My Commentary on George Whitefield, after reading about him online - Wikipedia, etc.

What do the woes of Christendom today have anything to do with George Whitefield?
How many have you preached to in open air meetings?
How many revivals have erupted under your preaching?
No man of God (except Jesus) or no Church is perfect. Have fun finding one.

Except that what Throughfaith said is true. The mess that is the modern American evangelical church is their legacy. From bad mimickery of pop culture, soft rock bands as church music to lazer light shows, and topical sermons from prosperity to best life now sales pitches for Jesus preached from pulpits; all the while robbing us of our only actual physical contact with Christ in this world, His word, his supper, and his baptism, reduced to Christless iconism. And then we wonder why young men and women leave church when they can no longer play cool kid hang out with the youth group. The leavings is this discipleless group of people who gather each Sunday to give their due to God, and then go to the local buffet and torment the staff, being loud, rude and tipping like a 15 year old on his first date all the while wearing a blessed to be a blessing t-shirt, and spouting cliche churchanese jargon that means nothing. And why the vast majority of church goers are as theologically sound as a conspiracy theorist. Why even in this very forum I have seen people use the red x icon of disagreement on scripture posted with no commentary.
I know this is harsh but it's true, and it's horrifically sad. The worst is that none of them even know that this how it is. Even preachers don't even know they are going wrong. It's just what was left to them to do, generation after generation.
Jesus said go into all the world, make disciples, and baptise them, not build monstrous auditoriums, and put on poorly performed vegas shows with million dollar production equipment, followed by inspirational pep talks, platitude montras and an alter call.
Sorry, sore subject. I love God and I Love all my brothers and sister in Christ, and it angers me what this modern version of revivalism has robbed them of.

We should separate the signal from the noise . Sure if I became a ' throughfaithism then there's a problem. Some of these guys we quote so much and read and follow so much is to the detrement of actually reading and studying the bible itself .

Reformed churches are nothing like what you are describing.

They have their issues, to be sure. But it is nothing close to what you are describing.

What you are describing is the New Age, seeker sensitive stuff. Reformed churches are completely opposite of this. No offense to those who go to Reformed churches but they are boring, especially for young people and children. So then parents are driven to take their kids to these more "exciting" churches.

Its not church that is the fault here. It is parents and culture and the nature of men.



In the 1500's and 1600's they probably had this same issue over the mandolin in church and singing "modern" songs... lol

We should separate the signal from the noise . Sure if I became a ' throughfaithism then there's a problem. Some of these guys we quote so much and read and follow so much is to the detrement of actually reading and studying the bible itself .

The woes of today are a direct result of that brand of theology.

Again', it's not the fault of Wesley that Methods cae to be or Luther that Lutheran were formed. They never intended to start a movement by their name. I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

I'm not blaming them directly , but the followers of them . To the extent people today are following the ' ism ' still .

There's really only 3 camps.

Calvinism.

Arminianism.

Confused.


There's no reason to refute Arminianism AND Calvinism unless you just don't understand Salvation.

In my experience those who say they are neither calvinist nor arminian are most likely confused and when you press them on the issue of salvation, they are 99% of the time arminian, but they dont want the label.

Is it that clear cut, i.e. Arminian/Calvinism?
Here is a possible middle road...

The term ‘compatibilism’ in the free will/determinism controversy has a long and established history, meaning obviously that free will is compatible with determinism. (It is not obvious and indeed a subject of much dispute what the expressions ‘free will’ and ‘determinism’ mean. Also, some philosophers use the term ‘compatibilism’ to refer to the view that determinism is compatible with moral responsibility or with free will understood in a sense according to which free will is necessary for moral responsibility.) There is, however, no commonly accepted definition of ‘classical compatibilism.’ Thus, for one charged with assigning ‘classical compatibilism’ a meaning, it is more fruitful and avoids arbitrariness to begin by recognizing the central presupposition of the existence of this concept. The term originated in order to highlight the striking convergence of compatibilist views found within British philosophy from Thomas Hobbes in the mid-seventeenth century to twentieth-century gurus such as G. E. Moore and A. J. Ayer. This pantheon includes seminal gurus such as John Locke, David Hume, and John Stuart Mill.....
( more at https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315758206/chapters/10.4324/9781315758206-10 ).

Philosophy is not a strong suit of mine, but then again, I'm not sure philosophy is the path for Christians.

reform churches members can be rather snobby.

If you were a part of the so-called "elect", you too would be snobbish. But James has some harsh words for those who think they are a cut above the rest.
And of course we know that self-deception is the worst kind of deception.