I’ve been very busy with so many things lately that I haven’t had a whole lot of time to put into my blog. One of the good things I did so as to give me more time for my apologetics ministry was to dismantle and close down my social commentary blog, “Sanity in an Upside Down World.” That was getting too time consuming!
Over the past couple weeks I have been collecting various stories to report on, so sit back and enjoy!
Beth Moore is one of those in the spotlight who never seems to lack in false teachings. I’ve reported on many of her problems, but now it seems she also considers Roman Catholicism to be just another Christian denomination - which tells me a lot about her ignorance or Roman Catholicism! But even worse than that, Moore is now recommending the book, Jesus Calling, a book whose author claims she receives direct revelation from Jesus. If you are unfamiliar with this book, read the excellent review by Tim Challies.
The Church today is really, really getting entertainment-oriented as it slides farther and farther into apostasy. Steve Bricker, at What Accords With Sound Doctrine, has an excellent article about whether our worship services are about God or man. Now let’s look at a couple assemblies where the answer seems to be, “MAN.”
I don’t know what church this is in, but if this is what you see where you worship - run out the door and never come back. Steve Furtick’s “Elevation Church” is right up there at the top rung of the ladder of a self-worshipping assembly. An example of the nonsense going on there is this “Christmas Dance.” Elizabeth Prata at The End Time blog has a good commentary on Furtick, as well as providing more examples of such foolishness.
I think this short talk by Paul Washer also addresses these types of assemblies, but he also addresses a much bigger problem invading churches who don’t get as bizarre as the ones we just saw, but nevertheless are “catering to the carnal.”
Meanwhile, false teacher Rick Warren’s market-driven assembly says that “God is Mad About You.” Where do these goatherds come up with this stuff!?!?
One thing I have observed over the years in my Christian life is that those churches who place women in positions of pastor and elder always go liberal in their doctrine and practice. Think about the ELCA, the Episcopal Church, United Church of Christ, PCUSA, and even the Methodist church; these are the churches who promote the social gospel, support same-sex unions, support abortion, etc. There is a reason why Scripture said women are not to be in these positions. Matt Slick has a good, short article about Women Pastors and a lack of a biblical worldview.
The “Code Orange” so-called revival seems to me to be more of a place for false teachers to gather and promote their corrupt view of the Church. In the process of reading many articles about this upcoming event, I have learned more and more names and faces of the goatherds who participate in this event. The latest is Kevin Gerald, and Erin’s article covers a lot of ground exposing who he is.
Meanwhile, Mark Driscoll has released his new book, Real Marriage. Knowing that Driscoll is fascinated by all things sexual, it doesn’t surprise me that he has a really controversial chapter about sex. And he thinks deviant sexual behavior is okay as long as it is within the confines of marriage! Tim Challies’ review ends with him saying it isn’t a book he’d want his wife reading and that he can’t recommend it. An even more thorough review by Denny Burk should lead you to agree with Challies if you hadn’t already done so. Again I say, Driscoll has no business being a pastor.
Roman Catholics virtually Idolize Mother Teresa. Over the years I have come across a lot of information about her which led me to believe there is no way she was saved. This week I stumbled across an old article by Tim Challies which I think conclusively demonstrates that Teresa had no clue about the true Gospel.
Neil has a good post about a discussion with an atheist, showing how illogical their arguments are.
Finally, someone doctored a video of arch-heretic Benny Hinn to have him portrayed as a “Dark Lord of the Sith.” It’s posted at Slaughtering the Sheep. Prepare for a good laugh.
Posts
20 comments:
Great roundup, by which I mean, "horrific roundup!"
I agree about the correlation / causation between ordaining women and shifting to liberal theology.
Great article about Teresa. She was a sad case.
Glenn thank you so much for the link. I am pretty sad about the state of the church, but every time I get sad I just think of Jeremiah, or Obadiah or Micah...preaching doom and destruction amid a world of scoffers and cold faith (and Jeremiah with no wife or friends, either)...or Simeon or Anna, practically the only ones left in the time just before Jesus began to preach that had warm, true faith. They had things much worse than me and when I remember that I make myself stop being a wimp. Jesus is with me, even if He is being shoved out of the church :)
The United Methodist Church does not support abortion nor does it support same-sex marriage. Here are the social principles for The UMC where you can see exactly what The UMC stands for (at least until General Conference in April.)http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1704
As for women preaching, the Bible does mention they should not, but you have to put it in context of who Paul was writing his letter to. People eat pigs though the Bible says not to, but there is context to that as well. And I've never seen sacrifices of animals in the church. Context.
You write a good summary of the things you despise, yet you do not offer the reasons or proof for doing so. It's ok to disagree with someone (though I find name calling and put downs inappropriate), but give a reason. Otherwise, in today's terms, I'd consider you spam (not the food) with really nothing to offer and nothing to make me rethink my positions.
Anne,
As for the UMC and abortion, using your reference site I found this quote, as I did for my post on the UMC on 10/7/09:
“We recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures.”
Contrary to the UMC, there is NO justification for abortion.
While the OFFICIAL stance of the UMC denomination is still against homosexual behavior and same-sex unions, it is rather moot because so many individual UMC assemblies do indeed promote it and support them, and clergy are not punished by removal for doing so. I suggest you look at my articles under the “Methodist Church” label to see how deep into support for homosexuality and same-sex unions has gone without much counter by the leadership.
The Bible doesn’t “mention” that women should not be in teaching/leadership positions - it commands against it. The qualifications cited in 1 Tim and Titus specify a man, and the context of 1 Cor 14 is a letter to "all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." It is not limited to a specific culture or time, and objective evidence that having women in leadership positions always leads to a liberal assembly.
The context against eating pigs was a law for the Jews only and for no one else, and even then Jesus declared all foods clean. Sacrifices were done away with because of Christ‘s sacrifice. However, there has been no revelation doing away with Paul’s commands as to qualifications for church leaders.
This summary is not of things I despise, but things God despises. It was written as an alert for people to avoid false teachers and false teachings. The reasons should be apparent to any Christian, and my intended audience is Christian. I don’t believe I have to spell out why idolatry is bad, why worship of self is bad, why false teaching is bad, etc. The only “name-calling” I do is labeling people as false teachers (gee, Jesus, Paul and Peter did the same) and calling the leaders goatherds because they are not shepherds. I don’t put people down - I put their teachings down if they are against God’s Word. If you have specific examples where I err, then I welcome correction.
If you don’t see that Beth Moore is a false teacher, search my blog and many other apologetics sites for more evidence against her, and all of us cite the appropriate Biblical passages. If you think Roman Catholicism is a Christian denomination devoid of heresy and false teaching, then you haven’t done your homework: read my articles about their doctrine for a primer. If you think the book “Jesus Calling” is revelation from God, then you lack discernment - the Bible is sufficient with no need for new revelation. If you have no problem with carnal entertainment-oriented worship focusing on self rather than God, then again you lack discernment. If you think God is “mad about you” then demonstrate from Scripture. If you believe “Code Orange” will be a true revival of God, then you lack discernment. If you think Mark Driscoll should be a pastor, then I suggest you peruse my articles about him.
And yet you say this article was “spam” with nothing to offer. I offered lots of warnings to prevent people from becoming trapped in webs spun by Satan.
Glenn, I pointed you to the umc.org sites so you could see what the General Conference voted on four years ago. Whether all United Methodists agree is a different story. General Conference is coming up and all of this could change, but I feel you misrepresented the denomination when not pointing out the official voice of the church which is GC. There are a good bit in the denom who are loud, but that does not mean they speak for all United Methodists and they have no official capacity to do so. I'm very aware of the homosexuality cases and their slaps on the wrist. Abortion is a huge issue that people spend a great amount of time on, yet people never mention human trafficking, exploiting the earth, helping the needy, etc.
I really can't believe that context doesn't matter. That's like saying prooftexting is ok. People use prooftexting all the time to make the Bible fit into what they want to believe (some would say people prooftext Paul's writing about women), not the other way around. I'd say a lot of our problems come from this and the fact that there are people without humility who think they are the only person who could be right.
Who spread the good news of Christ's resurrection? Why weren't men used? God did not just use men. There are powerful stories of women in the Bible. Should they be ignored? Do we have nothing to learn from them?
cont'd
John 3:16 comes to mind when I think of whether or not God is "mad about me." But then, I view God as a loving God and a grace-filled God; a parent who loves his child and gives praise, but loves also with discipline moving the child toward a more Christ centered life.
Are you saying that there is absolutely no value in anything Mark Driscoll, Beth Moore, etc. have to say? They have nothing right in regards to what is in the Bible? Honestly, if anyone told me they knew everything about the Bible, what it means and how God meant for it to be read, I'd be very worried and be very aware. From your posts, I'd say you believe your word is infallible.
I could consider you a false prophet, but has your post made me think about God and my beliefs? Sure. Is that valuable? I think so. My goal is not to become a follower of Glenn, Beth Moore, Mark Driscoll, Rob Bell, etc. My goal is to become a better follower of Christ. This will always be a journey. I will never know everything I need to nor should I ever stop seeking. If I never hear what others have to say, I would never grow in what I believe. I know many Christians who are content to believe what their preacher says. Their faith is their preacher's faith, mother's faith, etc. They never really think about what they believe, they just spit out what they've been taught.
I'm sorry, I always get a little leery when people only have negative things to say yet offer no alternatives. Fine, the Catholics, Methodists, Episcopals have everything wrong about the Bible. Then who has it right? Ok, Mark Driscoll and Beth Moore are false prophets, who is not? Give me something I can learn from. Instead of only warnings of Satan's web, teach me the things I need to know to be a better follower of Christ. That's why I called this post "spam". It does not help me further my walk with Christ. I'd rather focus on Christ than Satan's web. It just makes me start to hyperventilate, wondering if there is anyone I can trust to propel me in the ways of God. What if I start listening to Adam Hamilton? Goodness, but what if he's wrong like Driscoll?
I believe God gives us a feeling (discernment) when things aren't just right. I've read pieces from Driscoll and gotten the feeling. It makes me read what he says more closely, think about it and decide what I believe.
For every argument on one side using scripture, there is an argument for the other. "There is no justification for abortion." One of God's earliest gifts to man was choice. Humans are called to take care of the earth, God's creation. God gave humans dominion.
We could go on and on.
Well said.
Sun Cracked Soul,
I'm taking it that you were saying that about my post rather than the comments by Anne?
Anne,
I understood the point of your link, but my point was that you denied that UMC supports abortion (which I proved they do), and you denied that they support same-sex unions, but the fact that numerous UMC assemblies throughout the nation are indeed supporting them and even permitting those who practice homosexual behavior to be in the pulpit and yet are not defrocked or excommunicated demonstrates tacit approval by the UMC denominational leadership.
I don’t understand your comment about human trafficking, etc. The issue is whether or not the UMC and other liberal denominations support abortion rights, and whether or not they also support sanctioning homosexuality. I know of no Christian denomination which supports human trafficking, abusing the earth, etc.
I didn’t say context didn’t matter, and in fact pointed out that there IS a context for what Paul taught about women teaching and in leadership - it was for all cultures and all time: "As in all the congregations of the saints..." "all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." In the 1 Timothy passage Paul even makes his argument base on the creative order - and that transcends any cultural argument.
I also pointed out that there was a context about eating pigs or sacrificing animals, and both those were temporary in nature.
I agree that much “proof-texting” is done, taking things out of context to make it agree with one’s beliefs; that is called eisegesis. The issue of women teachers has never been a debate until recent history with the advent of liberal theology, and then suddenly there was a “new” understanding.
The issue is not about the value of women and women teaching. The context is about leadership authority and teaching in the setting of the assembled church. We can learn from women, and they are never ignored. But that isn’t the same as putting them in leadership positions. Not all Jews were qualified to be priests, but that didn’t lessen their value in other ways.
John 3:16 says nothing about God being “mad about” the human race. Loving the human race is one thing; making a self-esteem issue out of it is another.
I have never said there is no value in Driscoll’s or Moore’s teachings, and if you would read articles I have written on them you will see I make the point that they do have some good teachings. But when the bad outweighs the good, then the teacher cannot be trusted. A little bit of cyanide ruins a pure glass of water, bringing death to the one drinking it. Both these teachers claim direct revelation from God, and yet what they claim came from God contradicts what Scripture says! How does one test a prophet? If he disagrees with God, that is a sure sign he is lying.
Anne, cont.
Nowhere in any of my articles will you find even the hint that I believe I am infallible. I have many, many times stated that if someone finds error in what I publish I will welcome correction. Every time someone has demonstrated an error, I have corrected it. What I find infallible is the Word of God, which is best understood through proper exegesis. When claims do not line up with Scripture, then the Scripture is not what is in error. I would never claim I know everything about the Bible, but I do study it in depth as well as study what many, many scholars have to say about ever issue I study. I do not take my position as a teacher lightly, nor do I take this ministry for granted. I spend many hours in study and research to come up with anything I write about. I never stop learning and never intend to; if I haven’t learned something new every day, then that day was wasted.
Anyone claiming to be a prophet today is a false prophet; they’ve been proven so by contradicting Scripture.
I do not call people false teachers just because they make mistakes here and there, or because they have different understandings of non-essentials, etc. False teachers are those who consistently err in what they teach, consistently abuse Scripture, etc to where they are dangerous spiritually for listening or reading their teachings.
None of us should be followers of any man or woman - only followers of Christ. But there are too many Christians who do indeed follow particular teachers as fans of entertainers follow their favorites. I know Beth Moore followers, e.g., who can’t get enough of Moore but won’t pick up the Bible without her books guiding them (sort of like JWs and the Watchtower pubs).
The purpose of apologetics ministries is to expose the false teachers and false teachings so as to protect the flock from being led into legalism, heresies, aberrations, etc, which can shipwreck their lives. It is also to defend the true faith against false belief systems.
I never have just post “negative things” - if you were to review my blog you would find much general teaching, encouragements, devotional thoughts, etc. But there is much to be warned about, and it will only become worse as we near the end.
I have never even intimated that any Christian denomination has everything wrong about the Bible; I point out where they have serious error. And often it isn’t what they teach about the Bible, it is where they stray from it!
No matter who we listen to as teachers, we need to exercise discernment and test them against the Word of God. And THAT is the main thing I would like people to take away from my blog.
Glenn,
(Going in order of your comments written just because it's easiest.)
I do understand that The UMC is sending mixed signals about homosexuality. (Well, mixed signals to those who keep up with it anyway.) The UMC is a very diverse group and we have come to be known more for our fight over homosexuality rather than the wonderful things the denomination and members do. It will again be brought up at General Conference and I'm afraid to try to predict what will come from it.
My experience with many Christians is they only care about the issue of abortion. They do not care to know about human trafficking much less make a fight to do something about it. They also do not think through what happens if you ban abortion and how people, country and world will deal with it. I don't have an answer and I certainly don't believe in abortion. But, I know if there is a ban then what will happen to the women who are forced to birth their babies? Are churches, society and the government ready to deal with their emotional health, and for some, help provide the necessary resources to take care of their children? Will those against abortion be willing to adopt? We have so many children in foster care now, what happens when the number increases substantially? If you ban abortion should you not also ban fertility treatments? I guess my point is that there are chain reactions that start when an issue like abortion is decided upon and the majority of people I know don't want to entertain thoughts of what's next if this happens. It does not take away the fact that abortion is wrong, it just adds another layer or layers.
"I know of no Christian denomination which supports human trafficking, abusing the earth, etc." This is very similar to what you said about The UMC. The OFFICIAL stance sounds good, but the actions are not in line. The same happens with the environment, human trafficking, etc. The Bible tells us we need to care about these issues, yet members ignore them.
I understand what you are saying about context, but there is also context taken from background info like who Paul was writing his letter to and their history and Paul's history for that matter. You could look at the creative order, but you see that God didn't leave Adam alone. God gave him a helpmate.
Re: connection of women and liberalism- Would abolishing slavery be considered a "new" understanding?
Using "mad about" actually gets me excited to think God loves me that much, but I think the word love has lost a lot of meaning to me because of overuse. (I love danishes. I love that dress.) Unfortunately, in English, there is not a delineation of the types of love that might better convey God's love for the human race.
Our culture is so idolatrous. Not just of people, but country, money, fashion, etc.
Maybe we need more legalism. I believe people see God as so loving and accepting that they forget (or ignore) that we should "go and sin no more". We never become transformed because we believe God loves us just the way we are.
As you can tell, I'm not familiar with apologetics. I've learned a lot from your last comments. It still would not be my preferred style.
The things I know about you now will help me understand your posts better in the future. It will also give me another lens when reading other blogs. I appreciate the dialogue. I'm not in a position where I can have conversations like this with people.
Anne,
The UMC is becoming known for its involvement in homosexuality more than anything else because approving sexual immorality, especially this kind, leads to rapid degeneration of a denomination, let alone society. There has been way too much approval and promotion of same-sex behavior and unions in UMC assemblies to be ignored. The Wesleys are spinning in their graves.
I’m not sure what sort of Christians you associate with, but almost all the believers I know care about all social issues. However, only the liberal churches promote the acceptance immoral practices, such as homosexuality and abortion, which is why these issues get the media attention, and which is why these assemblies are called to task.
Abortion is not the answer for poverty, human trafficking, or anything else. If you make that connection then you cannot logically justify not murdering children for the very same reasons. We all think through what will happen if abortion is banned - millions of lives will be saved. Using your logic, should we drop the ban on homicide?
Anne, cont.
What women will be forced to abort? Chinese and Indian women? Other than governments who force such things, no one is forcing women to abort their children. Being against abortion does not mean one has to adopt the children who are born. Why not instead force women to behave responsibly and take responsibility for their behavior. And I think Neil Simpson at Eternity Matters blog has a good response to this argument:
Protesting an immoral act does not obligate you to take care of its victims.
If the government wanted to solve the homeless problem by killing homeless people, could you object to their destruction without having to personally house them? In the same way, we can object to the killing of innocent human beings without having to feed, clothe and house them for life.
Your statement is false. Pro-lifers help women and children before and after pregnancies with their own time and money. There are more pregnancy centers (which offer services for free) than their are abortion clinics (which make huge profits).
Unless you are insisting that poor people must have abortions, the same obligations of support and care that you require of pro-lifers would fall on you.
As for fertility treatments, I would be more than happy to ban them!
Again, I know of no fellow believer who ignores all these other social issues.
Your comment about the context of Paul’s teachings attempts to dismiss the idea with a claim to the culture he was addressing. I already gave the rebuttal to that from Scripture - his instructions were addressed to all Christians every where! There is nothing about Paul’s history or the history of the people to whom he was writing which has any bearing on the context; this is an argument being made only by liberals in an attempt to dismiss the teachings. Yet Paul claims he gets his teachings from Christ!
Yes, God gave Adam a helpmate, but that has no bearing on whether women should be in authority in the church. Paul points back to that creative order and the Fall when the woman - not the man - was deceived. And it is an empirical fact that women operate mostly from emotions while men tend to operate more from reason, which is why women are more readily drawn into cults and false teachings - the statistics are there, and if you study the cults you will see it regularly.
Abolishing slavery has nothing to do with liberal theology. In fact, it was abuse of Scripture which was used to support slavery as we knew it in the Western world. Slavery as discussed in the Bible, which people used to defend the type of slavery in the USA, was a whole different concept, which did not recognize abuse of slaves as proper, and which gave periods for required freeing of slaves, etc. A whole other subject.
No, we don’t need more legalism: Jesus and Paul both soundly condemned it. What we need is proper teaching on what it means to be a disciple of Christ with our whole lives.
I’m not sure I understand about apologetics not being a “preferred style” - it isn’t a “style,” it is a discipline and a ministry. In reality, ALL Christians should be apologists as Peter says in 1 Pet. 3:15. The better able Christians are at discerning error and the better they are at defending their faith and using that knowledge to evangelize, the more solid the church would be.
I am always open for dialogue of this nature. You may find it easier to use my e-mail rather than the comment boxes. That e-mail is dedicated only to my apologetics ministry.
Hey Glenn~
Be not of faint heart my friend! You have not been trusted with an easy ministry... be faithful for you are not alone. Your work is not in vain.
Be wary of the time waster's. It is a difficult task to move 'the many' from their luke warm position.
Appreciating you for His sake!
Glenn Smith
Thank you, Glenn S. for your kind words and encouragement. This ministry is indeed often a challenge, but the Lord blesses me through it.
Glenn: You are to be commended for your patience with Anne. Of course, there is real truth in the old saying, "None is so blind as he (or she) who will not see."
Ron,
Anne is easy - she has just listened to the wrong teachings and has been misinformed in some areas, but she is polite. It is easy to be patient with those who are serious in their discussions and are actually looking or answers.
Good point. Of course, that really underscores the importance and validity of the ministry you have through your blog. Contending for the faith is extremely important in this day of so much false teaching. Obviously, anyone who stands against false teaching is going to be criticized for "being negative," but I encourage you to keep up the good work.
Anonymous said...
About the “tone deaf Michael Jackson,” there was nothing technically or biblically wrong with what this guy was saying or doing. I wonder if this clip represents an anomaly at that church or whether it is the steady diet. I wonder where they are on The Word and what God's impact through them to others might be. I wonder if God would not be delighted to see all of us (in our own ways) expressing such enthusiasm. About this I cannot speak from one clip. I can say I think I now know how David's wife must have felt when she watched him danced his way into Jerusalem with the arc . . . . and Paul did refer to the "foolishness of preaching". . . so all things considered, I don't think its for me to decide whether or not God was pleased with that guy's . . . uh. . . . exuberant expression of praise and worship. About Code Orange--if everything were taken away from it but the words, and those words were sung in soft choir music, you'd say "Now THAT's the way it's SUPPOSED to be done!" Generational expressions of faith and worship change and the older always condemns the younger. Who am I to judge whether or not this is pleasing to God? How can I know where the hearts of those who performed it are in relation to Christ or His plan? It amazes me how often we rave about Biblical characters who did seemingly crazy things and Church heros who got radically extreme. I think we have only the benefit of hindsight to know that God used it (and hence our applause and approval of it today). But how, I wonder, would we have reacted back then if we were the original observers? Perhaps we have the answer to that question when we see something like this in our age and grow mortified as we cluck our tongues and condemn it. Sorry, such a judgment (one way or the other) is above my pay grade.
Michael Burdick
Michael,
The “tone deaf Michael Jackson” to me looked like self-aggrandizement. A worship service is not an entertainment venue, and this was indeed pure entertainment with the get-up and all. I would wager that it is standard fare at that assembly.
The Code Orange Christmas video is at an assembly where, to my understanding, that IS the common fare. They are all about entertainment and Furtick himself is known for much aberrational and false teaching, and is part of the emergent movement.
When the focus is entertainment and self, no matter what the lyrics used, then it has no place in the assembly for worship.
Post a Comment