At work we have an Occupational Health and Safety noticeboard where information about workplace safety can be posted. Occasionally there will be photos of actual cases of incredible carelessness (even stupidity) that put people’s lives at risk.
An example would be someone standing on a ladder balanced on a chair that they have placed on a table – all in the attempt to reach a height beyond the capability of the ladder.
This thoughtless approach and attitude brings to mind the way some people approach their relationship with Jesus.
The ladder in the above example lacks stability. It is not placed on the required foundation, and it is a danger to anyone who climbs it.
There are foundations to the Christian life. They are specifically mentioned together in Hebrews 6 and separately elsewhere. They provide the basics of Christian faith, a secure anchor point. Yet how often do arguments arise about their necessity?
Some people seem intent on seeing how few of the foundational things they need? Is baptism really necessary? What about repentance? Surely it’s enough to merely believe?
These people make me think of the man on that ladder: seeing how little contact he can have with a solid foundation without falling. Some even try to test things further, rocking the ladder to one side until it is balancing on one leg only.
Showing posts with label Holy Spirit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Holy Spirit. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Thursday, September 09, 2010
"A Simple Method of Study"
On a Christian forum I was recently asked if I could recommend “a simple method of study. Here is the answer I gave. Some of this is a repetition of what I’ve written elsewhere on this blog:
A simple method of study I would recommend is to read scripture with prayer for understanding.
Avoid grabbing bits of scripture from here and there and trying to make sense of it. Scripture is not an unrelated collection of doctrinal facts that can be applied in isolation. It is an unfolding revelation of God’s relationship with His creation – mankind in particular.
Get a basic knowledge of how scripture fits together and how this revelation flows from Genesis to Revelation. My own understanding increased significantly when I finally understood how the different parts of scripture related to each other.
And a very important point is to not neglect the “Old Testament”. So often the impression is given that it isn’t as important as the “New” – but without the “Old” our understanding of God and His new covenant will be seriously lacking.
This obviously takes time and there’s no quick and easy way. It is often our impatience that leads us to turn to others for answers and makes us susceptible to accepting their word in place of scripture.
I don’t dismiss the importance of teaching from Spirit-led teachers but it’s not always easy to find teachers who ARE led by the Spirit. The majority of teachers we come across are merely passing on what they have learned from their church or seminary and they teach church doctrine instead of God’s word.
A Spirit led teacher does not merely pass on what he has learned from others. A Spirit led teacher is one who has received revelation himself through a personal encounter with the word and the Holy Spirit.
A Spirit led teacher will also GENUINELY encourage us to search the scriptures for ourselves. This is not only a safeguard for us – it also holds the teacher to account and provides a safeguard for him, reducing the chance of him leading us astray.
A simple method of study I would recommend is to read scripture with prayer for understanding.
Avoid grabbing bits of scripture from here and there and trying to make sense of it. Scripture is not an unrelated collection of doctrinal facts that can be applied in isolation. It is an unfolding revelation of God’s relationship with His creation – mankind in particular.
Get a basic knowledge of how scripture fits together and how this revelation flows from Genesis to Revelation. My own understanding increased significantly when I finally understood how the different parts of scripture related to each other.
And a very important point is to not neglect the “Old Testament”. So often the impression is given that it isn’t as important as the “New” – but without the “Old” our understanding of God and His new covenant will be seriously lacking.
This obviously takes time and there’s no quick and easy way. It is often our impatience that leads us to turn to others for answers and makes us susceptible to accepting their word in place of scripture.
I don’t dismiss the importance of teaching from Spirit-led teachers but it’s not always easy to find teachers who ARE led by the Spirit. The majority of teachers we come across are merely passing on what they have learned from their church or seminary and they teach church doctrine instead of God’s word.
A Spirit led teacher does not merely pass on what he has learned from others. A Spirit led teacher is one who has received revelation himself through a personal encounter with the word and the Holy Spirit.
A Spirit led teacher will also GENUINELY encourage us to search the scriptures for ourselves. This is not only a safeguard for us – it also holds the teacher to account and provides a safeguard for him, reducing the chance of him leading us astray.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
God’s Truth Not Man’s Opinion
Two forms of replacement theology which favour man’s opinion above biblical revelation. (1. The church has replaced Israel, 2. Scripture has replaced Spiritual gifts)
____________________________________________________________
In an earlier post, here, I linked to a sermon about Romans 9-11. That sermon helped me to understand why replacement theology gained such a strong foothold in the church.
For most of the church’s history Israel as a distinct and recognisable nation had been erased from the world map. So what understanding could be brought to the NT references to Israel, and in particular Paul’s strong statements that God had not and would not forsake Israel?
Israel was no more – so was Paul mistaken? Was scripture wrong?
It’s not surprising that a different approach to understanding scripture was seen as necessary. Ambiguous hints could be found that might suggest that the position of Israel had been taken over by the church. So references to Israel were seen as being symbolic instead of literal and the church was seen as the NEW or SPIRITUAL Israel.
That was perhaps the most logical position to take…
…until 1948, when Israel again appeared on the map.
Not everyone had accepted the idea of the church replacing Israel. Some remained faithful to a literal reading of scripture and expected Jews to return to the land of their ancestors. They trusted the word of biblical prophecy instead of geographical and political appearances.
Why is it that today, over 60 years after the return of Israel, the majority of the church still rejects the literal word of scripture regarding Israel? That literal word prophesied both the exile of Israel to all the nations, and also the return of Israel to the land of their ancestors.
They still reject it because they prefer the theology and reasoning of men above the clear word of scripture. Loved traditions are hard to abandon. This example also shows how much man prefers to base his beliefs on his own observations and his own reasoning rather than on the revelation of the word of God.
A similar thing can be seen with regard to Spiritual gifts, in particular those mentioned by Paul in 1 Corinthians. Wide sections of the church deny the relevance of those gifts. They say the gifts were made redundant by the compiling of the scriptures. They even quote Paul:
Their explanation is based on the assumption that “when perfection comes” refers to the coming of the scriptures – and therefore scripture has replaced Spiritual gifts within the church.
How can such a leap of logic take place and be so widely accepted?
The foundation of this assumption comes from a very tenuous inference projected into the phrase “when perfection comes”. It is a case of looking for something that can be MADE to support the already held conclusion that Spiritual gifts no longer exist.
Again it’s a matter of looking at the world around us and basing theology upon what is seen and interpreting scripture to support that view, instead of accepting scripture as written and seeking answers about why our experience doesn’t match scripture’s clearest meaning.
The process goes like this:
Example 1: The bible speaks about Israel and God’s continued faithfulness to Israel – but Israel no longer existed, so the church must have replaced Israel.
Example 2: Spiritual gifts are missing from the church, so they obvious no longer exist.
The final step in both of these examples is to find parts of scripture that can be interpreted in a way that supports the favoured conclusions.
The question arising out of all of this is: Do we REALLY rely on the revelation given in scripture and interpret our world and experience according to what God has revealed?
Or do we insist on interpreting the world and scripture according to our experience and what we can see?
____________________________________________________________
In an earlier post, here, I linked to a sermon about Romans 9-11. That sermon helped me to understand why replacement theology gained such a strong foothold in the church.
For most of the church’s history Israel as a distinct and recognisable nation had been erased from the world map. So what understanding could be brought to the NT references to Israel, and in particular Paul’s strong statements that God had not and would not forsake Israel?
Israel was no more – so was Paul mistaken? Was scripture wrong?
It’s not surprising that a different approach to understanding scripture was seen as necessary. Ambiguous hints could be found that might suggest that the position of Israel had been taken over by the church. So references to Israel were seen as being symbolic instead of literal and the church was seen as the NEW or SPIRITUAL Israel.
That was perhaps the most logical position to take…
…until 1948, when Israel again appeared on the map.
Not everyone had accepted the idea of the church replacing Israel. Some remained faithful to a literal reading of scripture and expected Jews to return to the land of their ancestors. They trusted the word of biblical prophecy instead of geographical and political appearances.
Why is it that today, over 60 years after the return of Israel, the majority of the church still rejects the literal word of scripture regarding Israel? That literal word prophesied both the exile of Israel to all the nations, and also the return of Israel to the land of their ancestors.
They still reject it because they prefer the theology and reasoning of men above the clear word of scripture. Loved traditions are hard to abandon. This example also shows how much man prefers to base his beliefs on his own observations and his own reasoning rather than on the revelation of the word of God.
A similar thing can be seen with regard to Spiritual gifts, in particular those mentioned by Paul in 1 Corinthians. Wide sections of the church deny the relevance of those gifts. They say the gifts were made redundant by the compiling of the scriptures. They even quote Paul:
“But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.”
Their explanation is based on the assumption that “when perfection comes” refers to the coming of the scriptures – and therefore scripture has replaced Spiritual gifts within the church.
How can such a leap of logic take place and be so widely accepted?
The foundation of this assumption comes from a very tenuous inference projected into the phrase “when perfection comes”. It is a case of looking for something that can be MADE to support the already held conclusion that Spiritual gifts no longer exist.
Again it’s a matter of looking at the world around us and basing theology upon what is seen and interpreting scripture to support that view, instead of accepting scripture as written and seeking answers about why our experience doesn’t match scripture’s clearest meaning.
The process goes like this:
Example 1: The bible speaks about Israel and God’s continued faithfulness to Israel – but Israel no longer existed, so the church must have replaced Israel.
Example 2: Spiritual gifts are missing from the church, so they obvious no longer exist.
The final step in both of these examples is to find parts of scripture that can be interpreted in a way that supports the favoured conclusions.
The question arising out of all of this is: Do we REALLY rely on the revelation given in scripture and interpret our world and experience according to what God has revealed?
Or do we insist on interpreting the world and scripture according to our experience and what we can see?
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Solution to ALL Doctrinal Error: last post for 2009
I will be away from my computer until after the New Year holiday, so for my last post of 2009 I will provide the solution to all doctrinal error.
1) Stick with what scripture says.
2) Do not add to (or take away from) what scripture says.
3) Admit personal ignorance or lack of understanding where applicable.
4) Do not try to cover up ignorance or lack of understanding by parroting a pre-digested theological viewpoint.
5) Do not adopt or promote man's words and teachings as if they were equal to scripture in authority.
6) Do not under any circumstances put your trust in an isolated, out of context proof-text.
And finally and most importantly, not ignoring any of the above…
7) Seek and ask for the Holy Spirit’s revelation.
[I first wrote these points to specifically address the matter of “election” but recognised that a wider application is also appropriate.]
1) Stick with what scripture says.
2) Do not add to (or take away from) what scripture says.
3) Admit personal ignorance or lack of understanding where applicable.
4) Do not try to cover up ignorance or lack of understanding by parroting a pre-digested theological viewpoint.
5) Do not adopt or promote man's words and teachings as if they were equal to scripture in authority.
6) Do not under any circumstances put your trust in an isolated, out of context proof-text.
And finally and most importantly, not ignoring any of the above…
7) Seek and ask for the Holy Spirit’s revelation.
[I first wrote these points to specifically address the matter of “election” but recognised that a wider application is also appropriate.]
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
The man who convinced me to SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES
David Pawson is one of the very few bible teachers I would personally recommend. I first became aware of his ministry in the early 1980s when he visited Australia to speak at conferences run by Vision Ministries.
I came across recordings of his conference sermons and enjoyed most of his teaching.
At the time I was getting involved with Word of Faith teaching through Kenneth Copeland’s TV broadcasts and I heard Pawson speak out against the excesses of “faith” and “prosperity” teaching. At the time I thought he was out of line, but I still liked a lot of what he had to say.
My involvement with WOF finally took its toll, as will involvement with any false teaching. It took many years (over 15) to start the recovery process, and even after so many years WOF teaching was clearly still having an effect on my understanding of God.
I am grateful to the Lord for bringing David Pawson’s teaching back into my life at that time. I am also grateful that I found it hard to accept. I resisted what he was preaching. It didn’t fit with the gospel that I’d accepted previously. I couldn’t recall Pawson preaching that way in the past…
But despite my resistance, I was coming across more and more people saying the same kind of things and I started to wonder whether I had ever understood the gospel in the past.
I went back to Pawson and what he was saying started to make more sense. Most importantly he made a big issue about people NOT accepting what he was preaching. He consistently told his hearers to go to the scriptures to test everything he said. How different is this to the “touch not the Lord’s anointed” threats wielded by those who don’t want their teaching held up to the truth of scripture?
Through David Pawson’s encouragement and example I have learned of the need to search scriptures for myself and to always accept its clearest and simplest meaning unless the context indicates otherwise.
Here are links to two David Pawson sermons.
Romans 11
Jesus The Baptiser
Or if they fail, try following this link
http://www.skyebiblechurch.net/Sermons.html
and scroll down almost to the bottom of the page until you find:
Romans 11
David Pawson May 31 pm (88 min 49 sec)
Jesus The Baptiser
David Pawson May 31 am (77 min 49 sec)
I came across recordings of his conference sermons and enjoyed most of his teaching.
At the time I was getting involved with Word of Faith teaching through Kenneth Copeland’s TV broadcasts and I heard Pawson speak out against the excesses of “faith” and “prosperity” teaching. At the time I thought he was out of line, but I still liked a lot of what he had to say.
My involvement with WOF finally took its toll, as will involvement with any false teaching. It took many years (over 15) to start the recovery process, and even after so many years WOF teaching was clearly still having an effect on my understanding of God.
I am grateful to the Lord for bringing David Pawson’s teaching back into my life at that time. I am also grateful that I found it hard to accept. I resisted what he was preaching. It didn’t fit with the gospel that I’d accepted previously. I couldn’t recall Pawson preaching that way in the past…But despite my resistance, I was coming across more and more people saying the same kind of things and I started to wonder whether I had ever understood the gospel in the past.
I went back to Pawson and what he was saying started to make more sense. Most importantly he made a big issue about people NOT accepting what he was preaching. He consistently told his hearers to go to the scriptures to test everything he said. How different is this to the “touch not the Lord’s anointed” threats wielded by those who don’t want their teaching held up to the truth of scripture?
Through David Pawson’s encouragement and example I have learned of the need to search scriptures for myself and to always accept its clearest and simplest meaning unless the context indicates otherwise.
Here are links to two David Pawson sermons.
Romans 11
Jesus The Baptiser
Or if they fail, try following this link
http://www.skyebiblechurch.net/Sermons.html
and scroll down almost to the bottom of the page until you find:
Romans 11
David Pawson May 31 pm (88 min 49 sec)
Jesus The Baptiser
David Pawson May 31 am (77 min 49 sec)
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
TRUTH or Tolerance and Compromise?
It is becoming increasing evident that the teachings of men have replaced the authority of scripture in the church’s theological foundations. The evidence has become overwhelming. Rather than accept and trust scripture, people will go to all kinds of lengths to explain why it doesn’t mean what it is clearly saying.
We have Calvinism redefining salvation and the means by which God has made it available. Then there are the extreme charismatics who have redefined signs and wonders and have turned God’s love into an expression of His desperation to be accepted. And what about the “extreme prophetic” and the “New Apostolic Reformation”? They’ve created new definitions of the prophetic and apostolic?
No matter which direction we turn there’s someone trying to improve on the truth God has provided in His written word.
I don’t know how many feel the same kind of frustration that I’ve been experiencing increasingly over the last year. From regular involvement with a variety of blogs and forums I’m coming across more and more people who are content to tolerate clear cut doctrinal error.
The first clear (recent) examples came in response to concerns about Todd Bentley and his Lakeland “revival”. No matter how weird and perverse things became there were always those who jumped up to defend what was happening. No matter how aberrant the preaching; no matter how many flaky prophecies were given; no matter how much occultic mysticism was mixed with a sampling of bible quotes – there was always a stridently vocal cheer squad singing the “revival’s” praises and condemning the ‘heresy hunters”.
Even Bentley’s open immorality was not enough to open the eyes of many. Instead the support continues.
But the modern day charismanic circus is only one aspect of the problem. The deceiver knows that you can’t tempt everyone with the same flavours. There are other things he provides for the unwary to taste. Those without a sweet tooth, who are not attracted to fluffy, sugary carnival treats, might prefer something a bit meatier; something with more substance. While the extreme charismatics prefer a scripture-lite approach that shuns “traditional interpretations”, others cling to traditional teachings as if they have the authority of scripture itself. They prize scripture – as long as it’s been filtered through a trained and ordained intermediary. Scripture is beyond the average believer and contains mysteries that are best left to those more qualified to seek out its truths.
And so centuries old traditions are passed from generation to generation and defended ferociously should they be challenged.
My personal journey over this last year (and more) has included experience with these opposite extremes of Christian tradition. One group interprets scripture through a centuries old theological system while the other group seems to make things up as they go along.
One group gives lip service to the authority of scripture while in reality authority is given to their theological tradition and how IT interprets scripture.
The other group gives lip service to scripture while in reality giving authority to spiritual experiences and glib clichés.
One group esteems long dead theologians the other adores the flamboyant man (or woman) of the hour.
In these different groups it seems that the Word of God and the Spirit of God are pitted against each other. One is governed by established doctrines, and interprets scripture according to those doctrines. The other is governed by “the Spirit” and interprets scripture according to “spiritual” revelation.
There are obviously some very distinct and irreconcilable differences between these two groups. And yet they have at least one common factor. Both in reality have applied some kind of condition to their approach to scripture that takes away the average believer’s relationship with God’s word. Those average believers are TOLD what can be believed and how it should be believed. They are told that scripture doesn’t necessarily mean what it seems to mean, promoting the understanding that a (traditionally) college trained or a (charismatically) anointed teacher is required to convey what scripture really saying.
Of course, the extent of how this affects the church is immense and it would be impossible to go into every aspect of the problem. But to the person who wants to know and understand the truth, and is willing to spend the time and make the effort required, the truth is easily accessible. Everyone reading this blog has the means and the ability to search the scriptures for themselves because they can obviously read. But are they willing to utilise that ability?
To a great degree we have been conditioned to believe that scripture is hard to understand and that we need someone to explain it all and to share its hidden secrets. We lack confidence. But we should recognise that it is not only a lack of confidence in ourselves – we are lacking confidence in the God who desires to make Himself known through the revelation of scripture. We lack confidence in the One who promised to send His Spirit to be our teacher, and we lack confidence in His Spirit’s ability and willingness to teach us.
The conditioning process that has distanced us from scripture has also worked by giving us an expectation of how scripture should be approached. Our exposure to scripture has been through “texts” – often meaning isolated verses that are expounded upon at length by an appointed teacher of the word. In most cases little attention is given to context and meaning is given to the selected “text” that indicates some kind of special insight has been needed to get to what was really meant by that text.
Through this experience, we ourselves then try to delve into parts of scripture according to the same method used by the teacher. We dig around and try to find the deeper things hidden within those parts of scripture. And this is usually done before the student has developed even a rudimentary understanding of how the whole bible fits together, and what its overall revelation is about.
There is little understanding of how God has related to mankind throughout history and there is little understanding about the significance of God’s relationship with Israel. To most believers, the Old Testament account is a total mystery – beyond a few half remembered stories of certain bible characters.
Now I’ve waffled on and on about this for long enough. A lot of it I’ve touched upon before on this blog and on others. But is the message getting through? Is what I’m saying having any effect?
It seems not. From what I’ve read elsewhere people are quite content to cling to their personal traditions and to tolerate the traditions of others. Relativism is alive and thriving within the “church” and it has been demonstrated time and again in some of the responses my writings have received.
While I have made it abundantly clear that I am totally opposed to Calvinism and its abhorrent “doctrines of grace” – those Calvinists that have been most ferocious in their responses to me have at least shown a devotion to those things that they believe. They recognise the exclusivity of their beliefs and see little room for compromise. The same can not be said for so many others who demonstrate (though they would surely deny it) that they accept the relativity of “truth” – that what is true for one person is okay for that person, and what is true for me is okay for me. There is a clear opposition to any idea of bringing correction to others – such actions would be seen as divisive, and it seems like division should be avoided at all costs, even if it meant compromising on the truth.
Recently I have seen time and again how people will twist scripture in every direction possible to avoid accepting what it clearly states. All kinds of mental and logical gymnastics are performed to come to an understanding that contradicts or ignores what would be unavoidable if only the actual words of scripture were accepted for what they actually said.
Why do so many persist with this wilful blindness? And why do so many let them persist, all in the name of keeping the peace?
We have Calvinism redefining salvation and the means by which God has made it available. Then there are the extreme charismatics who have redefined signs and wonders and have turned God’s love into an expression of His desperation to be accepted. And what about the “extreme prophetic” and the “New Apostolic Reformation”? They’ve created new definitions of the prophetic and apostolic?
No matter which direction we turn there’s someone trying to improve on the truth God has provided in His written word.
I don’t know how many feel the same kind of frustration that I’ve been experiencing increasingly over the last year. From regular involvement with a variety of blogs and forums I’m coming across more and more people who are content to tolerate clear cut doctrinal error.
The first clear (recent) examples came in response to concerns about Todd Bentley and his Lakeland “revival”. No matter how weird and perverse things became there were always those who jumped up to defend what was happening. No matter how aberrant the preaching; no matter how many flaky prophecies were given; no matter how much occultic mysticism was mixed with a sampling of bible quotes – there was always a stridently vocal cheer squad singing the “revival’s” praises and condemning the ‘heresy hunters”.
Even Bentley’s open immorality was not enough to open the eyes of many. Instead the support continues.
But the modern day charismanic circus is only one aspect of the problem. The deceiver knows that you can’t tempt everyone with the same flavours. There are other things he provides for the unwary to taste. Those without a sweet tooth, who are not attracted to fluffy, sugary carnival treats, might prefer something a bit meatier; something with more substance. While the extreme charismatics prefer a scripture-lite approach that shuns “traditional interpretations”, others cling to traditional teachings as if they have the authority of scripture itself. They prize scripture – as long as it’s been filtered through a trained and ordained intermediary. Scripture is beyond the average believer and contains mysteries that are best left to those more qualified to seek out its truths.
And so centuries old traditions are passed from generation to generation and defended ferociously should they be challenged.
My personal journey over this last year (and more) has included experience with these opposite extremes of Christian tradition. One group interprets scripture through a centuries old theological system while the other group seems to make things up as they go along.
One group gives lip service to the authority of scripture while in reality authority is given to their theological tradition and how IT interprets scripture.
The other group gives lip service to scripture while in reality giving authority to spiritual experiences and glib clichés.
One group esteems long dead theologians the other adores the flamboyant man (or woman) of the hour.
In these different groups it seems that the Word of God and the Spirit of God are pitted against each other. One is governed by established doctrines, and interprets scripture according to those doctrines. The other is governed by “the Spirit” and interprets scripture according to “spiritual” revelation.
There are obviously some very distinct and irreconcilable differences between these two groups. And yet they have at least one common factor. Both in reality have applied some kind of condition to their approach to scripture that takes away the average believer’s relationship with God’s word. Those average believers are TOLD what can be believed and how it should be believed. They are told that scripture doesn’t necessarily mean what it seems to mean, promoting the understanding that a (traditionally) college trained or a (charismatically) anointed teacher is required to convey what scripture really saying.
Of course, the extent of how this affects the church is immense and it would be impossible to go into every aspect of the problem. But to the person who wants to know and understand the truth, and is willing to spend the time and make the effort required, the truth is easily accessible. Everyone reading this blog has the means and the ability to search the scriptures for themselves because they can obviously read. But are they willing to utilise that ability?
To a great degree we have been conditioned to believe that scripture is hard to understand and that we need someone to explain it all and to share its hidden secrets. We lack confidence. But we should recognise that it is not only a lack of confidence in ourselves – we are lacking confidence in the God who desires to make Himself known through the revelation of scripture. We lack confidence in the One who promised to send His Spirit to be our teacher, and we lack confidence in His Spirit’s ability and willingness to teach us.
The conditioning process that has distanced us from scripture has also worked by giving us an expectation of how scripture should be approached. Our exposure to scripture has been through “texts” – often meaning isolated verses that are expounded upon at length by an appointed teacher of the word. In most cases little attention is given to context and meaning is given to the selected “text” that indicates some kind of special insight has been needed to get to what was really meant by that text.
Through this experience, we ourselves then try to delve into parts of scripture according to the same method used by the teacher. We dig around and try to find the deeper things hidden within those parts of scripture. And this is usually done before the student has developed even a rudimentary understanding of how the whole bible fits together, and what its overall revelation is about.
There is little understanding of how God has related to mankind throughout history and there is little understanding about the significance of God’s relationship with Israel. To most believers, the Old Testament account is a total mystery – beyond a few half remembered stories of certain bible characters.
Now I’ve waffled on and on about this for long enough. A lot of it I’ve touched upon before on this blog and on others. But is the message getting through? Is what I’m saying having any effect?
It seems not. From what I’ve read elsewhere people are quite content to cling to their personal traditions and to tolerate the traditions of others. Relativism is alive and thriving within the “church” and it has been demonstrated time and again in some of the responses my writings have received.
While I have made it abundantly clear that I am totally opposed to Calvinism and its abhorrent “doctrines of grace” – those Calvinists that have been most ferocious in their responses to me have at least shown a devotion to those things that they believe. They recognise the exclusivity of their beliefs and see little room for compromise. The same can not be said for so many others who demonstrate (though they would surely deny it) that they accept the relativity of “truth” – that what is true for one person is okay for that person, and what is true for me is okay for me. There is a clear opposition to any idea of bringing correction to others – such actions would be seen as divisive, and it seems like division should be avoided at all costs, even if it meant compromising on the truth.
Recently I have seen time and again how people will twist scripture in every direction possible to avoid accepting what it clearly states. All kinds of mental and logical gymnastics are performed to come to an understanding that contradicts or ignores what would be unavoidable if only the actual words of scripture were accepted for what they actually said.
Why do so many persist with this wilful blindness? And why do so many let them persist, all in the name of keeping the peace?
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
SEEK MAN OR SEEK GOD?
In recent weeks in various places I have written of the need to search the scriptures and seek the Holy Spirit’s teaching ABOVE the teachings and traditions of men.
Without exception – every time I’ve written of the need, I’ve had people saying things like:
1) I’m abandoning accountability
2) I think I have a monopoly on the truth
3) I’m expecting others to adopt my beliefs
4) I’m arrogant
5) I’m a lone ranger Christian
These are only a sample of the comments I’ve received.
I am wondering why people are so challenged by the thought of seeking God for themselves through His word and Spirit rather than turning immediately to men for their teaching.
Aren’t we taking a big risk if we put our trust primarily in men’s teaching? Wouldn’t it be much more profitable if we took more responsibility and made more of an effort to search the scriptures for ourselves BEFORE we seek the opinions of men?
Have we fallen too far into the mindset of a clergy/laity division that we always need to look for a man of “learning” to teach us? Did the Lord provide the scriptures only for the scholars? Do we need to consult an academic in order to find understanding from the Bible?
Take a look sometime at the controversies that rage throughout the “church” and see how many of them result from arguments arising from human theological reasoning. Do any of them originate from the scriptures alone (when the scriptures are taken in context)? How many of those arguments rage around selected proof texts, with one side quoting one set of verses and the other side quoting another set?
Why is it so threatening to suggest that we can seek God’s revelation PERSONALLY rather than rely on a scholarly or theological intermediary?
And before the opposing voices start building their straw men again, let me state clearly that fellowship and discussion with other SPIRIT LED believers is an essential part of our lives.
As we each search the scriptures for ourselves; as we each seek the Holy Spirit’s revelation; together we can encourage each other. The Holy Spirit’s teaching will be consistent and complimentary. There will be no contradiction. So in fellowship, as we are led more and more by the Spirit, we’ll move more and more in agreement.
Where disagreements rage – somewhere there is a failure to follow the Spirit’s leading.
Often when disagreements arise, peace is made by “agreeing to disagree” – but is that a satisfactory solution?
Why not agree to seek the Lord to reveal the truth? Do we think He’s incapable of doing so?
Without exception – every time I’ve written of the need, I’ve had people saying things like:
1) I’m abandoning accountability
2) I think I have a monopoly on the truth
3) I’m expecting others to adopt my beliefs
4) I’m arrogant
5) I’m a lone ranger Christian
These are only a sample of the comments I’ve received.
I am wondering why people are so challenged by the thought of seeking God for themselves through His word and Spirit rather than turning immediately to men for their teaching.
Aren’t we taking a big risk if we put our trust primarily in men’s teaching? Wouldn’t it be much more profitable if we took more responsibility and made more of an effort to search the scriptures for ourselves BEFORE we seek the opinions of men?
Have we fallen too far into the mindset of a clergy/laity division that we always need to look for a man of “learning” to teach us? Did the Lord provide the scriptures only for the scholars? Do we need to consult an academic in order to find understanding from the Bible?
Take a look sometime at the controversies that rage throughout the “church” and see how many of them result from arguments arising from human theological reasoning. Do any of them originate from the scriptures alone (when the scriptures are taken in context)? How many of those arguments rage around selected proof texts, with one side quoting one set of verses and the other side quoting another set?
Why is it so threatening to suggest that we can seek God’s revelation PERSONALLY rather than rely on a scholarly or theological intermediary?
And before the opposing voices start building their straw men again, let me state clearly that fellowship and discussion with other SPIRIT LED believers is an essential part of our lives.
As we each search the scriptures for ourselves; as we each seek the Holy Spirit’s revelation; together we can encourage each other. The Holy Spirit’s teaching will be consistent and complimentary. There will be no contradiction. So in fellowship, as we are led more and more by the Spirit, we’ll move more and more in agreement.
Where disagreements rage – somewhere there is a failure to follow the Spirit’s leading.
Often when disagreements arise, peace is made by “agreeing to disagree” – but is that a satisfactory solution?
Why not agree to seek the Lord to reveal the truth? Do we think He’s incapable of doing so?
Monday, December 15, 2008
WHO IS THE GOD YOU WERE TAUGHT TO FOLLOW?
Forget the hyped up superstar preachers.
Forget the overbearing, authority-claiming “anointed” celebrities.
Even forget the local “pastor”.
Take the time to know God for yourself. Get to know God FIRST through the scriptures, allowing the Holy Spirit to be your teacher.
The MAJORITY of what we have learned about God from others is wrong. They are not bringing us to the God revealed in scripture, but to a God created in man’s imagination.Be HONEST and don’t try to twist, change or ignore those “difficult” verses that portray a God that makes our theology uncomfortable.
The God of the bible is NOT the God of comfortable, westernized Christianity. And He definitely is NOT the God of the superstar celebrity preacher.Unfortunately most of us are too lazy and too disinterested to seek Him for ourselves and we find the entertainment we get from the celebrities preferable to any thought of Holiness.
Forget the overbearing, authority-claiming “anointed” celebrities.
Even forget the local “pastor”.
Take the time to know God for yourself. Get to know God FIRST through the scriptures, allowing the Holy Spirit to be your teacher.
The MAJORITY of what we have learned about God from others is wrong. They are not bringing us to the God revealed in scripture, but to a God created in man’s imagination.Be HONEST and don’t try to twist, change or ignore those “difficult” verses that portray a God that makes our theology uncomfortable.
The God of the bible is NOT the God of comfortable, westernized Christianity. And He definitely is NOT the God of the superstar celebrity preacher.Unfortunately most of us are too lazy and too disinterested to seek Him for ourselves and we find the entertainment we get from the celebrities preferable to any thought of Holiness.
Monday, July 28, 2008
TRADITION AND THE BEGINNING OF OUR CHRISTIAN LIFE
Recently I came across the question : “Is receiving the Holy Spirit part of Salvation or is it just an added ‘bonus’?”
The answer to this requires us to ask another question. What is salvation and what are we saved from? (Or was that two questions?) This issue of receiving the Holy Spirit is merely one part of our introduction to the Christian life that has been distorted by many centuries of human tradition.
Is it coincidence that so much controversy centres on those issues that are foundational; the things that focus on the very beginnings of Christian life, the things that ensure we start our life of discipleship CORRECTLY?
Some people are only interested in being saved from hell, and many of those want to do the minimum required to achieve that goal. But is that what Jesus came to save us from?
Mat 1:21 And she shall bear a son, and you shall call His name JESUS: for He shall save His people from their sins.
The salvation Jesus offers is salvation from our sins. Salvation from hell is a result of being saved from our sins.
Salvation is about THIS life as much as about our eternal destiny. Therefore we need to ensure we are equipped fully to live in our salvation here and now. How can we think we are fully equipped if we ignore and reject what Jesus has provided and has told us to receive? I strongly suspect that those who are ONLY interested in escaping hell and have no interest in God changing their lives NOW, will unfortunately find themselves thrown into the hell they had hoped to avoid.
To many people initiation into Christianity has been reduced to “believing” in Jesus. Yet scripture is very clear that repentance, baptism in water and baptism in the Holy Spirit are ALL parts of the process of salvation. They are not optional extras that we can pick and choose according to our own whims. They are all essential aspects of our entry into Christ, COMMANDED by Jesus Himself. How can we say we believe in Him if we ignore, disobey, or explain away these basic, foundational things?
The dismissal or changing of these vital aspects of Christian life has come about because men’s traditions have replaced the plain and clear teaching of scripture.
REPENTANCE
In scripture, repentance required observable changes in behaviour and the turning away from sin.
In tradition, repentance is a brief, confessed recognition that we are sinners and that we are sorry for our sin.
BAPTISM
In scripture baptism is the full immersion of a repentant believer in water.
In tradition it is the sprinkling of water on an unsuspecting baby.
RECEIVING THE HOLY SPIRIT
In scripture this occurs with observable evidence – most often the evidence reported in scripture is speaking in tongues, but prophetic utterance and “magnifying God” (possibly spontaneous praise) are also mentioned. The important thing to recognise is that SOMETHING happened that convinced those present that the Spirit had been received. The Spirit was not received in a passive and unobserved way. When the Spirit came into someone’s life it was OBVIOUS that He had come.
In tradition, the Spirit is received when we “believe” – with no particular evidence that anything has happened. (Pentecostal tradition is equally erroneous to insist that tongues is the ONLY evidence.)
What does scripture say about believers receiving the Holy Spirit?
1) Jesus told us that the Holy Spirit is given to those who ask (and keep on asking; – the verb is in the Greek present continuous tense).
To ask for the Holy Spirit we need to recognise that 1) we have not yet received Him 2) That we NEED to receive Him and 3) that God is willing and able to give Him to those who continue to ask until they DO receive Him.
2) The first disciples were told to stay in Jerusalem UNTIL they had received the Holy Spirit.
3) Peter told his audience on the day of Pentecost to REPENT AND BE BAPTISED and THEN they shall receive the Holy Spirit. He did not say they should just believe in Jesus and they would receive the Holy Spirit.
4) The believers in Samaria “gave heed” to the gospel Philip preached and responded with “great joy”. The apostles heard that they “had received the Word of God” and travelled to Samaria to pray for the Samaritans so they would “receive the Holy Spirit” – note this was AFTER they had heeded and received the Word of God. They did not receive the Holy Spirit automatically. They received the Holy Spirit after the apostles laid hands on them.
5) When Cornelius and his household were filled with the Holy Spirit, Peter and his companions knew it had happened:
“For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.”
Upon this evidence Peter ordered that they be baptised in water.
6) The Ephesians were asked by Paul if they had received the Holy Spirit after they had believed. After determining that they hadn’t, Paul had them baptised, laid hands on them and THEN they received the Holy Spirit – again this was AFTER they had believed and AFTER they had received water baptism in the name of Jesus. How did they know they had finally received the Holy Spirit?
“ And as Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.”
Only someone drawn away by tradition could argue against these CLEAR, PLAIN statements to insist that receiving the Spirit happens automatically with no discernable evidence.
Are men and their traditions above God and His Word?
Do men and their traditions decide and determine what is acceptable and needed for a believer to walk in their salvation?
Do men and their traditions determine which parts of God’s word are applicable today and which parts are mere historical records? (A common argument against the examples given in Acts – is that “Acts is merely historical it’s not doctrinal” – who gave anyone the authority to make that distinction?).
Returning to the original question: “Is receiving the Holy Spirit part of Salvation or is it just an added ‘bonus’?”
Consider Jesus Himself. At what point did He start His public ministry? When did He begin to preach, heal and deliver those who were captives?
AFTER His baptism in water and AFTER the Holy Spirit had come upon Him.
If Jesus, who is God Himself, ALSO submitted to water baptism why should we think we don’t need it? If HE needed to receive the Holy Spirit (with confirming, observable signs) why should we think we don’t need to?
Mt 3:13-15 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John.
But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”
Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.”
Lk 3:21-22 When all the people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too. And as he was praying, heaven was opened and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove.
Note that even Jesus received the Holy Spirit AFTER His baptism and AFTER He had prayed.
And He received the Spirit for THIS purpose:
Lk 4:18-19 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.”
He didn’t start His ministry until He had received the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Jesus didn’t conduct His ministry in His own name and power and according to His own authority as God.
If JESUS needed to submit Himself to these things, and if JESUS commanded His disciples to follow His example in these things – who are we to try to change them?
Who are we to try and reason our way out of obedience?
Who are we that we can choose to do things OUR way instead of Gods?
The answer to this requires us to ask another question. What is salvation and what are we saved from? (Or was that two questions?) This issue of receiving the Holy Spirit is merely one part of our introduction to the Christian life that has been distorted by many centuries of human tradition.
Is it coincidence that so much controversy centres on those issues that are foundational; the things that focus on the very beginnings of Christian life, the things that ensure we start our life of discipleship CORRECTLY?
Some people are only interested in being saved from hell, and many of those want to do the minimum required to achieve that goal. But is that what Jesus came to save us from?
Mat 1:21 And she shall bear a son, and you shall call His name JESUS: for He shall save His people from their sins.
The salvation Jesus offers is salvation from our sins. Salvation from hell is a result of being saved from our sins.
Salvation is about THIS life as much as about our eternal destiny. Therefore we need to ensure we are equipped fully to live in our salvation here and now. How can we think we are fully equipped if we ignore and reject what Jesus has provided and has told us to receive? I strongly suspect that those who are ONLY interested in escaping hell and have no interest in God changing their lives NOW, will unfortunately find themselves thrown into the hell they had hoped to avoid.
To many people initiation into Christianity has been reduced to “believing” in Jesus. Yet scripture is very clear that repentance, baptism in water and baptism in the Holy Spirit are ALL parts of the process of salvation. They are not optional extras that we can pick and choose according to our own whims. They are all essential aspects of our entry into Christ, COMMANDED by Jesus Himself. How can we say we believe in Him if we ignore, disobey, or explain away these basic, foundational things?
The dismissal or changing of these vital aspects of Christian life has come about because men’s traditions have replaced the plain and clear teaching of scripture.
REPENTANCE
In scripture, repentance required observable changes in behaviour and the turning away from sin.
In tradition, repentance is a brief, confessed recognition that we are sinners and that we are sorry for our sin.
BAPTISM
In scripture baptism is the full immersion of a repentant believer in water.
In tradition it is the sprinkling of water on an unsuspecting baby.
RECEIVING THE HOLY SPIRIT
In scripture this occurs with observable evidence – most often the evidence reported in scripture is speaking in tongues, but prophetic utterance and “magnifying God” (possibly spontaneous praise) are also mentioned. The important thing to recognise is that SOMETHING happened that convinced those present that the Spirit had been received. The Spirit was not received in a passive and unobserved way. When the Spirit came into someone’s life it was OBVIOUS that He had come.
In tradition, the Spirit is received when we “believe” – with no particular evidence that anything has happened. (Pentecostal tradition is equally erroneous to insist that tongues is the ONLY evidence.)
What does scripture say about believers receiving the Holy Spirit?
1) Jesus told us that the Holy Spirit is given to those who ask (and keep on asking; – the verb is in the Greek present continuous tense).
To ask for the Holy Spirit we need to recognise that 1) we have not yet received Him 2) That we NEED to receive Him and 3) that God is willing and able to give Him to those who continue to ask until they DO receive Him.
2) The first disciples were told to stay in Jerusalem UNTIL they had received the Holy Spirit.
3) Peter told his audience on the day of Pentecost to REPENT AND BE BAPTISED and THEN they shall receive the Holy Spirit. He did not say they should just believe in Jesus and they would receive the Holy Spirit.
4) The believers in Samaria “gave heed” to the gospel Philip preached and responded with “great joy”. The apostles heard that they “had received the Word of God” and travelled to Samaria to pray for the Samaritans so they would “receive the Holy Spirit” – note this was AFTER they had heeded and received the Word of God. They did not receive the Holy Spirit automatically. They received the Holy Spirit after the apostles laid hands on them.
5) When Cornelius and his household were filled with the Holy Spirit, Peter and his companions knew it had happened:
“For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.”
Upon this evidence Peter ordered that they be baptised in water.
6) The Ephesians were asked by Paul if they had received the Holy Spirit after they had believed. After determining that they hadn’t, Paul had them baptised, laid hands on them and THEN they received the Holy Spirit – again this was AFTER they had believed and AFTER they had received water baptism in the name of Jesus. How did they know they had finally received the Holy Spirit?
“ And as Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.”
Only someone drawn away by tradition could argue against these CLEAR, PLAIN statements to insist that receiving the Spirit happens automatically with no discernable evidence.
Are men and their traditions above God and His Word?
Do men and their traditions decide and determine what is acceptable and needed for a believer to walk in their salvation?
Do men and their traditions determine which parts of God’s word are applicable today and which parts are mere historical records? (A common argument against the examples given in Acts – is that “Acts is merely historical it’s not doctrinal” – who gave anyone the authority to make that distinction?).
Returning to the original question: “Is receiving the Holy Spirit part of Salvation or is it just an added ‘bonus’?”
Consider Jesus Himself. At what point did He start His public ministry? When did He begin to preach, heal and deliver those who were captives?
AFTER His baptism in water and AFTER the Holy Spirit had come upon Him.
If Jesus, who is God Himself, ALSO submitted to water baptism why should we think we don’t need it? If HE needed to receive the Holy Spirit (with confirming, observable signs) why should we think we don’t need to?
Mt 3:13-15 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John.
But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”
Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.”
Lk 3:21-22 When all the people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too. And as he was praying, heaven was opened and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove.
Note that even Jesus received the Holy Spirit AFTER His baptism and AFTER He had prayed.
And He received the Spirit for THIS purpose:
Lk 4:18-19 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.”
He didn’t start His ministry until He had received the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Jesus didn’t conduct His ministry in His own name and power and according to His own authority as God.
If JESUS needed to submit Himself to these things, and if JESUS commanded His disciples to follow His example in these things – who are we to try to change them?
Who are we to try and reason our way out of obedience?
Who are we that we can choose to do things OUR way instead of Gods?
Saturday, June 09, 2007
THE ESSENTIAL SCRIPTURES - our defence against deception
Maybe a year ago I raised some questions regarding the nature of the scriptures. But in my questioning I had NO INTENTION of questioning their authority, or their necessity for our Spiritual growth and well being. My concern was that some traditional views regarding scripture had led to the Holy Spirit being sidelined. However, I see the answer to this situation does NOT include reducing the importance of scripture in our lives. As we increasingly give the Holy Spirit room, our relationship with the scriptures will increase and be enriched. The Holy Spirit does NOT replace or supersede the scriptures He Himself inspired.
The Holy Spirit does not contradict Himself – therefore there is great value (necessity!) in referring to earlier Spirit inspired teaching as a measure to test current teaching to see whether the current is genuinely Spirit inspired. Look through the New Testament writings and see how often Jesus and the apostles quoted the Jewish scriptures (our Old Testament) to give legitimacy to their teachings. We also have the example of the Bereans who tested Paul’s teaching by searching the Old Testament scriptures.
While the early church prospered without the compiled New Testament, our situation is far different from theirs. Ac 2:42 says of the earliest believers: “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship”. The early church had direct access to the teachings of the original apostles, men who knew Jesus; those who had received teaching from and had been discipled by Him PERSONALLY. We obviously don’t have that benefit.
Later, as the church grew and spread out, believers received written teaching from the apostles and other eyewitnesses to Jesus’ ministry. These writings were considered important enough to be preserved by the church until the present day, so those who did not have direct access to the apostles due to distance or time, could benefit from their Spirit inspired teaching. The writings of the New Testament are OUR direct link to this “apostles teaching” that the early church considered to be essential.
While the scriptures quoted throughout the New Testament are obviously the Jewish (Old Testament) scriptures, Peter writes of Paul’s letters in a way that compares their authority to those ancient texts:
2Pe 3:16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
And Paul himself stated:
1Th 2:13 And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe.
Who did the Thessalonians receive the word of God from? Was it direct from the Holy Spirit? NO! It was heard through Paul and his companions. Is Paul’s message any less the word of God in writing than it was through preaching? Is the teaching of the apostles any less valid today merely because it has been handed down to us in written form? I would say it is equally valid and MORE of a necessity because we don’t have direct personal access to those original apostles and their teaching. It is MORE of a necessity because it helps us to recognize the GENUINE leading and teaching of the Holy Spirit. The written scriptures help us to judge between the genuine and the false.
Almost every book of the New Testament gives warning of deception, of false apostles, false prophets, and false teachers. We are warned against receiving false gospels – even if they are delivered from spiritual sources. We are warned against the spirit of antichrist. How do we recognize the false? By the same method used by the Bereans, MEASURING ANY TEACHING AGAINST THE STANDARD WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN THE WRITTEN WORD OF SCRIPTURE. In a day when almost every man and woman (and possibly their dogs) are claiming to be apostles and prophets (despite Jesus’ warnings of false ones appearing), how BLESSED we are to have that foundational teaching provided in the scriptures so we aren’t left in the dark to fumble around to determine the truth; that we aren’t left in uncertainty regarding the nature and identity of any spirit that claims to be the Holy Spirit.
Without the written account of scripture we would have no means of determining validity (or otherwise) in the abundance of contradictory teachings that flood the world. And it can be seen that the variety of conflicting teachings increases the MORE that scripture is either ignored or reduced to a collection of out of context verses. In other words – when scripture becomes a tool of man used to “prove” what man has already determined; when man reads meaning into scripture rather out of scripture. (Refer again to 2 Peter 3:16)
In some parts of the church scripture is held as the only source of revelation to the extent that the Holy Spirit has been shut out. THIS IS CLEARLY WRONG. Both are necessary for effective GENUINE Christian life and ministry. Giving a correct emphasis on the Spirit’s leading does NOT demand a corresponding neglect of scripture; in fact, the MORE we experience the Spirit working in our lives, the MORE we will embrace scripture. If the Spirit leads us away from scripture – then it is NOT the Spirit of God we are dealing with.
The members of the early church that thrived without the compiled, written New Testament not only had direct personal access to the apostles, but they were STEEPED in the Jewish scriptures. These scriptures were continually used as a foundational reference to verify the legitimacy of their doctrine and practices.
They didn’t have a superficial knowledge of scripture like most of us who profess to be Christians. To them scripture was ESSENTIAL. They didn’t denigrate the written word in order to justify their own laziness and their neglect of scripture.
Today many are so steeped in the culture of our times that they give little time for studying the scriptures – and yet seem to have plenty of time to try to undermine the Bible’s importance. Trying to score intellectual points by attacking the authority of the written word they adopt the world’s cynicism, disguising it in sheep skin. Some deny the integrity of scripture and claim to be led by the Holy Spirit alone, while others clothe their deceptive doctrines with carefully selected, out of context, verses of scripture.
Referring again to 2 Peter 3:16, “[Paul] writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.”
Everything we know of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit and how they relate with us ALL originates from the scriptures. Diminish and distort the scriptures and we diminish and distort the gospel and the Christian faith we claim to hold.
Ironically, those who try to undermine the authority of the scriptures often do so by quoting scripture. And often the Holy Spirit is promoted as if He nullifies the value of the scriptures. But who told us about the Holy Spirit?
The first disciples were personally told by Jesus to wait in Jerusalem until they received the gift of the Spirit. The Ephesian church was unaware of the Holy Spirit until Paul arrived and introduced Him to them (Acts 19). Without the scriptures HOW DID WE COME TO KNOW?
Without the scriptures we would emulate the Ephesians:
“We have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”
I have also noticed that common verses quoted when trying to promote the Spirit and “spiritual” revelation/experience above the word are:
Matthew 7:9-11 “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake?
If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!
I have seen this quoted to justify all manner of manifestations within the church. With this there is an assumption that God will not allow Christians to be deceived by false signs, wonders or gifts. YET JESUS SPECIFICALLY WARNS of the danger of deception within the church. Almost every New Testament book warns of deception. The scriptures give written teaching to equip us to recognize what is the truth and what is false. If we cast aside or demote the importance of the written word, or if we place “spiritual” experience above the word, we are casting aside the clear warnings against deception given in scripture – and have thereby have already fallen victim to it. Then, by propagating our own scepticism regarding scripture, we ourselves become the deceivers, the false prophets, the false teachers, promoting the spirit of antichrist.
The Holy Spirit does not contradict Himself – therefore there is great value (necessity!) in referring to earlier Spirit inspired teaching as a measure to test current teaching to see whether the current is genuinely Spirit inspired. Look through the New Testament writings and see how often Jesus and the apostles quoted the Jewish scriptures (our Old Testament) to give legitimacy to their teachings. We also have the example of the Bereans who tested Paul’s teaching by searching the Old Testament scriptures.
While the early church prospered without the compiled New Testament, our situation is far different from theirs. Ac 2:42 says of the earliest believers: “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship”. The early church had direct access to the teachings of the original apostles, men who knew Jesus; those who had received teaching from and had been discipled by Him PERSONALLY. We obviously don’t have that benefit.
Later, as the church grew and spread out, believers received written teaching from the apostles and other eyewitnesses to Jesus’ ministry. These writings were considered important enough to be preserved by the church until the present day, so those who did not have direct access to the apostles due to distance or time, could benefit from their Spirit inspired teaching. The writings of the New Testament are OUR direct link to this “apostles teaching” that the early church considered to be essential.
While the scriptures quoted throughout the New Testament are obviously the Jewish (Old Testament) scriptures, Peter writes of Paul’s letters in a way that compares their authority to those ancient texts:
2Pe 3:16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
And Paul himself stated:
1Th 2:13 And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe.
Who did the Thessalonians receive the word of God from? Was it direct from the Holy Spirit? NO! It was heard through Paul and his companions. Is Paul’s message any less the word of God in writing than it was through preaching? Is the teaching of the apostles any less valid today merely because it has been handed down to us in written form? I would say it is equally valid and MORE of a necessity because we don’t have direct personal access to those original apostles and their teaching. It is MORE of a necessity because it helps us to recognize the GENUINE leading and teaching of the Holy Spirit. The written scriptures help us to judge between the genuine and the false.
Almost every book of the New Testament gives warning of deception, of false apostles, false prophets, and false teachers. We are warned against receiving false gospels – even if they are delivered from spiritual sources. We are warned against the spirit of antichrist. How do we recognize the false? By the same method used by the Bereans, MEASURING ANY TEACHING AGAINST THE STANDARD WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN THE WRITTEN WORD OF SCRIPTURE. In a day when almost every man and woman (and possibly their dogs) are claiming to be apostles and prophets (despite Jesus’ warnings of false ones appearing), how BLESSED we are to have that foundational teaching provided in the scriptures so we aren’t left in the dark to fumble around to determine the truth; that we aren’t left in uncertainty regarding the nature and identity of any spirit that claims to be the Holy Spirit.
Without the written account of scripture we would have no means of determining validity (or otherwise) in the abundance of contradictory teachings that flood the world. And it can be seen that the variety of conflicting teachings increases the MORE that scripture is either ignored or reduced to a collection of out of context verses. In other words – when scripture becomes a tool of man used to “prove” what man has already determined; when man reads meaning into scripture rather out of scripture. (Refer again to 2 Peter 3:16)
In some parts of the church scripture is held as the only source of revelation to the extent that the Holy Spirit has been shut out. THIS IS CLEARLY WRONG. Both are necessary for effective GENUINE Christian life and ministry. Giving a correct emphasis on the Spirit’s leading does NOT demand a corresponding neglect of scripture; in fact, the MORE we experience the Spirit working in our lives, the MORE we will embrace scripture. If the Spirit leads us away from scripture – then it is NOT the Spirit of God we are dealing with.
The members of the early church that thrived without the compiled, written New Testament not only had direct personal access to the apostles, but they were STEEPED in the Jewish scriptures. These scriptures were continually used as a foundational reference to verify the legitimacy of their doctrine and practices.
They didn’t have a superficial knowledge of scripture like most of us who profess to be Christians. To them scripture was ESSENTIAL. They didn’t denigrate the written word in order to justify their own laziness and their neglect of scripture.
Today many are so steeped in the culture of our times that they give little time for studying the scriptures – and yet seem to have plenty of time to try to undermine the Bible’s importance. Trying to score intellectual points by attacking the authority of the written word they adopt the world’s cynicism, disguising it in sheep skin. Some deny the integrity of scripture and claim to be led by the Holy Spirit alone, while others clothe their deceptive doctrines with carefully selected, out of context, verses of scripture.
Referring again to 2 Peter 3:16, “[Paul] writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.”
Everything we know of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit and how they relate with us ALL originates from the scriptures. Diminish and distort the scriptures and we diminish and distort the gospel and the Christian faith we claim to hold.
Ironically, those who try to undermine the authority of the scriptures often do so by quoting scripture. And often the Holy Spirit is promoted as if He nullifies the value of the scriptures. But who told us about the Holy Spirit?
The first disciples were personally told by Jesus to wait in Jerusalem until they received the gift of the Spirit. The Ephesian church was unaware of the Holy Spirit until Paul arrived and introduced Him to them (Acts 19). Without the scriptures HOW DID WE COME TO KNOW?
Without the scriptures we would emulate the Ephesians:
“We have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”
I have also noticed that common verses quoted when trying to promote the Spirit and “spiritual” revelation/experience above the word are:
Matthew 7:9-11 “Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake?
If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!
I have seen this quoted to justify all manner of manifestations within the church. With this there is an assumption that God will not allow Christians to be deceived by false signs, wonders or gifts. YET JESUS SPECIFICALLY WARNS of the danger of deception within the church. Almost every New Testament book warns of deception. The scriptures give written teaching to equip us to recognize what is the truth and what is false. If we cast aside or demote the importance of the written word, or if we place “spiritual” experience above the word, we are casting aside the clear warnings against deception given in scripture – and have thereby have already fallen victim to it. Then, by propagating our own scepticism regarding scripture, we ourselves become the deceivers, the false prophets, the false teachers, promoting the spirit of antichrist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)