Show Notes:
How to use our past appropriately with other people.
You have to deal with it first.
If you haven't dealt with it biblically, but have become bitter, that will come out when you speak with other people.
Not gossiping, not slandering.
Not everyone needs to learn the hard way. We share our experiences so other people don't have to go through the same experiences.
It's like seeing a trap in the way, and saying "look out."
2 Corinthians 1:3–4 (NET)
3 Blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, 4 who comforts us in all our troubles so that we may be able to comfort those experiencing any trouble with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.
It's not our experience that is primary, but the comfort of God.
"Show me your scars" garbage.
No one should have to earn the right to be heard. "Pay your dues," "earn your stripes," suffer first before you can talk to me, all that may just be spite.
Some people say you're not worthy to talk to me if you haven't experienced this, or younger.
Rather, we should put our experience in proper place.
It's God's comfort, not our comfort primarily. It's God's comfort we bring.
You cannot minimize a child's hurt just because it's nothing for you. You cannot be selective with suffering.
We are not entitled to know the multiplicity of reasons for our suffering. We need to accept the fact that we aren't going to know.
But in 2 Corinthians 1, we are told one of the purposes: so you can comfort others.
Give people God, give them Scripture.
It hurts when we have to watch other people, because we remember our past.
We have to equip people, so they learn how to protect themselves.
What experiences do we share so that people will not get hurt?
Example: 2 young people want to get married. The pastor's wife believes that they need to hear from God prophetically, before they may get married. So the pastor preaches that you "need a verse," instead of rebuking this unbiblical thinking.
By sharing what we've learned and how we've dealt with it, we can give them a heads' up. *When* it happens to them.
It's emotional. Emotions make thinking harder. Think through it before you suffer through it.
Counsel is different from "do this, do that." You are free to ignore wise advice.
There are many layers that makes the situation very complicated. That's why you take them one at a time.
Making personal experience normative—your individual experience the standard for other people—will ALWAYS lead to abuse.
If a pastor in a church is doing that, it's a personality cult.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
How to use our past appropriately with other people.
You have to deal with it first.
If you haven't dealt with it biblically, but have become bitter, that will come out when you speak with other people.
Not gossiping, not slandering.
Not everyone needs to learn the hard way. We share our experiences so other people don't have to go through the same experiences.
It's like seeing a trap in the way, and saying "look out."
2 Corinthians 1:3–4 (NET)
3 Blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, 4 who comforts us in all our troubles so that we may be able to comfort those experiencing any trouble with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.
It's not our experience that is primary, but the comfort of God.
"Show me your scars" garbage.
No one should have to earn the right to be heard. "Pay your dues," "earn your stripes," suffer first before you can talk to me, all that may just be spite.
Some people say you're not worthy to talk to me if you haven't experienced this, or younger.
Rather, we should put our experience in proper place.
It's God's comfort, not our comfort primarily. It's God's comfort we bring.
You cannot minimize a child's hurt just because it's nothing for you. You cannot be selective with suffering.
We are not entitled to know the multiplicity of reasons for our suffering. We need to accept the fact that we aren't going to know.
But in 2 Corinthians 1, we are told one of the purposes: so you can comfort others.
Give people God, give them Scripture.
It hurts when we have to watch other people, because we remember our past.
We have to equip people, so they learn how to protect themselves.
What experiences do we share so that people will not get hurt?
Example: 2 young people want to get married. The pastor's wife believes that they need to hear from God prophetically, before they may get married. So the pastor preaches that you "need a verse," instead of rebuking this unbiblical thinking.
By sharing what we've learned and how we've dealt with it, we can give them a heads' up. *When* it happens to them.
It's emotional. Emotions make thinking harder. Think through it before you suffer through it.
Counsel is different from "do this, do that." You are free to ignore wise advice.
There are many layers that makes the situation very complicated. That's why you take them one at a time.
Making personal experience normative—your individual experience the standard for other people—will ALWAYS lead to abuse.
If a pastor in a church is doing that, it's a personality cult.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
Show Notes:
Abuse of power, in an unbiblical system of church government—one man with unchecked authority.
"God doesn't need you," and "no one is indispensable." That's unbiblical.
When you don't have a worldview that is Christian, your basis is that of the world and you talk the same way. Pastors speak like motivational speakers.
We use our experience to point to God, to trust in God. Their backgrounds will be different, but you have God's Word, and it's his power.
Teach people to depend on God in the midst of trouble.
Instead of taking your past and saying "be like me." Experience is not the foundation. We don't tell people to follow our pattern.
Scripture is enough, and is always the foundation.
Why talk about this? The motive is for help, teaching, warning, instruction, and comfort for those currently going through it.
"Experience is not the best teacher; evaluated experience is."
—Howard Hendricks
We evaluate our experience through the Word of God. Then we use it to help other people.
If it's a common experience, we'll bring it up. How does God's Word apply to it?
Those who object to using the past cannot evaluate theirs in light of the Word. They don't teach and don't want others to.
"Leaving what is behind" is not positive thinking.
That's a misuse of Scripture.
Sentimentalism will backfire. You can only pretend for so long before you get a rude awakening.
Many evangelicals are not equipped to handle this biblically.
You have to be taught how to encourage and comfort others.
Interpret the past according to Scripture, and use it to help other believers.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
Abuse of power, in an unbiblical system of church government—one man with unchecked authority.
"God doesn't need you," and "no one is indispensable." That's unbiblical.
When you don't have a worldview that is Christian, your basis is that of the world and you talk the same way. Pastors speak like motivational speakers.
We use our experience to point to God, to trust in God. Their backgrounds will be different, but you have God's Word, and it's his power.
Teach people to depend on God in the midst of trouble.
Instead of taking your past and saying "be like me." Experience is not the foundation. We don't tell people to follow our pattern.
Scripture is enough, and is always the foundation.
Why talk about this? The motive is for help, teaching, warning, instruction, and comfort for those currently going through it.
"Experience is not the best teacher; evaluated experience is."
—Howard Hendricks
We evaluate our experience through the Word of God. Then we use it to help other people.
If it's a common experience, we'll bring it up. How does God's Word apply to it?
Those who object to using the past cannot evaluate theirs in light of the Word. They don't teach and don't want others to.
"Leaving what is behind" is not positive thinking.
That's a misuse of Scripture.
Sentimentalism will backfire. You can only pretend for so long before you get a rude awakening.
Many evangelicals are not equipped to handle this biblically.
You have to be taught how to encourage and comfort others.
Interpret the past according to Scripture, and use it to help other believers.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
Show Notes:
It's the "ber" months: September, November, December. We are approaching Advent Season.
People become "holier" because of this season.
Though they don't attend church regularly the rest of the year.
What happens in the Roman Catholic context in December?
"Simbang Gabi." Church every day for 9 days. Everyone goes, out of superstition. Apparently, you get one wish granted if you finish all 9 days.
Papist church and practice is melded with the culture that you can't tell them apart. How much is the teaching of the church, and how much is just cultural custom? Is it actually religious devotion.
There's also the fun part: attending to see all your friends, then go somewhere after. It's a social activity.
Extra-biblical holy days, ecclesiastical holy days, inevitably puts down the Lord's Day.
People observe man-made holy days, but not the day God has made holy.
God says work, but a religious body has said worship.
Sunday is completely neglected by the majority. Their attitude is it is okay to skip Sunday worship, but not these special days.
When a special holiday lands on Sunday, that Sunday is considered more holy than the rest. Easter, for example. The focus is on the special day, rather than regular worship.
Protestants to this when they change the time of worship to a "sunrise service," making one Sunday unique.
This applies to church anniversaries.
When an additional calendar date is set by a church, it becomes a regular part of worship, as regular as the Lord's Day. That's adding to divine worship. When required, the conscience of people is bound.
Mark 7:6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commands of men.’
8 Leaving the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 And He was also saying to them, “You are good at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. . .
13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”
When man adds a holy day, the Lord's Day will be left behind. The command of God is inevitably replaced by man's tradition.
It is vain worship.
The tradition of man and the command of God cannot co-exist.
Stages:
1. Bible is higher than traditions.
2. Bible and tradition are equal.
3. Tradition replace the Bible.
That's what we see with these religious seasons, ecclesiastical holidays. The command of God has been invalidated by the traditions of a church.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
It's the "ber" months: September, November, December. We are approaching Advent Season.
People become "holier" because of this season.
Though they don't attend church regularly the rest of the year.
What happens in the Roman Catholic context in December?
"Simbang Gabi." Church every day for 9 days. Everyone goes, out of superstition. Apparently, you get one wish granted if you finish all 9 days.
Papist church and practice is melded with the culture that you can't tell them apart. How much is the teaching of the church, and how much is just cultural custom? Is it actually religious devotion.
There's also the fun part: attending to see all your friends, then go somewhere after. It's a social activity.
Extra-biblical holy days, ecclesiastical holy days, inevitably puts down the Lord's Day.
People observe man-made holy days, but not the day God has made holy.
God says work, but a religious body has said worship.
Sunday is completely neglected by the majority. Their attitude is it is okay to skip Sunday worship, but not these special days.
When a special holiday lands on Sunday, that Sunday is considered more holy than the rest. Easter, for example. The focus is on the special day, rather than regular worship.
Protestants to this when they change the time of worship to a "sunrise service," making one Sunday unique.
This applies to church anniversaries.
When an additional calendar date is set by a church, it becomes a regular part of worship, as regular as the Lord's Day. That's adding to divine worship. When required, the conscience of people is bound.
Mark 7:6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commands of men.’
8 Leaving the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 And He was also saying to them, “You are good at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. . .
13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”
When man adds a holy day, the Lord's Day will be left behind. The command of God is inevitably replaced by man's tradition.
It is vain worship.
The tradition of man and the command of God cannot co-exist.
Stages:
1. Bible is higher than traditions.
2. Bible and tradition are equal.
3. Tradition replace the Bible.
That's what we see with these religious seasons, ecclesiastical holidays. The command of God has been invalidated by the traditions of a church.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
Show Notes:
When days have been elevated and been made mandatory by church or custom.
In terms of God's Law, it is both sides of "sin."
Children's Catechism:
Q. 28. What is Sin?
A. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of the law of God.
Q. 29. What is meant by want of conformity?
A. Not being or doing what God requires.
Q. 30. What is meant by transgression?
A. Doing what God forbids.
Both sides apply to each commandment.
Transgression is often overlooked here: making more holy days. Inventing regular worship.
Sin of omission: neglecting the Lord's Day.
Sin of commission: adding days of worship.
This is not just the error of Rome.
Non-Roman Catholic religious people do it, too.
Easter or church anniversaries: additions or changes to the worship service, more people, the motive for the worship is the special day, not the Lord's Day.
And what has been added is regular part of worship.
More effort and preparation is given to special days, than the Lord's Day.
God does care about how we worship him.
Westminster Shorter Catechism
Q. 50. What is required in the second commandment?
A. The second commandment requireth the receiving, observing, and keeping pure and entire, all such religious worship and ordinances as God hath appointed in his Word.
Q. 51. What is forbidden in the second commandment?
A. The second commandment forbiddeth the worshipping of God by images, or any other way not appointed in his Word.
Much of Protestantism is not Reformed because they hold to the Roman Catholic church calendar.
The Normative Principle of Worship: not doing what God forbids, but free to do what is not commanded.
The 2nd commandment requires doing only what God commands for worship, and nothing more.
Worship in every part is congregational. None of it is to be a performance.
Special holidays is adding to what God requires—a transgression of the Law of God.
The consequences will be what Jesus said: neglecting what God does command.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
When days have been elevated and been made mandatory by church or custom.
In terms of God's Law, it is both sides of "sin."
Children's Catechism:
Q. 28. What is Sin?
A. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of the law of God.
Q. 29. What is meant by want of conformity?
A. Not being or doing what God requires.
Q. 30. What is meant by transgression?
A. Doing what God forbids.
Both sides apply to each commandment.
Transgression is often overlooked here: making more holy days. Inventing regular worship.
Sin of omission: neglecting the Lord's Day.
Sin of commission: adding days of worship.
This is not just the error of Rome.
Non-Roman Catholic religious people do it, too.
Easter or church anniversaries: additions or changes to the worship service, more people, the motive for the worship is the special day, not the Lord's Day.
And what has been added is regular part of worship.
More effort and preparation is given to special days, than the Lord's Day.
God does care about how we worship him.
Westminster Shorter Catechism
Q. 50. What is required in the second commandment?
A. The second commandment requireth the receiving, observing, and keeping pure and entire, all such religious worship and ordinances as God hath appointed in his Word.
Q. 51. What is forbidden in the second commandment?
A. The second commandment forbiddeth the worshipping of God by images, or any other way not appointed in his Word.
Much of Protestantism is not Reformed because they hold to the Roman Catholic church calendar.
The Normative Principle of Worship: not doing what God forbids, but free to do what is not commanded.
The 2nd commandment requires doing only what God commands for worship, and nothing more.
Worship in every part is congregational. None of it is to be a performance.
Special holidays is adding to what God requires—a transgression of the Law of God.
The consequences will be what Jesus said: neglecting what God does command.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
Audio
Let's shake things up and drop a late-post of Coffee & Christian Worldview today, to talk about something recent.
Though the post of Arkitekyuklid has been deleted, the "progressive Christianity" that it represented is a pernicious cult in the Philippines that needs to be addressed. And he was quoting someone else, whose article has been around since 2016.
Even though he deleted his post and commented an apology "for posting that," he has yet to renounce the content itself as unbiblical, letting everyone who saw it know that he does not believe that error.
Though the post of Arkitekyuklid has been deleted, the "progressive Christianity" that it represented is a pernicious cult in the Philippines that needs to be addressed. And he was quoting someone else, whose article has been around since 2016.
Even though he deleted his post and commented an apology "for posting that," he has yet to renounce the content itself as unbiblical, letting everyone who saw it know that he does not believe that error.
Show Notes:
"Jesus was a protestor."
*See the screenshots here:
https://www.facebook.com/nate.sonner/posts/10157658472584058
Christians who hold the Bible as their authority need to be more upset about pictures of Jesus.
Pictures of Jesus are a violation of the 2nd Commandment.
The caption to the cartoon, that included a fake picture of Jesus:
"Jesus devoted his life to speaking, helping, supporting, defending, empowering, healing, freeing, and loving everyone, especially saving those who were in desperate need from the hands of oppressors, rulers, officials, mobs, and those who intended to harm, kill, and destroy — because Jesus was a protester.
"Sometimes the most Christ-like thing we can do is protest."
Arkitekyuklid copied from an article in a “progressive Christian” magazine:
https://sojo.net/articles/jesus-was-protester
"Progressive Christian" is a new term for Liberal. Liberalism, not Christianity.
You can expect rejection of orthodox Christian doctrine and ethics.
You can see what kind of blasphemous trash that magazine is about on their Facebook page, from transvestites to female preachers.
When a professing Christian quotes from a source like this, you have to ask: is this individual a Christian at all?
A Bible-believing Christian would not defer to this garbage.
Does he hold to biblical Christianity or "progressive Christianity"?
"Progressive Christianity" is a false religion.
Progressive Christianity is dangerous because of the use of biblical language.
It's a mixture of truth with error.
What does a "protestor" look like?
A bunch of university students standing on a corner with signs, yelling.
Jesus wasn't rallying against the government of his day. He wasn't leading a march. He wasn't calling for the overthrow of Rome.
Jesus was breaking man-made traditions, but followed God's Law to the letter. He came not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it.
Jesus did not have the attitude or program of a protestor.
Jesus was preaching the Gospel of God.
He was not a Zealot. He refused to be made an earthly king.
If anything, the Pharisees were accusing him of being a protestor, to Pilate.
Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be delivered over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not from here.”
—John 18:36
Jesus was bringing the Kingdom of God. He was fulfilling the Old Testament Scriptures.
Jesus claimed to be God.
Is a protestor ever one who is in authority? No. By definition, the protestor is not in power.
But Jesus is God, and man. He taught as one who had authority.
When he was contradicting the religious teaching of the day, he was giving the proper interpretation of the Law.
He was the boss coming down to earth and putting people in their place—the true and greater Prophet, Priest, and King.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
"Jesus was a protestor."
*See the screenshots here:
https://www.facebook.com/nate.sonner/posts/10157658472584058
Christians who hold the Bible as their authority need to be more upset about pictures of Jesus.
Pictures of Jesus are a violation of the 2nd Commandment.
The caption to the cartoon, that included a fake picture of Jesus:
"Jesus devoted his life to speaking, helping, supporting, defending, empowering, healing, freeing, and loving everyone, especially saving those who were in desperate need from the hands of oppressors, rulers, officials, mobs, and those who intended to harm, kill, and destroy — because Jesus was a protester.
"Sometimes the most Christ-like thing we can do is protest."
Arkitekyuklid copied from an article in a “progressive Christian” magazine:
https://sojo.net/articles/jesus-was-protester
"Progressive Christian" is a new term for Liberal. Liberalism, not Christianity.
You can expect rejection of orthodox Christian doctrine and ethics.
You can see what kind of blasphemous trash that magazine is about on their Facebook page, from transvestites to female preachers.
When a professing Christian quotes from a source like this, you have to ask: is this individual a Christian at all?
A Bible-believing Christian would not defer to this garbage.
Does he hold to biblical Christianity or "progressive Christianity"?
"Progressive Christianity" is a false religion.
Progressive Christianity is dangerous because of the use of biblical language.
It's a mixture of truth with error.
What does a "protestor" look like?
A bunch of university students standing on a corner with signs, yelling.
Jesus wasn't rallying against the government of his day. He wasn't leading a march. He wasn't calling for the overthrow of Rome.
Jesus was breaking man-made traditions, but followed God's Law to the letter. He came not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it.
Jesus did not have the attitude or program of a protestor.
Jesus was preaching the Gospel of God.
He was not a Zealot. He refused to be made an earthly king.
If anything, the Pharisees were accusing him of being a protestor, to Pilate.
Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be delivered over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not from here.”
—John 18:36
Jesus was bringing the Kingdom of God. He was fulfilling the Old Testament Scriptures.
Jesus claimed to be God.
Is a protestor ever one who is in authority? No. By definition, the protestor is not in power.
But Jesus is God, and man. He taught as one who had authority.
When he was contradicting the religious teaching of the day, he was giving the proper interpretation of the Law.
He was the boss coming down to earth and putting people in their place—the true and greater Prophet, Priest, and King.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
Facebook
Log in or sign up to view
See posts, photos and more on Facebook.
Show Notes:
One of the hard things to learn is what to take seriously. Some things said or written are so ridiculous, that you can just move past them.
Not everything requires an essay to refute. This Sojourners article is almost that.
https://sojo.net/articles/jesus-was-protester
The overwhelming majority of comments to Arkitekyuklid's post were negative: that's unbiblical, read your Bible more.
The majority recognized that the article quoted was ridiculous on its face.
Let's look at some of the claims.
Many people pull this move: invoking Jesus.
"This is a gospel issue."
Jesus doesn't need to be a member of your political party for you to be right or justified in your views.
It does not need to be a "gospel-issue" for it to be a serious issue.
Christianity has ethics, and biblical ethics is authoritative just for being biblical.
You don't need to add the gospel to an issue for you to take it seriously.
Don't fictionalize Jesus in a cartoon to talk about political issues.
Keep it in ethics.
It cheapens the rest of the Bible: "Unless it's a gospel issue, it doesn't really matter."
If the Bible talks about it, it's important.
We have his Word, work with that.
What is God's purpose for the State? Don't elect someone wicked.
Don't make things gospel, that are not.
The author of the article stephen mattson @mikta Tweeted:
"Dear God, help me to love my neighbor more than I love my Bible, defend the oppressed more than I defend my theological beliefs, and love humanity more than I love my religion."
I think humanity *is* his religion.
Deal with the Bible properly, and don't insert your political agenda into it.
Read the Bible and understand what it says according to its intent, and the whole of Scripture.
Don't just throw Jesus into every issue.
Arkitekyuklid's "apology" comment.
But "why."
There must be repentance for promoting the social-gospel on his page.
Almost half a million people saw it.
Why do you apologize?
Did you just ignorantly promote false doctrine?
Or is that what you actually believe, and you just deleted the post because of the kickback?
If you are on board with the social-gospel, you are not a Christian.
And you need to repent and believe in Christ.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
One of the hard things to learn is what to take seriously. Some things said or written are so ridiculous, that you can just move past them.
Not everything requires an essay to refute. This Sojourners article is almost that.
https://sojo.net/articles/jesus-was-protester
The overwhelming majority of comments to Arkitekyuklid's post were negative: that's unbiblical, read your Bible more.
The majority recognized that the article quoted was ridiculous on its face.
Let's look at some of the claims.
Many people pull this move: invoking Jesus.
"This is a gospel issue."
Jesus doesn't need to be a member of your political party for you to be right or justified in your views.
It does not need to be a "gospel-issue" for it to be a serious issue.
Christianity has ethics, and biblical ethics is authoritative just for being biblical.
You don't need to add the gospel to an issue for you to take it seriously.
Don't fictionalize Jesus in a cartoon to talk about political issues.
Keep it in ethics.
It cheapens the rest of the Bible: "Unless it's a gospel issue, it doesn't really matter."
If the Bible talks about it, it's important.
We have his Word, work with that.
What is God's purpose for the State? Don't elect someone wicked.
Don't make things gospel, that are not.
The author of the article stephen mattson @mikta Tweeted:
"Dear God, help me to love my neighbor more than I love my Bible, defend the oppressed more than I defend my theological beliefs, and love humanity more than I love my religion."
I think humanity *is* his religion.
Deal with the Bible properly, and don't insert your political agenda into it.
Read the Bible and understand what it says according to its intent, and the whole of Scripture.
Don't just throw Jesus into every issue.
Arkitekyuklid's "apology" comment.
But "why."
There must be repentance for promoting the social-gospel on his page.
Almost half a million people saw it.
Why do you apologize?
Did you just ignorantly promote false doctrine?
Or is that what you actually believe, and you just deleted the post because of the kickback?
If you are on board with the social-gospel, you are not a Christian.
And you need to repent and believe in Christ.
Please FOLLOW this channel and LIKE / SHARE / REPOST
COMMENT / DISCUSS
Today, head over to 1 Point Preacher for another episode on the Reformation & Preaching
https://t.me/OnePointPreacher
https://t.me/OnePointPreacher
Telegram
1 Point Preacher
1 Point Preacher is dedicated to the preparation and preaching of sequential expository sermons.
A podcast by Christian Worldview Discipleship.
A podcast by Christian Worldview Discipleship.
🎥 Or, you can WATCH the VIDEO on Odysee:
https://odysee.com/@1PointPreacher:8/The-Reformation---Preaching-2.-Primacy-of-the-Pulpit:1
https://odysee.com/@1PointPreacher:8/The-Reformation---Preaching-2.-Primacy-of-the-Pulpit:1
Odysee
Ep. 33. The Reformation & Preaching: 2. Primacy of the Pulpit
1 Point Preacher
Episode 33
Show Notes:
A special series of 1 Point Preacher, to commemorate the 504th anniversary of the Protestant Reforamation.
The great Reformation was emphatically a reformati...
Episode 33
Show Notes:
A special series of 1 Point Preacher, to commemorate the 504th anniversary of the Protestant Reforamation.
The great Reformation was emphatically a reformati...