My name is Jerry. I’m learning blogging on the fly so to speak that’s why this blog continues to change and improve. I am a preacher, but I am not typical of my generation of preachers. I’m not into things often associated with the so-called Emergent Church. I am into the Biblical Church. I am not into junk music. I am into David Crowder Band. I’m not into Left Behind books. I am into Jesus coming back to earth. I am not into ‘christian fiction’. I am into the Count of Monte Cristo. I am not into large conventions. I am into the local church. I am anti televangelism (and to a large extent, televangelists). I am into working in our own communities and making Jesus a visible presence for righteousness. I am not into emotional upheaval. I am into repentance from sin. I am not an Arminian. I am not a Calvinist. I am Scriptural. That means, sometimes Calvin is right. Sometimes the other guy is right. It always means God is right: He is the Potter; I am the clay.

I hope what you will find here is a clear, as far as I am able, explanation of Scripture. I am a big fan of Scripture speaking for itself. I don’t happen to think that my understanding is always right. I do happen to think that the Holy Spirit leads us into Truth.

I am a big fan of baseball.  And I love NASCAR. Then again, I also really enjoy a good game or horseshoes and occasionally I like to ride my son’s skateboard (very slowly, with two feet). I am a bookophile. This means I love reading books. Among my favorite authors are DA Carson, David F Wells, Eugene Peterson, Annie Dillard, Alexander Dumas, GK Chesterton, CS Lewis, Dostoyevsky, Mark Buchanan, Tolkien, JK Rowling, PT Forsyth, Lemony Snicket, Jack Cottrell, and Thomas Merton and about a million others–especially those with two letters for first names.

I am a preacher, but I don’t think I chose preaching. I think preaching chose me. I find much of what passes itself off as Christian faith to be completely incompatible with the Word of God. I don’t mean that in an arrogant sense as if I have it all worked out in my own life. But, for the most part, I see very little, Scripturally speaking, in the Emerging, Purpose Driven, Seeker Sensitive, Mega, Your Best Life Now Church. But who knows where one might discover grace? I am 100% in favor of the Crucifixion Driven Life: Take up your cross, deny yourself, and Follow Jesus.

Thanks for reading. I’ll tell you some more about my journey towards the Cross and His Kingdom as time goes by. In the meantime, trust in the grace of God.


47 thoughts on “Goldfinch

  1. Dear Jerry,
    After long I found someone who truly follows Christ, at least from the testimony you sound that. I liked it.
    Just came here bcoz wanted to start a blog and wanted to see some samples. And we are doing study on John’s Gospel that why it got clicked.
    But only read your Testimony.
    Continue to do good work which God has appointed you to do it..and we will see HIM soon.
    God Bless!!!

  2. hi Jerry,
    Found very encouraging to go through your testimony, thanks for being so truthful and right.
    Your article on Gospel of John caught my eyes, when I was looking for a sample to start my own blog. We at our Church are doing the study of same Gospel. we are now in 8th Chapter.
    Please continue to be a blessing to people, and I pray that Lord may protect you from evil one and his schemes.
    God Bless!!


  3. Thanks for visiting. I hope what I write can be of help to you in your journey towards the Father. Thanks for the comments, I appreciate the encouragement. I am glad to know that there are folks in this world, in Christ’s Church, who trust in the Word of Jesus more than the word of modern prophets who would have us believe anything and nothing all at the same time. Study Scripture! That is the goal of this blog–to get people into the Word of God daily. If you and your congregation do that, you will be blessed. If I can encourage you to Read and Study Scripture, then I will be satisfied. Thanks again for your kind and encouraging words.

    In Christ,

    1. Hi Jerry please could you email me as i would like to talk about this topic with you abit more is that ok. Thank you. L

  4. Hey dangold(fillintheanimalhere),

    Good to read your words, I can really resonate with what you’re saying (as I’m sure you know). I’ve always enjoyed reading you on the forums and I look forward to probing your mind more here. It’s refreshing to see someone of our generation who is NOT sold out on all the “get-saved-quick” schemes.

    Keep writing, I’ll keep reading.

    Oh, and I think I love Dostoyesky, but can never get through his books. I need more attention span.

  5. Brandon,

    thanks for stopping by. Thanks for reading. I’ve been working real hard to get some exposure to my thoughts–not necessarily the ones about me, but the ones where I comment on Scripture and the like. I’ll add you to my blogroll. Later!


  6. Jerry,
    I just found your blog today. I will have to add you to my blogroll. I too am Biblical, atleast trying to.

    Look forward to growing in the Lord alongside of you. Maybe we can bring the Church back to it’s roots, instead of all the other garbage that is out there.


  7. Warrior,

    Thanks for stopping by. I just added you to my blogroll. I appreciate you adding me to yours. I hope we can. It will take many of us who are committed to the Word of God, who are not at all intersted in pleasing men, and who are waiting for Jesus, to get this job done. It might take time, but we must be diligent. I noticed at the end of John 17 that Jesus prays for the ‘future church’, that is, the church that will grow as a result of the apostles preaching. I think we too need to be concerned about, and pray for, the church that grows out of our preaching. This means we must watch and guard our preaching well. We must take care to honor Scripture and be faithful in all things. I’ll look forward to reading you and writing for you. I hope you can grow in Christ by visiting here. Thanks again.


  8. God Bless You and Your Efforts, Jerry! You have several month’s jump on me at this blog exposure but I am with you all the way on your testimony! Will play catch-up on the blogging! I have been discouraged in finding a church because of the lack of sincerity you speak of but I do attend then pray, study and write on my own. Pray without ceasing! It’s disturbing to see so many giving Christianity, i.e. Christ-like, a bad name, and it’s become an “umbrella” term, but perseverance is the goal! I will keep coming back to study with you… In His Love

  9. Word,

    Thank you for your kind words. I hope my words about the ‘lack of sincerity’ are not a stumbling block for you. My goal here is to expose people to the Scripture. I think if Christians would get into the Word of God and read what God really gave to us, they would be surprised. I also think they would abandon this ‘lack of sincerity’ gospel. Sadly, many other would abandon the Gospel altogether.

    I’m encouraged by your visit. Thanks again for your thoughts.

    in Christ,

  10. Joe,

    Most of my life I have been a Kansas City Royals fan because I love George Brett. I still root for them secretly, but I am currently a Cleveland Indians fan since I live near Cleveland. Also, I just love baseball. I’ll watch any team and I am a huge fan of stats. Pete Rose is my ultimate (#2 behind Brett) player of all time. I can’t stand the Red Sox. Roger Clemens is a beast! And Barry Bonds ought to be left alone–I am a baseball purist and think the media ought to shut up and go away. What about you?


  11. I love the Yankees. I’m an east coast kid transplanted to the mid-west. My wife is from the Elyria area near Cleveland. I lived there for a short time while we planned our wedding a long time ago. I tease her that she now knows more about the Yankees than the Indians. I loved Rose but find him to be a bit caricature-like now. I actually keep a baseball blog and love writing about baseball.

  12. Joe,

    I love to see your baseball blog. If you give me a link, I’ll check it out and add it to my blogroll.

    As for Dan Goldfinch, well…I invented the pen-name Don Goldfish when I was about 16. ‘Don’ is for my grandfather with whom I was very close as a child. ‘Goldfish’ is for the name of a little pond that I used to fish in called, affectionately, ‘the goldfish pond.’ It was filled with goldfish; duh.

    Anyhow, I was fishing there one day with a friend. I had a small aquarium net that my grandfather had bought me and I was using it to catch these tiny minnow like fish. As it turned out, some bullies were in the park and spotted me and my friends. I took off running as I was only a short distance from my house. They caught me, took my fishing net, and threw it in the small creek that was running high due to some rains we had.

    A few years later when I started writing, I wrote some poetry that included the name ‘Don Goldfish.’ The name stuck and I have used it ever since when writing at my blogs, or at message boards, or any other private poetry or journals. I took the name ‘Dan Goldfinch’ as a way of demonstrating a sort of evolution, a change that began taking place in my life several years ago. I had been using it at a message board that I used to frequent. In some ways, then, it has been an identity hider for public displays, and in other ways it has been a reminder of my growing up years. I’m still fond of ‘Don Goldfish’ even though he has slipped away. Someday I hope that Dan too evolves. We’ll see.

    If you found my other blog which is called ‘Life in the Aquarium’ there are some old posts (I think poetry) about the goldfish pond episode. If I can find it, I’ll post a link to it. I don’t update the other blog any longer.

    Thanks for stopping by again.

    Merry New Year.


  13. Joe,

    Yes, I visited but only on my Blackberry. I haven’t had the full experience yet. Maybe today.

    Also, I live about 45 minutes from Cleveland which means that I am close enough to get to a game whenever it is humanly possible. I’d prefer not to indulge specific locations of my where-abouts.

    I hope all is well with you today. Thanks a lot for visiting my blog. I enjoy the company.


  14. Why do you call yourself “Dan Goldfinch” yet are referred as Jerry? The reason I ask this is that my last name is Goldfinch (and it is a fairly unknown name) and I have a relative named Dan Goldfinch…..

  15. Lori,

    Thanks for stopping by. My real name is jerry. Dan Goldfinch is a pseudonym I use for writing in public places (even though I still sign jerry to my posts). If you look above in the comments, you will see a short reply written to Joe that explains in part why I call myself dangoldfinch. It gives the gist of the history which actually started out as dongoldfish. I have, in a sense, evolved.


  16. Jerry, Many confused Christians often claim they are neither Calvinists nor Arminians but merely biblical. Unfortunately, as with preacher like Chuck Smith, with more than a tinge of pride. This is, of course, not a totally irrational statement for there is a 3rd possibility. They could be Pelagians. Arminianism is semi-pelagianism. Usually, however, after loudly affirming they are neither Calvinist nor Arminians, they proceed to preach sermons so Arminian in orientation they would make even John Wesley blush. Charles Grandison Finney was a full- blown Pelagian who denied the fallen nature of man and taught a distorted theory of the atonement. I have also heard some say, “No creed but Christ! No book but the Bible!” These people usually teach aberrant doctrines like baptismal regeneration, etc.. Calvinism teaches man’s total depravity or condition of being total dead in trespasses and sin. Pelagianism denies the falls effects claiming the only negative consequence of Adam’s sin was a bad example. They teach man is spiritually alive. Now Arminians seek to be a tertium quid or middle ground between what they perceive to be two extremes. But there is no logical middle ground between dead and living. Shall we say, for example, a spiritual coma? But a person in a coma is alive not dead. Perhaps you have read Dave Hunt’s ridiculous tome WHAT LOVE IS THIS? In which he demonstrates not only a complete lack of understanding about the reformed faith but also reveals his penchant towards misrepresentation or down right prevarication. His answer to Calvinism’s biblical assertion that man, being spiritual dead cannot hear or respond to the gospel without a work of the Holy Spirit taking place first was to assert, “Dead men can’t sin either.” A brief moment of biblical meditation will show this to be untrue. “…dead in trespasses and sin in which ye all formally walked. “ After catching Dave in several lies during his rant at a local Calvary Chapel, I confronted him, in private and asked him, “You say the Calvinists have high-jacked the reformation. Can you name one reformer who was not a Calvinist.” Caught flat-footed Dave thought for a moment and then blurted Beza. He then suggested John Wesley. Well, Theodore Beza, Calvin’s successor was accused of being even more Calvinistic then Calvin in his views and I fail to see how John Wesley, who came along two hundred years later could have been one the reformers. Arminianism teaches humanism in biblical terminology. It essentially denies God’s sovereignty or worse His foreknowledge and makes man not only the center but measure of all things. At the risk of seeming uncharitable, Jerry, I sincerely would like to know what preachers such as yourself mean when they make statements about being neither Calvinist or Arminian. It reminds me of people who claim they are neither conservative nor liberal politically but moderates. It has been my experience that most so-called moderates are really just liberals who are slightly less liberals than the rest of their sort. I might add that I was raised and originally ordained as a Pentecostal. I was interested in Apologetics having listened to and studied the works of Walter Martin. I changed my views after being challenged to read and refute THE REFORMED DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION by Dr. Boettner. I couldn’t and believe me, I tried. The Pentecostal Churches failed to teach the crucially important doctrine of justification by faith as well. Boettner’s book is free upon request.
    In Christ’s love, RLJ
    PS. I really would love to hear rational answers explaining the “biblical” alternative to Calvinism or Arminianism. I’m afraid, however, that Arminianism is a non existent tertium quid between the two logical opposites of Pelagianism and Calvinism. RLJ

  17. RLJ,

    Here’s what I wrote in context: “I am not an Arminian. I am not a Calvinist. I am Scriptural. That means, sometimes Calvin is right. Sometimes the other guy is right. It always means God is right: He is the Potter; I am the clay.” [See that part where it says ‘That means’??]

    What this means is that at the end of the day, I am trusting in God’s grace to save me from this wretched place and not my adherance to a particular theological pattern.

    I am surprised that you couldn’t refute the doctrine of Calvinist predestination. It’s not terribly difficult to do. I will not change my views no matter how many books I read on the subject. I would reccomend to you Perspectives on Election ed. Chad Brand. If you can read that book and come away still believing in the Calvinist predestination point of view, then you are a man. I cannot believe that God determines apart from man’s choice who is saved and not. I cannot and I will not. It is a horrible doctrine and makes God a monster.

    As it is, I said that sometimes Calvin is right; other times the other guy is right. I assure you I am no pelagian and that I have no idea what ‘non existent tertium quid’ even means. Before you judge me to harshly as a ‘liberal’ or a ‘moderate’ read some of my work at this blog and make a judgment about me then. I think you will find that most of the time I am in full agreement with the Reformed authors and scholars I read–with the exception of their opinions of Election.

    I don’t know who David Hunt is, nor have I read his book. I don’t know Dr. Boettner (Lorraine?) I still haven’t read their work.

    I don’t know if you confronted ‘David’ or not since I have no idea what that has to do with my blog and my personal page about who I am. I don’t know if I am a full blown Arminian or not, but I have read what it is about and I can assure you that your characterization is far from the truth. Again, read Perspectives on Election. (BTW are you Supralapsarian or Infralapsarian?)

    I certainly hope your reply is in love, because it almost sounds to me like you are judging my standing before Christ because I don’t line up with man made doctrines of Calvinism. But I am sure you are not saying that, now are you? Oh, BTW, I am not a member of the Denomination known as the Pentecostal Churches. I don’t know where you got that.

    in Christ,

    PS–I would seriously like to know how Calvinists can say that God is glorified by deliberately sending a person to hell apart from their free-will choice to reject him. I’d like to know how they can say that with a straight face and not be guilty of accusing the Lord God of being the author of sin in an infra or surpra way.

    PPS–if you want to judge me, that’s fine. But again, I would suggest you read the work I have done here and make judgements about my work–not my person. I am saved by the Grace of God and you, however judgemental and condescending you might be, cannot and will take that away from me.

  18. Jerry, I never said or implied you were either a liberal or Pentecostal. I drew a paralel between the those who claim to be in the middle of two possitions when, in truth, they take the one side. I am an ex-pentecostal. Yes, my comments were made in love. I would never judge you for not believing in predestination. I have faith that you believer in salvation by grace and the Holy Trinity. I have read Perspectives on election. Yet you have not read one of the most pivotal books on predestination by Lorain Boettner. With the fear of seeming to badger you, I would seriously say that untill you have read it or Steele and Thomases book or even Absolute Predestination by Jerome Zanchias or Arthur W Pink’s The Sovereignty of God you have made a very heavey doctrinal decision and not had access to the facts of the matter. The very nature of your questions seems to confirm this. God is not glorified when misanthropist like John Stuart Mills can trot out the philosophical argument about how He is either all powerful and evil for not preventing sin and human suffering or finite, incapable of preventing sin and human suffering, and therefor not worthy of our worship and loving devotion. It never ceases to amaze me how atheists, as well, will presume to judge God. They will often say how He is wrong to do something like not eliminate human suffering. But by what standard do we judge God? Are there laws and rules above and beyon Him that he must follow ethically? Who is He answerable to? “What if God, wanting to show His wrath endured with longsuffering the vessels of wrath PREPARED for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had PREPARED for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?” Romans 922-23 God derives His glory from washing a repenentent sinner white as snow in the blood of Christ in accordance with His unmerited mercy or Grace which said recipients don’t deserve as He does in allowqing the reprobate to endure punishment in hell which he does deserve. Grace is unmerited. Damnation is merited but mercifully not given to the saved. If man’s choice is the determining factor in God’s predestinating choice of a person for salvation, then it is not based upon free grace but on merit. You did something others did not do to incline God toward you. He saw you as willing to accfept His free offer and chose you. The God of Holy Scripture is one who breathes life into dead sinners and gives them the gift of faith and repentence. He talkes the most stubborn god haters and ethical rebels and with the beautiful miracle of the touch of a Loving Father’s hand molds into vessels of honor lumps of obstinant clay hell bent on disobeying His commands. The idea of calling a loving God a monster because He doesn’t do things the way we as fallen, finite creatures think He should in our “infinite wisdom” is abbhorent to me, however. As to supra or infra those ponts are a bit artificial. That God did NOT chose based on forseen choice is apparent from scripture. He contemplated fallen man and chose to save some. He could have saved all from hell if He chose. Better yet, He didn’t have to create hell in the first place. I am a bit surpised that you adamantly say you will not change no matter what you read in a book. How do you know if you are not privy to all of the facts? It seems to me, in closing, that God must etiher be the author of some sort of universalism in which everyone is saved without exception, or be called a monster for even one person going to eternal destruction. He is under no obligation to save even one person, Jerry, for if He is obligated to save or even give a chance to hear the gospel to all, it is NOT grace but something else. In love, RLJ

  19. RLJ,

    I debated about publishing your remarks because I have no idea what your angle is. I am a Christian, so if that is true, why is it anyone’s business to try and persuade me to believe something that is wholly unbiblical? I think you are confusing some serious issues here (see below for an example).

    Be that as it may, I have a really tight reading schedule right now so I cannot read all that you have suggested. I have read the work of other authors who support the Augustinian version of predestination and election and I can assure you that if Dr Boettner and the others you mention follow in his footsteps, or the footsteps of Calvin, my mind will not be changed. I find that idea of that sort of God to be abhorrent as you find my suggestion that God gives us free will.

    However, your statement: “You did something others did not do to incline God toward you. He saw you as willing to accfept [sic] His free offer and chose you” is not Calvinism. Actually, God saw that I would respond to the Gospel and on that basis predestined me to be conformed to the image of His Son.

    Your statement: “He contemplated fallen man and chose to save some” is Calvinism. As I said, I don’t think you really know what you believe.

    I won’t debate this issue any further. I don’t preach anything but the grace of God–read what I have written–nor have I ever suggested that God is obligated to do anything. But even so, I hardly think I have to justify myself at my own blog.

    Thanks for stopping by.

  20. Blog is looking very good. I got your comment about taking some classes @ CCU. It would be great for our paths to cross.

    I am a cheap-skate, so I am only taking one class per semester (most likely the week-long intensives, but an occasional 2-2-2 or 3-3 in there).

    How has the first class gone?

  21. Brandon,

    Thanks for stopping by. I am only taking a class at a time–the same schedule you are managing. I really cannot afford to take any more than one at a time since I’m paying for it. My first class went well. I enjoyed it, and I think it was an easy class to work myself back into study habits. It will be interesting to see if I can manage Dr Cottrell’s class. Good luck!


  22. Jerry, I am happy you believe the Bible. I also believe the Bible. As a fellow believer, I would be interested in your interpretation of the following passage:
    “In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will.” Ephesians 1:11

  23. Richard,

    I guess at face value, I would say that this passage of Scripture means that God himself has predestined us to receive or obtain an inheritance. It is his good purpose, the counsel of his own will that has decided we should receive this inheritance ‘in Him’ which means that there is no other way to obtain it. Those not ‘in him’ are disinherited so to speak.

    That’s face value though. I suppose I might need to look at the context, examine what Paul was writing to the Ephesians in the entire letter, do a word study on exactly what the word ‘inheritance’ means, consult several commentaries and theologies, and discover the identity of the ‘him’ in the phrase ‘in him’ (which is, incidentally, one of Paul’s favorite expressions). There’s a lot that goes into such exegesis as you well know.

    If you are trying to trip me up concerning the word ‘predestinated’ you will fail. I have never said I don’t believe in predestination. I wholly believe in the wholly biblical concept and doctrine. (Although, to be sure, it is sort of difficult to manage an entire doctrine out of one word that is used a mere 6 times in the entire New Testament.) What I disagree with is the notion that such predestination is unconditional which is, I’m guessing, what you are hoping I will say.

    I will say this much, there is nothing in this passage that you have ripped out of context that suggests whether or not this predestinating is conditional or unconditional. It says, ‘In him,’ which implies one condition. That is, those not ‘in Him’ are not predestined to obtain an inheritance.

    I think this verse is directly related to a verse that preceded it: “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves.” (Ephesians 1:4-6)

    Notice the ongoing reference to those who are predestined being found ‘in Him’, ‘through Jesus Christ.’ Notice also exactly what he ‘chose us’ for: ‘to be adopted as sons, and to be holy and blameless in his sight. Says nothing here about salvation as such, but only about certain effects after we have been saved.

    But that’s just face value. Thanks for stopping by.


    ps–since we’re playing a game together, I would be interested in knowing how you would interpret these passages:

    “For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”–John 6:40

    And this one:

    “He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.”–1 John 2:2

    And, for good measure, this one:

    “Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.”–Romans 10:17

  24. In John 6:40 the key word is looks. One who is spiritually dead cannot look at Christ. He must first be regenerated by God the Holy Spirit. This is, of course, according to God’s will. Jesus says in verse 44 that “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him;” In Acts 16:14 God must open the heart of Lydia to heed Paul’s words. Man has a free will to do whatever he chooses without coercion. Unfortunately his will is enslaved to a fallen, depraved nature so that what he wants to do is sinful and opposed to God. “No man seeketh after God.”

    I John 2:2 The word world does not have to mean every single person on the planet , let alone everybody past, present and future. As the Pharasees said in John 12:19 “Look the whole world has gone after Him.” The word world often means others in addition to the Jews. In Acts 11: 17-18 they note that God has granted repentence to life to the gentiles as well. John 3:16 must be understood in this manner tool. The [rest of] the world (as opposed to the Jews only.)

    Romans 10:17 Yes faith comes to God’s elect at the time appointed by God when they hear the message and in conjunction with it. God graciously opens their hearts (Acts 16:14) to hear and believe. The unregenerate sinner has the words go in one ear and out the other.

  25. RLJ,

    The only reason you make these interpretations is because you have bought into the false teaching of ‘total depravity.’ I disagree that the word goes in one ear and out the other because that is not what the Scripture says.

    You interpret 1 John the way you do only because you have bought into limited atonement of which there is no Scriptural authority to do so.

    RLJ, I’m not going to agree with you. It doesn’t mean I don’t respect you, and it certainly doesn’t mean I am any less saved. It means we don’t agree, but there seems to be sufficient enough abiguity to authorize us to have faith in God that we are sufficiently saved by his grace. God gave man free will. IF not, there would not have been two trees in the garden, only one. Let’s agree to disagree. OK? Then, we can move on with the work of sharing the Gospel with our atheist friends. OK?


  26. Seems like you wand to end the discussion so I bow to your wishes. Yes Jerry, my friend, there is plenty of room in God’s kingdom for us both. I am curios as to your church afiliation (or lack there off.) Are you Church of Christ? God bless you brother. RLJ

  27. RLJ,

    That depends entirely upon what you mean by the phrase ‘Church of Christ’ since there are about 10 different variations on that, I would have to clarify that statement.


  28. Fair enough, Jerry. I know just what you men for I am a Presbyterian by conviction and former ordination. I believe in the representative form of church government and the Westminster confession of faith and larger and shorter catechisms. Yet I am not currently affiliated with any denomination. Like Baptists, Church of Christ, etc… There are MANY organizations of Presbyterians of various stripes and colors. They run the political and theological gamut from liberal to ultra-conservative. I suppose I mean by Church of Christ any of the groups. They don’t usually have pastors but do have deacons. Many don’t have musical instruments. (Although the Disciples of Christ do.) Just curious. My younger brother went to one of their Bible collegers in Arkansas. Your friend, RLJ

  29. Jerry,

    You are very reserved with your information (I understand) and so I wanted to ask some questions in a place you might be more willing to answer. If you don’t want to answer, no skin off of my back, just wanted to “meet” you and possibly rejoice and mourn together where/when appropriate.

    If you ever want to e-mail me, you should have access to it from this blog. If not, you should also be able to find it at

    I graduated from CBC (before they became CCU) and started Seminary at Lincoln Christian Seminary last fall. I’ve been preaching in Missouri for 5 1/2 years at a small church in a small town.

    I wanted to know more about your situation and if there was any way I could help/encourage you with the specific issue you mentioned at

    I would love to take some Cottrell classes. I’d appreciate it if you would tell me what degree you are in and what you think of the program at CCU.

    Do with it all what you will.

  30. Christian,

    Thanks for stopping by. There’s not really anything to share about the particular situation. There is nothing I can do because I have given the matter to the Lord. I don’t confront people when they leave the church and I don’t defend myself when they do either. I just let it be and the Lord will deal with it in His own way. You can pray about the situation.

    My concern is the church. I really don’t think people understand the Body of Christ when they treat the Body the way they do. Who in their right mind would be so brazen against Christ that they would leave a church and then try to shipwreck those of lesser faith after they have gone? Do you see, with me, how unbelievably dangerous such an act is? This is why I have such a hard time with certain blogs. They don’t even realize what they are criticizing, who they are hurting, who they are persecuting. They really don’t, and I fear someday they will have to account for their discord and hatred.

    Cottrell’s class is worth every penny. I haven’t officially enrolled in a program yet. I’m between the MA and the MDiv and I can’t make up my mind how much money I want to spend (I’m paying out of my own pocket). I’ve been at my current location for 8+ years. Thanks for stopping by.


    Thanks for the link.


  31. Jerry,

    Go if you wish to purpuse a PhD go with a MA.

    So, what type of music do you consider junk?

    I too am neither Armenian or Calvinists but instead to focus on Christ’s command to “Go and make disciples.”

    Oh, I wrote a post about baseball last week.


  32. DH,

    Thanks for stopping by. Some don’t understand what I mean by being neither Calvinist or Amenian. I’m glad you do.

    Junk music is most of what is produced today. American Idol is junk music, Britney Spears is junk music. I like the old hymns, David Crowder. Junk music is the garbage that is mass produced, written with lyrics that are soaked in sexual overtones or explicit sexuality, and contain little thought as to the notes on the scale.

    Thanks for stopping by.

    ps–i love baseball. I’ll check out your post.

  33. Dan,

    I used to get so tried of the guys in seminary devoting too much time on the Calvanist v Amenian debate. It is interesting. I believe in security of the believer. I believe that salvation is by faith and if one is saved it will be evident in one’s life. I believe that God already knows who will accept or reject His gift of salvation. I believe that Christ’s commands to go and preach the gospel making disciples not converts.

    As for music. I like Crowder but my favorites are 3rd Day, Superchic[k], Flame, U2, Phil Keaggy & Josh Groban. I also wrote a post about my favorite solo artists. Don’t know if you listen to rap or not but have you heard any of the Cross Movement guys. Their lyrics are pretty solid and like Crowder differant from the other stuff out there.


  34. Will,

    Thanks for stopping by. Uh, I’m not sure what you are talking about, but I’ll leave your site posted right here where it is. I think I have seen you posting over at that loser blog ODMafia. Those guys are losers and I would stay far away from them if I were you or you might get infected with their disease.


  35. Dee,

    It’s a serious spoof. I write for another blog that is a parody of certain other blogs like Slice of Laodicea. Well, now this person is spoofing too. I’m not sure the angle yet, but it is quite fun.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s