Category: theology

Posted in theology

Pulpit Fashion

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Pulpits. If you attend church, you’ve got one. It may be a music stand, a desk, a simple or an ornate traditional pulpit. But the preacher needs to stand somewhere to face his audience, and preach the truth visibly and audibly. A pulpit, in Western church architecture is “an elevated and enclosed platform from which the sermon is delivered during a service.”

Here is Spurgeon opining on how horrible many pulpits are, lol. At the time apparently, the Pulpit was enclosed in some way, either by rails or a box, and between being confined and having gas lamps near the head, Spurgeon said, “is very apt to make a preacher feel half intoxicated, or to sicken him. We ought to be spared this infliction.” More here, Pulpits–

Remarkable are the forms which pulpits have assumed according to the freaks of human fancy and folly. Twenty years ago they had probably reached their very worst. What could have been their design and intent it would be hard to conjecture. A deep wooden pulpit of the old sort might well remind a minister of his mortality, for it is nothing but a coffin set on end: but on what rational ground do we bury our pastors alive? Many of these erections resemble barrels, others are of the fashion of egg cups and wine glasses; a third class were evidently modeled after corn bins upon four legs; and yet a fourth variety can only be likened to swallows’ nests stuck upon the walls. Some of them are so high as to turn the heads of the occupants when they dare to peer into the awful depths below them, and they give those who look up to the elevated preacher for any length of time a crick in the neck. I have felt like a man at the mast-head while perched aloft in these “towers of the flock.” These abominations are in themselves evils, and create evils.

Even 200 years ago they were looking for that sweet spot of design for a pulpit. Seems like at some point, Spurgeon found it.

Here is HB Charles on the making of the only 3rd replica of Spurgeon’s pulpit desk from which HB will now preach. He was overcome with joy at how this structure supports and aids the preacher in his preaching: The Charles Spurgeon Pulpit at Shiloh

https://www.firstfam.org/media/spurgeon-pulpit

Pastor David Tarkington was asked by a woodworking congregant what kind of pulpit he would like if he could design one, and he promptly said, ‘Like Spurgeon’s- go see HB Charles’ to see what it looks like.‘ Then he wrote,

Why the Pulpit?

What is the significance of having a replica pulpit of Spurgeon’s? I know that throughout our community and around the world, God’s men are preaching God’s Word faithfully while standing behind home-made stands, music stands, milk cartons stacked up, ornate pulpits, tall tables, and some with no stand at all. Yet, in our church, with the facility God has blessed us to have, this stage set-up and pulpit says more than most know. The desk where the copy of God’s Word is opened each Lord’s Day for the preaching of the word is more than just a piece of furniture. It is a heavy responsibility for the pastor to preach the Word, rightly divide it, and feed the flock well, trusting the Holy Spirit to empower the spoken words from the written Word so that God may be glorified.

Rebecca Van Doodewaard wrote an 8-part series on Ecclesiastical Architecture. I enjoyed that series very much. Here is an excerpt from that series, the entry focusing on pulpits:

So, “because the Word is indispensable, the pulpit, as the architectural manifestation of the Word, must make its indispensability architecturally clear” (Bruggink and Droppers, 80). The sacraments are necessary. Congregational singing is important. Prayer is needed.

Proclaimed gospel, however, has historically held and should hold primary importance in Protestant worship. Everything else in worship and the sanctuary should revolved around it and point to it. Presbyterians, low Anglicans, Baptists, and Methodists (among other Protestant groups), despite their differences, all originally put the preached Word front and center, theologically and architecturally.

This most basic element of biblical Christianity found consistent architectural expression across the board. You will see in old churches that have not renovated their sanctuaries, that even in times of strong denominational affiliation, large, beautiful, central pulpits were ubiquitous.

The pulpit was large, not only so that it was visible from all parts of the sanctuary, but also so there was space to hold the preacher’s notes, a hymn book and a copy of the Scriptures which the congregation could see. The other reason that pulpits were large was to make the minister look smaller, hiding most of the man behind this architectural manifestation of the Word. Source Rebecca Van Doodewaard, Ecclesiastical Architecture.

The Pulpit at Grace Community Church, By Phil Johnson:

Pastors often express interest in the pulpit at Grace Community Church. It is famous as one of the first pulpits ever mounted on a hydraulic lift, so that it can be adjusted for height, (side note: Spurgeon complained that as a short person “They are generally so deep that a short person like myself can scarcely see over the top of them, and when I ask for something to stand upon they bring me a hassock…” which is unstable.)
and it can even descend all the way beneath the platform, all at the touch of a button.

(This was made necessary by the placement of the baptistery, which is at the congregation’s eye level, in the platform behind the pulpit. The pulpit was built to descend so that it could be permanently located at the very front of the platform, yet be easily moved—almost imperceptibly—so that the baptistery can be seen.)

I’ve often said this is my favorite pulpit to preach from, for several reasons. Of course, it’s a historic pulpit with an unrivaled reputation as a place where biblical preaching always meets an eager congregation.

But I like the pulpit for pragmatic reasons, too. It offers more real estate for notes than any pulpit I have ever preached from anywhere. Its top is almost flat, not slanted like a music stand. (Slanted pulpits always allow my notes to slide beneath the reach of my bifocals. I’d prefer a totally flat pulpit-top.) Our pulpit is high enough that the line of sight between my notes and eye-contact with the congregation is very short.

As a piece of furniture, our pulpit is not particularly remarkable. There’s nothing ornate or extraordinary about its craftsmanship. But what it lacks in aesthetics it more than makes up for in serviceability.

CR Wiley says, “I was recently asked, “What makes a good pulpit?” Here’s one I designed and had built for me at my last church. Here are a few convictions and practical considerations that went into the design of this one.

1.A pulpit has a liturgical function—it isn’t a lectern, it is the throne of the Word in Reformed churches. Consequently, it should make the pulpit Bible visible from every part of the sanctuary. It’s not supposed to enhance the status of a preacher, instead it should say something about the authority of God’s judgements. To reinforce this I had what appear to have armrests on either side of the pulpit Bible—and it just so happened that these provided places for a preacher to place his hands.

2.It should be substantial, even heavy, made of the highest quality materials a congregation can afford. This pulpit is made of quarter sawn red oak from the Berkshires in Massachusetts and it weighs roughly 400 pounds.

3.On the practical side of things, it should have places to put notes and books that might be used during preaching. As you might be able to tell, this pulpit provides plenty of space on either side of the pulpit Bible for those things. Source

What is your opinion on pulpits?

Posted in theology

Elisabeth Elliot: Faith, Controversy, and Legacy

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Source

A reader asked me about Elisabeth Elliot. This is the answer I gave.

Elliot was one of the five wives whose husbands were killed by the unreached Ecuadorean Auca Indians back in 1956. She decided to remain in the mission field and minister to the same natives who had speared her husband. Later, returning to the US, she remarried and began speaking on a circuit. Her second husband, Addison Leitch, died agonizingly of cancer 4 years later. Elliot wrote books and hosted a radio program for 13 years called Gateway to Joy. She married for a third time in 1977 to Lars Gren and remained so until her death caused by dementia in 2015. She had one daughter, Valerie. Elisabeth was seen as a graceful, valiant, strong woman, but she was also disillusioned at times, complex, and had bouts of depression.

The question I was asked about Elliot was, was her theology off? It seems a bit off to the reader. I answered, yes her theology IS off. Elisabeth seems to be something of a sacred cow in evangelical circles, and has escaped scrutiny or critique. She gets a pass.

Some years ago I read an interview a Catholic lady was involved in with Elisabeth Elliot. A remarkable exchange occurred which the interviewer put in her resulting article. Elisabeth’s evangelical brother Thomas converted to Catholicism. He became an apologist for Roman Catholicism and wrote many books on the religion.

She said of her brother, the Catholic, that she wished she was brave or she’d be a Catholic too. From Catholic Exchange, an interview:

“Do you know my brother, Thomas Howard? He entered the Catholic Church some years ago. I only wish I had his courage. … “Cowardice, I suppose. My listeners and readers simply would not understand.” Source: Courage to be Catholic

No, we would not.

Though these things happen, it wasn’t solely wanting her child to go to American schools that made Elisabeth leave the mission field, it was constant interpersonal conflict with fellow widow Rachel Saint that was the final straw. They could not stand each other. Though Elisabeth apparently tried to heal the fracture, it never did heal. It’s really not here or there, but the press gives Elliott a winsome graciousness or a settled placidity which was not always true.

She also preached to men. Christianity Today wrote, “Elliot, like many prominent conservative women, also manifested certain contradictions amid her complementarian advocacy. Though she insisted that only qualified men could serve as pastors, she taught church audiences that typically included adult men. Along with her second husband, she joined the Episcopal Church, one of the denominations most adamant about ordaining female pastors.“

In her early life and especially when courting Jim, she had weird ideas about personal will and divining the will of God, using almost mystical means such as circumstances and experience. Her Keswick Holiness upbringing instilled this in her. This led her to excessive self-introspection and sometimes paralysis in decision making.

Elliot biographer wrote in her essay Why Elisabeth Elliot Changed Her Beliefs about Finding God’s Will, “She saw God’s care as dependent on her perfect obedience, and obedience as including not only her actions and her will but every aspect of her life right down to her natural inclinations. Human free will involved only the choice to obey or disobey God’s direction, and God’s will was so minutely specific that even an earnest seeker could miss the narrow path of obedience.”

Elisabeth Elliot teaching men

The fear of missing God’s direction caused Elliot much grief. While it is admirable to want to lay down the whole body, mind, strength, and heart down for the Lord, it is a kind of personal sovereignty that thinks our own decisions can and do thwart God’s will.

Did not Mordecai say to Esther, “Then Mordecai told them to reply to Esther, “Do not imagine that you in the king’s palace can escape any more than all the other Jews. For if you keep silent at this time, liberation and rescue will arise for the Jews from another place, and you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not attained royalty for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:13-14), making it clear that Esther could decide what she wanted to decide, but that God’s plan would proceed regardless of Esther’s decision.

Elisabeth developed a rubric for divining what God wanted her to do,

(1) the circumstances,
(2) the witness of the Word,
(3) peace of mind

It’s an unstable thing to depend on emotions to confirm a personal decision. Whether it’s fear or peace, emotions should not figure in. No doubt Paul did not ‘feel peace about it’ when he got up from the road from being beaten almost dead to confront the mobs again, or when he floated on a shipwreck plank for days. In Acts 9:16, Jesus tells Paul, “For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” Knowing the certainty of suffering was ahead, I am sure Paul didn’t feel a spiritual placidity all the time. Our emotions should not be a guide for obedience.

On the plus side, Elisabeth was staunchly against feminism, and spoke frequently about headship submission, roles in marriage, and resisting cultural norms. On the downside, she often said these things at predator Bill Gothard’s events. And she began this professional relationship with Gothard in the mid 1990s, AFTER accusations began to come out against Gothard, which were later confirmed by his Board.

She certainly endured horrific tragedies, martyrdom of her first husband, agonizing long death of 2nd from cancer, and a semi-abusive relationship with the 3rd, and a 10-year battle with dementia, which caused her death at age 88. Her work on the mission field is beyond admirable, and her writing no doubt has helped many, as well as her popular radio program.

However, her legacy is definitely complicated, wrapped in grace under suffering, obedience to the Lord even under the most difficult trials, and an advocate for gender roles- which are all good things. However her search for HOW to obey God, her yearning for Catholicism, and her evident hypocrisy in preaching to men, are sad complicating factors in her life’s story.

Posted in theology

The Puritan Fashion Police: A Look at Sumptuary Laws

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Costumed interpreters, wearing historically accurate dress, gather around a table for the Harvest Feast of 1621, or “The First Thanksgiving,” at Plimoth Plantation in Plymouth, Mass. Pam Berry/The Boston Globe via Getty Images. Source

You can’t legislate behavior. The 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibited the sale, transportation, and manufacture of alcohol. It went into effect on January 17, 1920.

It didn’t work. The 21st Amendment repealed it in 1933. It had little effect on alcohol consumption.

I was watching a Youtube history video on the Renaissance in Europe. This is the period around the 1400s to the 1600s. In the video the history expert mentioned Italian “Sumptuary laws.” I learned that these were laws designed to regulate personal spending, often based on religious or moral grounds. The idea was to limit extravagant spending on food, drink, clothing, and/or household items.

Sumptuary Laws extend as far back as ancient Rome and ancient Greece. The secular point of sumptuary laws was to distinguish one’s class by the manner of dress. The religious point was to prevent lavish and wasteful expenditures on finery of those in ‘mean condition.’

The American Puritans tried Sumptuary Laws on the new colony as well. It worked about as well for them as these laws did for everyone else: not too good. But they tried it anyway, and so, the American Puritans became fashion police for a while.

Hannah Lyman was a Connecticut Puritan who, in 1676, was hauled to court for her manner of dress, along with about three dozen other women. Charged with overdressing, their crime was wearing a silk hood. In a moment of rebellion, Hannah wore her silk hood to court. The judge was not amused, and she along with the other women, were fined.

In another example of a specific sumptuary law, no one except those in high government were permitted to wear gold in their clothes. “Declaring its “utter detestation and dislike” of men and women of “mean condition, education and calling” who would wear the “garb of gentlemen,” the Massachusetts General Court in 1639 particularly prohibited Puritans of low estate from wearing “immoderate great breeches, knots of riban, silk roses, double ruffles and capes.” Women of low rank were forbidden silk hoods and scarves, as well as short sleeves “whereby the nakedness of the arms may be discovered”— the daring new fashion popular among the upper classes.” We Were What We Wore.

As the Puritan colony settled, trade resumed between our side of the Atlantic and Europe. People were just as fond of their frills and frippery as they always had been. More exotic garb was coming in, including short sleeves, gasp! This infuriated the Reverend Nathaniel Ward so much that, under a pseudonym, in 1647 he issued an angry and somewhat cryptic treatise called ‘A Simple Cobbler of Aggawam‘,  and called out the ladies:

“I truly confesse, it is beyond the ken of my understanding to conceive, how those women should have any true grace, or valuable virtue, that have so little wit, as to disfigure themselves with such exotic garb, as not only dismantles their native lovely lustre, but transclouts them into gant bar-geese, ill-shapen-shell-fish, Egyptian Hyeroglyphicks, or at the best into French flirts“…  geese, shellfish, hieroglyphics, and French flirts!? Egad! The reverend was truly worked up! (Source).

To be fair, the reverand also called out other religious sects, such as Familists, Antinomians, Anabaptists, and other enthusiasts…

Governing personal behavior and individual choices is always a dicey proposition. Hannah and the other women were fined. It was said specifically that Hannah was “wearing silk in a fflonting (flaunting) manner, in an offensive way…” I really don’t know how you’d wear a silk cap in a flaunting way. Perhaps she flirtatiously tipped it over one eye?

According to Claudia Kidwell, the former head curator of the Smithsonian Institution’s Costume Division, “Clothing’s most pervading function has been to declare status.” The early Puritans loved finery, but only the ones who could afford to have it tailor made enjoyed the finer points of it, and these were usually the leaders of the community, wealthy merchants, or high-born immigrants from England. It wasn’t until the late Industrial Revolution when ready made clothes appeared on the shop shelves.

But in the early days, we read,

Massachusetts lawyer and later governor of Massachusetts John Winthrop with his lace collar and cuffs.  Charles Osgood/Public domain

Though simplicity of dress was one of the cornerstones of the Puritan Church, the individual members did not yield their personal vanity without many struggles. As soon as the colonies rallied from the first years of poverty and, above all, of comparative isolation, and a tide of prosperity and wealth came rolling in, the settlers began to pick up in dress, to bedeck themselves, to send eagerly to the mother country for new petticoats and doublets that, when proudly donned, did not seem simple and grave enough for the critical eyes of the omnipotent New England magistrates and ministers. Hence restraining and simplifying sumptuary laws were passed. In 1634, in view of some new fashions which were deemed by these autocrats to be immodest and extravagant, an order was sent forth by the General Court.

Though we most often see a Puritan portrait where the subject is wearing black, this was not usually the case in real life. Puritans wore black for paintings becuase black was their Sunday best. Black was a hard color to achieve and it faded quickly. But their daily mode of dress sported all sorts of colors.

Margaret Winthrop, the Massachusetts governor’s wife, ordered her clothing from John Smith, her family’s tailor in London. Margaret wanted “the civilest fashion now in use.”

Even then the clothes made the man. Or woman. In 1652, Jonas Fairbanks was called to the court in Salem for “wearing great boots.” Someone had spotted him wearing them, and snitched. The court record reads: “Jonas Fairbankes presented for wearing great boots. Discharged, it appearing that he did not wear them after the law was published.” Not today, snitcher. Not today.

A few other court decisions from that time in Salem (1646-1651) read:

Henrye Bullocke fined for excess in his apparel in boots, ribbons, gold and silver lace, etc.

Marke Hoscall of Salem fined for excess in his apparel, wearing broad lace.

John Bourne and his wife presented for concealing some pieces of cloth, stuff and thread committed to them and converting them to their own use. To make treble restitution and public acknowledgment at a public meeting in Salem within one month or pay fine.

In England in the late 1500s, a sumptuary law was passed requiring wool caps to be worn. In New England, such wool caps, called Monmouth caps, proved to be practical, and the people who had come from England were used to wearing them, so they were worn without resistance. These ‘Monmouth caps’ became widely used, but as a personal, practical choice.

“Every person above the age of six (excepting “Maids, ladies, gentlewomen, noble personages, and every Lord, knight and gentleman of twenty marks land”) residing in any of the cities, towns, villages or hamlets of England, must wear, on Sundays and holidays (except when travelling), “a cap of wool, thicked and dressed in England, made within this realm, and only dressed and finished by some of the trade of cappers, upon pain to forfeit for every day of not wearing 3s. 4d.” Sumptuary Law of 1651 Massachusetts Bay Colony and the Fairbanks Family

Partly, the old issue of Job’s friend tinged the American Puritans’ thinking. They believed that wealth ordained by God, the wealthy were in favor with Him. Thus, to dress below one’s class would be highly incorrect. However, this use of sumptuary laws to identify class distinctions and maintain hierarchies in class waned as there was more socio-economic movement between classes occurring than it did in England. It became impossible to enforce, too. “Clothing is created out of motivation,” says Claudia Kidwell. “The wealthy wanted to maintain distinctions. Everyone else wanted to close the gap.”

In Puritan Massachusetts, the Sumptuary Law was instituted less to maintain a hierarchy, though that was part of it, but based on biblical standards of wise shepherding and to institute frugality. In this, New Englanders do owe a debt, because if you have heard of the “Thrifty Yankee”, that regional characteristic is real and pervasive to this day. Enacted in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the fall of 1634, the General Court ordered,

“That no person either man or woman shall hereafter make or buy any apparel, either woolen or silk or linen with any lace on it, silver, gold, or thread, under the penalty of forfeiture of said clothes. Also that no person either man or woman shall make or buy any slashed clothes other than one slash in each sleeve and another in the back; also all cut-works, embroideries, or needlework cap, bands, and rails are forbidden hereafter to be made and worn under the aforesaid penalty; also all gold or silver girdles, hatbands, belts, ruffs, beaver hats are prohibited to be bought and worn hereafter.” (Old English updated to modern language, Source).

Problem is, Christian liberty is still Christian liberty. It should not be legislated. But it kept happening anyway, people insisting on personal choice with their money, including where or when to buy finery. The court opined there was-

“intolerable excess and bravery hath crept in upon vs, and especially amongst people of mean condition, to the dishonor of God, the scandal of our profession, the consumption of estates, and altogether unsuiteable to our povertie…”

Obedience to God’s ways is a personal choice and a matter of Christian liberty when it’s in the areas not prescribed. Attempts to regulate one’s choices, whether tobacco, alcohol, clothing, or spending have always proved impossible to enforce and have failed in almost all cases. Hannah Lyman was 16 years old when she faced the court. Her bold stand for personal fashion choice resounds to this day.

However, there IS something to “the clothes make the woman.” The Bible advises us to be modest, and it also advises to shepherd our means well. Paul wrote of women in 1 Timothy 2:9, “Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive apparel,”

and in, 1 Peter 3:3-4, “Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair or gold jewelry or fine clothes, / but from the inner disposition of your heart, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in God’s sight“.

In the Old Testament, showy attire is likened to haughtiness. Being haughty is behavior that attempts to bring excessive attention to self,

Isaiah 3:16-24, “The LORD also says: “Because the daughters of Zion are haughty—walking with heads held high and wanton eyes, prancing and skipping as they go, jingling the bracelets on their ankles— / the Lord will bring sores on the heads of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will make their foreheads bare.” / In that day the Lord will take away their finery: their anklets and headbands and crescents…“

But legislation is not the way. Simple obedience to Jesus is the way. It DOES say something about a woman who wears short-shorts and halter tops. It says, ‘look at my body on display.’ It also says something if a woman goes in the other direction with a constant neck-high and floor length mode of dress, which in my opinion says, ‘look at my modesty on display.’

The indignant Reverend does make a sensible plea, “to avoid morose singularity, follow fashions slowly, showing by their moderation, that they rather draw in the other direction with their hearts, then put on by their examples.“

All things in moderation. Including laws!

Further Resources

Our Puritan Ancestors: Mass Bay Residents Waged a Fashion War in the Colony

Records and files of the Quarterly courts of Essex county, Massachusetts

We were what we wore

Sumptuary Law of 1651 Massachusetts Bay Colony and the Fairbanks Family

The Puritan Experiment with Sumptuary Legislation

Posted in theology

Victim Mentality: A Biblical Critique

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Over the last five or eight years, I’ve seen a dramatic rise in what people term a “victimhood culture.” This is a culture which declares all power is evil, privilege is ill-gotten and leads to oppression, and victimhood is virtuous. Victims are allowed to opine on anything without facing critique, because, after all, it was their experience, or in the current parlance, “their truth.”

It’s the idea that that suffering and persecution (and any slight, wound, or grief is ‘persecution’ to victims) are a source of status. The deeper the ‘persecution’ the higher the status.

Photo by Dev Asangbam on Unsplash

The notion that suffering or persecution can become a source of status is testimony to two things: 1) how satan twists anything, even the good things of the Bible, and 2) how me-centered Christianity can become if allowed to fester unfettered.

How does satan subtly twist the Bible away from Jesus toward ourselves? In this identity politics sphere anyway, the Bible says that the foolish shame the wise, the the weak are made strong, the king becomes a slave so that the slaves may become kings, the first shall be last and the last shall be first. Satan took this and ran with it to create victimhood mentality.

Victim identity is not new. Prior to Swiss philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s ideas infiltrating his 1700s culture, participants in civil society counted their status based on what they had contributed positively to it. After Rousseau, who invented the category of ‘the disadvantaged’, it became based on a lack or a negative. Source.

But its infiltration wholesale into the faith is fairly new. Slowly, incrementally (because satan is subtle) me-centeredness crept into the faith in the form of sermons, books (self-help), and famously platformed ‘wounded women’ prancing about their stages opining about how they were ‘hurt’. Thus, one’s faith is based on how the person overcame the hurt in their own power, instead of focusing on and glorifying Christ by their teaching. Their experience becomes the focus.

I give one example among many, perhaps the best known example to this day- Beth Moore. On her instagram recently, she wrote,

Here is how Beth Moore was ‘hurt by her denomination’: She was given a Sunday School class to teach by her denomination (Southern Baptist Convention pastor John Bisagno, Moore’s pastor). When it outgrew the room, she was given an auditorium. Then she was given opportunity to ‘speak’ (AKA preach) to her congregation on Sunday evenings. Moore’s pastor John Bisagno is widely seen as having launched her ministry career and ’empowering women’ in ministry in modern times. When Moore’s first manuscript was rejected by Lifeway, an arm of her denomination, her friend Lee Sizemore advocated for her and got the manuscript published. Moore went on to have a lucrative relationship with Lifeway for decades, with a Lifeway worker noting “no one’s products brings in more money for Lifeway than Beth Moore’s”.

Her denomination via Lifeway paid for half of Moore’s private jet travel for decades as she rose in prominence and became known as the most famous conservative evangelical woman in the world at the time. Supported by her denomination she was puffed by Christianity Today and even the secular magazine The Atlantic in long articles. Moore made millions, and at one time enjoyed owning 4 homes scattered across Texas from Galveston to Tomball to Menard.

But … the ‘denomination hurt her’. She called all this support ‘misogynistic’ even though she was specifically launched as an ’empowered woman in ministry’ BY her denomination, and supported for decades BY her denomination, petted and jetted BY her denomination. Now wrung dry, Moore’s noisy and divisive exit was the thanks they got.

That’s the victimhood culture- as long as it serves the person and their goals, they will play the victim. Playing the victim keeps the focus on the individual and away from Jesus.

Oh, I know they will say the word ‘Jesus’ a lot. They may even attribute their overcoming their hurt to Jesus. But the focus is squarely on themselves, their hurtful experience, and their power to overcome.

While reality constrains us to acknowledge genuine suffering and oppression exist and obligates compassion, it also requires us to acknowledge that the doctrine of perpetual victimhood—an ideology that frames individuals as powerless, blameless, and entirely at the mercy of external forces—stands in opposition to reality and starkly contradicts the teachings of Scripture. Source The Doctrine of Victimization and the Destruction of Personal Agency

At root of the victim mentality is pride. It says ‘I was hurt. I deserve better treatment than that.’ The word deserve is key here. In fact, what we deserve is hell. What did John the Baptist deserve? He was beheaded. Did he deserve that for speaking the truth? No. Is he deemed a victim in the Bible? Jesus said he was the greatest man. Did Paul deserve to be imprisoned? No. Did Paul claim to be a victim? He went through a lot. He counted it all as joy in service to the King.

If you have a victim mentality, you will see your entire life through a perspective that things constantly happen ‘to’ you. Victimisation is thus a combination of seeing most things in life as negative, beyond your control, and as something you should be given sympathy for experiencing as you ‘deserve’ better. Source: The Victim Mentality: What it is and Why You Use It

A true Christian will see whatever happens to them as being FOR them. Why? Because Jesus is sovereign and is the cause of all things.

Today a person’s moral authority is directly proportional to how many different ways he or she can claim to have been victimized.

Social Justice and the Gospel, part 1

I could easily trade on being a victim. I grew up in a neglectful and abusive home. I am a child of divorce. I was a latchkey kid. I was stalked by an actual rapist in college and helped the police catch him. I was betrayed and abandoned by an adulterous husband. I was a congregant in a spiritually abusive church. I was a congregant in a church whose worthless pastor blatantly plagiarized every sermon he gave, even ripping off the original pastor’s life anecdotes as if he had lived them. Do you know what all of that adds up to? LIFE. It’s life. That’s all.

Pagans and Christians alike have things happen to them. Just because Christians have wounds and hurts doesn’t make us special. Playing a Christian victim is a devolving sphere of self-pity and a heaping up other victims to affirm your self-pity.

Herbert Schlossberg has said of victim mentality that it, “exalts categories of weakness, sickness, helplessness, and anguish into virtues while it debases the strong and prosperous. In the country of ontological victimhood, strength is an affront.” (see source below).

This is exactly why strong Christian men are seen as oppressors and Christian women crying over ‘misogyny’ in the faith are seen as the strong and ‘brave’ ones.

It is OK to feel sorrowful once in a while. Do I ever feel sorrowful for a lost childhood? Sure. But I focus on the positives. I have been saved by the blood of the Lamb, though I do not deserve it. I have His strength, provision, and support every day. I can boldly approach the highest throne with my petitions. I have an eternity to see the face of God and dwell in glory. What a joy that the Lord shepherded me even before my moment of justification to turn me into the person I am today, including the life trials before and after salvation! What minuscule things my wounds and hurts are when compared to the weight of glory!

I am sorry if you were hurt by family, stranger, church, denomination, anyone. I am sorry if you are feeling sorrowful. But we are not victims. We are to love, forgive, bring our cares to Jesus and lay them at His feet. Some of the people who ‘hurt’ me are not saved. They were just living their unsaved lives in sin, and their sin affected me. Some have passed into their eternity unsaved as far as I know. Others are near death’s door as an unsaved person. How can I feel sorry for myself when their eternity hangs in the balance? May it not be that I sit in the safe seat of justification and point to myself when others around me are destined for eternal wrath and torment!

Both Paul and Moses were so torn by the fact of their countrymen being unsaved they pleaded for them, even to suffer in their stead. (Romans 9:3, exodus 32:32). This kind of self-abegnation is unheard of today.

It would be logical for pagans to wonder, ‘what kind of Jesus do Christians serve who constantly moan about being a victim? What a sad, ineffectual religion!’

Photo by Joyful on Unsplash

The cross of Jesus defeats all self-pity, victimhood, pride, anger, bitterness. Yes, we may need to work hard at claiming this defeat depending on the depth of the crime. But we certainly do not need to inflate our wounds in order to garner attention and pity. Jesus is too precious for that.

Further Resources

G3 Ministries: video, The Intersection of Victimology and Evangelicalism | Ep. 90

The Cult of Victimhood, The Master’s Seminary blog article

Source for Schlossberg quote- Herbert Schlossberg, Idols for Destruction: Christian Faith and its Confrontation with American Society p. 69–70.

Posted in theology

Are Women in Pulpits Challenging Biblical Truth?

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

For those of us who love God and seek to obey at all points (but knowing we fail, so we repent and try again), the persistent and entrenched disobedience of some self-proclaimed Christian women is a puzzle to us.

But then again, we read our Bibles and see 1 John 2:4 which says, The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;

And we say, those who constantly disobey, (especially by preaching in church, which is a gross abomination to Jesus), who are unteachable, who reject correction, who preach a different gospel, who deny the sufficiency of the Bible by their direct revelatory stories and puffed up visions, who abandon their career of motherhood & children at home to pursue a career, whose fruit is only thorns and is bad…must not be saved.

And then we receive pushback on every point above. So it’s still a puzzle when the Bible is so clear on certain points which are easy to understand and interpret. In the collage above are some of the more prominent women who stand behind a pulpit in a church they claim is Jesus’, and preach.

Because if they had the Holy Spirit in them, He would not allow them to continue on a consistent path of rebellion. He would correct them either by opening their eyes to the proper verses, or by some drastic measure to awaken them to their transgressions. Do you think the Holy Spirit is in a woman who, for decades, disobeys? Can a Christian have a seared conscience over their persistent and public sin? Dishonoring Jesus along the way and creating stumbling blocks for the weaker sisters?

No. He killed Ananias and Sapphira to demonstrate how serious He is about sin in the church. He sent 7 letters to the churches in Revelation to show how serious He is about His church.

Above we have-
Beth Moore at St Timothy’s,
Aimee Byrd at Covenant Church,
Rev Nancy Frausto at Seminary of the Southwest,
Sadie Robertson Huff at Auburn Community Church (only age 22!),
Christine Caine at Life Church,
Priscilla Shirer at Concord Church.

“women should keep silent in the churches”. 1 Corinthians 14:33-34.

G3: No, Women Can’t Preach

Pastor Gabe Hughes of WWUTT.com: Women Pastors are a Fundamental Problem for Southern Baptists

GTY: Does the Bible permit a woman to preach?

Ladies, be discerning. Above all, be humble. It takes humility to say ‘I followed this or that woman for a while and invested in her, with my heart, money, time, or energy, but my investment in her was misguided. Let me learn to discern better, let me be pure in my approach to obeying Jesus, let me abandon that which makes me stumble on my walk and turn to “…whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, think about these things.” (Philippians 4:8).

If you see a woman standing at a pulpit on a Sunday morning at church service and open her Bible and preach to the congregation, she is in rebellion. Though satan is subtle, and hides his schemes secretively many times, this one is an easy spot. If the woman preaches consistently (not just a one-time mistake), she is in rebellion and you can learn nothing from her.

If you’ve followed such a one for a while, just talk to Jesus about it. Repent and ask Him to give you better discernment. He will!

Posted in theology

The easy-peasy way to discern a false teacher

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

There is an easy way to tell if a teacher you like, follow, admire, or ‘learn from’ is false. I’m going to reveal this heretofore (not so) hidden way to detect false teachers. I could go on like the liberal theologians who say ‘this is a new method for interpreting’ or ‘I have a freshly discovered method…’ but I won’t. It’s been there all along. Here it is. Are you ready for this shocking message?

The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;” (1 John 2:4).

People who say “Jesus, Jesus” but sin against him constantly by living a life contrary to His commands, or teach falsely, do not have the truth in them. In other words, they are not saved.

They are revealed to be hypocritical. As John wrote in the verse above, a person cannot have an authentic relationship with Jesus and obstinately and consistently oppose His commandments with their actions.

The inward transformation of a person results in outward transformation (compare Matt 15:11). The work of Christ in a person necessitates them acting on His behalf, out of love (1 John 3:17). Source Faithlife Study Bible

Jesus made it very easy for us. Yet so many people say “but, but, but” and make layers upon layers of excuses.

“But she talks about Jesus all the time!” Of course they do. They talk about knowing Jesus right up to the moment they face Jesus and claim to His face that they know him. But they don’t. And he says so.(Matthew 7:22-23).

“But she does so many nice things!” I know. So did the Pharisees. Outwardly they did all the right things, seemingly. But Jesus said, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness.” (Matthew 23:27). Inside they were dead. They did not have the truth in them.

dead inside

“But she only to men preaches a little“. Sorry, but “whoever keeps the whole Law, yet stumbles in one point, has become guilty of all.” (James 2:10). Even a small sin, or a single transgression against God’s law, means they are guilty and due his or her just penalty.

“But lifestyle doesn’t count, and her doctrine is fine!” Sorry, but Titus 2:3-5 is only one of several standards for Christian women to adhere to a certain lifestyle. “Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored.” It is dishonoring to God to live otherwise. Men too. Lifestyle counts. So does character. Are they divisive? Slanderous? Combative? Unteachable? Then they are false.

“But you don’t know their heart!” Yes we do. In true Christians, “The Holy Spirit implanted in us a heart that can understand and love spiritual truth” says Tom Pennington in his sermon Recognizing False teachers. A false teacher is not saved and thus does not have the Holy Spirit indwelling his heart. You can detect what is in their heart because the Bible tells us these people are greedy, liars, deceivers, hypocrites, and more.

Jesus said, “By their fruit you shall know them”. Not ‘maybe, but you WILL know them. We cannot see their heart but what comes out of their mouth is what defiles them, and then we can see the evidence. Making a determination based on evidence (their fruit) is not ‘seeing their heart’. It’s making an intelligent and accurate assessment of their output.

Figs. Their fruit is rotten. EPrata photo

For example, didn’t the Pharisees make a show of praying, fasting, and worshiping? But we can see the evidence of their self-serving attitude in their lengthened tassels, announcements of fasting, pretentious prayers at the street corners, choosing the chief seats. Look beyond their show. See the fruit.

Barnes Notes says of the 1 John 2:4 verse, “Is a liar – Makes a false profession; professes to have that which he really has not. Such a profession is a falsehood, because there can be no true religion where one does not obey the law of God.“

Gill’s Exposition says, and the truth is not in him; there is no true knowledge of God and Christ in him; nor is the truth of the Gospel in his heart, however it may be in his head; nor is the truth of grace in him, for each of these lead persons to obedience.

Did you catch that reference to the heart? The truth of the gospel is not in his heart. “What is in the heart will emerge, and corrupt theology will result in a corrupt life. False teaching and perverted living are inseparable, and eventually will become manifest.” (Grace to You, “What are the Marks of a False Teacher?“)

We over-complicate things. Just go back to the Bible. A false teacher will claim to know Jesus but constantly, unrepentantly, and long term, be disobedient to His commandments.

Further Reading

Beware of False Teachers

Posted in theology

Exploring Biblical Boats: From Noah’s Ark to Roman War Ships

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Mt. Hermon from Sea of Galilee – Public domain image. Dry plate negative. Galilean fishing Ships didn’t evolve much since Jesus’ day. This was taken in the very early 1900s and would have been very similar to the disciples’ boat.

Boats are often mentioned in the Bible. Aside from the Ark that carried Noah and his family, a once in a history boat, there is a lot of shipping going on, much traveling on boats, shipwrecks, and references to boats. There is also the symbolism of boats. Let’s dig in.

The port city of Tyre was known for his boats, shipping, and valuable products. Ezekiel 27:3, and say to Tyre, who sits at the entrance to the sea, [ports, harbors] merchant of the peoples to many coastlands, ‘This is what the Lord GOD says: “Tyre, you have said, ‘I am perfect in beauty.‘

1 Kings 9:26-27 also mentions not only ships, but a navy. Solomon used these ships to bring in much gold and silver. King Solomon also built a fleet of ships in Ezion-geber, which is near Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram sent his servants with the fleet, sailors who knew the sea, along with the servants of Solomon. 

Numbers 24:24 also mentions ships, “And ships shall come from the coast of Chittim, and shall afflict Asshur, and shall afflict Eber, and he also shall perish for ever.“

Grain boats of Egypt. Nile River. The boats used for carrying freight are built with a narrow keel, the stern and prow, as in ancient time, rising high above the water. They are usually managed by three or four men and carry what is known as the lateen sail. This is a large triangular sail. In Joseph’s day Egypt was the great granary of the world. Source: Earthly Footsteps of the Man of Galilee, p. 47

In the New Testament also there are mentions of shipping and passenger travel. Famously, Paul was shipwrecked. Acts 27:14-44 describes in some detail a difficult passage, and Paul’s ship eventually wrecked.

What kind of boats were these? Seagoing merchant ships, Galilean fishing boats, slave triremes, pirate ships, ferries (2 Samuel 19:18) …all types.

In 1986 in the Sea of Galilee a boat was discovered. The drought had caused waters on this freshwater large lake to recede and a 27′ long, flat bottomed boat was revealed. They call it the “Jesus boat” not because it has any connection to Jesus but the style of boat dates it to about Jesus’ time. It was about 7 feet wide and could hold 10 passengers if used as a ferry boat. If used as a fishing boat it could hold about five crew members and a catch of 600 pounds up to a ton of fish. It had 4 rowing stations and a mast for a sail.

remnants of ancient boat called Jesus boat.

We usually think of these kind of boats but the ancients were masters of shipbuilding. Aside from camel or donkey, ships were the only other mode of travel. They excelled at finding way to construct large vessels to get goods or people where they needed to go.

We read at Answers in Genesis,

In the writings of Pliny the Elder (AD 23–79), I discovered the table (below) about ships of antiquity. This documents the rapid advances the ancients made in ship-building technology in just a few centuries. The time period in the table is from about the seventh century BC to the end of the third century BC.

Jonah’s ship was large enough so he could ‘go down to the lowest part of the ship’ and fall asleep. (Jonah 1:5).

Below is a modern reconstruction of a Roman War Ship docked near Ephesus from Holy Land Photos. It is called a penteconter. You see the box-like structure along the side, that is where the oars would poke out. The holes above are for light and ventilation for the oarsmen. These ships typically lacked a full deck. “They were versatile, long-range ships used for sea trade, piracy and warfare, capable of transporting freight or troops. A penteconter was rowed by fifty oarsmen, arranged in a row of twenty-five on each side of the ship” says Wikipedia. These ships evolved into the more famous triremes. 

There is a ‘ram’ at the bow just under the surface of the water.

There were skiffs, highly maneuverable smaller boats used to transport goods, rowboats, smaller sailboats… In fact the Romans were so good at shipbuilding they became experts at building piers to dock the many ships. Some of their piers are stronger than ours built today. How?

How Roman concrete became strong: (AI overview)
“Roman concrete was made from volcanic ash, lime, volcanic rock, and seawater. When seawater interacted with the concrete, it dissolved components of the volcanic ash. This allowed new minerals to grow, including aluminous tobermorite and phillipsite. These minerals reinforced the cementing matrix, making the concrete stronger. This process continues over thousands of years.”

Paul used some maritime references to the faith. Though the Hebrew people were pastoral and agricultural, showing no inclination to become seafaring, they did know what these terms meant. In 1 Timothy 1:19, Paul wrote that some have rejected the faith ‘keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to their faith‘.

Jude warns in Jude 1:12 that false teachers are like hidden reefs which would cause the ship to be torn apart from stem to stern and sink.

Newfoundland: the skiff rounds the point widely, avoiding the visible rocks and the further hidden reef under the surface. Art high tide the rocks would be covered. EPrata photo

Hebrews 2:1 reminds us that we must pay close attention lest we “drift away”. Isaiah 57:20 refers to the wicked being like the sea itself, But the wicked are like the tossing sea, For it cannot be quiet, And its waters toss up refuse and mud.

Larry Pierce said in his article at Answers in Genesis, Just because we cannot duplicate something that was done thousands of years ago, it does not mean the ancients could not do it either!

The biblical world was full of coming and going. The ancients were experts in many things, some of which we can’t even discern how they did it! Pyramids, anyone? The ancient world is fascinating, including maritime advances.

Further reading

A Day in the Life of a Fisherman

The Galilean fishermen and their boats (and calming of the storm)

Posted in theology

How Minor Biblical Characters Impact Major Stories

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

I love learning about the major people in the Bible. I have a biography of Moses I plan to read. I read one on Paul. It’s fun to look all the verses that mention the top three apostles, Peter, John, James and learn of their backgrounds and personalities. It’s good to remind myself that these are real people, not characters in a book.

I’ve also developed a series of “Little Known Bible Characters”. The series is linked below. The ones who are mentioned a few times and which the Bible gives some details of their lives. I became curious about people such as Trophimus, Eutychus, Iddo, Esther’s Harbonah the Eunuch. There is enough in the record to be able to glean something of their lives and their service to God in providential ways.

But comes now a short essay I read from a favorite author of mine, JR Miller. He was an American who lived from 1840-1912. He was “was a popular Christian author, Editorial Superintendent of the Presbyterian Board of Publication, and pastor of several churches in Pennsylvania and Illinois” says Wikipedia.

JR Miller

We have the major people in the Bible, we have the minor people in the Bible, and we have the (seemingly) insignificant people in the Bible. JR Miller has something to say about this last group, that I thought was wonderfully comforting. Here is Pastor Miller-

Treasures from J.R. Miller (1840 — 1912)

Mordecai gave Hathach a copy of the decree issued in Susa that called for the death of all Jews, and he asked Hathach to show it to Esther. He also asked Hathach to explain it to her and to urge her to go to the king to beg for mercy and plead for her people. So Hathach returned to Esther with Mordecai’s message.

Then Esther told Hathach to go back and relay this message to Mordecai …” Esther 4:8-10

We are apt to overlook the minor actors in Scripture stories — in our absorbed interest in the prominent ones. Yet ofttimes these lesser people are just as important in their own place, and their service is just as essential to the final success of the whole — as the greater ones.

–The little girl in the story of Naaman the leper, is scarcely seen among the splendors of the Syrian court; but without her part, we would never have had the story at all.

–The young lad with the basket, is hardly thought of when we read the account of the miracle; but they were his loaves with which the Master fed all those hungry thousands that day on the green grass.

The smallest links in a chain — are ofttimes quite as important as the greatest links.

Hathach was one of these obscure characters. But his part was by no means unimportant. Without his being a trustworthy messenger, Mordecai’s communication with Esther would have been impossible — and the whole nation would have perished!

If we cannot do brave things like Esther, nor give wise counsels like Mordecai — we may at least be useful, as Hathach was, in faithful service. And perhaps our lowly part may someday prove to have been as essential — as the great deeds which all men praise. We may at least help some others in doing the great things that they are set to do in this world. –END JR Miller

You may feel like the smallest ant in a great civilization. You may be thinking, ‘What am I to contribute? How will the Lord use me? My spheres are so small, my resources so few…’ But God. He uses those who love Him in many ways. Naaman’s servant girl had the fewest resources of all, but she had the greatest knowledge, of the One True God. The boy with the basket had barely anything, and he isn’t even named. But his generosity and kindness speaks through the millennia.

Friend, keep living a life in obedience to God and your life itself is the service. Speak of Him where you can. Raise those children, as Eliza Spurgeon did, who was Charles’ mother and whose son became the Prince of Preachers. Even if your son or daughter is also ‘invisible’ to the world at large, no one is invisible to God. He sees all. He has placed you where you are on purpose, according to His will.

Little Known Bible Characters series

Little Known Bible Characters #6: King Cherdolaomer
Little Known Bible Characters #5: Harbonah the Eunuch
Little Known Bible Characters #4: Eutychus
Little Known Bible Characters #3: Trophimus
Little Known Bible Characters #2: ‘The List of Offenders’
Little Known Bible Characters #1: Iddo

Posted in theology

Is Gather25 Leading Believers Astray?

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Jennie Allen, from her Instagram

On February 28 to March 1st, 2025, there will be a global live streaming event called Gather25. It is the new version of the ten-year-old IF:Gathering, founded by Jennie Allen. In the past, the gathering has been a local annual conference to which attendees pay to attend in person and listen to messages by speakers. The usual conference arrangement.

This year, the conference will be mostly virtual. It will be beamed live globally, according to the scant information at Gather25.com ‘s website, “For 25 hours, Gather25 is inviting believers across the world to pray, repent, worship, and discover how the love of Jesus is transforming the world through everyday people.”

from Gather25.com website

It is led by Jennie Allen, in America, of course, and “Teachers, Worship Leaders, Storytellers, and Prayer Guides” from around the world, such as Malaysia, Nigeria, Australia, Mexico and other locations. Some of the names leading and teaching and praying are familiar to us here in the US, such as Christine Caine, Sadie Robertson Huff, Rick Warren, Priscilla Shirer, Louie Giglio, Kari Jobe, David Platt, Jenn Johnson, Ann Voskamp, and Francis Chan. Others from abroad may not be familiar to us, such as Dr. Peter Tan-chi, Taya, Sinach, Patrick Fung, and so on.

From the website: “Through live-streaming technology, the Global Church will connect together for prayer, worship, repentance and commissioning. Each continent will host a portion of the 25 hours. There will be stories told of what God is doing on each continent. There will be powerful times of worship. And there will be a worldwide “sending out” of the workers to the harvest“.

Back in 2014 when the first gathering was held, there were no public announcements or advertisements, it was mostly word-of-mouth that people learned of its existence. Blogs and social media were the primary venues for alerting interested people. Further, the speaker list those first few years was a secret, you could not know who was speaking, thus a discerning person could not vet the person who may or may not be delivering truth. Despite the secrecy, tickets for that first in-person conference sold out in 42 minutes. Since then, IF:Gathering has proved immensely popular and has only grown.

From Gather25.com website

But even before the first actual conference in 2014, seven years prior, Jennie was going about her day, or night, she’s unclear on which, she “heard a voice from the sky”. Allegedly this ‘voice’ told her to “gather and equip your generation.” She was astounded by this and was flummoxed as to how to go about it because she was a stay-at-home-mom without resources, but from the beginning of when she heard the voice, according to her, she’d wait to see how ‘God’ would equip her.

If that anecdote Allen told at her first event in 2014 wasn’t enough to turn off a Christian woman, Allen’s premise for the ‘ministry’ is this: “IF God is real, then what?“

How can a ministry purporting to teach about God to women begin with supposing He may not be real?

From Gather25.com website. Notice it says ‘from every denomination, for anybody who follows Jesus…including a ‘denomination’ that is heretical? Mormons? Catholics? Orthodox? Dangerous! We should not be blindly affirming people outside of the faith as in the faith. Mt 7:21-23 applies!

Gather25’s stated “mission is to mobilize our world’s 2.5 billion Jesus followers to share the Gospel with the 5.5 billion people who do not know Him“. This is a good thing, right? Energizing people with prayer, focusing on repentance, commissioning them as Matthew 28 tells us to? Well, hold on. All that glitters is not gold. Just as with Allen obeying a voice from the sky and basing her organization on doubting God’s existence, most of the American teachers and leaders listed as part of Gather25 are false teachers. It has always been so even with the in-person IF:Gathering. It is a percolating vat of false-false-false teachers, doctrine, and music. And likely all or most the rest of them from other continents are false too.

And like in any horror movie, while you’re not looking, the evil monster grew tentacles and comes at you from different directions. IF:Gathering grew numerous ministry arms of ministry such as IF:Local, IF:Equip, IF Table, IF:TV, IF:Lead, and IF:Pray. Allen said the central hub of “making disciples” is a major part of all of these.

I have concerns about a woman-led, no male oversight, para-church ministry making disciples. That is the church’s job, to preach unto repentance, be baptized into a local body with male leaders, who observe your growth, decide when you are ready for ministry, then repeat, multiplying men (and women) for local ministry. Granted, some are set apart to leave the local church for missions or evangelizing, but not without having been home-grown, as they say. The Bible does not show any design or structure for making disciples that’s distinct from the local church.

The IRS tax forms for IF:Gathering state their mission- “To gather a new generation of women, equip them with the tools to know God more deeply and live out their purposes and unleash a movement to promote healing and reconciliation around the world.”

What IS global ‘healing’ and ‘reconciliation around the world’?

According to IF:Gathering’s first mission statement, we read this from their IRS tax return: We hope to prepare women around the world to know God more deeply and to live out their purposes by sharing comments and feelings about daily passages posted online.

Feelings.

Jennie heard the ‘voice’ one day 7 years prior to her first IRS tax return for her by-then incorporated company. She is listed a President/CEO from the years 2013-2020, working 40 hours per week. From 2021 to the present, she is listed as Founder, still affirming to the IRS she works 40 hours per week. Jennie has 4 children. When she first heard the voice and began her journey toward incorporation in 2013 and the first gathering in 2014, her children were under the age of 5. She was raising four young children AND working 40 hours/week as President and CEO of a growing company?

This should not be. The biblical standards for women are that their primary orientation should be toward the home, in the home, and focused on raising her children, not siphoning women from their own churches to promote ‘reconciliation around the world’.

I have written warnings about Allen and her IF:Gathering numerous times. Her premise is false, her organization competes with and siphons women away from the local church, it presents false doctrine by false teachers, and affirms a working mother lifestyle to which the Bible disagrees. The only thing Jennie Allen ‘gathers’ is false doctrine and making false disciples.

Thinking of attending an If:Gathering? Please read this, it’s eye-opening
IF:Gathering – updated review four years later
If:Gathering: more information

Recently Amy Spreeman and Michelle Lesley focused on the new Gathering25 in an episode on their podcast A Word Fitly Spoken, which I commend to you. Their research and warnings about this new version of IF are biblically based and well done, as always.

Shakespeare famously said “all that glitters is not gold”. We must be discerning. Just because an organization says the right words such as commissioning, repentance, prayer, Jesus, et cetera, does not mean they know the Jesus to whom the pray, teach about, or commission into ministry. And by the way, it is up to the local church to commission. How can a speaker in Africa commission some woman in Idaho for biblical ministry?! How does a leader in Australia know if some lady in Britain is ready to serve Jesus?

I remember 11 years ago Beth Moore led a “commissioning” at the Unwrap the Bible conference. I looked askance at that ‘commissioning’, too.

Beth Moore led a "commissioning" for 11,000 women (and men) at Unwrap the Bible conference

Please be discerning as to who you allow into your home, mind, and heart. I’d suggest to avoid this Gathering25, and focus on gathering at your own local church and serve there, and in your home, as Jesus designed it to be.

Posted in theology

The True Meaning of Love: A Biblical Perspective

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

I saw this on Twitter/X. I loved Amy Spreeman’s reply to it.

The history of this holiday is murky. It is supposedly honoring to a long-ago martyr called Saint Valentine of Rome who was a priest martyred in 269. The Anglican Communion, Lutheran Church, and the Catholic Church officially celebrate the holiday.

But Valentine’s day was not a huge deal until Chaucer referenced it in a poem about “Valentine’s Day” in the Medieval times of the 1300s. Exchanging cards expressing love on the day wasn’t popular until the middle of the 1800s, when manufacturing production increased due to the Industrial Revolution, postal rates became affordable, and stamps were invented. The ‘modern age’ of Valentines cards began. No one is quite sure of the drift toward the holiday being centered around romance and love. But here we are, drowning in the color red, Hallmark cards, romantic expectations, and some notion of love.

This is today’s point. Love. I’d said ‘some notion of love.’ The Bible shows us what God expects of love. God IS love. He has set forth in His word instructions for who to love, and how to love. He ordained marriage as a pairing with love for Him as the foundation, and love for each other on earth so long as you both shall live once united in matrimony. Love among and between the brethren is described in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7.

The photo of the cards I opened with is significant. It is obvious the world does not know what love is. The word ‘love’ is by now so watered down it’s equated with casual colleagues from work, even love from a pets’ point of view!

The Bible speaks much of the concept of love. Yes, it’s an emotion. But it is also a concept into which we dive, choosing it at all points in life and not simply feeling it temporally.

The unsaved do not know love. They do not know how to love. Yes, they love, but not according to God’s standards. (1 Corinthians 13:4-7). The unsaved can show care and concern. But they do not love in holiness or righteousness.

Furthermore, the stumbling, unsaved kind of love is perplexing. I remember being an adult and wondering what love was. I had not grown up in a loving family. I was briefly married, but he became an adulterer and left the marriage for the other woman. At that point in my life I truly wondered what love was. Where it was. How to obtain it. Love was so absent, so warped, so confusing, I didn’t know if I even wanted it anymore.

The 1984 Foreigner song “I wanna know what love is” was popular on the radio. I listened to it every time it came on, mouthing the same words what the singer was asking-

I’ve gotta take a little time A little time to think things over. I better read between the lines In case I need it when I’m older. This mountain, I must climb Feels like a world upon my shoulders. Through the clouds, I see love shine. Keeps me warm as life grows colder. In my life, there’s been heartache and pain, I don’t know if I can face it again. Can’t stop now, I’ve traveled so far To change this lonely life. I wanna know what love is. I want you to show me.

But WHO? Who can show me? That was the question. I didn’t know…until God in His timing showed me. We can only know what love truly is when we understand Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. When we understand the Gospel. That is knowledge we can never gain on our own, but God has to show us.

I learned about love 20 years later when Jesus came into my life and awakened my soul. Twenty years is a long time on earth but not a long time in eternity. I am glad He came at all, choosing to save me from my ignorant life of pagan love and showing me what love is. It’s not a Valentine card. It’s the Gospel.