It is sometimes difficult to understand how a son that seemed to be such an upstanding and good son can turn out to almost seem evil. Especially when that son turns on his parents and vilifies them in a very public book.
Frank Schaeffer wrote a memoir of his life called Crazy for God, in which he rips into his parents. I wonder how Exo 20:12 and 21:17 shape into his life? A man that can publicly speak of his parents the way that Frank does, must be a man that has lost his way!
Anyhow, Os Guiness wrote an excellent review of Frank Schaeffer's book here. It is well worth reading!
HT: Justin Taylor
Friday, February 29, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
This is MY belief!
This week's commentary at the White Horse Inn is so true of today's spirituality in the world, and I dare say even in the church.
Here is a short paragraph from it:
"Seekers of the day are apt to peel away the tough theological stuff and pluck out the most dulcet elements of faith, coming up with a soothing sampler of Judeo-Christian imagery, Eastern mediation, self-help lingo, a vaguely conservative craving for virtue, and a loopy new-age pursuit of peace. This happy free-for-all appealing to Baptists and star-gazers alike comes off more like Forrest Gump's ubiquitous box of chocolates than like any real system of belief, 'You never know what you're gonna get.'"
Finish reading here.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Chuck Colson praises PETA
Charles Colson praises PETA for their consistent worldview.
Read about it here.
Read about it here.
C.J. Mahaney and a pastor's task of discernment
C.J. Mahaney of Sovereign Grace Ministries has written a blog post on how he approaches the issue of erroneous teaching in the church today. It would be prudent for each pastor to heed Mahaney's careful approach to protect the flock from all the errors that are being taught today. He especially mentions Rob Bell of NOOMA fame infamy. You can read about C.J.'s heart on this matter here.
C.J. makes special mention of Greg Gilbert's review of Rob Bell's NOOMA videos. If you are interested in the emergent perversion of the gospel, you will do well to read Gilbert's review, which comes in three parts.
C.J. makes special mention of Greg Gilbert's review of Rob Bell's NOOMA videos. If you are interested in the emergent perversion of the gospel, you will do well to read Gilbert's review, which comes in three parts.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
What does your level of worship say about you?
Greg Gilbert, at XI Marks Ministries wrote an exceptionally thought provoking blog post on music in the church, and how what you say about other styles of worship in the church, says a lot on your maturity in worshipping God!
The post is called Against Music. Read it and think...
After many comments on his post he followed it up with this post.
The post is called Against Music. Read it and think...
After many comments on his post he followed it up with this post.
Is Natural Revelation Sufficient to Govern Culture?
John Frame says, "no," and gives 13 reasons why not.
Find out here why he says "no."
HT: Justin Taylor
Find out here why he says "no."
HT: Justin Taylor
John Piper admired by his own son
"I’m Abraham, number 3 of John Piper’s 5 kids."Different people know my dad in different ways.
"Most of you probably know him as a preacher and an author. I know him as a preacher, too. He’s been at Bethlehem since I was 6 months old.
"And I suppose I know him as an author…I’ve read one of his books.
"But it’s not most important to me that he’s a pastor or an author. It’s most important to me that he's my dad."
Read more...
Also visit John Piper's amazing resource library here.
Disingenuous redefining of evangelicalism
Paul Edwards has written a strong case against the current Evangelical Liberals Left in his article, "Defining Evangelicalism Down."
He wrote:
"The Religious Left is successfully redefining what it means to be a conservative evangelical by misrepresenting what it means to be a conservative evangelical. In a recent conference call hosted by Faith in Public Life, one of the emerging voices of the Religious Left, Dr. Joel Hunter, said:
"There’s also a change in the voices that are defining what is conservative now, and what is evangelical. In the past couple of decades you’ve had some very loud voices on both sides – hard right, hard left – and when those were the only choices, then of course many evangelicals are going to go with the hard right because, well, that’s kind of where we mostly are. Now there are many more voices that are expanding the agenda, and so those people that have always had kind of a holistic approach, rather than just a one or two issue approach, are now feeling permission and given permission to be more nuanced and more sophisticated in their approach, rather than just going in a very bifurcated system. And so, what you’re hearing now is that the old voices that appointed themselves as the definers of what was evangelical or what was conservative are not holding sway with the majority of evangelicals anymore.
"By convincing America that conservative evangelicals are concerned only with two issues, stopping abortion and preserving traditional marriage, these new voices of evangelicalism are effectively making the case that conservative evangelicals ignore poverty, HIV/AIDS, and the environment. The history of evangelicalism tells a different story."
Finish reading the article here.
He wrote:
"The Religious Left is successfully redefining what it means to be a conservative evangelical by misrepresenting what it means to be a conservative evangelical. In a recent conference call hosted by Faith in Public Life, one of the emerging voices of the Religious Left, Dr. Joel Hunter, said:
"There’s also a change in the voices that are defining what is conservative now, and what is evangelical. In the past couple of decades you’ve had some very loud voices on both sides – hard right, hard left – and when those were the only choices, then of course many evangelicals are going to go with the hard right because, well, that’s kind of where we mostly are. Now there are many more voices that are expanding the agenda, and so those people that have always had kind of a holistic approach, rather than just a one or two issue approach, are now feeling permission and given permission to be more nuanced and more sophisticated in their approach, rather than just going in a very bifurcated system. And so, what you’re hearing now is that the old voices that appointed themselves as the definers of what was evangelical or what was conservative are not holding sway with the majority of evangelicals anymore.
"By convincing America that conservative evangelicals are concerned only with two issues, stopping abortion and preserving traditional marriage, these new voices of evangelicalism are effectively making the case that conservative evangelicals ignore poverty, HIV/AIDS, and the environment. The history of evangelicalism tells a different story."
Finish reading the article here.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
February Challies DVD giveaway!
Tim Challies is again doing his giveaway drive. This time it is a set of DVDs. Simply click on the banner below to enter the giveaway!
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Theology Network launched!
A new website has been launched and it seems that it will have articles worth reading and learning from. Articles by men such as Wayne Grudem, Don Carson, J.I. Packer, Vern Poythress, Carl Trueman and more can be found here. Simply click on the graphic below and enjoy the visit!
HT: Tim Challies
HT: Tim Challies
Monday, February 04, 2008
Super Bowl XLII and Mahaney
The Super Bowl has come and gone and the Giants beat the Patriots. I wonder what C.J. Mahaney has to say after he predicted "that New England will win easily and decisively?"
Oh, the folly of sports predictions!
Oh, the folly of sports predictions!
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Rick Warren shows lack of discernment
It happens to all of us. Somewhere along the line we meet people who claim to be Christians, and we accept that claim at face value. It usually happens to young Christians who have not studied the Bible enough to know what real Christians believe.
It happens to most of us. I remember, when I was but a young Christian with not much knowledge of others who claimed to be Christians, that I, together with my youth group here in South Africa, ran into the ZCCs (Zion Christian Church). To us it was very simple. "Look, it is a Christian church!" However,... these people have merged Christianity with their ancestor worship, and ended up with something that is not Christianity at all! How can you worship the ancestors and Christ together? That is an abomination. It is like worshipping the devil and Jesus while claiming that you are a Christian!
Now this is what I do not understand in Rick Warren's case. He wants mainline churches to reconcile with evangelical churches to stop their decline in membership.
According to Warren:
“100 years ago the phrase ‘social gospel’ first came out. Some people took that to mean only if we reform the social government and society and not personal faith in Christ Jesus – that is, if we make the world a better place – we don’t need personal redemption.”
Warren feels that the mainline churches went one way and evangelical churches went another. He continued:
“Who’s right? The fact is both are right. Somehow we got divided like Jesus didn’t care about society or members of society didn’t need Jesus. I think we need both.”
Warren's idea here is ignoratio elenchi. As "Seven of Nine" from Star Trek: Voyager would have said, "Irrelevant!" Warren's conclusion here is simply irrelevant. It may be right, but it is irrelevant. Sure, we need "personal redemption" and we need to be involved in society. However, Warren misses the point.
While speaking with the dean of the Washington National Cathedral, Samuel T. Lloyd III, Warren said, “The reconciliation is that in a pluralistic world…we (Christians) need to be on the same team because we share the same savior.” This is where many in evangelicalism differ with Warren. It is this very belief of Warren's that make his statement above ignoratio elenchi.
The fact is that among the mainline churches there is gross apostasy. They either deny all or some of the fundamentals of Christianity. From denying the virgin birth, to denying the death of Christ, to denying the resurrection of Christ, to denying that the Bible is the inerrant inspired Word of God, these people have walked away from what the Bible clearly teaches on almost every facet the Bible touches on, whether doctrinal or moral!
The fact is, contrary to what Mr. Warren has said, we do not "share the same savior." The fact is that these people cannot call themselves Christians when they deny the very faith they claim to hold onto.
Which brings me back to Rick Warren. Is this man so Biblically inept, that he will welcome anyone into the Christian fold? Who's next? The Mormons? The Jehovah's Witnesses? It seems to me that Warren wants to become all things to all people. Yet, contrary to the apostle Paul, it certainly is not to win some. He went to Iran... to pat Ahmedinejad on the back. He went to Jewish synagogues... to help them grow their membership. Now he goes to mainline churches... to reconcile with them. Based on what? That we have the same "savior." Think again!
How is that so many hold Warren in such high esteem (for some just below God Himself), yet he does not know why evangelicals parted ways with the mainline churches almost 100 years ago? Liberalism flooded what is now called the mainline churches. It came to be accepted in these churches to deny the fundamental doctrines of the faith and to basically become "social clubs" with the name of Christ somewhere close.
Evangelicalism did not part with mainline churches over something like community involvement. It was a doctrinal parting. The evangelical church continued with following the fundamentals of the faith and caring for the poor, etc. Several surveys over the years have concluded that evangelicals give and care more than mainline churches or the world do. Yet, people continue to hold onto the modern media caricature of evangelicals as uncaring. That is simply false!
Ingrid Schlueter wrote:
"Rick Warren’s presence in the pulpit of National Cathedral on January 27, and his call for 'reconciliation' with such churches should disgust every Christian who believes in the authority of Holy Scripture and who understands the critical importance of the foundational doctrines of the Christian faith. National Cathedral is a New Age pantheon to the gods of the world religions. That's why the church can feature goddess theology proponents teaching women how to dance in 'sacred circles', welcome the worship of Tibetan monks, teach Buddhist meditation techniques and introduce attendees to the Jewish Kabbalah. Where is Rick Warren's concern about the people who are on their way to hell in these churches that blaspheme the Lord Jesus Christ with goddess worship, homosexuality, a rejection of Christ’s penal substitutionary atonement, a denial of the authority of Scripture, and the promotion of the doctrines of anti-Christ?"
The point is that Rick Warren does not seem to exercise any discernment. How can this man want to merge truth and heresy? Truth and apostasy?
To read more on the essentials or fundamentals of the faith, read "What is the Gospel? What is the foundation to the Gospel?"
Some posts on the importance of truth and doctrine:
Without truth - empty, heartless gestures to God
The Relevancy of Doctrine
The Gospel: Diluted and non-Saving
Is the preacher a "reliable carrier" of God's truth?
It happens to most of us. I remember, when I was but a young Christian with not much knowledge of others who claimed to be Christians, that I, together with my youth group here in South Africa, ran into the ZCCs (Zion Christian Church). To us it was very simple. "Look, it is a Christian church!" However,... these people have merged Christianity with their ancestor worship, and ended up with something that is not Christianity at all! How can you worship the ancestors and Christ together? That is an abomination. It is like worshipping the devil and Jesus while claiming that you are a Christian!
Now this is what I do not understand in Rick Warren's case. He wants mainline churches to reconcile with evangelical churches to stop their decline in membership.According to Warren:
“100 years ago the phrase ‘social gospel’ first came out. Some people took that to mean only if we reform the social government and society and not personal faith in Christ Jesus – that is, if we make the world a better place – we don’t need personal redemption.”
Warren feels that the mainline churches went one way and evangelical churches went another. He continued:
“Who’s right? The fact is both are right. Somehow we got divided like Jesus didn’t care about society or members of society didn’t need Jesus. I think we need both.”
Warren's idea here is ignoratio elenchi. As "Seven of Nine" from Star Trek: Voyager would have said, "Irrelevant!" Warren's conclusion here is simply irrelevant. It may be right, but it is irrelevant. Sure, we need "personal redemption" and we need to be involved in society. However, Warren misses the point.
While speaking with the dean of the Washington National Cathedral, Samuel T. Lloyd III, Warren said, “The reconciliation is that in a pluralistic world…we (Christians) need to be on the same team because we share the same savior.” This is where many in evangelicalism differ with Warren. It is this very belief of Warren's that make his statement above ignoratio elenchi.
The fact is that among the mainline churches there is gross apostasy. They either deny all or some of the fundamentals of Christianity. From denying the virgin birth, to denying the death of Christ, to denying the resurrection of Christ, to denying that the Bible is the inerrant inspired Word of God, these people have walked away from what the Bible clearly teaches on almost every facet the Bible touches on, whether doctrinal or moral!
The fact is, contrary to what Mr. Warren has said, we do not "share the same savior." The fact is that these people cannot call themselves Christians when they deny the very faith they claim to hold onto.
Which brings me back to Rick Warren. Is this man so Biblically inept, that he will welcome anyone into the Christian fold? Who's next? The Mormons? The Jehovah's Witnesses? It seems to me that Warren wants to become all things to all people. Yet, contrary to the apostle Paul, it certainly is not to win some. He went to Iran... to pat Ahmedinejad on the back. He went to Jewish synagogues... to help them grow their membership. Now he goes to mainline churches... to reconcile with them. Based on what? That we have the same "savior." Think again!
How is that so many hold Warren in such high esteem (for some just below God Himself), yet he does not know why evangelicals parted ways with the mainline churches almost 100 years ago? Liberalism flooded what is now called the mainline churches. It came to be accepted in these churches to deny the fundamental doctrines of the faith and to basically become "social clubs" with the name of Christ somewhere close.
Evangelicalism did not part with mainline churches over something like community involvement. It was a doctrinal parting. The evangelical church continued with following the fundamentals of the faith and caring for the poor, etc. Several surveys over the years have concluded that evangelicals give and care more than mainline churches or the world do. Yet, people continue to hold onto the modern media caricature of evangelicals as uncaring. That is simply false!
Ingrid Schlueter wrote:
"Rick Warren’s presence in the pulpit of National Cathedral on January 27, and his call for 'reconciliation' with such churches should disgust every Christian who believes in the authority of Holy Scripture and who understands the critical importance of the foundational doctrines of the Christian faith. National Cathedral is a New Age pantheon to the gods of the world religions. That's why the church can feature goddess theology proponents teaching women how to dance in 'sacred circles', welcome the worship of Tibetan monks, teach Buddhist meditation techniques and introduce attendees to the Jewish Kabbalah. Where is Rick Warren's concern about the people who are on their way to hell in these churches that blaspheme the Lord Jesus Christ with goddess worship, homosexuality, a rejection of Christ’s penal substitutionary atonement, a denial of the authority of Scripture, and the promotion of the doctrines of anti-Christ?"
The point is that Rick Warren does not seem to exercise any discernment. How can this man want to merge truth and heresy? Truth and apostasy?
To read more on the essentials or fundamentals of the faith, read "What is the Gospel? What is the foundation to the Gospel?"
Some posts on the importance of truth and doctrine:
Without truth - empty, heartless gestures to God
The Relevancy of Doctrine
The Gospel: Diluted and non-Saving
Is the preacher a "reliable carrier" of God's truth?
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Churches may as well close their doors
Phil Magnan, President of Biblical Family Advocates, has written an open letter to churches and their pastors called, "If Churches Cannot Preach Against Abortion, They Should Just Close Their Doors." It is on the front page of their website and can also be read at ChristianNewsWire.
It is a stinging rebuke aimed at churches who do not speak out against abortion openly.
I am inclined to agree with Magnan. When I look at the churches in South Africa, I see a group that is so disinclined to speak out on the issues of the day, that they will harbour murderers or those who agree with murder in their churches!
That is the bottom line! Why can churches so easily speak against fornication, adultery and other gross sins (if they do at all), yet when it comes to abortion, they are silent.
It is this very silence that condemns them!
Mat 25:34-46 (34) Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (35) For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, (36) I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' (37) Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? (38) And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? (39) And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?' (40) And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.' (41) "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. (42) For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, (43) I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.' (44) Then they also will answer, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?' (45) Then he will answer them, saying, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.' (46) And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
The interesting thing about this discourse is that Jesus made it clear, that when we do justice unto others, we do it unto Him. When did we welcome, clothe or visit Jesus? Jesus' answer is, "as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me."
On the other hand, when we neglect to do justice unto others, the question can be stated, "Lord, when did we not do justice unto you?" Then Jesus answers, " as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me."
It is NOT good enough for churches to say that they are doing something in the background. The time for Secret Service operations is over. The time for a full frontal attack is here.
The enemy is destroying millions of the unborn every year (more than 50,000/year in South Africa), yet the church is satisfied with its silence.
"IF YOU DID NOT SPEAK OUT FOR ONE OF THE LEAST OF THESE, YOU DID NOT SPEAK OUT FOR ME!"
Churches are happy to have their little prayer huddles, their exciting relevant services, their three-points-to-a-successful-life or how-to-hear-from-God sermons, but in the meantime babies are being slaughtered daily; yet, for these churches, God has not spoken on the issue to them in their prayer huddles at all! I guess, if God does not speak to them personally from the blue yonder, then they do not move.
However, it seems that when the Bible speaks, their spiritual ears are shut!
From those who have more, more will be expected!
It is a stinging rebuke aimed at churches who do not speak out against abortion openly.
I am inclined to agree with Magnan. When I look at the churches in South Africa, I see a group that is so disinclined to speak out on the issues of the day, that they will harbour murderers or those who agree with murder in their churches!
That is the bottom line! Why can churches so easily speak against fornication, adultery and other gross sins (if they do at all), yet when it comes to abortion, they are silent.
It is this very silence that condemns them!
Mat 25:34-46 (34) Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (35) For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, (36) I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' (37) Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? (38) And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? (39) And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?' (40) And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.' (41) "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. (42) For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, (43) I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.' (44) Then they also will answer, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?' (45) Then he will answer them, saying, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.' (46) And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
The interesting thing about this discourse is that Jesus made it clear, that when we do justice unto others, we do it unto Him. When did we welcome, clothe or visit Jesus? Jesus' answer is, "as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me."
On the other hand, when we neglect to do justice unto others, the question can be stated, "Lord, when did we not do justice unto you?" Then Jesus answers, " as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me."
It is NOT good enough for churches to say that they are doing something in the background. The time for Secret Service operations is over. The time for a full frontal attack is here.
The enemy is destroying millions of the unborn every year (more than 50,000/year in South Africa), yet the church is satisfied with its silence.
"IF YOU DID NOT SPEAK OUT FOR ONE OF THE LEAST OF THESE, YOU DID NOT SPEAK OUT FOR ME!"
Churches are happy to have their little prayer huddles, their exciting relevant services, their three-points-to-a-successful-life or how-to-hear-from-God sermons, but in the meantime babies are being slaughtered daily; yet, for these churches, God has not spoken on the issue to them in their prayer huddles at all! I guess, if God does not speak to them personally from the blue yonder, then they do not move.
However, it seems that when the Bible speaks, their spiritual ears are shut!
From those who have more, more will be expected!
Monday, January 14, 2008
Charismatic pastor to divorce again?
Evangelical church on downward spiral
The Evangelical church continues its downward spiral, even here in South Africa. Those in other countries, like America, must not think that only the evangelical church in America is losing its grip on what is right and true. No, it is happening all over the world to the evangelical church!
Ray McCauley, pastor of one of South Africa's largest churches--Rhema, divorced from his wife Lyndie in 2000. Just a year after that he married another woman, Zelda Ireland, a former model. This was Ireland's third marriage!
Now, it seems, this marriage is in trouble too!
What is going on in this case is not clear yet. However, it seems that Ray McCauley dug this hole for himself. As a so-called "man of God," he should have known what the Bible says about divorce and remarriage. It took him just a year after divorcing his first wife, to marry his second wife.
He made crucial mistakes in marrying this woman. Let's look at the practical first. The alarm bells should have been ringing exceedingly loud in his ears. First of all, she had been married twice before. Did he not think that the only common denominator in her first two failed marriages was her? There were two failed marriages, and she was involved in both of them! Second, she has three children of her own, all from different fathers. Last, if my calculations are correct, based on the ages of the children given by the Sunday Times, and the amount of years she was one of his congregants, she had both of her divorces and at least one illegitimate child while she was a member if his church! Strike Three!
Biblically, he had no recourse for marrying this woman. The Bible is clear on the issue of divorce and remarriage.
One does not have to read far into the New Testament to run into the subject of divorce. Jesus said, "whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery." (Mt 19:9) Naturally, the one who has gone through divorce and the one contemplating divorce will look for all kinds of excuses to justify their divorce.
However, the case is clear against those that divorce. "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so." (Mt 19:8) Jesus set the parameters within which divorce could take place. Except for sexual immorality, divorce would be a no-no. Paul adds one more parameter for divorce. When the spouse is an unbeliever and wants a divorce, "the brother or sister is not enslaved." (1 Cor 7:15) But, notice how Paul frames his argument. The believer should never seek the divorce. While the unbeliever wants to remain in the marriage, the believer should remain married to the unbeliever. The believer is only freed from the covenant of the marriage when the unbeliever seeks the divorce.
So, the Bible is very clear about the issue of adultery. It is when a married person has sex with someone he is not married to. When someone remarries, they commit adultery. Unless of course the divorce was as a result of the previous spouse committing sexual immorality, or an unbelieving spouse that wanted the divorce.
Coming back to Ray McCauley and Zelda. I do not know the circumstances of her two divorces, but chances are (I am merely speculating here) that at least one of her divorces was an unBiblical divorce, according to Jesus and Paul. From my knowledge of Ray and Lyndie's divorce, it certainly was an unBiblical divorce. Neither of them (according to their own testimonies) is an unbeliever. Further, according to my knowledge, neither of them committed sexual immorality. Therefore, their divorce was unBiblical and certainly was not sanctioned by Jesus or Paul.
As a result, Ray McCauley is in an adulterous relationship with Zelda McCauley (nee Ireland) according to Matthew 19. Incredibly, here is a man, head of the largest charismatic church in South Africa, and also the head of the IFCC (International Fellowship of Christian Churches), in an adulterous relationship!
Apart from McCauley's marital woes, in 1996, he decided to move away from Johannesburg where his church is. He did not move into the next town to still be close to his church. No, that would be too simple! He moved 600Km (375mi) away to Umhlanga, on the north coast of Kwazulu-Natal, about 20Km north of Durban! How in the world can a man be a pastor to a church in any way when he lives 600Km from his church. Isn't it just too convenient? He just does not have to do the work of a pastor! He only has to preach. And the money comes rolling in!
The last point I want to make about Ray McCauley is that he is part of the Word-of-Faith (WOF) clan. I have written about WOF before in a series called "Heresies in the church," and it is such a serious error that I believe it to be heresy. The fact is that preachers that teach these heresies, like McCauley, Joyce Meyers and others, have been accepted large scale into the evangelical church and scores of evangelical book stores.
The fact is, the evangelical church does not have the backbone to call a spade a spade, and will therefore not call preachers like this heretics. And if they will not call them heretics, why would they bother with holding McCauley accountable for his adulterous marriage?
The evangelical church is indeed on a downward spiral!
Update:
29 January 2010 - Although the divorce did not happen at the time of this post, it is now 2 years later, and it seems like it is definitely going to happen!
The Evangelical church continues its downward spiral, even here in South Africa. Those in other countries, like America, must not think that only the evangelical church in America is losing its grip on what is right and true. No, it is happening all over the world to the evangelical church!
Ray McCauley, pastor of one of South Africa's largest churches--Rhema, divorced from his wife Lyndie in 2000. Just a year after that he married another woman, Zelda Ireland, a former model. This was Ireland's third marriage!
Now, it seems, this marriage is in trouble too!
What is going on in this case is not clear yet. However, it seems that Ray McCauley dug this hole for himself. As a so-called "man of God," he should have known what the Bible says about divorce and remarriage. It took him just a year after divorcing his first wife, to marry his second wife.
He made crucial mistakes in marrying this woman. Let's look at the practical first. The alarm bells should have been ringing exceedingly loud in his ears. First of all, she had been married twice before. Did he not think that the only common denominator in her first two failed marriages was her? There were two failed marriages, and she was involved in both of them! Second, she has three children of her own, all from different fathers. Last, if my calculations are correct, based on the ages of the children given by the Sunday Times, and the amount of years she was one of his congregants, she had both of her divorces and at least one illegitimate child while she was a member if his church! Strike Three!
Biblically, he had no recourse for marrying this woman. The Bible is clear on the issue of divorce and remarriage.
One does not have to read far into the New Testament to run into the subject of divorce. Jesus said, "whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery." (Mt 19:9) Naturally, the one who has gone through divorce and the one contemplating divorce will look for all kinds of excuses to justify their divorce.
However, the case is clear against those that divorce. "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so." (Mt 19:8) Jesus set the parameters within which divorce could take place. Except for sexual immorality, divorce would be a no-no. Paul adds one more parameter for divorce. When the spouse is an unbeliever and wants a divorce, "the brother or sister is not enslaved." (1 Cor 7:15) But, notice how Paul frames his argument. The believer should never seek the divorce. While the unbeliever wants to remain in the marriage, the believer should remain married to the unbeliever. The believer is only freed from the covenant of the marriage when the unbeliever seeks the divorce.
So, the Bible is very clear about the issue of adultery. It is when a married person has sex with someone he is not married to. When someone remarries, they commit adultery. Unless of course the divorce was as a result of the previous spouse committing sexual immorality, or an unbelieving spouse that wanted the divorce.
Coming back to Ray McCauley and Zelda. I do not know the circumstances of her two divorces, but chances are (I am merely speculating here) that at least one of her divorces was an unBiblical divorce, according to Jesus and Paul. From my knowledge of Ray and Lyndie's divorce, it certainly was an unBiblical divorce. Neither of them (according to their own testimonies) is an unbeliever. Further, according to my knowledge, neither of them committed sexual immorality. Therefore, their divorce was unBiblical and certainly was not sanctioned by Jesus or Paul.
As a result, Ray McCauley is in an adulterous relationship with Zelda McCauley (nee Ireland) according to Matthew 19. Incredibly, here is a man, head of the largest charismatic church in South Africa, and also the head of the IFCC (International Fellowship of Christian Churches), in an adulterous relationship!
Apart from McCauley's marital woes, in 1996, he decided to move away from Johannesburg where his church is. He did not move into the next town to still be close to his church. No, that would be too simple! He moved 600Km (375mi) away to Umhlanga, on the north coast of Kwazulu-Natal, about 20Km north of Durban! How in the world can a man be a pastor to a church in any way when he lives 600Km from his church. Isn't it just too convenient? He just does not have to do the work of a pastor! He only has to preach. And the money comes rolling in!
The last point I want to make about Ray McCauley is that he is part of the Word-of-Faith (WOF) clan. I have written about WOF before in a series called "Heresies in the church," and it is such a serious error that I believe it to be heresy. The fact is that preachers that teach these heresies, like McCauley, Joyce Meyers and others, have been accepted large scale into the evangelical church and scores of evangelical book stores.
The fact is, the evangelical church does not have the backbone to call a spade a spade, and will therefore not call preachers like this heretics. And if they will not call them heretics, why would they bother with holding McCauley accountable for his adulterous marriage?
The evangelical church is indeed on a downward spiral!
Update:
29 January 2010 - Although the divorce did not happen at the time of this post, it is now 2 years later, and it seems like it is definitely going to happen!
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Will the evangelical church stand up to die for its faith?
We are told several times in the New Testament that Christians will suffer for their faith. However, if we listen to the evangelical church today, it would seem that God's curse would be upon us if we do suffer for our faith.
This, however, is not how the early church (or the New Testament) viewed it.
"'Come fire, cross, battling with wild beasts, wrenching of bones, mangling of limbs, crushing of my whole body, cruel tortures of the devil—only let me get to Jesus Christ!' Hardly the stuff of Sunday morning conversation in the 21st century. Ignatius, a bishop in Antioch, wrote these words in a letter to the Roman church in the early second century. He had been arrested for being a Christian and knew that a grisly death probably lay before him. Yet he looked forward to it almost joyfully."
Read about persecution of the early church here.
For a more complete account of Christian persecution into the 1800s, read FOXE's BOOK of MARTYRS online.
This, however, is not how the early church (or the New Testament) viewed it.
"'Come fire, cross, battling with wild beasts, wrenching of bones, mangling of limbs, crushing of my whole body, cruel tortures of the devil—only let me get to Jesus Christ!' Hardly the stuff of Sunday morning conversation in the 21st century. Ignatius, a bishop in Antioch, wrote these words in a letter to the Roman church in the early second century. He had been arrested for being a Christian and knew that a grisly death probably lay before him. Yet he looked forward to it almost joyfully."
Read about persecution of the early church here.
For a more complete account of Christian persecution into the 1800s, read FOXE's BOOK of MARTYRS online.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
