"Lost" Christianities?

In the first centuries after Christ, there was no "official" New Testament. Early Christians read and fervently followed many more scriptures than we have today. … What did these other scriptures say? Do they exist today? How could such ideas ever be considered Christian? If such beliefs were once common, why do they no longer exist?

That, in a nutshell, is the catalog description for the course, "Lost Christianities: Christian Scriptures and the Battles over Authentication," taught by Bart D. Ehrman, Professor of Religious Studies at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, offered by an arm of The Teaching Company. The full description also mentions the belief of some early Christian that there were up to 12 "gods," and that Christ's death had nothing to do with salvation.

To the professor's credit, the lecture titles do describe the various "lost books of the Bible," referring to the Gnostics, the Copts, the forgeries, and so forth. The Gnostics seemed to be the ones who caused the most trouble in those days. They believed they held a "special knowledge" that was "hidden" from the rest of the world. To give them credit, they claimed to have additional writings from the apostles that included some of these additional secrets.

Consider †his: if God wanted to bring salvation to the world, He wouldn't have kept any secrets from the world.

The Gnostics' teachings continue to infiltrate our society today. The most recently publicized "lost book" was the alleged Gospel of Judas. Thankfully the buzz has died down, but people still like to think they're so important that they have special revelations. For example, some heretics "teachers" such as Kenneth Copeland tell us of things "whispered into their ears" by alleged "angels" standing with them. One recent "teacher" continues, as of this writing, to try to deceive others with his belief that he has knowledge of the day & time of the end of the world … something even Jesus claimed not to know (according to the common interpretation of Matthew 24:36)!

Salvation is simple. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved" (Acts 16:30-31). It's that simple! No extra knowledge or study is required!

It's also that difficult. In Christ's day and today people want to hold on to what they believe is "theirs." That includes "special knowledge" or "secrets" that make them somebody "important." We'd rather trust in our own understanding than God (Proverbs 3:5-6). We don't want to trust God alone. That's our pride, born into us as a part of the death Adam brought into the world, and into his descendants.

What do you hold on to that makes you feel "special" other than Christ?

Look for the Christian Label

Recently a few different articles have come my way. One was from the blog of a person who had experienced physical or emotional abuse by her "evangelical" parents. Another was an article from a friend saying that "dispensational theology" may be a "wolf in sheep's clothing." I encountered a person with an opposing point of view, taking "dispensationalism" as a badge of pride, then expounding on how bits & pieces of the King James Version (the "only true version," of course) proved it.

In this article I'm not going to expand on my issues with all of the above. I just have one thing to say:

Stop the labeling, already!

In the interest, or lack thereof, of full disclosure, I am not a Dispensationalist. I am not a Calvinist. I am not an Arminian. I am not a Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Pentecostal, Lutheran (either type), Wesleyan, a Smith-follower (neither Chuck nor Joseph), an Evangelical, a Fundamentalist, or any other label you wish to try to stick on me.

"But how can that be?" you may ask. "Don't you believe in...?" I happen to believe in several dispensational beliefs. I happen to agree with some of what Calvin said. I also happen to agree with some of what Jacobus Arminius ("the other guy") taught. John Wesley had some agreeable things to say, and I do like what Chuck Smith, Charles Stanley, Jerry Falwell, and numerous others have taught.

But I don't follow them.

Paul knew that the church at Corinth was dealing with something similar. In 1 Corinthians 1:11-3:15 (yes, I know, a long passage, but it's all important) Paul hits them head-on with that fact. The Corinthians weren't a united group of Christians. There were followers of Paul. There were Apollosians. Some even downgraded Jesus to "good teacher" status and added Him to the mix.

Paul had enough of it. He treated them like little children, because that's how they were acting. He told them to break down the walls and remember that it was Christ who gave His life for them (1 Corinthians 2:2). It's a simple message, simpler than what these people who prided themselves as great philosophers and possessors of expansive wisdom wanted to hear.

Consider †his: the grace offered on the cross is that simple!

Christianity isn't complicated. There's no good reason to make it complicated. It only causes division, which makes a world literally dying in its sin wonder what we have that they need. They don't need division. They don't need high-sounding labels! THEY NEED GOD!

Plenty of people have plenty of good things to say. Many people need what God reveals through the Bible. Nobody needs to have a theology degree to come to Him. Theology can enrich one's life, and that can be used for God's glory, but not when it divides and allows the devil to conquer our delivery of the Good News.

I refuse to be labeled by theology, politics, or anything except my name. Even then, if my name doesn't make somebody think of Christ, then I need to change that label, too.

What labels do you need to throw away today?

Personal Responsibility

Recently I talked a bit about the current trend towards having an "accountability partner." I took a rather negative view of the whole thing.

This time I want to deal with something else: responsibility.

For me, being "held accountable" and being "responsible" for an action or attitude has never been a positive thing. In my past either one was always used as a bludgeon to shame me into not being "good enough." (For somebody from New England, especially New York City, I've noticed that's considered "encouragement." To a depressed child who never really felt good about himself anyhow, though, "do better" always seemed to come out as "your best isn't good enough." But that's still another topic of another post.)

I suppose other people have taken that same outlook on the term, because today the word "responsibility" only applies to someone else, never to oneself. Each one of us is a "victim" of something that wasn't our choice. It could be childhood abuse. It could be chemical imbalances. It could be drugs, alcohol, or tobacco taken by mothers during pregnancy.

Even some Christians have an "out" in the theology of John Calvin, who supported the notion of the "elect." To simplify the whole package now referred to as Calvinism, God pre-chose certain people to come to Him, and others He did not. Those He chose were predestined to be conformed into the image of His Son. They were also called, justified, and glorified. Those who weren't chosen … well, I guess they don't get in on the offer.

The sticky part of that whole concept is that there is Biblical support for it. What I wrote up there is essentially a paraphrase of Romans 8:29-30, though I suggest you check out the surrounding text. (In fact, it dovetails into a tricky little bit of Romans 8:28, where it talks about all things working together for those who are called according to His purpose.)

So how can God be fair if He not only knows ahead of time who will and who won't turn to Him, but chooses them? Well, that's where the counterpoint to Calvinism, called Arminianism after Jacobus Arminius, comes in. Arminius stressed the aspect of free will. After all, God wouldn't be "fair" without it. Well, that didn't set well with some folks, so John Wesley took a stab at trying to unite the two concepts. Chuck Smith, founder of Calvary Chapel in Costa Mesa, CA, in his book Calvary Chapel Distinctives, admits that the Bible teaches both, and that he cannot unravel the paradox, so he teaches predestination when the text shows that, and he teaches free will when the text goes that way.

Consider †his: God holds us responsible for our choice to accept the free gift of His Son's sacrifice for our sins, even though He knows already whether we will or not.

I refuse to accept the sum total of Calvin's, Arminius', or Wesley's treatment of the whole thing. I won't accept any of those labels (which is yet another topic to come). I do know this, though: none of us will be able to use predestination as an excuse to bypass God's justice. John 3:18 says that we are all already condemned if we have not accepted the free gift of God's grace. That's predestined, if you like. Is it our choice? Let's be honest. Yes, we choose to sin. Yes, we're under a curse on a cursed planet in a cursed universe. Jesus showed that we're without excuse, because He, though not born under the curse, lived a sinless life. God promises us a way to escape any temptation (1 Corinthians 10:13), even when the temptation is caused by chemical imbalances, childhood abuse, genetics, or whatever.

We still choose to sin.

We are still responsible for that choice.

We are still responsible for the choice we make about Jesus' sacrifice in our place.

What choices are you going to make today?

Gone On The Account[ability]

Something that seems to be popular in churches today is the idea of "accountability." As far as I can tell, the idea is that people "open up" to someone they can "trust," confessing their faults either voluntarily or when asked by one's "accountability partner." The word on the street is that this helps keep you on the right track.

10 years after being first exposed to this idea, I have to say one thing: huh?

I guess one example of this was when a friend who went to the same church we did (the same one that introduced to me the concept of "accountability" being a good thing) asked me, "where are you serving now?" The idea was that I needed to be "serving God" somewhere in that church.

Hold the phone!

Consider This: we are accountable to God, first and foremost! Anybody who doesn't realize that needs to discuss some things with their "accountability partner" and/or pastor. Yes, we are to encourage one another. Too many "accountability partners," though, take a heavy-handed "tough love" approach. That's just fine IF that's what you need.

For somebody like me, it doesn't work. Usually I'm already so wrapped up in guilt over the slightest thing, I don't need somebody to come down hard on me. It would be like trying to heal a man's crippled legs by beating them so hard with a stick that you cause further injury. (Never mind that at least one false teacher in the news a couple of years ago did just that.)

In his book, 52 Lies Heard in Church Every Sunday (And Why the Truth is So Much Better), Steve McVey puts it quite nicely. He says:

The common idea of an accountability partner is a cheap counterfeit of an authentic relationship based on trust and encouragement, and it actually gets in the way of our developing that kind of relationship. We do need each other. God has built us so that we are not meant to live out our lives alone. … [T]he accountability partner movement comes across more like the secret police. It's simply Pharisaism in modern dress.

Harsh? Yep. True? Too often so. In the example I gave above, my well-meaning friend didn't know that I was one of about 8 people writing a daily devotional that got posted on our church's web site. When the devotional team first met, we agreed that only our initials would appear below our devotionals. This would allow people to know who "transcribed" what the Spirit gave us without "risking" being prideful over what was written. (That in itself may have been heavy-handed for some, but it seemed right to the group at the time.) I also did several other things outside the church, including this blog (though not as frequently as I try to do now).

In my past being "accountable" for something meant little more than you took the blame when something went wrong, and got told how you should've done it better when nothing went wrong. There was nothing positive about "accountability" or its close cousin, "responsibility." (How "responsibility" led me to a power-dive away from any hope in Christ needs to be another blog post that, honestly, I'm still discovering.) There was no trust or hope in being "held accountable" for something, only guilt and shame.

Those of us with that negative background probably aren't helped by an "accountability partner."

McVey points out something that I need to echo here. Some people, even those with a negative view of accountability, do need accountability partners! People who have a hard time overcoming an addiction, say to online pornography or offline alcohol, may need somebody to help distract them & steer them away from such things. People who don't realize that "God is watching" may think they can get away with stuff. For them, an accountability relationship might be a good thing until they are set free from that addiction. That accountability relationship, though, needs to help them overcome that addcition, though, not merely keep them out of trouble!

The "proof" text of accountability relationships tends to be Ecclesiastes 4:12 and its reference to a "cord of three strands." Context, however, shows that Solomon merely notes that a man left alone, perhaps by following vanity to the point that he has driven off his family & friends, is significantly weaker than one with family and/or friends. We do need each other.

That doesn't mean, though, we need a personal "police officer" around 24/7 to make sure we do the right thing.

This touches on an issue of personal responsibility and "getting out of punishment," but I'll leave that for another post.

Has "accountability" truly worked out for you? Has lack of "accountability" caused a failure? Do you find "accountability" to be a blessing or a curse?

Come, Let Us Experience The Spirit of Emotional High Together

Over the past few days an interesting discussion — poured across several different places — has arisen. And it's not even about Rob Bell!

It started, most likely, with a Facebook note by Anthony Weber regarding the book, God is Not One, by Stephen Protero. The note's title is "Protestantism's Scarecrow Faith?!?!?" I learned of it via a comment made by a blog brother, Scott Smith, who further addressed it in his blog, Sarcastic Xtian, in a post titled "A Mindless Faith." Both provide excellent insights and stuff to consider.

I'm going to take a slightly different approach.

Consider †his: the Holy Spirit is not an emotional high experienced in "church."

I was surprised to discover in Google's results for "gifts of the holy spirit" a mention of Isaiah 11:1-5. I was more familiar with the ones found in 1 Corinthians 12:4-11 and Romans 12:1-10. (Thanks to Robert Longham, Jr., for his page, Gifts of the Holy Spirit, which provided a quick reference as well as a balanced view of the whole thing.) Galatians 5:22-23, on the other hand, provides the fruit of the Spirit.

While I could go off on the abuses made involving the gifts & fruit, I'll leave that for another post.

This time I want to tackle the modern notion of shutting down our minds in favor of getting "pumped up" with emotions. Yes, I'm talking about preachers and other leaders who choose to lead in chaos during a worship service rather than teach the word of God!

God has much for us to learn from His Word. We are called to learn sound doctrine so we may encourage those who trust it, and rebuke or refute those teachings that go against it (Titus 1:9). That passage refers to the "trustworthy word," meaning what is now considered Scripture, as we don't have the apostles among us (apostolic succession notwithstanding). Titus was later instructed by Paul to teach that same sound doctrine (Titus 2:1).

Paul's successor in teaching, Timothy, was also instructed to hold fast to sound doctrine (1 Timothy 6:3-16, 1 Timothy 1:3-7). Later Paul warned Tim that people would give up on sound doctrine, choosing a wide variety of teachers that will affirm whatever they want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3).

Welcome to the 21st century!

We have so many "feel-good" teachers that you have no reason to feel bad. Yet so many of us do! That's because emotions aren't permanent. They run & hide at the drop of a circumstance. Emotions aren't trustworthy. Many people feel "up" when the sun is shining, and "down" when it's cloudy & "gloomy." Emotions are often merely the result of chemical changes in our body. I suffer from clinical depression, caused by the inability to create and/or use the neurotransmitter serotonin properly.

Emotions make up the majority of our remembered experiences. This is especially true of women, who are able to use both sides of their brains at once, allowing them to think and feel at the same time. Sorry, men, it makes no sense to us, because we're "brain damaged" and can't do that. Still, how much pain do we guys remember compared to learned knowledge?

God can, of course, heal our hurts, repair our remembrances, and effect emotional changes for His glory. Sometimes, though, we have to be smart … Book smart … WORD smart! We need to know what God says to us so that we can bring Him glory even when we don't feel like it, or when our past experiences "prove" that what we "feel" is "true."

Life in Christ can be a "thrill ride" at times, but that's not all it is. We need solid truth — sound doctrine — to get us through those times when we know that roller coaster of life is surely going to throw us out of our car, hurtling head-first to our destruction … precisely what our enemy, the devil, wants us to think so we won't bring God glory!

When have you "felt" God protecting you in spite of your emotions? Has the emotional high ever failed you? When has the truth you've learned from God's Word rescued you from a bad emotional experience?

Creation is Groaning … But No Worse Than Usual

Okay, time to dive in to the Japan earthquake whirlpool of commentary swirling about the Internet.

I've read several blog posts, and probably passed by several more, that note the recent earthquakes in Haiti and Japan are a sign of the end-times. While I really cannot disagree with them, I do need to provide a fact-check on events.

According to the US Geological Survey's web site, the number of severe quakes has remained constant over the past several decades. A related article by AccuWeather provides further explanation. The number of reports has increased dramatically. What do you expect when the network of seismic detection stations has grown from around 350 in the 1970's to over 8,000 today, each station using equipment that will detect tremors that people won't even feel? What do you expect when we can see, hear, and experience an earthquake immediately via a cell-phone video transmitted over the Internet?

What we're seeing is the technology to go into the whole world and preach the Gospel (Matthew 28:19) in action!

Consider This: each day brings us closer to Christ's return, no matter when that will be. And, remember, not even Jesus knew the day or hour of that event (Matthew 24:36, Mark 13:32)! It could be very soon, as many people believe, or it could be beyond our lifetimes.

Consider This: each day brings us closer to our final destination. No matter what your end-times ideas are, today could be your last day on Earth. The day of the earthquake was the last day for many in Japan. The day of another earthquake was the last day for many in Haiti. The day when a dear 25-year-old friend died of cancer was his last day … his "end-time."

I won't argue at all the need to be ready, and to get people ready to meet our Lord on His terms, not our own. But let's keep the facts true, shall we?

How would you have responded, before Christ, to someone telling you the "end of the world" is near?

Faith: Practical, powerful, rooted in sonship, and NOT in emotionalism « Project: Mathetes

For those who follow this blog (thanks to both of you :) ), you may have noticed I've changed the "tag line" or description of this blog. I've been inspired by other blogs to copy their style expand my horizons a bit in this blog. While I started out thinking this would be something more of a "Bible study" blog, I've come to realize that pulling together concepts from personal experience, supported by the Bible, might make my writing more relatable to others. I'm not saying that personal experience trumps the Bible … God forbid, as the King James says! On the other hand, describing how God whacks me on the head touches me through the Scripture is probably less dry and more easily understood by others.

Besides, I feel it's where God's leading me, so there. :)

Having said all that, I've started encountering tons of other Christ-centered blogs, as well as a few "flakes" out there. I don't like following the "flakes," so I'll probably leave them alone. There's one blog post, though, that expresses an idea perfectly! This article's title is a link to it, or you can use the one below:

Faith: Practical, powerful, rooted in sonship, and NOT in emotionalism « Project: Mathetes (Note: as of August, 2011, the blog has been shut down over concerns for the safety of the author & his family. See my post on Cyber-Persecution for details. I'll have to see if I saved a copy of the article and summarize it here or get permission to make it available.)

I first encountered the "Word of Faith" movement through someone I met online, on a pre-Internet system known as American People/Link. Okay, the Internet was sort-of kind-of in existence, but not to the home. These were the days of online services such as CompuServe and America Online. (For more about this period, see the Wikipedia Internet article's History section.) PLink (as it was commonly called) was one of the early "chat room" systems that added forums and other content later. One fellow from Georgia found me on there and on CompuServe. He read quite a bit by authors such as Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, and Charles Capps. He "graciously" sent me a sampling of their books, including Capps' The Tongue: A Creative Force.

The bottom line of the whole "speaking = creating" heresy is that God "used His Faith" when He "spoke the universe into existence." Since we are "made in the image of God," we, too, can use the Force Faith to speak things, events, and situations into existence. Don't "speak negative," though, or that will come into existence as well!

This allows us puny humans to be like God, or like "little gods."

Sound familiar? I seem to recall an angel in Heaven who was cast down, along with a third of the angelic host, for wanting to supplant God. This ex-angel, now known as "the devil," Satan, the serpent in the garden, and a wide array of other names & terms, still wants to throw God off His throne and seat himself in it.

Is that what he wants to do with us? No way! He is a liar, and the father of lies (John 8:43-44). His purpose is to steal, kill, and destroy (John 10:7-13). He wants to obliterate everything that is special to God — especially you & me! You can't sell your soul to him, because he hates it. His purpose is like that of the man who searches for the finest example of art made by his enemy, only to burn it out of existence forever. He doesn't want you to prosper by the world's standards or by God's standard. He will, however, "fake it" until you're deceived to the point where it's too late to see the truth.

This is precisely what the heretics from "Copeland-Hagin" are doing to hundreds of thousands of people worldwide! They and so many other false teachers are deceiving people into the devil's hands, and away from God's truth. Some of them may very well be deceived themselves, perhaps by the "angel" that Copeland claims he hears. (Remember that third of the angels that fell with Satan? Yeah, we tend to call them "demons" now, but that doesn't make them any less angelic.)

True faith is vibrant and connects us with God. The false power of the "Word of Faith" disconnects us from the One Who loves us.