The way some Christians speak about the truth of their so-called theology or doctrine, one would think that the truth of a theological system was based on how many people adhered to that system!
Right off the bat, I would like to stress that I am what is called a "Reformed Charismatic." I do not really like the term charismatic, however, we have to live with it since it has become the term used by all. Read these articles to find out why I do not like that term! I would prefer to be called a Reformed non-Cessationist, but that would not make sense to many people out there!
Whenever there is some debate on the pros and cons of non-cessationism or that of cessationism, the non-cessationists (those that believe that the spiritual gifts continue today) would make the claim that they just had to be right, since it is growing faster across the world than the cessationists.
It is true that the charismatic/pentecostal branch of the church is growing faster than its cessationist cousin; yet, since when do we validate truth by the number of people that believe it?
Truth has no democratic process by which it can be validated. Something is either true, or it isn't!
When it comes to the truth of the Scriptures, no-one can claim their version of the truth as the real truth by the number of people holding to that truth!
A spiritual movement, no matter which one, must be scrutinized by its proper adherence to the Scriptures. And,... that adherence to the Scriptures MUST be according to correct principles of Biblical interpretation (hermeneutics).
Therefore, do not think that the Kingdom of God is run by democratic voting for systems of truth!
Truth comes from the Scriptures, and the Scriptures alone!
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
A slip of the tongue!
I was listening to a sermon last year at a prominent charismatic church in the city where I live.In the sermon the pastor said the following:
"After all, God took a chance on us! Isn't it true? Jesus died for you and me and expressed His love with NO guarantee of a positive response from us. He didn't know what we would do! And many, many people reject His love. [He] still loved them."
Because I respect the pastor in this case, I wrote a letter to him querying him on the statement, "He didn't know what we would do!" In his reply to my letter, he said:
"Thank you for raising your concern with me. I am positive that it must have been a slip of the tongue – I would like to affirm that I definitely believe in God’s foreknowledge. I share your concern to uphold the truth and endeavour to do so at all times."This got me thinking about the so-called "slip of the tongue."
Preachers should take utmost care not to say things that they do not mean. A "slip of the tongue" could have dire consequences!
Basically, a "slip of the tongue," such as this, can be caused by many things, I guess. However, I want to look at three possible causes:
1. Lack of Theological Depth
"Slips" such as these most often happen to those who do not have the proper theological grounding or understanding. I agree that "slips" occur more frequently than we would like to admit. Yet, "slips" more frequently occur with subjects that we are not very proficient at.
Once we have mastered a subject, it becomes that much more difficult to
experience lapses of thought regarding those subjects. On the other hand, these lapses may point to the fact that one hasn't reached a thorough understanding of the subject at hand.Preachers should hardly ever experience such lapses, since they are supposed to be thoroughly grounded in the Word of God and they should have a strong understanding of theological constructs in the Bible! The problem with many charismatic preachers today is that they hardly ever have a solid theological foundation!
Quoting a couple of verses merely means that one has a good memory. Having a solid theological understanding of those verses; now that is what should be aimed at! Many of these preachamatics (charismatic preachers) are very good at quoting verses while preaching. Yet, very few of them actually have a Biblical understanding of the verses they quote.
I remember, way back in the mid-80s, when I was still into the Word-of-Faith heresy, I attended a conference at which Kenneth Copeland was speaking. One of the verses in his sermon was Amos 4:6, "'I gave you cleanness of teeth in all your cities, and lack of bread in all your places, yet you did not return to me,' declares the LORD." Copeland used this verse to preach about how God would bless us if only we believed. We would be so blessed that we would even have clean teeth! Funny, this verse does not say that at all. In fact, God was chastising the Isrealites at the time by keeping food from them, and as a result their teeth were clean from not having anything to eat!
But, I digress!
One of the big problems among preachamatics, is that they are not interested in reading and studying theology. As a result, they continue with their own brand of suspect theology.
Of course, a good place to start reading good theology, is with the prince of theologians himself, John Calvin. His Institutes of the Christian Religion is available free online. He has also written many commentaries which can also be found free online.
The problem with such a lack of theological depth, which cannot be denied, especially at this church where I heard this sermon, is that they sell the books and teaching videos/tapes of known heretics. They sell stuff by men such as T.D. Jakes (more on Jakes here) and Tommy Tenney who do not teach the Trinitarian God of the Bible! They further sell goods by many Word-of-Faith teachers such as Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Joyce Meyers, Fred Price, Charles Capps and Benny Hinn.
2. Topical Preaching
Another problem that can lead to a "slip of the tongue" is this incessant need in the modern church for topical preaching. I am not saying that topical preaching is bad all the time. The problem I have with churches where they only hear topical preaching is that they hardly ever get the whole counsel of God. Most topical preachers jump from verse to verse and as a result never show their people how the Scriptures fit together!Another issue with topical preaching is that preachers using this method of preaching almost invariably think that they know the topic at hand well enough to preach off the cuff! Can you see the problem? This is exactly where the "slip of the tongue" comes in!
The best solution for this is to start preaching expository sermons (preaching through a book of the Bible). Not that expository preaching is the be-all and end-all! This can be messed up too! Yet, this method of preaching demands more from the preacher. More study and more concentration! The preacher will then have to do proper hermeneutics on the book he is preaching through in order to teach the passage in question accurately.
But, I guess, that will be too much work for our preachamatics!
3. Insufficient Sermon Notes
Finally, as has been suggested before, most of these preachamatics are topical sermon preachers. Since, as has also been suggested under point 2, these preachers are mostly into topical sermons, they have this over-confident attitude that they know the topic at hand very well, and as a result they have very short, to no sermon notes that they preach from.
It makes me wonder how they can preach the whole counsel of God at all!
They claim to flow with the Spirit! If they claim to be flowing with the Spirit, why do they have these "slips of the tongue?" Or, perhaps the Spirit has given them new revelation that should be added to the Bible? But, this is not what they claim! At least not the new revelation part!
The problem with many of these preachamatics is that they do claim to be led by the Spirit and so they have become so arrogant, and they treat the content of the very Word of God so flippantly, that they do not bother with preaching the whole counsel of God at all.
They would rather claim to be led by the Spirit and preach all kinds of nonsense (a "slip of the tongue"), than honour God by preaching His Word and only His Word.
If they really honoured God in their preaching, they would do everything in their power to ensure that they preach only the Word of God. That would mean spending hours before God in prayer and sermon preparation, studying the Word of God to ensure that the passage at hand is interpreted correctly. However, I guess hermeneutics is a lost art among the preachamatics! Further, proper notes will be taken to the pulpit to ensure that such a "slip of the tongue" does not occur.
In conclusion, many of these charismatic churches that claim to be led by the Spirit of God allow the merchandise of heretics (such as those mentioned under point 1) to be sold in their bookstores. Why is the Spirit not telling them to get rid of the wolves in sheep's clothing from their midst? Is it perhaps, as I maintain, that they are not so-called led by the Spirit as much as they claim to be?On this topic, of divining the leading of the Lord, it may be good to go over to the PyroManiacs to read the post by Dan Phillips called "Misreading God." Perhaps the preachamatics will say that Dan Phillips is wrong, because the spirit told them so!
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
The Gospel: Diluted and non-Saving
di·lute
This is what the western, modern church is doing to the gospel. It is making the gospel weaker, fainter, inefficient and easy!
I was reading a post by the Calvinist Gadfly and thought to myself: "That is exactly what I want to say!"
The gospel that is preached today in many churches is more about self-help programs than the Biblical gospel itself! What can be heard in churches today are sermons like: "5 Steps to a happy marriage," "8 Steps to becoming a prayer warrior," "How to become a successful leader," "How to raise good children" and many more...
In my post, Reformation Needed Today, I wrote the following:
"The world around us is falling apart and still, many pastors want so much for people to like them in order to draw the crowds. In order for people to like them, these pastors must as a consequence get rid of all the offensive material in the gospel, and end up drawing the crowds with nothing but the elements of the world itself. In the end, what are these people getting saved towards? Definitely not the gospel and Jesus Christ! These preachers simply attract people to 'all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions,' which 'is not from the Father but is from the world' (1 Jn 2:16 ESV)."
Gadfly wrote it much more succinct than I did: "What you win them with is what you win them to."
The point is, if you preach a diluted, weak gospel, devoid of the truth of the Biblical gospel, then your converts will be diluted, weak, devoid of the truth.
The fact that preachers think they could preach a watered down gospel in order to get people, show 3 things at least:
Perhaps Jesus did not know of the psychological advances made since Freud and Jung?! Or, maybe, just maybe, He gave us an example of how to preach the gospel! Yet, when many modern preachers deliver their sermons, they appeal to what Gadfly calls "creaturely-centeredness." It is this self-centered gospel that leads its adherents to believe that they could manipulate God like some pagan god with the correct mantras and rituals. This gospel contains no sense of self-denial!
What these preachers do is to give good advice toward self-help and self-esteem programs. However, it leads to deception and in the end, I am sad to say, no-one is saved! If people are won over by self-help and self-esteem programs, that would be what their salvation turns out to be. This is not the salvation promised by Jesus!
The modern church has made the gospel all about us. It is for that reason that many people see their own testimonies as the gospel itself. They have forgotten that the gospel is about the One that made salvation available. It is for this very reason that when preachers dilute the gospel that they once again show their unbelief in the very One that provided the gospel!
Maybe next time we think about the power of the gospel we should rather think about the power to take up our cross than think about some self-centered reason why we should have more in this life to make us feel better!
- to make (a liquid) thinner or weaker by the addition of water or the like.
- to make fainter, as a color.
- to reduce the strength, force, or efficiency of by admixture. –verb (used without object)
- to become diluted. –adjective
- reduced in strength, as a chemical by admixture; weak: a dilute solution.
This is what the western, modern church is doing to the gospel. It is making the gospel weaker, fainter, inefficient and easy!
I was reading a post by the Calvinist Gadfly and thought to myself: "That is exactly what I want to say!"
The gospel that is preached today in many churches is more about self-help programs than the Biblical gospel itself! What can be heard in churches today are sermons like: "5 Steps to a happy marriage," "8 Steps to becoming a prayer warrior," "How to become a successful leader," "How to raise good children" and many more...
In my post, Reformation Needed Today, I wrote the following:
"The world around us is falling apart and still, many pastors want so much for people to like them in order to draw the crowds. In order for people to like them, these pastors must as a consequence get rid of all the offensive material in the gospel, and end up drawing the crowds with nothing but the elements of the world itself. In the end, what are these people getting saved towards? Definitely not the gospel and Jesus Christ! These preachers simply attract people to 'all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions,' which 'is not from the Father but is from the world' (1 Jn 2:16 ESV)."Gadfly wrote it much more succinct than I did: "What you win them with is what you win them to."
The point is, if you preach a diluted, weak gospel, devoid of the truth of the Biblical gospel, then your converts will be diluted, weak, devoid of the truth.
The fact that preachers think they could preach a watered down gospel in order to get people, show 3 things at least:
- The preacher does not believe in the God of the Bible.
- The preacher is concerned with the numbers of the church more than with the real salvation of the people in the church.
- The preacher is concerned with the size of his salary.
Now great crowds accompanied him, and he turned and said to them, [26] "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. [27] Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple. (Luk 14:25-27)
Perhaps Jesus did not know of the psychological advances made since Freud and Jung?! Or, maybe, just maybe, He gave us an example of how to preach the gospel! Yet, when many modern preachers deliver their sermons, they appeal to what Gadfly calls "creaturely-centeredness." It is this self-centered gospel that leads its adherents to believe that they could manipulate God like some pagan god with the correct mantras and rituals. This gospel contains no sense of self-denial!
What these preachers do is to give good advice toward self-help and self-esteem programs. However, it leads to deception and in the end, I am sad to say, no-one is saved! If people are won over by self-help and self-esteem programs, that would be what their salvation turns out to be. This is not the salvation promised by Jesus!
The modern church has made the gospel all about us. It is for that reason that many people see their own testimonies as the gospel itself. They have forgotten that the gospel is about the One that made salvation available. It is for this very reason that when preachers dilute the gospel that they once again show their unbelief in the very One that provided the gospel!
Maybe next time we think about the power of the gospel we should rather think about the power to take up our cross than think about some self-centered reason why we should have more in this life to make us feel better!
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Top 10 Irish Calvinist posts
The Irish Calvinist lists his 10 most visited blog posts of 2006.His post is called "Top Blog Posts of 2006."
HT: Justin Taylor
Monday, January 08, 2007
Give and Take
"God gives and Satan takes away!"
I am sure you heard that before. Of course, it is true!
You do not believe me? Well, just ask the myriads of so-called evangelicals who teach that almost every Sunday in church!
There are so many preachers claiming to be evangelical, that teach their people from the pulpit that God is not sovereign! They will teach that God gives us all the good things in life, but Satan comes to take it all away!
However, we read about Job saying, "The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away..."
Of course, these preachers will immediately reply by saying, "Yea! But that is what Job said, not what God said!"
The fact is that in this passage of Job 1, verse 22 clearly says, "In all this Job did not sin or charge God with wrong."
Reading about this first tragedy in Job's life, one is immediately faced with the question of God's sovereignty!
What did Satan tell God about where he had come from? "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it." (v7)
What amazes me is God's answer to Satan's "coming and going" on the earth! "Have you considered my servant Job...?" What was Satan doing on the earth, "coming and going?" "Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour." (1 Pet 5:8) This is what Satan does while he is "coming and going" on the earth. Seeking "someone to devour!" The Lord knew about this. He knew that Satan was looking for someone to devour!
Yet, it was the Lord who asked Satan to consider Job. Did the Lord ask Satan to consider Job simply to think about Job? Or, did God ask Satan to consider Job as his next subject for testing and "devouring?"
The fact is that God gave Satan his limits in his attack upon Job. (v12) In one day, Job lost all his children, his servants and all his livestock. That is a tragedy beyond imagination!
Of course, if this happened to the modern evangelical, who would be blamed for the tragedy? Satan, of course! As if God was totally unable to limit Satan's actions!
Yet, Job understood God's sovereignty when he said, "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return. The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD." (v21)
Job knew that God is the Almighty Sovereign of the universe and nothing, but nothing, could happen on this planet without God's signature on the triplicate application! In fact, it is God Himself who suggested Job to Satan. Why would it be any different for you and me?
The problem is that many today think of God and Satan as co-equals! Sometimes they even include themselves as God's co-equal! They do not understand, nor believe that God is sovereign and that ALL comes to pass by God's sovereign decree!
I am sure you heard that before. Of course, it is true!
You do not believe me? Well, just ask the myriads of so-called evangelicals who teach that almost every Sunday in church!
There are so many preachers claiming to be evangelical, that teach their people from the pulpit that God is not sovereign! They will teach that God gives us all the good things in life, but Satan comes to take it all away!
However, we read about Job saying, "The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away..."
Of course, these preachers will immediately reply by saying, "Yea! But that is what Job said, not what God said!"
The fact is that in this passage of Job 1, verse 22 clearly says, "In all this Job did not sin or charge God with wrong."
Reading about this first tragedy in Job's life, one is immediately faced with the question of God's sovereignty!
What did Satan tell God about where he had come from? "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it." (v7)
What amazes me is God's answer to Satan's "coming and going" on the earth! "Have you considered my servant Job...?" What was Satan doing on the earth, "coming and going?" "Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour." (1 Pet 5:8) This is what Satan does while he is "coming and going" on the earth. Seeking "someone to devour!" The Lord knew about this. He knew that Satan was looking for someone to devour!
Yet, it was the Lord who asked Satan to consider Job. Did the Lord ask Satan to consider Job simply to think about Job? Or, did God ask Satan to consider Job as his next subject for testing and "devouring?"
The fact is that God gave Satan his limits in his attack upon Job. (v12) In one day, Job lost all his children, his servants and all his livestock. That is a tragedy beyond imagination!
Of course, if this happened to the modern evangelical, who would be blamed for the tragedy? Satan, of course! As if God was totally unable to limit Satan's actions!
Yet, Job understood God's sovereignty when he said, "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return. The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD." (v21)
Job knew that God is the Almighty Sovereign of the universe and nothing, but nothing, could happen on this planet without God's signature on the triplicate application! In fact, it is God Himself who suggested Job to Satan. Why would it be any different for you and me?
The problem is that many today think of God and Satan as co-equals! Sometimes they even include themselves as God's co-equal! They do not understand, nor believe that God is sovereign and that ALL comes to pass by God's sovereign decree!
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
I agree with Rick Warren!
I do! Seriously!
Rick Warren believes that the church is in need of a second reformation. I agree with him on this matter! However, this is exactly where my disagreement with him comes to a grinding halt!
Warren thinks that the church needs a reformation of deeds and not creeds!
When I look at the church today, I can see it getting involved in all kinds of good deeds in all kinds of places. There are myriads of social projects going on in many churches.
There are prison ministries, social upliftment programs, HIV/AIDS care facilities, orphanages, skills training for the unemployed, feeding the poor, and many other programs that are doing exactly what Warren is speaking about. Yet, he speaks of it as if it is some new revelation from heaven! The church has been involved in these things for almost 2000 years! Maybe Warren has stepped out of some time warp, and he hasn't seen all the ministries involved in the "deeds," but "deeds" ministries are nothing new!
The fact is that these programs are good! They bring relief to many people.
Yet, for Warren to think that the church is in need of a reformation of deeds and not a reformation of creeds, simply shows that (1) he is either out of touch with what is going on in the church theologically, or (2) he does not think that the theological issues are important! Either way, it can lead to a heap of trouble!
If option 1 is his problem, it would certainly show his ignorance of what is going on the church today. It would show that his call for a reformation of deeds is based on a pure thumb-suck, and that it does not square up with the reality of the modern church!
If it is option 2, then he is in bigger trouble than we could have imagined! If theology is not that important to him, then it would be easy to imagine why he would call for a reformation of deeds instead of creeds. Furthermore, it would also be easy to see why he shared his pulpit with Barack Obama--uber-liberal! It would also explain the five points of his P.E.A.C.E. plan!
Warren came up with his P.E.A.C.E. plan:
P - Plant a church or partner with a church if there is one there. It always starts with a church... in, through, and to the church.
E - Equip servant leaders.
A - Assist the poor.
C - Care for the sick.
E - Educate the next generation.
According to Warren, "[i]t's the five things Jesus did when he was here on earth." Are these really the five most important things Rick Warren could pick out of Jesus' life to make his P.E.A.C.E. acronym? What about the death of Christ to atone for the sins of His people? Or, perhaps the atonement is not such a big deal to Warren. I would like to see that cleared up! Further, does the resurrection from the dead of Christ even make a blip on Warren's radar screen? Did Paul not say that without the resurrection, we had no hope! That would make the resurrection more important than all of Warren's five points!
There is another point that I agree on with Warren. Seriously, I do! With his Purpose-Driven books and in the article linked, Warren makes it clear that he believes that each person on earth has a purpose. I agree with that! What that purpose is, is where we would part ways. In Warren's mind, God's purpose for every person on this planet is good, according to human measure. And, that purpose includes salvation for every person!
With this in mind, I would like Rick Warren to explain Romans 9:10-18!
Rick Warren believes that the church is in need of a second reformation. I agree with him on this matter! However, this is exactly where my disagreement with him comes to a grinding halt!
Warren thinks that the church needs a reformation of deeds and not creeds!
"I’m looking for a second reformation. The first reformation of the church 500 years ago was about beliefs. This one is going to be about behavior. The first one was about creeds. This one is going to be about deeds. It is not going to be about what does the church believe, but about what is the church doing."
When I look at the church today, I can see it getting involved in all kinds of good deeds in all kinds of places. There are myriads of social projects going on in many churches.
There are prison ministries, social upliftment programs, HIV/AIDS care facilities, orphanages, skills training for the unemployed, feeding the poor, and many other programs that are doing exactly what Warren is speaking about. Yet, he speaks of it as if it is some new revelation from heaven! The church has been involved in these things for almost 2000 years! Maybe Warren has stepped out of some time warp, and he hasn't seen all the ministries involved in the "deeds," but "deeds" ministries are nothing new!
The fact is that these programs are good! They bring relief to many people.
Yet, for Warren to think that the church is in need of a reformation of deeds and not a reformation of creeds, simply shows that (1) he is either out of touch with what is going on in the church theologically, or (2) he does not think that the theological issues are important! Either way, it can lead to a heap of trouble!
If option 1 is his problem, it would certainly show his ignorance of what is going on the church today. It would show that his call for a reformation of deeds is based on a pure thumb-suck, and that it does not square up with the reality of the modern church!
If it is option 2, then he is in bigger trouble than we could have imagined! If theology is not that important to him, then it would be easy to imagine why he would call for a reformation of deeds instead of creeds. Furthermore, it would also be easy to see why he shared his pulpit with Barack Obama--uber-liberal! It would also explain the five points of his P.E.A.C.E. plan!
Warren came up with his P.E.A.C.E. plan:
P - Plant a church or partner with a church if there is one there. It always starts with a church... in, through, and to the church.
E - Equip servant leaders.
A - Assist the poor.
C - Care for the sick.
E - Educate the next generation.
According to Warren, "[i]t's the five things Jesus did when he was here on earth." Are these really the five most important things Rick Warren could pick out of Jesus' life to make his P.E.A.C.E. acronym? What about the death of Christ to atone for the sins of His people? Or, perhaps the atonement is not such a big deal to Warren. I would like to see that cleared up! Further, does the resurrection from the dead of Christ even make a blip on Warren's radar screen? Did Paul not say that without the resurrection, we had no hope! That would make the resurrection more important than all of Warren's five points!
There is another point that I agree on with Warren. Seriously, I do! With his Purpose-Driven books and in the article linked, Warren makes it clear that he believes that each person on earth has a purpose. I agree with that! What that purpose is, is where we would part ways. In Warren's mind, God's purpose for every person on this planet is good, according to human measure. And, that purpose includes salvation for every person!
With this in mind, I would like Rick Warren to explain Romans 9:10-18!
[10] And not only so, but also when Rebecca had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac,
[11] though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad--in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call--
[12] she was told, "The older will serve the younger."
[13] As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
[14] What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means!
[15] For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
[16] So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
[17] For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."
[18] So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
(Rom 9:10-18 ESV)
[11] though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad--in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call--
[12] she was told, "The older will serve the younger."
[13] As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
[14] What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means!
[15] For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
[16] So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
[17] For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."
[18] So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
(Rom 9:10-18 ESV)
Monday, December 11, 2006
Some men refuse to grow up!
Dr. Al Mohler wrote a commentary called Thank God for Testosterone? Confusion About Christian Manhood. It is an excellent, precise commentary without mincing words.
With the feminization of the church, many men have realized that it is time to be men again in their homes and in society. This is a good realization!
However, it seems that men have been denied the right to be men for so long, that many of them have forgotten (or was never taught) what real men were supposed to be like!
What is the end result? Men, acting like teenage boys, thinking that an external display of testosterone, attempting to outdo other teenage boys, is what men are supposed to be like!
The problem with this scenario is that real men do not have a need to outdo other men! Is it necessary to go into dark forests on hunting trips to prove that we are men? Do we have to participate in dangerous or not so dangerous sports to prove anything? Do we as men have to sit glued to the TV every time there is sport on the telly?
To me, this seems to be how adolescents would act and not men. Being male does not make you a man!
Carrying a weapon, shooting an indefensible animal, does not make you a man! (I have no qualms with hunting per se). Beating yourself on the chest like a gorilla does not make you a man.
I do not see the Bible giving us examples of chest beating as proof of being men! It was not part of who Jesus was, or the apostle Paul!
Dr. Mohler wrote:
"Christian manhood is not about beating chests and celebrating testosterone -- it is about showing up and doing what real Christian men do. Real manhood is demonstrated in the fulfillment of a man's assigned roles as husband, father, leader, servant, teacher, protector, and provider. Real manhood is in doing what men do, not endless talk about how great it is to be a man. Real Christian manhood is evident in taking up leadership in the home and in the church, not in crude and facile talk about Jesus using profanity when he called Herod 'that fox.'
"In other words, real Christian men are those who have grown up to be men, not those who embarrass the church and confuse the Gospel with displays of adolescent misbehavior. Let's hope this movement grows up before it blows up."
In this modern era, boys are not required to grow up. They can continue to live in their MTV world where there is no need to become responsible or accountable. Virtues needed to ensure a healthy neighbourhood!
Instead, men today see no need to grow up, because they have all these wonderful toys that can keep them busy and entertained for many years. They remain in their adolescent stage and later think that that is the real "men" stage. They have no way of discerning the difference, since all they know is the adolescent stage.
With the feminization of the church, many men have realized that it is time to be men again in their homes and in society. This is a good realization!
However, it seems that men have been denied the right to be men for so long, that many of them have forgotten (or was never taught) what real men were supposed to be like!
What is the end result? Men, acting like teenage boys, thinking that an external display of testosterone, attempting to outdo other teenage boys, is what men are supposed to be like!
The problem with this scenario is that real men do not have a need to outdo other men! Is it necessary to go into dark forests on hunting trips to prove that we are men? Do we have to participate in dangerous or not so dangerous sports to prove anything? Do we as men have to sit glued to the TV every time there is sport on the telly?
To me, this seems to be how adolescents would act and not men. Being male does not make you a man!
Carrying a weapon, shooting an indefensible animal, does not make you a man! (I have no qualms with hunting per se). Beating yourself on the chest like a gorilla does not make you a man.
I do not see the Bible giving us examples of chest beating as proof of being men! It was not part of who Jesus was, or the apostle Paul!
Dr. Mohler wrote:
"Christian manhood is not about beating chests and celebrating testosterone -- it is about showing up and doing what real Christian men do. Real manhood is demonstrated in the fulfillment of a man's assigned roles as husband, father, leader, servant, teacher, protector, and provider. Real manhood is in doing what men do, not endless talk about how great it is to be a man. Real Christian manhood is evident in taking up leadership in the home and in the church, not in crude and facile talk about Jesus using profanity when he called Herod 'that fox.'
"In other words, real Christian men are those who have grown up to be men, not those who embarrass the church and confuse the Gospel with displays of adolescent misbehavior. Let's hope this movement grows up before it blows up."
In this modern era, boys are not required to grow up. They can continue to live in their MTV world where there is no need to become responsible or accountable. Virtues needed to ensure a healthy neighbourhood!
Instead, men today see no need to grow up, because they have all these wonderful toys that can keep them busy and entertained for many years. They remain in their adolescent stage and later think that that is the real "men" stage. They have no way of discerning the difference, since all they know is the adolescent stage.
An Interview with Dr. Wayne Grudem
I have long been an admirer of Dr. Wayne Grudem, well known for his Systematic Theology. It is one of the best written systematic theology textbooks I know of. To purchase this volume in South Africa, visit Kalahari.net, and to purchase it in the USA, visit Amazon.com.
Anyhow, Adrian Warnock has done an interview with Dr. Grudem, and so far has posted four parts of the interview.
Visit the links below for the four parts of the interview:
INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part One
INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part Two - Systematic Theology and Controversy
INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part Three - Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism
INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part Four - Ethical Trajectories, Feminism, and Homosexuality
Anyhow, Adrian Warnock has done an interview with Dr. Grudem, and so far has posted four parts of the interview.
Visit the links below for the four parts of the interview:
INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part One
INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part Two - Systematic Theology and Controversy
INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part Three - Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism
INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part Four - Ethical Trajectories, Feminism, and Homosexuality
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
It's is all about me... Isn't it?
Most in the church today think that the gospel is all about them. Sure, they may not say it in so many words, but they really do believe it. This can be borne out by how they live and what they do.
The fact is that the gospel is about what happened within historical time 2000 years ago. It is redemptive history worked out in the life and death of Christ. To many, the gospel is man's response to the gospel or God's regenerative work in the believer today.
Whenever the apostles are preaching the gospel in the book of Acts, they are preaching about historical events. They never make our responses to the gospel, the gospel itself! To the apostles, the gospel is always what transpired in history, in measured time, in the verifiable acts here on earth two millenia ago.
The problem with making the gospel anything but the historical events of the Christ, is to remove the validity of the gospel. The gospel has no meaning outside of its objective historical setting. Without the historical events the gospel does not exist!
However, many treat their own experiences with the gospel as the gospel itself, and preach that as the "gospel." This way they rob the gospel of its objective nature, making it equal to just another self-help program. By preaching their own experiences as the gospel, there simply remains no reason for anyone to follow this "gospel" since which person's "gospel" will they follow?
The fact is that many people change after converting to some or other religion. If a changed person is the evidence of the religion, then we have a problem. How will we gauge which religion to follow? Do we test the change in each person to see who changed the most?
No, if we have to test religions by their subjective experiences, then which experiences should we test by? This will reduce the gospel to a case of pragmatism.
The fact is that we need to test by objective criteria. Criteria that can be verified. Experiences are unverifiable since we have no way of testing the internalization of anything!
The real gospel is historical, fully documented and can be tested. That is why our experiences should never be treated as the gospel, but rather the life and events of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
Our lives can only speak of the work of the gospel in us, not of the gospel itself in its completeness.
The fact is that the gospel is about what happened within historical time 2000 years ago. It is redemptive history worked out in the life and death of Christ. To many, the gospel is man's response to the gospel or God's regenerative work in the believer today.
Whenever the apostles are preaching the gospel in the book of Acts, they are preaching about historical events. They never make our responses to the gospel, the gospel itself! To the apostles, the gospel is always what transpired in history, in measured time, in the verifiable acts here on earth two millenia ago.
The problem with making the gospel anything but the historical events of the Christ, is to remove the validity of the gospel. The gospel has no meaning outside of its objective historical setting. Without the historical events the gospel does not exist!
However, many treat their own experiences with the gospel as the gospel itself, and preach that as the "gospel." This way they rob the gospel of its objective nature, making it equal to just another self-help program. By preaching their own experiences as the gospel, there simply remains no reason for anyone to follow this "gospel" since which person's "gospel" will they follow?
The fact is that many people change after converting to some or other religion. If a changed person is the evidence of the religion, then we have a problem. How will we gauge which religion to follow? Do we test the change in each person to see who changed the most?
No, if we have to test religions by their subjective experiences, then which experiences should we test by? This will reduce the gospel to a case of pragmatism.
The fact is that we need to test by objective criteria. Criteria that can be verified. Experiences are unverifiable since we have no way of testing the internalization of anything!
The real gospel is historical, fully documented and can be tested. That is why our experiences should never be treated as the gospel, but rather the life and events of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
Our lives can only speak of the work of the gospel in us, not of the gospel itself in its completeness.
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Best Bible Software (IMHO)
I see that some of our Christian blog writers recommend Bible Study Software such as Logos Bible Software.When I look at the pricing of this software it simply takes my breath away! I wonder what Luther, Calvin and the Puritans did without this software?! Poor guys had to do it the hard way!
I looked at the price for the Gold Edition in my own currency (R11 399.00/$1379.95) and I almost fell off my chair! This is exactly the edition that I would like to have myself, but at that price I'd rather do a root-canal at the dentist! The Gold Edition has almost everything that any serious Bible scholar could need. Yet, this is a price that is totally out of my league without some kind of sponsorship.
However, there is light at the end of this pricing darkness!
e-Sword is free, and it is good. It includes many different free versions of the English translation, such as the ESV, ASV, CEV, Message, KJV and several more. It further includes the Majority Greek NT, Scrivener Textus Receptus, Westcott-Hort, Hebrew OT, Septuagint, Vulgate and also many foreign language translations.
Further, some of these texts are coded with Strong's numbering system.
There are also many Commentaries available. There are commentaries like Clarke's Commentary, Barnes, John Gill, Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Matthew Henry, Robertson's Word Pictures, etc.
e-Sword also includes Dictionaries, such as Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definitions, Easton's, ISBE, Nave's, Strong's Bible Dictionary, Thayer's Greek Definitions, etc.
There are also some Graphics available. It includes the American Bible Society Maps, Classic Bible Maps, Ancient Mediterranean Maps and even NASA Satellite Images.
Then there are the Extras. This would include the Ante-Nicene Fathers, All of Grace by Spurgeon, Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus, Concerning Christian Liberty by Martin Luther, Creeds of Christendom and History of The Christian Church by Schaff and many more.
There are also some Devotions included and finally some STEP Libraries such as collections by A.W. Pink, J.C. Ryle and John Bunyan.
In my opinion, e-Sword is one of the best Bible Study Software products to be found. If the price of e-Sword is considered, then I would say it is the best deal you can find on any Bible Study Software! The reason for saying this, is that it is FREE software! Yes, you read correctly! It is free.
I have been using e-Sword now for many years. Probably from about early 2001, and I have been more than happy with this software.
It is easy to use and easy to configure. Starting with e-Sword is simple, even for someone that is not very computer literate. It is also advanced enough to satisfy a regular computer user.
In my opinion, you cannot go wrong when using this software!
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Body Piercing Saved My Life
Tim Challies did a very interesting review of Andrew Beaujon's book, Body Piercing Saved My Life.
Although Beaujon is not a Christian, he has been attending Christian concerts and events, since this is a subject that intrigues him. Read the commentary by Challies to see how Beaujon views Christian contemporary music.
I would like to comment on something that Challies wrote,
"On a more minor note, he [Beaujon] often focuses undue attention on the music itself rather than the lyrics. While music is no doubt important, and while we should clearly attempt to bring before God music that is excellent, he expends little effort in examining lyrics. Many Christians, as much as they love a good melody, wants songs that speak of the great truths of the Scriptures more than they want songs that are memorable or even musically superior. There are two dimensions to songs and he seems to give preeminence to the wrong one. "
I don't disagree with Challies entirely, since in principle he is right in saying that "Christians, as much as they love a good melody, wants songs that speak of the great truths of the Scriptures more than they want songs that are memorable or even musically superior." What I do disagree with is the word "many" that he starts his sentence with in this case. I am personally not so sure that there would be many modern Christians that would think like that.
From my experience with the church I have seen a very different dynamic in the church. It seems to me that many Christians--whether my many is more or less than Challies' many is disputable--are more interested in the entertainment value in the Christian music they listen to than the actual words being sung. I have noticed this even concerning worship music, to the point that I am calling it worshitainment. I have written about this already (Worship at a price, Big words and worshitainment and most recently Praising God down!).
Churches have become so worshitainment centered that it would be almost inconceivable that they would use so-called "boring" music with good Biblical words that speak to the soul. Please, believe me when I say that I have nothing against good professional sounding music, modern or old! That is not the point! What I do have a concern about is that many Christians think that the music is the worship. To them, the sound and the vibe it gives is the worship. It all comes back to the entertainment value intrinsic to the music.
Sure, there are churches out there where the Christians are more concerned about the actual words of their worship. However, many times they are at the opposite side of the spectrum, where the music itself has no real value. The fact is that our worship is about the words and the meaning they convey, yet that meaning may have different vehicles by which they are conveyed. The vehicle may be writing, preaching, or even in song. The fact is that in each of these cases we must ensure that the vehicle that conveys the message is a good vehicle.
My point is that there are Christians out there that do believe that the lyrics of our songs are important. However, there are also others that find it more convenient to be titillated by music, rather than actually use their brains to think about what they are singing!
Just thinking...
Polemical Commentary on
the State of the Church
Although Beaujon is not a Christian, he has been attending Christian concerts and events, since this is a subject that intrigues him. Read the commentary by Challies to see how Beaujon views Christian contemporary music.
I would like to comment on something that Challies wrote,
"On a more minor note, he [Beaujon] often focuses undue attention on the music itself rather than the lyrics. While music is no doubt important, and while we should clearly attempt to bring before God music that is excellent, he expends little effort in examining lyrics. Many Christians, as much as they love a good melody, wants songs that speak of the great truths of the Scriptures more than they want songs that are memorable or even musically superior. There are two dimensions to songs and he seems to give preeminence to the wrong one. "
I don't disagree with Challies entirely, since in principle he is right in saying that "Christians, as much as they love a good melody, wants songs that speak of the great truths of the Scriptures more than they want songs that are memorable or even musically superior." What I do disagree with is the word "many" that he starts his sentence with in this case. I am personally not so sure that there would be many modern Christians that would think like that.
From my experience with the church I have seen a very different dynamic in the church. It seems to me that many Christians--whether my many is more or less than Challies' many is disputable--are more interested in the entertainment value in the Christian music they listen to than the actual words being sung. I have noticed this even concerning worship music, to the point that I am calling it worshitainment. I have written about this already (Worship at a price, Big words and worshitainment and most recently Praising God down!).
Churches have become so worshitainment centered that it would be almost inconceivable that they would use so-called "boring" music with good Biblical words that speak to the soul. Please, believe me when I say that I have nothing against good professional sounding music, modern or old! That is not the point! What I do have a concern about is that many Christians think that the music is the worship. To them, the sound and the vibe it gives is the worship. It all comes back to the entertainment value intrinsic to the music.
Sure, there are churches out there where the Christians are more concerned about the actual words of their worship. However, many times they are at the opposite side of the spectrum, where the music itself has no real value. The fact is that our worship is about the words and the meaning they convey, yet that meaning may have different vehicles by which they are conveyed. The vehicle may be writing, preaching, or even in song. The fact is that in each of these cases we must ensure that the vehicle that conveys the message is a good vehicle.
My point is that there are Christians out there that do believe that the lyrics of our songs are important. However, there are also others that find it more convenient to be titillated by music, rather than actually use their brains to think about what they are singing!
Just thinking...
Polemical Commentary on
the State of the Church
Monday, November 20, 2006
Jesus and Satan joining hands in fighting HIV/AIDS?
It keeps on happening! Satan wanting to join forces with Jesus in fighting a so-called evil. The problem with this is that the reasons for doing so between our dear Lord and the fiend of hell are diametrically opposed to each other.
Christ came to bring deliverance to the elect. Satan wants to bring bondage. Christ brought us the light. Satan only brings light-less darkness of oppression. Christ's deeds are done with the good of mankind in mind. Satan comes to kill, steal and destroy!
So, if these two kingdoms--the kingdom of light and the kingdom of darkness--are so irreconcilable, how is it that some of the church's so-called leaders think that it would be acceptable to join forces with the devil to fight any scourge on earth?
It seems that Rick Warren thinks that it would be acceptable to link the cause of Christ with the cause of the devil!
Warren, the senior teaching pastor at Saddleback Church in California, has invited U.S. senator Barack Obama to speak to Warren's church on Dec 1, 2006.
Now, for those who do not know who Obama is, as a state legislator he stood for abortion through the complete term of pregnancy while opposing parental notification. He also opposed all bans on partial-birth abortion. He also supports the homosexual agenda including so-called "hate crimes" against homosexuals, which may in due course be used to silence the clergy on this issue. He even opposed the right of life for babies who survived failed abortions.
Is this the type of person that Warren wants to associate with?
Discernment goes a long way in doing what is right with the right people. However, when we start joining forces with the forces of darkness, it shows our own lack of discernment and indeed our lack of understanding our Biblical mandate!
Read more about this episode in the continued Warren saga here.
Just thinking ...
Christ came to bring deliverance to the elect. Satan wants to bring bondage. Christ brought us the light. Satan only brings light-less darkness of oppression. Christ's deeds are done with the good of mankind in mind. Satan comes to kill, steal and destroy!
So, if these two kingdoms--the kingdom of light and the kingdom of darkness--are so irreconcilable, how is it that some of the church's so-called leaders think that it would be acceptable to join forces with the devil to fight any scourge on earth?
It seems that Rick Warren thinks that it would be acceptable to link the cause of Christ with the cause of the devil!
Warren, the senior teaching pastor at Saddleback Church in California, has invited U.S. senator Barack Obama to speak to Warren's church on Dec 1, 2006.
Now, for those who do not know who Obama is, as a state legislator he stood for abortion through the complete term of pregnancy while opposing parental notification. He also opposed all bans on partial-birth abortion. He also supports the homosexual agenda including so-called "hate crimes" against homosexuals, which may in due course be used to silence the clergy on this issue. He even opposed the right of life for babies who survived failed abortions.
Is this the type of person that Warren wants to associate with?
Discernment goes a long way in doing what is right with the right people. However, when we start joining forces with the forces of darkness, it shows our own lack of discernment and indeed our lack of understanding our Biblical mandate!
Read more about this episode in the continued Warren saga here.
Just thinking ...
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Praising God down!
Modern, especially Charismatic, churches seem to have this notion that we have to continually sing louder in order to bring God down into the service. There is this idea that we have to sing in tongues or at least make a lot of noise in order for God to inhabit our praises, thereby joining us in our services.
This happened in church today. People were making a lot of noise when the worship leader took control of the situation and announced that we weren't there yet. We were then told to sing in tongues and to lift our voices even higher for God to inhabit our praises.
It will also not help to quote verses from the Old Testament! The Old Testament (OT) had very different "mechanics" than the New Testament (NT). In the OT there was a physical place where God dwelt and showed Himself. The Temple! This is where God came down to, in order to visit the people. In the NT it is very different. Whereas in the OT, God showed Himself at various times in the temple, in the NT there is no longer a physical temple where we must go to meet God! Now, the Christian is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19), and He does not take up residence at various times in the Christian's life, but rather He indwells the Christian at all times.
It seems to me that the evangelical church has gone so far down the road towards seeking the next experience that it will get up to almost any kind of shenanigans to make those experiences real. Whether these methods are Scriptural or not, do not seem to deter them from seeking the next big thing.
To them, especially if they are charismatic, worship has undergone a tragic metamorphosis. It has happened so often that people would exit the church saying that worship wasn't good that day and that it did nothing for them.
A pastor was once waiting at the door of the church he pastored at the end of the service, and when a visitor walked out he asked the visitor how he enjoyed the service. The visitor answered that he enjoyed the sermon, but the worship did nothing for him. Hearing this the pastor answered him by saying, "Well I am glad to hear that. We didn't come here to worship you!"
The problem with this neo-evangelicalism is that it has become very self-centred and selfish in its motives. This church has become obsessed with itself, thinking that it is the center of the universe. It has forgotten about the Creator of the universe to the extent that it has denied Him His rightful place, and in the process usurped the throne of the King of kings.
If the church's aim is to move from experience to experience, it will never grow up to full maturity in Christ. If the only thing that can keep it going is adrenalin, then it surely has lost its way. Adrenalin does not strengthen the spirit of man. It simply gives a momentary feeling of invincibility and then fades away.
What will help the spirit to be strengthened is to daily spend time in the study of the Scriptures and to meditate on it.
The fact is that acquiring sanctification cannot be acquired in a moment when that adrenalin shoots through our veins. Sanctification takes a lifetime of glorifying God in everything we do and living out the Word that we study each day!
If the church wants reformation, it certainly is going about it the wrong way!
It is time the church moves back to the basics and stops seeking grand schemes to get highs on adrenalin.
The neo-evangelicals surely are experience-adrenalin junkies!
May it find deliverance!
Just thinking...
This happened in church today. People were making a lot of noise when the worship leader took control of the situation and announced that we weren't there yet. We were then told to sing in tongues and to lift our voices even higher for God to inhabit our praises.
(1) When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place.
(2) And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting.
(Ac 2:1-2)
Scripture seems to be so different from the concocted ideas that the church can come up with at times. The disciples were told to wait in Jerusalem until the promise. When the promise came, it wasn't because they conjured Him down! He came in His own time. The amazing thing was that they weren't jumping up and down shouting at the top of their lungs in order to ensure His arrival! "They were sitting!" This indicates a very relaxed atmosphere in which no one was forced to do anything to bring God down into the house!(2) And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting.
(Ac 2:1-2)
It will also not help to quote verses from the Old Testament! The Old Testament (OT) had very different "mechanics" than the New Testament (NT). In the OT there was a physical place where God dwelt and showed Himself. The Temple! This is where God came down to, in order to visit the people. In the NT it is very different. Whereas in the OT, God showed Himself at various times in the temple, in the NT there is no longer a physical temple where we must go to meet God! Now, the Christian is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19), and He does not take up residence at various times in the Christian's life, but rather He indwells the Christian at all times.
It seems to me that the evangelical church has gone so far down the road towards seeking the next experience that it will get up to almost any kind of shenanigans to make those experiences real. Whether these methods are Scriptural or not, do not seem to deter them from seeking the next big thing.
To them, especially if they are charismatic, worship has undergone a tragic metamorphosis. It has happened so often that people would exit the church saying that worship wasn't good that day and that it did nothing for them.
A pastor was once waiting at the door of the church he pastored at the end of the service, and when a visitor walked out he asked the visitor how he enjoyed the service. The visitor answered that he enjoyed the sermon, but the worship did nothing for him. Hearing this the pastor answered him by saying, "Well I am glad to hear that. We didn't come here to worship you!"
The problem with this neo-evangelicalism is that it has become very self-centred and selfish in its motives. This church has become obsessed with itself, thinking that it is the center of the universe. It has forgotten about the Creator of the universe to the extent that it has denied Him His rightful place, and in the process usurped the throne of the King of kings.
If the church's aim is to move from experience to experience, it will never grow up to full maturity in Christ. If the only thing that can keep it going is adrenalin, then it surely has lost its way. Adrenalin does not strengthen the spirit of man. It simply gives a momentary feeling of invincibility and then fades away.
What will help the spirit to be strengthened is to daily spend time in the study of the Scriptures and to meditate on it.
Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.
(2 Tim 2:15)
We are supposed to work at learning the truth of the Scriptures and to live thereby. These neo-evangelicals are forever looking for short cuts to growing in Christ (sanctification). The fact is that there are no short cuts. There are no easy ways to be sanctified in Christ. If it all depended on following ten steps and five songs at the top of our voices we would be back to serving the law in order to gain acceptance before God! If our sanctification depended on recipes to follow, it would be the same as following the law in order to secure that sanctification.(2 Tim 2:15)
The fact is that acquiring sanctification cannot be acquired in a moment when that adrenalin shoots through our veins. Sanctification takes a lifetime of glorifying God in everything we do and living out the Word that we study each day!
If the church wants reformation, it certainly is going about it the wrong way!
It is time the church moves back to the basics and stops seeking grand schemes to get highs on adrenalin.
The neo-evangelicals surely are experience-adrenalin junkies!
May it find deliverance!
Just thinking...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
