Many thanks will be given if you announce this on your blog, site, or newsletter.
Please help us to monitor the comments by alerting us to abusive, spam, offensive, or ungracious posts. blog@reclaimingthemind.org.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
As many reading probably know, I used to be firmly entrenched in third wave, word/faith, charismatic circles. During that time, there was most certainly hunger and an earnest desire to be on one accord with what God was doing, with how I believed that the Spirit was moving. I did study the Bible, well actually read the Bible, ferociously and was determined to not miss God. I therefore, followed a number of popular teachers (names unmentioned) that had books, megachurches, TV spots, radio programs and conferences to which many would flock. If a book was written by one of these spiritual superstars, I wanted to get it. I faithfully followed the Elijah List, a consortium of today’s “prophetic” voice so I could stay on top of things.
But in gravitating towards popular name brands (because after all, with those kinds of crowds, how can the teaching be off in any way), it does seem like I missed something vitally important…discernment. Don’t get me wrong, I would listen carefully and yes, there were times that things were said, including times in my own church, that I would question or not necessarily agree with. But overall, I would dismiss these fleeting moments of doubt to embrace the larger and grander prize of being in the know, or so I thought. But the ability to really dig in and compare what I was listening to with what Scripture was really communicating was lost on me until about 3 years ago. That is when I became acquainted with a dear brother in Christ who would eventually become of my best friends and he challenged me on how I was reading Scripture. This would usually occur after I would recite whatever latest musings I had grabbed hold of from one of these popular teachers. It was at this time that I really began to study the Scriptures, contextually, comparatively, exegetically and expositionally. Needless to say, since that time some of the positions that I dogmatically would espouse as truth, began to unravel under the microscope of Scriptural examination. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
I live with the fear that someone will discover that I am not fit for ministry. Wait, I am getting ahead of myself . . .
January 2000. I have just been hired as an intern at Stonebriar Community Church. I still have a year left at Dallas Theological Seminary, but my excitement is far beyond anything I could have ever imagined six years ago when I began to think about ministry. My life had not been one of a minister in preparation by any means. It was a fun, selfish, sinfun, and “I’ll deal with you later Lord” type life . You can read about it here. However, now things were different. The constant adrenaline that the idea of full-time service for the Lord was enough to keep my mind off my past failures. Watching Braveheart in 1995 seventeen times at the theater fueled my motivation. I thought to myself If I could just give my life for something bigger than myself like William Wallace did then contentment would be found in sacrifice. This was the road I was on. Excited, motivated, hopeful, and ready to change lives, I was now working for Chuck Swindoll, my hero.
The internship at Stonebriar Community Church for small groups turned into an internship for missions and outreach. This was good. I was going to set the example of one who was passionate for God. I was going to catch the eye of those around me. They were going to look at me and say to themselves Now that is what a young minister should be like. Maybe even Chuck Swindoll would call me into his office and commend my passions and service. Maybe Chuck would become my mentor.
I graduated in 2001 with a Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary. That is a theological masters—yes masters. From their standpoint I was a jedi of theology. Would others take notice? They would have to. Not only this, but I won awards for service and teaching from the seminary and graduated at the top of my class. I was ordained into the ministry by the elders of Stonebriar Community Church in May of 2001. Chuck preached a sermon that was devoted just to me (well, there were three others who were ordained, but he was looking at me most of the time). Chuck and the elders laid their hands on me as I was on my knees whispering prayers, words of encouragement, and warnings in my ear.
Now, I was totally prepared and confirmed for ministry. I am on full-time pastoral staff at Stonebriar Community Church. My past was under my feet and I was turning my foot on it like a discarded cigarette. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
I can’t believe I forgot to post this, but here it is anyway. (Thank Carrie Hunter—I only contributed in a minor way).
On the first day of Christmas my Calvie explained to me, the fallen nature of man.
On the second day of Christmas my Calvie explained to me, called and chosen and the fallen nature of man.
On the third day of Christmas my Calvie explained to me, John chapter six, called and chosen, and the fallen nature of man.
On the fourth day of Christmas my Calvie explained to me, Synod of Dordt, John chapter six, called and chosen, and the fallen nature of man.
On the fifth day of Christmas my Calvie explained to me 5 GOLDEN POINTS! Synod of Dordt, John chapter six, called and chosen and the fallen nature of man. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Robert Bowman give a list of the books that have most shaped his life and thought.
Josh McDowell, Evidence that Demands a Verdict (1972). I became an evangelical Christian in 1974-75, and McDowell’s Evidence was one of the first apologetics books I read. Yes, it was a popular, unsophisticated book, but it got me interested in biblical apologetics. Thanks, Josh.
E. Gordon Rupp and Philip S. Watson, ed., Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation, Library of Christian Classics (1969). Toward the end of my first year of college, another Christian college student challenged me to read Martin Luther’s Bondage of the Will (1525). When I discovered that Luther’s book was a response to Desiderius Erasmus’s book On Free Will (1524), which was itself a critique of Luther’s theology, I decided to read Erasmus first and then Luther in order to get both sides of the debate. At the time, my own theological inclinations were very similar to those of Erasmus. However, I was forced to admit that Luther won the debate, hands down. Reading these two books completed my conversion to an evangelical Protestant faith. The Library of Christian Classics volume, which I read, includes both books and helpful introductions and footnotes.
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (1952) and Miracles: A Preliminary Study (2d ed., 1960). Like most evangelicals, I am unabashedly a fan of Lewis (even though he was not consistently evangelical in his theology). I limit myself to the two Lewis books that have meant the most to me. I still think Lewis’s Miracles is one of the very best books ever published on the subject.
F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (5th ed., 1960) and New Testament History (1969). Bruce’s NTD is a short, clear exposition of the evidence for the textual and historical reliability of the New Testament writings. I read this book in 1975 and its basic positions and arguments still hold up today. You can read the fifth edition of NTD online free; the later sixth edition (1981) is now available with a Foreword by N. T. Wright. NTH is a masterful textbook survey of the New Testament placing the events it records in their historical context. I used NTH as a textbook for an upper-division course on New Testament history that I taught in 1978 for my senior project at California State University, Dominguez Hills.
Read the rest here.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Just in case you had not heard, we now have the entire curriculum of The Theology Program for free on iTunes as well as all the electives.
Here is a list of the electives.
Be sure to subscribe to these on iTunes as we will be updating them with new courses soon.
Also, here are the COMING ELECTIVES:
Please give us a review on iTunes and tell us what you think.
God bless and Happy New Year.
Dei Gratia,
Michael Patton
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
This is a sort excursus or interlude to my series that I think is a valuable part of the discussion. It comes from a friend who responded to my post on prophecy. Please read carefully as I believe his testimony, while you may or may not agree with it, is representative of many disillusioned continuationists/charismatics. Nathan was very passionate yet respectful in this post. I pray that you would show the same maturity in your responses.
Thanks Nathan for letting me post this.
“I’ve held back from posting my comments thus far. But Michael has provoked me to say something. I will try to focus on the current context of this post. At this point in the series, Michael is focused on healing and prophecy, so I will focus on prophecy for now.
My experience with the gift of prophecy, healing and tongues is 20 years in the making. Grew up around the gifts. Prophecy was a dime a dozen. It was everywhere.
Now, as I look back like a PI and investigate my experiences, I consider all the prophecies that are burned into my head. And, lo and behold, not one came true. Really? Yes, really. And its not like I didn’t like prophecy, for many years I hoped against hope that it was really God speaking through these folks. But, if evidence means anything, these folks were not prophesying on behalf of God. They couldn’t have been. Most of the prophecies were tethered to real events or something coming soon. Later on the prophecies became very generic and more praise than anything. I imagine the people could have just as well given the praise without the prophecy, since that was all that really happened. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
I got this from an unnamed P & P reader and thought I would open this up to you instead of answering it right now.
I’m confused. Should we or should we not expect anything from God? The scriptures tells us that Jesus said (Mat 7:7-11)
“Ask, and you will receive. Search, and you will find. Knock, and the door will be opened for you. Everyone who asks will receive. Everyone who searches will find. And the door will be opened for everyone who knocks. Would any of you give your hungry child a stone, if the child asked for some bread? Would you give your child a snake if the child asked for a fish? As bad as you are, you still know how to give good gifts to your children. But your heavenly Father is even more ready to give good things to people who ask.”
So, will I receive or not? I have a wife and two kids. I got lay-off from the firm I was working from. I keep praying for a job, even if it’s not as an architect. I received nothing! Yet I keep praising God. I’m starting to believe that I should just be happy with receiving his forgiveness. Even if I do lose my home, my cars, my health; I already lost my job and these are probably next!
I really feel for him. I often meet people who are confused—even disillusioned—by this passage. You can include my wife in this list.
What does it mean? Is there a unspoken qualification to the asking? Or is the qualification in the context?
Can you join me in giving him some encouragement?
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
I’ll confess, I am not big on Christmas. No, not because I don’t relish celebrating the birth of Christ but because of the superfluous trappings that have melded into obligations. We generate lists to foster consumerism that encourages overspending and stress. Decorations and meals and gifts have to fit within the holiday motif to satisfy the holiday requirements. It’s all become part of fulfilling the Merry Christmas. It all seems so trite. If I had it my way, I probably would forgo the gift exchange obligation entirely. But sadly, others for whom the trappings have become meaningful, would be short changed and that, I could not abide by. Perhaps it is because as a student I don’t have the resources I used to and its become more strenuous to meet holiday demands. Perhaps it is that I spend another year without a that meaningful somebody to share it with. Nonetheless, I will be glad once December 25th is over.
Of course, for us Christians it is supposed to be a time to reflect on the birth of Jesus. Unfortunately, I think that we put that specific celebration into a banal box of pageants and programs. For if the reflection is not maintained year round, then the one time shot could just be reduced to a program that we include on our list of Christmas stuff to do. But I do make every effort, particularly at this time to really reflect on what it is we are supposed to be celebrating. It indeed is quite magnificent but unfortunately gets lost in the jumbled ball of holiday happenings.
I think our tendency is to reflect on Christmas and the birth of Christ through 21st century, gentile eyes. We who have trusted in Christ consider the salvation that we have. We may consider our former way of life before Christ and how unknowledgeable we were regarding the reality of our spiritual deadness. The birth we celebrate represents spiritual reconciliation so desparately needed for hope and eternal life. Yes, God did need to save us and sent His son in the likeness of flesh to do just that.
But recently, I have been thinking about this from another perspective. Perhaps it is because I am reading through the Pentateuch and am considering the status of things pre-Christ both from a Jewish and Gentile perspective. I imagine it must have tough for the Jews. They were God’s chosen people and rightful claimers of his promises. But the catch was they had to follow all these rules. There was no internal enablement to assist them other than the motivation of maintaining covenant with God.
I don’t know who had it worse, the priests or the people. The law was so specific. Every jot and tittle had to be performed to perfection. There were so many requirements. But if God was to be satisfied so the people could have atonement for sins and maintain favor in consideration of covenant promises, these requirements were necessary. I have to imagine that was quite a bit of pressure for the priests.
Everything had to be perfect for meaningful worship. Priests could not have deformities. The requirements of perfection also extended to the people. There was no brokenness allowed. Persons with skin diseases, women hemorrhaging, men with abnormal discharges were banished from the presence of community life unless specific offerings and a proclamation by the priests were provided so these broken people could have some chance of normalcy within the context of covenant promises.
It is no wonder that time and time again, rebellion ensued as the people followed after the enticements around them that eventually led to captivity. These were people in need of hope.
To the Jew, the birth of Christ meant that the perfection of the Law was no longer dependent upon external performance but upon the Law written on the heart. The shekinah glory that represented God’s presence, would now reside internally. The only perfection that existed was Christ himself and the sacrifice that He became, fulfilling every aspect of the Law. It is no wonder that He addressed healing through his acts to show the wholeness that is found only in Him.
But the ones who were the big losers were the Gentiles. They were not God’s people. They were not chosen by Him to receive His covenant promises. The Gentiles were the ones that God commanded His people to stay away from and not intermingle lest the purity of God’s holiness as reflected on His people, be marred. I can imagine some Gentiles craving to be included in God’s community because of His care, concern and provision for His people. Yes the Gentiles, were people in need of hope.
It reminds me that from pre-Christ eyes, we Gentiles would have no business in His business. But it also reminds me of what Paul says to the church at Ephesus:
Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by the so-called “Circumcision”, which is performed in the flesh by human hands - remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ…So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household. (Ephesians 2:11-13, 19).
To the Gentile, Christ meant that the covenant promises could now be claimed based on faith and not by circumstances of birth.
So as Christmas draws near, I think of these 2 classes of hopeless people that without Christ, would remain struggling to keep laws or to achieve a denied status. But then I think of this passage:
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. (Titus 2:12-14)
And I praise God for the greatest gift ever.
Merry Christmas everyone!
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
In the quest for political correctness over the last two decades one of the primary battlegrounds has been centered around Christmas. The phrase “Merry Christmas” and all the public displays associated with it have been considered offensive for a variety of reasons. Pluralists object because it is exclusivistic, those who hold to other faiths feel slighted or left out, and many atheists simply object to all public religious displays. For these people Christmas is so offensive it needs to be cleansed from our vocabulary so that the “Christmas Spirit” (whatever that is) can be ascribed to just about anything that can qualify for the phrase “Happy Holidays.” At best, the sacred is replaced by the sentimental.
Christians, on the other hand, often find it hard to understand what could possibly be offensive about celebrating the birth Jesus, the Prince of Peace. After all, he is the incarnation of a loving God who came into the world as a savior. What’s so offensive about that? The answer is: EVERYTHING! Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Having discussed some of the strengths of the continuationist/charismatic position, I would now like to explain why, at this point in my life, I am not a charismatic. I am going to put these in order, but I want to stress the tentativeness of my conclusion. In this, I am not necessarily offering what I believe to be strong arguments against continuationism, but only those arguments that are subjectively persuasive to me. I hope that these arguments genuinely express my position without the normal combative tone communicating “This is what I think everyone should be!”
1. I have never had a genuine charismatic experience.
Considering the relative weakness of any biblical defense against a strong cessationist position, I am very open, biblically and theologically, to continuationism. I used to have an emotional bias against all things charismatic, but I have not had such in years. In fact, I have come to respect and be intrigued with the position due to the scholarship and balance that I find in many contemporary charismatic leaders. However, I have never witnessed anything that I believe to be persuasive evidence that the supernatural sign gifts are normative or even active in the church today. This does not mean that I have not witnessed what I believe to be are miracles (I have seen one or two) or God’s intervention and guidance, but I have never witnessed anything that would lead me to believe that someone has, as their gift to the body of Christ, any of the particular gifts—workers of miracles, healings, prophecy, or the like—that I mentioned in my first installment in this series.
Of course I have heard people give prophecies. During my undergraduate, a little over ten years ago, we had a “prophet” come to our school (it was a third wave school) and lay their hands on everyone during the chapel service giving them personal words of prophecy. But it was hard to tell the difference in this and a session of palm reading. The words were so general, a sort of “catch-all”, that they could have been applied to anyone. “You have been through much pain lately . . . God knows.” “You are confused about a decision you are up against . . . God says, ‘go with your heart.’” “Be kind to her.” Yes, people were listening with tears running down their face, but I could not adjust my skepticism and allow for such a breach of conscious. I though—and still think today—anyone can do this.
If a person is a prophet, they much show some type of undeniable sign. Would God really expect less for the surrendering of my mind? I would say and still will say to anyone who says that they are a prophet or have the gift of prophecy, “Why should I listen to you? What evidence do you bring that you are from the Lord?” Look at the examples of those who carried the Lord’s message in the past. Look at Moses, Elijah, Peter, and Paul. The dead were raised, lame walked, and shadows healed. I have never witnessed anyone who spoke on behalf of the Lord—the definition of prophecy—and accompanied such with these type of miracles. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
I first came across the writings of Harold Hoehner when I was in college. He was writing a series of articles for Bibliotheca Sacra (or BibSac, as it is called by folks at DTS) on chronological aspects of Jesus’ life. I was amazed at how he went about establishing the probable date of Jesus’ birth, death, resurrection, and certain points in his ministry. He brought in evidence from all sides, did not present only one viewpoint but discussed several angles, was less than dogmatic with his conclusions, interacted with literature, both ancient and modern and in a number of languagues. He seemed to leave no stone unturned. His judgments were sober and even-handed. I was deeply impressed. (I later learned that this work was essentially based on his second earned doctorate, this one at Cambridge University.)
After reading Hoehner’s arguments on the death of Christ (Friday crucifixion, Nisan 14 or April 3, AD 33), I wrote to him and suggested that another argument that Jesus died on Nisan 14 and that he presented himself to the nation on Nisan 10 was that it fulfilled the typology of Exodus 12:1–6. To my surprise and delight, Hoehner wrote back! And he politely pointed out that my argument could only be brought in as tertiary evidence, for although Jesus did indeed fulfill the typology of the OT, as historians we must look at the evidence that is of a historical nature—that is, evidence that both Christians and non-Christians would embrace—and we must also recognize that typological fulfillment often went in various directions, preventing us from cherry-picking in support of a view. For example, Jesus was not a year old when he died; he was not killed by fire but by crucifixion, etc. In other words, typology can be used in a confirmatory manner for historical study, but not as primary or secondary evidence. It’s what one brings in when discussing the results of one’s investigation. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
[Doug Powell is a guest author and apologist. His website can be found at www.dougpowell.com]
Just in time for the 2008 Christmas season, the American Humanist Association launched a new ad campaign with the message “Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness’ sake.” The ads feature a Christmas motif with their snowflakes and green and red lettering, and some even picture a guy in a Santa suit. But the campaign slogan reveals a confusion about the nature of morality.
According to Roy Speckhardt, executive director of the American Humanist Association, “Humanists have always understood that you don’t need a god to be good. Morality doesn’t come from religion. It’s a set of values embraced by individuals and society based on empathy, fairness, and experience.” The interesting thing about this statement is that Speckhardt characterizes empathy and fairness as good, but he doesn’t say why these things are good. And that is the real question: What makes good things good? What grounds morality?
There are only two possible sources for morality: God or human beings. If, as the American Humanist Association claims, morality is grounded in human beings and their experience, then some very serious problems arise. The first problem is that it justifies societies that are clearly morally wrong, such as Nazi Germany. If morality is “a set of values embraced by society based on empathy, fairness, and experience,” then Nazi Germany did nothing wrong. Being empathetic does not mean doing good to someone, only understanding their feelings. And the Nazis were fair – all Jews were sent to concentration camps. The morality of their society cannot be condemned by our society since their society simply embraced values that differ from ours. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
In the last post I breifly described what it means to be Charismatic in the theological sense of the word. In essence, it does not necessarily have to do with a belief in God’s intervention in history or his willingness or power to perform modern day miracles, but, properly speaking, it has to do with a particular belief often called “continuationism.” As apposed to “cessationism” the “continuationist” believes that the so-called supernatural sign gifts such as tongues, prophecy, and healings (among others) are still active gifts of the Spirit given to people today. The church, according to continuationists should seek, expect, and promote the use of such gifts. All Charismatics are continuationists and all continuationists, properly speaking, are charismatics (even if you must use a small “c”).
Now I want to give a short defense of the Charismatic/continuationist position. Please understand these represent what I personally believe to be the strongest arguments, biblically, theologically, and practically, for the position, but this does not represent an exhaustive list of the arguments.
1. Acts chapter 2 seems to suggest that the gifts of the Spirit (particularly prophecy) would be normative for the church.
Notice especially 14-21 where Peter is explaining to the many Jews gathered to see why these people were speaking in tongues.
“Acts 2:14 But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them, “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words. 15 For these men are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel: 17 “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; 18 even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. 19 And I will show wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; 20 the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. 21 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’”
Peter is obviously arguing that the events that they are witnessing are evidence of the “last days” prophesied by Joel. Peter believes that the powers being displayed are evidence that the “last days” had begun. Including in these last days events are great miracles. But most importantly, Peter believes that the pouring out of the Holy Spirit during these days results in specific events: “your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams.” These last days events do not indicate a certain duration or cessation. In fact, it would seem that they will last until the “day of the Lord.” Therefore, it would seem that Peter believes that the giving of such gifts is a perpetual norm of the last days. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
The following is the type of post that I am always afraid that I will write and quickly regret. In fact, I doubt that it will stay published too long as I expect to have blogger’s remorse within 24 hours of writing it.
I started crying about 3am last night and have not been able to stop. I have been avoiding everyone because every time I begin to talk, nothing happens but crying.
The immediate question that you will have is Why? I don’t necessarily have an answer. I remember two times in the last twenty years that I have cried. Once when I was in the backyard with my mother and I just started crying. When she inquired as to why I was crying, I could not tell her. I did not know. The second time was after my sister died and I put together the picture show for the funeral. Set to the background of “I Can Only Imagine” and Sarah Mclaughlin’s “Angel,” me and my family previewed the show in the living room. Everyone, including my dad, whom I had only seen cry once before, began crying. I could not help but cry with them.
I have not cried over my mother’s condition yet. Maybe this has something to do with my present state. Since the aneurysm and stroke, for the last two years (or has it been three?) we have waited for things to turn, for good of for ill. I suppose it has been a time of morning delayed turned morning denied. We are not really sure what to morn for yet. My mother is still here, but not really. Did we lose her or not? Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
I used to walk through Christian book stores and choose my books based on whether or not the author was a charismatic. I would pick up a commentary and turn immediately to 1 Cor. 12 (the section on spiritual gifts). If the author believed that the spiritual gifts were for today, I would put it back on the shelf in disbelief that the store would carry such misleading material. If they did not believe that the gifts were for today—if the author was a “cessationist”—I would consider purchasing the book.
Such was the time when I believed that all those who believed that all charismatics were practicing a different Christianity, at best, or demon possessed, at worst.
I am not a charismatic, and I have my reasons, but I do not feel the same way today as I used to. Let me first define the terms and set up the field of play.
The word “charismatic” can be used in many ways. It is taken from the word “charisma.” Websters Dictionary defines it as “a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure (as a political leader).” Many would say that Barack Obama has charisma in such a way. Charisma is taken from the Greek charisma which means “gift.” Its root, charis, means “grace.”
In Christianity, “charismatic” refers to those who believe that certain “spiritual gifts” such as tongues, prophecy, and gifts of healings, are normative for the church. In the Scriptures, we are told that God gives certain gifts to everyone in the body of Christ. Representative gift lists are mentioned in 1 Cor. 12, Rom. 12, 1 Pet. 4, and Eph. 4. Some of these gifts seem to be natural extensions of the recipients personality (leadership, teaching, encouragement) while others distinguish themselves by their extra-ordinary nature. A charismatic is one who believes that God still gifts people in the church with the extra-ordinary or supernatural gifts and that these gifts are normative in the body of Christ for the extension of God’s message, glory, and grace.
Charismatic is not a denomination, but a trans-denominational theological stance or tradition which can find representation in any denomination or tradition, including Evangelicalism. In fact, I think that the charismatic position (or some variation thereof) is the fastest growing tradition within Evangelicalism. Continue Reading »
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Friends, just a short note: Several have asked about getting a hold of my plenary lecture at the Evangelical Theological Society’s annual meeting; others have wanted to get my lecture given at apologetics conferences and in churches on whether our Bibles today essentially reflect the wording of the original text. Both of these are now available as a video DVD. The ordering information is available below.
“Is What We Have Now What They Wrote Then?”
A lecture at an apologetics conference in Providence, Rhode Island, 2008, about whether our printed New Testaments today accurately represent the original text.
“Challenges in New Testament Textual Criticism for the 21st Century”
A plenary lecture at the annual Evangelical Theological Society meeting in Providence, Rhode Island, 2008, on current issues in NT textual criticism.
The price of each video DVD is $10 plus $3 S&H. The price of both video DVDs together is $15 plus $3 S&H. Texas residents also will pay 8.25% sales tax. Allow two to four weeks for delivery.
To order, go here.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
A few days ago, I had the opportunity to attend Zane Hodges funeral, which was a little strange considering that I did not know him. But I have been so impressed with the indelible impression that he made on so many, including people that I do know who have known him, that at the least I wanted to glean from the final farewells a legacy that I most certainly would have appreciated and desired to know personally. I guess this was the next best thing to being there, benefitting from the words of wisdom that he seemed to share with so many.
To be sure, there were many remarks given from people who had known this beloved man and whose comments were replete with praise of a life well lived. One comment in particular really stuck with me. One of the speakers indicated that Zane Hodges had helped him to know Christ better. I continued to reflect on this as I ducked out right before the eulogy as work responsibilities beckoned. I kept thinking of this throughout the day. It was clear to me that Mr. Hodges was a consummate exegete of the Scripture and took to challenge theological positions that contradicted the grace by which believers in Christ are reconciled to God. I heard that he was a passionate teacher of the greek language. But what I heard most of all was a man who desired for others to know Christ better.
As I contemplated these things, it struck me that this is indeed the ultimate task of theology, to know Christ better. Yes, engaging in the study of God is faith seeking understanding that will of course lead to exhaustive investigations of historical developments, hermeneutics, and doctrinal positioning. I think it is indeed serious business to understand God on His terms and I am personally committed to a lifelong in-depth learning of His character and attributes, His ultimate revelation in Christ and the reconciliation of His creation. History has indeed demonstrated that many have sought to misrepresent or distort this revelation and the salvific process defined for us in Scripture. Deviations do need to be addressed. But we can get so enmeshed in the process of debate that we begin to leave Christ out. I confess that in my pursuits to defend truths as I have understood them, I have been guilty of such. But then I recognize that at these times our wrangling over doctrinal truths can amount to an intellectual match with pretty arguments but no real basis for meaningful Christian dialogue.
Christ is the centrality of the faith and if our dialogue doesn’t have a heartfelt knowledge of Christ as the ultimate goal, the game is meaningless. I think Paul was getting to this ultimate task in his commendation to the church at Colossae regarding the supremacy and sufficiency of Christ,
We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete in Christ (Col 1:28)
All the words, debates, arguments should point to Him, should help people to know Him and to know Him better. Perhaps if we find that our theological investigations and debates become more about winning arguments then pointing to Christ and presenting men complete in Him, then maybe those investigations should be superseded by silent moments of introspection.
I did not know Zane Hodges, but it did seem from the myriad comments that I have heard about him, that this was something he understood well. The comments suggested that he was a man who pointed people to Christ and His corresponding grace. And for this seminary student engaged in the process of doing theology, I feel somewhat robbed for not having made his acquaintance but refreshed at the legacy that he left that seemed to help so many to know Christ and to know Him better.
The next time we are engaged in a theological debate, let’s think about what we are really arguing about.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
My annual and updated Christmas post! This is actually from my very first blog I did two years ago.
Tonight we went to see my mother with my children and the subject of Christmas was naturally brought up being so close. We sang some Christmas carols to prepare for the season. While others were singing Santa and North Pole songs, I took it upon myself (playing the role of the faithful pastor) to balance our excitement with the good Christian Christmas songs. (Waiting for applause to slow down). My daughters were just wanting to sing the Santa songs. My wife asked my oldest daughter Katelynn (9yrs old now) before I started the balancing act, “What is Christmas all about”? To which she responded “Presents, candy, Christmas tree, presents [again], and Santa.” My wife looked at me with the I-am-about-to-laugh-because-I-know-how-much-trouble-she-is-going-to-be-in-from-daddy look. Then she said, “Katelynn, Christmas is about Jesus, not Santa.”
I know you THINK you know where this is going, but you don’t. At first, my reaction was the typical OK, this confirms it. We are not watching anymore Santa movies, cutting way back on the Santa fun, and not going to talk about getting presents anymore. But that never feels right. I quickly turned away from that and started singing the Santa songs with them. Why?
Well, everyone is going to hate me, but why not? I will just dive right in. I don’t have that much trouble with Santa, sleigh bells, Frosty, and presents being emphasized at Christmas. I won’t even get too uptight with situations where Santa becomes the priority. (Waiting now for boos and hissing to cease). Santa is fun. Frosty is silly. And presents give us a chance to teach to give and exercise the gift of giving (since it is more blessed to give than receive). My daughter did forget the true meaning of the Christmas and I could have gotten very angry. But here is the thing: generally speaking, she hardly ever forgets about Christ. Christ is part of her life everyday. She talks to her friends about Him, she reads her Bible, she asks great questions, prays with me, she often voluntarily gives her allowance for others, and she honors her mother and I. Heck, she is even having me teach her Greek (no, I did not force this!). Who am I to step in when she is singing Christmas carols that don’t mention Christ and say in a rather legalistic fashion that she can’t sing those because it dishonors Christ? I have looked through my Bible and I cannot find where Christ gave a command to celebrate His birth on a particular day of the year. Yet He did say to celebrate the meaning of his birth everyday of the year. Isn’t it the incarnational life that matters?
This Katelynn is doing. What message am I sending by mandatorily sanctifying a particular day or season when every day is sanctified? I know that there are some days that we set aside in special way, and I have no problem with that. Neither do I have a problem when we set aside particular times of the year to focus on God and what He has done. But if Katelynn is doing everything else right and not forgetting about God throughout the year, I should not get upset if she forgets about what the meaning of Christmas is. I should not demonize Santa and other “secular” Christmas cheer when it is the life throughout the year that is important. I would rather my daughter tell one of her friends about what Christ means to her in July than to have her focus on the manger in December. Telling others about Christ all year round is commanded in Scripture and is the true meaning of Christmas.
As well, [stepping higher on my box] it would seem that there are so many people who choose to set aside all their secularism in December and require that there be a moratorium called on all things not pertaining to Christ, but forget the rest of the year. This seems to evidence a loss of priorities. I have often heard it said by Christians that Santa has taken over Christ in December, but I would argue that December has taken over Christ for Christians.
Should Christians play Santa? I have no problem with it. Personally, I can’t bring myself to tell my children that he actually exists, but I have no problem with others who do and I have no problem singing Christmas carols that don’t involve Christ so long as Christ is the focus of our lives, not just our Decembers. If Christ is not the focus of our lives January-November, December is not going to make any difference anyway because, contrary to popular belief, December does not sanctify the rest of the year.
Moral of the story: To truly celebrate Christmas presupposes that we are living an incarnational life 365 days a year. Don’t be so hard on poor Santa.
Merry Christmas.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
