LM Sullivan

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@Jared_Andersen1 @Bull_Moose01 @bilywonka Who did Jesus say he was sending in John 14?

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@JamieBonkiewicz Interesting. So you think an inherently religious issues is a result of his voting record.

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@ericmetaxas lol buy my book Trump loves me

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@JDScholten Interfaith uniting around sodomy lol

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@SteveDeaceShow Bad take Steve. Widow! Sounds like the Joooooos

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@BrysonGray Like what?

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

All these presumptuous Mormons thinking they have a right to be called Christians… 🙅🏻‍♂️

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@BasedMikeLee @conservmillen Correct

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

I am good with it

[Josh Barzon @JoshuaBarzon]

How accurate do you think this chart is?

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

😬

[🟩The Mallard Reborn🟩 @MallardReborn]

My favorite thing Mormons do is follow a prophet who claimed all Christian churches are apostate and then complain that all these apostate Christian churches won't include them in the Christian club.

[R. Scott Clark @RScottClark]

The Gnostics drew pictures of Jesus too and like the Gnostics, the LDS worships a Christ of their own imagining.

Ps. Here's a very good reason for the reformation doctrine of sola scriptura: No continuing revelation, no LDS.

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@BasedMikeLee @BasedMikeLee stop. You’re making this worse.

[Nick Freitas @NickJFreitas]

I used to wonder how things like child sacrifice could have ever been a thing…Then I started listening to leftists talk and it all made sense.

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@JamieBonkiewicz Which churches are empty?

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@marklevinshow Quiet old man

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@BrysonGray @LizzieMarbach Do you keep the law perfectly now?

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@BasedMikeLee I have questions as to why most are on that list. Doesn’t seem like many Christian churches are on there.

[Joseph Spurgeon @Joseph_Spurgeon]

Michael Spangler (whose ordination was revoked by his former Presbyterian denomination) and his followers argue that the error of Peter in Galatians 2 was only about Judaizing and therefore has nothing to do with ethnicity. They argue that because the underlying heresy was justification by works, Paul’s rebuke has no application to modern attempts to divide Christians along racial or ethnic lines.

But this misses the point entirely.

No one denies that the Judaizers were teaching a false gospel. The question is how Peter participated in that error. Peter did not deny justification by faith with his mouth. Peter did not begin preaching salvation by circumcision. Peter’s sin was his conduct. He withdrew from Gentile believers and separated himself from them.

Why did Paul rebuke him so publicly?

Because Peter’s actions communicated something false about the nature of Christ’s church. His separation suggested that faith in Christ was not enough for full fellowship among God’s people. A dividing wall had been rebuilt where Christ had torn one down.

In his article on race realism, Spangler spends much of his time defending propositions that are not actually in dispute. Churches are often homogeneous. Churches are often shaped by language, nation, culture, and providence. Different peoples have different histories, customs, and strengths. None of that proves his point.

The issue is not whether churches are often homogeneous. The issue is whether race and ancestry may become a principle of ecclesiastical separation.

A church that happens to be predominantly one ethnicity is one thing. A church that is intentionally organized around ethnicity, and which directs otherwise qualified Christians elsewhere because of their race, is something very different.

Spangler appeals repeatedly to prudence. He argues that separation may be justified by social tensions, cultural differences, immigration, national concerns, or the preservation of a people. But the Judaizers also had prudential arguments. They wanted peace between Jews and Gentiles. They wanted continuity with ancient customs. They wanted to avoid scandal among conservative Jews. They wanted to preserve a distinct people.

Paul did not deny that tensions existed. He did not deny that practical concerns were real. He asked a different question: Was Peter’s conduct in step with the truth of the gospel?

That is still the question.

A nation may have concerns about preserving its culture, customs, language, and people. Families certainly have an interest in preserving their own heritage and lineage. But the church is not a nation, and it is not an ethnic association. The church is the assembly of those united to Christ by faith.

The New Testament recognizes nations, tribes, tongues, and peoples. It does not make ancestry a term of communion.

This is why Galatians 2 speaks directly to what Michael Spangler is teaching. While he is not repeating the Judaizing error in exactly the same form, he is repeating the same pattern. He is introducing a new boundary marker into the church that Christ never established. He is treating race and ancestry as relevant to ecclesiastical fellowship in a way that the gospel does not permit.

In one sense, this is even worse than the Judaizers. The Judaizers at least taught that a Gentile could become a Jew through circumcision and submission to the ceremonial law. Their solution was false and destructive, but it offered a path, however misguided, into the covenant community they envisioned.

Spangler’s system offers no such path. The dividing line is not circumcision, ceremony, or culture. It is ancestry itself. The marker he introduces cannot be adopted, acquired, or changed. It is permanent.

The gospel tears down dividing walls. Spangler rebuilds them.

The gospel makes Jew and Gentile one new man in Christ.

[LM Sullivan @AlmostReformed5]

@DrFrankTurek Regeneration

[Ruslan @RuslanKD]

the internet can be dark but you guys didn't experience a miscarriage. you didn't like what you saw on a genetic test and ended a life. a life that could have possibly survived out of the womb. you then overshared all of this with the world and are surprised people found it abhorrent.