Am I critiquing simply to destroy someone else, or am I critiquing to build someone else up? This matters significantly. It doesn’t take a genius to see flaws. But it does take someone with character, hope, and love to critique in a way that actually makes things better.

Is it to tear down something bad?
Is it to poke holes in something weak?
Is it to add value to something that needs work?
Is it to correct something that has gone wrong?
Is it to finally put someone in their place?
Is it to show people how smart I am?
Is it to keep an appearance of truly “seeing” things as they are?
Is it to avoid the responsibility of offering a better solution?
Is it to confirm my cynicism?
Is it to make a case for something better?
Is it to show a better way that the world can be?
Is it to help someone else see the truth?
Is it to expose the shallowness of something in order to show the fullness of something else?
Is it to break free from harmful views and practices?
How you answer this question determines a lot. It may be any one of these at any given time. Our motivations behind our critiques are rarely as transparent to us as we would like them to be.
Read More
Related Posts:

In keeping with the journalistic tradition of looking back at the recent past, we present the top 50 stories of the year that were read on The Aquila Report site based on the number of hits. We will present the 50 stories in groups of 10 to run on five lists on consecutive days.  Here are numbers 21-30.

In 2021 The Aquila Report (TAR) posted over 3,000 stories. At the end of each year we feature the top 50 stories that were read.
TAR posts 8 new stories each day, on a variety of subjects – all of which we trust are of interest to our readers. As a web magazine TAR is an aggregator of news and information that we believe will provide articles that will inform the church of current trends and movements within the church and culture.
In keeping with the journalistic tradition of looking back at the recent past, we present the top 50 stories of the year that were read on The Aquila Report site based on the number of hits. We will present the 50 stories in groups of 10 to run on five lists on consecutive days. Here are numbers 21-30:

The Tormented Decision on Homosexuality of The Presbyterian Church in Canada

The old distinction of 1985 in the PCC between an acceptable homosexual orientation and the forbidden homosexual practice did not last. On June 7, 2021 wide ranging changes were adopted. The old policy was labelled as exclusion, the sort of attitude unknown to a loving God. This has been replaced, or so they say, by God’s covenantal embrace. This means that in love the Lord now includes the “sexually immoral” who, according to Revelation 21:8, will be eternally excluded from the New Jerusalem.

Thoughts on the Present State of the PCA: A Series of Theses Presented by a Concerned Member—Part One

That the foremost sufferers of our present deeds are those that are tempted with homosexual lust. For they need to be encouraged diligently with the assurance that their sin belongs to the old man that was crucified with Christ (Rom. 6:6), and that they are new creations (2 Cor. 5:17) who have been cleansed of their sin and who can and will finally overcome it (Rom. 6:12-14). And yet we set before them as leaders and models men who proudly claim their sin as an essential part of their identity, and who name themselves by it.

Cru Chose Critical Race Theory Over Christian Unity

Cru Elevated Ethnic Identity over Christian Identity. Of particular concern is Cru’s Cultural Training called the Lenses Institute. Lenses was an in-depth “cultural competency training for Cru staff. However, it functioned as an ideological re-education camp where Christian unity was replaced by the primacy of ethnic identity.

God’s Ordinary Deliverance from the Sin of Homosexuality: A Testimony

If something like the positions espoused by Revoice were being articulated in 2005, I almost certainly would have gravitated to them. Though I was no longer interested in dating, I think that if I had been told it was okay to identify as same-sex attracted and even to pursue celibate friendships with other women who identified that way, I would have been very receptive to the arguments.

A Response to the “Open Letter” to the PCA

Instead of expressing sympathy towards the legitimate concerns of thousands around the PCA, the Open Letter highlights a slanderous claim that “the PCA is ordaining practicing homosexuals,” a claim that I’ve never heard. Not even once. Rather than give attention to the real pressing issues facing the PCA, the Open Letter regrettably diverts the reader’s attention to a Red Herring.

The Vote Tally of PCA Presbyteries On Overtures 23 and 37

Thus far, 51 of the 88 PCA presbyteries have voted on Overtures 23 and 37. The remaining presbyteries will begin voting at their respective meetings beginning in January 2022, with 20 presbyteries voting during January; by then, a clearer trend will become obvious as to whether these amendments will receive the required 2/3 votes of the presbyteries.

A First-Time Commissioner on SSA and CRT At the PCA General Assembly

Lastly, to those thinking this response lacks compassion toward the sexually broken and frustrates our ability to counsel those struggling with SSA, I would suggest that clarity is more compassionate than confusion. Equivocating on homosexual sin hinders our witness. SSA is a heinous sin (Colossians 3:5). It is unacceptable to adopt a gay Christian identity (Galatians 2:20).

The Three “U”s and PCA Overtures 23 and 37: Part 1

There is a world of difference between identifying our sin so as to mortify it and identifying by our sin as a component part of our Christian identity. Every Christian is called to identify his sin, take it to the cross in faith and repentance, and ask God for an increase of grace to war against the desires of the flesh. Far from singling out our brothers and sisters who struggle with SSA we are simply calling on them to join the rest of us who are no less committed to being renewed in the whole man after the image of Christ.

Ravi Zacharias was a Liar, Sexual Pervert and Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing. This Report Proves It

The evidence is clear.  Ravi Zacharias was a liar, a sexual pervert, and an abusive, deceitful manipulative, greedy hypocrite.  This goes way beyond one incident, one fall.  It reveals a lifestyle and pattern over many years.  He fooled many people, shamed his family and brought disgrace upon the Church. He was someone of whom the Scripture warns us – a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

A Final Plea to the 48th PCA General Assembly

As a denomination, you men of God will face a major issue this year that has already caused many congregations to leave the PCA, and may very well cause a major split in the PCA.  Will teaching elders (and ruling elders) who identify as gays (or homosexuals) be allowed to hold office in this branch of the Lord’s Church?  The answer should be clear.  Absolutely not!  Action must be taken now.  It must be taken this year.

In addition to their own jarring polemics and personal misfires, the New Atheists failed to realize that religion, especially Christianity, was the proverbial branch upon which they were sitting. For example, the freedom of expression depends on a number of assumptions, that there is objective truth, that it can be discovered, that it is accessible to people regardless of race or class, that belief should be free instead of coerced, that people have innate value, and that because of this value they should not be silenced. Every one of these ideas assumes the kind of world described in the Bible and mediated across centuries of Christian thought. Not one of these assumptions can be grounded in a purposeless world that is the product of only natural causes and processes.  

Though it’s not always clear when a movement is over, there are many indicators that suggest this is the case of the “New Atheism,” a cultural wave that rose in the 2000s and aggressively attacked religion in the guise of scientific rationalism. Despite the name, the New Atheism wasn’t really new, at least not in the sense of presenting new arguments. Instead, leveraging the global shock of 9/11, New Atheists pushed an anti-religious mood along with a vision of a society free from the cobwebs of religion, defined by scientific inquiry, free speech, and a morality not built on God or religious traditions. 
In 1996, prominent New Atheist Richard Dawkins articulated this mood in his acceptance speech for the “Humanist of the Year” Award: “I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world’s great evils,” he said, “comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate.” There was a commercial aspect to the New Atheism, with bumper stickers and T-shirts carrying well-worn slogans, such as one coined by Victor Stenger: “Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.”  
Though, at the time, it grew into somewhat of a cultural force and platformed a group of minor celebrities, the New Atheism now seems to have run out of steam. Divided by progressive politics and haunted by the obnoxious tone of many of its own founders, the movement is being devoured by other ideologies. Concepts like freedom of expression, scientific realism, and morality without God have all met their antitheses, often in clashes featuring the New Atheists themselves.  
One watershed moment was a conflict over the role of science. Just last year, the American Humanist Association revoked Richard Dawkins’ “Humanist of the Year” award for his long history of offensive tweets. For example, Dawkins told women who experience sexual harassment to “stop whining” and parents of babies with Down syndrome to “abort and try again.”
Read More
Related Posts: