The Duel - Pt. 1

It appears that I have been called out. Long time friend and fellow brother in Christ, Eric Conn, has come to shame me. I for one do not take personal insults lightly, and I will not be mocked by some 'southern gentleman', if there is such a thing...

The following message was sent to me, and i must say, it cuts to the heart:

------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail Title: Consider this a slap in the face with the white dueling glove of duels

No more games Paul Pavlik, I have officially registered for t4G and I am hereby slapping you in the face with the white dueling glove of duels and southern gamesmanship. Technically, I figure, you're a "seminarian," so that qualifies you for the $99 rate. The glove has slapped you in the proverbial face, your shame is made evident to all the world, and you have no choice but to respond with a duel on April 15 thru 17 in Louisville, Kentucky. Should you turn down this duel, you will be subject to a disgusting stomach cancer called "yellow belly." The duel lasts three days because that's how long it's going to take for me to put you to full shame. So, tell your wife it's a matter of a man's honor that ye be here for the conference, that is, duel.


Colonel Conn Sanders
Southern gentleman extraordinaire and true crafter of the famous Kentucky Fried Chicken recipe
67 dueling titles under his belt, 65 widowed, countless men shamed, and 1 more to denounce with all rancorous humiliation ( i.e. you!)

------------------------------------------------------------------

Eric,

You have cut to the deepest core of my being and for that sir, I find it hard to decline such a duel. You sir are a detriment to all things honorable, and twill not be I that is shamed this April, but rather, twill be thee! Granted, the blood (plasma) that must be spillt in order that I may take up your challenge will nearly kill me in and of itself, but I cannot and will not run from so great a fool as you! Even if I must beg on the streets for funds, it must be so. You sir, are a villian. You shall not denounce me with all rancourous humiliation for I will return whatever attack you bring with fervor and a heart albaze with the glorious passion of a wild boar. Aye sir, a boar! You will rue the day that you challenged me!

Sir Paul
Colorado Knight and ArchBishop of all things smoldering and intense.
No notches in his belt, but he hungers for the visual shame that will no doubt be brought upon his enemies, beginning with the fall and total humiliation of Colonel Conn Sanders.

Seeker Sensitivity

Here we go. It is no secret to my close friends that I am not exactly fond of the seeker sensitive movement. I believe strongly that 'no one seeks for God'. For some reason many people assume that if you don't agree with seeker sensitive ideals, you must not like people that are curious about God. This could not be further from the truth. I believe that the church has and always will be primarily for believers. The church in Acts appears to be this way, as well as most churches in the centuries following. There is evidence that non-believers were welcome during early morning worship, but the time of fellowship and praise does not seem to be geared towards the lost. Again, this does not mean that non-believers were cast out if discovered. That would be absolutely ridiculous. There is a common saying that I've heard a lot recently that I absolutely agree with:

"We are not seeker-sensitive during Sunday morning worship, but we are definitely not seeker-insensitive."

This sums up my position. I think that the best argument that I have seen in opposition to the seeker-sensitive movement was spoken by R.C. Sproul and Al Mohler. I ran into this video on YouTube and I was very impressed by the answers given by these men. I am not entirely sure which conference this video is from, but it seems to be hosted by Ligonier Ministries. The one thing that bothers me is the audience's reaction to the question, "What do you think about the seeker-sensitive movement?". Laughter after such a question does not show grace, but a lack of humility. Instead of laughing at what appears to be the foolishness of others, they should be humble and pray for the churches that are wrapped up in this 'ideal'. Anyway, here is the video. Enjoy!

John Calvin: Church Planter

One complaint that I hear over and over again about Calvinist's is that they don't see any need for evangelism. The thought must be that because of the Calvinist's disposition towards predestination, there is no reason to share the gospel. God has chosen everyone already so what is the point? I can't help but think that if people actually read Calvin, the controversy over Calvinist doctrines would not be as intense. Unfortuantely, most people who disagree with Calvin have never actually read anything by the man, and all of their frustration comes from an argument that they had with an uneducated "Calvinist" trying to defend himself against an "Arminian" that has never actually read Arminuis. It is a shame really. It reminds me a lot of how the world views Christianity. The world sees a bunch of sinful people calling themselves Christians and therefore for them Christ either didn't exist or his teachings don't hold water. The world judges Christ by how his people act. Sad...so very sad. Their whole perception of Jesus is then skewed. If only Christians actually read the Bible we might not make Jesus look as bad as we do...

I digress.

Calvin was not opposed to evangelism. He was not opposed to missions. He was definitely not opposed to church planting. I would encourage you to read through this article (link below) written by Frank James of Reforemed Theological Seminary about Calvin's evangelistic efforts. It was quite encouraging and exciting, and it is definitely worth your time if you appreciate historical Christianity in action.

CLICK HERE FOR SOME CHURCH PLANTING GLEE!!!