"I Was Going to Preach this, but the Holy Spirit Led Me to This" . . . And other Stupid Statements
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Does my title give me away? So much for being coy with my proposition. Let me say that this post is going to get me in trouble with some dear friends who preach God’s word every week. My message to them: Bear with my critique. I pray that my thoughts will be considered as “wounds from a friend”—a very fallible friend.
Here, let’s start this way. Have you ever heard someone (probably a preacher or teacher in the church) say something like this:
“I had prepared all week to teach on __________, but the Holy Spirit changed my lesson at the last minute.”
I have. Dozens of times. The idea it conveys is that the particular message that was prepared was not of God (at least at that time) and this new message was most certainly of God. In fact, the new message is miraculously of God! Why? Because I did not really prepare for it. It must have been God who prepared it. “I just step back when that happens and let God do his thing. Who am I to interrupt God?”
Can I say something? (Wait, let me hide behind something first . . .There.) That is a stupid statement!
My basic thesis is this: The type of assumptions required to adopt the occurrence of such homiletic detours is irresponsible both to yourself and to your audience and misunderstands the way God works in the life of the church.
Let me give you some characteristics that I see in such statements. They can:
Neglect the Holy Spirit. The idea that is conveyed is that the Holy Spirit is not present in the sermon/lesson preparation process. Without God’s presence and guidance in the study, does he somehow show up at the pulpit? There is no justification for such thinking. In fact, I would argue that we are in more need of the Spirit’s guidance in the study than we are when we deliver. If the Spirit is not present when you are in preparation, how can he be there when you deliver? The delivery is simply the product of your life, study, preparation, and daily walk with God. If this is true, why would God miraculously change what he has been preparing you to present? Can he not make up his mind? Did some new unforeseen circumstance arise that caused him to adjust, shift, or compensate for? Be careful.
Blame the Holy Spirit. The idea that God changes the sermon or lesson can be an attempt to discount your involvement and responsibility in what is being presented. Maybe you did not prepare and you are seeking someone to blame? Maybe you want to say something that you don’t think will gain people’s favor? Maybe you are just trying to blame the Holy Spirit?
Be manipulative. The third commandment, in principle, has nothing to do with swearing, but everything to do with protecting God’s reputation. When we claim that God miraculously changed the lesson or sermon, we may be manipulating the audience. In other words, it may be another way of saying, “This sermon is really from God.” In doing this, you are using his reputation by way of putting a “hands-off” authentication on your teaching. After all, if God changed your mind at the last minute, whatever criticism that someone might have must concede its fury; otherwise, the critics might find themselves at enmity with God himself. That type of approach is manipulative. The best we can do is prayfully hope that God has guided our lives, thoughts, and studies to qualify us to represent him when the time comes.
Arise from a gnostic bent. I think that people assume that this is a norm in the pulpit because we have the tendency to separate the mundane from the sacred. We often believe that if it is from the Lord, it will have a halo around it. Halos don’t seem to appear in studies that are filled with struggle, doubt, and, often, timidity in our conclusions. We seek the halos to rise above the mundane to sanctify us in a different way. However, we must live thoroughly converted lives, recognizing that the wall between the sacred and the “secular” is not really present, and it never was. It is no more spiritual to study than to preach.
But . . . What about . . .
I can hear it coming. What about Jude in the New Testament? I am just following in his footsteps.
“Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.” (Jud. 1:3)
Doesn’t Jude here demonstrate that he was going to write about something but the Holy Spirit led him somewhere else? Yes, but this cannot be applied to what I am speaking about. Jude is not saying that he was just about to write on the subject of salvation, but the Lord miraculously changed his lesson. He is saying that he purposed to write about salvation, but he was convicted of a greater priority instead. To put this in our current situation, it would be like me saying that I have been intending to preach on marriage, but I feel it is more important at this time for me to start a series on dealing with false doctrine due to its current influence in our culture. The reason for the change is not some last minute anointing of the Holy Spirit, but because of the expediency of the subject for the current situation. It says nothing about preparation and study. It is assumed that Jude is prepared to speak to the issue of his conviction precicely because of the presence of his conviction.
In the end, we need to be careful. From conception, preparation, to presentation, we can only hope that God is guiding it all. Can God change our sermon or lesson while we are in the pulpit? Of course. The question that you have to ask yourself is whether or not this is a model that we should expect. Your message can be further shaped, nuanced, and impassioned while you are teaching, but this is not really God changing your sermon. Preach what you prepare for and prepare for what you preach.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!- The Problem of Evil, Suffering, and Pain
- Is the Holy Spirit for Today?
- "Belief is No Good Without Practice" . . . and Other Stupid Statements
- Did the Holy Spirit indwell Old Testament believers?
- The Problem of Pastoral Depression
Print This Post

Lisa Robinson on 29 Jul 2009 at 3:14 pm #
Brave man. Kudos for having the guts to say this. I think a statement that really adds insult to injury of the last minute change is ‘this message is going to change your life.’ Ouch!
ScottL on 29 Jul 2009 at 3:44 pm #
Michael -
I am a bit saddened by your post. Of course you know this, but there are quite a few people that have said such a statement about the Holy Spirit changing their message, but they did not say it because they were not prepared, but rather they really sensed a different direction. This can happen in the midst of study or in the midst of the gathering. It is quite acceptable.
I think you are unfortunately ridiculing the practice because a few of the extreme cases that are out there. Mind you, I think we should be willing to pray more often, ‘Lord, is this Your heart? Is this what you want said?’ I don’t ridicule preparation, as I partake of such a practice each week. But we need to be in a place of complete dependence on Him, not mainly upon our hermeneutical, homiletical and theological skills and training. It might just be a healthy practice to not prepare every once in a while, or at least pray, ‘Lord, should I not prepare this week.’
I know, I know. Sounds absurd. But I do kind of think it lines up with the cross. That foolishness stuff. Again, I am not trying to go overboard, but trying to bring balance to what I believe is an unbalanced attack.
Try and be gracious.
Bob on 29 Jul 2009 at 3:44 pm #
Kudos indeed! What I have found troubling in those instances when my pastor does this is that those sermons tend to be somewhat rambling and muddled. I don’t want to sound like I am piling on, but I really don’t know what to make of that. I mean, I suspect I do, but I’ll just say that it leaves me somewhat disquieted. It isn’t surprising that for my tradition (I’ll speak only for us Baptists) hasn’t quite embraced the idea of theology being done in community when this model is not embraced by the pastor.
Nick Norelli on 29 Jul 2009 at 3:46 pm #
Are the “other stupid statements” those that you make in this post?
Lisa Robinson on 29 Jul 2009 at 3:50 pm #
Scott, regarding this comment,
“But we need to be in a place of complete dependence on Him, not mainly upon our hermeneutical, homiletical and theological skills and training.
I think Michael’s point is that preparation is not relying on the training but the Spirit. He says the Spirit must be involved during that preparation and we must depend on Him for the message. And I can’t help but think it shows a greater respect for what the Spirit will have to say by engaging in preparation.
Dave Z on 29 Jul 2009 at 3:53 pm #
Let’s say a pastor is working through Romans. It’s a series that could run 20 or 30 weeks. Somewhere in the midst of that, God, knowing someone will be attending on a given week, may need to steer the sermon in a different direction in order to speak to that individual.
I have also been in church when the musical part of the worship service was so powerful that the pastor stepped aside and did not preach, but allowed the music to continue.
So, I believe a sensitivity to the leading of the Holy Spirit can be a benefit. After all, what if a pastor ignores a leading of the Spirit during preparation? Could God then get more insistant as the service gets closer? The pastor finally yields as the service begins.
All that being said, I believe such an occurance should not be normative. I have heard too many pastors say such things, or to say “I’ll wait to see how the Spirit leads” as if the Holy Spirit cannot plan ahead.
James Gibson on 29 Jul 2009 at 4:03 pm #
Then, there is the equally stupid opening statement which immediately tells you you’re in for a boring sermon: “In reading the lections this week, I was disturbed by. . .”
Daniel on 29 Jul 2009 at 4:04 pm #
Excellent, Michael! I heartily agree.
This is why I try plan our teaching series months ahead, so that God can put things into my path leading up to and into the prep time for any given message.
My experience is that when something changes at the last minutes, it still falls within the overall structure that I have already communicated to my team. Possibly a better supplement text is pointed out, or a better way of stating a point or key idea.
To say that God won’t let me know until the last minute because someone is going to be in the crowd is to say that God didn’t know it until then, too! He couldn’t have led me there 3 months ago?
cheryl u on 29 Jul 2009 at 4:25 pm #
“He couldn’t have led me there 3 months ago?”
Certainly He could of–but is it a guarantee that He will? I think too that we have to leave room for the genuine last minute change of plans that the Lord might bring us to in any area of our lives.
On the other hand, I can certainly see Michael’s point. And I am sure this is a line that has been far overused. However, I don’t think that we can automatically rule out the possibility that God will at times work in the last minute in this way. Doesn’t at all mean that we should expect it to be the norm though.
Joshua Allen on 29 Jul 2009 at 4:48 pm #
What about pastors who constantly plead for the Holy Spirit to convict the congregation of this or that? Are they also crossing the line?
I totally follow your reasoning here, but it seems potentially incongruous to keep praying for the Holy Spirit to convict us, yet consider it insincere to testify when He answers our prayers.
Guival Mercedat on 29 Jul 2009 at 4:56 pm #
I am not sure that I’ll call it stupid statement. I, personnaly, would not say it before a sermon as when you are preaching in a giving day you look at different subjects if you do not have a chosen subjECT.
It is an abuse statement by unprepared preacher, but once a while the Holy Sipirit can take over in convaincing you to touch a a particular subject, it does not have to be a passage.
Jugulum on 29 Jul 2009 at 5:15 pm #
Joshua,
I’m not sure I follow. What’s the connection between prayer for conviction and changing a sermon topic on-the-fly?
Alden on 29 Jul 2009 at 5:18 pm #
As someone who’s lived in a quasi-charismatic environment for 20+ years, I have to totally agree with Michael. While there are exceptions, much of the time the “leading” is questionable, and the preacher needs to take responsibility for either not hearing from God early on, or just acting on a whim on his way to church.
This raises another issue, that of our view of the sermon compared to our view of Scripture. It seems that the sermon (i.e., the pastor’s perspective) carries more authority than the plain reading of the Word. What if the sermon isn’t particularly “inspired” at all? What if the text is inspired enough on its own? I kind of think this is okay. It’s kind of refreshing when a pastor says, “this is just my take on what this says.”
I’m bugged (obviously) by a lot of what I’ve heard over the years, in charismatic and non-charismatic churches.
Aaron on 29 Jul 2009 at 5:19 pm #
Forgive my postmodern sounding response, but I believe that both approaches can be inspired by the Holy Spirit. I, too, have seen the “God just spoke to me” approach used and abused, and I can recognize the frustration within my own heart. I firmly agree with Michael that:
#1 – God the Holy Spirit can and SHOULD be involved in our message preparation. If He’s not, we have no business delivering that message in the first place.
#2 – Sometimes the “shifting” gears approach is just an excuse for laziness.
BUT…
Sometimes there are times when I felt that I was hearing God during my lesson prep time, but when it came time to deliver the teaching, I realized I had missed something very critical. In less formal meeting times, someone could give a testimony that leads to a time of prayer which leads to a certain song being sung by the band…and the prepared teaching never gets preached! I have been a part of these types of meetings and can give testimony that God was most definitely involved.
I guess what’s the most frustrating is when people who use the “God just changed the message” come across as holier-than-thou or more “spiritual” or something…maybe that’s just me, though.
C Michael Patton on 29 Jul 2009 at 5:34 pm #
Nick…lol…it is part of my “and Other Stupid Statements” theme.
elnwood on 29 Jul 2009 at 5:39 pm #
You wrote: “The idea it conveys is that the particular message that was prepared was not of God (at least at that time) and this new message was most certainly of God.”
I too, have heard pastors begin a sermon this way, and not once did it convey the idea you expressed above. Perhaps you are overthinking this?
After 9/11, I was in attendance C. J. Mahaney said something to that effect. The message he had prepared earlier in the week did not reflect what he needed to preach to effectively minister to his church, including some members who were directly affected by the attack on the Pentagon.
It was pretty apparent that C. J. was not saying his previous message was not of God, and yet it was also clear that the Holy Spirit, who guides and gives wisdom, did lead C. J. to preach the particular message that he did.
Jugulum on 29 Jul 2009 at 6:25 pm #
Michael,
Hmm…
So let me get this straight.
We shouldn’t say, “I was going to preach this, but…” because it will deny that the Holy Spirit was preparing us to present our planned sermon.
Meaning that you’re claiming the divine stamp of approval on the prepared sermon? It’s inviolate?
Chris on 29 Jul 2009 at 7:00 pm #
An assumption of an assumption! That is weird.
Are there any pastors that would agree. I noticed we have many who comment on the pastorial ministry who are not Pastors of churches. These critics are armchair pastors.
Also, this was written by a U2 Fan! Where is the Holy Spirit in that?
Pastor Christopher
“Blogs make authorities out of everyone”
Daniel on 29 Jul 2009 at 7:48 pm #
Chris said: “Are there any pastors that would agree.”
Sorry, I didn’t make myself clear. Yes, I am a pastor, and I heartily agree with this post.
Chris said: “Also, this was written by a U2 Fan! Where is the Holy Spirit in that?”
You’re joking, right? A little sarcasm to make a point, I hope?
Daniel
Stuart on 29 Jul 2009 at 7:56 pm #
I get an uneasy feeling when I hear people claim that their actions are the direct bidding of the Holy Spirit. That’s a big statement. Preachers saying it before a sermon is just one example.
Certainly there are times where it is appropriate to alter our planned course of action, perhaps because of a last-minute occurrence or what have you. However, saying it’s divinely ordained is saying more than I’m comfortable with.
One of the things that is scary to me about that is that I know I’m prone to make mistakes. I’d hate to credit those to God.
I’m not a pastor or a U2 fan, but I approve of this message.
Cadis on 29 Jul 2009 at 8:04 pm #
Not a bad post, but I think you could have calibrated those words differently.
Neil Damgaard on 29 Jul 2009 at 9:08 pm #
Without yet reading the 21 responses in front of me to this interesting post from Michael, let me just add my observations on preaching, as one who has preached about 1,400 sermons so far, and as one who considers every single opportunity to do so, a high privilege:
1. I depend upon the Holy Spirit in every message but I try never to presume upon Him.
2. I like Haddon Robinson’s rule:make it plain. Make it PLAIN! Did I not say, Make it PLAIN!!!???
3. Study the original text to the best of my ability so that the Holy Spirit doesn’t have to correct my stupidness or presumption AT THE TIME OF MY PREACHING.
4. A text without a context is a pretext (Dr Martin E. Clark formerly Vice President of Cedarville University who was once my pastor many years ago) who got that saying from someone else I’m sure.
5. My job is to proclaim God’s Word, simple as that. That DEMANDS that I seek the leading–however I can manage that each week.
6. LISTEN to how God speaks to ME in the Spirit when I listen to other people preach, which I DO as often as possible. But I CHOOSE whom I listen to carefully. Frankly some of the men whom people think are wonderful, bore me.
7. When we preachers get stupid, God doesn’t get the glory.
8. I preach FROM a manuscript as I learned by modelling from S. Lewis Johnson and Jack L. Arnold, and at DTS although they said Lose the Manuscript before you preach. I don’t do that part. I have the mss in front of me every week, and THEN the Spirit occasionally leads me for a moment or two away from the mss while preaching. But that is dangerous. Too often I am indulgent of impulsiveness and that is almost never the movement of the Spirit; My prep. came up with ideas that went INto the mss which I should not sidetrack. ALSO: the mss is then made available, or the Notes online for people to benefit from after the actual preaching. Economy and getting the max out of the prep. effort.
9. God always is honored when I am exercising faith. So, I try to trust God to use my message even when I feel so inadequate and unworthy. And He does. Praise His name.
Lisa Robinson on 29 Jul 2009 at 9:27 pm #
I can certainly attest to Neil’s formulations regarding sermon prep as I listened to them for two years since he was my pastor. There were series and every now and then an occasional interruption in the series. But that shift was not an unprepared message. It was obvious he spent much time in prayerfully preparing the ‘interruptions’. I do think it honors God when we take the task communicating his word and instructing others in their faith serious enough prepare messages. Moreover, the fact to do so in no ways negates dependence upon Him. I think this is responsible stewardship.
C Michael Patton on 29 Jul 2009 at 9:31 pm #
Stuart, I agree. I have yet to be comfortable enough saying something I have prepared (including this blog) is of the Holy Spirit. The best I can do in any circumstance is say I pray that it is of God.
C Michael Patton on 29 Jul 2009 at 9:32 pm #
Cadis,
Yes, I know. You are probably right. I give myself some rhetorical liberty with the “…and other stupid statements” series. Unfortunately, many people will not be able to see past this. Especially first time readers (of which we get about 1000 per day).
C Michael Patton on 29 Jul 2009 at 9:40 pm #
FWIW: I would have less a problem with people who change their sermon at the last minute to say “I decided to change it at the last minute” for this is all you can say with assurance. Let the work of the Holy Spirit change lives without your divine mandate prelude!
Otherwise, I would think that it would be just as true to say, “I was going to wear a blue tie this morning, but God led be to wear a red one,” and “I was going to have cereal this morning, but God led me to have eggs.”
My point is that is you are going to play Calvinist, do so with everything!
Joshua Allen on 29 Jul 2009 at 11:03 pm #
@Jugulum — My point is that it’s very strange for a pastor to frequently pray for the Holy Spirit to convict us of various things, but then be afraid to report that the Holy Spirit convicted him to change the sermon topic. By Michael’s reasoning, we may ask for the Holy Spirit to change people’s minds about things, but we can never give the Holy Spirit credit, since “all we can say with assurance” is that the person’s mind changed.
FWIW, I once had a woman at my church who would come in every day and testify for 10 minutes about the supreme spiritual warfare that enabled her to come to church (“The devil knocked over the syrup, and I was discouraged, and God said, ‘no you don’t, you devil!’”). So I understand Michaels skepticism. But it just seems incongruous to pray for the Holy Spirit’s movement, and then never acknowledge it while congratulating oneself for humility and modesty.
C Michael Patton on 29 Jul 2009 at 11:08 pm #
Joshua, what I am saying is that what this type of methodology, in my opinion, assumes is a bit of a Gnostic worldview. The Holy Spirit works through all things. He is not only in the preparation process, but he is the author of it!
Joshua Allen on 29 Jul 2009 at 11:19 pm #
@Michael – OK, I can see that, especially for pastors who do it with some frequency. I think your “gnostic” observation is especially apt in the case of many new converts, who start changing many of their outward behaviors; for example, when you say, “How are you?”, they say “I’m blessed”. And they use every opportunity to claim that God is moving them in this or that way. People make these superficial subculture adaptations by seeking out “worldy” phrases that can be replaced with “holier” versions.
TJF on 30 Jul 2009 at 12:52 am #
Please don’t come to my church and hear me preach. You will surely find something “stupid” I said as I myself do after every sermon. I find it sad that you wasted so much energy on this post and answering the comments. I listen to Seth Godin talk about Grace and Decency in business. How come it is missing from so many Christians?
ScottL on 30 Jul 2009 at 1:16 am #
Lisa -
I think you misunderstood my comment. I didn’t ridicule the preparation process nor deny the Spirit’s work in such. I can testify to such. All I am encouraging is that we don’t put all eggs in the preparation basket. Let’s just assume, with regards to practical circumstances, a family member gets ill, you are in a car accident and your child breaks his/her leg – all in the same week. Not to mention the daily matters of leading a flock. This becomes an opportunity to see Him work, since you had only a couple of hours on a Sunday morning to prepare.
That came about through God’s providential acts in life. He ultimately was in all of it, since He is sovereign. So He obviously knew there would be little preparation time. But He still directed, maybe even gave revelation (or illumination) in the teaching/preaching on that Sunday.
Now, think about this same sovereign One whispering that we not spend time in preparation, but in seeking Him in prayer and fasting. No commentaries out, no concordance, no Greek NT. It is possible, and I think you would agree.
Again, read my heart – I am not ridiculing preparation. But when I read Acts, I don’t sense these guys had a lot of prep time before those major ’sermons’ we find in the book. Matter of fact, things happened that they least expected. How could they have prepared for it all? But they were people of the Word and the Spirit, reading it regularly and listening regularly.
So, please know I want to find middle ground. I was trying to swing Michael’s pendulum back a little from what I thought was extreme.
Michael -
As for your illustration about the blue and red tie. The Calvinist would begin by saying, ‘God ordained (predestined) that I wear this blue tie this morning.’ But you would probably never hear that said (it is just in the thinking).
But it is the more Pentecostal or charismatic person would say, ‘I was putting on my red tie when God spoke to me that I should wear the blue tie.’
Aaron on 30 Jul 2009 at 2:09 am #
@TJF: “Can God change our sermon or lesson while we are in the pulpit? Of course.” quoting the author… nuff said…
Chris on 30 Jul 2009 at 3:01 am #
I wonder if the Holy Spirit likes U2
j on 30 Jul 2009 at 3:44 am #
Does a last minute appeal to the H.S. make a sermon Pseudepigraphal?
Bradley on 30 Jul 2009 at 6:01 am #
Hmmm, not often I find myself disagreeing with you CMP but I’m afraid I’ll have to this time. Now I do agree with several previous commentors that the vast majority of instances where this is claimed are probably bogus but I believe it can and does happen because I have experienced it, only once in ten years of ministry mind you though.
I was set to preach the Sunday night service in a church out of town. I knew the pastor and some of the congregation but not everyone. I had a sermon prepared especially for this occasion, nice printed notes, studied and prayed over etc etc. Everything seemed fine until about midway through the worship service when several scriptures began to come to my mind and I felt impressed to write them down. These were not mind blowing ,”oh I have just had the deepest gnostic mysteries revealed, oh you’re going to be rich”, but simple gospel stuff (which is mind blowing enough), none of the deep dark Sooper-Dooper-Christian stuff that people usually claim to have heard from God as they ascended the platform.
I borrowed a bit of scrap paper and quickly scrawled them down before I was supposed to preach. I stepped up to podium, thinking I would end up looking like an idiot for abandoning my original sermon, and preached a very simple gospel message (as in 7 and 8 year old Sunday School class simple). A young man I had never met responded to the message, repented and was baptized that very night. He later told me that he would never had responded if he hadn’t heard the verses that I preached. Two weeks later he was struck by a car and killed.
Perhaps it’s because I’m Pentecostal, but the idea that the Holy Spirit can do things that may seem spontaneous to us does not bother me in the least.
Nick on 30 Jul 2009 at 7:15 am #
I cringe every time I hear any terminology either from a Christian or to a Christian to do as you “feel led.”
Strange they don’t want me to do that when I see a beautiful lady….
Susan on 30 Jul 2009 at 10:08 am #
I recall a series of sermons our pastor preached about the role of the Holy Spirit as it is laid out in scripture. I believe that his attention to the subject was partially born out of repeated observation of the way Christians use the phrase “The Spirit lead me to do this” to justify their actions. At the time one of the elders (and family) announced via a letter to all elders, that they were leaving the church. When our pastor asked them why…and when others asked, they said, “because the Spirit lead us to do so”. As our pastor said….when someone uses that phrase …what can you say?
He pointed out that in scripture the Spirit leads people to salvation, but cautioned that we can’t claim the Spirit’s leading in sorts of random decisions and actions (OK, those weren’t his exact words). The point is, people often make that claim that the Spirit lead them to do something, when that might not be the case at all…but who can argue with them? Truthfully, it is very WRONG to make such claims in many cases. I’m more comfortable with “the Spirit’s leading” language when someone is speaking of their role in sharing the gospel with someone they have met….then at least there is a Biblical president…and yes, the Spirit does lead witnesses, and those He is drawing to the Son.
Maybe Michael can hash out the roll of the Holy Spirit in a series of blogs….what it is and what it isn’t.
Lisa Robinson on 30 Jul 2009 at 2:26 pm #
Hey Susan. I do think that since the believer is indwelt with the Spirit, it seems reasonable that He would provide an active presence that seeks to bear upon the believer’s conscience. That is as we allow through yielding.
With that said, I also think its reasonable that we can say we are led of the Spirit. However, as to not impose upon the Spirit any activity stemming from our own will as opposed to his, its probably safer to say ‘I feel like the Spirit is leading me’ or ‘it seems like the Spirit might be leading’. I agree that we should not make assertive claims about the something the Spirit is doing with 100% conviction since that is possible He is not the source of our inspiration. I find this type of approach rather authentic and humble than absolutely knowing what the Spirit is doing.
Leslie on 30 Jul 2009 at 2:54 pm #
And I am yet to hear any theologically sound preacher/teacher utter the stupid statement!
Jay on 30 Jul 2009 at 5:09 pm #
So in the sermon I preached Sunday, during the introduction i said the following (and pardon the choppy grammar…I throw out a lot of rules when I am transcribing):
“Turn in your Bibles to Hebrews chapter 13. I studied several different passages this week, trying to nail down a text for this morning. Genesis 2, of course, marks the beginning of marriage…plenty can be gleaned from there. There’s Matthew 19, Jesus is speaking to marriage and divorce…actually defending it by calling on the Genesis 2 account. There’s Ephesians 5…Paul defines marriage practically, and then unpacks the mystery of marriage in what’s arguably the most important section of text on marriage in the New Testament. But in studying these I ran across this passage in Hebrews 13, and a light came on…something just floored me about the writer’s inspired thinking, especially as we seek to celebrate marriage here today. Let’s read it together.”
Was this stupid?
BTW: sorry I can’t make the open house tonight. Would there be a good time I could come by and say hello?
Jay (Faith Bible, Edmond)
C Michael Patton on 30 Jul 2009 at 5:15 pm #
Jay, did you say, “But as I came up here today, the Holy Spirit has just led me to teach on something different, here it goes”? If not, you are good.
Vinod Isaac on 30 Jul 2009 at 7:03 pm #
Hi CMP,
I think I agree with you. Most of the people who claim to be speaking God’s word may have never spent time in prayer asking God what He wants to speak.
Most people only study from different commentaries and prepare a sermon and go and preach. They totally depend on their ability to prepare a sermon.
Does God change at last moment yes He does and you have admitted it.
Classic example is Isaiah.
2 Ki 20:1 In those days Hezekiah was sick and near death. And Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, went to him and said to him, “Thus says the LORD: ‘Set your house in order, for you shall die, and not live.’”
2 Ki 20:4 And it happened, before Isaiah had gone out into the middle court, that the word of the LORD came to him, saying,
2 Ki 20:5 “Return and tell Hezekiah the leader of My people, ‘Thus says the LORD, the God of David your father: “I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; surely I will heal you. On the third day you shall go up to the house of the LORD.
Isaiah had just said to Hezekiah that he is going to die and he just went out to the middle court and Lord sent him back to say Hezekiah is not going to die.
Believe me it must have been tough for Isaiah to do it. He just spoke moments ago something and he was asked to contradict it.
What Isaiah heard was the clear voice of God that many people don’t hear today because they don’t want to.
Lisa Robinson on 30 Jul 2009 at 8:18 pm #
Vinod, how can you claim to know what most people do and how they study? If a person uses a commentary to make sure they are not going down some strange path with God’s word, they are not depending on the Spirit? And how do you know whether they depend on God or not? That seems to be a very presumptuous statement. I think the only one who knows that is God.
Vinod Isaac on 30 Jul 2009 at 9:39 pm #
Lisa,
How many people you know wait for God to speak to them on what they are supposed to speak? How many of them really hear God’s voice?
Have you ever had an experience like described in Mat 10:19-20?
Mat 10:19 “But when they deliver you up, do not worry about how or what you should speak. For it will be given to you in that hour what you should speak;
Mat 10:20 “for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.
Did you ever have any experience like mentioned in John 16:13? I mean “He will tell you things to come”. I am not asking of Holy Spirit clarifying the Word of God but I am asking about “things to come”
John 16:13 “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.
If Jesus being Son of God need to hear from the Father then how much more we need to? Do you know anybody in your circle who hears from God before they speak? Jesus could have read commentaries written by rabbais. All He quoted was scripture and what He directly heard from the Father.
John 12:49 “For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.
John 12:50 “And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.”
Lisa Robinson on 30 Jul 2009 at 9:45 pm #
Vinod, it is not my place to say if people wait for God or not because that would presume I know what is going on in their heart. I cannot presume the person who does not prepare for a sermon is truly led of the Spirit nor can I presume that the person who carefully crafts a sermon with aids of original language and commentaries are not hearing from God. I do not know what is going on in a person’s heart and whether they are truly depending on Him or not. Last time I checked, I am not God.
Jay on 30 Jul 2009 at 9:49 pm #
Nope…I said nothing of that sort.
Vinod Isaac on 30 Jul 2009 at 9:56 pm #
Lisa,
Why don’t you tell about yourself? When was the last time you heard from God?
Vinod Isaac on 30 Jul 2009 at 9:56 pm #
And what was the reason you didn’t answer my specific questions.
Lisa Robinson on 30 Jul 2009 at 10:11 pm #
Last time I heard from God? when I read some of Matthew this morning.
Regarding the passages you cited in John – CONTEXT! Jesus was talking to his apostles, as these are the ones who will carry his testimony with authority. How could he bring me into remembrance of things when I wasn’t there?
Last I checked, Jesus was God, and wrote the Law. Why would he consult anybody? That makes no sense.
It’s interesting that you tell others they don’t value the word when you don’t seem to either. Do you understand what IS the word of God anyway?
Joshua Allen on 30 Jul 2009 at 10:43 pm #
Last time I heard from God? when I read some of Matthew this morning.
Very nice response!
I think I’m going to go listen to God’s clear word, now.
Douglas K. Adu-Boahen on 31 Jul 2009 at 6:24 am #
Preachers are to called to preach the Word, not what they hear in their ears purporting to be from God. I grew up in a very weird Pentecostal church (in distinction to the Keeners, Fees and Grudems of this world) where every sermon was a Bible verse and some “revelations” that a preacher got which held no water against the text.
Vinod’s view of God speaking makes you a captive to subjective experience, rather than the objective truth of God’s Word. Bro. Leslie made a good point earlier: No serious, time-consumed student of the Word who is known as a solid preacher these days have EVER come to that conclusion
We ought to beware a cold, mechanical sermon preparation period, but we should just as avoid the temptation to sit in the corner, hum and wait for the sermon to come down from heaven. God gave us brains, logic and reasoning faculties – let us glorify Him and make use of those faculties.
Lisa Robinson on 31 Jul 2009 at 6:34 am #
We ought to beware a cold, mechanical sermon preparation period, but we should just as avoid the temptation to sit in the corner, hum and wait for the sermon to come down from heaven. God gave us brains, logic and reasoning faculties – let us glorify Him and make use of those faculties.
More importantly, He gave us His breathed out word. I think this is why expository preaching is so powerful because it is highlighting what the text says and just letting it say what it says. It is inspired by God so just reading it out to work wonders. I am reminded of Israel’s response when Josiah recovered the books of the Law and just began reading them to the people. Oh what repentance that invoked. Same with Ezra after the temple was rebuilt.
Sadly, I have heard some preachers dismiss expository teaching as if it were cold and dead. I’m like, how can God’s word be cold and dead?
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:06 am #
Hi Lisa,
Good answer that God spoke to you when you read Matthew. I am not sure if you know that devil also speaks so how you can be sure that God spoke?
Don’t get me wrong I refering to.
Mat 4:5 Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple,
Mat 4:6 and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written: ‘He shall give His angels charge over you,’ and, ‘In their hands they shall bear you up, Lest you dash your foot against a stone.’”
That is Ps 91:11,12 quoted by devil. Was Ps 91:11,12 wrong? Was it not God’s Word? It is God’s Word and it did happen just after devil left.
Mat 4:11 Then the devil left Him, and behold, angels came and ministered to Him.
Problem was devil was trying to use it for his purpose.
If only God was speaking then every single person who read the Bible would have understood it exactly the same because God is not a God of confusion.
You wrote:
“Regarding the passages you cited in John – CONTEXT! Jesus was talking to his apostles, as these are the ones who will carry his testimony with authority. How could he bring me into remembrance of things when I wasn’t there?”
Paul was not present but Holy Spirit did bring every thing to rememberance. Do you know why you used context here? Because you don’t want to believe that verse. Every time you don’t want to believe you try to hide behind context.
Gal 1:11 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man.
Gal 1:12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Throughout Bible God has been revealing. Paul was a theologian and his studies could not bring revealation. He sincerely believed the wrong thing until the revelation came. When revelation came he belived the right thing. Then he got all the further revelation directly from God.
Good question why would Jesus consult anybody. If Jesus doesn’t consult why would you and I? Should we not consult only the Word of God?
When rich man pleaded with Abraham. Abraham didn’t tell him to consult commentary instead he said “They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them”.
Luke 16:28 ‘for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’
Luke 16:29 “Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’
God speaks through His Word and He speaks directly too. Problem with you is that you don’t believe that God can speak directly.
Lisa Robinson on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:12 am #
Paul was not present? Read Acts 9. And thanks for pointing out my problem. Appreciate it
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:15 am #
Hi Douglas,
You wrote:
“Preachers are to called to preach the Word, not what they hear in their ears purporting to be from God.”
Where do you get that? Every single person who wrote the Bible heard what you call “in their ears purporting to be from God”. Every single one of them. Why you consider it as unaceptable method?
Can you find one single person in the Bible who sat down and did his study and prepared a sermon like that? Give me one single example.
You guys teach what is not in the Bible. You do what God hates.
Jer 23:30 “Therefore behold, I am against the prophets,” says the LORD, “who steal My words every one from his neighbor.
Jer 23:31 “Behold, I am against the prophets,” says the LORD, “who use their tongues and say, ‘He says.’
Jer 23:32 “Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” says the LORD, “and tell them, and cause My people to err by their lies and by their recklessness. Yet I did not send them or command them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all,” says the LORD.
If you did your study go and tell that you prepared it with your own brain and did not hear from God specifically. Why go and tell it is Word of God after adding and substracting and changing the meaning?
God still speaks directly. God still speaks through dreams. God still speaks through visions. He has done it throughout Bible and He doesn’t change.
jim on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:17 am #
For me, it is sad that we live in such an age where the Holy Ghost has so been either reduced to a non-tangible position or misrepresented to be the source of all that we do. If we Pentecostals have, in many ways, usurped His identity, then let it also be acknowledged that many others have deified the Book and turned it into a totem. In the fifth chapter of John’s gospel, Jesus, at one point, tells the Pharisees, those “men of the church” who studied and parsed and edited the written Law, that they have not “heard His voice” at any time nor did they have “His word abiding in them”. In his “The Cost of Discipleship”, Dietrich Bonhoeffer asks “Which is our final authority: Christ or the Law?” and then states that “The law is not itself God, nor is God the law. It was the error of Israel to put the law in God;s place, to make the law their God and their God a law. The disciples were confronted with the opposite danger of denying the law its divinity altogether and divorcing God from His law. Both errors lead to the same result.” If what the brother, here, is saying is simply that we need to be careful as to how much authorship of our efforts we attribute to the Spirit, I enthusiastically say “Amen!”, but let it apply to our preparation as well as our deliverance. The Holy Ghost, even as Jesus stated, is well able to testify of Himself.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:18 am #
Hi lisa,
What you want me to read in Acts 9? That just confirms what I said Paul was not present when Jesus walked on the surface of this earth.
Paul got everything through revelation later. So what you want to tell from Acts 9?
Lisa Robinson on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:20 am #
“God still speaks directly. God still speaks through dreams. God still speaks through visions. He has done it throughout Bible and He doesn’t change.
Vinod, I would encourage you to read Hebrews 1:1-3 regarding how God speaks now versus how God spoke prior to Christ.
I would also encourage you to read the blog rules. Your accusatory and condemning tone is not only in violation of said rules but completely unproductive for fruitful discussion.
If we are so uninformed and wrong, then why on earth do you bother to interact here?
Lisa Robinson on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:22 am #
Yes Vinod, Paul received a revelation of Christ which authenticates his apostleship. He wrote under apostolic authority to bear the testimony of Christ. Your verses in Galatians affirm this fact.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:30 am #
Hi lisa,
Heb 1:1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;
Heb 1:3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
That talks about Jesus’s life on this earth. What happens after “Sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high”?
John 16:7 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
Heb 1:1-3 doesn’t say that God has changed his methods of speaking.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:32 am #
Hi Lisa,
Blog rules? You have accused me of being arrogant and so many other things. So that is ok for you but not ok for me to tell you the truth?
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:35 am #
Hi Lisa
You wrote:
“Yes Vinod, Paul received a revelation of Christ which authenticates his apostleship. He wrote under apostolic authority to bear the testimony of Christ. Your verses in Galatians affirm this fact.”
Where does Bible say that Jesus gave revelation to atuhenticate his apostleship? God doesn’t give revelation to authenticate apstelships, He gives reverlations to convey His message.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:41 am #
Hi Jim,
God still speaks directly. But a person hearing God’s voice needs to make sure that he is really hearing from God. If God is speaking He will speak in confirmation to the Word.
If anything comes in contradiction to the Word then it is possible that source is different.
jim on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:49 am #
Hi Vinod,
I very much agree, but would tell you that Christianity is split into many factions which do not all agree as to what the Word tells us. Therefore I suggest that the best we get in this is an inner anchor-line whom we refer to as the Holy Ghost (Spirit), the Bible, and a boot-in-the-but (His rod and His staff) as we take the next step in an attempt to know the Third Member of the Trinity. It remains a stumble any way one looks at it and the best we can try to do is give Him the glory, since our ego is usually in there somewhere…
Lisa Robinson on 31 Jul 2009 at 8:49 am #
Vinod, here is where you have to step back and consider how God revealed Himself progressively. This goes back to the passages you cited in John 14-16. Jesus was speaking to His witness who would bear his testimony and proclaimed to them how he would In Acts 1:8, he affirms that these men would be his witness but that they should wait for empowerment to do so.
Paul’s apostleship is significant as one who would testify to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15-16).
Yes, God gives revelation to convey his message, but He does so through prophetic and apostolic authority.(2 Peter 1:20-21; Ephesians 2:20). This is the foundation for providing God’s breathed out word, which is Scripture. If God speaks in His son, and Christ sat down, it means the quest for authoritative revelation can end. But we have the written transcript of His revelation.
It does not deny the on-going and permanent presence of the Spirit in the life of the believer who should bear upon our conscience continually and especially as we read His word.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 9:22 am #
Hi Lisa,
Every thing you wrote is just adding extra text to what is written.
Bible doesn’t say anywhere that revelation will end. It doesn’t say that revelation ended either. For your information I have heard God’s voice since 1984 when He filled me with His Holy Spirit and gave me ability to speak in tongues.
In fact Bible says that Holy Spirit will be poured out in last days. Prophesy, dreams and visions will be given as well.
Joel 2:28 “And it shall come to pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams, Your young men shall see visions.
Joel 2:29 And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days.
Also revelation Paul got was after Jesus sat down on the throne. So if revelation had to end we would not see any books from Acts till book of revelation.
Also Joel 2:28 is very clear “all flesh” that means these things are not limited to prophets or apostles.
Why you want to believe that revelation ended because you don’t want to believe on most of the Bible passages. You don’t want to hear God’s voice.
If revelation ended then that will mean God doesn’t speak any more not even through His Word. Do you have any passage in the Bible that says God will continue to speak through Word when revelation ends? First of all there is no passage that tells revelation ends so there is no way you can find one.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 9:41 am #
Yes I agree Jim,
Unless Holy Spirit reveals things one can not comprehend the Word of God.
Holy Spirit is the author that’s why we have Word of God that is non contradictory. If Holy Spirit was not inspiring and speaking to 40 authors of Bible we would have had the same confusion and debate over what is right and what is wrong.
Those who studied with their own mind had such debate even at the time of Jesus. Pharisees believed in resurrection and Sadducees did not.
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 11:39 am #
Vinod,
Here’s one rebuke:
“You guys teach what is not in the Bible. You do what God hates.”
One thing I promise not to do to you: If you and I disagree about some part of Christianity & theology & the way God works & what the Bible teaches, I promise that I will only argue, “You are misunderstanding what the Bible says.”
If I think you get the Bible wrong, I will not simply conclude that you are being a false prophet and doing what God hates. I will assume that you are sincerely attempting to understand the Word, and just getting it wrong–unless you gave me reason to think that you didn’t actually care what the Bible says (and no, you haven’t done that)–and I will try to show you how you are wrong about God’s Word. (And I will listen to your attempt to show me that I’m getting it wrong.)
Please return the favor. Don’t respond to a disagreement by posting a list of verses that say, “Don’t put words in God’s mouth”–as though you think that you have to prove it. As though you think Lisa & Douglas aren’t sincere in their belief that they are presenting what God’s Word says.
Either they are right about what God has taught us, or you are. (Or you’re both partially right & partially wrong.) Disagreement doesn’t mean that you aren’t all trying to honor God’s Word.
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 12:03 pm #
Suppose you stood in front of Isaiah while he prophesied, and you asked God to help you understand it correctly. Then suppose you went to your home town and proclaimed the word of God to your community. You didn’t “hear from God specifically”, but you are proclaiming the Word, right?
In Neh. 8:1-8, when they opened the Law and explained its meaning, they were proclaiming the Word, right? It wasn’t a new specific revelation, but it was the proclamation of revelation already given, right?
If a pastor today preaches from the Bible—praying for God’s help to understand while reading the text carefully and using Greek & Hebrew resources and discerningly considering what other Christians have said in the past in commentaries as they studied the text—would you call that “preparing it with your own brain”?
I certainly agree that it’s possible to use your brain to study without depending on God. But don’t you think we should be using our brains while depending on God to illuminate?
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 12:05 pm #
Hi Jugulum,
I do feel lack of sincearity because I have not heard back on many of the questions. Many of the Bible verse I gave were ignored constantly.
How can I believe that somebody respects Word of God when they ignore Bible passages.
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 12:09 pm #
P.S. On commentaries. If I read a commentary, it is not any different from if I read one of your comments here, where you point to a passage and say something about what it teaches us, and why.
It would be foolish of me to assume that you get it right. I have to read your comments with discernment. But it helps me to understand the Word more, if I read what you write, and what Lisa writes, and what Michael writes, and what other people write. I’ll have to weigh what you all say against the text of God’s Word, asking for his help to do so.
I don’t want to just read it by myself—I want to draw on the help that the Holy Spirit has given to all of you, also. I want to start by reading it by myself, and prayerfully seeking to understand. But then I want to listen to the rest of the Spirit-filled Body of Christ, too.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 12:27 pm #
Hi Jugulum,
You wrote:
“Suppose you stood in front of Isaiah while he prophesied, and you asked God to help you understand it correctly. Then suppose you went to your home town and proclaimed the word of God to your community. You didn’t “hear from God specifically”, but you are proclaiming the Word, right?”
If they proclaim word to word exactly same yea it will be Word of God. But if they alter it or add or substract then it will not.
If pastor is expanding on the Word of God and adding illustrations etc what ever extra he is adding will not be Word of God. God has not spoken it pastor has added them up.
But yes if pastor specifically hears from God then only it becomes Word of God. Every thought that runs through my and your mind is not Word of God.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 12:30 pm #
Hi Jugulum,
You wrote: “It would be foolish of me to assume that you get it right. ”
Yes you are 100% on target. You should have exact same thing when you read the commentaries and anything that explains the Word of God.
But when you read Word of God you should be open to trust it with all your heart. Anything other than Word of God can have mistakes and falacies. That includes my explanations.
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 2:16 pm #
Don’t really have time to reply right now, but here’s a quick expansion of where I was going:
When people talk about using commentaries, that’s often–typically–what they have in mind. That’s definitely how Lisa was referring to them. Discerningly drawing on other believers’ exploration of God’s Word, as part of the studying process.
(Sidenote: And the theologians/scholars who I hear talking about commentaries also give this advice: Start with the passage, don’t start with the commentaries (or with the notes in study Bibles). Because that makes it more likely that you’ll just assume it means what the commentator thinks. Start by reading the passage, and struggling with it. Do your best to understand it, first. Then read commentaries or study notes to get more help & ideas.)
So be careful about how you talk about people who use them, and don’t dismiss their usefulness in your own Bible study. Don’t assume that people who use them aren’t relying on the Spirit. Don’t set up a hostility between using our minds and depending on the Spirit; don’t assume that people who talk about the importance of study & preparation are contradicting dependence on the Spirit.
Don’t say that a sermon coming from prayerful study of God’s Word (using all the helps we have) is just coming from the pastor’s mind.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 2:44 pm #
Hi Jugulum,
It is one thing to depend on Holy Spirit and it is another thing to really hear from Holy Spirit.
If sombody is using commentary that tells me that they are depending on commentary. I am not against using commentary. I have used them and some times they are good and some times they contradict the Word of God.
So I use them with discernment. But will I use them to shape my theology? answer is no. I will shape my theology from the Word of God not from somebody’s interpretation of the Word of God.
My response was to the original topic here. So far I have found that most of the preachers don’t listen to the Holy Spirit. They only study from commentaries and preach. Commentary is a food prepared by somebody else and you do not know if they heard from the Holy Spirit or not.
When I got saved I was just copying somebody’s message and preaching it. It was in late 1980’s my cousin told me that I should try to ask the Lord what He wants me to preach. I tried it and the first message I had to preach was in a Church. When I prayed Holy Spirit asked to speak about the gifts of Holy Spirit and specifically about tongues. He asked me to warn the members that when they speak against the gift of tongue they are insulting Holy Spirit.
I was not ready to preach that. Why because this was my first chance to preach. I wanted to please the pastor and congregation. So I argued with the Lord and said give me another message. He said to me If you do not want to say what I asked you to say you can leave the ministry. I was stunned and I realized that after all it is His work not mine. And that I definately needed to obey Him.
Leslie on 31 Jul 2009 at 3:18 pm #
How can I trust someone who claims it was the Holy Spirit who told him to preach on a certain topic? How do I know if he is lying or not?
If the Holy Spirit gives exact messages to preacher/teachers to preach/teach, do we then put the Bible aside?
Douglas K. Adu-Boahen on 31 Jul 2009 at 3:31 pm #
Vinod,
First of all, you’re talking to a former Charismatic – words from the Lord, tongues, miracles, you name it – I was in over my head, so do not assume you are some exalted Christian who has a greater spiritual life because supposedly God spoke to you.
Now to your comments,
Hi Douglas,
You wrote:
“Preachers are to called to preach the Word, not what they hear in their ears purporting to be from God.”
Where do you get that?
From the Bible, of course (2 Tim 3:16-4:4)
Every single person who wrote the Bible heard what you call “in their ears purporting to be from God”. Every single one of them. Why you consider it as unaceptable method?
Because in the process, you are pitting the Word of God against the Word of God. The Bible is God’s Word – if you claim a word from God and it contradicts the Bible, give me one reason I should listen to you? Who would you trust, Vinod?
Can you find one single person in the Bible who sat down and did his study and prepared a sermon like that? Give me one single example.
Stupid argument to be honest – you are not writing Scripture to expect the same experience they did. When you write book 67 of the Bible, e-mail me a copy. I’ll be glad to staple it to the rest of my Bible.
You guys teach what is not in the Bible. You do what God hates.
Jer 23:30 “Therefore behold, I am against the prophets,” says the LORD, “who steal My words every one from his neighbor.
Jer 23:31 “Behold, I am against the prophets,” says the LORD, “who use their tongues and say, ‘He says.’
Jer 23:32 “Behold, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” says the LORD, “and tell them, and cause My people to err by their lies and by their recklessness. Yet I did not send them or command them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all,” says the LORD.
Before I respond to this point, a brief word about context. When you read your newspaper, do you lift a paragraph here or there and randomly apply it here and there? No – you read it in the knowledge that unless it is clearly addressed to you, it doesn’t apply to you.
Jeremiah 23 is speaking of those who claim prophecies from the Lord when He had not spoken, not of those who go to his Word, the Bible, which He did speak and seek to make that vision plain for God’s people.
If you did your study go and tell that you prepared it with your own brain and did not hear from God specifically. Why go and tell it is Word of God after adding and substracting and changing the meaning?
I would, if I didn’t have the Holy Ghost dwelling with me as a Christian, but I do and this argument is nonsense.
God still speaks directly. God still speaks through dreams. God still speaks through visions. He has done it throughout Bible and He doesn’t change
Again, go read Hebrews 1:1-3 – God clearly changed His means of communicating with the people of old…
Douglas K. Adu-Boahen on 31 Jul 2009 at 3:35 pm #
By the way,
God still speaks directly. God still speaks through dreams. God still speaks through visions. He has done it throughout Bible and He doesn’t change.
God also used to demand sacrifices of bulls and goats from people – you own a slaughterhouse at all?
God used to demand that when a firstborn child is born, you offer him to the Lord as a servant? You done with your firstborn child yet?
God used to demand that you observe seven yearly Sabbaths – you been to the Feast of Tabernacles yet in Jerusalem?
No? Why not? God did all those things in the Bible too…
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 3:44 pm #
“So I use them with discernment. But will I use them to shape my theology? I will shape my theology from the Word of God not from somebody’s interpretation of the Word of God.”
Vinod, do you see that this was redundant?
Using commentaries with discernment means not treating them as the Word of God. It means listening to what other Christians have said about it, considering, and evaluating. It means not just trusting their opinion, but checking it against the Word.
Using a commentary means you think that it could be helpful. That is all. Yes, some people misuse them.
But using it doesn’t mean you’re over-using it! It doesn’t mean you’re taking the commentator as Gospel Truth. If that’s what you’re saying, then that’s nonsense.
Leslie on 31 Jul 2009 at 3:57 pm #
Jugulum:
I don’t know you, but reading your comments, I know for certain that you are a VERY patient person!
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 4:40 pm #
Leslie,
Heh. Thanks. Only in written format. (That’s why I prefer internet-based discussions. If it’s a conversation, I can easily get worked up/passionate/pushy/offensive.) And only sometimes, even online. I could link you to another recent-ish discussion where I got very annoyed and unjustifiably snarky. (A friend of mine described it as “horrifically inappropriate”.)
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 4:58 pm #
Hi Douglas,
Thanks for giving me passage that says preach the word. I don’t find in that passage that tells, “not what they hear in their ears purporting to be from God”
You were supposed to give me verse that tells me that part. Is that a new addition I have to add to 2 Tim 3:16-4:4?
What do you mean by “it contradicts the Bible”? I am the one who said that the following in a reply to Jim.
God still speaks directly. But a person hearing God’s voice needs to make sure that he is really hearing from God. If God is speaking He will speak in confirmation to the Word.
You wrote:
“Stupid argument to be honest – you are not writing Scripture to expect the same experience they did. When you write book 67 of the Bible, e-mail me a copy. I’ll be glad to staple it to the rest of my Bible.”
Who told you that God speaks only to write Bible? Also Who told you that there are only 66 books that are inspired?
Read Josh 10:13, 2 Sam 1:18, 1 King 11:41, 1 Chr 29:29, 2 Chr 2:29, 2 Chr 12:15, 2 Chr 20:34, Jude 1:14
According to Bible to me it looks those books are inspired and where are those books?
Also there are many things Jesus said that is not recorded in the Bible. So somehow to think that God speaks to write scriptures is baseless.
Again you quote Hebrew 1:1-3. I already replied to Lisa about it. It doesn’t say anything about end of revelation.
I gave Lisa a question what happens after “Jesus sat down on the throne”. She replied revelation ends.
I gave her John 16:7 that talks about after Jesus goes away.
John 16:7 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
She ignored that verse.
I gave her Joel 2:28 and she ignored that as well.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 5:06 pm #
Leslie,
You wrote:
“How can I trust someone who claims it was the Holy Spirit who told him to preach on a certain topic? How do I know if he is lying or not?”
That’s your choice to believe or not believe. I can’t make you believe but what I wrote is truth.
You also wrote:
“If the Holy Spirit gives exact messages to preacher/teachers to preach/teach, do we then put the Bible aside?”
Answer is no. Because Holy Spirit will testify of Jesus and He will take the words of Jesus and declare them. God doesn’t replace or override the Word that He has already spoken.
John 15:26 “But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.
John 16:13 “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.
John 16:14 “He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.
Vinod Isaac on 31 Jul 2009 at 5:14 pm #
Hi Jugulum,
You wrote:
“But using it doesn’t mean you’re over-using it! It doesn’t mean you’re taking the commentator as Gospel Truth. If that’s what you’re saying, then that’s nonsense.”
But that is what I see happening here. For anything I ask Bible verse they refer me to somebody’s writing or commentary. They don’t have a single Bible verse all they have is somebody twisted the Bible passages.
Right now also I am still waiting for a single Bible verse that says revelation ended or ends. I can’t believe how people can get brain washed and read things that are not there as though they are there.
God has spoken throughout Bible and somebody makes a statement that revelation ended and no body verifies it from Bible and just believes it without thinking. It is horrible.
Think about it all they gave was Heb 1:1-3 that doesn’t say revelation ends or ended. All it says is how God spoke before and how God spoke through Jesus that’s all nothing else. How they go one step further and declare that revelation eded? Something that is not there in the Bible.
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 5:21 pm #
Vinod,
Something about sermons. I’m going to ask you to approach this comment with fresh eyes. (Don’t assume I’m saying exactly the same thing as CMP, or anyone else here.)
People do sermons to fulfill the “preaching & teaching” part of church life. Preaching the Word of God. Like when Paul told Timothy to preach the Word in season & out of season.
And I assume that “preach the Word” didn’t mean “stand up and read aloud from the Bible for a while, then sit down”. Anyone who can read can quote. Teaching includes explaining. (Our teaching of the Word is never infallible–we’re apt to get things wrong–but we are called to teach.)
That’s what I understand a sermon to be. Not a prophecy. Rather, something like Neh. 8:1-8, or one of Peter’s sermons in Acts (where he explains some Old Testament passages, and how they point to Christ, and he calls people to repentance & the Gospel in light of that).
We have to depend on God’s Spirit in every kind of ministry, and we should pray that God will give us all the insight & understanding that we need. Teaching is a spiritual gift; it’s a manifestation of the Spirit’s work.
What you’re trying to say, on the other hand, is that every sermon should have an element of prophecy prophecy. We should have a revelation from God about the topic. Preaching the Word should come from a specific word from God, given for the circumstance.
Problem is, I don’t see Paul telling that to Timothy, when he explains to his apprentice how he should minister. 1 & 2 Timothy are great letters–letters from an apostle to his protege, his pastor/elder/leader-in-training. Paul gives a lot of advice about how to run a church, and what Timothy’s responsibilities are. And Paul says to preach the Word, but he doesn’t say, “Preaching means letting God tell you directly what you should talk about, and then talking about that.”
You seem to be saying, “Unless you’ve gotten a specific message, you’re not preaching the Word.” And I don’t see that in the Bible at all.
It’s as though you would criticize Timothy, if he responded to Paul’s letter by intensely studying the Scriptures, and preaching the Word, reproving, rebuking, and exhorting, with complete patience and teaching–without having particular instructions from God, “This week, talk about this topic.”
In your mind, that’s a required element of sermon preparation. But I haven’t seen it in our sufficient guide–the Bible–at all.
Douglas K. Adu-Boahen on 31 Jul 2009 at 5:45 pm #
Vinod,
Firstly, is God so useless as to inspire other books and they not make it into the Bible? Those books were meant to be in the Bible. Same with the words of Jesus not in Bible – they were not necessary. These are written that we might believe – John 20:28-31, 2 Tim 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:19-21
Secondly, go read 2 Tim 3:16-4:4 – the Word there is the Scriptures.
Thirdly, your view of the Bible is digusting and frankly, very dishonoring to God. Men died to get that book into your hands and you dishonour it by placing your menial revelation on a par with it.
Fourthly, unless you are the apostles, promises of continuing revelation don’t apply to you.
I’m done with this conversation – much more beneficial things to do with my time than to converse with foolhardy persons such as yourself.
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 5:50 pm #
Vinod,
So, if people refer you to someone else’s commentary instead of taking the time to write out a brand-new explanation of exactly the same thing just for you, then they’re over-using commentaries?
If people don’t take the time to give you brand-new compositions, you think you’re justified in deciding that they don’t think for themselves?
If people are convinced by arguments that don’t convince you, you think you get to accuse them of trusting commentaries over the Word of God?
When people do point you to the verses that they think teach what they’re arguing, and you’re not convinced by it, you feel comfortable saying that they’re just brainwashed and they haven’t given you any verses?
Even though people have argued their position from Scripture–and posted comments that actually didn’t refer to any commentaries–you think you get to say, “For anything I ask Bible verse they refer me to somebody’s writing or commentary”, just because you think they’re wrong about the passage?
Vinod, everyone gets things wrong, sometimes. Everyone has the experience of finding out that a verse actually doesn’t teach something that they thought was obvious. Everyone has the experience of finding out that a verse does teach something that they didn’t see at first. Everyone makes mistakes, misreading things for all sorts of reasons. And every time you see someone supposedly misusing a verse, the flaw might be in you. (Hopefully. Some people make mistakes, but go for their whole lives pridefully confident that if they don’t see it, the other person must be brainwashed.)
I haven’t interacted much with you, in your recent comment threads. I don’t have time. Sometimes I’ve (at least partially) agreed with you, other times I’ve disagreed. And I have definitely disagreed with some of your attempts to support your ideas with Bible references. You have pointed to passages, and I’ve thought, “It doesn’t say that at all!” I’ve been as unimpressed as you were with Hebrews 1:1-3.
I expect that on some of those, you really were wrong–and I also expect that on others, I have something to learn.
But I haven’t decided that you’re insincere, or that you don’t think. I understand how it can happen that you would be blind, or see something (in all sincerity) that isn’t there. And I understand how I can be wrong in the same way.
—
I read what other people write about the Bible because I know that I have blind spots & misunderstandings. I know that the Word is richer than I have yet seen. I know that I have seen things that aren’t there. And considering the counsel of the rest of the Body of Christ is a fantastic help in finding out.
Jugulum on 31 Jul 2009 at 5:58 pm #
P.S. The point is, everyone has blind spots. Sometimes we get them from accepting bad arguments, in a blog post or comment thread or commentary. Sometimes we get them from our own heads.
The only thing that concerns me more than people over-using commentaries is under-using them. The only thing that concerns me more than people easily accepting other’s bad arguments is easily accepting their own bad arguments. Remaining invincible in their conclusions–or approaching every disagreement as though the other guy is brainwashed.
Lisa Robinson on 31 Jul 2009 at 6:30 pm #
Jugulum, you’re absolutely correct that we should wrestle with the word first. That has always been my practice. Observe, observe, observe. See connections. Follow the flow of thought. Prayerfully ask for illumination. Then consult commentaries to see what others say. Of course, in my case I get to consult the greek text and wrestle with it. There is something about studying the word in the original language that really draws out is being communicated and helps to understand His word better.
I also think your comments highlight 2 important facts:
1) God gave teachers to the body so the body can be grow up in Him (Ephesians 4:11). Now a teacher is one who explains things and help us understand the word better. I can’t imagine relying on a teacher that has not engaged in significant study of God’s word. Maybe that’s why James tells us that not all should be teachers as they bear the stricter judgment. But what significant is the difference between the teacher you learn from in your congregation and the teacher that has written a book or commentary? Isn’t this the purpose that God gave this gift, so we can learn? When we reject them, perhaps we are rejecting what God gave us.
2) We were created for community, to serve one another, learn from one another, support one another, and exhort one another. Hebrews 3:13 indicates this is needed lest we be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. Those that have trusted in Christ drink of the same spirit and we all have something to contribute. Ignoring the contribution of others, even dead ones that have written books, accomplishes the purpose for which we have been placed in community. I think we can get quite hardened when we refuse to learn from others.
Finally, yes we must be able to recognize when we have not been seeing something correctly. I have said that I was wrong about how I have read some passages more times than I can count. And here too, is the value of community.
cheryl u on 31 Jul 2009 at 6:43 pm #
I have a question for all of you that have stated that Heb. 1 proves that God doesn’t speak any more through dreams, visions, etc. (I hope I am not confusing long threads here–I think I am on the right one!)
How do you reconcile that with Peter’s statement in Acts regarding the prophecy in Joel of what would happen “in the last days”? If what was happening then was in the last days, how much more must we be in the last days now! So I simply can’t see how the Heb. verses negate the fact that dreams and visions etc. can still happen today.
Saying that, I want to say for everyone that may not know, that I was a part of a hyper charismatic church for some years and came to see many problems there and subsequently left. However, I still believe that the gifts of the Spirit, etc. are for today–just not the horrendous abuses I saw there.
Lisa Robinson on 31 Jul 2009 at 7:35 pm #
Cheryl, I think that’s a great question. I am personally fascinated by the issue of divine speech, how God has spoken revealed progressively throughout Scripture and how can be expect God to speak today.
To be honest, I have not fully reconciled Peter’s statement concerning dreams and visions in the last days and what exactly is he talking about. But here is where I am leaning:
The prophecy comes from Joel 2:28-29. Judah is being quite idolatrous, as is their northern neighbors, and Joel is telling them to come back to God. What is interesting is that he says after this, so it begs the question ‘after what?’ Previous to this statement, it is indicative of Israel’s repentance, which suggests a near fulfillment. However, God speaks of restoration of land, which they were already occupying. So starting with vs 21, it could be indicative of an eschatalogical fulfillment for Israel.
I think this can be supported by what follows our passage in question. God will display signs and wonders on the earth, describing the state such that is compatible with the tribulation period as described in Revelation 14-16.
So back to Peter in Acts 2. He was addressing Israel and the question becomes does his statement mean it is a then fulfillment OR is he reminding them of a yet future fulfillment. I am leaning towards the latter. Just because he is making the statement does not necessarily mean it is being fulfilled then.
So I think the statement ‘in those days, the Spirit will pour out on all flesh’ is compatible with a future fulfillment. Assuming a pre-tribulation rapture, where the church is removed from the equation and thus the Spirit with them, God pouring out His Spirit to usher in His judgment and eventual reign of Christ makes sense.
Lisa Robinson on 31 Jul 2009 at 7:52 pm #
Cheryl, interestingly I’ll be taking the Prophets this fall, which is a Bible exposition class covering Isaiah-Malachi. We have 6 papers and can choose from 30 topics. Discussing the various interpretations of Joel 2:28-29 is one of them so I think that should definitely be one of my 6.
cheryl u on 31 Jul 2009 at 9:36 pm #
Lisa,
But Peter said, in answer to questions by the people asking for an explanation of what was going on, that what they were seeing was a fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy. At least that is the only way I can understand what he said by reading it. If that is the case, how do you see it as being a future only thing? Or are you saying that the Spirit was poured out at that time but the rest is for the future? And if so, that still doesn’t explain the discrepancy betwwen that and the Heb. 1 verses if they indeed mean that no such things will happen after Jesus came.
Lisa Robinson on 01 Aug 2009 at 3:06 am #
Cheryl, yes that is something to consider. However, it could be the significance is this is the start of how people would relate to God through the Holy Spirit. So he could be reminding them of a yet to be fulfilled prophecy BUT indicating that it has to start somewhere. If that makes any sense. I dunno, gotta do some more study on it.
Regarding Heb 1:1-3, it does beg the question, what does it mean that God speaks in his son? Certainly, He is God incarnate as vs. 3 indicates and displayed in the gospels. So God speaking in his son, points to His revelation in Christ. I believe this is where the apostles come in to bear testimony to the risen Christ. Clearly, there were miraculous signs and wonders being performed in the early church but I believe this was to authenticate the gospel message. It was not about the signs, dreams or visions but about Christ. I think its important to note that all was there were OT Scripture. Letters were being circulated for sure, that would eventually be recognized as Scripture but not so much in the early church. The whole point was to convey God’s revelation in Christ as Scripture, as pointed out in John 20:31.
I honestly have not closed the door on the miraculous, where needed. But we have God’s authoritative word bound in the 66 books of our Bible. Christ sat down means there is nothing further in the way of God’s revelation to say. That is my take anyway. I do believe that in more remote parts of the world, in the absence of Bibles as well as communication and worldview disconnects, that God can and does work through the miraculous. But that is to convey what we have written.
Again, I will emphasize this in no way negates the living and active presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer that bears on the believer’s conscience as an emblem of God’s presence who leads and guides us as we allow (significance of yielding to the Spirit).
cheryl u on 01 Aug 2009 at 9:38 am #
Thanks for your clarification Lisa.
Lisa Robinson on 01 Aug 2009 at 9:56 am #
Cheryl, I found this question about Joel’s prophecy intriguing so I started a discussion topic about it on Theologica, if you’re interested.
Here http://theologica.ning.com/forum/topics/thoughts-on-joel-22832
cheryl u on 01 Aug 2009 at 10:24 am #
Thanks again Lisa. I may get in on that conversation. However, as I have mentioned in another thread, I have been and continue to be extremely busy–my summer has been an absolute “zoo”! So getting involved in long conversations right now is not something I really have time for. “Quickie” comments here and there is about all I have time for right now!
Vinod Isaac on 01 Aug 2009 at 12:50 pm #
Hi Douglas ,
You wrote:
“Firstly, is God so useless as to inspire other books and they not make it into the Bible? ”
Answer is no your theology of 66 books is useless. I will trust the Word of God which says there are other books too. I can’t imagine that a person will go low to defend his theology that he will call God useless. If you read those verses it is clear that those books were inspired.
Jude 1:14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints,
You wrote:
“Those books were meant to be in the Bible. Same with the words of Jesus not in Bible – they were not necessary. These are written that we might believe – John 20:28-31, 2 Tim 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:19-21″
If you read Jude 1:14 you would have known that Jude believes that Enoch’s prophecies were inspired. Also I can’t understand how can a person say that something God spoke was not necessary or of no value. It all because somebody thoroughly brain washed saying 66 books is the only inspired Word of God. All the passages I gave contradict it very clearly.
You wrote:
“Secondly, go read 2 Tim 3:16-4:4 – the Word there is the Scriptures.”
For your information Timothy had only first 39 books as scriptures. That time New testament was not available. So are the only 39 inspired?
You wrote:
“Thirdly, your view of the Bible is digusting and frankly, very dishonoring to God. Men died to get that book into your hands and you dishonour it by placing your menial revelation on a par with it. ”
My view? What are you talking about? Have you read your Bible? God has been speaking to people through the Bible. And no where it says God stopped talking or will stop talking.
You didn’t give me a single verse in the Bible to support your theology and you tell me that something else. Actually your views are not in the Bible are so disgusting that they rot.
You wrote:
“Fourthly, unless you are the apostles, promises of continuing revelation don’t apply to you.”
You are wrong again and a clear effect of brain washing. Joel 2:28,29 is very clear that it is not limited to aposteles and prophets.
Joel 2:28 “And it shall come to pass afterward That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, Your old men shall dream dreams, Your young men shall see visions.
Joel 2:29 And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days.
Even in old testament God’s voice was not limited to prophets and apostles.
Gen 16:13 Lord spoke to Hagar and Hagar was not prophetess.
Also it looks you do not know there were other prophets who heard from God and these prophets didn’t write any book. 2 Ki 2:3 sons of the prophets at Bethel, 2 ki 2:5 sons of the prophets at Jericho, 1 Sam 10:5 group of prophets. So your thinking that God speaks only to write scripture is wrong.
Vinod Isaac on 01 Aug 2009 at 12:59 pm #
Hi Jugulum,
You wrote: “And I assume that “preach the Word” didn’t mean “stand up and read aloud from the Bible for a while, then sit down”. Anyone who can read can quote. Teaching includes explaining. (Our teaching of the Word is never infallible–we’re apt to get things wrong–but we are called to teach.)”
Preach the Word means preach the Word. More than 90% of what is preached today in the World is twisted and manipulated version of the God’s Word.
Any time you add or change what is written in the Word it is no more Word of God. Also if a person did not hear from the Lord what he needs to preach that is not word from the Lord either. For example if a blind man is shouting “Jesus the Son of God have mercy on me”. And Jesus goes and tells him you need to repent of your sins other wise you will not make it to heaven. Will that be Word from the Lord for that person? Answer is no. Word from the Lord was “What do you want Me to do for you?” and “Go your way; your faith has made you well.”
So today 99% of what is preached today is not what God wants them to speak, instead what preacher thinks is right for the congregation.
Vinod Isaac on 01 Aug 2009 at 1:18 pm #
Lisa,
You wrote:
“Just because he is making the statement does not necessarily mean it is being fulfilled then.”
That’s interesting. Acts 2:16 is crystal clear that what was happening at that moment was fulfillment of Joel 2:28
Acts 2:15 “For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day.
Acts 2:16 “But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
You don’t trust Acts 2:16 because you are again using your theology as template instead of Word of God being template. You should have trusted Word of God over your theology.
Not only Joel 2:28 was fulfilled there it fulfilled continously.
Problem of Corinth congregation was too much speaking of tongues from pulpit.
They had gifts of Holy Spirit operating without shortage.
1 Cor 1:4 I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you by Christ Jesus,
1 Cor 1:5 that you were enriched in everything by Him in all utterance and all knowledge,
1 Cor 1:6 even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you,
1 Cor 1:7 so that you come short in no gift, eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ,
1 Cor 1:8 who will also confirm you to the end, that you may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
That again proves that God doesn’t give revelations to only write Scriptures.
I am still waiting for one single Bible verse that tells God stopped talking or revelations ended or ends. I am only asking for one. I give you a lot of them and you don’t believe in them. I am just asking for one.
Vinod Isaac on 01 Aug 2009 at 9:31 pm #
Hi Jugulum,
“And I have definitely disagreed with some of your attempts to support your ideas with Bible references. You have pointed to passages, and I’ve thought, “It doesn’t say that at all!” I’ve been as unimpressed as you were with Hebrews 1:1-3.”
You could have pointed them out to me. That would have been the best thing you could do. I don’t think I quoted any verse that didn’t say what I meant. I would have definately looked into if I have made any mistake in reading the Word of God.
You wrote:
“I read what other people write about the Bible because I know that I have blind spots & misunderstandings. I know that the Word is richer than I have yet seen. I know that I have seen things that aren’t there. And considering the counsel of the rest of the Body of Christ is a fantastic help in finding out.”
All have blind spots and when blind leads that blind both fall. That is what is happening here. Every body sings in the same tune and if somebody sings in different tune he is unwelcome. Blind leading the blind and every one is following the blind. That why I was trying to put emphesis back on Word of God. Word of God is not blind and it will lead to the right place.
Psa 119:102 I have not departed from Your judgments, For You Yourself have taught me.
Psa 119:103 How sweet are Your words to my taste, Sweeter than honey to my mouth!
Psa 119:104 Through Your precepts I get understanding; Therefore I hate every false way.
Psa 119:105 Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path.
I like that “You Yourself have taught me”.
JasonJ on 02 Aug 2009 at 11:02 am #
@DaveZ Post 6.
I must be honest, I’ve only read about 2/3rds of the posts here. But I wanted to comment on the post that mentioned teaching through Romans and God adjusting the message because of someone who is at church on a certain day.
As a qualifier, I pastor a house church, 15-20 people and growing. I have a seminary education and an active guest speaking ministry throughout Arizona. I mention this because of the “arm-chair pastor” comment from earlier post.
My comment is this: Far too many chruches teach from the bible rather than teaching the bible. It’s not semantics. It’s the difference between topical teaching and exegetical, expositional teaching. I realize this is a long road to a simple point but I wanted to try and be very clear where I’m coming from with the upcoming statement.
My point: If you are teaching the bible, say Romans 11, how exactly can you teach Romans 11 apart from what the text allows and still consider yourself faithful to the text?
OR (if i missed your point entirely) Did you mean to imply that the pastor may feel moved by the Spirit to teach from a diferent text? Say Colossians 1 instead of Romans 11, by the Spirit, to reach a special visitor that only God knows is there?
If the latter was your point my question is: Can you effectively teach on a text which you have not, at some point in time, prepared through prayerful, Spirit-filled study?
Douglas K. Adu-Boahen on 02 Aug 2009 at 1:07 pm #
Vinod,
For someone who claims to be some super-Christian, you are actually rather rude and bombastic. If that is what your “spirit” is leading you to do, I want none of it. I hope you and it are very happy together…
Dave Z on 02 Aug 2009 at 5:25 pm #
JasonJ, yes, I meant a different text.
I’m guessing, but you seem to be speaking from a perspective that assumes the following:
1. Exegetical/Expositional (verse-by-verse) is the only valid teaching method.
2. Specific (and recent or even within the week) study of a paticular text is mandatory to teaching on it.
Regarding the former, this statement borders on the outrageous:
I don’t know how you meant it, but it could be read as a self-righteous (“Far too many churches…” but not yours, I’m sure) blanket condemnation of topical teaching, which seems very presumptuous, if not arrogant. I’ll assume that’s not how you meant it, so those of us who prefer eisegesis should not take offence.
Furthermore, even verse-by-verse teaching is topical in essence. For example, the first couple verses of Galatians 3:
You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?
From that I could preach a sermon on any of the following topics:
1. Foolishness
2. Demonic influence
3. The crucifixion and it’s implications
4. Receiving the Spirit
5. The Law and legalism
6. Belief, with an emphasis on Grace
Everyone who teaches verse-by-verse, from MacArthur to Chuck Smith, does this. They just choose a topic based on what verse is on the schedule for that week.
Regarding my second point, I would point out that there are many pastor/teachers who would be able to teach through a passage without XX hours of preparation. Maybe he’s taught through it before. And maybe he just really knows his Bible. Then there is always the remote possibility that the Holy Spirit could actually guide his words. Well, maybe not – relying on the Spirit and power of God sounds pretty foolish. Sorry. (My sarcasm is not meant to mock or ridicule; consider it hyperbole to make a point)
A pastor friend has a remarkable story regarding this very topic. Short version – God woke him up at 2 AM Sunday morning and re-directed his message. The re-direction was confirmed at church when a 1st time attender told the pastor of sitting with a .45 in his mouth at 2 AM and praying that God would speak to him. The pastor without understanding why, preached a message that spoke directly to this individual’s situation. And believe me, this pastor is no charismaniac.
How is it that we (the evangelical church) have so little confidence in the power and privilege of God to move in miraculous ways?
Steve on 02 Aug 2009 at 5:55 pm #
Evengelicals don’t move in miraculous may be because they think God is dead.
JasonJ on 02 Aug 2009 at 6:37 pm #
DaveZ,
Your assumptions are correct. I do believe expository teaching is the correct way to teach the bible.
As to your second point, I’m not entirely sure how you arrived at the conclusion that my comment made any reference to time. I have studied some sections of Scripture at such great lengths while in seminary that if I were called to speak at a church within the next hour, on that passage, I would be prepared. And to that end I think you and I are in more agreement than you realize.
As for as my dislike for topical teaching, as a methodolgy, it’s akin the the “ordo salutis” debates, it’s about preeminence, what comes first.
Topical teaching, as a methodology, starts with it’s topic and searches for affirming text.
Expository teaching, as a methodology, starts with the text and communicates the topic of the text.
It really is a very different thing.
As to your comment on Galatians 3, do you really believe that all of those topics you listed are in view as Paul is writing to the Galatians? I do not. And you have perfectly illustrated my point as to how topical teaching falls short. Of your list only #5 would sort or fit the context of chapter 3 and even that “topic” falls short. The issue at hand for Paul is justifications by faith or works of the Law. So the subject matter (or topic) is neither faith nor Law but how one obtains justification.
All the other topics you listed would impose on the text things that do not communicate the message Paul was delivering.
But I think we are getting off topic. {bad ironic wordplay joke intended} =)
Latest Links | blog of dan on 02 Aug 2009 at 9:02 pm #
[...] “I Was Going to Preach this, but the Holy Spirit Led Me to This” . . . And other Stupid Statemen… [...]
Dave Z on 02 Aug 2009 at 11:00 pm #
JasonJ,
I prefer expository preaching, but I don’t buy the premise that topical is inferior by default. I have yet to hear anyone give a scriptural example of expository preaching. The sermon on the mount is topical, as is, I believe, every sermon recorded in scripture.
Regarding the Galatians reference, Paul mentions, in one form or another, each of the items I mentioned. How can one speak on justificaton without reference to the Law, belief or grace? The cross is the basis for our justification. What is foolishness? Paul had a reason for calling the Galatians foolish, and that can be expounded upon.
I’ve heard too many well-respected preachers wander far afield from a specific passage in order to provide background or additional support for a specific teaching. Yet they still claim to be expository. What troubles me is that some seem to feel a certain smugness about that, especially compared to all those topical preachers.
I was listening to MacArthur recently speaking on The Lord’s Supper section of 1 Cor 11. The guy was all over the map. He went into detail about the Passover, went to Acts 2 to talk about the beginning of the church. Went into the definition of the church (never means a building in scripture). Spent several minutes on heresy. Used references from all over the OT and NT. He spoke on half a dozen topics that were not directly referenced in the text. Took him 2 sermons. When someone spends 90 minutes on a text that takes less than three minutes to read, he’s bringing in something that is not directly in the text. He’s developing topics and supporting them with other references. And he’s the Grand Poohbah of expository preaching!
So I disagree with your premise there too.
And to directly answer your original question:
Maybe. But I think what I really hope is that a pastor who has spent time in the Word (and if he hasn’t, he shouldn’t be a pastor) would be able to develop almost any theme on the spot, as you said you can.
Well, you did say “at some point in time,” but I seem to have missed that so I went into the time thing. Sorry. But I think you’re right, we do agree that at some time, the pastor should have developed some familiarity with almost any topic, and certainly the main themes of scripture. And on that basis, he should be able to speak with authority on something in a pinch.
I think we’re still in the topic ballpark.
Douglas K. Adu-Boahen on 03 Aug 2009 at 4:04 am #
Dave Z,
I disagree with your premise that unless someone preaches rigidly from a text and doesn’t show how the Scriptures interrelate that the preacher is not doing Bible exposition. The Bible is not a self-contained unit and so I would do exactly the same thing – linking texts together, presenting how other doctrines fit into the main point of the text, etc.
Dave Z on 03 Aug 2009 at 8:57 am #
Right, no scripture stands alone, but when you start going through the scriptures pulling in other references, you’re in this situation:
Dave Z on 03 Aug 2009 at 9:29 am #
Oops, forgot to close my blockquote. It should end after the words “affirming text” in the second line.
mbaker on 03 Aug 2009 at 7:46 pm #
CMP,
I too have heard that statement too many times. One has to wonder if they were listening to the Holy Spirit in the first place, instead of doing their own thing, and if that’s not simply a public admission of guilt, even if it isn’t exactly framed that way.
mbaker on 03 Aug 2009 at 7:51 pm #
Or, to take it a little further, if it isn’t a “You guys better really listen, because I’ve got REALLY got a message from the Holy Spirit that you need to heed” kind of heads up, man inspired kind of thing. Either way, I find it somewhat troubling, and want to ask: Why did the Holy Spirit have to remind them at the last minute? weren’t they listening in the first place? And, if so, why not?
Mike on 03 Aug 2009 at 10:14 pm #
I don’t know why there seems to be a preponderance of stuck on stupid judgments lately. God should be directing and changing your steps if need be; if you haven’t been paying attention during the basic preparation, than there’s an honesty to the statement that our otherwise more diligent disciplined efforts have thankfully avoided. I’d rather hear someone admit to being inept on occasion.
I do think there’s more to God choosing the foolish of the world than our professional and personal egos like to admit.
Being impulsive and flaky for the sake of being “spontaneous” : Think Theology on 02 Sep 2009 at 10:44 pm #
[...] Oh, and then there’s the whole issue of how manipulative the “spontaneity” card can be (not always, but sometimes). Michael Patton covers this well when he writes, “I was going to preach this, but the Holy Spirit led me to this”… and other stupid… [...]
Matt Mitchell on 04 Sep 2009 at 10:57 pm #
I believe that the Holy Spirit works through structure, organization, and planning. Studying for a sermon… God is in that! Yes. But, the Holy Spirit works through spontaneity as well. As pastor we prepare and study with the Spirit, but we also listen as the Spirit speaks to us as we preach. Sometimes God may change the direction of our sermon for a much needed purpose.
It’s easy with a seminary degree (and I have one) to fit God into an academic box and to overemphasize preparation, as if that’s the rubber stamp. It’s kinda of our way of saying screw you uneducated fools. We don’t want to be niave like those backwood pastors who don’t prepare at all because they are convinced by the notion that the Spirit only works through spontaneity, so we jump to the polar opposite (allow our studies to be the main voice we listen too.)
And don’t get me wrong–study IS WORSHIP! The Jewish people embody this well, but it isn’t an end in itself. Because God’s Spirit is dynamic and not static, the Spirit may lead us differently. We have to be careful not to attribute to God what is actually from us, but there are times when the Spirit testifies to us in such a real way, we know that God is leading us in a different direction.
kurt on 25 Sep 2009 at 8:08 pm #
I have a potentially silly question, is it possible that a pastor may spend his week preparing a sermon for personal reasons (personal interest, questionable motives, etc) and God is absent throughout this preperation.
At the last minute, God steps in and delivers His own message through the mouth of His messenger.
I am not a theologian, but I am also leery of categorically stating that God does not operate in a particular way because it does not meet my criteria for His actions.
I hope this makes sense and thank you for an opportunity to ramble…
ashley on 07 Nov 2009 at 10:01 pm #
I am new to comment, but have been lurking for a while (and have read and benefited from most every word on this blog!)
I have a question in regards to one of the related comments to this post.
Would any of you care to elaborate on how you came to the conclusion that many of the charismatic gifts used in the pentecostal churches may not be intended to be a part of the church of today?
I ask this, not to attack at all, but because I too have been damaged through charismatic churches. I grew up in a traditional church, and in college moved on to a large contemporary church that was very interested in feeling the Holy Spirit. I moved to being on staff. The church was seemingly being pulled in all directions, prophesies constantly happening, etc.
I am working my way back to the church. I had thought it was an issue of me and my personal faith that had gotten in the way. I had always been taught, and taught others, to actively seek the gifts of the Holy Spirit as you move to maturity in faith.
I am beginning to think I may agree with those of you who have moved back to more conservative christianity.
Would anyone share their personal journeys, or help with any biblical reasons for coming to this conclusion?
If this is better answered on another thread, please direct me!!!
-Ashley
Daniel B on 09 Nov 2009 at 6:54 pm #
“Neglect the Holy Spirit. The idea that is conveyed is that the Holy Spirit is not present in the sermon/lesson preparation process”"
That’s not necessarily true. People can fully agree that the Holy Spirit should and does guide the preparation process, but claim that this particular time, they didn’t let him do this and just went at it on their own.
I doubt you would claim the the Holy Spirit would never say to someone “You are supposed to be saying such-and-such, instead of so-and-so”. And even if that did happen, it wouldn’t mean that the preparation was not from God. God can very well use what we see as preparation for X for the purpose of Y instead.
And also, it seems like you’re referring to the “instant, non-prepared message” as MIRACULOUS, but not the prepared type. Only on the human end of the communication is there a difference. Both are equally miraculous and equally supernatural.
Daniel B on 09 Nov 2009 at 6:59 pm #
Ashley …
Remember that the abuse of gifts does not render void the proper use.
“I had always been taught, and taught others, to actively seek the gifts of the Holy Spirit as you move to maturity in faith.”
You taught and were taught correctly.
Charismatic gifts are not just used in “pentacostal churches”, they are used by God all over the world and in most places it’s rather silly to think that God doesn’t do certain categories of supernatural activity any more. The USA and Western Europe are the exception because our materialistic backgrounds have limited us.
Prophecy is primarily meant, in my opinion, to see people as God sees them. God often tells us something about someone and wants us to “pass the word along” so that they can see the image of God, and see the New Creation that God has made them, rather than seeing their sin nature as their true self.
Learning to minister prophetically takes grace and humility. Humility to say “Hey, I think heard God say this, but I’m not sure. It seems right and encouraging and Biblical, but it still could be my own thoughts. Da da da da da. What do you think?” And it takes having grace for others to be wrong about something they’ve spoken, understanding that if we never risk we will rarely learn.
Ashley on 10 Nov 2009 at 12:59 am #
Daniel B-
Agreed.
I think, because as a nation we are so earthly wealthy, God certainly can get muddled. And I have witnessed a lot of us seeking these signs and bodily experiences rather than pursuing the more difficult road of slow sanctification.
For whatever reason, I think discernment in some situations is much more difficult. As I said in another thread, I have suffered from incorrect prophecies (which were given with honest intentions, and thoroughly checked on my end). I don’t think it can be written off as a mistake, because these came from several sources.
I still love and admire them.
And of course I have no bad feelings towards God.
I’ve thought perhaps it could be some sort of spiritual warfare (Satan displaying lies that are indistinguishable from the truth), or these types of issues are a result of our nation’s church collectively missing the mark.
The best answer I can come up with is that this is really powerful stuff, and we here in many of the churches in America are playing with it as if it is nothing big, or there to primarily make us feel good.
I’ve seen extraordinary things, but I have also seen a lot of negative chaos as a result of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. And I just don’t think it’s as simple as false prophets or beginner mistakes.
When I say I am becoming more conservative, what I mean is this. I know scripture is 100% accurate. Do I NEED a sign, a word from God, an experience (or any of the other manifestations of the gifts) to know His will and thoughts/feelings about me? The answer is no. Because I have His inspired word, I technically have all that I need.
Is that taking a safe route? Yes.
Is that missing out on something (some deeper connection) in my relationship with God? I don’t know. How many of us in America are taking full advantage of experiencing God through His word? Maybe we are missing out.
scottidog on 16 Nov 2009 at 5:05 am #
I’ve had many times where I’ve been preparing for a Bible Study, and I thought I knew where I was going at the start, only to find my studies leading me in a different direction. I don’t think that’s illegitimate. It was the process of studying, and the stuff I was learning that made me rethink my initial assumptions.
Chris on 21 Nov 2009 at 8:36 pm #
OK….. I just deleted a huge paragraph that I wrote to try and put this more to the point, though the writer of this article may criticize me for not going with what I originally wrote.
Who are you, who am I, who is anyone of us, to play the position of judging another minister when he makes a statement such as the one you judged as stupid, in your own understanding. My friend, what if you are wrong? If so, then you just said you think it is stupid that ministers follow the leading of the Spirit. If there are those of you that feel you are OK in doing that, then I guess go right ahead and hammer down. Just remember that in the same manner in which you judge, you yourself will be judged. It just amazes me that people write such articles using the Bible as their source of authority. The same book which says that the only thing that matters is faith expressing itself in love. Oh I am sure that you will find some passage that will support your point and you will reply with it. Don’t worry, this is my only post. I just had to write something b/c it disturbs me so much to see believers speaking about ministers in such a way. Before you say that your writing this is out of love perhaps go read what the scripture has to say love is. (1 Cor.13)
mbaker on 22 Nov 2009 at 2:30 pm #
Chris,
Just in case you’re still reading here, I think this post has a lot more with exercising Godly discernment in all our teaching than a lack of love or judging others. After all, the Bible itself states those who teach will be judged more harshly, and that scripture is talking about God doing that.
Some pastors I know think it’s not the Holy Spirit speaking when they are ‘told’ to change a well thought out sermon, but satan wanting it not to be heard. Others think it’s because there’s something which personally convicts them, and it’s their own mind rebelling against the truth. Still others want to get their personal opinions across as truth, without causing offense, by tacking the Holy Spirit’s name on it.
For a pastor not to question the source of something like this, and go mindlessly along with it, is a good example of fools rushing in where angels fear to tread.
We’ve got too many false prophets and teachers out there already who mislead people simply because they ‘feel’ a certain emotion or check about something, which they erroneously conclude is God speaking instead.
I think that would be a much greater offense to God.