Posted by spdar on January 1, 2009
The church I belong to is part of the NewFrontiers family of churches. NewFrontiers is looking to transform the cultures where we are by living out the Gospel of Jesus!
This video outline the commitment NewFrontiers has to Church Planting and seeing as many people hearing the Good News of Jesus and the life he offers us.
Posted in Church Life, Church Planting | Tagged: NewFrontiers, Curch, Culture, Changing a Nation, Church Planting | No Comments »
Posted by spdar on December 26, 2008
I was recently encouraged to consider what it means to “Preach in the Spirit”. Does it mean to just come to the pulpit and trust that the Holy Spirit will fill my mouth? Should I abandon preperation and notes and just “go with the flow”? What does preaching in the Spirit really mean?
First of all I believe that “Spirit-Led” preaching and notes/preparation are not mutually exclusive. That is I believe that my preparation is just as much spirit led as the delivery of the message on a Sunday morning. I believe that God is outside of time and therefore not constrained by it. In his providence he has planned the content of each gathering of his church before the creation of the world and so I have no difficulty in believing that the Holy Spirit will, and does, inspire me and lead me as I prepare long before the delivery of the message in the meeting.
I have a high regard for BOTH the Word and the Spirit and it is my desire to see both honoured. My preparation is the direct result of my high view of Scripture. Since the Bible is the Word of God – inerrant, infallible, and inspired – then we must commit ourselves to a method of preaching that most honours God’s revelation in Scripture. Generally this means for me diligent study, reading, prayer and preparation.
In order for me to explain the scriptures I need to study, understand and prepare, but I do so in the power of the Holy Spirit. “Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law” (Psalm 119:18). We read of Apollos in Acts that “He was an eloquent man, competent in the Scriptures” My preparation allows us to be competent in the scriptures. Paul instructs Timothy “from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” which I think again shows us the value of studying and preparation. We must be very careful of drawing conclusions from what the bible does not say. The bible does not say if Paul for example ever used notes. However, in 2 Tim 4:13 he does ask Timothy to bring “the books, and above all the parchments”. It is widely accepted by most commentators that these books were Pauls own writings (notes if you will) as well as some of the Old Testament, possibly the Septuagint (Parchments). Even in prison Paul was reading and preparing himself for what speaking opportunities might lie ahead.
Now all that said I think as preachers we do need to be flexible and not so tied by our preparation that we miss it when God says “well done for preparing, but I want to do this now” there is of course a fine line.
I have seen Mark Driscoll’s preaching notes and he has 2 post-it notes in his bible and preaches for an hour from just that. However, this is because of all of the time he has spent prior in reading, praying, studying the scriptures at length and writing books. “… out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks” (Luke 6:45) Mark Dever, CJ Mahaney and other Holy Spirit anointed preachers tell us that they spend 30 hrs per sermon! (I think CJ works on one hour of prep for every 5 mins of talking).
I think too there are times of anointing that come, as we are attentive to the Spirit, and God leads us is different ways. In times of great outpouring we see this anointing to speak, examples such as Peter in Acts, Smith Wigglesworth, right up to John Arnott and other in more recent times where people preach without notes or preperation it would seem. In these times we see an abundance of grace and anointing to carry out Gods will in the most interesting of times (having to preach several times every day would certainly qualify J ). I would agree that in those exciting circumstances there is a special grace and anointing for those moments where one is lead “in that moment”. It is in those times that the Lord calls to mind all that we have stored in our hearts over the years in reading the scriptures, in diligent study and reading. We must be like Mary who pondered things in her hearts. - “Mary treasured up all these things and pondered them in her heart“ (Luke 2:19)
I personally think that it would be irresponsible of me not to prepare but equally as irresponsible for me to ignore the Holy Spirit when he tells me to leave my notes and follow his lead. As I started off by saying … I believe that “Spirit-Led” preaching and notes/preparation are not mutually exclusive. This is why I believe that we must, and should prepare. We must be men given to prayer and the scriptures (Acts 6:4) so that we are able to declare the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:28), to teach with authority but also to follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Both are important –WORD & SPIRIT operating together !
Posted in Church Life, Preaching | Tagged: Holy Spirit, Preaching, Spirit-Led | 1 Comment »
Posted by spdar on December 25, 2008
Now that I am waiting for my Christmas Dinner and having just been to a Christmas Morning service I am a little confused by the final line in one of the carols. The line was …
Sav’d by his love, incessant we shall sing
Of angels and of angel-man the King
What perplexed me is what on earth is an “Angel-Man”? Surly it can not be suggesting that Jesus was an Angel!
Christians, Awake! Salute The Happy MornThe Carol is called “Christians, Awake! Salute the Happy Morn” written as a Christmas poem John Byron and altered slightly to become a Carol John Byron was also the author of “Hark! the herald angels sing“. John Byron was friends with John Wesley but I am aware that they had a “religious sympathy deeper than the differences of their temperaments and theological views” which would suggest that Mr Byron’s theology was different to Wesley’s. That said it would not indicate that these differences were fundamental in their nature.
My concern is that the line we are looking at “Of angels and of angel-man the King” is indicating that Jesus was not, as the bible tells us, fully God who becoming flesh (man) but was an Angel who became a man. This is heresy if this is what it saying !
“(1)In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. (14) The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,[d] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” John 1:1,2 & 14
After a little research I have found what I think is the origional by John Byron called “CHRISTMAS DAY FOR DOLLY”. Allegedly written for his daughter, Dolly, the final verse says …
Saved by His love, incessant we shall sing
Eternal praise to heaven’s Almighty King.
Now that I am happy with, Mr Byron you are forgiven … not that it would seem you need to be as someone else changed your words. So who was this heratic that decided to change the line to be “Of angels and of angel-man the King” rather than “Eternal praise to heaven’s Almighty King”?
According to the “An Annotated Anthology of Hymns by J. R. Watson, Timothy Dudley-Smith” the origional has been altered many times for various hymn books. It seems that this may have been where this heresy has crept in.
In the limited time I have before the Turkey appears I have not been able to find the culpret. Do you Know ? If you do let me know in the comments below.
Do you know any other carols where the text is less than theologicaly sound? If so, let me know.
In the meantime let me wish you all a ver happy Christmas and a blessed new year! Merry Christamas.
Posted in Theology | Tagged: Carol, Christams, Heresy, Theology | No Comments »
Posted by spdar on December 12, 2008
There is, within many charismatic circles, a reticence to embrace what many would consider secular wisdom in the area of pastoral care within the local church. Most preferring to embrace the “Power Encounter” of the Holy Spirit as all that is necessary to resolve any and all pastoral situations. Whilst fully embracing the power of the Holy Spirit, looking and longing for it, there is also need, as Paul instructs the Romans , to use the knowledge that we have received from God to instruct one another. The bible provides us with a wealth of knowledge that Paul informs Timothy is good for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness . This, I believe, provides us with a platform to cooperate with the Holy Spirit and the “power encounter” with loving, thoughtful discussion and counselling.
We know that we are living in a fallen world, that man’s inherent propensity is towards sin and that in and of our selves we are unable to overcome that which is inherent within us. By definition we need therefore to find the solution from outside of ourselves. I believe that the solution comes only from God himself and would therefore subscribe to the biblical view that our salvation in these areas of difficulty are found only in Him. However, whilst our salvation is only found in God the working out of that salvation can vary from person to person and situation to situation. Because of the uniqueness of God’s creation we all come to a realisation of our need for change (sanctification) in areas of our lives in different ways. Sometimes it is through scripture, other times through preaching or through the challenge of a friend. Sometimes it is because our circumstances are so extreme that we can no longer cope. There are many examples of people in extreme circumstances simply crying out to God and immediately being healed or the situation remedied . However, there are also many situations where that is not the case, or where learned behaviour, destructive conduct, habits or addictions cause the person to re-offend. Paul expresses this well in Romans when he says “For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate” . We do not always understand why we do the things we do. How often have we come before the throne of grace and cried for forgiveness for yet another repeated offence? It can be helpful to utilise counselling in these circumstances to assist the individual in understanding more fully the nature of their circumstances and/or actions and so to look, with God’s help, at how they may overcome !
With this in mind I would like to look at The Role of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) within Pastoral Counselling showing how it could provide valuable insight and support in all areas of pastoral care.
CBT is designed to help you alter how you think (Cognitive) and what you do (Behaviour). By examining the relationship between our thoughts, feelings and behaviour we can then consider why we are responding in a particular way. For example if you were to walk down the street and see someone you know who then completely ignores you, you could respond by thinking they don’t like you, you then feel miserable which then may cause you to take some comforting behaviour such as eating or shopping which then causes some physical reaction such as weight gain or debt. This then results in new thoughts of failure and so the vicious circle continues. CBT allows us to affect one of these areas and so break the cycle. Typically this is done be looking to change our thoughts which in turn will alter our behaviour.
This is my story! At almost 20 Stones, my weight was out of control. My blood pressure was so high that I was borderline for needing medication. I had been overweight for longer than I could remember trying every fad diet and weight loss programme that came along. I have always been very goal orientated and can discipline myself to diet no problem. I could lose weight and feel great and then put it all right back on again. Deep down being overweight depressed me as it affected my health, my ability to enjoy my kids and my wife. I would go through periods of great sadness because I had tried to lose weight and failed time and time again. One day, it was my eldest’s sons 13th birthday, and I had arranged for him to have a flying lesson with a pilot friend of mine who invited me to sit in the back of the plane as my son flew. However when we got to the airstrip and did the pre-flight checks it became apparent that I was too heavy to go with them as we exceeded the max load of the small plane. Over the next day or so I realised that I was a glutton and gluttony was a sin. So I decided that I must again lose weight. As I researched which fad diet I would choose this time I came across a rapid weight loss programme which appealed to my impatient nature. This one however included group counselling which I now know as CBT (See Figure 1). The diet was a great success, losing 6 stone in 100 days, but I had lost weight in the past and put it straight back on. However, that was almost 2 years ago and I am still under 15 stone! So what changed? My thinking changed. The CBT caused me to think about “why I ate”. I realised that I ate when I was depressed, I ate when I was sad, or stressed or fed up. I ate for comfort! This then made me put on weight which then depressed me so I ate more and so the vicious circle continued. This is a great example of secular CBT in operation. By causing me to think of the circumstances that caused me to eat I was able to look past the immediate – I was just eating too much – to asking why and under what circumstances. As I then changed the way I thought about things it then altered my behaviours and the need for comfort (feelings) through food. This then changed the physical reactions (that of eating) which has allowed me to maintain a more appropriate body weight.
CBT – In a Pastoral Environmentpart from my reason for starting the diet being a realisation of sin (Gluttony) the CBT I was involved with was wholly secular. However, in a pastoral environment we need to include the aspect of God into our model (See Figure 2). By including God we are more able to look at not just the reasons behind our behaviour and responses but also look at what the bible has to say. Even though I have lost weight I still struggle daily with what is, in essence, an addictive cycle of eating. The CBT still allowed me to address my thinking but still it is a constant struggle. This is where I believe that the Pastoral Element is so helpful. As I consider the CBT cycle I have come to realise that our thoughts, feeling and behaviours/action are “in Christ ” just as a new creation I am in Christ. Secular CBT allows me now to understand what I should do and how I should handle it but as Paul says in Romans “For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out”. As we bring in the wisdom of the secular CBT model with wise pastoral counsel we can address the spiritual aspects of our being. With a pastoral model I can conclude that in turning to food in times of stress, hurt, sadness or despair means that one is doing more than being a glutton, we are making food a god and in doing so we break the first commandment . As we then not only consider the spiritual impact as well as the physical/psychological we recognise that the results are not simply that one gets fat, but that one also offends God.
One must not simply look therefore to change ones thinking about food in order to amend behaviour towards food but also to change our thinking in terms of the offence the action will cause God. Without pastoral assistance this information could easily lead again to a vicious circle of eating because one could so easily then feel more depressed and more of a failure because now as a Christian you are offending God. Pastoral care can help understand the grace of God that is freely available when we repent and ask for forgiveness. With a God centred pastoral CBT approach we can not only understand the triggers, as the world would see them, that cause us to behave in a particular way but also the sin that so easily entangles . As we use these things together we can look to change our thinking and, if necessary, to come to a place of repentance by providing a safe environment where we can explore our feelings, thoughts and behaviours and where we can confess our sins knowing that God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness .
Whilst not in every case I do believe that CBT has a vital part to play in Pastoral Counselling within the life of the local church under the government and oversight of biblical eldership. I would not see this as first line care, but would certainly see that in some circumstances this type of pastoral counselling would be a great help.
Posted in Counselling, Pastoral | Tagged: Biblical Counselling, CBT, Chrsitian Counselling, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, Counselling, Pastoral Counselling | 4 Comments »
Posted by spdar on November 24, 2008
The results of the Supernatural Outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the early pasts of Acts is very exciting and in there we see how these encounters shaped the early church. Today we are seeing healing in our Sunday meetings and experiencing the Holy Spirit at work which leads me to ask “How is this manifestation of the Holy spirit that we are currently experiencing affecting our lives”?
Signs have a purpose. They are not and end in themselves
When Heaven Invades Earth – (Johnson, When Heaven Invades Earth, 2003)
As I investigate the out pouring of the Holy Spirit in Acts 1 & 2 and again in Acts 3 & 4 I see Luke explaining that after the out pouring we see the gospel preached, people saved and added to the church and then he gives us an insight to how the church then looks as a result. I see their radical attitudes, actions, trust & sacrifice expressed in generosity to one another and there being no needy person among them.
I think that this is a model we, as a Radical Spirit Filled Community, should be adopting today!
 |
LISTEN for free or Download free to your iPod |
 |
|
|
|
|
Posted in Free MP3 Download, Miracles/Supernatural, Preaching | Tagged: Church, Free MP3, Holy Spirit, Supernatural, Healing, Radical, Andy Robinson | No Comments »
Posted by spdar on November 23, 2008
Read Part 1
Read Part 2
Read Part 3
This is my final write up on the shack and concludes all that I am wanting to convey regarding this book. I have had much feed back, some I can publish and have done so. Having read the book I think that there are many good aspects of it. It tackles some very difficult issues very well, it has, as I have outlined it has some major doctrinal errors in my opinion there are other areas that I believe that could easy be taken wrongly, but if you look hard enough you can see the deeper meaning if you look for it. For example it is very easy to read The Shack with a critical eye, looking for error, and believe that it is saying that everyone is forgiven.
(Page 192) Papa: “Honey, you asked me what Jesus accomplished on the cross; so now listen to me carefully: through his death and resurrection, I am now fully reconciled to the world”. Mack: “the whole world? You mean those that believe in you, right?” Papa: ” The whole world Mack. All I am telling you is that reconciliation is a two way street, and I have done my part, totally, completely, finally. It is not the nature of love to force a relationship but it is the nature of love to open the way”.
It might appear that Papa (God) is saying that everyone is forgiven, but I am not convinced that is what is being said. God is saying that everything that needed to be done on his part to reconcile us to himself is done in Jesus. That is true! It then takes us, the sinner, to do our part and believe, repent and follow him. He has made away, our part is to take the opportunity offered to us!
I am keen not to go on a witch hunt here, but to simply name the theological errors that I saw as I read the book. I have not re-read the book looking for more errors in order to condemn it or the author. My goal was to simply review the book and determine if there was a basis for me being able to recommend the book or not. My answer is not. That Said, if you want to read it … then read it, but read it knowing that it is not theologically sound throughout.
So in concluding this next section of the book casued me to take a look at my electronic bibles to do a search and the results brought a smile to my face !
Papa: “My words are alive and dynamic-full of life and possibility; yours are dead, full of law and fear and judgment. That is why you won’t find the word responsibility in the Scriptures. “
English Standard Version: 1 Occurrence
New King James Version: 5 Occurrences
New International Version: 13 Occurrences
New American Standard Bible: 4 Occurrences
The Message: 26 Occurrences
King James Version: 0 Occurrences
Clearly God only reads the King James Version !
Posted in Book Reviews, The Shack, Theology | Tagged: Heresy, Literature, The Shack, Theology, Trinity | 2 Comments »
Posted by spdar on November 22, 2008
Read Part 1 The Trinity
Read Part 2 The Trinity
This is the third part of my thoughts on some of the theological difficulties I have struggled with in being asked to recommend The Shack, particularly to my youth group. In short I thought the book as a whole was really enjoyable but it through up some serious “Red Flags” in my understanding of biblical theology.
This is a huge area of possible error and one that needs careful discussion. It all begins with a section of text on page 121 where Mack says “Isn’t one of you more the boss than the other two? … I have always thought of God the father as sort of being the boss and Jesus as the one following orders, you know, being obedient … I am talking about who’s in charge. Don’t you have a chain of command?” Although simplistic these are reasonable questions and statements about the relationships in the trinity. The answers the Shack then provides are, in my opinion, disturbing and wrong.
There are some very weighty topics here! However, they must be looked are carefully and not “glossed over” because they are too complicated.
There is clearly a difference between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in how they relate to creation. Equal yes, but different. As we read the bible we see these differences. Right from the beginning we see that the Father was the one who planned and directed creation. God the Father spoke the creative words throughout Genesis 1 “And God said …” but we know that in the gospel of John that Jesus is referred to as ‘The Word’ of God. “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father” [John 1:14] As we read in verse 1 of John “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made” [John 1:1-3]. So here we see that Jesus is God and is eternal as the father is, but Jesus was the one who carried out these creative instructions. “All things were created through him (Jesus) and for him (Jesus)” [Col 1:16] nowhere in scripture does do we find any evidence of the Son or the Holy Spirit creating through the Father. The father is the originator and the Son is the doer of his will.
Here too, in the redemption, we see that Jesus was “sent” by God the Father and Jesus “obeyed” the Father. It was God the father that sent his only Son to the world because of his great love for the world [John 3:16, Gal 4:4], but the Father clearly sent the Son. The plan to redeem mankind was, like creation, God the Fathers idea [Ephesians 1:7-10]. Jesus submitted himself to the will of the father [John 6:38] and obeyed him. “and being found in human form, he [Jesus] humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” [Philippians 2:8]. Obedience is interesting terminology here. This is the same word used in this verse: “Our fathers refused to obey him, but thrust him[God] aside, and in their hearts they turned to Egypt” [Acts 7:39]. Stephen recounts the refusal of the people of Israel to obey God that is to do what God had asked them to do. The only other verse in the New Testament where they same Greek word is used for obey is the one in Philippians 2:8 which refers to Jesus being obedient to God the Father. Clearly this tells us there is some ordering of activities within the trinity.
We need to be careful that in arguing for order in the trinity (Economy of the Trinity) we do not imply that Jesus, or indeed the Holy Spirit is anything other than equal within the trinity. “The Shack” does say this and in challenging the issues of order we must not portray Jesus (Or Holy Spirit) as subordinate in anyway. They are equal in nature, being and attributes.
Whilst we are saying that the trinity are equal in nature, being and attributes we are not saying that the Father, Son and Holy Spirits roles are interchangeable. The Father, as we have discussed is the one who sends, designs, commands etc and the Son is one who obeys, goes as the Father sends and revealing the father to us. As you look at the roles it is wholly appropriate that the Father is one who commands and plans and the Son in one who obeys and goes. Wayne Grudem says this in his book – Systematic Theology “These roles could not have been reversed or the Father would cease to be the Father and the Son would have ceased to be the Son.”. He goes on to say “These relationships are eternal, not something that occurred only in time”. The Son did not become the Son when the father sent him to the earth as a man. He was always the Son!. The bible tells us that as Christians we were chosen by God the Father in God the Son before the foundation of the world [Ephesians 1:3-4]. This leads us to understand see again these clear roles of the trinity are ordered in eternity past, present & future
“It may be said that there are no differences in deity, attributes or essential nature between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Each person is fully God and has all the attributes of God. The only distinctions between the members of the trinity are in the ways they relate to each other and to the rest of creation. In those relationships they carry out roles that are appropriate to each person” (Grudem, April 1994)
Sarayu (Holy Spirit): “Mackenzie, we have no concept of final authority among us, only unity” We are in a circle of relationship, not a chain of command … what you are seeing here is relationship without any overlay of power. We don’t need power over the other because we are always looking out for the best. Hierarchy would make no sense among us”.
Whilst we say that the trinity are equal in nature, being and attributes and that there is no subordination there is an issue of headship. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 11:3 the following “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God” You can argue over terminology but there is clearly a sense of “overship” if you don’t like the word hierarchy.
1 Corinthians 15:27-28 (New International Version)
27For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
Jesus will be made subject to God is a statement of what I am calling “overship” but it is certainly not a “Circle of relationship” as described in The Shack. It is in fact Hierarchy!
The Greek word for “will be subjected” is ‘hupotagasetai’ which is the future passive indicative. This means that it is a future event where Jesus will forever be subjected to the Father.These passages teach that there is indeed a hierarchy within the Trinity in which all three members are equal in nature, yet the principle of headship and submission is perfectly displayed in the Trinity. [Patrick Zukeran Research Associate, Probe Ministries]
But, page 124 of The Shack we read, “So you think that God must relate inside a hierarchy like you do. But we do not.” This is directly opposing the bible.
There is a clearly a sense of one being over another, but not is a master/slave sense that we see when we talk of being over someone, but being originator of the move and the one caring out the move. A good example of this might be an inventor of a product and that salesman who sells the produce. Both essential, without the inventor there is no product, but without the salesman there is no way anyone would ether know there was a product or get hold of it. Both are essential, they are inextricably linked and equally. Headship is similar. The bible talks of the church being like a body [1 Cor 12:12-31], every part essential but we can’t all be the hands or the eye or the head. However, all the parts are necessary and without the heart for example the body will die, but it is the head who plans and creates and the rest of the body makes it happen. This is true in the trinity as we have already discussed. God the Father plans and speaks and Jesus and Holy Spirit are involved in making it happen, all equal but in that special relationship of headship and hierarchy.
Mack: “but every human institution I can think of , from political to business, even down to marriage, is governed by this kind of thinking (hierarchy) It is the web of social fabric”. Papa: “Such a waste”. Jesus: “Once you have a hierarchy you need rules to protect and administer it and then you need law and the enforcement of the rules and you end up with some kind of chain of command or a system of order that destroys relationship rather than promotes it. You rarely see or experience relationship apart from power. Hierarchy imposes law and rules and you end up missing the wonder of relationship that we intended for you”.
The Shack here argues that Gods biblical plan for marriage is incorrect because it is based on headship/hierarchy. The bible has clearly set up marriage as a wonderful expression of intimate relationship (a very dim reflection of the trinity – “the two shall become one [Mark 8:10]”) and explains as we have already discussed that the man is the head of the woman [1 Corinthians 11:3].This is not a negative, or a substandard situation but one that God has planned and instituted. It is one based on the same understanding of authority and headship that we have already established is operating within the trinity.
Sarayu (Holy Spirit): “When you choose independence over relationship, you became a danger to each other. Others became objects to be manipulated or managed for your own happiness. Authority, as you usually think of it, is merely the excuse the strong use to make others conform to what they want”. Jesus: “If you have truly learned to regard each other’s concerns as significant as your own, there would be no need for hierarchy”.
The bible clearly teaches headship in the context of the trinity and so clearly it is possible to operate in a way that is distinct and still not be manipulative or overbearing. The Shack is suggesting that Jesus is saying that being in authority over someone or something (a wife or even a church) is mutually exclusive to being able to regard each other’s concerns as significant as your own. This is just what sin and the devil has done headship and biblical authority. These things are not inherently evil in themselves only in the way they have been abused!
Posted in Book Reviews, The Shack, Theology | Tagged: Heresy, Literature, The Shack, Theology, Trinity | No Comments »
Posted by spdar on November 18, 2008
Read Part 1 The Trinity
This is the second part of my thoughts on some of the theological difficulties I have struggled with in being asked to recommend The Shack, particularly to my youth group. In short I thought the book as a whole was really enjoyable. It tackled some pretty hard core topics such as the trinity, why do bad things happen, death, crime and forgiveness in the form of a story. That said could a recommend this book to people? Well to be honest not without some serious caveats. Would I tell people not to read it? No, I don’t think I would assuming they were a discerning reader able to enjoy the book as a literary piece and not a theological piece. It is for that reason that I would not recommend it to youth because they are not always that discerning and will, i think, read The Shack and then think they understand the Trinity or God as a result and they really won’t, not from this book anyway.
Well last time in Part 1I spoke of my concerns with the way the trinity is depicted in terms of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit. Part 2 continues with the Trinity, but this time looks at Modalism and how, I think, it appears within The Shack
Possibly here your first question is “What is Modalism”. Well the simplest way to explain it to say that Modalism states that God is either God the father, or God the Son or God the Holy Spirit. He is not all 3 at once; he appears in one mode or another as a single person. So in the Old Testament he appears a God the Father, then in the Gospels as God the Son and then in the remainder of the New Testament as God the Holy Spirit. These modes are consecutive and never simultaneous. It is this subtle doctrine that comes out in the Shack and so contradicts the trinity that the book is desperately trying to explain. The book says on page 99 the following:- “We we three spoke ourselves into existence as the Son of God, we became fully human. We also chose to embrace all the limitations that this entailed. Even though we have always been present in the created universe we now became flesh and blood”
This clearly shows the Modalism in the authors understanding. Again on pages 95-96 we see this Modalistic doctrine surfacing further.
Page 95-96 of the Shack tells of a conversation between Mack and God (Papa). Mack notices scars on Papa’s wrists and Papa explains that on the cross “we were together”. When Mack rightly challenges this and asks “At the cross? Now, wait, I thought you left him – you know – ‘My God, My God why have you forsaken me?” Papa then replies “You misunderstand the mystery there. Regardless of what he felt at that moment, I never left him”
This is a huge error! For 3 reasons
PART 3 Coming Soon ……
Posted in Book Reviews, The Shack, Theology | Tagged: Heresy, Literature, The Shack, Theology, Trinity | No Comments »
Posted by spdar on November 15, 2008
I thought the book as a whole was really enjoyable. It tackled some pretty hard core topics such as the trinity, why do bad things happen, death, crime and forgiveness in the form of a story. The main character, “Mack”, is a father who takes his kids camping while his wife goes away. On the trip his youngest daughter is abducted and murdered. The story follows the emotions, thoughts and spiritual journey of Mack as he meets God and gets some answers to the many questions he has.
I have heard so much spoken about this book. Some for and some against. Some say it is a “Must Read” others say “If you haven’t read it … DON’T” So what is all the fuss about? I read it to make up my own mind and I think to be honest I have mixed feelings.
I really enjoyed reading the book, but to be honest I enjoyed the Da Vinci Code too, anyway I found the story gripping, compelling even and so read in just a day or two. I had to keep reading to find out what happened. The story is very emotive and so really draws the reader in. It is the that gives me some concerns as there were one or two things in the book that did not sit all that comfortably with me. That said the book does tackle some very difficult issues very well which then leads me to my “mixed feelings position”. This leads me to the point where I must ask “Becasue there are good bits, do they out weigh the poor bits”. There are good bits in the book of mormon, but I would never recomend one reads it!
I thought I would write down some of my concerns here and see what everyone else thinks too. At the end I will then put everything into a paper (and make it avaialble on the blog of course).
So please let me know your thoughts too.
Today I will look at the most obvious area of contention …. that of the Trinity
Let us first of all look at how the biblical theology presents the Trinity to us.
The Trinity is “God eternally exists as three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and each person is fully God, and there is one God”. (Grudem, Systematic Theology)
Ok let’s look at “The Shack” and compare that to our definition of the trinity.
I. God eternally exists as three persons
a. I think “The Shack” does OK here. It clearly shows that the trinity is made up of 3 distinct people (Papa, Jesus and Sarayu) But then I think most of us get the “3 people part”. It’s how they are all one were our brains start to hurt.
II. Father
a. Now this is where the book traverses into heresy in my view as it depicts “God the Father” as an African-American woman (Mother). We are skating on the very thin part of the ice here as we move away from how God chooses to describe himself in the bible. Whilst the book does “try” to give some explanation as to why God is depicted as a woman this is simply wrong as the bible gives us no indication. In fact the bible tells us that “God is spirit” [John 4:24] and so is not gendered because he is spirit. Jesus tells us in John 6:46 “not that anyone has seen the father except he who is from God” which tells us two things. First of all that no one has seen God other than Jesus and Jesus refers to him as Father and so I believe it extremely inappropriate to depict him in any way other than is reveled in scripture. We are looking at the “invisible qualities and divine nature” [Rom 1:20] of God here. The bible reveals the divine nature of God as being that of “Father”. Jesus refers to God as Father only, never mother!
b. We also move into the whole discussion of making a likeness of God. What does that mean? Well, it is the point that we are not to try and take the invisible God [1 Tim 1:17, Heb 11:27] and attempt to make him visible. That is to create a representation of God that we look on as God. The second commandment [Exodus 20:4-5] tells us that we “shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them”. This is where I would have problems with statues, or paintings of God. Even if they are used to help us focus on God I believe the bible clearly tells us that God is a jealous God and will not share himself with anything.
c. Jesus is the “image of the invisible God” [Colossians 1:15]. This is the only acceptable image of God that the bible permits that of Jesus. As Jesus was visible then I have less of a problem with creating images or representations of Jesus because he did come to earth as a man. Likewise the Holy Spirit. Clearly the Holy Spirit was made visible in the form of a dove, or tongues of fire and so again has been made visible. However, God the Father is a different ball game. We cannot take the creator God and try and make him part of creation by comparing him to something he created or made by something we, a created being, created. We are not to compare God to anything. God says through the prophet Isaiah “To whom then will you compare me, that I should be like him?” (Isaiah 40:25) Paul warns the Romans that “For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man … they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” [Rom 1:21-23,25]. As “God is spirit” [John 4:24] we cannot render an image, a picture or a look-a-like without falling foul of all this scripture.
III. Son
a. The book here does fine in depicting Jesus as a man of Jewish decent, a carpenter, fully human and fully God.
IV. Holy Spirit
a. Again the book takes a stab at describing the Holy Spirit and a shimmering, free spirit kind of person.
Read the next article in the series … Part 2 - What’s Wrong with the Shack
Posted in Book Reviews, The Shack, Theology, Youth Resources | Tagged: Heresy, Literature, The Shack, Theology, Trinity | 7 Comments »
Posted by spdar on November 10, 2008
It was so exciting this week at church as people were healed! I was preaching at my Church, Kings Church Horsham, this week and during the worship there were several word of knowledge about healing. Even some primary school kids from our kids work came into the adult meeting to speak out about what God had shown them and to pray for the sick. I was really moved by what God was doing and so as I began to speak I felt I should ask anyone who was sick to stand so as a church we could pray for them.
This led into a great opportunity to talk on Acts Chapter 3 & 4 as this was the same model as we were experiencing right there in our church meeting!.
You can LISTEN to the sermon here, or you can download it for free to listen on your iPod here.
Following the Sermon a lady testified to being healed of Carpel Tunnel Syndrome !
Posted in Free MP3 Download, Miracles/Supernatural, Preaching | Tagged: Free MP3 Download, Healing, Miracles, Miracles/Supernatural, Sermon | No Comments »
