Spiritual vs. Biblical

By: John Stonestreet|Published: October 27, 2011 12:00 AM

It sounds spiritual, but it's not. I'm John Stonestreet, and this is The Point.

Listen Now | Download

Yesterday we talked about how being biblical means being true--approaching things from the biblical framework of reality. Putting Bible references on the points me make sounds spiritual, but it's no guarantee that we're actually being biblical.

Another line of thinking that sounds spiritual but isn't goes something like this: "don't focus on what's happening in the world, focus on your relationship with Christ. Now, every Christian should cultivate a personal relationship with Christ. But when this is set opposed to what's happening in the world, it's way off-track. A relationship with Christ is personal, but it isn't private. Christians are called to be culturally active because of two realities.

First, Jesus is Lord over all creation because he brought it into existence. Colossians 1 teaches that clearly. Second, those who recognize His lordship will inevitably collide with ideas and expressions that don't. We're called to be in that conflict, not run from it. And the rest of Colossians teaches that. For ThePointRadio.org, I'm John Stonestreet.

Latest Broadcast on YouTube

Jesus confronted the issues of His day. His answers always come from the Scriptures. "It is written" occurs time & again in both OT & NT, it is much more powerful. Even Paul on Mars hill appeals directly from scripture.

We can be culturally relevant & still reference the Bible. You have set up a straw man argument. Why are you so afraid to quote the Bible when our opponents aren't.

Please answer in the comments rather than using your bullhorn.

Posted By: Phillip Riley on October 27, 2011 12:27 PM

You must login to this website in order to comment.