Theology – Page 4 – LOVE | ACCEPT

MacArthur on Baptism in the Holy Spirit

John MacArthur examines the Charismatic sects of the Church in his book Charismatic Chaos. His well reasoned critique is an indictment of a a faith based upon experience when that experience supersedes the Bible. As I have examined in a series of posts on this topic, at the core of Charismatic belief is the Doctrine of Subsequence (Fee), the second event that follows salvation in which the Holy Spirit is received. This doctrine is constructed around the event recorded in Acts 2:4: (1-4 included for context)

When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

The Charismatic believes that this post-salvation experience of baptism in the Holy Spirit is a mark of spiritual maturity. When the Christian is lacking this experience, they are immature, carnal, disobedient, or otherwise incomplete. The danger in this approach, MacArthur says, is that it opens the door to the expectation of continued experience. He denies the validity of Subsequence, primarily because of its reliance on a very narrow interpretation of Scripture that does not consider passages that refute the position.

MacArthur begins by saying that doctrine constructed around the experiences in the book of Acts should at least be consistent throughout that single book. Subsequence as seen in chapter two should be witnessed in each recorded instance of baptism but this does not appear to be the case. In Acts 2 and 8, there appears to be subsequence. In chapters 10 and 19 however, the filling of the Holy Spirit accompanies salvation immediately. A secondary component of the Subsequence doctrine is that the Christian is to be earnestly seeking this second baptism. The scriptures in Acts do not support this expectation. In chapter two, the believers were simply waiting for their next move and in chapters 8, 10, and 19, no one is looking for the baptism. On this brief examination alone, MacArthur points out that the book most closely associated with the idea of subsequence does not provide the consistent pattern necessary to build a Christian doctrine.

It’s important to note that MacArthur is not denying the singular experiences of Acts and other books of scripture. The theological construct that applies to proper exegesis of these events is to view them in light of the transitional nature of the period. There was an overlap in the periods between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant and (MacArthur says) “Although the disciples knew and trusted Christ, there were still Old Testament believers. They could not have understood or experienced the Spirit’s permanent indwelling until the arrival of the Spirit at Pentecost.” (pg 177) In other words, markers defining transition served a specific, one time need in the establishment of the faith. MacArthur points out that this one time event is not meant to be translated as normative for all Christians.

Hell, Literally

Hell is portrayed clearly in the scripture as the punitive, eternal punishment of the unredeemed. It is not described geographically as the subterranean caverns of flame and horror somewhere beneath our feet. Instead, it is understood as a state of being as the wicked stand separated from God into eternity. The inspired authors of the references to Hell were less concerned with painting horrific visions of the nature of Hell and more motivated to spell out the seriousness of the coming judgment. The literal view of Hell has fallen from favor with modern Christians who often attribute it to the fevered dreams of the early fathers, saying that it is unseemly for the educated Church to further such a doctrine.

Three words are used for Hell in the Old and New testaments. In the Hebrew of the OT, the reader encounters the word sheol (שׁאול). The term appears 65 times with a variety of translations being made in the modern Bible (KJV): 31 times it is translated as ‘grave’, 31 times it is ‘hell’, and as ‘pit’ three times. It is important to note in the case of translations, this usage is not universal. The NIV does not apply the specific label Hell in the OT, unlike the KJV. Sheol is the destination of the dead and in many cases it carries the connotation of nothing more than the place of interment (cf: Ps 49:14, Num 16:33). The instances where sheol is translated more directly as hell do not present a consistent theological position. Some see a clear teaching of a place of judgment while others do not see the ultimate state as one of punishment. In order to decide contextually which translation is appropriate, the reader must evaluate the whole of OT scripture and theology. An understanding of final states emerges which can direct the exploration as the instances of sheol appear. There is a belief in life after death. For the righteous it will be blessed and for the wicked it will be punitive. Details on the nature of the punishment, destruction, etc. are obscure and the reader is cautioned against reading interpretations into the text that do not exist.

The Greek of the NT uses three different words for Hell. Hades appears 9 times, Gehenna is used 8 times, and Tartaros is used once. Hades is the Hellenistic translation of sheol while Gehenna is the more literal word for Hell. In the New Testament, the scriptures add considerably to the Christian doctrine of life after death and the doctrine’s concept of everlasting punishment. Jesus contributes significantly to the understanding of the punitive nature of Hell and the eternal length of one’s stay. The theological ideas are not always expressly stated but when read as a whole, the statements regarding Hell (Mt 5:22, Mt 5:29, Mt 18:9, Mk 9:43, Lk 12:5, etc.) carry the implication that the punishment of Hell will have a duration and that duration will be endless. Various word pictures portray an eternity of fire (cf Mt 13:18-23) and crushing sadness (Mt 22:13). The idea of degrees of punishment is also found in the words of the Lord. The severity of one’s punishment is dependent on their understanding of will of God.

Taken literally, the scriptures teach a doctrine of everlasting punishment though the details of that punishment are few. Like many theological concepts, it is not without challengers, especially in the modern Church where tolerance has become more important and the idea of everlasting punishment in flame and horror an embarrassment that the Evangelical church would prefer not to deal with. One point of difference has to do with duration and whether or not there is a chronological limit to the punishment. The Greek word aionios is often challenged but in every case, the word refers to eternity. (Many people challenge its use with regard to punishment but the same word, when associated with heaven or blessing, is found to mean eternity. Poor hermeneutics.) Another popular challenge to the notion of eternal punishment comes in the form of harmonizing this punishment with the love and grace of God. Many who would like to soften the doctrine say that the concept of unending horror is anathema to God’s love, that He would not wish this retributive eternity on His creation. This theological desire does not align with the exegetical evidence presented in the Scriptures.

Conclusion

If the Scriptures are faithfully interpreted with sound exegetic principles as a guide, the literal picture of eternal blessing for the redeemed and eternal punishment for the wicked is clear. A portrait of an eternal duration for this punishment is also recorded; there is no promise of end to the horror. The nature of Hell is less clear and many through the centuries have been guilty of fabricating more and more horrific visions of the eternal fire that are not directly recorded in Scripture. If the picture of Hell is derived strictly from the words of the Bible, it can be said to be partly mental, partly physical, and partly emotional. Hell may be an unpopular doctrine but the Scriptures clearly support the concept.

Image tdbub303

Theology of Creativity : Motivation

All activity, creative or otherwise, begins with motivation. There is nothing that spontaneously occurs without a motive energy behind it and the creativity within you is no different. When you sing, write, paint, shape, photograph, or devise a new idea, each action began with the firing of energy placed by God as a part of the image dei within you. While the spark will fire and ignite the motivation, the response is ours to make.

God created but what was His motivation? He was not in need of anything. He did not require the acclaim that would come from such a magnificent achievement. What God did desire was an expression of His love. Love is the foundation of creation and its initial perfection. Love sees it fullest expression in the fellowship that the Creator now has with his creation.

When we utilize the creative spark imbued in each of us, it is also an expression of love. We bring the divine image out for others to see when we bring our gifts to life in creative practice. Your motivation is not glory or acclaim but the audience of one for whom your creation is the most precious thing. Some people will say that they are not motivated to create, that they lack the spark. With the divine image within, we have to ask ourselves not why we don’t have the spark but rather, what we are allowing to smother it.

Photo by Akbar Simonse

Women in Ministry: An Introduction

Should women be excluded from ministries in the Church in which they would exercise authority over men? This question has been placed before countless leaders over the centuries as called and spiritually gifted women have come into their orbit seeking to fill a pulpit or ascend to another leadership role and exercise their God given gifts. In some instances, the recognition of the gifts and their Giver override the traditional prohibition and great ministries are born. In others, tradition and theology are understood to uphold the ban and the woman is denied the opportunity. While this is not generally counted among the theological essentials of the Christian faith, in an age of modern feminism it is an important topic to discuss and analyze in the hopes of settling your thinking one way or the other. In the same way that Peter extols us to be prepared to give the reason for the hope that we possess (1 Pet 3:15), when we should understand and be able to explain our theological tenets and the choices that we make based on them.

Allowing for a broad spectrum of intermediate points between them, the discussion of gender equality in Church authority is carried by two positions: the egalitarian and the complementarian. The complementarian position holds that ministry roles are differentiated by gender and that, according to the Bible, women are prohibited from holding roles in which they would teach or exercise authority over men. This is also known as the Traditionalist position. The egalitarian position believes in gender equality in church roles and points to the spiritual gifting of women as evidence of a theological shift. The question that we want to address is whether or not this difference can be biblically reconciled in favor of one position over another. We recognize that like so many theological standards (e.g. Calvinism and Arminianism) with equally valid evidence on both sides, we may need to accept that outside of divine inspiration we may need to accept that it cannot. An irenic spirit is an absolute necessity.

To adequately explore this topic requires that we examine a number of exegetical and theological issues that arise in the course of our study. None on their own make a solid case for one position or the other. In fact, many involved in the discussion find that the evidence supports both sides and that it is tradition that causes them to fall to one side. Given the variables and sometime controversy surrounding the issue, prayer and the guiding of the Spirit are the key elements in our movement forward.

The Cost of Compromise

The Wall Street Journal reports that twenty five percent of Protestants and better that fifty percent of Catholics voted for president-elect Barack Obama. They cast their vote despite his clear anti-life record and the agenda of abortion support and economic enslavement that his party has vowed to support. If you identify yourself among these numbers you have compromised your principles, the Church, and your God.

Can someone explain this?

How does one who lays claim as an heir or heiress to Christ support and put in a place of authority leaders who have promised to forward a culture of death at all costs? Does the sanctity of life, every life, that is a reflection of the imago dei in even the unborn child mean nothing? Holiness in a follower of Christ does not compromise holiness in their actions.

I read Christians who claim that it is Obama and his coalition’s support for the poor that made their compromise valid. They say that government will now do more for the least of these. Sadly, this is not the gospel of Jesus. The fruit by which the orphans and widows are cared for comes from individual disciples transformed by the Holy Spirit into the likeness of Christ . This spiritual fruit is not provided by government. It comes from the capital C Church, the community of saints who together, in their transformed state, seek out the least of these and serve them through the desire of their heart, not a mandate of human authority. Government imposed solutions are nothing more than an abdication of the responsibility given by our Lord. We compromise and we fail.

For those who will respond by saying that God places all of our leaders in their positions of authority, I would ask that they read their bible again. Read particularly in Judges. Not all leaders are in place for the good. Sometimes, leaders and their failure before God cause us to repent and return to Him in our brokenness, despondent and terrorized by the decisions that we have made.

Pray.

Blue Parakeet 3

Scot McKnight establishes a key idea in The Blue Parakeet mid way through chapter four. He posits that the Bible that God gives us to read is presented as the unfolding story of His ways with His people. When we approach the text as something else, we lose the power of reading the book as a story. In doing so, we lessen its impact on our lives and may even ‘discover’ interpretations that differ from the original intention of the authors or The Author.

Context is everything in reading the Bible as we’ve seen countless times. Context can be viewed as the concentric rings of a pebble in a pond; there is an immediate ring or context, and then one a little further out, and so on. Each of the verses exists in a context of a passage and that exists in a book and so on until we can see that each of the smallest contextual markers contributes to the whole of God’s story. Rather than standing on their own trying to carry the full weight of biblical revelation, the stories contribute to The Story. McKnight gives us a valuable example in asking us to consider our perspective on paying interest on a loan. Many of us have home mortgages or car loans on which we have agreed to pay a certain percentage of interest. We do this as Christians despite the clear biblical prohibition against it in Leviticus 25:35-38. Why? How do we justify dismissing this (and many other) passage when we claim the whole Bible as the Word of God? We do so saying “that was then, this is now” pointing out culturally how our time in God’s story is different from that of the Israelites. We stand correctly in this assertion because we read the Bible as a story with many different eras and cultures represented for the purposes of God’s expression of His relationship with His creation.

The question that we must address is what determines “what was for then?” If we read for promises and blessings or morsels of law we lose sight of the story and we are tempted to say that ‘this was for then’ and ‘it is also for now’ to everything, despite the obvious cultural differences. Tempering this is the easily remembered device: God spoke to Moses in Moses ways in Moses days, to Amos in Amos’ days in Amos’ ways and to us in our days in our ways. If we are able to read the Bible as story and we understand the thread that runs throughout, we see that same thread running through our own lives in our own modern ways. Each author reworked the bigger story for his audience and we should read what God has left for us in our own context.

I struggle a bit with this chapter. Is it for everyone to decide what ‘was for then’ on their own? Is it only in the context of reading as a community that we can discover that? I’m interested to hear your views on this and on the book as a whole.

Psalms 9 & 10 – The Lord is Known by His Justice

This pair of psalms form a carefully constructed prayer of praise for both the glory of the Lord and David’s trust in the righteous justice by which the universe is ruled. He begins with anticipatory praise, lifting Yahweh high as he looks forward to what will be visited on his enemies:

I will praise you, O Lord, with all my heart; I will tell of all your wonders.

I will be glad and rejoice in you; I will sing praise to your name, O Most High.

My enemies turn back; they stumble and perish before you. For you have upheld my right and my cause; you have sat on your throne, judging righteously. (vv 9:1 – 4)

The combined message of nine and ten is threefold; humility, limitation, and responsibility. From a human standpoint, not three of our favorite topics. To realize our humility is to recognize how little is truly under our control. No matter how high our position, when we set our own throne before that of the King we are yet again aware of how insignificant it is. When our humility fails us, we rebel against this King thinking ourselves higher than the Host. The warning is clear:

The nations have fallen into the pit they have dug; their feet are caught in the net they have hidden. The Lord is known by his justice; the wicked are ensnared by the work of their hands. (vv 9:15- 16)

If our perspective remains on the earthly plain, we can easily convince ourselves of how powerful we are. The humility engendered by an encounter with the Almighty leads us clearly to realize our limitations. David sees clearly that the authority granted him by the Lord can be used in terribly destructive ways:

In his arrogance the wicked man hunts down the weak, who are caught in the schemes he devises. He boasts of the cravings of his heart; he blesses the greedy and reviles the Lord. (vv 10:2-3)

Does the evil man filled with hubris get away with this arrogant behavior? Perhaps, for a time, but as we soak in the words of both of the psalms we return to the glorification that filled the first few verses. We trust and know, based on the ultimate goodness of our God, that righteousness will prevail.

Finally, the rapaciousness of the ‘enemies’ that lurk in the second of the two psalms is in direct contrast to the responsibility for creation that was assigned to the men and women who are to populate it. It is provided for our use but not to be plundered without concern. To do so is as much rebellion as denying the Creator His place and authority. Circling back to humility forces us to answer; are we enemies to any degree?

Blue Parakeet 1

This is the first post in a series that will engage the ideas in Scot McKnight’s new book The Blue Parakeet. As I said in my earlier review, this is an excellent piece of work destined to make a lasting contribution to the Church and is particularly useful to the seminarian immersed in the technical aspects of Bible study. Scot’s perspective is refreshingly non-academic or pedantic in the least. He writes as a fellow journeyman confronting with us what it means to read the 1st century Bible in a 21st century context. Is Christianity fossilized in that time which we must forcefully apply to modern life or is the Bible a guide to understanding how the Spirit moves today?

In the first two chapters of the book, Scot outlines the observations that led him to construct his tools for discernment. The Christian bromide ‘if the Bible says it, we do it’ is the foundation on which he begins to build his method. This, if we stop to consider it for even a moment, is nonsense. We pick and choose among the biblical mandates those that we will apply today and those we will ignore. The Sabbath, foot washing, surrender of possessions, charismatic gifts; all are dispensed with in various ways and with a variety of justifications as not applicable to today’s church. At the same time, we hold other mandates to be fixed in time and to be obeyed regardless of the times, women in ministry leadership a prime example. Scot asks how we develop the discernment to tell which is which.

McKnight outlines the three general ways in which we approach the Bible and the attitudes and actions that result from each. We may read to retrieve, meaning that we return to the times of the Bible to retrieve the ideas and practices for today. The challenge with this common approach is that we cannot live a first century life in the twenty-first century. The truth is, we shouldn’t want to do this as it ignores the work that the Spirit is moving to accomplish in our modern age. If we read carefully we find that God spoke in Moses’ days in Moses’ ways, to Paul in his days in his ways, and we should expect this pattern to continue; God will speak to us in our days in our ways. Our reading of the Bible should help us to see how God wants to move in our current time.

Reading the Bible through tradition is an important component in developing this discernment. One of the most important changes that the Reformation wrought was to put the scriptures into the hands of the believer. Everyone should read the Bible for themselves but they shouldn’t necessarily interpret it for themselves. Christians have a rich history and long held beliefs that can serve as the guard rails to our interpretation. We should respect long held beliefs, trusting that the Spirit guided those who came before us in forming those beliefs. Moving on this track helps us to roughly figure the edges of our belief while allowing the Spirit sufficient freedom to breath new insight into our faith for today.

Finally, we read with tradition, recognizing that God is forever on the move toward His conclusion. We were never meant to be stationary as history flowed around us like a stone in a creek. We were meant to be a part of it, serving out our individual purpose in the story. We should be able to read the Bible without getting stuck there. God did not freeze time in the periods of the Bible anymore than most cultures have stood still. He provided the scriptures so that we would have a guide to understanding how He wants to move today addressing the issues that we face.

McKnight challenges us to think about the way we approach the scriptures. We can try to cage it, taming the Spirit. In doing so we lose its edge, dulling the double edged sword that transforms us and the world around us. Bringing modern eyes to the Bible is not a crime, any more than it was for Paul to understand the whole of his scriptures in light of the modern revelation that he confronted. We’re not Paul but we do have to understand the way that God speaks to us in our days. I hope you’ll follow along as we read through the rest of the The Blue Parakeet, attempting to put the tools to work to hear the Spirit move today. I look forward to hearing what you think.

The Shock of Gideon’s Turn

Reading the Gideon cycle in Judges we find ourselves at an unexpected turn after his victory in war. Rather than the hero we are led to expect who transcends his fearfulness and forges forward in trust, we find instead a normal person.

Maybe, a person more like ourselves than we are willing to admit.

What catches us off guard is how quickly Gideon forgets his Yahweh ordained purpose. God did not call on him to destroy parts of Pineil or administer the whipping that the men of Succoth endured; he performed both of these actions out of his own desire for revenge. The Israelites will respond in much the same way as we turn the page. Rather than turning to the Lord in their desire for leadership, they cry out for Gideon to lead them as their ruler. Is there hope for Gideon?

We can benefit today by meditating on the words of a later leader.

Psalm 3

O Lord, how many are my foes!

How many rise up against me!

Many are saying of me,

“God will not deliver him.” Selah

But you are a shield around me, O Lord;

you bestow glory on me and lift up my head.

To the Lord I cry aloud,

and he answers me from his holy hill. Selah

I lie down and sleep;

I wake again, because the Lord sustains me.

I will not fear the tens of thousands

drawn up against me on every side.

Arise, O Lord!

Deliver me, O my God!

Strike all my enemies on the jaw;

break the teeth of the wicked.

From the Lord comes deliverance.

May your blessing be on your people.

Gideon Pursues the Enemy III

After Gideon and his army had routed the entire army of the Midianites and began marching their kings Zebah and Zalmunna back toward the Jordan, he must have been wondering why his Israelite brothers had refused to support him. Angrily he must have decided that they remained turned against Yahweh, unwilling to trust the mission that he had been given. Given the distance of time, do we see the irony in Gideon’s rage against them. They were bypassed by the Midian army but would suffer humiliation and destruction at the hands of God’s judge.

Perhaps the irony is masked by the change we see in Gideon himself. Starting out as hesitant and fearful, he slowly obeys God’s commands and embarks on the restorative mission. Obedience marks this Judges’ cycle until ego and the need for revenge transforms the man. Does he feel that God’s mission gives him permission to act independently to punish Piniel and Succoth? He crosses ‘over the line’ in crossing over the Jordan. Are we at similar risk?

Christian leaders are all tempted by ego and the human desire to get ‘even.’ It’s easy to even momentarily forget that we serve at the pleasure of God and it is His glory alone that should be the result of our service. Obstacles may come, we may have to face struggles that prick our every nerve ending and exhaust the limits of our patience, we may even find ourselves sidelined for a season when we feel as though we should be in the middle of the action but we must maintain our trust in God and the purpose he calls us to.