaritan woman (John 4) or his calling of Matthew (Matt 9:9-13) or his message to the rich young ruler (Matt 19:16-30). Jesus does not witness to nonbelievers by telling them they are going to hell, instead he gives them positive reasons to believe (living water, eternal life, purpose, freedom).<br /><br />Yes, Jesus preaches about hell, usually warning his followers that they must get serious about their discipleship.<br /><br />ctwpub, I hope that helps you understand where I'm coming from. I won't be buying any of your Jack Chick tracts because I think it's more important to go about doing Jesus' work in the same Jesus did it. I want to come alongside the Samaritan woman, the tax collector and the wealthy person, the way Jesus did rather than armed with a Chick tract.Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-8483672440503154802010-10-26T12:44:26.148-04:002010-10-26T12:44:26.148-04:00Hi ctwpub, part 2,
You said, I just want to hear ...Hi ctwpub, part 2,<br /><br />You said, <i>I just want to hear you to admit the truth after checking your opinion against the Bible.... your main point seems to be that Jesus did not preach Hellfire and brimstone. If you believe that, you are not reading your Bible; cf. Jude 23; Mark 9:43-48.</i><br /><br />In the previous part of this reply, I addressed your misunderstanding of my main point. Now to the other part, you want me to read these two Scripture passages, see that I'm wrong and admit it to you. And, then, presumably buy some Jack Chick tracts from your store! ;)<br /><br />Recently at the blog where I publish <a href="http://merecslewis.blogspot.com/2010/10/second-meanings-and-old-testament-part_12.html" rel="nofollow">daily readings from C.S. Lewis</a>, I posted a quote from Lewis in which he contrasts using the Bible as an encyclopedia to back up what we want to say versus being steeped in the Word like tea so as to be flavoured in its overall message. It concerns me, ctwpub, when people do things like quote one part of a sentence from the Bible to make a point, like you do by referring to Jude 23. When I look at Jude 20-23, I don't see how this verse would be relevant to our discussion about Jack Chick tracts present the gospel well or not. <br /><br />Jude 20-23<br />20 <i>But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit,</i> 21 <i>keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.</i><br /> 22 <i>Be merciful to those who doubt;</i> 23 <i>save others by snatching them from the fire; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.</i><br /><br />It's pretty clear that Jude is speaking to believers (see also v17). He is concerned about false teachers dividing the church (Jude 18-19), so in vv20-23, he exhorts us to build ourselves up in the faith. This is a great message to us as believers.<br /><br />But Jude is also concerned about those in the church who might listen to the false teachers. In verses 22-23, Jude tells us about three groups of believers who are affected by the false teaching. In v22, Jude tells us to be merciful to those who listen to these false teachers and start to waver in their belief and even doubt -- we need to encourage them to stick with the truth. In v23a, <i>save others by snatching them from the fire,</i> Jude is telling us with some believers we may need to confront them more directly about the false teaching they are coming to believe and in this way, we will save them from judgment (fire). Then, finally, in v23b, even to those who've pursued the false teaching and are corrupted by it, we are to show mercy, try to bring them back to the truth, but show appropriate fear toward being influenced by this false teaching.<br /><br />Jude is telling us what to do when people in the church start turning away from the truth of the gospel. He's urging us to minister to doubters, defiant persons and even deceived people. In other words, this passage from Jude has nothing to do with Jack Chick tracts which are addressed to nonbelievers. Jude is speaking to believers urging us to be strong in our faith and reach out to those who are being deceived by false teachers. There is the warning of fire, which is probably judgment rather than hell, but that's a warning to believers who accept false teaching. It's not addressed to nonbelievers.<br /><br />see part 3...Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-72955228654735916702010-10-26T10:05:53.556-04:002010-10-26T10:05:53.556-04:00Hi ctwpub:
I'm not sure what else I can say b...Hi ctwpub:<br /><br />I'm not sure what else I can say because it doesn't seem like you're trying to understand what I'm saying. That makes dialogue very difficult.<br /><br />You said, <i> I just want to hear you to admit the truth after checking your opinion against the Bible.<br />After finally boiling it all down, your main point seems to be that Jesus did not preach Hellfire and brimstone. If you believe that, you are not reading your Bible; cf. Jude 23; Mark 9:43-48.</i><br /><br />No that's NOT my main point. This is why I think you're not really trying to hear or understand me. I have said many times now that Jesus taught extensively about hell. And I have said many times now what my main point is. Here it is again: Jack Chick's approach of scaring the hell out of people so they will accept Jesus is not Biblical -- no one has shown a Biblical example of this "turn or burn" message. This is not how Jesus (or the apostles) present the good news to people in the New Testament. Indeed, my next blog post is titled <a href="http://samaritanxp.blogspot.com/2010/10/jack-chick-tracts-are-they-appropriate.html" rel="nofollow">Jack Chick tracts: Are they an appropriate way for schoolchildren to share their faith?</a> It's very clear that my main point is whether it is appropriate to scare nonbelievers with a message about hell in order to get them to believe. I am not questioning the truth that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23) and will be judged and sent to hell unless they accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour. I am questioning whether Jack Chick is right to try to scare people with a message about hell in order to get them to believe. Jesus uses a very different approach.<br /><br />You see, ctwpub, I have checked the Bible, and Jesus does not tell the Samaritan woman she's going to hell unless she accepts him as Saviour (John 4). He calls Matthew to follow him, but does not tell him that he's going to hell if he chooses not to follow (Matt 9:9-13). When the rich young ruler comes to Jesus wanting eternal life, Jesus tells him to keep the commandments and then to sell all his possessions, but does not tell the man to his face that he's going to hell if he doesn't do it (Matt 19:16-30). If these people had been given a Jack Chick tract they all would've been told directly that they were going to hell unless they accepted Jesus' message. <br /><br />To me the choice is simple. Either you trust that Jesus knows best how to share the good news with people or you decide to preach a different message like the one Jack Chick presents. I sincerely recommend that we try to pattern our witnessing efforts from the example of Jesus rather than the tracts of Jack.Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-15865135702677569272010-10-26T09:37:38.496-04:002010-10-26T09:37:38.496-04:00Pebbles:
You wrote, Ken you have made the stateme...Pebbles:<br /><br />You wrote, <i>Ken you have made the statement many times...scaring the hell out of people... at the end of the day Ken, it really is turn or burn, because the are only two options, heaven for all eternity or hell, yes hell!</i><br /><br />As kind of a quick way to summarize Chick's approach, I have said that he tries to scare the hell out of people so that they will believe. For example, the <i>Oops</i> tract ends with a boy finding himself in hell and some demon explaining to him that he did not accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour. The next page invites the reader to trust in Jesus. So the logic is simple: get you scared of hell and then ask you to believe. So after reading this tract the reason a person would become a Christian is to avoid hell.<br /><br />While you and Jack may think this "turn or burn" approach is great, I'm trying to show you that it is NOT biblical. You guys lack the support of Jesus. <br /><br />The longest example we have of Jesus sharing the good news is with the Samaritan woman in John 4. He offers her water that will quench her thirst and well up inside her to eternal life. Jesus identifies the wreck that her life has been having had more than five husbands. He invites her to worship God. Then Jesus identifies himself as the Messiah that she and her people have been waiting for.<br /><br />By contrast, Jack's tract would tell this Samaritan woman that she's going to burn in hell for her adultery and promiscuity, unless she chooses to believe in Jesus.<br /><br />Pebbles, those are two VERY different approaches to witnessing. I choose Jesus' approach and not Jack's because at the end of the day, I must be faithful to Jesus and do my best to do what he did. My job as a Christian is to become like Christ and for me that does not mean becoming like Chick.<br /><br />This does not mean that I disagree with your conclusion, Pebbles. You are completely correct to say <i>there the are only two options, heaven for all eternity or hell</i>. Again, I will say clearly I am not denying the reality of hell. The question here is about how we witness to nonbelievers. Jack tells them straight that they are going to hell unless they believe, but Jesus does not do this. Yes, Jesus teaches about hell but I'm looking at what Jesus does when sharing the good news with someone. When witnessing to someone, he does not tell that person they are going to hell (ex. Samaritan woman, Nicodemus, rich young ruler, Matthew)<br /><br />Pebbles, the people I share the gospel with are often times in desperate life situations -- they are living in conditions as close to hell on earth as possible. I offer them hope that God can help them where everyone else has failed. I tell them about God's power to forgive and his power that can help them overcome the addiction that has ruined them. They don't need some self-righteous preacher telling them that they are going to hell. I hope you had a chance to view the clip of the preacher from <i>The Waltons</i> and to read what I wrote there.<br /><br />You really have a choice to make. Do you want to approach people with the good news like Jesus did or would you rather approach them like Jack Chick tracts do? I choose Jesus and I think people will find him far more compelling than Jack.Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-68462823119975134402010-10-25T21:03:15.059-04:002010-10-25T21:03:15.059-04:00Anonymous,
Where do you find this stuff? "h...Anonymous,<br /><br />Where do you find this stuff? "hell is eternal...once there no one leaves."<br /><br />Malachi 4:1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. <br /><br />Does verse 1 sound eternal, I think not? If all is consumed there is nothing left.<br /><br /> 4:2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. <br /> <br /> 4:3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do [this], saith the LORD of hosts.<br /><br />The wicked shall be ashes under the soles of the righteous feet nonexistent.<br /><br />Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.<br /><br />In the above verse hell is cast into the lake of fire it too becomes nonexistent once consumed.<br /><br />I repeat where do you get this stuff?<br /><br />Furthermore, in Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. <br /> 9:6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any [thing] that is done under the sun. <br /><br />There's more if you like.<br /><br />BTW all the above scriptures do not contradict each other they are in total harmony.Andynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-16947695786344928112010-10-25T11:26:32.593-04:002010-10-25T11:26:32.593-04:00Well, Ken: I am very, very glad to hear that you a...Well, Ken: I am very, very glad to hear that you are a professing Christian. As such, I just want to hear you to admit the truth after checking your opinion against the Bible.<br /><br />After finally boiling it all down, your main point seems to be that Jesus did not preach Hellfire and brimstone. If you believe that, you are not reading your Bible; cf. Jude 23; Mark 9:43-48. <br /> <br />Finally, and in sum: <br />1. Again: Satan is not against good morals and ethics, just the gospel. So, ask yourself: a.) is the doctrine in the tracts Biblical? And, b.) Does the bible say in Jude 22-23, “And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire;…”? If so, there is nothing to dislike. <br /><br />2. Jesus did not draw cartoons. He preached using parables instead.<br /><br />3. Again, Benny Hinn’s ministry is not the same as Chick’s tract ministry. One is false doctrine, the other is good Bible doctrine.<br /><br />4. You wrote: “Your doctrine of hell may be correct, but my point all along has been that Jesus does not present hell as a way of pressuring people to become believers. He does not scare people into the kingdom, nor should we.” <br /><br />…Again, you never did address Jude 23. Also cf. Jesus’ description of Hell in Mark 9:43-48 – HE SAYS IT THREE TIMES AND TELLS THEM TO GO SO FAR AS CUTTING OFF LIMBS AND POKING OUT THEIR EYES! Are you going to say Jesus was to morbid now? I don’t think it would matter what tone of voice He said that in. It’s likely the words were VERY shocking to the audience!<br /><br />5. I never said you weren’t a Christian. I asked the question. That is not the same.<br /><br />6. Again, you didn’t answer my question. “WHAT ARE YOU SAVED FROM?” If your answer is an eternity in Hell, and it is if you are truly saved, then we can finally rest. There is nothing wrong with the tracts, just your opinion of them.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02035566267183933302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-73027224453019920702010-10-23T19:07:36.125-04:002010-10-23T19:07:36.125-04:00Ken you have made the statement many times...scari...Ken you have made the statement many times...scaring the hell out of people...I think the need is to scare people out of hell, nut wait, hell is eternal...once there no one leaves...I'm sure everyone there right now would wish someone had told them of this horrible place...at the end of the day Ken, it really is turn or burn, because the are only two options, heaven for all eternity or hell, yes hell! PebblesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-40515495049821872872010-10-23T04:05:25.670-04:002010-10-23T04:05:25.670-04:00I can think of only two Pebbles: one with the last...I can think of only two Pebbles: one with the last name Flintstone and the other is the name of a cat which belongs to Susan Boyle from Britain's Got Talent. I doubt that you are either one. I have no idea why you want to make me suspicious as to who you are, "Pebbles." If you and "many" of my readers are so concerned about where I'll end up with my reasoning, it seems like it would be appropriate for you to contact me by email or phone.<br /><br />For now, let me try to clarify some points which seem to be confusing.<br /><br /><i>Isn't the good news all about that Jesus saved us from hell?</i><br /><br />I think there's more to it than that. While that is true it is one aspect. How about forgiveness of sins? Receiving the power to do what is right? How about the experience of knowing that we are loved by God? The good news is that Jesus reigns and we might find true life in submitting to him.<br /><br />But, I concede your point. Yes we are saved from hell. I have never denied this nor have I ever said that Jesus does not teach about heaven and hell -- he certainly does. My point is that when Jack Chick presents the gospel, he says you are going to hell, unless you believe in Jesus, BUT Jesus himself NEVER uses this approach when he is sharing the good news. Does that concern you? It concerns me. Chick would've told the Samaritan woman that she and her five husbands were going to hell. By contrast, Jesus offered her the water of life. I am only saying that I would rather base my approach to evangelism on the example of Jesus rather than the tracts of Jack Chick.<br /><br />Pebbles, let me try to clarify this other point you raised: <i>I don't see in the Bible where Jesus actually says, I AM GOD, yet He is, so with your philosophy Ken, you'd say we cannot tell people He is God because He didn't say the actual words?</i><br /><br />NO, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying I'd like to tell people about Jesus the way he did himself rather than using the "Turn or Burn" approach found in the Jack Chick tracts. I am not denying the eternal penalty of hell, I am questioning why you would make this the main reason for someone to come to faith in Jesus. As for the deity of Jesus, I do not think it is as hidden in the gospels as you suggest. Why is Jesus crucified? Is it not on the charge of blasphemy -- that he claimed to be God? And what does the Roman centurion say when Jesus dies? "Surely this was the Son of God."<br /><br /><i>He also didn't say rapture and many other Christian based beliefs, does that eradicate all those doctrines also?</i><br />I have not eradicated any doctrines. I have only questioned why you would make the doctrine of hell the central part of your presentation of the gospel. The gospel is good news, how about sharing some of that, just like Jesus did?<br /><br />Pebbles, I don't understand what I've said that concerns you so much. I am more interested in telling people about the gospel in the way that Jesus did rather than using the Jack Chick tract approach. I thought we all generally agreed that as Christians our goal is to be "like Christ." So why are you so concerned about this Christian who wants to share the good news as Jesus did rather than trying to scare the hell out of people?Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-39852741634641399792010-10-22T13:46:29.698-04:002010-10-22T13:46:29.698-04:00Isn't the good news all about that Jesus saved...Isn't the good news all about that Jesus saved us from hell? Even if He doesn't say hell or heaven as you explain ( but I see where He references it many times), isn't it still the case? I don't see in the Bible where Jesus actually says, I AM GOD, yet He is, so with your philosophy Ken, you'd say we cannot tell people He is God because He didn't say the actual words? He also didn't say rapture and many other Christian based beliefs, does that eradicate all those doctrines also? I don't know where you will end up with this reasoning, and it concerns many readers who I have talked too, but do not comment. I do, and by the way, if you need my name...Pebbles it is. Thank you...now I hope I put your suspicious of who I am to rest. Have a great day.<br /><br />PebblesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-31295760555521363672010-10-22T09:37:35.708-04:002010-10-22T09:37:35.708-04:00ctwpub,
Since you are now accusing me of espousin...ctwpub,<br /><br />Since you are now accusing me of espousing worldly philosophy along the lines of Colossians 2:8, let me be clear, I was attempting to counter your utilitarian philosophy which as a Christian I find to be an incredible ethical compromise. You said, "Dear Ken: You do claim to be saved. However, evidently you do not seem to care about even one that was saved from hell because, if you did, you would have stopped attacking Jack Chick's tracts."<br /><br />To me, it looks like you're saying since at least one person was saved, THEREFORE Jack Chick tracts are ok and THUS I should not question them. Because of one good result (at least one person was saved), don't criticize. That is the hollow and deceptive philosophy of utilitarianism: <i>the end justifies the means</i>. You want me to suspend critical thinking and biblical analysis because of the result. I will not buy into your worldly philosophy. As a Christian, I was trying to tell you that the ends do not justify the means. Thus, just because people are saved at Benny Hinn crusades (the end / results) does not justify the fraud and antics (the means).<br /><br />Instead, I tried to show you that as Christians we must use the right means to the right ends, because ethics matter. We are trying to model the character of Christ. So neither defrauding people with false miracles nor scaring children with hellfire are acceptable means.<br /><br />We should aim to share the good news as Jesus shared it. He did not pass out scary, violent tracts to children in order to scare the hell out of them so that they would believe. Neither should we.<br /><br />On MANY occasions Jesus shares the good news with individuals, like Nicodemus, the rich young ruler, the Samaritan woman, Matthew, Zaccheus, etc. You are certainly correct in saying, "It is a fact in the Bible that Jesus preached more about hell than of heaven, explaining in grave detail what would be expected in that place." Yes, but in sharing the good news, can you show me even ONE example of Jesus presenting it like Jack Chick does? Where does Jesus ever say, "Go to hell or Believe in me"? You may be right in saying that this is the consequence people face, but I am more concerned about sharing the good news in the same way that Jesus shared it. Did he tell the Samaritan woman she would be going to hell if she chose not to accept the Jewish Messiah? Nope. How about Nicodemus, did Jesus say to him, Burn in fire or be born again? Nope.<br /><br />Your doctrine of hell may be correct, but my point all along has been that Jesus does not present hell as a way of pressuring people to become believers. He does not scare people into the kingdom, nor should we.<br /><br />It's almost ironic that you accuse me of ad homenim attacks. You who have no name but claim to represent a business. You come on my blog and leave a comment here boldly declaring that I am not a Christian. Who made you judge of whether people are truly saved? Jesus forbade such action (Matt 7:1-5; Matt 13:24-30; John 12:47-48).<br /><br />I am a repentant sinner who found mercy and grace when I turned to Christ in faith. He has transformed my life and I live to love and serve him in this world. God has gifted me with discernment and I am exercising that gift when I review Jack Chick tracts and conclude that they are an inappropriate way for schoolchildren to share their faith. To promote the use of such fear-based violent material brings shame upon the church.<br /><br />If people are offended, they should be offended by the message of the gospel, not by unacceptable tracts. There's no reason to be offending these parents by giving scary, violent material to their children. It's hard enough witnessing to people as it is, we really don't need Christians ruining opportunities to share the good news.Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-55005488491985469102010-10-19T10:10:01.284-04:002010-10-19T10:10:01.284-04:00Thirdly, if everyone stopped preaching or handing ...Thirdly, if everyone stopped preaching or handing out the gospel that is seen to be offensive by even one individual, whether by Chick tracts or otherwise, then the gospel would have stopped being preached centuries ago. The Bible teaches, ‘how will they know without a preacher?’The gospel is offensive. Jesus said many would be offended by it. Look around you. I believe it! The enemy, the Devil is not opposed to handing out tracts or good morals, he is offended by the gospel of Jesus because he wants as many as possible to end up in Hell for eternity with him. I love these people. I don’t want them to go to Hell. Eternity is a long, long time.<br /><br />Ken, you wrote: “I have argued that Jack Chick's approach of scaring the hell out of people so they will accept Jesus is not Biblical -- no one has shown a Biblical example of this "turn or burn" message. This is not how the gospel is presented to people in the New Testament.”<br />It is a fact in the Bible that Jesus preached more about hell than of heaven, explaining in grave detail what would be expected in that place. (c.f. Mark 9:43-48) Ken: What are you saved from? The Bible teaches that anyone who is truly saved is saved from an eternity of damnation, from hellfire and brimstone. You never did address the bible verse in Jude v.23 that says, “…and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire…” The Bible teaches it is supposed to be a fearsome thing so people will not want to go there. <br /><br />Finally, you wrote: “… If the message is wrong in the tracts, then the tracts are wrong, even if sometimes someone has responded well. I think we'd be better off finding a more suitable means of sharing the message.”<br />This is simply a matter of, Ken Symes says, “I don’t like it!”, not that the message or the method is wrong in these tracts. You can have your opinion but, everything in those tracts is backed up by scripture. All your refutations are your own opinion, without any backing from scripture, and do not make the tracts wrong. <br /><br />So, we are left with these choices: humanism or Bible believing Christianity. They do not mix. They oppose one another. Therefore, everyone must pick one or the other. Are you sure you wouldn’t want someone rather get saved?<br /><br />Finally, I was sincerely sorry to hear your ad hom. attacks on me and others that do not agree with you by setting up straw man attacks against us to defend yourself. I had hoped you would be above that. At no time did I ever accuse you nor anyone of not being saved; however, anyone who is saved would not recoil at the question, but instead answer confidently. I did say, however, that anyone that is truly saved would be beyond joyful to hear that one that was truly saved.<br /><br />If you have not accepted Jesus as your Saviour to be saved from Hell for eternity, would you not make that decision now? Read Rom 10:9-10. If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02035566267183933302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-59473558767907350642010-10-19T10:08:07.279-04:002010-10-19T10:08:07.279-04:00I am sorry, but I did not know you were sick. I si...I am sorry, but I did not know you were sick. I sincerely hope you are feeling better now.<br /><br />To address your philosophy: you said, “As a Christian philosopher, I believe we should do the right thing because it is right.” So, you believe to do the right thing because it is right. But, I want to do what is right because Jesus, through God’s Word, commands me to, such as, “Therefore, to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” (James 4:17) Jesus Himself commands me instead of me being left to my own moral compass. Humanism leads to the philosophy of ‘no moral absolutes’, which leads to certain destruction. There is a distinct difference between these two worldviews: one follows humanistic philosophy and the other follows Christ. Humanistic philosophy always prefers “correctness”, political or otherwise, over “effectiveness”, hence the degradation of society we see today. <br /><br />Secondly, you likened Chick’s tract ministry to Benny Hinn’s ministry. There is a distinct difference between the two: Titus 1:10,11 teaches us about those who lead people away, “…subverting whole houses for filthy lucre’s sake.” I think you would agree that better describes Benny Hinn. The other uses an effective method teaching sound doctrine leading many from hell into the kingdom of heaven. Again, Jude v.23 that says, “…and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire…” By the way, I heard a little adage I thought nailed it: “What you win them with, you win them to.”<br /><br />...2Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02035566267183933302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-27596578208744005072010-10-17T21:50:47.094-04:002010-10-17T21:50:47.094-04:00Thanks for the support, Gary. I'm uncertain of...Thanks for the support, Gary. I'm uncertain of what to do with "Anonymous" commenters as they are so many of them. Sometimes it's puzzling when you try to see if one "Anonymous" is the same as another "Anonymous." I'm working on upgrading the Comment system and that might require people to use some sort of identification. We'll see.<br /><br />But certainly, I believe if I'm putting something out there for public discussion, then I should freely post comments which are for and against my position. And my hope is that we can learn something from each other and sharpen our positions.<br /><br />It would be interesting to compare one of the tracts you like, Gary, with a Jack Chick tract. Hit me up sometime ;)Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-89961631261157469752010-10-16T22:35:15.411-04:002010-10-16T22:35:15.411-04:00Ken why do even bother to post comments from anony...Ken why do even bother to post comments from anonymous? People who get to know you, know you are a good Christian and never hide or back down from a good debate.<br />Mr. anonymous why not come out and declare who the real person is behind these e-mails? I love handing out tracks and talking to people but I also want it to be a positive experience so they will want to have a loving relationship with God. Any fire and brimstone they can get from the Bible as they mature as a Christian. GaryGarynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-51512067066545963142010-10-15T19:21:49.025-04:002010-10-15T19:21:49.025-04:00Why wait? I'm taking a break from work to resp...Why wait? I'm taking a break from work to respond now.<br /><br />ctwpub, you're asking, "Is it not worth it that even one was saved that these tracts exist and to support the little ones with the heart for the lost?"<br /><br />You're asking me don't the ends justify the means? As a Christian philosopher, I believe we should do the right thing because it is right. Both right ends and the rights means are important. I will not choose one or the other as you are asking me to do. Just because I accomplish something good cannot possibly justify the horrible approach (means) I used to do it.<br /><br />Here's the clearest example I could think of in response to your tract-scenario. Many people have come to faith in Christ through the preaching of Benny Hinn. Do you think, therefore, we should not question his ministry? His scam is well documented. We know many of the healings at his crusades are fraudulent deceptions. But, hey, some people are being saved, so let's not complain. Why don't I invite my nonChristian friends to the next Hinn crusade?<br /><br />No, I'm sorry I cannot agree with you on these tracts, especially in using them with children. My son is almost 7. I would not want him to read the Jack Chick tract "Boo!" or "Oops!" They have violent and mature content not appropriate for children. Their threats of torment in hell if you do not accept Jesus are a definite departure from the way that Jesus and the apostles present the good news. Again, I ask you for even one example in the New Testament where someone is told "Believe Jesus OR burn in hell." Jack's approach to evangelism is not biblical. Threatening hellfire to persuade people to believe is a feature of American revivalistic preaching not the Bible.<br /><br />Thus, my answer to your question: No it's not worth it for these tracks to exist and to be distributed in Canada because some have received Christ. How many countless others have crumpled the tracts and been hardened from hearing the message ever again? How many more good parents must be offended by Christians handing out violent, hateful literature to their children before we realize that this is wrong? No, ctwpub, the ends (a few people saved) do not justify the means (distorting the gospel and turning off many who would listen to a good presentation of the message).<br /><br />Further, you said, "Ken, these tracts are effective at getting people saved, not at becoming popular. I agree that not all of them are for everyone in every situation, but there is at least one suitable for everyone. All of them should not be thrown out with the bathwater, as it were."<br /><br />I think you're on the right track. More important than "effectiveness" is "correctness". If the message is wrong in the tracts, then the tracts are wrong, even if sometimes someone has responded well. I think we'd be better off finding a more suitable means of sharing the message.<br /><br />How about we all learn it well enough that we live it and share it naturally without having to use scary comics?Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-7109013213028924482010-10-15T18:51:16.291-04:002010-10-15T18:51:16.291-04:00ctwpub: I intend to reply to you, sorry for the de...ctwpub: I intend to reply to you, sorry for the delay. Do you realize that questioning people's salvation is probably not your best PR strategy? I'm just wondering about that. I'm uneasy about you posting comments in which you question the Christian identity of my readers or myself, but I have published them anyhow in the interest of profitable discussion.<br /><br />To the Anonymous commenter just above this comment:<br />You describe me as "cowardly" and yet you left your bold accusation "anonymously." Thank you for demonstrating hypocrisy. It is you who is hiding as you do not even have the courage to post your name.<br /><br />I have spent very little time online this week as I've been very sick and unable to take time off work. I'm exhausted. I have not had the time or energy to reply to ctwpub, yet, but I will try to do so tomorrow. I've been working on my answer in my mind.<br /><br />I suggest we try to remain rational in our discussion. "Ken" has not been proven wrong. I have argued that Jack Chick tracts often have content not suitable for children -- many parents have agreed with me. <br /><br />I have argued that Jack Chick's approach of scaring the hell out of people so they will accept Jesus is not Biblical -- no one has shown a Biblical example of this "turn or burn" message. This is not how the gospel is presented to people in the New Testament.<br /><br />Indeed, my post this week was intended to show the hollowness of preaching damning hellfire sermons to children (and others). It's well worth watching The Waltons video which is included in the post <a href="http://samaritanxp.blogspot.com/2010/10/preaching-according-to-waltons.html" rel="nofollow">Preaching according to The Waltons</a>. This style of preaching is certainly still out there, but like the tracts, it lacks Biblical grounding.<br /><br />Park West School received a complaint from a parent that these tracts were violent. They decided they should not be handed out. That was a good decision. Offending the very parents we should be sharing the message with is an unwise strategy.Ken Symeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11459635303438115559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-91217996024817047622010-10-15T17:30:19.445-04:002010-10-15T17:30:19.445-04:00Ken won't answer you 'ctwpub'...seems ...Ken won't answer you 'ctwpub'...seems when he is proved wrong he hides with embarrassment and ignores the truth. Such a shame, and cowardly!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-41248047931902092992010-10-15T10:34:36.909-04:002010-10-15T10:34:36.909-04:00Andy: Ok. Chick tracts have lead at least one to C...Andy: Ok. Chick tracts have lead at least one to Christ to be saved from hell. I am satisfied. <br /><br />Now, I wonder if Ken would be so kind as to reply as I have yet to hear from him.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02035566267183933302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-12797416190198964512010-10-14T21:31:33.572-04:002010-10-14T21:31:33.572-04:00ctwpub,
You do realize that everyone on this eart...ctwpub, <br />You do realize that everyone on this earth has been saved (2000 years ago) some just haven't come to that realization yet. The sacrifice on the cross was and is complete, all one has to do is apply the blood. I'm not telling you anything you don't already know. Right!<br /><br />I have read both your posts and I have difficulty with the idea that these Chick tracts save. They might reveal some things, however they do not save anybody. It is Christ that saves. Remember the verse in Acts 15:11 "But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved" and the other one in Romans 10:13 "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."<br /><br />It is the Holy Spirit that teaches and then leads us to follow Christ.Andynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5396279953555655134.post-78929146655412345132010-10-12T17:11:05.776-04:002010-10-12T17:11:05.776-04:00Dear Ken: You do claim to be saved. However, evide...Dear Ken: You do claim to be saved. However, evidently you do not seem to care about even one that was saved from hell because, if you did, you would have stopped attacking Jack Chick's tracts.<br /><br />Ken, these tracts are effective at getting people saved, not at becoming popular. I agree that not all of them are for everyone in every situation, but there is at least one suitable for everyone. All of them should not be thrown out with the bathwater, as it were.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02035566267183933302noreply@blogger.com