Last year, an opportunity opened up for me to teach a group of very-young-in-the-faith believers.   This is not the first time I have worked with new believers but I find that I am taking a different approach this time.  You would think that one of the first things I would teach them was how to be a good Christian.  After all, isn’t that what every new believer wants to know…”how do I do this Christian thing?”  It seems reasonable that I would want to teach them Christian living principles so they can have some type of guideline.  Right?

Well, I that is not what I did nor is what I advocate to teach Christians, even believers who are new to the faith.  Instead, I wholeheartedly endorse teaching the foundations of Christianity.   Foundations of Christianity are a very different animal than Christian living principles.  Foundations start with an understanding of God, who He is and what He has provided.  Foundations establish how God has revealed Himself and His redemptive plan for His creation through Christ.  Foundations teach who Christians are according to what the Father has done through the Son by the Spirit.  Foundations teach how the individual salvation relates to the corporate entity of the church.

Christian living principles, on the other hand, provide a methodology for how to approach spiritual life.  It is basically a checklist for compliance for maintaining Christian growth.  Here are some principles that I have found common

• Pray
• Read your bible
• Maintain fellowship with other believers
• Walk in integrity and honesty
• Get involved with serving
• Share your faith

While this may seem like a good list to give new Christians, I do not believe that ultimately compliance with principles is what leads to authentic Christian growth.  In fact, I think this could actually be a hindrance and can ensnare new Christians as they strive to understand what the Christian life is about.  So here are five reasons I do not teach Christian living principles.

1) Christian living principles do not teach the Christian how to grow spiritually.  They only provide a standard for compliance.

2) Christian living principles can get confused for actual spiritual growth.  A believer may get the impression that they are becoming a better Christian simply because of compliance.  Conversely, they may feel they are not good Christians by lack of compliance.  Rather, spiritual growth occurs when the believer is becoming more Christ-like, trusting in the completed work of the cross, yielding to the Holy Spirit and participating in active body life. This can only happen through authentic learning and support of the Christian community.

3) Christian living principles encourage a standard by which to evaluate the spiritual status of other Christians.  This is not necessarily a good thing.  What I have discovered both through the pages of scripture and experientially is that God takes Christians through varied and individualized growth processes.  Growth should be steady but does not occur the same way with everyone.  The Holy Spirit is at work in the hearts of Christians in ways we cannot fully know.

4) Foundations establishes the Christian in their identity.  Considering that we still have fleshly tendencies and histories of how we see ourselves, authentic growth occurs by understanding who we are in Christ.  And this happens when we understand who He is and what He has accomplished according to the will of the Father.  The more we understand who God is and who we are, the more it ought to affect our reliance upon the Holy Spirit, our worship and submission to the triune God and our relations to members of the body of Christ.  We will not need to tell Christians to read their bible if they understand that it is God’s communication to us.  We will not need to tell Christians to pray when they gain an understanding of the necessity of prayer.  We will not need to be told to serve if we understand our position in relation to the church, its purpose and function.

5) Foundations encourage developing a life of grace.  If we are to believe that the grace freely given to us through Christ is unmerited and the basis of our Christian existence, then maintenance of grace is only achieved through reliance on that grace and the active work of the Holy Spirit.  Moreover, it mitigates the need for us to evaluate other Christians according to a list of things we think they should be doing.   Foundations rightly put the focus on God and how we relate to Him.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that Christians do not need to live by principles.  Nor am I advocating for the abandonment of methodology.  But my premise is that what Christians need to grow in grace and true knowledge of Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:18) is the foundation by which they understand grace and the true knowledge of Christ.  This can only happen when they learn about God on His terms and the life that He has called them to.  Whatever methodology is needed will follow.  Whatever principles that should be the fabric of our Christian life will fall into place as we grow and develop into maturity.

So how have I approached this?  In my class, we started out with the concept of revelation and God’s intentional unveiling of Himself.  The gospel is the very fabric by which we understand what we have. We did an overview of the bible, establishing the story of revelation and how each component fits within that story.   We have been plodding through John for a few months now, which we approach holistically and theologically striving to learn about God on His terms.  To be sure, the subject of Christian living principles come up but it is only in response to what we are learning about what God has communicated to us and our Christian identity.  It is invigorating watching these guys grow.Similar Posts:

• My Take on Christian Living Books
• Yes, We Should Follow ‘Man’…But ‘Man’ With Understanding
• Dealing with Doubt – Part 1
• Does the Holy Spirit Interpret the Bible?
• The Voice of Reason: Decision Making and Spirit-Led Direction

I’m sure that the title alone has sparked some questions, raised eyebrows or maybe even some scathing criticism.  But before you judge a book by its cover, please read what I think is a fascinating way that Jared Moore has constructed a guide  in which Christians can learn about God and His world through an intentional interaction with pop culture and specifically it’s media products.   His goal is simple;

My goal is for readers to gain enough understanding of how to exercise a Christian view of the world in their daily lives…to teach Christians how to participate in media unto the Glory of God.  In order to enjoy God through media, Christians must submit to God’s revealed Word in light of Christ’s finished work and take every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Corinthians 10:5).  In other words, I hope to show Christians how to be on their knees in their cultures worshipping God through recognizing His fingerprints in the media produced by God’s fallen image bearers. (pg 9)

With this goal in mind, I think the title can be a bit misleading since it suggests that we understand scripture by watching Harry Potter movies.  Rather, the goal of Moore’s exercise is to engage Christians in a deeper understanding of how pop culture reflects general revelation and how cultural products speak to God’s invisible attributes and eternal power, which he has made evident (Romans 1:19-20).   It makes sense that image bearers would reflect themes of redemption and hope, even though truth within them is suppressed, as I wrote about here as well.   It is no different with the Harry Potter series or with any other cultural products that contain both elements of truth and lies.    When we sift media through the lens of special revelation and God’s redemptive plan for his creation, we can take even something as unlikely as Harry Potter movies to experience how much God has interacted in the world He created.

Moore aims to  participate in media as an act of worship.  He proposes utilizing this study to not engage Christians in critical evaluation of media, but also to use it as a tool for outreach that will ultimately shine light on the gospel.  And why not, given the popularity of the Harry Potter series?   It is here that I think he makes a very compelling case for parents to teach kids how to navigate through the world.  he states, “Parents may profess their children are sinners, but they seek to protect them from a sinful world as if the world is the problem.  The problem is not outside influences but is instead their inside influences.” (pp 6-7).  By utilizing media to teach kids 1) who they are as sinners; 2) their need for Christ and 3) how to navigate media, Moore illustrates that media can and should be used for this training in how to think Christianly, not just for kids but for all Christians.

He uses it to show humanity’s fallenness and quest for truth and how to evaluate what is consistent with divine revelation is what is false.  Since all truth is God’s truth, media is a way that Christians can and should engage with it, identifying where it exists and rejecting what contradicts it.  I concur with Moore that we should not throw the baby out with the bath water simply because it contains some unpalatable elements.

Therefore, one should not get the impression with this study that Moore is glorifying Harry Potter or sorcery.  He is not.  In fact, Moore is pretty emphatic about pointing out the elements in the Harry Potter movies the book guides the reader through that are contradictory to Christianity.   And some will undoubtedly still be troubled by the fact that these elements in Harry Potter.    But I think Moore makes a compelling case for why this should not be a concern.  First, he emphasizes that the world of Harry Potter is a created, fantasy world that demonstrates creativity of its authors.  Second,  the engagement with the Harry Potter movies are not to emphasize the evil elements but to examine where there is a reflection of God’s revelation and his truth and engage with the philosophical underpinnings of contradictory worldviews.   He demonstrates that Harry Potter like all cultural products, contain elements of evil but also elements of truth.   This is the reality of our fallen world.  The problem is not Harry Potter, the problem is sin and a fallen world.

Moore takes the last four Harry Potter movies and provides a step by step guide of how to analyze the themes present in each film.   He extracts themes of good, evil, providence, love, forgiveness, creation, fall and redemption that are present in the movies that are analyzed in this study.  Since I don’t want to present a spoiler nor counteract Moore’s prescription of viewing the movie first, then reading the guide, suffice it to say that I think he does a wonderful job of drawing out themes for analysis, discussion and reconciliation with the biblical text.

Overall, I think that Moore’s study is worth the time and is no more detrimental to the Christian than watching the 11:00 news.  In fact, by engaging with the discussion guide and the movie, I can’t help but see how it would but sharpen our Christian worldview lens and provide a greater ability to interact with heightened Christian thinking in the world we live in.  Moreover, the questions can serve as a guide to evaluate other media products as well and should give the reader a better sense of discernment.

But most importantly, Moore uses this study as an opportunity to demonstrate that the only real remedy is found in Christ.   The gospel is the very foundation and overarching theme which Moore wishes to highlight, as he states here,

To summarize, this Bible study is based on the foundation that Christians should engage their cultures, find the common examples of God’s image therein, extract these common truths, and add God’s truth to them: 1) man is sinful (Romans 3:23; 2) God’s answer for the sin problem is Christ’s redeeming work in reconciling sinners and creation to His Father (John 14:6). (pg 23)

The link to Amazon is here.

Jared Moore’s web-site is here.

 Similar Posts:

• What Movies Will I Let My Kids Watch?
• If God So Loved the World, Then Why Do We Hate It?
• Seven Possible Reasons We Find the Bible Boring
• Theology is More Than Head Knowledge
• Truth in Advertising: A Case for Christianity’s Unique Claim

Over the past couple of weeks I have listened several times to the latest Newsboys work, God is Not Dead.  I confess, I really like this album.  It speaks of the supremacy of Christ and our receipt of His gift sourced in the love of the Father towards His creation.  It makes me think of God’s overarching redemptive plan told through all 66 books of the bible.  It reminds me of the promise of hope found in Christ and His eternal reign and rule.

However, I recently encountered some negative feedback about this work, and the Newsboys in general.   It was familiar criticism because the same words have left my lips in relation to CCM offerings – lacks substance, too simple, boring, not theologically sophisticated.   Basically, the gist of such criticism is that such music is not worthy of time or attention, with an indirect implication that God cannot be honored with such banal worship nor can the worshipper be enriched because of it.  This sentiment comes with the notion that only music packed with doctrinal significance and consistent theological articulation is pleasing to the Lord.

Admittedly, I have been rethinking how we consider Christian music, and “worship” music in general.  I have examining the fruit of such critiques.  For I too have responded to many songs with highly critical lens of doctrinal integrity (according to me of course) and comprehensive theology.   The motivation behind such criticism is the desire to see a song accurately reflect upon the character and work of the triune God and fill our souls with divine truth.  But now I am rethinking this type of criticism and its counter-productive characteristics.

Yes, I am coming to the understanding that nit-picking at music and especially music that encourages us to offer praise and thanksgiving to God and reflect on his greatness can actually discourage the praise we are commended to offer.  This motivates me to ask a few questions with regard to why we find it necessary to be over-critical of worship music, to the extent that it can appear to have no redeeming value.

The first question I have to ask is why we expect a song to deliver a concise theological treatise?  When I look through the pages of scripture, we are commended to extol God with gratitude, sing hymns in our heart, to Him and to each other.  We are not told that they should be rich in substance.   Read through the Psalms.  Sometimes it is just as simple as “praise Him”.

I am questioning how fruitful is to expect the song to organize our theology.   Perhaps a song does not necessarily need to do this.  Rather, we bring in theology to the song offering, even to the simplest of lyrics.   If we sing, God is good or Jesus saves, we should not criticize the song because it doesn’t tell us how exactly God is good or Jesus saves.   We should already have that articulated so when we sing simple lyrics the richness of what we already understand, motivates the worship of song to our great God.   This is a function of good teaching not good song writing.

Now, I do recognize that some songs have troubled lyrics that are inconsistent with the nature and self-revelation of God.  I think such inconsistencies deserve to be noted.  But that is different than criticizing a song because the lyrics or musical 1-4-5 arrangements are too simple.  To criticize a song that encourages the praise and worship of God, and especially one with no inconsistencies,  is to say that our musical and lyrical preferences supersedes our praise of God.

The second question I have to ask is how we consider such criticism might impact the worshipper who simply wants to praise God without dissection of how the song could be better.  Nate Claiborne offers some poignant sobering thoughts with How to Worship When You Think the Song Sucks. (I encourage you to read it – it’s good).  Specific to the impact of criticism, we writes;

How do I worship when I think the songs suck?” you might ask. Well first off, you don’t express that you think the songs suck to anyone else. You may ruin a genuine worshipful experience for them by your complaining. While they were perfectly fine worshipping to that particular song, your comments could forever taint it for them. You are certainly free to mentally critique the artistic and theological merits of the songs you sing each Sunday. But when you decide one or more are duds, don’t rain on everyone else’s parade.

When we ruin someone else’s worship experience, I do believe scripture would liken that to a stumbling block and something we are not to do or be with our family in Christ.  While I was not impacted by the negative reaction to the album I was enjoying, it made me realize that perhaps there are those with a higher level of sensitivity who might be impacted with such criticism.  This leads me to publically apologize if through my criticism, I have tainted a brother or sisters worship experience.  Please forgive me,  don’t mind me and carry on!

The last question I’d have to ask is if worship music criticism does not point to a deeper issue and that of being critical in general.  While I can’t speak for individual motives behind each rendering of criticism, I have found with my own self it stems from a prideful arrogance that somehow my standard should set the precedent for how we worship God.  Yes, I stated correctly – pride and arrogance.  Not only that, we can come off as people without hope who find no beauty in the simplest of creation.  We should not be this way.

So my critique is this – stop being so critical.  Worship God with music that honors Him with whatever lyrics are consistent with His character, from the simplest to the most compact.  Allow others to worship Him as well.  Don’t ruin someone else’s worship experience because you don’t think the song has value.  If it directs us to the Lord, that is all the value we truly need.Similar Posts:

• The Crazy Worship Lady
• A Theology of More III: Worship
• If We are Not Meant to Be Alone Then Why Do We Promote It?
• Critical of Criticism?: A Plea to the Theologically Conservative
• De-waving the Magic Wand: A Note on Sanctification, Doctrine and Worship

I have encountered an expression on a number of occasions that goes something like this…”I don’t follow man, only God”  Sometimes there might be “denominations” thrown in, to emphasize that following God does not mean following denominations.  Of course, that is the sentiment behind not following ‘man’.  By man, I don’t mean male but anyone that represents Christianity.  I believe the idea behind this thought, is that people have opinions about Christianity or about what the bible says.  It does seem more spiritual to say that one does not follow such opinions but only relies on what the bible says.  Not only is this thought counterproductive to real learning,  it is antithetical to Christianity.

Throughout the pages of scripture, God placed people in positions from which His people should take cues, instruction and learn from.  There was Moses and Joshua, the judges, the kings and the prophets.  Jesus Himself, instructed his disciples to make disciples and teach them everything He commanded.  We see a beautiful portrait of this in the early kernels of the Church as new converts sat under the apostles teaching (Acts 2:42).  Paul commended Christians under his tutelage to follow him as he followed Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1).   He gave instruction for leadership to carry on the apostolic witness in the teaching of Christ.  This necessarily comes with the expectation that Christians must follow man in order to understand Christ.

To say that we don’t follow man, is the same as indicating we don’t need teachers and we can arbitrarily decide what is best for ourselves.   It is an attitude that we learn according to our own private interpretations, that says I only need me and my bible since the Holy Spirit will give the interpretation.  However, this contradicts the fact that God has always given his word to His people, organized to learn from each other.  An examination of Ephesians 4, indicates that the body of Christ, united by Spirit baptism, contribute to each other’s growth under the tutelage of leaders.  The same goes for 1 Corinthians 12.  We must rely on others as each one contributes, and learning from others is a part of the package.

The reality is that unless we live in complete isolation, it is a false statement to say that we follow no one.  There is usually someone or a group of someone’s influencing our bible interpretations.  I actually find it ironic when the ones who insist on not following ‘man’, are being influenced by like-minded thinkers who have listened to their brand of interpretation.  The danger here is that private interpretations, and particularly ones that have rejected the historic witness of the faith for something “new”, can create interpretations and biases in such away that removes Christian faith from its very foundation

Yes, tradition is important because it teaches us how others have followed Christ.   I am dismayed at how those who have gone before are dismissed and disdained, as if we can’t possibly learn from them, or that it is unspiritual or academic to inquire about historical thoughts.  But if those to whom we are united in Christ, even if they are no longer here,  have taken time to put their thoughts in writing, there is something to learn from their contributions.

And that leads to the premise that we are to follow people with understanding.  I have observed, and particularly in American evangelicalism, an alarming acceptance to anyone who articulates ideas about Christianity using scripture, and call it bible-based.  And we won’t even get into what is being promoted in the internet.  Just because one uses scripture does not necessarily mean it is accompanied by understanding in relation to God’s overall redemptive program as outlined in scripture.  Church history has witnessed that even heretics can use scripture to support erroneous ideas and those ideas have stemmed from a lack of understanding how their proof-texts are rooted in the foundation that God laid.

Thus, understanding comes from how it all fits together.  I worry that so much of modern day teaching is nothing more than a set of Christian principles to live by.  Christians are learning isolated proof-texts under topical teaching that wants to support whatever the pastor/teacher thinks is important.  Don’t get me wrong, there are principles but those principles must be understood according to the very foundation of Christ.  It takes more than just isolated passages, but Christians must learn Christ according to who He is and what He came to accomplish.  There must be an understanding of His redemptive act in accordance to what God progressively revealed with the law and the prophets, his covenantal promises and ultimate fulfillment.

I propose this is the job of the leader whom the Christian is to follow, to teach the whole counsel of God not just isolated proof-texts.  When Paul commended his hearers to learn from him, it was more than just him giving a set of Christian living principles but him following Christ according to his revelation.  And by that I mean Christ’s unveiling of His fulfillment of what had been promised.  The instructions to pastors and elders is to exhort with sound doctrine (Titus 1:9).  Well, that doctrine is formulated based on the foundation that was laid.   It is this foundation that will give Christians sure footing in their Christian walk, not just because they’ve learned a set of Christian living principles.  In fact, I think principles without foundation will soon crumble under the weight of trials and temptations and most likely contributes to the overwhelming expressions of doubt.

So this means that while we are to follow ‘man’, that person is following Christ according to a holistic understanding and conveying that to the flock.  A test of this would be how they handle isolated passages of scripture.  Are they tying it to the whole thing?  Have they taken time to examine the cultural and historic backdrop to understand what the original author is addressing?   This is why I love it when pastors and leaders teach whole books of the bible in an expository fashion always correlating what is going on in the text to the overall foundation that was laid.   This demonstrates that they are committed to understanding.

Bottom line is that we are to be led by sound leaders.  So we should get out of the mindset that we don’t follow man.  God designed it so we would.Similar Posts:

• Why I Do Not Teach Christian Living Principles
• O Teacher Where Art Thou?: A Case for Legitimate Higher Learning
• A Need for Higher Learning – Part II
• The Problem With Proof-Texting
• Five Signs You Might Be in a Cult-Like Ministry

I have found one of the biggest differences between good Bible reading and Bible reading that is disjointed or otherwise skews what is being communicated, is how we understand the relationship between what is transpiring through the Bible’s narrative vs what we read as directed towards us.   It is understanding what is descriptive vs what is prescriptive.  In fact, I would include prophetic discourse in that as well.  Our understanding of how these two are related will depend, in large part on  instruction and training we receive with respect to how to understand each of the Bible’s 66 books.  This instruction would include understanding that each author is communicating to a particular audience, addressing particular situations or norms, what type of book it is (narrative, wisdom, letters), and how it correlates into God’s overarching narrative in salvation history.

Through my own personal experience and observation of many, there is an inverse relationship between the level of instruction and the tendency to personalize passages as being directed towards us.  What do I mean by that?  I have observed that without instruction, there is a tendency to read the Bible as if everything is being communicated directly to us.  I did just that for many years, especially related to the prophetic books and using that as an indicator of what God was communicating to me personally.  With a personalized focus, there will also the tendency to expect  what transpired through the pages of narrative to be replicated today, especially if it is believed as direct communication.

I believe it is of utmost importance for every Christian to understand how to read their bible, which starts from understanding what it is and how it was put together.  As long as we use language like “manual for living”, it will be nothing more than a self-help guide so that we can stay on track with our Christian life and abide by Christian living principles.  But I believe that is a misrepresentation of God’s self-revelation, which displayed throughout all 66 books.  And this must be considered according to the trajectory that is being laid out through the bible’s narrative.

Don’t get me wrong, there is instruction in there for us, particularly in the New Testament letters.  These were written to situations that were going on the Church, general exhortations to the Church and/or warnings and exhortations to individuals.  Even with the letters, they were addressing an historical and cultural reality that must be taken into consideration.  There are also general principles to glean from how God relates to his people.  The wisdom literature (Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiates, Job)  provides timeless principles as well, although we must be aware of historic and cultural references.

As Christians, we want to understand what God is communicating to us through the pages of scripture.  If we start with the premise that He is communicating Himself as He intersected with human history, this will temper how much we understand is being directed to us personally vs what He is doing in the course of salvation history.  Thus, when an author is addressing a particular situation, or audience or providing prophetic discourse, it must be seen as what God is doing in that particular setting in relation to what he is doing overall.  In that discourse, there will be language and concepts used in a way that the original audience would understand.

But specifically when it comes to bible narrative, it is important to understand that the authors are explaining what happened.  And for that, I think a brief sketch is in order.  As the pages of the biblical narrative unfold, we see God’s intentional actions towards his creation, His calling out of a people to Himself,  His promise to them, His instruction to them and provision for their consecration to Him. This is why the first five books are classified as the Pentateuch, meaning Law.

Then the narrative continues.  They enter the land that was promised but reject God’s leadership.  They eventually get a king and a promise of eternal kingship.  But the earthly kings, generally did not do what was right and this eventually leads to the seemingly end of God’s promises.  Enter the prophets who spoke as direct communication from God to His people.   It is significant to note that the prophets as God’s spokespeople (see Hebrews 1:1), were addressing the situation that was going on with Israel.  That has to be at the forefront when we read the prophets.  In that, there is a prophetic foretelling of God’s promises and correction, especially related to the unveiling of His Son.

Thus, there must be a Christo-centric focus to how we read narrative.  The gospels are explaining of Christ’s fulfillment of the law and prophets (Matthew 5:17) and how he was establishing something new.  What is explained in the narratives must be reconciled to what God had accomplished and promised throughout the Old Testament narrative.   How he addresses the religious leaders and cultural norms is not necessarily a blanket prescription for us, though as Christ followers we do want to pay attention to how he deals with people and what exactly he is teaching.  He is revealing God to us, and thus we see the heart of God in His actions.  He is addressing cultural expectations and norms while all the while gradually unveiling how He has come with respect to God’s promises and what He has come to establish.

He calls eyewitnesses so that they can teach others what this all means for them.  Thus, right before his ascension, he tells these eyewitnesses what the must do – be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).  So the book of Acts is explaining what happened with the establishment of the Church, the shift from an external manifestation of God’s glory to the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit – Christ in us the hope of glory (Colossians 1:27).  We see the conflict between the old establishment and the new inclusion of Gentiles as the people of God, even though this had been promised through the Abrahamic covenant.   Acts explains how all this unfolded, as thus the transition from a Jewish orientation towards the establishment of churches in the Gentile world, replete with the cultural conflicts that church faced.

So based on this brief sketch, I wanted to cite some examples of passages that have been used as a personally directed reference but not  rightly correlated with what is going on in the biblical text.   It should demonstrate the caution we should use when examining what God was doing then vs. what is directed for us now as a direct communication or prescription for our Christian life.

Jeremiah 29:11 – “For I know the plans that I have for you, declares the Lord, plans to prosper you and not harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”

What is going on?  The Israelites have been taken into Babylonian captivity.  They were removed from the land that God had promised them, the kingship was gone and all seemed lost.  Jeremiah is sent to them to remind them that God was not done with them yet according to what He had promised them.  Thus, in vs 14 He indicates “I will bring you back from captivity.  I will gather you from all the nations and places where I have banished you.”  This is the plan God was referring to and if you keep reading he talks about some unfavorable plans he has for them as well.  While I don’t think it is wrong to say that God has plans for us, this verse is referencing a particular promise made that have nothing to do with us.

John 14:26 - “but the helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.”

 What’s going on?  Jesus has gathered the apostles one last time to give them instructions before His sacrificial death, resurrection and departure.  They had learned of the Father’s plan related to the Son, from Jesus directly.  Now Jesus is bringing in the force of God’s Trinitarian outworking to let them know that what they have learned from him directly, the Holy Spirit will bring that back to their attention as they go out to make disciples (Matthew 28:18-20) and be his witnesses (Acts 1:4-8).  Personalizing indicates that the Holy Spirit will make us remember things.  Extreme examples including espousing a lack of preparation for a test or sermon or that we don’t need teachers because the Holy Spirit will give us the information.  But that is not what this verse is referencing.

Genesis 8:22 – “As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter,  day and night will never cease.”

What is going on?  God is making a promise after the flood that he will never destroy life again.  He is indicating that life will continue to regenerate itself and there will always be seasons.   This is not a principle to be used for our personal harvest.  Unfortunately, there has been a philosophy of sowing and reaping that has been built around this one passage that I think is dishonest to what is being communicated and should probably do that in a separate post.

These are just a few examples and I could cite many more, such as 2 Chronicles 7:14.  Personalizing is bound to happen when we lift a verse out of its original context.   This is why it is really important to understand the situation the narrative is addressing before making applications to what it means for us personally.  A couple of links that I highly recommend.

Greg Koukl’s article Never Read a Bible Verse

Michael Patton’s article Bible Interpretation in a Nutshell

 Similar Posts:

• If God Has Stopped Speaking Then Why Do I Still Hear Him?
• Does the Holy Spirit Interpret the Bible?
• Yes, We Should Follow ‘Man’…But ‘Man’ With Understanding
• Some Thoughts on Biblical Convictions and Being Biblical
• The Problem with Vision

As Halloween approaches, you can bet the discussions will increase amongst Christians, as they normally do.  One faction promotes participation while the other faction wants all Christians to see the horrors of Halloween and why they should not participate.  But that is neither here nor there because I believe it is a matter of Christian liberty of whether one participates or not.  Each should live according to their own convictions.

But I want to address what I consider a real horror that does involve Christian participation in Halloween.  In various spots in the country, months of organization and activity have gone into the production of a haunted house experience for innocent people looking for a good old fashioned Halloween scare.  The will line up to go to Hell House and they will rightfully face a horror.

Participants will be led through a series of scenes, which sadly go on in every day life.  There is one scene that emulates the Columbine shooting.  There is another one where a Rave ends up in a date rape scenario.  The girl feeling so ashamed of what has happened to her, curses God.  Another ends up hemorrhaging from a morning after pill.  There is one living room scene that confronts the addictions of pornography.  Yes, this is certainly real life.

Unfortunately, the scenarios are used to highlight one thing – all these people are going to hell.  And that is the point of Hell House, to lure people into a haunted house experience and expose scenarios that could be going on with anyone in the audience.  In fact, as I watched the documentary of the original Hell House here in TX, I couldn’t help but wonder how many people were being forced to relive their own private pain and then being scorned for being victims.

Now, do not get me wrong.  I do believe in Hell.  I do believe that it is the destiny of those who have rejected the grace of God by trusting in His Son.  But I also believe that it was not a place made for people nor does God want people to go there, though some will.  But to frighten and condemn people using such deceptive and horrific tactics is abusive, both to the people who witness them and to the gospel itself.

I see nothing of these tactics used in the pages of scripture to win people to Christ.  If anything, Jesus Himself reached out to the very ones these scenarios condemn – the outcast, the abused, the neglected and the mistreated.  Can you imagine if He made the woman with the issue of blood watch a scenario that only emphasized the horror of her situation?  Or if He had told showed something like this to the woman at the well?

The problem with highlighting these scenarios and equating them with damnation, is that it negates the real problem that separates us from God.  Sin is our problem not bad behavior, although it certainly is the motivation behind everyone of the acts portrayed.  But sin also motivates us to believe we can earn our own righteousness through good deeds and avoid these kinds of immoral circumstances.  Apart from Christ, we are all dead in our trespasses and sin  (Ephesians 2:1).  Those who are apart from Christ and suffering under the anguish of these scenarios are already condemned.    Castigating victims is not only cruel but very unloving.

And this is where I think Hell House abuses the gospel.  Everything that God did by sending His Son was motivated by love (John 3:16; Romans 5:8).  All through the pages of scripture, we see a righteous and loving God pursuing His creation, extending grace and mercy and calling people to Himself.  Look at Ephesians 2:1-9,  we were sinners and acting out on this nature, but God who is rich in mercy extends grace through the gift of His Son.  God so loved the world (broken humanity) that He sent His Son, not to condemn it because it is already condemned.  I don’t believe He takes delight in condemning the condemned and calling it evangelism.  In fact, the only people that got condemned were the self-righteous religious leaders who were more concerned with form and function, than with God’s redemptive plan.

Yes, there is a brief message at the end of the ‘tour’.   The message was in line with what I wrote in this evangelism post, that dealt with people as widgets with souls to be rescued from the horrors of Hell and not as people that God wishes to redeem.  So the message was really nothing more than a get out of jail free card.  I was actually shocked that the presenter of this message gave people a time by which they must make their personal decision. Otherwise, forget about it.

Friends, this is no way to do evangelism.  It is abusive to people and to the gospel.  It treats people as nothing more than commodities to gain in order to satisfy a quest of Christian accomplishment.  If we are so concerned about the people that God came to rescue, wouldn’t it be better to use the opportunity of Halloween to feed people, to give them treats and not tricks.  And this is a trick, to make them think they are getting one thing and getting something completely different.  I love what Marc Cortez says here regarding this kind of bait and switch tactic,

Why do we do this? Deep down, are we that afraid that they won’t want to hear? Do we doubt the power of the message that much? Do we think the Spirit can’t handle things?

And, what are we subtly communicating to ourselves and to other people about the Gospel when we do this? I’m afraid that we’re hinting that we really don’t think that the Gospel is all that. If I’m really convinced that I have the most amazing story that will transform your life forever, I’m not going to invite you over to my church for a football game and then try to slip it in between commercials. I’m going to invite you over to hear the story.

In the case of Hell House, it is far more than just a story but it is giving people a good scare while victimizing the victims who are already ensnared in a darkened prison.  Apparently,  just presenting the gospel  is insufficient by itself and the Holy Spirit is clearly incapable of drawing lost people without tricky tactics.  Sadly, some have thought this was a good idea and have replicated the model.  I can only hope that people will escape the horror of Hell House and instead be shown real love, the kind that Christ demonstrated to us.

 Similar Posts:

• Jesus with His Lights Out on Halloween
• Jesus with His Lights Turned off on Halloween
• Making Jesus Known: Some Random Thoughts on Evangelism
• The Gospel is Not Just for Beginners
• Bucer, Evangelism and Unconditional Election

Saturday morning, the Facebook app on my Blackberry got stuck.  It seemed the best solution to rectify the problem was to uninstall it and then re-install it.  No problem, that’s exactly what I did, or so I thought.  After re-installing, I went to log in and got the message “unable to connect to the server at this time.”  Ok, it’s probably just busy so I tried again a few minutes later and got the same thing.  Hmmm, what was going on here?  I tried unsuccessfully throughout the day, and kept getting the same thing, making repeated attempts at uninstalling and re-installing.  Nothing!  Grrrr  Well, it seemed to me that some action was needed here.  Obviously, something is not working right and somebody needs to fix it.  I really didn’t care who, whether that be RIM or T-mobile or whoever.  I just wanted my app to work.  Well actually, I was annoyed at RIM and T-Mobile.  It seemed to me they should be making better products.  I mean, this was no way to treat a consumer.  Right?

After service on Sunday, I fiddled with again.  But this time, I took a moment to try a different perspective.  Perhaps, I can go to the app page and there might be some information there.  So as I again, uninstalled and re-installed I took a moment to examine carefully if there’s something that maybe I missed.  Sure enough, I had missed the instructions that said successful installation will require rebooting.  That could only happen if I took the battery out and disconnected from it.  Ahhh.  Problem solved.

The irony of this little frustrating mishap, is that all the while during this time, I had been engaged in an escalating dispute with a dear sister.   Apparently, I had offended her through a disagreement in an on-line discussion, one in which hindsight has clarified I should have stayed out of.  We had a series of exchanges.  Each time I tried to explain my position, it only fueled the offense.  I couldn’t win.  But I kept trying.  Before long, my buttons were pushed, I reacted and bluntly so!  There really wasn’t any resolution but to “disconnect”.

It strikes me that as long as people interact with each other, there are going to be misunderstandings and offenses.  It’s really kind of unavoidable.  It would be nice to think that just because we are Christians and encouraged with the words of scripture to exchange brotherly love, there might be some challenges in our ability to do so.  Because behind every saint is a person who has opinions, wounds, personality bents, perspectives and vulnerabilities.  We are still all very broken people no matter how much we would like to believe otherwise (Paul Tripp posted a really good article on this today).  We offend, we are offended, we react, we project and we expect.  We want the other person to see our point of view.  Sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn’t.  Sometimes we are wronged and sometimes we are wrong.  Sometimes, we are both wrong.

I’ll be the first to confess that I can be a jerk sometimes, stubborn and resistant to overlook my over-inflated sense of reason.  And yeah, sometimes I’m right and stepped on.  It happens to all of us.  In fact, another irony in all of this, was that the dispute caused me to reflect on my own behavior just months prior with another sister, who despite trying to reason with me, all I saw was the offense and I couldn’t get past it.  We “disconnected”.  Ironically, she had been on my mind anyway so upon reflection of this whole incident, I quickly sent her a note to “re-boot”.   It was quite refreshing reconnecting with her.

And that leads to my point of the lesson learned from the Facebook app.  Sometimes, we are so concerned with resolution that we overlook the necessity to disconnect.   The more we try to force our way and make sure the other party sees their wrong, the more likely the whole thing will blow up in our face.  I think there is also a similar lesson from Acts 15:36-41, and the dispute between Paul and Barnabas concerning John Mark.  How long did they argue before they realized it was a losing battle?  I gather from the passage, not long.  And I’m pretty sure that both of them were convinced they were right!  It should give us some perspective that for the sake of Christian unity, the best solution might be to break away for a bit.   Use that time to examine, reflect and ask the primary question “Lord is it me?’  When we are wronged, or feel wronged, that is a very tough answer to see.

And I propose that Christian unity is what is at stake.  Paul and Barnabas understood that.  There was a bigger picture to consider than our right to be right and the insistence that the other person understand their wrong.  It is better sometimes to walk away, even if temporarily, lest our disagreement impinges upon the demonstration of brotherly or sisterly love as a reflection of being Christ’s disciples.  That can’t happen in the midst of heated or otherwise ugly interactions.  In fact, I would say sometimes it is necessary for that church to split if it means displaying disharmony before the world.

Following Paul’s prescription in Philippians 2:1-4, considering the other person as better than ourselves does require that we do what is in their best interest not ours for the sake of community.  If we are wronged, that means we’ll have to be wronged.  After all, isn’t that what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 6:7 that for the sake of unity, it is better to be wrong?  If we are wrong, we need to face that but sometimes that is not readily understood since all we see is the offense.

So my encouragement with this post is not to let disagreements or interactions get out of hand.  Know when to walk away.  Don’t throw yourself in situations where you know it will not be compatible, where there will be division and animosity.  And don’t be a stumbling block to your brother or sister regardless of how much you might feel you’re correct.  Just let it go.  There is much at stake in the name of Christ.

“How good and pleasant it is when brothers live together in unity.” (Psalm 133:1)Similar Posts:

• Facebooking to the Glory of God?
• Beware of “Professional Weaker Brethern”
• Beware of “Professional Weaker Brethren”
• Do People Who Commit Suicide Go to Hell?
• For those considering suicide . . .

It doesn’t take long for a Christian to realize that accepting Christ enlists them in a struggle.  We learn very quickly that God has an enemy, Satan.  He can’t really do anything about God’s plans since what God had purposed he will bring about (Ephesians 1:11).  But there is the case for him to frustrate God’s people.

One passage that clearly identifies this is Ephesians 6:11-12:

Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes.  For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

As Christians, we must rightfully understand that there are forces at work against us, that there is a spiritual warfare occurring.  In fact, I am observing an increased focus in Christian messaging on spiritual warfare.  However, I am concerned that spiritual warfare has been amplified in both content and practice to the extent of producing an unwarranted militancy.  What has been construed as a wrestle beyond flesh and blood has translated into a war-like posture that makes us take a proactive charge against Satan, and sometimes in a physically hostile way.  It peppers our language and produces prescriptions of seizing authority over Satan and his demons.  We take certain passages of scripture as charging the Christian to fight the devil.

I contend that what has developed into a war-like motif of taking aggression against demonic activity is a misplaced emphasis on how struggles against us are overcome.  There are other passages that get overlooked in this aggressive posture and these passages indicate that we have no cause to fight the devil.  Moreover, nowhere in scripture is the Christian charged to fight the devil.

There is no doubt that the New Testament is full of imagery of arsenal and warfare.  For example looking at the fuller Ephesians passage, it does seem to suggest that we should take a posture of fighting.

Finally, by strong in the Lord and in the power of his might.  Put on the whole armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes.  For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.  Therefore put on the whole armor of God, so that you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.  Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace.  In addition to all of this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one.  Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.  And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayer and requests.  With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints.  (Ephesians 6:10-18)

The first thing to note is that while there is a spiritual battle, what we are fighting against are the devil’s schemes.  These are strategies and methods sourced in lies.   It is a tactic to get us to doubt or give in to temptation, in the same way the serpent tempted Eve.  But the second thing to note is that the governing verb in this passage is “stand”.  The counteraction against these strategies is not to fight the devil but to stand firm.  I also note in 1 Peter 5:8-9 and James 4:7 that our charge is to resist.  This is how we fight, by resisting and putting on the whole armor of God.  It is not taking a charge against the devil but a resistance that is sourced in who we are and what we have.  Every one of those components speaks to something that has already been provided for us.  The only offensive weapon cited here is wielding the sword of the Spirit.  We proactively counteract strategies with the word of God – believing it and living it.

Another passage that I believe contributes to hyper-militancy is 2 Corinthians 10:3-6

For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does.  The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world.  On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.  We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.  And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your disobedience is complete.

Certainly, this passage is chalk-full of war imagery.  But I believe the imagery is designed not to encourage an outward hostile militancy on our part, but to demonstrate how radical a shift the Christian worldview is from the pagan society in the 1st century Greco-Roman society.  This is particularly relevant in Paul’s defense of his apostolic ministry, which is the premise of this passage. It is meant to highlight the seriousness of the spiritual warfare that existed in this environment and should compel the same level of seriousness in contemporary times.  But it is not an encouragement to engage in hostile behavior.

Secondly, what is it that is being fought? – arguments that exalt themselves against the knowledge of God.  It is a way of thinking that is contradictory to the revelation of God.  The weaponry in this case is not to charge against the devil but charge against contradictory philosophies.  How is it counteracted? – by taking thoughts captive and making them obedient.  I contend this can be as quiet as surrendering to the will of God, aligning our thinking according to his will and ways and taking serious the call of obedience to scripture.  This is in line with Romans 12:2 – “Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.  Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is – his good, pleasing and perfect will.”

Moreover, I contend that a significant attention towards Satan is misdirected and myopic.   Everything I’ve described points to the enemy of a worldly philosophy that is sourced in self-reliance and opposition to God.  But there is also the flesh.  Many times the outward focus is misplaced because we need to direct the attention inward.  There is a serious enemy called “I” and seeks to rebel and have its way at all costs.  There is an internal sin struggle that believers face, as outlined Romans 7:14-25.  I note that vv 21 and 23 indicate there is a principle of sin at work seeking our downfall.  This is why James says “a man sins when he is drawn away by his own lust and enticed.” (James 1:13) and why Paul commends to not yield ourselves to sin to be its master (Romans 6:11-14). We can be our own worst enemies.

And this does get to what I think is the misplaced counter-strategy that we have engaged with in spiritual warfare.  I get the sense from a more outwardly militant approach to spiritual warfare that we are working side by side with God fighting the enemy.  But this negates the victory that Christ already gained over him at the cross.  As believers, we have been rescued from the dominion of darkness and translated into the kingdom (Colossians 1:13).  We are united to Christ and found in him (Ephesians 1:1-8; Romans 6:3-7).   We are not fighting alongside him.  Though there is a proactive response required on our part, the battle is the Lord’s.

So our warfare does not have to look militant or hostile.  It can be lived out quietly when we surrender to Christ, follow after the Spirit and engage in intense prayer as noted in Ephesians 6:18.  It is being kind when we don’t want to or loving that otherwise unlovable and difficult brother or sister.  It is seeking the concern of others and the Christian community above ourselves.  It is being obedient to scripture when temptation says otherwise.   It is allowing ourselves to be conformed to the image of Christ and living that out in meaningful and tangible ways.  I don’t know about you, but seems pretty radical to me.Similar Posts:

• Questions I Hope No One Will Ask: Why Did God Put Satan in Eden?
• What Does it Mean to Be Spiritual?
• What is Satan’s Goal?
• Looking For Peace in All the Wrong Places
• De-waving the Magic Wand: A Note on Sanctification, Doctrine and Worship

This post is really not about singleness.  Although, by way of getting to something that has me increasingly troubled, I will use singleness as the spring to launch into what I believe is the root of a problem, particularly in American evangelical Christianity.  In contending with my own issues related to singleness, I note this as an objective observation, which actually prompted my thoughts on this matter along with other things related to ecclesiology that have come across my radar.

The single person who longs to be married, is generally told to be content in their present circumstance.  That single person should not express too much their desires for a partnership otherwise it gets labelled as idolatrous.  So the burden on their heart to be loved, accepted, to belong to a union with another is supressed lest the desire turn into an idol.  Now, I am not saying that we should not learn contentment for there is biblical support to do so, such as Paul says in Philippians 4:13 that he has learned to be filled (content) in whatever circumstance he is in.  Although I would contend that the contentment in this case based on his argument is more related to material comfort.  There is also the idea that we must endure hardship.  That doesn’t mean we are not impacted by it, but in consideration of our life not being our own, we consider the prize more worthy than our loss or pain.

Nonetheless, I have noticed the extent to which we celebrate love when it does happen.  From the time that special person is realized, each successive step in the relationship is met with announcement and fanfare.  The no longer single person can rave about their significant other.  They can publicize how wonderful it is and begin including their significant other in with every conversation.  The engagement is announced and every one celebrates.  This is just the beginning as the lives of these two people are intertwined, so is the display of the union.

So what is interesting to me is that the single person who desires this kind of celebration is told that it can be idolatrous.  But when it actually happens, it is not.  What is missing and longed for when it is not there must be supressed, but not so when it actually happens.  It is celebrated and encouraged.  Why is the partnered person not told that they are being idolatrous?  I don’t know about you, but this seems awfully hypocritical to me.

Ok, so like I said this post is not about that (and I wanted to get that off my chest).  But it occurs to me that there is a reason that longing exists in the heart and the reason it is celebrated with joy when found.   There is a reason that the single person feels its absence.  And this does not just happen with singleness, but a lack of relationship in general.  Although there may be exceptions, for most of us, the difference between having relationship vs not having relationship on any or many levels impacts us.   There is a difference when we belong, are accepted and have community vs. when we are alone, isolated and missing important relationships.  That is because we are created to be in relationship with others.  I believe that when God said it is not good that man should be alone and created woman, this set the precedent for our human experience – to be in relationship with others.

But more importantly, how much more should relationship exist among members of the body of Christ.  It is one thing to experience love with one individual, but for members of the body to love one another is how Jesus said the world would know we are his disciples (John 13:35).  That does involve relationship and support in meaningful and tangible ways so that we accomplish what is commended in Ephesians 5:19-21.  No Christian should experience isolation.

But I have been increasingly dismayed to the extent this is downplayed and particularly in American Christianity.   Our rugged individualism is fostered through exhortations concerning our Christian experience.  Our language is peppered with isolationism and individualized supremacy.  We make a “personal decision” for Christ.   We encourage alone time with God.  We tell the weak to be strong in the Lord and realize they can do all things through Christ who strengthen them.  We promote the idea that it is just me and God, as exemplified in this song called Me and God.

Now before you protest, I am not saying that we don’t include the importance of a corporate component in the quest to have some kind of body life.  But even when we do that, it is so our own life can be strengthened so that we by ourselves can make it.  The occasion of the Lord’s Supper is typically marked by isolation as I reflect on what Christ did for me. (Although I do note that some traditions encourage a more participatory focus).  In our corporate worship time, we sing in isolation.  We close our eyes to have our own personal experience with the Lord and sing about how we don’t need anyone else but Jesus, like this song.

I contend that this is still individualism in a corporate guise and I fear that we are losing sight of what it means to be the body of Christ,  to experience community with each other and have the mindset that it is not just me and God, but God and His people.  This is the existence that members united together in Christ are supposed to have.  The Christian life must mean more than just God meeting my needs, being strengthened for myself so that I can go out and be a witness for him.  The biblical evidence suggests that it is the corporate makeup that witnesses to the world (Ephesians 3:10-11).  It is the body loving, serving and tending to each other that causes growth and the ability to witness (Ephesians 2:21-22; 4:15-16).   Again, that means interacting with one another in meaningful and tangible ways that entail more than just a handshake or hug on Sunday mornings.

Going back to the Philippians citation, the context of his letter heavily weighs on body life, where members are encouraged to concern themselves with something more than just their walk with the Lord but how they may support one another.  When Paul says he has learned to be content that is not for the purpose of be strengthened apart from body life.   I also contend that in Paul’s apostolic ministry, he was called to bear a more isolated existence such as those who serve in that apostolic function, i.e. missionaries may have to endure the same thing.  But I don’t believe that is meant to be the brunt of our Christian experience.

Now, I am not saying that we are escape responsibility of our Christian growth by relying on others.  It is our responsibility to work out our salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12)  and bear our load (Galatians 6:5).  That does mean spending time alone in prayer, in study, and in reflection.  Under divine discipline, there might be times where God wants us alone to experience the fellowship of Christ’s sufferings and purge sinful orientations. But that is for the purpose of providing support to body.  How can we grow up in Him, supporting one another if our Christian experience is so focused on how our own personal experience?   It is fine that we have individual mission fields but there has to be a concerted effort in how we engage with one another and foster relationship.

But as long as we promote this rampant individualism, we will likely to be impatient and possibly neglectful to the concerns of weary, troubled, lonely or isolated saints.  Is it any wonder that the single person is expected to be happily content on their own?  Should we not be surprised that an overburdened saint is offered prayers to be strengthened instead of calls for assistance?  Or that the  isolated saint is encouraged to pray harder, read more and get closer to God, as if there problem is they need more of Jesus.  Maybe they don’t need more of Jesus, but  more of His body.

 Similar Posts:

• Single Compensation
• “It is not good for man to be alone”: A Theological look at Singleness
• The Benefit of Many “Teachers” and Why Diversity is Important
• The Gospel is Not Just for Beginners
• God Never Promised Us a Mate

A few mornings ago was one of the those mornings nobody likes.  Everything is going normal…until you turn the ignition key to get nothing in return but a ticking sound.  Ok, so I don’t know much about cars and had no idea what it could be.  I thought it wasn’t that long ago that I replaced my battery (I can hardly keep track of such things) so I figured it must be something else.  After a few tries, I figured it was time to call AAA.  As I waited, and walked around a bit, one of my neighbors who had been observing the whole thing, approached me and thought he should give me his assessment of the situation.  “It was my starter”, he said affirming that it had to be based on the sound the car was making.  He even had me turn the lights on so that he could see if it was my battery.  Nope, had to be the starter.

Well, that’s just great.  How much is that going to cost? I wondered.  So in response to my neighbors emphatic assessment, I got on the phone with my mechanic to let them know there was a high probability that I would have to have my car towed.  I had them give me an estimate based on this assessment of needing a starter.  Almost $400 bucks!?!?  I was two days away from payday and already had expenses earmarked.  I immediately started re-organizing things in my head to accommodate this unexpected expense.

Finally, the guy from AAA shows up.  Upon hearing the sound that replaced the engine noise, he immediately asserted “it’s your battery”.   I thought surely this AAA battery I got from the last time this happened should not have such a short shelf life.  But I figured that AAA had more credibility than the neighbor, who could only offer an emphatic statement based on his speculation.    I find out from the AAA guy that the battery only lasts a couple of years anyway.   And this is the business of AAA, right?    The guy actually knew what he was talking about.  Sure enough, after locating the receipt I discover that it had been 23 months since the last battery replacement.  Within 15 minutes, I was on the road again.  Whew!

But I think you know where I’m going with this.  It seems to me that this same kind of thing happens in our evangelical circles.  There are many preacher/pastor personalities that make emphatic statements based on speculation.   And the statements sound believable to those who don’t know any better.   Just like my neighbor who probably did have some kind of understanding of cars, these folks may have spent many years reading the bible but it is superficial.  There is not the type of engagement with the text that will accommodate an understanding of the historical or cultural context, authorial intent and correlation with the entire witness of scripture.  This is especially true when the theological method of ascertaining what a passage is communicating is based on a “spiritual” understanding  devoid of the realities of the text’s actual communication.  Turn on the TV and you will see plenty of this.  Unfortunately, that is a small percentage of what actually exists.  I would not be so concerned if I didn’t hear so much perpetuation of speculation.

But what is even more troubling – the number of people who believe such speculation upon hearing it.  After all, isn’t that what I did with the battery situation?  See if I had know more about cars, I probably would not have been so quick to accept what this neighbor said.  And that is the way it works with Christians who, for whatever reason, are not fed a proper diet of biblical literacy and rely on a theological method of experience and what sounds right.  Instead, there is gravitation towards crumbs that can be detached from a reasonable meaning and perpetuated because of this easy belief.   Personally, I am grieved that this happens.  The charismatic (no I don’t mean large “C”) deliverance of dogmatic speculation makes it sound reasonable and true.  Persuasion is a powerful tool especially when backed by large congregations, books and endorsements.

My wish is that pastors/church leaders take seriously the charge to disciple Christians.  That means giving them more than sound bytes and therapeutic remedies with selected proof-texted passages to support whatever claim is being made.   But more importantly, it means making sure their own their own theology is grounded in the historic witness of Christianity and is something more than speculation.  Yes, that means engaging in some type of objective learning experience where ideas and interpretations can be measured against that witness.  I can only hope that would cut down on the level of dogmatic speculation and circumvent erroneous understandings, giving Christians what they need and not just what sounds good.Similar Posts:

• A Need for Higher Learning – Part II
• Yes, We Should Follow ‘Man’…But ‘Man’ With Understanding
• A Matter of Perspective
• The Patsy Called Relativism
• If God Has Stopped Speaking Then Why Do I Still Hear Him?