Category Archives: Biblically Speaking

This category is for topics and issues which come back to specific biblical answers and debates. It is especially concerned with God’s grace and the Christian life…and, with keeping the Gospel of faith alone in Christ alone crystal clear.

October: National Ad Veritas Blogging Month?

Hi All,

Within this site there are discussions that have erupted about the character and actions of individuals.  Personally I have often been embarrassed and saddened for some of the folks who have said some of the things they’ve said.  Often it turns out to be a discussion of Ad Hominem assaults rather than staying on the point.  I posted an exhortation and got some divergent responses.  So, I though I’d try to be clearer and see what happens.  Tell me what you think!


Fred Lybrand


Thank you both for your comments…I totally understand them. As a pastor for 23 years your divergent responses work just about like a sermon does. A sermon is preached to a large group…and every time (virtually) people hear different things. Not long ago I gave a sermon about how I felt there was a spirit of conceit in our church (focusing on Gal 6:3 as the cure). Well, I don’t think I’ve ever had such a divergent set of responses. People were writing the elders and me / wanting meetings, etc….and saying two things:

1. You should be banned from the pulpit because you’re wrong, we aren’t conceited, we are wonderful.

2. You are awesome…the first pastor I’ve ever seen willing to actually tell the truth. It is a disease in our church and you helped set a cure in motion.

The point is I both (a) know of specific examples; and (b) have all of us in mind.

You two are a perfect illustration. I have one hopeful and one in tears (finally). Wow. My hope is that you would both be hopeful and in tears! ;-)

J, my post is not a ‘mediation’ or effort at mediating. If I wanted to do that I would get the parties together.

G, though you are encouraged by the message, I hope you weren’t excluding yourself from the point.


I’m somewhat new to this community chatting through blogs, but I can tell you all the cure for the frustration and vitriol. The cure is to get off of each other. Get on to the point. Think, debate, look at the text, use logic, use a helpful illustration, stay on the issue.

Maybe the ‘other guys ARE evil’ (I’m sure some of them are)…but why are we all busy putting ourselves in the place of God in judging (see Rom 14 and James 5)?

I say it this way sometimes— If a bum on the street comes up to you and tells you your tie doesn’t match (or your shoes), you can ignore him because he is a bum. However, just because he is a bum, why does that mean he’s wrong?

I sit in this strange spot of not only not knowing how evil the the “other side is”, but I’ve also been ground fine by the Lord. I still think people are in great error (and yes, my blood can boil). But God has said the issue is especially the doctrine, teaching, logic, opinions, theories, hypotheticals, and facts themselves.

So, what you have rather than a ‘mediation’ is an exhortation. PLEASE, how about giving OCTOBER over to be the NATIONAL AD VERITAS blogging month. We take one month and we blog about information and not about people. It’s a bit of an experiment—what might happen?

Frankly, maybe Jim is a heretic…frankly I don’t know yet :-0! But I know I’d really like to just understand where he is coming from…and then try to invited him to reconsider a few things if necessary.

I can always attack him as a heretic and smear him all over the known world later.

You know, I had the same thing happen with my Open Letter about Zane.

I had people say I was mean and others say I bent over backwards to be gracious. What I was really trying to do is understand and analyze the facts adn the text. I came to conclusions and I offered them; and yet, to this day, I have had no one even attempt to help me reconsider my key arguments…I just saw a lot of ’sound and fury’.

I think we Christians are kind of copying the news media— like we wake up every day and we are on Crossfire or Nancy Grace. Of course, we could have gotten it from Martin Luther and his attacks on the Pope as the Anti-Christ. We spout a lot of opinion, and pardon me, a lot of vitriol.

If we need to call out individuals for their error then I get it (Paul certainly did on occasion); however, I’d plead that we stay on the argument and make use of reason and insight about the text…that is where things are won or lost.

So, there’s my exhortation. It is for me mostly…and if it splashes and you pick up the cause and give it a try…then I guess it might have been for you too!

Grace and Peace,

Fred Lybrand

2009 Free Grace Alliance Conference


Well, I’m in Dallas.

It seemed like a good idea to give a few updates every night just to let those who are interested to know of the value of our labors together.  I’ll through up a few points of interest each night.

Grace and peace,


P.S.  I saw John Hart (Moody) and George Meisinger (Chafer) a little while ago…just seeing them encourages my heart!

The Content of Saving Faith (The Dialogue) (REDUX)

So, I want to invite Jim Reitman to reload this discussion.   Here were my last words:

I really want to take the blame here in not framing things properly.  Jim and I certainly have different views on some things, and different ways to express agreed upon things.  Rather than getting into the minutiae of different aspects of whether or not hermeneutics has been damaged by being too rationalistic (though Jim agree that being rational is important), etc., I really just want to give Jim the opportunity to state what he really believes.  Now, stating what he believes may take some explanation of his epistemology.  I want to be patient with this as well.  In other words, I’d like to give Jim a real opportunity to tell me / us what he believes it takes for one to be saved.  In this way I can interact with him on the actual goal: hearing what he believes is the content of the gospel.  Perhaps more accurately he will need to address what is the content-side of the gospel (Jim, I think, believes the gospel…here we mean what it takes to get saved from heaven to hell…involves more than faith in content).

So now, I’d rather Jim really lead the discussion.  We are trying to get to the Content of Saving Faith from Jim’s perspective and understanding.  I think Jim understands saving faith to have both propositional and nonpropositional components or aspects.

So, here we go:

Jim what do you really believe about the Content of Saving Faith?  What does God require (if anything?) from an individual to be received into His Eternity?

What do we need to know first to understand before we hear your conclusions on the matter?  Explain whatever you need to to get to the point of sharing what you believe is required to believe in (or do…or feel…etc.) order to be saved from hell to heaven.

Honestly, win me over!

God bless,

Fred Lybrand

P.S.  Again, don’t post to this dialogue…instead please post your comments to The Content of Saving Faith (The Companion Discussion) (REDUX)

The Content of Saving Faith (The Companion Discussion) (REDUX)

Hi All,

This Post is for those who are wanting to read and comment on the discussion in the Post called The Content of Saving Faith (Dialogue) (REDUX).

Please see if you can be nice without compromising your convictions!  The goal is to first understand (seeking clarifications), then to agree or challenge.  But, why be a bit of a jerk (or jerkess)  if you don’t have to be?


Fred Lybrand