KAT

As a parent, we understand the implications of a certain haircut and as stated a 5 year old doesn't.  That is why we are the parents and have the final say so- whether our young child understands the reasoning or not. 
 
I kind of compare it to how God gives us "rules" that we sometimes don't understand as babes in Christ but we follow them anyway because He does know best- and as we mature in His Word, His "rules" make sense.
 
Our culture has expectations as to what a "real Christian" should look like. I am not saying that is right or wrong, just fact.  If two people were walking down the street- one punked out, and the other clean cut- and I said that one was a Christian, most people (saved and unsaved) would choose the clean cut one because of his look.  However, in reality the punked out one could be a newly saved Christian who is still being convicted on wordliness and the clean cut one could be a lost prep. It is all appearence. But it still shows that most people have an idea as to what a Christian looks like.  ( I actually took a poll from the ladies in jail- unanimously the clean-cut won).
 
Our witness (look, attitude, daily walk) should reflect our God and our Saviour and if my son having a mohawk will hurt my testimony (right or wrong), then he will not have a mohawk. As a parent, I have the final say-so. Not my young child.
 
KatnHat

While Scripture doesn't give specific time scales, it would seem a truly born again person wouldn't be backsliding for two decades. If a person is truly born again the Holy Ghost will be working to draw them to the Lord and if they continue in sin the Lord will chasten them. As Scripture touches this subject it would seem that if one who is born again repeatedly ignores the call of the Holy Ghost, ignores the chastening of the Lord, the Lord will end their life here.
 
Since Scripture doesn't give us specifics with regards to time, perhaps one could be saved and backslide for two decades, but I've never heard of such a case. I've heard of those who have backslid for several years, but never one that backslid for even a decade, and certainly not two. I've never known a drunkard who was born again that the Lord didn't either bring them out of that in a few years or they died; and those are rare, most drunkards who have come the Christ were freed from alcohol either immediately or very quickly.
 
There are many who preach and teach that all one has to do is say a "sinners prayers" and they are saved. Nothing about repentance, nothing about what sin really is, nothing but a very generic presentation of a very watered down Gospel message and then telling them all they have to do is "pray this prayer and you will be saved". This has left millions thinking they are good with God and assured of heaven when they die. Then they go on an live their lives as they please. However, if any of these ever to actually become born again later in life, when they look back at that prayer they said, they realize it meant nothing and they had been lost all those years. The woman in the story doesn't give such a testimony.

I remember when I was 18 I went to a pastor and said the sinner's prayer. I thought I was saved. Remember that lots of churches teach if you just repeat after me you're saved. Most people don't know any better and if no one is there to guide them they leave thinking they're saved.  She may have been truly saved but "backsliden" for 20 years? Why is it ok for alcoholics and others to be "backsliden" for 20 years but not someone like her? Sin is sin. Christians still sin everyday. Her sin was just different than ours maybe. If you purposely dress immodestly to get guys to notice you how is that different than stripping? If you're in a sexual relationship outside of marriage it's still a sin whether with a man or woman.  (I'm not advocating gay marriage) If you sip a little wine at dinner how is that different than drinking a scotch on the rocks every night after work or all night? Liquor is liquor no matter how fancy the glass and surroundings. At a fancy restaurant or a strip club.

Your bring forth some excellent thoughts on this. There is indeed a lack of any fear of God. While it used to be heard only from liberal Christians, the saying has spread to even some in the more conservative churches, which is the idea that sin, or at least some sin, is not that big of a deal so it's okay to go ahead and engage in some sin because you can ask God to forgive you later.
 
The fear of God, along with teaching on the reality of eternity and a real, everlasting punishment for the wicked in a literal burning hell, which will be tossed into a literal, burning lake of fire, and solid teaching on sin; including just what sin is, just how bad sin is, and that any sin separates us from God and all sin is bad in the sight of God, and the fact God doesn't only punish the wicked, but He also chastens His own, isn't being preached and taught much anymore. Not at all in some churches.
 
It's also a great point with regards to how preachers and such were once viewed, and how they are today. Part of this is due to the way preachers once lived their lives in accord with Scripture and the solid Bible preaching they engaged in, and the fact so many preachers today don't live holy, separated lives, and actually go out of their way to try and be "cool" and "just one of the guys", along with the less than solid Bible preaching or downright watery broth preaching.
 
When I was a child I remember seeing how people talked and acted differently when a preacher was around. There was a measure of respect, a sense of really being with a "man of God" and of God somehow seeming to be more real and near. That's not seen near as much today. It's much more common for preachers to be treated as just another guy, and some even go out of their way to try and "push it a little" around preachers just to see their reaction.
 
Back when California had the governor recall election, that Arnold eventually won, there was a porn "actress" who also ran for governor. This woman is the daughter of a Methodist preacher, claims to be a saved Christian, says she keeps her Bible on her night stand and reads it every night before going to bed. When asked about her job as a porn "actress" and what the Bible says, this woman said that she agrees with what the Bible says but as an actress doing a job it's not really her doing those things, she's just acting, so that's okay.
 
It seems most American Christians want that Burger King Christianity which allows them to have it their way. If they were to really pay attention to the Bible they would discover that God says He not only wants it His way, He will have it His way.

Can't one be willingly living in sin and be continually convicted about it?  It'd be a terrible way to live, but it seems to happen - at least until the conscience is sufficiently dulled and the Holy Spirit stops rebuking.  I don't see where such a state negates one from being saved. Consider the situation in Corinth - and consider our own wicked hearts. Don't know about you all, but I seem to habitually sin all the time - and sometimes often it is willingly (ever choose not to give someone a tract, anyone?).  I'm not agreeing with the premise of the OP at all - but some of the statements since seem to suggest that they think Christians will never habitually sin. Christians should not live in willing, habitual sin - but they do. And God chastens them.
 
That being said, while I don't think drunkenness necessarily precludes salvation, I do agree that that seems a bit quick for placing someone so recently out of RU in a teaching position.

Yes God's Holy Spirit can and does do such a thing.
God's Holy Spirit called me to Amarillo, but God's Holy Spirit did not call YOU to Amarillo.
God's Holy Spirit may lead one person into the Pastoral ministry, but certainly not everyone is called into that office.
So, yes, God's Holy Spirit can lead one person to "tithe" as a benchmark to avoid the excuse of NOT giving anything since we are under Grace, and not the Law; While God's Holy spirit may lead a different person to give freely with no regard to % or income because God knows that person can be trusted to give far beyond what they would otherwise give if they were tied to some rule.

That sounds just fine as you describe it. I don't think a pastor should never mention money or giving. Just as it's not good for a pastor to overfocus upon money and giving, it's also not good to avoid the topic. Scripture speaks to issues of money and giving so that should come up in a pastors sermons from time to time; either as a portion of a sermon or the topic.

Also, all believers are at different stages in their growth, understanding and walk with Christ, so there will always be someone who needs to hear about these matters. One of the amazing blessings which comes through the Holy Ghost, is how a pastor can preach a sermon so the whole congregation gets that general message, but at the same time, the Holy Ghost makes sure folks in the congregation also get a specific message, which sometimes can seem very different from one to another. So even if some in the congregation take away the basics of the sermon on money and giving, there will be others who get a more specific message from that with regards to their situation at their point in their walk with Christ.

He may well set in such a place yet never pay attention to who puts what in the collection plate.

In past years I've taken up the collection, that was before I was a pastor, & I never paid no attention to what was put in by who, & I still don't.

MHO, he should never corner a member telling them they should tithe, he actually should never know if you do or not, unless you tell him.

And yes, I know, some pastors that feels everything is their business & they lord over everyone & everything. IMHO that is a no no.

I was asked in my interview what I thought about tithing, & a pastor preaching on money very often. My answer was, no, I do not believe in tithing, & no, I don't feel a pastor should preach on money very often, but there would be appropriated times for that, & it should not be avoided. We are to be cheerful givers, & we should support our church, & the mission God gives it, & we are not to go outside of our church soliciting, begging, others church members, lost people, to support this church.

Its unbelievable at the number of churches that are soliciting money for everyone & anyone that comes along, just nearly begging.

I recall a well know TV & radio pastor a few years ago, he stated, "Our church is going though a rough time, our expenses have been way up, I'm begging anyone out there to please help support this church, we are hurting.

You have come on pretty strong, but you know, there are a lot of arguments made on this thread that you have completely ignored, and instead simply lumped everything you don't like into the "guilt by association" basket.  Then to top that off, you ASSUME that anyone who makes these arguments against your position are filled with pride.
 
There is far too much information out there that conclusively demonstrates that rock music in any form is not only harmful physically, psychologically, and emotionally, but more importantly spiritually for me to take any argument that says that "music" is "amoral" and merely a "personal preference."
The reason why so many Christians balk at this subject and throw up their hands in abject confusion regarding what is right and what is wrong is very simple: THEY REFUSE TO STUDY THE SUBJECT.  They merely pretend they have studied, and throw out their pet verse on that appears to favor their side, and then claim "victory" by labeling any dissenter as "legalistic" or "Pharasaical."
 
Any music that will be pleasing to the Lord will be contrary to the world, the flesh, and the devil.  It will be suitable to the character of God, which demands holiness.  The very idea that a Holy, righteous, sinless God would somehow take pleasure in music that is by its very nature rebellious, sinful, and carnal is absurd.
 
Too many people stop their study of music in Psalm 150, and then carry this idea to illogical extremes, but fail to take into account the demands of God's character.  They fail to consider that any music offered to God as a sacrifice (Heb. 13:15!) must meet the requirements of God's holiness.  That is, there should not be any admixture of the leaven of SELF, FLESH, or the WORLD in it. 
 
Good day to ya, mate!

Agreed! There should be more preaching than singing. It also helps if the preaching of the Word is the main focus rather than stories and tales. Nothing wrong with a story or tale that enhances or gives illustration to the Word being preached, but some preachers go off on one rabbit trail after another until it's just a series of stories that don't really tie into the sermon. By the time they get back to the sermon, whatever they began the sermon with has been forgotten.

For myself, I wouldn't want to sit through an hour of music before hearing the sermon. A song or two and then get to the preaching!

I can only agree with you, but both my parents say they were saved in a situation with no follow up. I don't know their hearts, nor was I there to see what went on, but they have been attending a good IFB church for thirty years now, have heard many many strong salvation messages, now bear all the fruit you would expect to see - and both still say they were saved all those years ago.
My parents lament the fact that they each were left without direction - they knew the traditional churches were wrong, but didn't know where was right - so they gave up looking, rather than accept wrong.


I personally have never seen someone who I would.have no doubt of their salvation who does not want to be in God's houseand learning of God, but there is a reason why the Lord commanded in Matt 28:19, 20 to teach, baptise, and teach.

So many forget about the second "teach".

I had one guy try to tell me that we shouldn't try to "make disciples to ourselves" and shouldn't therefore have contact details on tracts we give out!!!!!

Just wanted to throw something out here:
 
Growing up between two vastly different cultures ( Amish and English - loooong twisted story lol) I didn't understand a lot of the things about how my plain side lived and the other side of the family lived another. It was very confusing at such a young age. I don't remember much about what I asked or was confused about but what I do remember is my adopted parents trying their best to explain. Plus I got a chance at that early stage of life to understand what conviction and discipline was.
 
Kids are better off with an honest "no" then a "yes" out of complacency,trust me.

A godly husband needs to fulfil his God ordained position as the head of his wife.

1 Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

I think many husbands neglect or ignore their position as head and the woman ends up taking over because someone has to do it, of course this is opposing God's will, it is the way of the world.

When a Christian husband steps up and takes leadership like he should then it pleases his wife, for she is wanting him to do it, wanting him to 'play the man' and 'wear the pants' in their home. Satan doesn't want this, that's why he's so busy trying to reverse the roles in the home in these last days, he's quite successful at it too!

One nice thing about Catholics:  Fish i cheaper during lent!

One of the worst aspects of Billy Graham's yoking with the RCC and other false and watered down churches was that it gave an air of legitimacy to them, leading many who would have never have considered such wayward churches to think of them as sound.

Along these same lines is the practice of Billy Graham to send all who came forward and made any mention of being Catholic or having some connection to some wayward church, to refer them back to these churches.

No doubt some were saved over the years through Billy Graham's preaching, yet how many had their growth in Christ stunted by being shuttled into unsound churches and false religions? How many were not saved through a Billy Graham event yet went forward to learn more only to be pointed to a church which didn't preach the Gospel?

Any time we trust in our own efforts there will be trouble and work for the Lord will be hampered. While it may seem right and smart to yoke with the RCC and wayward churches in order to preach to more people, what is truly right and smart is obeying the Word of God and trusting Him with the results.

It's not an online resource, but one book in my library I have found helpful is "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop. As with anything, you have to watch for the bones, but it traces catholic history way back.

As a parent, we understand the implications of a certain haircut and as stated a 5 year old doesn't.  That is why we are the parents and have the final say so- whether our young child understands the reasoning or not. 
 
I kind of compare it to how God gives us "rules" that we sometimes don't understand as babes in Christ but we follow them anyway because He does know best- and as we mature in His Word, His "rules" make sense.
 
Our culture has expectations as to what a "real Christian" should look like. I am not saying that is right or wrong, just fact.  If two people were walking down the street- one punked out, and the other clean cut- and I said that one was a Christian, most people (saved and unsaved) would choose the clean cut one because of his look.  However, in reality the punked out one could be a newly saved Christian who is still being convicted on wordliness and the clean cut one could be a lost prep. It is all appearence. But it still shows that most people have an idea as to what a Christian looks like.  ( I actually took a poll from the ladies in jail- unanimously the clean-cut won).
 
Our witness (look, attitude, daily walk) should reflect our God and our Saviour and if my son having a mohawk will hurt my testimony (right or wrong), then he will not have a mohawk. As a parent, I have the final say-so. Not my young child.
 
KatnHat

This "husband of two wives" thing is crazy. I know of a Christian man who wanted to be a pastor but was told by a pastor that he would have to leave his saved wife whom he married not too long after being saved and go back to his unsaved wife he was married to while he was unsaved. If not then he was disqualified because he had "two living wives".

The passage is clearly about polygamy.

The gifts and callings of God are without repentance. If God calls a man to the pastorate then he is a pastor no matter what and this can't be taken away. He may place himself in a difficult position to be a pastor through certain behavior though. If a group of people don't care if the man was divorced and they want him as their pastor then he should be their pastor no matter what some IFB pharisee says.

The "qualifications" which Paul spoke of were qualifications before society NOT God.

I've hesitated to post this for a week or better...

Divorced people - plague!

Divorced people, yuck! They’re popping up everywhere these days. Oh my, we’ve even seen them in IFB and IB Churches! They create such a problem. You can’t fully use them in the ministries of your church, they’re so problematic. The nerve of them, they expect our good pastors to minister to them, they’re…sinners! They take the pastor’s time away from our other activities. Some of them have married again and so they are adulterers. Despicable cretins are what they are. Deliver us from this distasteful situation and remove them from our good IFB and IB Churches. After all, people may begin to talk. The next thing you know, others will accuse us of inviting in smokers, drinkers, prostitutes, and all manner of other sinners. Why can’t they go to some other church or form their own. Oh that’s right; they can’t form their own church because they can’t be pastors or deacons. Well something must be done with them, maybe the deacons can think of something. The Lord is getting a bad reputation because of these second class citizens attending our IFB Church. Some of us might even be accused of being sinners like them! Stoning is too good for them. Wouldn’t it be great if they would just go and leave us, our pastor, and IFB churches alone? Some of us wonder if they should be permitted to discuss spiritual matters among us or discuss Bible matters at all. Our children must be protected from them; they certainly should be closely monitored around the children. The nerve of some other churches to welcome them in with open arms; oh well, we knew the other churches were reprobate anyway. Now when Jesus had heard enough, he said to this group…

John 8:7-11
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

How many divorced people are in your church?
What, you don’t know of any?
I wonder if they may feel a need to hide this detail from you.
I wonder why they never help with church activities.

As a parent, we understand the implications of a certain haircut and as stated a 5 year old doesn't.  That is why we are the parents and have the final say so- whether our young child understands the reasoning or not. 
 
I kind of compare it to how God gives us "rules" that we sometimes don't understand as babes in Christ but we follow them anyway because He does know best- and as we mature in His Word, His "rules" make sense.
 
Our culture has expectations as to what a "real Christian" should look like. I am not saying that is right or wrong, just fact.  If two people were walking down the street- one punked out, and the other clean cut- and I said that one was a Christian, most people (saved and unsaved) would choose the clean cut one because of his look.  However, in reality the punked out one could be a newly saved Christian who is still being convicted on wordliness and the clean cut one could be a lost prep. It is all appearence. But it still shows that most people have an idea as to what a Christian looks like.  ( I actually took a poll from the ladies in jail- unanimously the clean-cut won).
 
Our witness (look, attitude, daily walk) should reflect our God and our Saviour and if my son having a mohawk will hurt my testimony (right or wrong), then he will not have a mohawk. As a parent, I have the final say-so. Not my young child.
 
KatnHat

Well, I just have to say our church is gay-friendly, too. We welcome them to come in and hear about Christ and their need of a Saviour. They can attend our Reformer's Unanimous to learn how to break free from the stronghold of their egregious sin. That said, though...they don't consider us gay-friendly...

Cloud does slam a lot of people with his ministry and like all big-time people in fundamental circles, he can be prideful. On the other hand, Cloud is right on spot here. Jack Schaap is the jock strap of Independent Baptists. The good that Hyles did do in his life is now being crumbled away little by little. What is sad is that older preachers who should be the example are not separating from him. Jeff Fugate did right to separate from Schaap and the affiliates there. The Bible says that to whom much is given, much shall be required. I've known some Schaap-followers who have said, "We should stop fighting, and just win souls." Winning souls to Christ is very important, but it is not the only command in the Word of God. Please read the quote from Pastor R. A. Smith (graduate of HAC) of Fort Worth Baptist Temple...


It has been said that silence isn’t golden, it’s just plain yellow! Silence is now being interpreted as approval of Hammond’s position, which I cannot allow. It is time to take a public stand.

There are far too many points of contention to list them all, but suffice it to say this. You can mark me down as one who vehemently disagrees with ANYONE who says the King James Bible is not inspired, who gives the least amount of sympathy or respect towards Rick Warren and the dirty liberal philosophy, and pragmatic approach to church-building which he advocates, who believes that the Holy Spirit can become "confused" or "depressed", who considers taking the Lord’s Supper as being similar to spiritual sex, who believes we should share platforms with non-Baptists and people who preach with Charismatics, etc...

Let it not be misunderstood. I’m an old-fashioned, unaffiliated, Bible-believing, Baptist who does not want to be confused with those who once claimed to be the same, but have since shown otherwise by their actions and associations. I’m not bitter toward anyone, anywhere, but neither am I intimidated by what others believe or do.

~Pastor R. A. Smith
My link


The list that Smith gave is not limited to, but is a list of some of Jack Schaap's actual teachings. Jack Schaap is the pastor of America's largest Independent Fundamental Baptist church and while it is one thing to look for trouble, it is another to put 'trouble-maker' on your forehead. Cloud could have and should have rephrased his wording but he got the plain point across that the preaching Jack Schaap ought not be ignored.

This is a discussion board and for the most part the only preaching put forth here is in the articles section or through links.

That said, yes, sometimes we do get into discussions that are based more on opinion than Scripture. For the most part, I don't see much value in this and we need to be very careful when we have such discussions. There are also times when opinion may be presented as fact, even sometimes with some Scripture. Sometimes the one posting such truly believes they are posting a scriptural post while at other times it may be they are simply trying to get Scripture to back their opinion. (To be VERY clear, I'm not thinking of anyone in particular, or even trying to, just considering threads I've read or been involved in over the past several years)

Yet we must remember that those who preach are held to a higher standard, as Scripture declares. They are to be very careful to adhere to the Word of God. At the same time we (those who hear) are to be like the Bereans and search the Scriptures to see if what they say is true. Also, as Scripture examples, we are to confront error when it crops up and we are to name false teachers by name.

This should all be done in the hope that error will be corrected, the Word may be held to truly, wayward brothers may be restored and those who are truly false teachers may be exposed as such and the brethren warned away from them.

I watched that video too and it certainly contained a lot of garbage. Some of it can indeed be dismissed as just personal opinion but some of it is stated as if it is fact too. Beside the fact that his projection of Mary as an "older" lady is pretty far fetched given that biblically we know Mary had at least seven children counting Jesus, Schaap also goes pretty far in trash talking Joseph when there is zero scriptural basis for doing so. He condemns Joseph for being minded to "put mary away privily" when he found out she was pregnant prior to their marriage. He talks as if this was somehow evidence that Joseph wasn't really a very good guy and didn't love mary very much. Nevermind the fact that Matthew 1:19 says that he was "a just man" and "not willing to make her a public example". Also nevermind that when the angel appeared to Joseph to tell him it was ok to take her as his wife the angel said "fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife", showing that he wasn't exactly getting "rid" of her as schaap seems to be implying but was doing it because he feared God and believed it was the right thing to do. Schaap then goes on to say(around 6:25) that Jesus grew up in a "disfunctional family", a home of strife and contention, and that Mary was the only one in the family who believed he was God. While his brothers truly did not believe in him according to the scriptures we have no record of what his sisters believed one way or another and from the fact that Joseph believed the angel it is quite safe to assume that Joseph did indeed believe Christ was God.Schaap is qualifying some of this completely unsupported and oddball stuff as opinion but is also presenting a lot of it as if it is fact. Whew, it has been a while since I have listened to hyles anderson style preaching, I had almost forgotten how shallow on substance, careless with truth, and big on opinion and entertainment much of it is.


Even if you don't think anything in that crosses a line into "real heresy", at the very least building such an elaborate and lengthy story without any basis in the scriptures is taking great liberties with the truth and God's church.

I mean if you look at the biblical model:

"1 Timothy 3:2-5 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) "

You will see a signification portion of the qualifications have to do with being a careful person not likely to lead anyone wrong either with word or example. Frankly from behind the pulpit is a poor place to launch an extensive and dubious story line without scriptural basis. If such an extensive story line cannot be supported by scripture then what is the point of presenting it from the pulpit at all? Does a lengthy personal opinion on biblical matters without any scripture to back it up matter much? Way to many preachers seem to forget that they are standing behind th pulpit to teach people Gods word not to speculate and make stuff up. About the only reason I can think of to present such a story is to entertain and tell people something they probably haven't heard before. I don't think that is very worthwhile at the best, and at the worst it is pretty shameful. See, this kind of thing where a lot of hyles anderson style preachers loose credibility. On the one hand many are very big on talking about how they are "Gods man" and so forth, but when you hear them preach rather than honoring the word of God and acting like a man of God they do it a disservice by a great amount of unfounded speculation. A man of God's job is to bring the word of GOD to the people. When preachers are in the habit of generously mixing in their completely unfounded opinions with the word of God it is a serious red flag. After watching that video, ask yourself seriously, doesn't it come across more as a man preaching his opinions and mentioning the word of God occasionally rather than a man preaching the word of God and occasionally giving an opinion?

I certainly don't expect preachers to be perfect, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect them to preach Gods word rather than their baseless opinions.

"Matthew 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."

If you do not know who the Getty's are, please look them up before posting.
Have you noticed that the new Majesty hymnal contains music from the Gettys/Sovereign Grace? What is your opinion on that? I find it an outrage that they are digging through garbage to find good music. I think it is sad I can't just buy a CD from a trusted source without knowing if there is CCM behind the music. Why aren't pastors stepping up and writing the Hamiltons? Why aren't we fighting for our music? Why have we stopped caring about associations? Don't people understand as soon as a weaker Christian hears you listening to something like "Amazing Grace My Chains are Gone" they will automatically assume you would listen to Chris Tomlin? We will loose my generation if we do not stand true.