discernment – Page 30

If:Gathering: more information, including video claiming direct revelation

Posted on February 6, 2017January 25, 2023 by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Three years ago I had an inquiry from a sister in the faith about the women of She Reads Truth and the IF:Gathering. In looking at these two organizations, which feature overlap of the ladies who participate in them, I discovered they adhere to a too-forward lifestyle, and teach an aberrant theology that’s unhealthy for women. A series resulted.

Three years later, the IF:Gathering and its women have only embedded themselves deeper into the faith and are tainting even more women with their brand of liberal theology, shaky hermeneutics, usurping lifestyles, and their idol of social justice.

Last week I received two additional, separate inquiries from women who sent me material showing why they were concerned over the IF:Gathering women. I decided to post about this para-church/social justice/liberal organization once again. I am adding new information.

or below-

The title “IF:Gathering” comes from their motto, “If God is real, then what?” The purpose statement on their IRS forms is to equip women by having them share their feelings about Bible passages posted online. I’m not joking. Here’s their IRS tax form statement of purpose: (click to enlarge)

Did you notice the ‘like-hearted‘ community? The faith is not about feelings, but about what we know about Jesus. Like-minded.

In any case, these women teach other women, usually younger, based on a foundational question that doubts God’s existence. Their entire activity is one of simply hedging bets.

The ‘gathering’ part is actually brilliant. They purport to disciple women in gatherings at homes and other locales, sometimes churches. They know where to gather through social media, which is employed in a major way. That’s why their embeddedness and vigorous activity is hidden from view and thus their danger is not readily seen. There aren’t posters, advertisements, billboards, pamphlets. etc. There’s texts, social media whispers, person-to-person promotion, all of it done in a way that is more subterranean than any other generation’s activity.

IF:Gatherings are ongoing in living rooms and lawns by the thousands. There are A LOT OF GATHERINGS. Look. This map is three years old and their gatherings are only increasing in number:

The idea to disciple women is a good one. However, that is an activity that the church is responsible for. These gatherings take place outside of the auspices of the local church and its pastoral authority.

The gatherings were born from the mind of a young woman named Jennie Allen. At the first Gathering, she revealed that she had heard God whisper to her, and after a few years decided to step out from her church to enact this so-called God-whispered “vision to gather, equip, and unleash women to live out God’s calling on their lives.” She further wrote that she-

“together with a team of friends, formally established IF:Gathering. … Some of the first friends to believe in her vision put aside their own individual ministries to leverage their collective influence for the glory of God and the good of His Church.” (Source, source).

So they abandoned their local ministries to go online for the good of the global church? Exactly wrong. Here is Jennie Allen claiming direct revelation from God as the catalyst for IF.

Video is here, 2 min

They abandoned their ongoing locally accountable ministries, to follow a young woman who’d heard a whisper, in order to establish Bible studies about a God they doubted existed, in order to equip women to discuss feelings about the Bible, enact social justice, reconcile the world, heal the nations, and disciple a generation. Hmmm. I’m not being satirical. All the previous verbiage is from their own statements.

I live in a rural county in Georgia with a population of about 27,000 people spread through five towns in an area of over 286 square miles. My town itself is small, about 1,113 people, and it’s the largest town in the county. And this month there are not one, but two IF gatherings in my town. IF is everywhere, pastors, leaders, and ladies!

From the IF pastor’s packet: (speaking of the years 2013-2015)

In the first two years, our gatherings have reached more than a million women in 50 countries worldwide.

Rather than re-hash the information I’d first published three years ago, I’ll simply offer some new information. First I’ll list some bullet points of concern. Then I’ll post lists of speakers who are involved with IF. Lots of links throughout.

Basic concerns with IF:Gathering:

Founded on Direct Revelation: Founder Jennie Allen said she heard a whisper from God telling her to start a discipleship group. (source, also see above). Direct revelation is hazardous to one’s soul. If you test a direct, audible command from God against the Bible and it’s there, you do not need the audible command. If it is not there, it’s a lie and you don’t need it anyway.

Doubting God: The premise itself is based on study of a God those gathered doubt exist. IF God is real? Doubt is not noble. The Bible says doubt is a destroyer of life. (James 1:5-8).

Lack of male oversight and involvement: Jennie’s husband Zac says he provides theological oversight, but he is listed as working only 10 hours per week at the 501(c) 3 non-profit, and the only other males on the Governing Board are Larry Cotton, who is listed as working 1/hour week and Treasurer Jonathan Harper, who is also listed as a 1-hour a week. The 40-hour/weeks are put in by Jennie and Lindsey. It’s Jennie’s baby, she is listed as Principal Officer on the tax forms. It’s led by Lindsey Nobles who’s listed as CEO. In fact it operates as a para-church organization with little local accountability and pastoral oversight.

The IF:Gathering’s premise is flawed and so are its goals. Again, from their IRS form, it states that their goals are to foment a ‘global movement’ that ‘promotes healing around the world’. Is that what the Bible says women are to do? Unleash movements? These women are mothers. With children at home. The Bible tells us what we are to do: raise the kids, support the husband. Did even Jesus come to promote healing around the world? And just what IS “healing”, anyway? More on that just below.

Goals are postmodern and extra-biblical: As Tim Challies said, the words reconciliation and healing have a different meaning to the postmodernist liberal than they do to the Christian fundamentalist:

“…perverts the Biblical meaning of “reconciliation.” The Bible does not use this word arbitrarily, but speaks of the reconciliation of man to God and how this can be accomplished. It speaks of redemption! Salvation! Our ministry of reconciliation is not relational healing of myself to my neighbor (right and good as that may be), but the far more important relational healing of a sinful man to a holy God.

The ‘reconciliation’ the IF-ladies mean is the latter, promoting relational healing. Hence their emphasis on feelings and their activity of social justice.

Very good critique from Lighthouse Trails on IF:Gathering. Please read.

Emergent IF: Gathering Conference Coming to a Town Near You (Coming For Your Daughters and Granddaughters)!

Who is involved with IF?

Ann Voskamp. Does she even know how to use the English language anymore? Below is a recent tweet. I thought teachers were supposed to be ‘able to teach’. (2 Timothy 2:24). Being able to teach presumes a facility with the language so as to communicate truths in a way that will edify the hearer. Voskamp’s gone beyond #babble all the way to to #Babel.

The remaining list of IF speakers and participants was sent to me by a concerned sister, which I appreciate. I am familiar with many of the women, and I’m unfamiliar with several. I’ve used the links sent to me and also added links and statements from their own bios where applicable. As always, do your diligence and research yourself.

Jenny Yang (self-described “visionary who works on behalf of refugees as the Vice President of Advocacy & Policy at World Relief.” AKA social justice).

Ann Voskamp (concern, concern, concern, concern)

Lysa Terkeurst (concern, concern, concern, concern)

Jeanne Stevens: self-described teacher who urges women to “take any opportunity to encourage people to live boldly from the fullest part of themselves”. Rather than die to self and live in the strength of the Spirit? Jeanne is also a Female Pastor -Co-Pastor of Soul City Church with her husband.

Jennie Allen (concern, concern, concern, concern)

B. David Smith: (“B. David loves helping people cultivate their artistic potential and use their gifts, voice, and lifestyle to create God encounters”. What does that even mean?)

Tann Smith (Singer at Andy Stanley’s North Point Church. Need I say more.)

Angie Smith (“Her greatest passion is to make the Bible feel accessible and relevant”. Again with feeling the Bible and not studying/knowing/believing)

Roce Anog (“helps people who don’t speak the majority language to express their worship to God with the use of music, art, dance, storytelling, and food”. So she helps people learn about God through dancing and food? Nope. 1 Corinthians 8 has something to say about that.)

Amena Brown (poetess, which is cool. vision-caster, not cool. Friend to Louie Giglio and Passion conference. Uncool.)

Jo Saxton (Female Pastor. A director of yet another ‘movement’ whose goal is “to CHANGE the world by putting DISCIPLESHIP and MISSION back into the hands of everyday people.” Emphasis theirs. I guess ordinary people haven’t been living and dying for the Gospel these last 2000 years.

Keisha Polonio (helps leaders of Tampa’s microchurches)

Bianca Olthoff (author, Bible teacher)

Christy Nockels (singer)

Shelley Giglio (wife of Louie Giglio)

Esther Havens (photographer)

Lindsey Nobles (CEO & strategist of IF:Gathering)

Shauna Niequist: (Congratulated Jen Hatmaker for affirming homosexuality, other concerns)

Ellie Holcomb (singer)

Andrews Lage (singer)

Latasha Morrison (“justice fighter, a bridge builder and a champion of people. Through the work of her non-profit Be the Bridge, she is fostering healthy dialogue around the topic of race.” Just like Lydia, Esther, Mary and the Proverbs 31 woman. Oh wait.)

Kate Merrick (writer)

Rebekah Lyons (wife of Gabe Lyons)

Vivian Mabuni (Campus Crusade for Christ worker)

Britt Merrick (pastor, surfer, founder of Reality Churches (multi-campus)

IF God is real, then what? IF:Gathering
Hath God said? Satan, Genesis 3:3

I hope any of this information helps you. IF gatherings are occurring every day in living rooms and lawns near you. No town is too small, too rural, too citified or too sophisticated to host an IF:table. The brand of Christianity the women promote is far from the Bible’s due to their emphasis on social causes, feminist living (i.e, gallivanting off to Africa while the kids languish at home), doubting God, and discussing their feelings. I pray you protect your daughters and granddaughters from any and all IF activities.

discernment, Uncategorized

Mail Call #5: My friend is following a false teacher

Posted on February 2, 2017January 7, 2024 by elizabethprata

Mail call is a big deal (at least it was on M*A*S*H)

We love Jesus and we’re so encouraged when a new Christian or a friend who is older but growing obviously develop fruit of the Spirit. However we also grieve when friends or new Christians go the other direction and begin to stray. One way they stray is by following false teachers. I can’t describe the heartache when I see friends post quotes from false teachers, or when they gush about a Bible ‘study’ that was written by someone who is not to be consumed. It hurts. We are all one body and we want the best for our brethren. False teachers are not the best. They are the worst.

What can we do when we see a friend beginning to be drawn away? They buy the false teacher’s books, they talk about what they ‘learned’ from the false teacher, they start attending a small group of this false teacher’s studies… what can we do?

First, remember we are to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. (Matthew 19:16). In this case, it means we are wise to the schemes of satan. One of his schemes is to send false teachers. We are aware of the danger they pose and we do not minimize it nor ignore it.

But in dealing with our friend we are to be harmless, innocent, kind, and gentle. Harmlessness does not mean gullibility, but it does mean tact.

When Jesus told the Twelve to be as wise as serpents and harmless as doves, He laid down a general principle about the technique of kingdom work. As we take the gospel to a hostile world, we must be wise (avoiding the snares set for us), and we must be innocent (serving the Lord blamelessly). Jesus was not suggesting that we stoop to deception but that we should model some of the serpent’s famous shrewdness in a positive way. Wisdom does not equal dishonesty, and innocence does not equal gullibility.

Nineteenth-century pastor Charles Simeon provides a wonderful comment on the serpent and dove imagery: “Now the wisdom of the one and the harmlessness of the other are very desirable to be combined in the Christian character; because it is by such an union only that the Christian will be enabled to cope successfully with his more powerful enemies” (Horae Homileticae: Matthew, Vol. 11, London: Holdsworth and Ball, p. 318).

In Matthew 10:16, Jesus taught us how to optimize our gospel-spreading opportunities. Successful Christian living requires that we strike the optimal balance between the dove and the serpent. We should strive to be gentle without being pushovers, and we must be sacrificial without being taken advantage of. (Source GotQuestions)

With that basis, I’d like to offer a few ideas. These are by no means exhaustive. Please comment below with your own success stories of how to engage a friend who is following a false teacher.

I like to ask questions. I ask them in a friendly way what they are getting out of it, or why they enjoy the teacher, or what the study is showing them. If the particular teacher has demonstrated unrepentant disobedience, I might ask them about it and ask if that changes their view of what and how the teacher is teaching them. For example, Christine Caine functions as a self-stated ordained pastor and teaches women that it is OK to step into leadership roles reserved for men. You could ask your friend what she thinks of this. Your friend’s answer could illuminate the direction in which your discussion could go.

If she is unaware that there are some roles reserved for men and others for women, you could explain this to her from the Bible. If she disagrees, then you know from whence her attraction to Caine or the certain teacher is coming from. If she was simply unaware and now agrees, then she’ll likely go away from false teachers who teach opposite to what the Bible says regarding roles, and you have won your sister.

Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. (Galatians 6:1).

If the friend is open to these initial probes, I ask if I might share how the false teacher strays from the Word. It is one thing to warn, but it’s more helpful to show how to think about the Word of God and how to compare what a teacher is teaching to the Bible than it is just to say “She’s false.”

For example, Beth Moore relies on personal visions and revelations, and you could show your friend about the canon, why it’s closed, and the true meaning of Paul really meant when he admonished not to despise prophesying. (1 Thessalonians 5:20-21).

It is also good to offer alternatives. Nature abhors a vacuum. The person presumably wants to study the word, and if they desire to study it in Spirit and in truth (John 4:24) then they will want the better option. God knows how to give good gifts.

If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! (Matthew 7:11)

So then I ask if they are open to receiving some solid material written by good Bible teachers. I accumulate books and CDs and booklets and pamphlets and links, and cache them in my bookcase set aside for the purpose of givine them away when the appropriate moment comes. When the time comes, I just give them the book/essay/CD etc. If I just suggest to them to go buy or acquire a certain resource, they will likely not do it. Sometimes they do. But not usually. I put the material in their hand (or electronic message box) and I have it on hand so I can do it quickly.

We are a discipling body. Christianity is not solitary. Lambs always have a mama sheep nearby. Be involved with the weaker ones, the new ones, the strong ones. Everyone. You could invite the friend to study with you (and your wife if you are a male leader or elder speaking to a woman) or invite him or her come to a group you’re involved with. Personal discipleship and establishing a trusting relationship works wonders.

Pray. Of course this is the best solution, the Spirit knows.

praying at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end, keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints, (Ephesians 6:18).

Asking the Lord to deliver a sister from the clutches of a false teacher is a wonderful supplication.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Some resources that might help–

Here is the Gospel Coalition’s essay 7 marks of a false teacher

Here is John MacArthur’s sermon How to treat a false teacher part 1

Here is 9Marks with How I Select and Schedule Discipling Relationships

Another Christian sister who answered the same question way better than I did! Help! My friend follows false teachers

discernment, Uncategorized

Andy Stanley, Billy Graham, and the Bible on the virgin birth

Posted on February 1, 2017February 1, 2017 by elizabethprata

Andy Stanley, megachurch pastor and son of noted pastor Charles Stanley, said of the virgin birth, this past December,

A lot of people just don’t believe it. And I understand that. Maybe the thought is, ‘Hey, maybe they had to come up with some myth about Jesus to give him street cred, you know, later on.’ Maybe that’s where that came from.

It’s interesting, because Matthew gives us a version of the birth of Christ, Luke does, but Mark and John – they don’t even mention it. A lot has been made of that….

You’ve heard me say some version of this a million times, so this will be old if you’ve been around for a while. But see, if somebody can predict their own death and then their own resurrection, I’m not all that concerned about how they got into the world.

I was not surprised that Andy Stanley said what he said about the virgin birth. Though S. Lewis Johnson reminds us that the miracle was the conception, the birth itself was bloody, messy, and like every other birth in history. After I heard him preach it, I never thought about the virgin birth the same way again!

In any case, Andy Stanley continues to deny our fundamental doctrines (I’ve kept track and there are may doctrines he denies). The way his church treats worship tells us this, too. Just last month he had go-go dancers as part of the singing.

It is not possible either to deny the virgin birth yet accept Christ as holy, sinless deity. When Stanley made his statement, there was quite rightly a hullabaloo over it. However, Stanley is not the first pastor claiming to be conservative who denies the virgin birth as necessary to the faith. Billy Graham also denies the necessity of belief in the virgin birth. Yet there is no hullabaloo over Graham’s denial but only excuses made for his ‘misstatements.’

In my thorough study of Graham, which encompassed listening to sermons from 1949 through to the 1980s, reading several of his books, reading books about him, listening to interviews, and reading two dissertations looking at the evolution of his theology over Graham’s 50 active years, the conclusion is clear to me. In 1993 Graham said to Time Magazine (as codified in Ken Garfield’s book Billy Graham, a Life in Pictures, of the virgin birth specifically,

Graham has said that the virgin birth of Christ is NOT an essential part of the Christian faith. In an interview with a United Church of Canada publication in 1966 (“Billy Graham Answers 26 Provocative Questions,” United Church Observer, July 1, 1966), Graham gave the following reply to a question about the virgin birth of Christ:

Q. Do you think a literal belief in the Virgin birth — not just as a symbol of the incarnation or of Christ’s divinity — as an historic event is necessary for personal salvation?
A. While I most certainly believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, I do not find anywhere in the New Testament that this particular belief is necessary for personal salvation.

Graham denied the necessity of the virgin birth not just once but several times in different decades. Graham’s response was a classic example of his penchant for doubletalk. Is there any other kind of salvation, besides the personal? Is there global salvation? Impersonal salvation?

And if we use his silly statement as the basis, “I don’t find anywhere in the New Testament” …we can also say “I don’t find anywhere in the New Testament any specific reference to the Trinity” so therefore “belief in the Trinity is not necessary to personal salvation”.

If Christ be not the virgin-born Son of God, He could not be our Savior. To reject the doctrine of the Virgin Birth is to reject the only Sinless Savior that God has provided for sinners.

Of course Graham’s denial of Jesus as the exclusive way to God, as seen in his adoption of the wider mercy approach, was articulated clearly and affirmed with questioning, at Robert Schuller’s Crystal Cathedral interview in 1997, displays Graham’s saddest denial of all.

As mentioned above, Stanley is not the first impostor to preach that believing the virgin conception is unnecessary as a part of the fundamental beliefs for the faith, Graham got there long before Stanley did.

There are five fundamentals of the faith which are essential for Christianity-

1. The Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9).
2. The Virgin Birth (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:27).
3. The Blood Atonement (Acts 20:28; Romans 3:25, 5:9; Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 9:12-14).
4. The Bodily Resurrection (Luke 24:36-46; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 15:14-15).
5. The inerrancy of the scriptures themselves (Psalms 12:6-7; Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20).

Below is a VERY general look at Thomas P. Johnston’s Examining Billy Graham’s Theology of Evangelism, (p. 379) Graham’s four phases of Graham’s life and Graham’s evolution of the five fundamental doctrines.

The fact is, Jesus told us wolves will come in sheep’s clothing. This means they will appear as friendly and soft-spoken. They will seem to adhere to the Bible’s truths, but they are inside ravenous for your soul. Wolves subtly deny God, just as satan did in the Garden. An excellent example of this subtlety is Graham’s statement “I do not find anywhere in the New Testament that this particular belief is necessary for personal salvation. Be wary, friends. Even popular pastors can be wolves. As a matter of fact, especially popular pastors can be wolves.

GotQuestions: Why is the Virgin Birth so Important?

Jesus was not born in sin; that is, He had no sin nature (Hebrews 7:26). It would seem that the sin nature is passed down from generation to generation through the father (Romans 5:12, 17, 19). The Virgin Birth circumvented the transmission of the sin nature and allowed the eternal God to become a perfect man.

Ligonier: Must Christians believe in the Virgin Birth?

Christians must face the fact that a denial of the virgin birth is a denial of Jesus as the Christ

Grace To You: Why the Virgin Birth is Essential

The virgin birth is an underlying assumption in everything the Bible says about Jesus. To throw out the virgin birth is to reject Christ’s deity, the accuracy and authority of Scripture, and a host of other related doctrines central to the Christian faith. No issue is more important than the virgin birth to our understanding of who Jesus is.

discernment, Uncategorized

Discernment lesson: how secular writers of Biblical material manipulate your emotions

Posted on January 31, 2017 by elizabethprata

Filmmakers are always looking for fodder to make their productions and of late they have discovered the narratives in the Bible. Since the people writing and producing these movies and shows are not saved, of course they get it wrong. This is because In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. (2 Corinthians 4:4).

In the recent series The Bible, there came a moment when Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were faced with a decision. Would they bow to a false god statue, or would they stand for Yahweh, thus losing their lives (as Nebuchadnezzar had aid those who disobey his decree to bow will die, Daniel 3:6).

It’s a dramatic moment when you see it in full visual force. Look, here is the clip:

It is not so dramatic when you hear it though. First, read what the men really said, from the real Bible. It is all from Daniel 3. That’s the first part of the lesson- always compare to scripture.

Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered and said to the king, “O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. 17If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. 18But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.”

The pagan man always seeks to elevate man and diminish God. See how the writers put very different words in the mouths of the three men when they answered to King Nebuchadnezzar.

[Azariah] With all our hearts we follow you. We seek your presence. With all my heart I follow you. I fear you. I seek your presence. Lord hear my cry, though death entangle me, though the anguish of the grave consumes me, do not ignore my tears, I’m overcome by sorrow. I call upon the name of the Lord. Lord save me! Hear my prayer, oh Lord. Hear my cry.

The prayer of the men were self-centered, not God centered. There is a big difference between ‘I will not serve your gods’ and ‘Lord, I seek your presence!’ In the Bible the men accepted the consequence of their fate, because as long as glory was being given to honor God they were satisfied. The TV show could not be more opposite to the actual statement the men made in the real Bible. That’s the second part of the lesson. Once you compare what you’ve read or heard to scripture, test it to see if it gives glory to God only and aligns with His character.

God decided to manifest a miracle in the fire and He saved the men. In the TV show, since the men had prayed to be saved, when they were saved, it looked like it was their own prayer that saved them rather than the sovereignty and power of God.

In the TV show, when the men were delivered from the fire, they emerged declaring “God is with us! People of Judah, rise!” Again, ‘me’-centered.

In the real Bible, honor to God in the highest was given by Nebuchadnezzar.

The hair of their heads was not singed, their cloaks were not harmed, and no smell of fire had come upon them. 28 Nebuchadnezzar answered and said, “Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent his angel and delivered his servants, who trusted in him, and set aside[f] the king’s command, and yielded up their bodies rather than serve and worship any god except their own God. 29 Therefore I make a decree: Any people, nation, or language that speaks anything against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego shall be torn limb from limb, and their houses laid in ruins, for there is no other god who is able to rescue in this way.” (Daniel 3:27b-29)

I mention this because the scene where the men do not bow, and the scene where the men are delivered in the furnace are well done and moving. In between, though, when the people speak, it is not with Bible words and a humble God-centeredness.

The point here is, do not let emotion cloud your judgment when you absorb non-biblical material. You will most likely be emotionally manipulated when you read a book written by a non-Christian, (The Shack was well done and emotionally engaging for the first 70 pages) or a movie. The scenes in The Bible are moving and close enough to the Bible, but close enough is not good enough. Be wary of letting emotion override the truth with any material you watch or read. Besides, the real word of God is emotional enough!

discernment, Uncategorized

God’s sovereignty in providence: Esther and Jael

Posted on January 30, 2017January 30, 2017 by elizabethprata

God is sovereign of the entire universe. He plans what he plans and He does what he pleases.

Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases. (Psalm 115:3).

It’s admittedly hard to understand how God can and does orchestrate all events at once, constantly, over the earth and throughout the stars, so that His plans providentially combine in perfect harmony to enact His will. But He is God and we’re not supposed to understand it! It is also hard to understand how our personal decisions are still personal but also are part of His will and plan and the outcome is predetermined. That our decisions are our own yet are part of a pre-ordained plan that all leads to the cross and beyond is a tension our finite minds can’t comprehend. It is a joy to ponder them though, because in so doing, we come up against God’s power, omniscience, and will.

Here are two things to consider when looking at God’s providence and will, with our decisions and will.

Esther

The book of Esther was not written by Esther but it is about Esther, her Hebrew name was Hadassah. She lived during the time of King Ahasuerus of Persia, also known as King Xerxes. Through a series of providential events, Esther wound up as Queen to Ahasuerus and also was put in a position to save her people. However the saving of her people was at dire risk to her own life. She was discussing what to do with her uncle Mordecai, and Mordecai famously said,

“For if you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:14).

Esther could make her own decision. She could risk her life and go in to the King, or she could stay in the harem and not go to the King. Mordecai knew God’s character well enough to know that His promise to keep a remnant of His people alive would indeed happen, whether Esther decided to participate at this particular moment or not. God would keep His promise no matter what Esther decided. The choice was hers. Esther decided to go in and speak to the King even though he had not called for her (usually this meant death). We know the rest, Esther’s action revealed to the King the evil deeds of Haman and Haman was killed instead of the Jews.

Jael

Jael was the wife of Heber the Kenite. Sisera had been cruelly oppressing the Hebrews for 20 years. The people cried out. Deborah was civic leader at that time, prophesying and judging. She sent for Barak, the military leader and told him to go take care of the problem. Barak could freely decide what to do. He could go or he could not go, the choice was his. He said he would not go unless Deborah came with him. (Judges 4:8). His answer was in effect, no. Deborah replied that she would go with Barak, but it would be an embarrassment to him because God would deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman, and Barak would not get the military glory for the victory.

Barak freely made his choice, but now the outcome would occur from another quarter, just as Mordecai had said it would if Esther decided against her action.

Into the story enters Jael. After Barak routed Sisera’s army, Sisera fled. Sisera aimed toward the tent of Heber the Kenite. Sisera knew there was peace between Jabin the king of Hazor (Sisera’s King) and the house of Heber the Kenite. Heber had separated from the Kenites and was settled far from the action. Sisera ran, believing he was safe to go toward the area where there was no fighting and where there was peace between the parties. Normally he would be right, especially since hospitality customs were so strong in protecting those who are invited into the tent. However in this providential case, Sisera was wrong. Jael invited Sisera into the tent, gave him drink, and covered him as he fell asleep.

Note that Sisera fell asleep. He had a hard day of fighting, but even though his life was in peril he felt comfortable enough where he let down his guard and fall asleep. Women in those days were responsible for pitching the tents and so Jael was strong enough and familiar enough with how to efficiently hammer a tent peg into the ground. As Sisera slept, she drove a tent peg into his temple and pinned his head to the ground. The verse succinctly states, “So he died.” (Judges 4:21b).

And behold, as Barak was pursuing Sisera, Jael went out to meet him and said to him, “Come, and I will show you the man whom you are seeking.” So he went in to her tent, and there lay Sisera dead, with the tent peg in his temple. 23So on that day God subdued Jabin the king of Canaan before the people of Israel. (Judges 4:22-23).

Barak had kind of said “I will go” but not really. Placing conditions on your obedience isn’t really obedience to God. I like how the verse says God subdued Jabin.

Whether Esther went in or didn’t go in, God would deliver the Jews from Haman. Whether Barak went to battle or didn’t go to battle, God would deliver the Jews from King Jabin and Commander Sisera. Both Esther and Barak freely decided on a course of action. Yet both outcomes occurred at the providential hand of God.

God is amazing.

Anonymous.
Jael and Sisera
pen drawing — c. 1440 – 1450
Museum Herzog Anton Ulrich Museum, Braunschweig. The name of the drafter is not known. He is thought to be someone close to Van Eyck and his workshop. Source: Art and the Bible

discernment, Uncategorized

The Herd Mentality v. Self-Control

Posted on January 26, 2017January 26, 2017 by elizabethprata

My grandparents were born in around 1900. The emigrated to the US in their 20s and soon after had accumulated enough money to buy a car. They liked to drive. However they were not so great with directions. When my grandfather didn’t know in what direction to go, my grandmother would helpfully advise, “Follow him. He looks like he knows where he’s going.”

Have you heard of the phrase, ‘herd mentality’? Wikipedia explains it,

Herd mentality, or mob mentality, describes how people are influenced by their peers to adopt certain behaviors.

Or this definition from The Royal Society-

Herding can be defined as the phenomenon of individuals deciding to follow others and imitating group behaviours rather than deciding independently and atomistically on the basis of their own, private information. Article- Herding, social influence and economic decision-making

We see the follow-the-crowd mentality in stock markets and even in home design trends.

Sociologists researched this phenomenon at Leeds University.

Researchers at Leeds University performed a group experiments where volunteers were told to randomly walk around a large hall without talking to each other. A select few were then given more detailed instructions on where to walk. The scientists discovered that people end up blindly following one or two instructed people who appear to know where they’re going. The results of this experiments showed that it only takes 5% of confident looking and instructed people to influence the direction of the 95% of people in the crowd and the 200 volunteers did this without even realizing it. (Source)

Herd mentality is real. Following a crowd in home decor trends is not a dangerous activity, but other follow-the-crowd activities are.

Parents often worry about their teenager falling in with the wrong crowd. That’s because they know how impressionable youths can be and how easily they can be led to certain behavior through peer pressure. It’s one reason I object so strongly to the exclusion of parents or other adults from the youth-oriented Passion conferences. This is a conference where tens of thousands of youths congregate for allegedly spiritual purposes, to receive instruction, and to engage in social justice activities. This last is helped along by the organizers having stationed many ATMs throughout the venue so the youths will donate money to social justice causes. And they do. Of course, donating to charities is not bad, but arming teenagers with credit cards, separating them from their parents, and inoculating them with incessant sermons preaching about donating to social causes, means it’s easy to induce the desired behavior from your captive subjects.

However, the herd mentality phenomenon is not restricted to youths, as the example above from Leeds University shows. Here is an example from the Bible which shows, in my opinion, just how easily led the heart and mind can be. In this example, we see how easily adults can fall prey to blindly following a crowd.

So the city was filled with the confusion, and they rushed together into the theater, dragging with them Gaius and Aristarchus, Macedonians who were Paul’s companions in travel. 30But when Paul wished to go in among the crowd, the disciples would not let him. 31And even some of the Asiarchs, who were friends of his, sent to him and were urging him not to venture into the theater. 32Now some cried out one thing, some another, for the assembly was in confusion, and most of them did not know why they had come together. (Acts 19:29-32).

The scene is Ephesus, and Paul is preaching. Ephesus was a wealthy city with numerous guilds such as coppersmiths and silversmiths. The smiths were engaged in a monetarily healthy trade in making false idols to the local deity, Artemis. Demetrius, a silversmith, had quickly seen the effect Paul’s preaching had had on the city’s new converts. They no longer bought idols of silver, and his income was affected. This could not stand. Demetrius incited a riot. The city-folk streamed into the amphitheater.

One reason I love the scriptures the way they are written is the Holy Spirit-inspired details. If you read the entire passage in context, It’s pretty dramatic. The scene is vivid. Picture any B-movie from the 1950s where the villagers are storming the castle with pitchforks. The crowd is unruly, loud,angry, and dangerous. They were also intent on making their point and the adrenaline rush of fury and tumult carried them along. But then you see the few words at the tail end of verse 32, lol.

most of them did not know why they had come together

MOST of them
did NOT know why
they were THERE

Not a few of them, not that some of them, MOST of the people did NOT know why they were headed up the hill and sitting at the local colosseum yelling their heads off.

I’m reminded of this past week’s Women March on Washington where thousands of feminists streamed to the capitol to demand nebulous ‘rights’. However, when Christian reporters and theologians who were there interviewed several women and asked them why they came, the women didn’t know. It reminded me of the riot in Ephesus all over again.

If you read to verse 34, it says But when they recognized that he was a Jew, for about two hours they all cried out with one voice, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”

I’m sure you’ve ever been to a high school pep rally or a sports event. The crowd stomps the bleachers and sings ‘We will rock you’, we are the champions’ etc. We have Queen to thank for his everlasting rally cry. Listen, if you will, to the first 35 seconds or so.

I avoid loud gatherings as an adult, but in high school pep rally assemblies were compulsory. I vividly remember the reverberations of the bleachers, the stomping, how quickly the first stomp grew to a unified sound that morphed into the song. It went on for a while, maybe a few minutes. But it didn’t last long. It’s hard for a crowd to remain vigorous in its unified efforts and soon the effort fall apart into distinct voices and scattered stomps, then ended.

In Ephesus, they cried out with one voice for two hours. Just imagine if the entire football stadium was singing ‘We will rock you’ for two hours, solid.

We see another mob mentality moment in Genesis 19:4-11. The scene is Sodom and the place is Lot’s house. The mob surrounded the house where the two angels dwelt and pressed so hard against the door that the angels struck them blind, but they still groped for the door.

Imagine the scene just prior to this, though. The news that two handsome men – strangers – were at Lot’s house spread through the city like wildfire. The verse says that men from all quarters of the city came to Lot’s house. The news spread and it ignited feet. Soon the men were like pillaging villagers ready to storm the castle, or in this case, Lot’s door. An entire population rushed there, yelling, demanding, just as the people did in Ephesus.

I think these examples of herd mentality (and also the example of the angry mob that stoned Stephen in Acts 7) show just how sinful we are. Even after salvation, the tendency to follow the crowd is still present in the heart and mind, because we are still sinners and not glorified yet. I believe this is why so many passages and verses advise wisdom and self-control. I think it’s especially important when a church is considering leaders for their local body. Anyone who consistently engages in self-controlled, measured actions based on wisdom and not an unreasoning follow-the-crowd mentality is definitely leader material.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. (Galatians 5:22-23).

Strong’s Concordance says of the word self-control here-

egkráteia (1466) – properly, dominion within, i.e. “self-control” – proceeding out from within oneself, but not by oneself.
For the believer, 1466 /egkráteia (“self-control, Spirit-control”) can only be accomplished by the power of the Lord. Accordingly, 1466 /egkráteia (“true mastery from within”) is explicitly called a fruit of the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:23).

Paul talked about this exact kind of self-control to Felix in Acts 24:25. Peter talked about self-control in 2 Peter 1:5-6,

For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith virtue; and to virtue, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness;

It’s easy to follow a crowd. All too easy. It’s hard to withstand the stream of thousands of people headed in one direction. It takes self-control to stop either actually or metaphorically as you’re buffeted by people all around you headed in a certain direction and you’re not at all sure you want to go. It takes strength to stand quietly for a moment and think, assess, and pray for wisdom. It is very hard NOT to follow the crowd.

But always remember that self-control is a fruit of the Spirit. Though we have the sinful tendency in us to easily become unreasoning animals and follow whatever crowd is doing, we have the Holy Spirit. Self-control proceeds out from within us, but is not by us. It’s Him. All him. When we rely on the Spirit to induce in us the control we need, Jesus receives glory.

discernment, Uncategorized

“God’s not in control” says Baptist theologian

Posted on January 24, 2017 by elizabethprata

The excerpt below is not a Babylon Bee article. [Babylon Bee is a satirical Christian online spoof publication). My response to the title of the article, “Theologian says God not in control”, is that if a theologian says God is not in control, he is not a theologian. Also, if God is not in control, He is not God.

And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. (Colossians 1:17)
Many are the plans in the mind of a man, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will stand. (Proverbs 19:21).

Below is an excerpt from the aforementioned article, then my thoughts follow. The article is based on a new book, Scandalous Providence: The Jesus Story of the Compassion of God, written by long-term professor E. Frank Tupper. Tupper was one of the founding faculty members of the School of Divinity at the Baptist educational institution of Wake Forest, also had taught for many years prior to that in Southern Theological Seminary. He has been teaching for 42 years. He has also been privately struggling with the concept of God’s providence and sovereignty since 1965, when his father died. He later struggled with it again, when his wife Betty was fatally diagnosed with cancer.

Theologian says God not in control

Tupper’s study and experience led him to reject platitudes on suffering such as “God is in control” or “everything happens for a reason.” “I do not believe that God is in control of everything that happens in our world,” he said. “Indeed, I would argue that God controls very, very little of what happens in our world.” Tupper said part of his own struggle has been understanding why God does not act in human life today with the same kind of power and purpose as the mighty acts described in Scripture. “Why does God not act today the way the biblical traditions present God to us, particularly in the New Testament?” he asked. “Why does God not act? Because the resources are not available to God to act.”

In an interview with the Homebrewed Christian Tripp Fuller, regarding Tupper’s same book about providence, Tupper said that there have been two historic responses to God’s Providence,

The 2 leading lines for interpreting Providence was ‘well, we do not understand why this has happened’ or, ‘In some sense this is the will of God and we must accept it.’ I rejected both those ideas. Betty Tupper’s experience of suffering with cancer and dying, and the enormous impact it had on my family gave me the courage to say, “I’m going to write and interpret providence in a way that is consistent with my understanding and my faith and I will accept the opposition and the challenges that I’ll experience.” HomeBrewed Christianity podcast

In his book Scandalous Providence, Tupper categorically rejects the classic verse on Providence, Romans 8:28, that all things work together for the good of those who love God. Tupper says,

No. [Romans 8:28] does not mean: Paul does not mean that God predetermines everything that happens. Not everything that occurs is the design and intention of God.

The main leading line throughout history for the faithful believers in interpreting God’s providence is to, ahem, trust Him. Esther did. The entire book of Esther is an object lesson in trusting His promises when circumstances on the ground clearly are going in the opposite direction. Also, Job. Job trusted God through it all, even when his own wife said he should curse God and die. Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego trusted His promise despite the threat of imminent death. They were providentially delivered, though the men acknowledged that God’s control was such that He might not choose to deliver them. God chose not to deliver Tupper’s father nor his wife, but that does not mean He isn’t in control. However, to Tupper, it does.

What Tupper is really saying here about providence and trust is that, ‘I had an experience that I did not like, therefore I will reinterpret the God of the Bible according to my own desires and understandings, based on my own experiences and not the promises of God as revealed in scripture.’

You can read about Tupper’s book on many different websites. It’s actually not a new book, but a massively updated version of an older one he’d written. As I said, he has been struggling with trusting God through difficult circumstances for a long time.

For this next section of the essay I want to offer insights on two important topics that Tupper’s interpretation of Providence raises. These are issues you should know about because they are so pervasive and because his influence as Seminary professor and molder of young minds is so strong.

1. Open Theism (in Arminian context)
2. Narrative Theology (morphing to to personal experiences)

Open Theism.

Open Theism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Open Theism is the thesis that, because God loves us and desires that we freely choose to reciprocate His love, He has made His knowledge of, and plans for, the future conditional upon our actions. [Ed note- more extreme version-]Though omniscient, God does not know what we will freely do in the future.

Classic Arminian, free will theology is basically Open Theism. We choose God, He reacts. The logical conclusion of a theology where we can choose to overcome our own thoroughly depraved heart (Genesis 6:5) by our own decision and not God’s supernatural ordination, is a theology where God is not in control. The first casualty in Arminian/Open Theism is the sovereignty of God. And if God is not Sovereign, the doctrine of Providence falls, too.

Speaking of narratives, it’s popular today to use the fact of Jesus’ storytelling through parables to excuse what is known as narrative theology.

Here is the definition of narrative theology, a wonky theology to begin with, before Tupper further corrupted it by showing his readers how to create a theology based on experience:

Narrative Theology.

Narrative theology

Narrative theology was a late 20th century theological development which supported the idea that the Church’s use of the Bible should focus on a narrative presentation of the faith, rather than on the development of a systematic theology. The Christian faith is thus also to be interpreted by the Christian community, and not by outside scholars or explorers. Narrative theology is typically done by those known as post-liberals.

Tupper’s book relies on narratives within the Bible to offer laypeople access to theology, which he calls “lay theology”. He says he uses narrative theology as a mechanism to communicate the fundamental concerns of scripture to the lay people. As with any mechanism, satan will use it and bring it forward even from its good foundations to foundations made from darkness and poison. So it is with narrative theology. In Tupper’s book, he strays from the straightforward interpretation of parables, (theology) to using parables as an excuse to narrate Jesus’ story, (a liberal stance) to using people’s stories as a narrative to explain Jesus. (a ridiculous stance, but inevitable if adopting narrative theology.)

As with any doctrinal error, there comes a point where its profound error becomes its fatal flaw. If we interpret evil through the lens of our own experiences and worse, construct a narrative to explain it, the skewed vision of who God is becomes fatally wounding.

Why am I going on about what may seem to you to be an obscure theologian, (but isn’t) who in no way impacts your life? Because I want you to understand something. This man has been teaching generations of young people the “truths” of God for 42 years. His journey away from the sovereignty and goodness of God’s toleration of evil means Tupper has also led impressionable youths away from it too. Many seminaries and Christian colleges today are bastions of doubt and unfaith. And I’m talking about the Professors.

God is in control of everything. Solomon says this in Proverbs 16:33,

The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.

This means that, we can throw the dice and we can use that as a basis for deduction, but God who sovereign over all things, even controls the roll of the dice. (Alistair Begg)

Here are some resources to help understand God’s sovereignty even in tolerating evil, death, and tragedy.

The Truth about Evil
How can a good and powerful God tolerate all the evil in the world?

In Tupper’s interview with the Homebrewed Christian, Tupper mentioned about God being love (so why does He accept evil and hate in the world…). The verse from 1 John 4:8 which says in its second part that God is love, is explained in this 90-second video from the WWUTT Pastor, Gabe Hughes.

From Ligonier, we find a list of essays dealing with the question Is God in Control?
When pain, suffering, and natural disasters occur, how can we know that God is really in control? Is He really sovereign over all things, including evil?

GotQuestions on narrative theology: Narrative theology is the idea that Christian theology’s use of the Bible should focus on a narrative representation of the faith rather than the development of a set of propositions reasoned from the Scriptures themselves or what is commonly called a “systematic theology.”

discernment, Uncategorized

Franklin Graham’s unwise comment about rain

Posted on January 22, 2017January 22, 2017 by elizabethprata

Pastor Gabe Hughes at WWUTT (When We Understand The Text) had a 90-second video response to Franklin Graham’s unwise comment at the Inauguration of Donald Trump.

Here is a screen shot:

Here is WWUTT’s 90-second video. (All their videos are 90 seconds, check them out!)

As noted in the video, the rain that fell in Genesis was a judgment on all the people of the earth (except for the 8 faithful in Noah’s family). Also as noted in the video, Jesus said in Matthew 5:45 that rain falls on the just and the unjust.

God raises up leaders and He takes them down. (Daniel 2:21, Psalm 75:7). Just because President Trump won the election does not necessarily mean God is blessing him or America. God could be judging America by raising up President Trump. The same could apply to ex-President Obama. We don’t know what was in God’s mind when He raised those men up. We do not know why He allowed President Harrison to lead for only 30 days while He has allowed Queen Elizabeth II to reign for 23,725 days.

In order to state that rain is a sign of blessing at any particular moment, one would have to be able to interpret the omen. God used the Prophets of old as a sign to the people. When Moses threw down his staff and it turned into a snake, it was a sign (omen) and Pharaoh understood it as a sign. He did not interpret it correctly, of course, since he had his own wizards standing by who performed the same sign. Pharaoh interpreted that Moses’ God was as not powerful as his false god and that Pharaoh could continue to resist God with no harm, no foul. He was wrong.

And that’s the problem with interpreting omens. Without a Prophet having heard directly from God, those who are claiming that rain occurring at any given moment means this or that are in fact claiming to know the mind of God. And that is presumptuous. Here is what the Bible says about interpreting omens, excerpt from GotQuestions:

These portents occurred in the Bible, usually through God’s prophets, when it served God’s purpose. However, the Bible expressly forbids divination of any kind: “Let no one be found among you who . . . interprets omens. . . . Anyone who does these things is detestable to the Lord” (Deuteronomy 18:10–12). We do not live by superstition, and we should not be searching for good or evil omens. Our understanding of the spiritual world does not come through the occult. God has given us the ultimate sign of His goodness, love, and grace in Jesus Christ (1 John 4:9). The Bible is our source for spiritual insight (2 Peter 1:19–21).

It is a shame, and it is unwise that Mr Graham said this. It’s unwise not only for his own soul but because he said it while standing on a platform in which his words would be broadcast globally. If one wanted to give the world a lesson on interpreting the mind of God by divination, one could not have chosen a better moment.

I’ve written before that Graham’s partnering with Catholics at his Crusades is also indicative of a heart that does not understand what the Bible says to do and not to do. (for example, do not interpret omens as already discussed, in the case of partnering with Catholics, do not be unequally yoked, 2 Corinthians 6:14).

May the Lord in His mercy send a spirit of repentance onto Mr Graham, and dispense mercy meanwhile.

——————————–

Christian books: It’s not “just fiction”

Posted on January 19, 2017January 19, 2017 by elizabethprata

I love to read. With the New Year and all the ‘Reading Challenges’ that emerge as people make decisions at the start of the year, I’d decided to go back to reading for pleasure. This is an activity that had fallen by the wayside as I got busier, and my eyes grew more tired at night. Aging. It’s not for sissies, lol.

I also decided to read the books that were on my own shelves to start with, rather than going out to buy a bunch of new books. Shop my own shelves, so to speak! So as I’d picked up that novel or this novel I’d had on my shelf since before salvation, and began to read them, I became dissatisfied. Sadly, the secular novels of today, even the literary ones, contain things my sanctifying soul objects to. Especially if there is profanity or blasphemy.

Are Christian books safer? Well, no. Take the book The Shack, for instance. This was a runaway bestseller back in 2007-2008 and onward. It was sold in Christian bookstores as a Christian book. Its author, William P. Young, wrote about a man who was staggering under heavy grief due to the kidnapping and death of his little daughter, which had happened in a derelict shack. One day the man received a handwritten note in his mailbox, with no stamp or postage, requesting his presence…in the shack. It turned out to have been an invitation from God. Curious, the man goes to the shack, where he also ‘meets’ Jesus and the Holy Spirit in addition to being greeted by ‘God.’ It turns out that according to the author’s presentation of the Trinity, God is a woman, as is the Holy Spirit. The book goes on to present discussions between the persons of the Trinity and the man, regarding sin, evil, salvation, judgment, and other doctrines. The book teaches that sin is its own judgment, that hell exists to purge away unbelief (not punish for sin), that there is universal reconciliation, and other aberrant, non-biblical doctrines.

Many credible leaders in the faith negatively reviewed the book. I reviewed it negatively also. A common rebuttal to our negative view of the book was, “Lighten up. It’s only fiction!” Or, “It’s only a novel!”

Dear reader, novels teach an author’s point of view, either subtly or overtly. It’s no different for Christian novels. Novels with Christian themes use narrative to teach. We must all be Bereans and check to see that these things in the ‘Christian’ book are so, in whatever form the doctrines are coming to us. Doctrine is taught in songs, poems, sermons, lessons, theological books…and fiction.

Below are three essays regarding Christian fiction and theology that flesh out these issues.

Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr. serves as president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. In this first essay I’m linking to, Albert Mohler offers thoughts on the missing art of evangelical discernment as encapsulated by evangelical response to The Shack. The massive popularity of the book meant that Christians were accepting of, or at least overlooking, the heretical doctrines The Shack espoused. Fiction or not, false doctrine is gangrenous, (2 Timothy 2:17) and spreads infection to all who come into contact with it. Infection is no respecter of literary genres.

Though The Shack was published 10 years ago, it is still evidencing strong sales, sure to be spurred by the imminent release of the movie of the same name. Dr Mohler wrote,

Even as Wayne Jacobson and others complain of those who identify heresy within The Shack, the fact is that the Christian church has explicitly identified these teachings as just that — heresy. The obvious question is this: How is it that so many evangelical Christians seem to be drawn not only to this story, but to the theology presented in the narrative — a theology at so many points in conflict with evangelical convictions?

[Professor Timothy Beal of Case Western University] then asks: “What are these progressive theological ideas doing in this evangelical pulp-fiction phenomenon?” He answers: “Unbeknownst to most of us, they have been present on the liberal margins of evangelical thought for decades.” Now, he explains, The Shack has introduced and popularized these liberal concepts even among mainstream evangelicals.

So we see that Christian fiction is deliberately used to bring heretical ideas to the masses and worse, popularize them. Christian reader, beware! It’s not “just fiction”!

In this linked essay, Samuel D. James muses on the current state of Christian Publishing, where adult coloring books and bubble-gum devotionals litter the top ten, and wonders why there is a gap between the thought-provoking content we regularly read on social media and blogs, versus the tripe we’re exposed to in hard copy publishing.

As I look out on the confessional evangelical writing scene, I see a lot of good, even in places where I’d find much to disagree with. There is quite a bit of thoughtful, meaningful commentary out there right now. So when I see a list like this, I can’t help but wonder: Where’s the disconnect? Why am I seeing such a stark difference between the content I inhabit on a daily basis and the content that the average Christian is consuming at bestselling rates? I don’t have an answer for that.

There are a few things I do know:

The space right now for creative Christian writers is enormous. There is a real material need in American Christian culture for literary talent. We can’t talk to teenage and twentysomething believers about using their gifts for the good of the body of Christ and only point them toward vocational ministry or the mission field. Christian art matters (it always has), and it requires Christian artists. They won’t grow out of the ground; they have to be cultivated, encouraged, identified, and supported.

Hear hear. Where are the new authors? People who might have written acceptable fiction twenty years ago are not only growing older but many of them are growing more liberal (Max Lucado…Ted Dekker…etc) Where are the young credible, solid authors coming up? Many of those older authors have taught their own family and their offspring are now writing books, such as Max Lucado’s daughter Jenna, and Beth Moore’s daughter Melissa. This is even a more important question because the twenty-somethings of today have been raised entirely in a liberal, prosperity, market-driven church growth model with sermonettes passing for deep theological thought and 7-11 praise songs that pass for hymns.

Jesus noted the pattern when sinful doctrine is allowed to remain for periods of time in teaching, the next generation adopts it.

But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. 21 I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. 22 Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, 23 and I will strike her children dead. (Rev 2:20-23a).

Christian reader, keep your eye out for good new authors, and buy their books and encourage them personally by offering good reviews on Amazon or even directly through their social media or email (if published).

I recommend reading the remainder of Mr James’ article, also. He has several additional bullet point thoughts on the matter that are worth your time.

Here is the third article for your consideration, 12 Fiction Books That Will Shape Your Theology

I am mentioning this article not for the list, which may or may not contain books that are healthy ‘eating’ for the Christian, but for the fact that the author writes that it’s a given that Christian fiction shapes theology.

When we think about the role of reading in our spiritual formation, we generally think of non-fiction books that help us understand scripture and theology, but fiction powerfully shapes the ways in which we think faithfully about God and the world. Here is some of the best fiction that has been most formative in my own theology.

Here Albert Mohler states, that Christian books, specifically The Shack, are in fact sustained theological arguments.

In evaluating the book, it must be kept in mind that The Shack is a work of fiction. But it is also a sustained theological argument, and this simply cannot be denied. Any number of notable novels and works of literature have contained aberrant theology, and even heresy. The crucial question is whether the aberrant doctrines are features of the story or the message of the work. When it comes to The Shack, the really troubling fact is that so many readers are drawn to the theological message of the book, and fail to see how it conflicts with the Bible at so many crucial points.

What is meant here is, is the heretical message simply a mechanism to propel the narrative, as in an

example of a character who believes something unorthodox but eventually is saved from his sinful devotion to an aberrant theology, or is the aberrant message THE point of the book? One of my favorite books of all time is Elmer Gantry by Sinclair Lewis. It tells the story of a false convert who rose to fame and celebrity pastor status, all the while not being a believer in any sense. The message of the book was to illustrate how this can happen, not promote that hypocrisy is to be accepted. The sustained theological argument of Elmer Gantry is that hypocrisy is bad, while the sustained theological argument in The Shack is that God does not punish sin and everyone will eventually be reconciled to God.

Friends, do not accept the argument that “it’s just fiction!” Unorthodox theologies come to us in song, poems, art, sermons, movies, and books. We must be Bereans and test every theological argument that we absorb. If this sounds like a lot of work, it is. Paul repeatedly advised his readers to be vigilant. (For example, 1 Corinthians 16:13). We are on a battlefield in a war, and we don’t only hear the cannons booming, but we must be alert for snipers, too. When it comes to accepting things not of the Lord, it all matters. A sniper is not “just a sniper,” and Christian books are never “just fiction.”

——————————————-

Miracle Max explains Arminianism v. Calvinism

Posted on January 14, 2017January 14, 2017 by elizabethprata

“With all dead, there’s only one thing you can do. Go through his pockets and look for loose change.”

LOL. For those who might not know, Miracle Max is a fictional character in the movie The Princess Bride. Of course, the movie was an entertainment fairy tale move, not a theological treatise. But Max’s words summed up a critical difference in the two actual approaches to salvation.

The Arminian believes we are slightly alive, and that in some corner of the heart, we can at some point in life choose salvation.

The person who understands the Doctrines of Grace knows that divine grace is the only catalyst for salvation, and that we have nothing to do with it. God saves us. As a matter of fact, He chose every person He decided He was going to save before the foundation of the world. (Ephesians 2:1-6).

There’s a big difference between Mostly Dead (Arminianism) and All Dead (Calvinism). Miracle Max, you are very wise!