Click the post title to be taken to the source.
God is love. His mercy is over all His works. He manifests His love to all. But the highest expression of His love is manifest to those who He lovingly draws to Himself by sheer grace. Therefore to those of us who believe, God’s love is a uniquely precious reality, albeit an unfathomable one. There [...]
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
In this generation we are going to have to make some hard decisions which will be similar to those Martin Luther himself had to make. As he once did we’re going to have to come to grips with the question of what to do with people who profess Christ but whose teachings are diametrically opposed to sound doctrine. For instance Dr. John MacArthur as opposed to Rob Bell. How could they be speaking from the same Spirit? How could Luther and the Pope of his time be speaking from the same Spirit? We who are Protestant say they weren’t and that God was with Luther.
It would seem very rough spiritual waters ahead because God wants to use the blogosphere to spread the Truth now that so many people simply don’t have good local churches for fellowship. But sadly many of the “name” bloggers are too busy blogging about nothing to get the word out that evangelicalism is every bit as spiritually corrupt as Roman Catholic Church was in Luther’s day. Think about it; look how quickly and willingly it’s climbing into bed with her.
Along these lines over at Reformed Gadfly Tim Brown has written a post which should provide for some lively and much needed discussion. Brown begins:
Ok. It’s come to this. I have to put this out as an issue. I think it is that important.
There has been talk about Ray Comfort’s speaking at conferences which includes “Word of Faith” leaders. Then there is Ravi Zacharias who is now becoming involved with Robert Schuller at “ReThink”. But the issue I’m addressing here has become intensely personal. Here it is as follows…
<!– –>
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
I met Ray Boltz very briefly in 1988 at a tent revival in Oklahoma. He sang several of his songs and I bought one of his tapes that evening. I was a very new Christian at that time and I really liked the focus of Ray’s songs. When I heard today of his “coming out of the closet” proclaiming that he is living the “homosexual lifestyle” I was saddened. We must learn from this my brethren. First, we must not put other Christians up on pedestals. None of us are perfect. That means we focus on Christ, bearing our hearts to Him for cleansing and healing. We never rely on our will power to resist temptation. Second, when we base the authenticity of our salvation on experience we are treading on very thin ice. Those who rely on that time from their past when they made a ‘decision for Christ’ by walking an aisle or whatever, but have shown little if any movement away from bondage to the flesh are more than likely deceived into relying on religiosity to save them rather than knowing our Lord intimately because He knows them.
(click here to read this post)
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Let’s say we’re back in high school (if you’re not now already). Let’s say there is this kid who everyone knows craves attention and wants to be popular, but doesn’t quite have that popularity and acceptance from his peers that he craves so. I’m sure we all have a mental picture at this point. Let’s say that this person desires so much to be in the “in crowd” that he calls one of the people who he considers to be in it and asks them to call him back. Let’s say that when the person in the “in crowd” does call back the kid, the kid goes around telling everyone that “so and so called HIM personally!” If you knew the truth about the reason why this person called him (returning a call) what would you think about this kid? Would you not think someone who called a certain person, had them return his phone call, then bragged to everyone that the person actually called them making it sound like the other person took the initiative was one of the lamest people you have ever met? I know I certainly would. If someone’s desire to “be somebody” and “be accepted with a certain crowd” was that evident that they would be as lame to do such a thing, I think it would actually reveal how much of a nobody they actually are. With all that in mind, read this.
END OF POST
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Straight from a Junior High locker room A Little Leaven, A Museum of Idolatry with the link to “a really ‘relevant’ sermon series from Pine Ridge Church. Their inviting ya’ll to meet them at church ‘naked’.”
*tee hee* “They said ‘naked.’” *tee hee*
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
The lines continue to be all but erased in the visible church by postevangelicalism and the Emerging Church rebellion against Sola Scriptura. We’re told that must reimagine i.e. rethink everything in a spiritual version of “Everything You Know Is Wrong.”
At Slaughter of the Sheep we read:
Many may believe Robert Schuller is not a threat in Christianity because he’s so preposterously apostate. I’ll never know where that line of thought comes from. Robert Schuller not only has a vast television outreach, but his monstrosity of a church called the “Crystal Cathedral” is packed to the seams with eager followers who come to hear Schuller and his guest speakers every week. What should trouble us is that even though Robert Schuller is so blatantly heretical, many many Christians still follow him… Most of the above list [of speakers] doesn’t surprise me, but one speaker who continues to baffle me is Ravi Zacharias…
And who knew Cole Porter was a prophet when he wrote the very secular song “Anything Goes.”
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
I can hear all the gasps of horror from fans of Dr. Ravi Zacharias, premier Christian apologist and A-List speaker for Christian conferences. “What audacity! How dare she suggest in her headline that brilliant Ravi needs to rethink anything?” Well, it doesn’t take a Th.D. to know that Jesus didn’t come to save us from our low self-esteem. It doesn’t take years of seminary or studying at Cambridge or Oxford to know that in biblical theology, sin is not having a low self-image. But it bothers Ravi not at all that his host for the 2009 ReThink Conference will be none other than Heretic Emeritus, Robert Schuller, who has spent his entire career teaching just that. Sometimes, what you really need in the church today is someone like the child in the Emperor’s New Clothes who cried out, “The King’s not wearing anything at all!” So I’ll say it. Ravi is aiding and abetting one of America’s most senior false teachers, the father of the modern seeker-sensitive movement that has so perverted the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Ravi Zacharias has been on a long downhill slide as witnessed by his Salt Lake City misadventure at the Mormon Tabernacle back in 2004, his Jesus-free prayer at the Capitol Hill National Day of Prayer event in May, and now his being staged by Robert Schuller who tells us we need to “rethink” everything. If you’re interested in defending the faith, Ravi, the best place to start would be with your host at the Crystal Cathedral. Here’s more from the Slaughtering the Sheep blog.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
The following book review is by Dr. Gary Gilley from his Think On These Things, which is a ministry of Southern View Chapel where Gilley is pastor and it’s reprinted by permission:
Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life
by Donald S. Whitney
I am often asked if, and in what ways, Donald Whitney differs from those who are promoting mysticism and the ancient practices of Roman Catholicism in evangelical circles. After all, he uses many of the same terms: spiritual formation, spiritual disciplines, meditation and the like. At the same time Whitney is a solid evangelical who is presently a professor at Southern Seminary, has the endorsement of men such as Al Mohler and Bruce Ware, and has spoken at The Master’s Seminary. Where does he stand on issues such as the spiritual disciplines?
On the one hand we must avoid guilt by association. His use of some of the buzzwords found within the unbiblical Spiritual Formation movement may be questionable but does not definitively mean that he is saying the same thing. For example Jay Adams wrote a little book called Godliness Through Discipline and Kent Hughes wrote The Disciplines of a Godly Man and yet neither man has been linked to the Roman Catholic understanding of spiritual disciplines. In a private conversation with Whitney he told me he has written against mysticism and does not link arms with Rome. We must also recognize that because he quotes questionable sources, even in favorable ways, does not necessarily imply that he agrees with all they teach. For example, he often quotes Richard Foster and Dallas Willard even though he differs significantly with much of their theology. And there is nothing to quibble with concerning the quotes he lifts from these men. We must be careful to hear out an author like Whitney and determine what he is really saying.
On the other hand, we cannot dismiss too lightly Whitney’s favorable endorsement of men such as Foster and Willard. Where I would find virtually nothing of value in Foster, and a lot that is dangerous, Whitney sees much that is helpful. For instance he speaks of the “great contribution” of Foster’s Celebration of Discipline (p. 23). J. I. Packer in the foreword tells of Foster’s ringing the bell concerning the spiritual disciplines as “a happy thing.” Quoting Carl Lundquist we are informed that by the closure of the New Testament the church had four spiritual disciplines: prayer, Bible study, the Lord’s Supper and small cell groups. For argument’s sake let’s grant this. If so, should not the New Testament believer stop where the New Testament does? When we layer the Scriptures with our man-made traditions do we not invalidate the Scriptures (Matt 15:1-8)? But Lundquist tells us that “the medieval mystics wrote about nine disciplines clustered around three experiences: purgation of sin, enlightenment of the Spirit and union with God” (p. 66). Lundquist is correct, the mystics did exactly this, using the same three steps or experiences found in all forms of mysticism—but this is a bad thing. It is bad because there is nothing like it taught in Scripture and, therefore, it certainly cannot be the key to our spiritual lives. Mysticism is something that should be exposed and rejected—and it was by the Reformers and their followers, until Richard Foster wrote his book. But Lindquist, and apparently Whitney, does not see Foster’s teaching on these subjects as unbiblical and dangerous, as Lundquist goes on to state, “Today Richard Foster’s book, Celebration of Discipline, lists twelve disciplines—all of them relevant to the contemporary Christian.” Foster clearly builds off the mystics—he even ups them by three disciplines. In all, Whitney quotes Foster six times and his spiritual twin, Dallas Willard, six times as well. As already mentioned, none of the quotes is wrong in itself. Yet it is disconcerting to say the least that not one mention is given of where these men are trying to lead the church—straight to Roman Catholic mysticism. I find this troubling. If Whitney is not promoting Foster’s mysticism why does he not distance himself? Instead Foster and Willard and their cronies are quoted as experts on spiritual disciplines.
Of a more positive nature I am happy to mention that when Whitney defines and describes the spiritual disciplines he gives them a biblical treatment in contrast to Foster. In my study of Foster he provides none of his twelve disciplines a biblical description, but manages to distort them by forcing them through a mystical grid (see my book This Little Church Stayed Home). By contrast most of Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life is simply good old fashioned teaching on the time-honored and biblical means of spiritual growth. Whitney offers fine chapters on the study of Scripture, prayer, worship, evangelism, serving and more. With the exception of the chapter on fasting, in which I do not believe Whitney proves his case biblically, each chapter is full of sound advice.
I do take exception with what I call Whitney’s “soft mysticism.” He writes often of “hearing the voice of God” and the like (pp. 44, 179, 184, 186, 193, 194, 195, 236, 237). By this the author means the inner voice, the prompting, and the inner “still, small voice of God.” I find no example or instruction in the Word concerning such inner voices.
So I must give Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life a mixed review. There is much to commend and any Christian will profit from the vast majority of the book. But Whitney’s link with Foster and company is deeply disturbing. It is as if he leads his reader right to the threshold of the corrupting influence of classical mysticism and then pulls back—without explanation. If he agrees with Foster’s brand of mysticism I would like him to say so. But if not, I need clarification.
reviewed by Gary E. Gilley, Pastor-Teacher
This review appears in its original form here.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
As you’ll be able to see in the Apprising Ministries articles Georgia Baptist Convention (SBC) Now Promoting the Cult of Richard Foster and Christianity Today Promoting the Roman Catholic Mystic Catherine of Siena the Emerging rebellion against Sola Scriptura has fired up evangelicalism’s lust for corrupt Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM), which has right now immersed the visible church in an epidemic of what I am calling “me-no-wanna-see-i-tis.”
In this missive we take a look at the proper view of the Bible and which is acceptable to God. Sadly, fewer and fewer hold to Sola Scriptura, but His Church that He purchased with His own blood must never compromise this position in the very least!
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Sanctify them through Thy Truth: Thy Word is Truth. As Thou hast sent Me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they also might be sanctified through the Truth. (John 17:17-19, KJV)
Have You Checked The Writings Today?
As you’ll be able to see in the Apprising Ministries articles Georgia Baptist Convention (SBC) Now Promoting the Cult of Richard Foster and Christianity Today Promoting the Roman Catholic Mystic Catherine of Siena the Emerging rebellion against Sola Scriptura has fired up evangelicalism’s lust for corrupt Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM), which has right now immersed the visible church in an epidemic of what I am calling “me-no-wanna-see-i-tis.”
But in his book Reckless Faith Dr. John MacArthur hits the target dead on as he shows you why a highly subjective and feelings-oriented neo-orthodox view of Scripture is a perfect fit for the spread of this spurious CSM as well as why it’s a necessity for it to flourish:
Neo-orthodoxy is the term used to identify an existentialist variety of Christianity. Because it denies the essential objective basis of truth—the absolute truth and authority of Scripture—neo-orthodoxy must be understood as pseudo-Christianity… Neo-orthodoxy’s attitude toward Scripture is a microcosm of the entire existentialist philosophy: the Bible itself is not objectively the Word of God, but it becomes the Word of God when it speaks to me individually…
Thus while neo-orthodox theologians often sound as if they affirming traditonal beliefs,…they relegate all theology to the realm of subjective relativism… [Contemplative] Mysticism is perfectly suited for religious existentialism; indeed, it is the inevitable consequence. The mystic disdains rational understanding and seeks truth instead through the feelings, the imagination, personal visions, inner voices, private illumination, of other purely subjective means. (26,27)
The subject of this work is a collection of writings, and it appears they are indeed very special writings at that. In fact millions of copies of them are sold every year! These are writings that even today determine the way many people will live their lives each day; all-important writings that millions of people quite literally plan their lives around. I’m referring, of course, to the…TV Guide. Aw, it’s just a joke…I mean c’mon, people don’t really plan their lives around TV Guide…do they? How much better we read the Bible today?
Dr. Simon Greenleaf the brilliant 19th century Professor of Law at the prestigious School of Law at Harvard University who wrote a classic textbook on legal evidence was confronted by the powerful living Word of God. In his classes Dr. Greenleaf would consistently attack the Bible until some of his students knowledgeable about their beliefs challenged him to take his textbook and apply it to the Bible and to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Dr. Greenleaf accepted the challenge and when faced with the impressive evidence supporting the claims of the Bible he accepted Jesus as his Lord and went on to write another classic book–this one in defense of the Christian faith!
Space doesn’t allow for me to tell you of the thousands upon thousands of similar accounts where people were driven to their knees at the foot of the Cross of Jesus Christ when taking an honest unbiased look at the Biblical record. And we keep in mind that when all is said and done the Word of God doesn’t need the opinions of men to validate it but it can serve as an encouragement to know the Bible has defeated all who have challenged it. If you have never tested the Bible for yourself then I challenge you to try taking an honest prayerful look at the truth of these Holy Scriptures uniquely inspired by the one true and living LORD God Almighty.
The Christian Is Not Using Circular Reasoning
It is important at this point to keep in mind what eminent Christian scholar Dr. Walter Martin—who once taught Comparative Religions and Christian Apologetics at the Simon Greenleaf School of Law—wrote in his book Essential Christianity, which I highly recommend:
The Bible is actually a collection of 66 books, written by 40 different authors over a period of more than 5,000 years about a Spiritual Being Who lives outside time and space. So the Bible is not one book but many and written by people of different time periods. An error arises when people don’t think of the Bible this way. The testimony of the authors must be accepted as independent evidence unless it can be proved there was collusion or deception on their part, or that the manuscripts we have today are not what the authors wrote. It needs to be strongly emphasized that none of these things has ever been proved.
With this point made, let me state categorically what the historic orthodox Christian Church means when we say that only the Bible is the Word of God. In theological circles this is known as the plenary and verbal inspiration of Holy Scripture. It can be summed up as follows: The Bible was produced by men whose recording of events was supernaturally supervised by God the Holy Spirit and thus preserved from all the frailties of human error and judgment which are so common in all other religious literature, so that even though God allowed men to use their own thoughts, the Lord was guiding those thoughts so that their words in literal fact actually became His.
Orthodox Christianity holds that the Bible, comprised of the Old and New Testaments, is the sole written Word of God, further it is infallible and inerrant—without error of any kind. And as The Baptist Faith And Message correctly states:
[The Bible is] the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried. The criterion by which the Bible is to be interpreted is Jesus Christ.
This is the only view of the Bible that is acceptable to God, and fewer and fewer hold this belief, but His Church that He purchased with His own blood must never compromise this position in the very least! Now it’s true that when you preach like this many people don’t like it but someone has to come out and tell the truth whether it is popular or not. “Is not My Word like fire,” declares the Lord, “and like a hammer that breaks rocks in pieces?” (Jeremiah 23:29). It has been my experience that relatively few people who are lit on fire and hit with a hammer will find it a pleasurable experience.
There Is Such A Thing As Absolute Truth
This is the most serious absolute truth that there is: All who die apart from a saving relationship to God by His grace through faith alone in Jesus of Nazareth—our resurrected Redeemer—are doomed to the eternal, conscious torment of a literal place the Master Himself called Hell. And all who claim Christ as Savior but refuse to take up their cross and in the power of His Spirit strive to deny themselves and to be obedient to Him in all matters are no more a Christian than living in a garage would make you a car. How you live defines who you are.
Here’s how we know this is the absolute truth. In John 14:23-24 as Jesus is talking to His disciples—Christians—and He says:
“If anyone loves Me, he will obey My teaching. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. He who does not love Me will not obey My teaching. These Words are not My own; they belong to the Father Who sent Me.”
Do you truly believe this? To do so requires faith and we are going to appear “narrow” and close-minded to those who think as men think. Remember — The man without the [Holy] Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Corinthians 2:14). And many people aren’t going to like you to be living with the convictions of the Christian faith. O but don’t let that stop you; give yourselves completely to Jesus and let Him love them through you. Beloved trust me they won’t like Hell even more!
Be Prepared For Satan’s Attacks
Today the Church is under increasing pressure from without to compromise; from the fast growing world religion of Islam, which has begun mounting a furious attack on Christianity and is currently winning more and more converts on our college campuses. The Church is also facing further attacks from secular humanism, by the Kingdom of the Cults, from the very powerful homosexual lobby, and from the women’s rights movement. All of the our dead mainline denominations caved in long ago and have obliterated clear Biblical truth. In all honesty, what is there to debate on these matters — if you really believe what the Bible says?
The Church is also under attack from within as well, through the seeker sensitive centered on self teachings of Rick Warren and his Purpose Driven Church, the cancerous “Christian” mysticism of Emerging Church spokesmen like Rob Bell, and the greed is good of smilin’ Joel Osteen of the Word Faith Church—all major pillars holding up up Satan’s Ecumenical Church of Deceit. There is increasing pressure to “put away our differences,” at the expense of proper doctrine and to be more “tolerant”. We’re told not to “judge,” just focus on love and God will take care of everything else. But listen to what Jesus has to say concerning this critical subject in Matthew 7:15-16 — “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing.” The reference to sheep’s clothing means that they will look like Christians, appearing to be just like the Great Shepherd’s own sheep.
Then the Master continues — “but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will know them.” So clearly we are to judge this and in Jude 3 God the Holy Spirit exhorts us to earnestly contend for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints. Then our Lord tells us that it is a minister’s job to hold firmly to the trustworthy message — the historic, orthodox Christian faith — as it has been taught, so he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it (Titus 1:9).
Church we must never abandon proper doctrine and fall victim to the Devil’s schemes. If we lose faith in the Bible—as more and more evangelical scholars and leaders are doing right now—then our churches become nothing more than lame social clubs filling with people seeking some sort of a spiritual buzz. Now more than ever is the time to study to show thyself approved unto God. It is imperative that we who are Christians make up our minds once and for all: Either we believe in absolute truth–or we don’t. Either we believe the Bible is trustworthy—or we don’t.
Because the time has now come where we need to know for certain just what the trustworthy message should be and just what the faith that was once delivered unto the saints really is. Men and women, not only do we need to know the absolute truth of what we are to believe, we also need to know why we are to believe it! And just a word to the wise, for those of you who have decided to “sit on the fence” the hand of Almighty God is about to knock down your fence and you’d best decide now which side of the playing field you wish to land on. As Jesus says — “He who is not with Me is against Me” (Matthew 12:30). The truth happens to be that there is no middle ground and this may indeed be your only wake-up call.
You see our love for the Lord will show in our devotion to His Word and in our willingness to let God love those of His who are lost through us—our actions really do speak louder than our words. It is our mission, each one of us, as the Body of Christ to help the people in this world to understand their true position before our holy God. You need to tell them: If I really love Jesus, and if I really love you, then I’m going to tell you the absolute truth. I’m going to tell it to you as lovingly, patiently, gently, and as often as you would be willing to listen, but tell you I must.
Love Someone Enough To Tell Them The Truth
Let me close with this illustration: Suppose you were along a roadside and you saw someone you love just standing in the street as a bus roared straight toward them from the opposite direction. You call out for them to move but they don’t seem to hear you. Now you yell louder, and then louder still, as that bus draws closer—speeding straight at them—but there’s still no response. I ask you; would you just stand there and “love” them? Would you just tell yourself: Well after all it’s their problem, and then just watch them be struck down? Or would you run out into that street and push them out of the way of certain death—even if you risked “offending” them or even injuring them—all the while knowing that you might even be hurt yourself.
Christ Jesus our Lord says — Thy Word is truth. And that’s why it is so very important that we return right now to what God’s Word—the Bible—–actually says. Today we face a crisis of faith; with all the conflicting voices of tolerance and compromise shouting in our ears, how do we decide who or what to believe? The Holy Bible, God’s written revelation of Himself to man, is this world’s only reliable source of absolute truth. The time has come to hear the Voice of the Lord — flee from the coming wrath, produce fruit in keeping with repentance…and now also the ax is laid unto the root (Luke 3:7-9).
And it is also in the Bible that God warns us that people without Christ face a fate far worse than the mere illustration I used above. O how the Church of our Lord in this vapid Laodicean age needs to come to a true understanding of the fear of the Lord. For Jesus says — “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One Who can destroy both soul and body in Hell”…it is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God (Matthew 10:28; Hebrews 10:31).
He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says…(Revelation 2:7). And then obey Him – to obey is better than sacrifice (1 Samuel 15:22).
See also:
NEO-ORTHODOXY: AN EMERGENT OVERVIEW
THE EMERGING CHURCH SOWING ITS NEO-ORTHODOX CONFUSION ON SCRIPTURE
SOLA SCRIPTURA: OUR ONLY FOUNDATION
Why Evangelicals are Returning to Rome: The Abandonment of Sola Scriptura as a Formal Principle by Bob DeWaay
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Ingrid Schlueter writes, “Ray Boltz was one of the most popular contemporary singers in the gospel realm back in the 1990’s… Sadly, Ray now claims that he knew from the time he was a child that he was a homosexual.” More at Slice of Laodicea.
*Update*
One News Now is reporting:
There is shock and sadness in the Christian community over word that famed Christian music singer Ray Boltz has publicly announced he’s living a homosexual lifestyle.
“If this is the way God made me, then this is the way I’m going to live…I really feel closer to God because I no longer hate myself.” Those were the words of Ray Boltz in an interview with the Washington Blade about his decision to engage in homosexuality. Boltz, a father of four who was married for 33 years before officially divorcing his wife this year, is well-known for his widely acclaimed songs “Thank You” and “I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb”…
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Imagine asking a pastor for advice and Bible verses on dealing with a specific problem. He isn’t your pastor, but it’s someone you respect, and you ask for advice. Within a short period of time, the pastor decides that the news is so juicy, it just has to be told publicly. That’s what happened to Sarah Palin when she returned a September 6 phone call from Rick Warren and asked him for Bible verses on dealing with pressures she is facing. Rick Warren’s apparently insatiable need to hang with the movers and shakers and to puff his ego was bigger than his respect for Mrs. Palin’s privacy.
I wish this was a problem unique to Rick Warren. It isn’t. I once had lunch with several pastors and their wives, and one Bible church pastor regaled us during the meal with how he was counselor to several players on our city’s major league baseball team. He informed us cheerfully that he was providing marital counseling for one of the players—a man he named. The pastor was in total violation of state statutes regarding clergy/client confidentiality, and I later called him and told him so. Most secular professionals understand that if they blow confidentiality, they can lose their license. Unfortunately, some “pastors” have no such ethics or grasp on the seriousness of spouting off confidential information to look important. As for losing their licenses to engage in spiritual malpractice, well, that doesn’t happen. Anyone who counsels with a pastor should check that he understands this confidentiality issue before a word is spoken. Failure to do so can be catastrophic.
UPDATE: Palin’s camp has clarified that the Alaska Gov. was returning Warren’s call. According to a Palin spokeswoman, Warren called her on Saturday, September 6, and she returned his call on Monday, September 8. The Monday phone call is when the above conversation described by Warren took place. My point absolutely stands. Warren, as a pastor, had no business discussing any private conversation publicly. “Dr.” Phil did this when Britney Spears was in a psyche hospital and got slapped down by her family. There is no “need to know” factor here for the public. It was PR for Warren.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Imagine asking a pastor for advice and Bible verses on dealing with a specific problem. He isn’t your pastor, but it’s someone you respect, and you ask for advice. Within a short period of time, the pastor decides that the news is so juicy, it just has to be told publicly. That’s what happened to Sarah Palin when she returned a September 6 phone call from Rick Warren and asked him for Bible verses on dealing with pressures she is facing. Rick Warren’s apparently insatiable need to hang with the movers and shakers and to puff his ego was bigger than his respect for Mrs. Palin’s privacy.
I wish this was a problem unique to Rick Warren. It isn’t. I once had lunch with several pastors and their wives, and one Bible church pastor regaled us during the meal with how he was counselor to several players on our city’s major league baseball team. He informed us cheerfully that he was providing marital counseling for one of the players—a man he named. The pastor was in total violation of state statutes regarding clergy/client confidentiality, and I later called him and told him so. Most secular professionals understand that if they blow confidentiality, they can lose their license. Unfortunately, some “pastors” have no such ethics or grasp on the seriousness of spouting off confidential information to look important. As for losing their licenses to engage in spiritual malpractice, well, that doesn’t happen. Anyone who counsels with a pastor should check that he understands this confidentiality issue before a word is spoken. Failure to do so can be catastrophic.
UPDATE: Palin’s camp has clarified that the Alaska Gov. was returning Warren’s call. According to a Palin spokeswoman, Warren called her on Saturday, September 6, and she returned his call on Monday, September 8. The Monday phone call is when the above conversation described by Warren took place. My point absolutely stands. Warren, as a pastor, had no business discussing any private conversation publicly. “Dr.” Phil did this when Britney Spears was in a psyche hospital and got slapped down by her family. There is no “need to know” factor here for the public. It was PR for Warren.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Imagine asking a pastor for advice and Bible verses on dealing with a specific problem. He isn’t your pastor, but it’s someone you respect, and you ask for advice. Within a short period of time, the pastor decides that the news is so juicy, it just has to be told publicly. That’s what happened to Sarah Palin when she returned a September 6 phone call from Rick Warren and asked him for Bible verses on dealing with pressures she is facing. Rick Warren’s apparently insatiable need to hang with the movers and shakers and to puff his ego was bigger than his respect for Mrs. Palin’s privacy.
I wish this was a problem unique to Rick Warren. It isn’t. I once had lunch with several pastors and their wives, and one Bible church pastor regaled us during the meal with how he was counselor to several players on our city’s major league baseball team. He informed us cheerfully that he was providing marital counseling for one of the players—a man he named. The pastor was in total violation of state statutes regarding clergy/client confidentiality, and I later called him and told him so. Most secular professionals understand that if they blow confidentiality, they can lose their license. Unfortunately, some “pastors” have no such ethics or grasp on the seriousness of spouting off confidential information to look important. As for losing their licenses to engage in spiritual malpractice, well, that doesn’t happen. Anyone who counsels with a pastor should check that he understands this confidentiality issue before a word is spoken. Failure to do so can be catastrophic.
UPDATE: Palin’s camp has clarified that the Alaska Gov. was returning Warren’s call. According to a Palin spokeswoman, Warren called her on Saturday, September 6, and she returned his call on Monday, September 8. The Monday phone call is when the above conversation described by Warren took place. My point absolutely stands. Warren, as a pastor, had no business discussing any private conversation publicly. “Dr.” Phil did this when Britney Spears was in a psyche hospital and got slapped down by her family. There is no “need to know” factor here for the public. It was PR for Warren.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Ray Boltz was one of the most popular contemporary singers in the gospel realm back in the 1990’s. I had several tapes of his back then and appreciated several of his songs including the famous, Thank You, For Giving to the Lord. Sadly, Ray now claims that he knew from the time he was a child that he was a homosexual. A father of four children, he “came out” to his family in 2004 and only now made it public in an exclusive interview last week with the gay paper, the Washington Blade.
*Updated comment* What is wrong with most of contemporary gospel music and has been from the start is that it appeals to emotions almost exclusively. I notice this often on the Gaither homecoming specials. There is little theology and what there is in a lot of these songs isn’t even biblically sound. That’s how contemporary songs find a following: there is an appealing, ballad/melody, coupled with repetitive, emotionally laden words that are repeated with growing intensity until the end. The great hymns/songs that have stood the test of time confess biblical truth, or God’s attributes, and the gospel. A Christian can experience emotion singing them, but that emotion is based on the sound truths of God’s Word proclaimed in the hymn or song.
The problem with this music is that it seems to contribute to the same type of attitude towards right and wrong. I FEEL this way, therefore that must be the way God made me. Who cares what the Bible has to say about the matter? I’m tired of wrestling with this sin, so I’m going to embrace it and toss God’s Word aside. That’s the only reason I can think of for the high incidences of homosexuality and immorality among gospel singers. The article from the Blade references several of these cases. When our subjective feelings are our only guide, we’re in dangerous waters.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Ray Boltz was one of the most popular contemporary singers in the gospel realm back in the 1990’s. I had several tapes of his back then and appreciated several of his songs including the famous, Thank You, For Giving to the Lord. Sadly, Ray now claims that he knew from the time he was a child that he was a homosexual. A father of four children, he “came out” to his family in 2004 and only now made it public in an exclusive interview last week with the gay paper, the Washington Blade.
*Updated comment* What is wrong with most of contemporary gospel music and has been from the start is that it appeals to emotions almost exclusively. I notice this often on the Gaither homecoming specials. There is little theology and what there is in a lot of these songs isn’t even biblically sound. That’s how contemporary songs find a following: there is an appealing, ballad/melody, coupled with repetitive, emotionally laden words that are repeated with growing intensity until the end. The great hymns/songs that have stood the test of time confess biblical truth, or God’s attributes, and the gospel. A Christian can experience emotion singing them, but that emotion is based on the sound truths of God’s Word proclaimed in the hymn or song.
The problem with this music is that it seems to contribute to the same type of attitude towards right and wrong. I FEEL this way, therefore that must be the way God made me. Who cares what the Bible has to say about the matter? I’m tired of wrestling with this sin, so I’m going to embrace it and toss God’s Word aside. That’s the only reason I can think of for the high incidences of homosexuality and immorality among gospel singers. The article from the Blade references several of these cases. When our subjective feelings are our only guide, we’re in dangerous waters.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
Ray Boltz was one of the most popular contemporary singers in the gospel realm back in the 1990’s. I had several tapes of his back then and appreciated several of his songs including the famous, Thank You, For Giving to the Lord. Sadly, Ray now claims that he knew from the time he was a child that he was a homosexual. A father of four children, he “came out” to his family in 2004 and only now made it public in an exclusive interview last week with the gay paper, the Washington Blade.
*Updated comment* What is wrong with most of contemporary gospel music and has been from the start is that it appeals to emotions almost exclusively. I notice this often on the Gaither homecoming specials. There is little theology and what there is in a lot of these songs isn’t even biblically sound. That’s how contemporary songs find a following: there is an appealing, ballad/melody, coupled with repetitive, emotionally laden words that are repeated with growing intensity until the end. The great hymns/songs that have stood the test of time confess biblical truth, or God’s attributes, and the gospel. A Christian can experience emotion singing them, but that emotion is based on the sound truths of God’s Word proclaimed in the hymn or song.
The problem with this music is that it seems to contribute to the same type of attitude towards right and wrong. I FEEL this way, therefore that must be the way God made me. Who cares what the Bible has to say about the matter? I’m tired of wrestling with this sin, so I’m going to embrace it and toss God’s Word aside. That’s the only reason I can think of for the high incidences of homosexuality and immorality among gospel singers. The article from the Blade references several of these cases. When our subjective feelings are our only guide, we’re in dangerous waters.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
In an editorial review by contemplative and Emerging Church author Eugene Peterson at Amazon.com for The Shack by William P. Young we read:
When the imagination of a writer and the passion of a theologian cross-fertilize the result is a novel on the order of “The Shack.” This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan’s “Pilgrim’s Progress” did for his. It’s that good! –Eugene Peterson, Professor Emeritus of Spiritual Theology, Regent College, Vancouver, B.C. (Online source)
Well, at least Apprising Ministries agrees on the fertilizer part. But here’s a far more accurate assessment concerning why you should stay away from The Shack by Tim Challies. In his own review Challies points out:
I am certain that there is no other book I’ve been asked to review more times than William P. Young’s The Shack, a book that is currently well within the top-100 best-selling titles at Amazon. The book, it seems, is becoming a hit and especially so among students and among those who are part of the Emergent Church… Young did not write this book for the story. This book is all about the content and about the teaching it contains…
Eugene Peterson grasps this, saying in his glowing endorsement,… “This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan’s “Pilgrim’s Progress” did for his. It’s that good!” Could it really be that good? Is it good enough to warrant positive comparison to the English-language book that has been read more widely than any other save the Bible? Let’s turn to the book’s content and find out…
Throughout the book there is this kind of subversive strain teaching that new and fresh revelation is much more relevant and important than the kind of knowledge we gain in sermons or seminaries or Scripture. Young’s readers seem to be picking up on this. Read this brief Amazon review as an example: “Wish I could take back all the years in seminary! The years the locusts ate???? Systematic theology was never this good. Shack will be read again and again. With relish. Shared with friends, family, and strangers. I can fly! It’s a gift. ‘Discipleship’ will never be lessons again.”
Another reviewer warns that many Christians will find the book difficult to read because of their “modern” mindsets. “If one is coming from a strong, propositional and, perhaps, fundamentalist perspective to the Bible, this book certainly will be threatening.” Still another says “This book was so shocking to my ‘staid’ Christianity but it was eye opening to my own thoughts about who I think God is.” At several points I felt as if the author was encouraging the reader to doubt what they know of Christianity—to deconstruct what they know of Christian theology—and to embrace something new. But the faith Young reconstructs is simply not the faith of the Bible.
Because of the sheer volume of error and because of the importance of the doctrines reinvented by the author, I would encourage Christians, and especially young Christians, to decline this invitation to meet with God in The Shack. It is not worth reading for the story and certainly not worth reading for the theology. (Online source)
You can read Challies’ full in-depth deconstruction of The Shack here.
Recently over at Slice of Laodicea Ingrid Schlueter informed us:
Pastor Larry DeBruyn will be discussing the wildly successful novel by William Young called, The Shack on Crosstalk today. I received an email from a young reader a couple of days ago, and she sincerely wondered how the “Christ” in The Shack was a counterfeit Jesus. Many are being moved today by emotional stories, but are not looking closely, through the lens of Scripture, at who the Jesus is that writers are talking about. This program will alert Shack fans that the Jesus presented by William Young is not the Jesus of the Scriptures. (Online source)
You can download and/or listen to that program here.
My friend Berit Kjos also takes a look at The Shack in Deceived by a counterfeit “Jesus”: Te twisted “truths” of The Shack & A Course in Miracles where she points out:
The two books share a common message. I saw a stark preview of it back in 1992. Skimming through a magazine called Well-Being Journal, I noticed this New Age “insight” from the author’s “inner guide:”
“Many people believe in evil, sin, and dark forces. It is your purpose to teach the opposite which is the Truth: there is no devil, no hell, no sin, no guilt except in the creative mind of humankind.”
I heard similar deceptions at Gorbachev’s 1997 State of the World Forum. At the time, keynote speaker Marianne Williamson was touting the Kabbalah, not A Course in Miracles (ACIM). While those New Age “insights” would fit both, they are best expressed through ACIM, which Williamson is now popularizing through Oprah Winfrey’s weekly radio program.
The Shack calls for a similar denial of reality. Yet countless pastors and church leaders are delighting in its message. By ignoring (or redefining) sin and guilt, they embrace an inclusive but counterfeit “Christianity” that draws crowds but distorts the Bible. Discounting Satan as well, they weaken God’s warnings about deception. No wonder His armor for today’s spiritual war became an early victim of this spreading assault on Truth. (Online source)
And Matt Slick of CARM also discusses The Shack and interviews author William Young on his CARM Radio Show Podcast, which you can download here.
Click the post title to be taken to the source.
In an editorial review by contemplative and Emerging Church author Eugene Peterson at Amazon.com for The Shack by William P. Young we read:
When the imagination of a writer and the passion of a theologian cross-fertilize the result is a novel on the order of “The Shack.” This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan’s “Pilgrim’s Progress” did for his. It’s that good! –Eugene Peterson, Professor Emeritus of Spiritual Theology, Regent College, Vancouver, B.C. (Online source)
Well, at least Apprising Ministries agrees on the fertilizer part. But here’s a far more accurate assessment concerning why you should stay away from The Shack by Tim Challies. In his own review Challies points out:
I am certain that there is no other book I’ve been asked to review more times than William P. Young’s The Shack, a book that is currently well within the top-100 best-selling titles at Amazon. The book, it seems, is becoming a hit and especially so among students and among those who are part of the Emergent Church… Young did not write this book for the story. This book is all about the content and about the teaching it contains…
Eugene Peterson grasps this, saying in his glowing endorsement,… “This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan’s “Pilgrim’s Progress” did for his. It’s that good!” Could it really be that good? Is it good enough to warrant positive comparison to the English-language book that has been read more widely than any other save the Bible? Let’s turn to the book’s content and find out…
Throughout the book there is this kind of subversive strain teaching that new and fresh revelation is much more relevant and important than the kind of knowledge we gain in sermons or seminaries or Scripture. Young’s readers seem to be picking up on this. Read this brief Amazon review as an example: “Wish I could take back all the years in seminary! The years the locusts ate???? Systematic theology was never this good. Shack will be read again and again. With relish. Shared with friends, family, and strangers. I can fly! It’s a gift. ‘Discipleship’ will never be lessons again.”
Another reviewer warns that many Christians will find the book difficult to read because of their “modern” mindsets. “If one is coming from a strong, propositional and, perhaps, fundamentalist perspective to the Bible, this book certainly will be threatening.” Still another says “This book was so shocking to my ‘staid’ Christianity but it was eye opening to my own thoughts about who I think God is.” At several points I felt as if the author was encouraging the reader to doubt what they know of Christianity—to deconstruct what they know of Christian theology—and to embrace something new. But the faith Young reconstructs is simply not the faith of the Bible.
Because of the sheer volume of error and because of the importance of the doctrines reinvented by the author, I would encourage Christians, and especially young Christians, to decline this invitation to meet with God in The Shack. It is not worth reading for the story and certainly not worth reading for the theology. (Online source)
You can read Challies’ full in-depth deconstruction of The Shack here.
Recently over at Slice of Laodicea Ingrid Schlueter informed us:
Pastor Larry DeBruyn will be discussing the wildly successful novel by William Young called, The Shack on Crosstalk today. I received an email from a young reader a couple of days ago, and she sincerely wondered how the “Christ” in The Shack was a counterfeit Jesus. Many are being moved today by emotional stories, but are not looking closely, through the lens of Scripture, at who the Jesus is that writers are talking about. This program will alert Shack fans that the Jesus presented by William Young is not the Jesus of the Scriptures. (Online source)
You can download and/or listen to that program here.
My friend Berit Kjos also takes a look at The Shack in Deceived by a counterfeit “Jesus”: Te twisted “truths” of The Shack & A Course in Miracles where she points out:
The two books share a common message. I saw a stark preview of it back in 1992. Skimming through a magazine called Well-Being Journal, I noticed this New Age “insight” from the author’s “inner guide:”
“Many people believe in evil, sin, and dark forces. It is your purpose to teach the opposite which is the Truth: there is no devil, no hell, no sin, no guilt except in the creative mind of humankind.”
I heard similar deceptions at Gorbachev’s 1997 State of the World Forum. At the time, keynote speaker Marianne Williamson was touting the Kabbalah, not A Course in Miracles (ACIM). While those New Age “insights” would fit both, they are best expressed through ACIM, which Williamson is now popularizing through Oprah Winfrey’s weekly radio program.
The Shack calls for a similar denial of reality. Yet countless pastors and church leaders are delighting in its message. By ignoring (or redefining) sin and guilt, they embrace an inclusive but counterfeit “Christianity” that draws crowds but distorts the Bible. Discounting Satan as well, they weaken God’s warnings about deception. No wonder His armor for today’s spiritual war became an early victim of this spreading assault on Truth. (Online source)
And Matt Slick of CARM also discusses The Shack and interviews author William Young on his CARM Radio Show Podcast, which you can download here.
