Wednesday, July 29, 2009

“I WAS GOING TO PREACH THIS, BUT THE HOLY SPIRIT LEAD ME TO THIS” . . . AND OTHER STUPID STATEMENTS


by ~ c michael patton ~

Does my title give me away? So much for being coy with my proposition. Let me say that this post is going to get me in trouble with some dear friends who preach God’s word every week. My message to them: Bear with my critique. I pray that my thoughts will be considered as “wounds from a friend”—a very fallible friend.

Here, let’s start this way. Have you ever heard someone (probably a preacher or teacher in the church) say something like this:

“I had prepared all week to teach on __________, but the Holy Spirit changed my lesson at the last minute.”

I have. Dozens of times. The idea it conveys is that the particular message that was prepared was not of God (at least at that time) and this new message was most certainly of God. In fact, the new message is miraculously of God! Why? Because I did not really prepare for it. It must have been God who prepared it. “I just step back when that happens and let God do his thing. Who am I to interrupt God?”

Can I say something? (Wait, let me hide behind something first . . .There.) That is a stupid statement!

My basic thesis is this: The type of assumptions required to adopt the occurrence of such homiletic detours is irresponsible both to yourself and to your audience and misunderstands the way God works in the life of the church.

Let me give you some characteristics that I see in such statements. They can:

Neglect the Holy Spirit. The idea that is conveyed is that the Holy Spirit is not present in the sermon/lesson preparation process. Without God’s presence and guidance in the study, does he somehow show up at the pulpit? There is no justification for such thinking. In fact, I would argue that we are in more need of the Spirit’s guidance in the study than we are when we deliver. If the Spirit is not present when you are in preparation, how can he be there when you deliver? The delivery is simply the product of your life, study, preparation, and daily walk with God. If this is true, why would God miraculously change what he has been preparing you to present? Can he not make up his mind? Did some new unforeseen circumstance arise that caused him to adjust, shift, or compensate for? Be careful.

Blame the Holy Spirit. The idea that God changes the sermon or lesson can be an attempt to discount your involvement and responsibility in what is being presented. Maybe you did not prepare and you are seeking someone to blame? Maybe you want to say something that you don’t think will gain people’s favor? Maybe you are just trying to blame the Holy Spirit?

Be manipulative. The third commandment, in principle, has nothing to do with swearing, but everything to do with protecting God’s reputation. When we claim that God miraculously changed the lesson or sermon, we may be manipulating the audience. In other words, it may be another way of saying, “This sermon is really from God.” In doing this, you are using his reputation by way of putting a “hands-off” authentication on your teaching. After all, if God changed your mind at the last minute, whatever criticism that someone might have must concede its fury; otherwise, the critics might find themselves at enmity with God himself. That type of approach is manipulative. The best we can do is prayfully hope that God has guided our lives, thoughts, and studies to qualify us to represent him when the time comes.

Arise from a gnostic bent. I think that people assume that this is a norm in the pulpit because we have the tendency to separate the mundane from the sacred. We often believe that if it is from the Lord, it will have a halo around it. Halos don’t seem to appear in studies that are filled with struggle, doubt, and, often, timidity in our conclusions. We seek the halos to rise above the mundane to sanctify us in a different way. However, we must live thoroughly converted lives, recognizing that the wall between the sacred and the “secular” is not really present, and it never was. It is no more spiritual to study than to preach.

But . . . What about . . .

I can hear it coming. What about Jude in the New Testament? I am just following in his footsteps.

“Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.” (Jud. 1:3)

Doesn’t Jude here demonstrate that he was going to write about something but the Holy Spirit led him somewhere else? Yes, but this cannot be applied to what I am speaking about. Jude is not saying that he was just about to write on the subject of salvation, but the Lord miraculously changed his lesson. He is saying that he purposed to write about salvation, but he was convicted of a greater priority instead. To put this in our current situation, it would be like me saying that I have been intending to preach on marriage, but I feel it is more important at this time for me to start a series on dealing with false doctrine due to its current influence in our culture. The reason for the change is not some last minute anointing of the Holy Spirit, but because of the expediency of the subject for the current situation. It says nothing about preparation and study. It is assumed that Jude is prepared to speak to the issue of his conviction precicely because of the presence of his conviction.

In the end, we need to be careful. From conception, preparation, to presentation, we can only hope that God is guiding it all. Can God change our sermon or lesson while we are in the pulpit? Of course. The question that you have to ask yourself is whether or not this is a model that we should expect. Your message can be further shaped, nuanced, and impassioned while you are teaching, but this is not really God changing your sermon. Preach what you prepare for and prepare for what you preach.

The Secret of Significance



Preached at Oasis Church
7/19/09
LISTEN HERE

Infrastructure for Souls: Tracing the parallel histories of the American megachurch and the corporate-organizational complex.



Slideshow by Joseph Clarke
HERE

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Chuck Norris Bible



www.sacredsandwich.com

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Friday, July 10, 2009

Walking By The Spirit

"Walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desires of the flesh" (Gal. 5:16)

Here are some necessary conditions for Walking In the Spirit:

1. Right Goal - Obedience to the Glory of God
2. Right Theological Foundation - Obedience founded on Justification
3. Right Means - Obedience Fueled and Reinforced with the Instruments of Grace (Word of God...)

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Sin: worse than hell. Christ: better than heaven

Anselm used to say, "that if he should see the shame of sin on the one hand, and the pains of hell on the other, and must of necessity choose one, he would rather be thrust into hell without sin, then go into heaven with sin."

Luther: I'd "rather be in hell with Christ, than in heaven without him."

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Old Women in Pulpits

Dr D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was asked publicly why the churches of his day had so few young men in the pews. He instantly shot back, "Because there are so many old women in the pulpits."

Monday, June 29, 2009

Pimp My Ride

11 Axioms for a Great Commission Resurgence

From the SBC convention:

http://www.GreatCommissionResurgence.com/

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Loving Cameras rather than Pictures...

Every poet and musician and artist, but for Grace, is drawn away from love of the thing he tells, to love of the telling, till, down in Deep Hell, they cannot be interested in God at all but only in what they say about Him.

Lewis, The Great Divorce, 85

Texting And Driving Worse Than Drinking and Driving

Friday, June 26, 2009

Car and Driver Magazine recently released results of driving tests that observed braking reaction times for drivers when texting and reading texts and compared them to those when the drivers were legally drunk. The results revealed drivers had worse reaction times when texting and reading than when drunk.

HERE

Friday, June 19, 2009

STUDY: Chubby people live longest...

One more reason to embrace and celebrate our elastic pants - HERE

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Are urban tapeworms on the rise?























Anthony Franz says an undercooked salmon salad gave him a 9-foot-tapeworm, and in August he sued the Chicago restaurant that served it to him... MORE

Survey Examines America's Megachurchgoers

HERE

Monday, June 15, 2009

Post Rapture Pet Care


"Suppose you go in the Rapture . . . What happens to Fido after you are gone? Cats can take care of themselves. But what about dogs? Well, here's a group of avowed UK atheists who know they won't go in the Rapture. So, for a small fee, they'll feed your pets after you are gone" (kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com) - HERE FOR POST-RAPTURE PET CARE

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

God Loves

God Loves - LISTEN

Monday, June 8, 2009

A FROG that constantly changes colour is being worshipped as a GOD in India

- Link

Hundreds of curious followers flock to Reji Kumar’s home every day to pray and ask for miracles.

Now one of the country’s top zoologists plans to study the rainbow frog. But Reji, 35, who keeps the creature in a glass bottle after finding it while out watering plants, is afraid it might CROAK first.

He said: “My one problem is that this frog does not appear to eat. I keep trying to feed it but it doesn’t eat anything. I don’t know what else to give it.”

The frog was a dazzling WHITE colour when Reji, from Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, first spotted it.

Then it changed to YELLOW and had gone GREY by the time he got it home.

Lift worker Reji added: “By night the frog was dark yellow, and then it became transparent so you could see its internal organs.

"It seemed like a miracle to me that this frog had so many different coats. So now people come to see him and pray to him.”

Professor Oommen V. Oommen from India’s Kerala University, said it was not uncommon for animals to change colour.

He explained: “Frogs do change colour to scare away predators.

“But from what I have heard, the frog at Kumar’s place changes colour so frequently it is a bit unusual. I will collect it for study.”

Saturday, June 6, 2009

Parents, guard your laptops!

WELLINGTON, New Zealand - A New Zealand mom made some online bids on toys before napping. Then her 3-year-old daughter took over and bought a bigger plaything than expected — a huge earth-moving digger for a cool $12,300.

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

The Art of Manliness



Summer Grilling - HERE

Why We Love the Church: In Praise of Institutions and Organized Religion



I'm looking forward to this book:

Why We Love the Church: In Praise of Institutions and Organized Religion (Paperback)
by Ted Kluck (Author), Kevin DeYoung (Author)

MORE...

Chinese Calvinism Flourishes

from guardian.co.uk

The churches that follow Calvin are the third largest Christian grouping in the world. In China they hope to become the religion of the elite. - HERE

Monday, June 1, 2009

God Loves...



Message: God Loves...
Series: God is...
June 7th @ 6 @ Oasis

Friday, May 29, 2009

God Speaks




Series: "God is..."
Message: God Speaks
Speaker: Pastor Jake Magee
Date: 5/24/09

Listen Here

Faith that Works - James 2:14-26

New Life Community Church
5/24/09
Weekend Message - James 2:14-26.
Series: Radiate. Speaker: Jake Magee

LISTEN HERE

Who taught me to like tobacco and alcohol?

'You are always dragging me down,' said I to my Body. 'Dragging you down! replied my Body. 'Well I like that! Who taught me to like tobacco and alcohol? You, of course, with your idiotic adolescent idea of being "grown-up". My palate loathed both at first: but you would have your way. Who put an end to all those angry and revengeful thoughts last night? Me, of course, by insisting on going to sleep. Who does his best to keep you from talking too much and eating too much by giving you dry throats and headaches and indigestion? Eh?' 'And what about sex?' said I. 'Yes, what about it' retorted the Body. 'If you and your wretched imagination would leave me alone I'd give you no trouble. That's Soul all over; you give me orders and then blame me for carrying them out.' - C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock.

Friday, May 22, 2009

God Speaks - Preview of Sunday Evening

God Is - The Nature of God


God Is... The Nature of God - HERE

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

WHY I’M PUMPED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE AMERICAN CHURCH

by Larry Osborne

It’s fashionable to decry the current state of Christianity in America.

But frankly, I don’t buy it.

Some of the most popular conference speakers on the circuit today excel at drive-by-guiltings. They paint a picture of a church that lacks guts, cowers from dying to self, and lives out a self-satisfied, what’s-in-it-for-me Christianity.

In most cases, I like these speakers. They are good guys. I respect them. But I just don’t agree on this issue.

I’ve noticed that their audience is usually a room full of charge-the-hill-type young leaders who eat it up and then return home to look with disdain upon other churches, pastors, leaders, and often their own congregation (oblivious to how much they have in common with the self-congratulatory zealot in Luke 11: 9-14).

__________________________

Now don’t get me wrong, I’ll agree that we have lots of carnality and self-centered living in our churches today. But come on, that’s nothing new. It’s been like that from the beginning. It’s simply not accurate to paint a heroic picture of the early church without also pointing out its many failures. In reality, the early church was pretty messed up, about as messed up as the American Church.

Have we forgotten . . .

Those who willingly sold what they had to share with those in need thought Jesus was returning any day. So when the Pentecost pilgrims who stayed rather than return home ran out of money (no one carried a debit card) the Jerusalem Christians sold possessions, fields, and homes to meet their need. I’m sure I would too if I thought Jesus was returning in the next couple of weeks.

They ended up broke. So much so that the Gentile churches took up a special collection for the impoverished saints in Jerusalem. Between persecutions and previously selling much of what they had, the Jerusalem church ended up in poverty. Perhaps Acts 2:41-47 is descriptive rather than prescriptive. After all, I know of no one who suggests we should be meeting daily, in Jerusalem, in the temple courts.

The early church ignored Jesus’ command to take the gospel to the world. They flat out disobeyed. They stayed in Jerusalem. Eventually God had to send a great persecution to drive them out of their holy huddle and jump start the expansion of the kingdom. That’s the only reason they left according to Acts 8:1

The early church was unwilling to share the gospel with Gentiles. And once they did, they didn’t want to allow them full status as Christians. Only after a contentious debate at the Jerusalem council did things change. And even after that, the battle raged on. That’s one of the major reasons we have the books of Galatians and Hebrews in our Bibles.

The Apostle Paul’s church plants were so messed up (both doctrinally and morally) he later had to write a bunch of letters to get them back on track. The Corinthians were visiting temple prostitutes, ignoring sin in the name of grace, hoarding the good stuff at church pot-lucks. And they seem to have forgotten that the resurrection really mattered. Timothy had to be reminded not to appoint the town drunk as an elder. The Galatians’ and Colossians’ flirted with heresy. And that’s just the beginning of a long list of sins and goofy thinking that had to be corrected.

The early church leaders were as feisty and flakey as today’s leaders. Paul and Barnabas had a messy split over how to handle a young intern named John Mark. Peter fell into hypocrisy and pretended to be a legalist until called out by Paul. And didn’t everyone skip out on Paul during his time of greatest need?

Jesus also had some rather unflattering things to say to the New Testament churches. Most of the churches mentioned in Revelation 2-3 hardly set an example I’d want my church to follow.

So when we call for a return to the New Testament church, do we really know what we’re asking for? In many cases, I think not.

__________________________

And in light of that, here’s why I’m so pumped about the future of the American church.

Jesus said he would build his church and the gates of hell could not hold it back. So I’ll bank on his promise despite some occasional setbacks.

As seen above, things might not be as bleak as they appear. Yes, we’re messed up, but so was the early church; and God used them to turn the world upside down.

God has already hand-picked a new breed of leaders and shepherds to care for his flock and beautify his bride. In my travels around the country, I run into them all the time. I wish everyone could see what I see and spend time with them as I do. They are the real deal. Many are already leading huge churches at a young age. Thousands more are heeding the call to become church planters. A plethora of church planting networks and organizations have spontaneously formed to recruit, train, and deploy these folks into ministry. It’s not only encouraging, it’s humbling.
__________________________

Does that mean they will win our nation back?

I don’t know. That’s out of their control. They can only be faithful and prepare the horse for battle. God will determine the outcome.

I said I was pumped about the future of the American church – not America.

So what do you think?

What I mean by Preaching - John Piper

What I Mean by Preaching
May 12, 2009 | By: John Piper
Category: Commentary
The following is from the intro to last weekend's sermon.


Some of you may have little or no experience with what I mean by preaching. I think it will help you listen to my messages if I say a word about it.

What I mean by preaching is expository exultation.

Preaching Is Expository

Expository means that preaching aims to exposit, or explain and apply, the meaning of the Bible. The reason for this is that the Bible is God’s word, inspired, infallible, profitable—all 66 books of it.

The preacher’s job is to minimize his own opinions and deliver the truth of God. Every sermon should explain the Bible and then apply it to people's lives.

The preacher should do that in a way that enables you to see that the points he is making actually come from the Bible. If you can’t see that they come from the Bible, your faith will end up resting on a man and not on God's word.

The aim of this exposition is to help you eat and digest biblical truth that will

make your spiritual bones more like steel,
double the capacity of your spiritual lungs,
make the eyes of your heart dazzled with the brightness of the glory of God,
and awaken the capacity of your soul for kinds of spiritual enjoyment you didn’t even know existed.
Preaching Is Exultation

Preaching is also exultation. This means that the preacher does not just explain what’s in the Bible, and the people do not simply try understand what he explains. Rather, the preacher and the people exult over what is in the Bible as it is being explained and applied.

Preaching does not come after worship in the order of the service. Preaching is worship. The preacher worships—exults—over the word, trying his best to draw you into a worshipful response by the power of the Holy Spirit.

My job is not simply to see truth and show it to you. (The devil could do that for his own devious reasons.) My job is to see the glory of the truth and to savor it and exult over it as I explain it to you and apply it for you. That’s one of the differences between a sermon and a lecture.

Preaching Isn't Church, but It Serves the Church

Preaching is not the totality of the church. And if all you have is preaching, you don’t have the church. A church is a body of people who minister to each other.

One of the purposes of preaching is to equip us for that and inspire us to love each other better.

But God has created the church so that she flourishes through preaching. That’s why Paul gave young pastor Timothy one of the most serious, exalted charges in all the Bible in 2 Timothy 4:1-2:

I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word.

What to Expect from My Preaching and Why

If you're used to a twenty-minute, immediately practical, relaxed talk, you won't find that from what I've just described.

I preach twice that long;
I do not aim to be immediately practical but eternally helpful;
and I am not relaxed.
I standing vigilantly on the precipice of eternity speaking to people who this week could go over the edge whether they are ready to or not. I will be called to account for what I said there.

That's what I mean by preaching.

Monday, May 11, 2009

If Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians was Published in Christianity Today

from Sacred Sandwich.


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dear Christianity Today:
In response to Paul D. Apostle’s article about the Galatian church in your January issue, I have to say how appalled I am by the unchristian tone of this hit piece. Why the negativity? Has he been to the Galatian church recently? I happen to know some of the people at that church, and they are the most loving, caring people I’ve ever met.
Phyllis Snodgrass; Ann Arbor, MI
————————————————————————
Dear Editor:
How arrogant of Mr. Apostle to think he has the right to judge these people and label them accursed. Isn’t that God’s job? Regardless of this circumcision issue, these Galatians believe in Jesus just as much as he does, and it is very Pharisaical to condemn them just because they differ on such a secondary issue. Personally, I don’t want a sharp instrument anywhere near my zipper, but that doesn’t give me the right to judge how someone else follows Christ. Can’t we just focus on our common commitment to Christ and furthering His kingdom, instead of tearing down fellow believers over petty doctrinal matters?
Ed Bilgeway; Tonganoxie, KS
————————————————————————–
Dear CT:
I’ve seen other dubious articles by Paul Apostle in the past, and frankly I’m surprised you felt that his recurrent criticisms of the Church deserved to be printed in your magazine. Mr. Apostle for many years now has had a penchant for thinking he has a right to “mark” certain Christian teachers who don’t agree with his biblical position. Certainly I commend him for desiring to stay faithful to God’s word, but I think he errs in being so dogmatic about his views to the point where he feels free to openly attack his brethren. His attitude makes it difficult to fully unify the Church, and gives credence to the opposition’s view that Christians are judgmental, arrogant people who never show God’s love.
Ken Groener; San Diego, CA
—————————————————————————-
To the Editors:
Paul Apostle says that he hopes the Galatian teachers will cut off their own privates? What kind of Christian attitude is that? Shame on him!
Martha Bobbitt; Boulder, CO
—————————————————————————-
Dear Christianity Today:
The fact that Paul Apostle brags about his public run-in with Peter Cephas, a well-respected leader and brother in Christ, exposes Mr. Apostle for the divisive figure that he has become in the Church today. His diatribe against the Galatian church is just more of the same misguided focus on an antiquated reliance on doctrine instead of love and tolerance. Just look how his hypercritical attitude has cast aspersions on homosexual believers and women elders! The real problem within the Church today is not the lack of doctrinal devotion, as Apostle seems to believe, but in our inability to be transformed by our individual journeys in the Spirit. Evidently, Apostle has failed to detach himself from his legalistic background as a Pharisee, and is unable to let go and experience the genuine love for Christ that is coming from the Galatians who strive to worship God in their own special way.
William Zenby; Richmond, VA
——————————————————————————
Kind Editors:
I happen to be a member of First Christian Church of Galatia, and I take issue with Mr. Apostle’s article. How can he criticize a ministry that has been so blessed by God? Our church has baptized many new members and has made huge in-roads in the Jewish community with our pragmatic view on circumcision. Such a “seeker-sensitive” approach has given the Jews the respect they deserve for being God’s chosen people for thousands of years. In addition, every Gentile in our midst has felt honored to engage in the many edifying rituals of the Hebrew heritage, including circumcision, without losing their passion for Jesus. My advice to Mr. Apostle is to stick to spreading the gospel message of Christ’s unconditional love, and quit criticizing what God is clearly blessing in other churches.
Miriam “Betty” Ben-Hur; Galatia, Turkey
——————————————————————————-
EDITOR’S NOTE: Christianity Today apologizes for our rash decision in publishing Paul Apostle’s exposĂ© of the Galatian church. Had we known the extent in which our readership and advertisers would withdraw their financial support, we never would have printed such unpopular biblical truth. We regret any damage we may have caused in propagating the doctrines of Christ.

Monday, May 4, 2009

You might be a Reformed male if...

No one has ever heard of the beer you are currently drinking.

You've named or plan to name your first son John, Jonathan, Charles, Knox, Owen, Calvin, Martin, Luther, Martin Luther, or Jean.

You have a beard (or wish you did).

You smoke a pipe.

You consult the PCA church directory when planning domestic vacations.

You dream of being accidentally left behind after hours in the Curry library (which, if you don't happen to be in the know, currently houses around 7,000 books from Charles Spurgeon's personal library).

You have a dream Bible.

You've considered Wittenberg, Germany as a great honeymoon destination.

You know what PCA, OPC, CREC, EPC, RPCNA, and APC stand for.

You refer to non-Christians as "unregenerates."

John Piper really is your homeboy.

You don't shop at Christian bookstores.

You've used the line, "Baby, your name must be Grace because you are irresistible" on women.

It's "Reformation Day" not "Halloween."

You've taped a copy of the 95 theses to the door of the nearest Catholic or seeker sensitive church on Reformation Day.

You can finish the names of each of these men:

A.W.
B. B.
R. L.
J. C.
C. H.

You end each email with "Soli Deo Gloria."

Saturday, May 2, 2009

The Great Offense - Sinning Against Mercy

"And so Capernaum, that was lifted up to heaven, was threatened to be thrown down to hell. No souls fall so low into hell, if they fall, as those souls that by a hand of mercy are lifted up nearest to heaven. You slight souls that are so apt to abuse mercy, consider this, that in the gospel days, the plagues that God inflicts upon the despisers and abusers of mercy are usually spiritual plagues; as blindness of mid, hardness of heart, benumbedness of conscience, which are ten thousand times worse than the worst of outward plagues that can befall you..."

"Oh! therefore, whenever Satan shall present God to the soul as one made up all of mercy, that he may draw thee to do wickedly, say unto him, that sins against mercy will bring upon the soul the greatest misery; and therefore whatever becomes of thee, thou wilt not sin against mercy."

Thomas Brooks, Precious Remedies Against Satan’s Devices, Banner of Truth Trust, 53.

Friday, April 24, 2009

Must have more books!!!

"We do not know what the books were about, and we can only form some guess as to what the parchments were. Paul had a few books which were left, perhaps wrapped up in the cloak, and Timothy was to be careful to bring them. Even an apostle must read. . . . A man who comes up into the pulpit, professes to take his text on the spot, and talks any quantity of nonsense, is the idol of many. If he will speak without premeditation, or pretend to do so, and never produce what they call a dish of dead men's brains—oh! that is the preacher. How rebuked are they by the apostle!

He is inspired, and yet he wants books!

He has been preaching at least for thirty years, and yet he wants books!

He had seen the Lord, and yet he wants books!

He had had a wider experience than most men, and yet he wants books!

He had been caught up into the third heaven, and had heard things which it was unlawful for a men to utter, yet he wants books!

He had written the major part of the New Testament, and yet he wants books!

The apostle says to Timothy and so he says to every preacher, "Give thyself unto reading." The man who never reads will never be read; he who never quotes will never be quoted. He who will not use the thoughts of other men's brains, proves that he has no brains of his own.

Brethren, what is true of ministers is true of all our people. You need to read. Renounce as much as you will all light literature, but study as much as possible sound theological works, especially the Puritanic writers, and expositions of the Bible. We are quite persuaded that the very best way for you to be spending your leisure, is to be either reading or praying. You may get much instruction from books which afterwards you may use as a true weapon in your Lord and Master's service. Paul cries, "Bring the books"—join in the cry." - Spurgeon

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Blah!!!!!

"God's grace, God's forgiveness...the free gift of salvation is at best just a footnote on the gospel."

Brian McLaren - A Generous Orthodoxy
"God's grace, God's forgiveness...the free gift of salvation is at best just a footnote on the gospel."

Brian McLaren - A Generous Orthodoxy

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Lesser Temptation, Greater Sin

"The less the temptation is to sin, the greater is that sin."

"When Satan says it is but a little one, do thou answer, that oftentimes there is the greatest unkindness showed to God's glorious majesty, in the acting of the least folly, and therefore thou wilt no displease thy best and greatest friend, but yielding to his greatest enemy."

"There is a great danger, yea, many times most danger, in the smallest sins.... Greater sins do soon startle the soul, and awaken and rouse up the soul to repentance, then lesser sins."

Thomas Brooks, Precious Remedies Against Satan’s Devices, Banner of Truth Trust, pgs 41-42)

Monday, March 30, 2009

Saddleback Church Trains 2,400 New Members; Baptizes 800

Saddleback Church in southern California trained nearly 2,400 new church members on Saturday. It was the largest membership class in the megachurch’s 30-year history. Of those who participated in the church’s introductory membership session, Class 101, about 800 were baptized afterwards. Founding pastor Rick Warren personally taught the program and then, with the help of other Saddleback pastors, spent more than three and a half hours baptizing the hundreds of new members.

HERE

Friday, March 27, 2009

Heavy Metal Monk

Monday, March 23, 2009

Friday, March 20, 2009

When Jesus Makes You Feel Bad

We’ve heard it before: Jesus is nearly equated with anti-depressant mediation. Accepting Jesus is like taking a Valium.

"Come to Jesus, and you’ll…(you fill in the state of euphoria)."

Again, "Know Jesus, Know Peace. No Jesus, No Peace."

Nice platitudes… I guess...

When a person comes to faith, there isn’t a removal of feeling bad and the installment of feeling good. Rather, the Christian life is gradual reversal of what you feel good and bad about. As non-believers, we generally feel good about sin and bad about righteousness. When God changes our hearts, we begin to feel bad about sin and good about righteousness. These feelings intensify gradually.

But it’s precisely this reversal that throws a person into a deep, nagging, and sometimes overwhelming struggle of soul (i.e., sadness). One might even argue that a person can sometimes feel "worse" as a believer than as an unbeliever. The more a person loves righteousness, the more he or she hates the sin within; which is to say, the more he or she feels "bad." Paul models this well:

Romans 7:15-24 For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate…For I know that nothing good dwells in me….For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want…Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?

The mere fact that you feel worse off now then you did when or before you first believed doesn’t at all mean that you are actually worse off not then when or before you first believed. Rather, it may be an indication that you are better off. Sometimes it’s an unhealthy person that doesn’t feel any pain. Pain can be a sign of health.

Imagine for a moment a man whose body is ravaged due to a head-on accident. One of the most significant injuries is a severed spinal column which has caused paralysis and lack of sensation, and therefore a lack of pain. Though the rest of his body is broken, he doesn’t feel it. Imagine some powerful scientific feat in which doctors are able to reattach his spinal cord. Upon this reattachment, pain signals begin to flow to his brain. Consider that though he is healthier after this procedure (due to this spinal cord being reattached), he experiences far more pain now then when he was significantly less healthier. The presence of pain may give the patient the illusion that he is worse off after the procedure than he was before it. Instead, pain is a signal of new found health.

The fact that a Christian experiences times of spiritual angst should not immediately dismissed as a sign of immaturity, but maturity. A sober man understands drunkenness, not a drunk. A person "sobering up" in the Christian journey will have a more sane and acute of the sin that remains. This leads to reinforce his convictions about salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. He is moved to boast louder in the cross and renounce confidence in the flesh.

Pastor Jake

Monday, March 16, 2009

How to Read the Bible Without Becoming a Cult Leader and Heretic

How to Read the Bible Without Becoming a Cult Leader and Heretic - HERE

Thursday, March 12, 2009

The New Calvinism: 10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now

Time.com reports on 10 ideas changing the world. Number 3 on that list is the resurgence of Calvinism.

HERE

Monday, March 9, 2009

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Sunday, March 1, 2009

Why Trust the Bible?

Evidence from Archaeology - Here
Evidence from Prophecy - Here

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Reading on Your Knees

I searched out these references to Whitefield's and Muller's approach towards Holy Scripture.
"We can visualize him at 5 in the morning in his room, on his knees with his Bible, his Greek New Testament, and a volume of Matthew Henry spread out before him. With intense concentration he reads a portion in English, studies its words and tenses in the Greek, and then considers Matthew Henry’s exposition of the whole. Finally comes his unique posture of ‘praying over every line and every word’ in both the English and the Greek, feasting his mind and his heart upon it till its essential meaning has become a part of his very person. When we shortly see him preaching forty and more hours per week with virtually no time whatsoever for preparation, we may look back upon these days and recognize that he was then laying up a store of knowledge on which he was able to draw amidst the tumult and hast of that later ministry” (Arnold A. Dallimore, George Whitefield: God’s Anointed Servant in the Great Revival of the Eighteenth Century, pg. 22)

George Muller (1898), after reading Whitefield’s biography and concluding that the source of his evangelistic power to be his reverence and approach to the word of God and his passionate prayer life. So, George Muller took up the practice of reading his Bible on his knees. What Whitefield was in Evangelism, Muller was with Faith (e.g. 50,000 cases where he could trace distinct answers to definite prayers). (A.T. Peirson: George Muller of Bristol: His Life of Prayer and Faith, pgs. 137-139)

Monday, February 23, 2009

Grace



Thomas Brooks offers ten particulars of renewing grace over and against restraining grace.

1. True grace makes all glorious within and without: A lion in a cage is a lion still; he is restrained, but not changed. But now true grace turns a lion into a lamb.

2. The objects of true grace are supernatural.

3. True grace enables a Chrsitian, when he is himself, to do spirtual actions with real pleasure and delight, To souls truly gracious, Christ's yoke 'is easy, and his burden is light;' his commandments are not grievous, but joyous."

4. True grace makes a man most careful, and most feaful of his own heart.

5. Grace will work a man's heart to love and cleave to the strictest and holiest ways and things of God, for their purity and sanctity, in the face all dangers and hardships.

6. True grace will enable a man to step over the world's crown, to take up Christ's cross; to prefer the cross of Christ above the glory of this world.

7. Sanctifying grace, renewing grace, puts the souls upon spiritual duties, from spiritual and intrinsical motives, as from the sense of divine love, that does constrain the soul to wait on God, and to act for God; and the sense of the excellency and sweetness of communion with God, and the choice and precious discoveries that the soul hath formerly had of the beauty and glory of God, while it hath been in the service of God.

8. Saving grace, renewing grace, will cause a man to follow the Lord Fully in the desertion of all sin, and in the observation of all God's precepts.

9. True grace leads the soul to rest in Christ, as in his summum bonum, chiefest good.

10. True grace will enable a soul to sit down satisfied and contented with the naked enjoyments of Christ.

Thomas Brooks, Precious Remedies Against Satan’s Devices, Banner of Truth Trust, 154-162.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Devilish Doubt

"Satan does not labor more mightily to persuade hypocrites that their graces are true when they are conterfeit, than he does to persuade precious souls that their graces are counterfeit, when indeed they are true."

Thomas Brooks, Precious Remedies Against Satan’s Devices, Banner of Truth Trust, 155.

Monday, February 16, 2009

Friday, February 13, 2009

A Review of The Shack

23 of 23 people found the following review helpful:

The Shack is no Shaq!, February 10, 2009

By whejoe

I thought this was a horrible book, as I thought it was a biography about Shaquille O'Neil. He will go down as one of the greatest centers in the history of the nba. From his time in Orlando, through his current team, the Phoenix Suns, he continues to dominate.

Permalink | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this)

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Sanctification

“Sanctification is a lifelong process of repentance (not recovery) and obedience (not inner healing) that results in holiness (not wholeness) for the glory of God (not personal fulfillment).”

- C.J. Mahaney

Friday, February 6, 2009

Saturday, January 31, 2009

The Dangerous Church in 2010

from Ed Stetzer

The Dangerous Church in 2010

Cautions

1. Don't Believe the Hype.

Many who promote bad news have a program to fix it.

If those that tell you have a need and then try to sell you the solution, you should be cynical.

For example, people keep telling me the era of the megachurch is over. They have data. They say this is the final year. And, then this year there were more than last year. You have to have over 7000 weekend attendees to qualify to be in our LifeWay Research / Outreach top 100 list (it was in the 5000s three years ago).

Well, turns out that they don't like megachurches. Like it or not, your current views impact your future predictions.
2. Be more cynical.

Too many believe the "next big thing" will fix the church. Instead, we need to be more cynical.

The church will not solve all its problems by emerging, having 5 purposes, moving into a house, or announcing itself missional. And, we tend to just be too ready to believe these things contain all the answers.

3. Be People of Issachar (1 Chronicles 12:32).

-There are trends we can and should watch.

I always like the name that Leadership Network used to use, "Scouts for the Emerging Church." They don't like to talk about that phrase as much today, but we need to be constantly looking for where God is at work so we can join him in it. Or, to quote my friend Reggie McNeal, we need to look at the present future.

-Skate Where the Puck Is.

Too many look at the trends and think they understand today-- they skate where the puck is. That is a start.

But, I think it is more than knowing today. We have to look into the future. (To quote Gretzky: we skate where the puck is going to be.)

For More - Here

Friday, January 30, 2009

Homosexuality, Evangelicalism, and Bigotry: A Plea for Clarity and Compassion

by Jake Magee
Someone recently asked me how he might graciously and tactfully respond to a homosexual friend who contends that Christians are being judgmental, bigoted, and unloving when they label the homosexual lifestyle as sin. Since this is pervasive in dialogues on the topic, I offer a few thoughts to hopefully help elucidate the conversation and allow Christians share Biblical convictions with clarity and compassion.

Here’s a basic question that comes to mind in thinking over the charge made: If, when, and how should people make moral evaluations on sexual behavior?

If and When?

Some homosexuals seem to imply that we shouldn’t make moral evaluations on sexual behavior. Notice that I’d rather use “evaluation” rather than “judgment” because “judgment” is term is loaded with a bunch of junk I’d prefer to avoid. By “evaluation,” I’m saying that we conclude that some sexual behavior is great, good, not so good, or bad. This is the proper meaning of “judgment.”

So, should one make moral evaluations on sexual behavior? Let’s distill this question a bit more and see if we make some headway: “can we make moral evaluations about behavior in general?”

Granted, this question borders on being simplistic. Murdering Jews in the holocaust is bad and saving Jews from the holocaust is good. Stealing from old ladies is bad and helping old ladies is good. Helping people because they are in need is better than helping people to get a favor in return. The list of behaviors of which we make judgments is seemingly endless. So then the answer is “Yes”; we can and must make moral evaluations about behavior in general.

Well, what about sexual behavior?

This too seems obvious to me. We make judgments about pedophilia, polygamy, bestiality, and rape. I understand that homosexuals will gasp at being lumped with most of these (and I think that their reversion is partially right), but that’s beside the immediate point. A homosexual also believes that it is sometimes proper to make moral judgments about sexual behavior; they’ll just disagree about what behaviors to make judgments about.

Here’s the point. Of the behaviors that they do make judgments on, it hardly seems to appropriate for someone (namely, the person whose behavior the homosexual is evaluating) to automatically label their evaluations “judgmental,” “bigoted,” or “unloving.” Making moral evaluations on sexuality isn’t default bigotry. Maybe our homosexual friends are responding to something else.

How?

In this debate, there seems to be the confusion of moral judgments and judgmentalism. Some homosexuals are responding to how some may convey moral evaluations. And this is understandable. Some believers offer moral evaluations in a way less than moral. With that said, it is a leap of logic to conclude that evangelicals are wrong in their moral evaluations due to the way they are communicated. That’s like some concluding the homosexual lifestyle is immoral because some fringe radical homosexuals assault people in the name of their cause. This too would be a leap of logic. Again, it would be leap to conclude that the homosexual cause was moral because the cause was communicated with meekness and gentility. The message and the method need to be distinguished.

With that said, evangelicals have been strong on message and negligent on method. Here are a couple of ways that evangelicals fail to communicate well on this issue, as well as some proffered adjustments.

First, some fixate on this sexual sin and elevate it to a category it shouldn’t. Scripturally, homosexuality, heterosexual sin, as well as non-sexual sin are lumped in the same list of behaviors deserving the wrath of God and therefore requiring the atonement of Jesus to satisfy (1 Corinthians 6:9, 10; Galatians 5:20-21). This list includes drunkenness, fornication, adultery, theft, covetousness, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, and carousing. Within evangelicalism, these behaviors are spoken of less frequently and resisted far less vigorously than homosexuality. The solution, however, isn’t to speak less about or tolerate homosexuality in the way that we do other behaviors. Rather, our response it is to speak and resist more any and all behavior that fails to conform to God’s kingdom, and hold out Jesus as God’s solution for our chronic sinfulness. This transitions to my last point.

Some fail to communicate redemptively. Believers often communicate on this topic in a way that makes it appear that they’ve never been guilty of damning thoughts and actions. What an indictment on them, and perhaps an indication of the absence of God’s grace in their own lives. If we truly have a sense of the greatness of our sin and our Savior, then any and all approaches to our friends and family about their moral condition (be it homosexuality, heterosexual sin, or non-sexual sin) will be marked by humility and love, like one spiritual beggar telling another where to get grace.

I urge my brothers and sisters to engage this issue. Engage it, and don’t shrink from the emotionally charged rhetoric that has silenced those who would represent the Biblical position far better than some of our well-meaning but poorly articulated brothers and sisters. Engage it Biblically, thoughtfully, humbly, and redemptively.

Sunday, January 25, 2009

Monday, January 5, 2009

Basic Outline for 1 John

1. The Person and Work of Jesus in History
A. The Person of Jesus (1:1-4)
B. The Need for Jesus (1:5-10)
C. The Work of Jesus (2:1&2)
2. The Effects of Jesus in our Affections – What we Love
A. They Love Righteousness (2:3-13)
B. They Hate Worldliness (2:15-17)
C. They Withstand Deception (2:18-27)
3. The Effects of Jesus in our Actions – How We Live
A. The Root of Righteousness
i. Pursuing Purity in view of the Christ’s 2nd Coming (2:28-3:3)
ii. Practicing Purity because of Christ’s 1st Coming (3:4-6)
iii. Practicing Purity because of Re-birth. (3:7-9)
B. The Fruit of Righteousness
i. The Presence of Practical Righteousness (3:10-19)
ii. The Presence of Practical Assurance (3:20-24)
4. The Challenges to Our Affections and Actions – How We Win
A. Overcoming the Challenges of the Demonic Deception (4:1-6)
B. Overcoming the Challenges of Christian Community (4:7-21)
C. Overcoming the Challenges of Worldly Influence (5:1-12)
D. Overcoming the Challenges of Personal Doubt (5:13-21)

Sunday, January 4, 2009

Monday, December 15, 2008

Every Commercial Flight in 72 seconds - Video

“But you, Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.” Dan 12:4

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

The Lone Commandment: Are Christians Inconsistent in not Obeying the Sabbath?



- Jake Magee

The Charge of Inconsistency

It has been argued that since the commandment to keep the Sabbath is placed in the middle of nine other commandments which are manifestly universal and perpetually binding, it is simply inconsistent for people to obey nine of the commandments and to ignore this one. To be consistent, it is asserted, we would do better to regard the Sabbath as we do the others - as being equally binding to all people.

I contend that this argument, considered apart from both New Testament declarations about the Sabbath, as well as the clear testimony of the early church, is unconvincing.

An Argument From Analogy

It appears that this argument is an argument from analogy. An argument from analogy states that if object x has properties A, B, C, and D, and object y has properties A, B, and C, then chances are that y also has property D. For example, let’s say that water has the properties of wetness, phase-changeability, drink ability, and is a molecule of two hydrogen atoms to one oxygen atom. Imagine that we landed on some obscure planet and observed something that looks like water. It is wet, undergoes changes into gas at the same temperature as water, and is drinkable. Given that this liquid is similar to water in these three properties, then chances are that this stuff on this planet also has a two hydrogen to one oxygen atom ratio.

As it applies to the discussion on the 10 commandments, those who argue for the perpetuity of the 4 th commandment seem to be saying something like this. Since the nine other commandments are
(1) divinely authoritative

(2) related to one another (i.e., part of the same family of commands)

(3) absolutely binding (i.e., perpetual, not reducible to spiritualization or culture)
Therefore,
(4) it is most probable that the 4 th commandment, which is divinely authoritative and related to the other nine, is also absolute and perpetual.
Now the strength of any argument from analogy is rooted in the genuine commonality of properties in two objects compared. So, if we find out that the liquid on this supposed planet doesn’t freeze at the temperature that water does (though it does change into gas at the same temperature as water), is drinkable but doesn’t hydrate our bodies, then we have good reason to be suspect as to whether it is a molecule of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.

As this applies to the 4 th commandment, to be really secure that Sabbath-observing is trans cultural or absolute, it would require that the other commandments are truly very similar to one another and all equally absolute. I contend that there’s plenty of dissimilarity with the nine other commandments that makes it perfectly allowable for the forth commandment to be revised in the way it has by most Christian churches.

Commandments That Are Situation-Specific

We observe in Scripture that there are some commandments that do not apply to all people at all times.

Take the commandment which says that we should not bear false witness. Now, is this commandment binding to all people in all circumstances? The scriptural answer is no. For instance, Rahab is praised for an action at the core of which was a violation of the 9 th commandment (Josh 2:1-7; James 2:25; Hebrews 11:31). A modern day case in which the 9 th commandment isn’t absolute was dramatically played out over and over again in places like Poland in World War 2. People were forced to either lie to Nazi soldiers or disclose that they had families of Jews hiding in their homes. It seems clear that the prohibition of bearing false witness gave way to a greater good of preserving peoples lives.

Take also the prohibition of murdering. Does Moses mean that it is always wrong in all occasions to take someone’s life? I think the answer is clear when the Lord commands Israel to slaughter various people groups throughout the Old Testament. God seems to command people to do in one circumstance something that he doesn’t in another. Now, we often make the distinction between murder and killing. Although I think this distinction is true, it’s not one given clearly in the actual commandment. Elsewhere in Scripture, the word is used for both justified and unjustifiable murder.

NAU Numbers 35:27 and the blood avenger finds him outside the border of his city of refuge, and the blood avenger kills the manslayer, he will not be guilty of blood

Here we have an instance where the same Hebrew word is used of both justifiable and unjustifiable murder. This passage refers to a city (cities) of refuge where a person who inadvertently killed someone could flee and find protection from avengers. In other words, if Bob desired to kill Larry for killing his brother, Bob wouldn’t be justified in killing Larry when Larry is within the borders of this city. However, if Larry ventures outside of the city limits and Bob slays him, Bob has committed justified homicide. To sum up, there are some circumstances that permit murder. As such, its not absolute and perpetually binding.

Commandments That Are Absolute

We also observe in Scripture that there are other commands that are binding to all people in all circumstances. For instance,

Exodus 20:3 3 "You shall have no other gods before Me.

This first commandment is clearly an edict that should never be violated. It doesn’t matter if lives are at stake, there is no circumstance in which idolatry is permissible.

The tenth commandment is also one that seems difficult to justifiably disobey. For example, we can’t even imagine a circumstance in which it would be permissible for a person to covet another person’s spouse. That is, it is always wrong to covet another’s spouse.

Commandments That Allow For Changing Details

There are certain commandments that were designed specifically for the promotion of people’s well-being such that if there was ever a circumstance when these commandments obstructed human good or didn’t conform to a person’s calling (vocation), the details of these commandments were subject to alteration. As an example, let’s take the activities of the Sabbath without considering the specific day it is to be observed. Jesus states in Mark 2:27,

"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.”

This statement was made after Jesus gave Old Testament examples of circumstances in which it was permissible to deviate from the normal activities that were commanded in the Law. The first example Jesus gives in this passage is David who takes the bread that was to be eaten only by the priests and feeds both himself and his men. This certainly was a violation of prescribed activities. However, the adherence to these specific activities was not superior to preserving the lives of David and his men. As such, this deviation was permissible. The second example Jesus gives is of the temple workers who were exempt from the Mosaic prescription of relative inactivity. Not only was this exemption permitted, but it was commanded. That is to say, they were considered disobedient to God if they weren’t disobedient to the Law.

Now notice that we can’t make the same kind of declaration that Jesus made concerning the Sabbath about worshipping God. We can’t say,

“Worshipping Jehovah was made for man, and man was not made for worshipping Jehovah.”

It is manifest that all creatures are obligated, from the moment they come into being, to worship the true God. The activity of Jehovah-worship should never be suspended or deviated from.

Some Conclusions

We’ve observed that the proposition that Saturday worship should be observed because it is found in the midst of nine other commandments that are absolute and perpetually binding is an argument from analogy. But I have argued that this analogy is bad because there are different kinds of commandments. There are
(1) commandments that one must always obey no matter what.

(2) commandments that one shouldn’t obey given certain circumstances.

(3) commandments that are specifically designed to promote human well-being such that the observances of these commandments are flexible.
As such, it may be the case that
(1) the Sabbath is a commandment that one doesn’t have to obey.

(2) the Sabbath has been altered to fit new historical circumstances (I.e. resurrection).

(3) just as certain Sabbath-day activities commanded by the law proved to be flexible, it may be the case that the day these activities were to be performed on is also flexible, such that Sunday worship is now appropriate.




-Jake Magee

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Season's Greetings

Try JibJab Sendables® eCards today!

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Sharing God's Love/Hate Relationship With People

jake magee
Christians harbor a fear of speaking about God's wrath towards sinful humanity. We shy away from the stark declarations of Scripture like Psalm 7:11-13,

"11 God is a righteous judge, And a God who has indignation every day. 12 If a man does not repent, He will sharpen His sword; He has bent His bow and made it ready. 13 He has also prepared for Himself deadly weapons; He makes His arrows fiery shafts. 14 Behold, he travails with wickedness"
The thought of God preparing weapons to afflict the impenitent is a bit unsettling to us, how much more the non-believer. Some fear that to thunder these kinds of verses will invariably eclipse the love of God and scare off our neighbors. God's wrath repels, God's love attracts.

Little do they know that God's love is amplified given God's righteous anger. Consider these words from Mark Dever:

"The Preacher who talks only of the love of God talk about it less and less with each sermon they preach, because there is less and less in their own mind that God loves us in spite of. There's less and less of a problem that has been dealt with; less and less weight that Christ has carrieed; less and less extent to which he has gone in his love for us."

Sunday, November 9, 2008

Saturday, November 8, 2008

"Let Him Alone"

"Ephraim is joined to idols; let him alone" (Hosea 4:17)

Thomas Brooks draws out the horrible state of someone forsaken by God.

"Woe, Woe to that soul that God will not spend a rod upon. This is the saddest stroke of all, when God refuses to strike at all"

Friday, November 7, 2008

A Tribute to Billy Graham at 90.

by John Piper

HERE

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Monday, November 3, 2008

Corvettes, Geos, and Church Models

















BY JAKE MAGEE
www.oasisnorthvalley.org
www.jakemagee.blogspot.com


There has been tension within evangelical ranks as to the model of church that is most faithful to Scripture: Attractional or Incarnational. A new breed of churchmen appear to have a fatal allergy to anything “attractional” or “corporate,” by which they mean most large gatherings on Sunday mornings that are somewhat programmed; gatherings which include skilled musicians leading people in singing, as well as a skilled man teaching people from the Bible. In other words, these churchmen have an allergy to what we have assumed to be church. This allergy is due in large part to a conviction that such a model has perpetuated passivity and spectatorship. This is either because the model is intrinsically flawed or unnecessary for capturing the New Testament church ethos.

I suspect that many of these churchmen are responding to an abuse of the “attractional” model. Certainly, many pastors have reduced “church” to the two hours on a Sunday morning. This is a shame. Whatever the rationale may be, I think it’s in unwarranted rejection. The solution of abandoning traditional church is an exaggerated prescription, like amputating your arms because of arthritis in your hands. Unknowingly, they’ve limited their missional velocity.

The mistake they’ve made is kind of like a person driving a Chevy Corvette taking mountain corners no faster than 30 mph, because every time he’s seen Chevy Geo Metros taking corners faster than 30 they flip and the driver dies. He concludes that all Chevy’s flip at 35mph and faster. He’s responded to the limitations of a bad Chevy (Geos) by concluding that all Chevys are bad (including Corvettes); he’s limited the potential of his good Chevy because of the limitations of a bad Chevy.

Like wise, many have responded to the limitations of bad corporate gatherings by concluding that all “corporate” gatherings are bad –thereby limiting the potential of good gatherings for their movement.

Great Resource for Apologetics

Check out Apologetics 315

Another Failed End-Times Prediction

"Members of the Lord Our Righteousness Church near Des Moines believed they would escape their earthly bondage and ascend to heaven Friday night. Their once-active Web site came down, and a church representative sent the Journal an e-mail saying he didn't anticipate having anymore contact with the media.

But as a small crowd of people and a TV news crew looked on from the gate to the wind-swept compound, midnight came. And then midnight went." MORE

Friday, October 31, 2008

The New Jerusalem???

Destiny Church plans to create a ‘holy city’ his followers never have to leave

Destiny Church is planning to create a holy city for its followers in the heart of South Auckland. He is urging church members to sell up their homes around the country and move to his promised land - a suggestion that is not being welcomed by everyone. The church’s leader, Bishop Brian Tamaki has told supporters the plans are well advanced, and that donations for the project have topped $2.4 million.

Destiny Church exhibits many signs of being a cult-like church. Four years ago, Tamaki expected Destiny Church to rule New Zealand by now. At least one newspaper believes Tamaki’s destiny is irrelevance... MORE

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Sobering Words about Preaching















"For myself, as I am ashamed of my dull and careless heart, and of my slow and unprofitable course of life, so, the Lord knows, I am ashamed of every sermon I preach; when I think what I have been speaking of, and who sent me, and that men’s salvation or damnation is so much concerned in it, I am ready to tremble lest God should judge me as a slighter of His truths and the souls of men, and lest in the best sermon I should be guilty of their blood.
Me thinks we should not speak a word to men in matters of such consequence without tears, or the greatest earnestness that possibly we can; were not we too much guilty of the sin which we reprove, it would be so."

Friday, October 3, 2008

Couple beaten to death in a stop-smoking "ritual"

Couple beaten to death in stop-smoking ‘cleansing ritual’

from Religion News Blog by Anton Hein

A couple who went to a relative's house to celebrate the end of Ramadan and agreed to an 'alternative treatment' to rid them of their problems, ended up dead after being battered with helmets and broomsticks during the cleansing ritual.

Five others who also participated in the ritual, including the couple's children and relatives, suffered head injuries and were being treated at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital here.

Thursday, October 2, 2008

The Power of Words and the Wonder of God













The Power of Words and the Wonder of God - 2008 Desiring God Conference

I'm presently listening through this helpful conference. Worth the listen. Here's the Link to the Audio and Video - The Power of Words

Here's the Line Up:

Sinclair Ferguson - "The Tongue, the Bridle, and the Blessing"
Driscoll, Ferguson, Piper - Friday Panel Discussion
Bob Kauflin - "Words of Wonder: What Happens When We Sing?"
Mark Driscoll - "How Sharp the Edge: Christ, Controversy, and Cutting Words"
Daniel Taylor - "The Life-Shaping Power of Story: God's and Ours"
Kauflin, Piper, Taylor, Tripp - Saturday Panel Discussion
Paul Tripp - "War of Words: Getting to the Heart for God's Sake"
John Piper - "Is There Christian Eloquence? Clear Words and the Wonder of the Cross"

Friday, September 26, 2008

Christianity's Greatest Enemy: Religion - Mark 2:1-12


Christianity's Greatest Enemy: Religion
September, 21 2008
Click Here the Audio

www.oasisnorthvalley.org

Monday, September 15, 2008

Jesus in the Dresser Drawer - Mark 1:21-39




Jesus In the Dresser Drawer
September, 14 2008
Click Here the Audio

www.oasisnorthvalley.org

Monday, September 1, 2008

Fighting the Unseen: An Intro in Spiritual Warfare - Mark 1:12 & 13


Fighting the Unseen: An Intro in Spiritual Warfare
August 31, 2008
Click Here the Audio

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

The "Lost" Years of Jesus - Mark 1:14-20














Series Title: The Real Jesus
Message Title: The “Lost” Years of Jesus
August 17, 2008
Mark 1:14-20

CLICK HERE to listen

Monday, July 21, 2008

Faith By Jealousy - Romans 11 pt.2
















Romans 11: 11-15
July 20, 2008
Jake Magee

LISTEN

Israel: A Lesson in the Unexpected - Romans 11 pt.1













Romans 11:1-10
7/13/08
Jake Magee


LISTEN

Saturday, July 19, 2008

oasis north valley - new location August 3rd



Starting August 3rd
We're Meeting at Victoria Community Church

Saturday, July 5, 2008

Divorce and Remarriage pt. 1 - Is Divorce Justified in Cases of Neglect? Probably in the Old Testament.










by Jake Magee
www.oasisnorthvalley.org
Exodus 21:7-11
7 "If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do. 8 "If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He does not have authority to sell her to a foreign people because of his unfairness to her. 9 "If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. 10 "If he takes to himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights. 11 "If he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money."
This passage is believed to provide for us “neglect” as a legitimate cause for divorce. I would like to look some of the strengths and weakness of this position and offer some reasons for my tentative agreement of this position. In offering a tentative agreement, this isn’t necessarily an affirmation that neglect is a legitimate cause for divorce. We have yet to weigh the words of Jesus on his handling of Mosaic regulations on marriage.

In verse 7, we have the conditions of a father selling his daughter into slavery. Moses says that she is not to go free after the allotted time as the male slaves to. Why the permanency of the slavery? The answer seems connected with what position she’s appointed to: “If he designates her for himself (vs.8),” or “if he designates* her for his son” (vs.9). The appointment seems to have been for engagement or marriage, not to ordinary servitude.

It’s vital to know the precise nature of this “designation,” for in verses 10 & 11, the “designation” may be legally dissolved in the case of neglect. If the appointment is to engagement, then this verse would be irrelevant to the topic of divorce. All Moses would be saying is, “If a woman is engaged and her fiancĂ©e betroths someone else, she is free to exit her term of servitude.” If it refers to marriage, than we must address other issues related the particular relevancy of this passage for new covenant living.

So, does this designation refer to marriage or betrothal? The answer could be determined by what is meant by “conjugal rights.” The NIV, RSV, NKJV translates it “marital rights” or “marriage rights”. The KJV has “the duty of marriage”. The NAU has “conjugal rights.” The Hebrew word under girding these translations can mean “cohabitation.” The Septuagint has apostereo which Paul renders sexual intercourse in 1 Corinthians 7:5.**

“Stop depriving (apostero) one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.”
Cultural conditions would be consistent with taking this as being sexual in nature.

“Many times female slaves were concubines or secondary wives ( cf. Gen. 16:3 ; 22:24 ; 30:3 , 9 ; 36:12 ; Jud. 8:31 ; 9:18 ). Some Hebrew fathers thought it more advantageous for their daughters to become concubines of well-to-do neighbors than to become the wives of men in their own social class (Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. 1983-c1985. The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures . Victor Books: Wheaton, IL ).
However, this is not without problems. If marriage is in view, then Moses seems to allow for polygamous marriages. To paraphrase, “if a man who is married to a former slave decides to marry another women, and if that man neglects the former wife for the latter, than she has the permission to leave the husband.” There’s no censure of the man marrying another women. And the former wife is bound in that relationship so long as the husband provides for her. Someone might argue that since Moses certainly would have addressed this perversion of the family unit, then it is best to interpret this passage as referring to engagement so as to avoid Moses’ tacit support of polygamy. Put differently, you can only have divorce in this passage if you embrace polygamy. Since no one wants to embrace polygamy, let’s interpret this passage as referring to engagement.

This objection is unconvincing when we look related passages like Deuteronomy 22:10-16. First, the passage refers to a clear case of divorce that neatly parallels Exodus 21. Secondly, this passage addresses polygamous relationships without explicit censure of such a relationship. Both of these factors diffuse the above argumentation that Moses couldn’t have meant espousal due to the resultant polygamy. Let’s look at the passage.

Deuteronomy 21:10-17

10 "When you go out to battle against your enemies, and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take them away captive, 11 and see among the captives a beautiful woman, and have a desire for her and would take her as a wife for yourself, 12 then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails. 13 "She shall also remove the clothes of her captivity and shall remain in your house, and mourn her father and mother a full month; and after that you may go in to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. 14 "It shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go wherever she wishes; but you shall certainly not sell her for money, you shall not mistreat her, because you have humbled her. 15 "If a man has two wives, the one loved and the other unloved, and both the loved and the unloved have borne him sons, if the firstborn son belongs to the unloved, 16 then it shall be in the day he wills what he has to his sons, he cannot make the son of the loved the firstborn before the son of the unloved, who is the firstborn. 17 "But he shall acknowledge the firstborn, the son of the unloved, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the beginning of his strength; to him belongs the right of the firstborn.”
This passage makes explicit what I said was implicit in Exodus 21:7-11. Here we have a woman of captivity taken into slavery and married by her captor. Due to the marriage bond and the subsequent divorce, she may chose not remain as a slave. She is a freed woman. Sounds a lot like Exodus 21.

Note the commonalities: (1) Both speak of women slaves: one sold in to slavery by a father, the other a slave in virtue of conquest. (2) If Exodus 21 is referring to taking the slave as a wife, then they both would refer to espousal, not engagement. (3) Both would refer to the condition of her freedom as the termination of marriage.

Exodus 21:11 11 "If he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.”
Deuteronomy 21:14 14 "It shall be, if you are not pleased with her, then you shall let her go wherever she wishes; but you shall certainly not sell her for money, you shall not mistreat her, because you have humbled her.
In Deuteronomy, it’s the husband that is displeased. In Exodus 21, it is the putative wife that is displeased. Taking these two passages together, it is likely that Exodus 21 refers to espousal, and not engagement.

Surprisingly enough, the espousal view of Exodus. 21 is supported by the discussion of polygamy in Duet. 21. The passage transitions to a case in which a man has two wives (vss.15-17). How did he get the second wife? It’s reasonable to think that he obtained the second wife from the conquest of Canaan that is referred to in vss. 10-14. With the new espousal, the first wife becomes unloved, as well as her son. Moses provides parameters to protect the status of the first born.

Notice how the two parallel nicely.

Exodus 21:10 - 11

10 "If he takes to himself another woman (as a wife), he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights (reduce his love for her). 11 "If he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.
Deuteronomy 21:15-17

15 "If a man has two wives (a new one taken from the captivity), the one loved and the other unloved, and both the loved and the unloved have borne him sons, if the firstborn son belongs to the unloved, 16 then it shall be in the day he wills what he has to his sons, he cannot make the son of the loved the firstborn before the son of the unloved, who is the firstborn. 17 "But he shall acknowledge the firstborn, the son of the unloved, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the beginning of his strength; to him belongs the right of the firstborn
Exodus 21:11 leaves it to the women as whether she stay or go should she be neglected. In the case in Duet 21, it appears that the wife chooses to stay. Moses establishes some parameters to protect her child should this woman choose to stay.

This interpretation raises many questions. For example, “why are Scriptural writers silent on the issue of polygamy?” “Is this silence a tacit support for such a lifestyle?” For that matter, “why is slavery condoned?” “Why is chauvinism so pronounced?” “How come Moses doesn’t resist slavery, polygamy, and chauvinism?” In reality, these are topics outside the scope of my immediate topic of interest, and each person who has a stake the discussion on divorce are left to explain these same areas regardless of which side of the debate they fall.

My conclusion is that Exodus 21:10-11 did allow for divorce in the case of neglect.

*d[y verb qal perfect 3rd person masculine singular , suffix 3rd person feminine singular B4034 d[;y" vb. appoint -- Qal appoint, a time; place; a rod; assign or designate as concubine. Niph. 1. reflexive, meet at an appointed place, with l., of Yahweh meeting Moses at the Tent of `Meeting'; at the throne of the Kapporeth. 2. meet by appointment; with B. of place; la, of place. 3. gather, assemble by appointment, kings for a campaign (abs.); with la,, unto Moses; to the door of the tent of meeting; with l[;, unto Solomon; against Yahweh. Po`el sq. pers. + la, of place. Hiph. make meet, i.e. summon or arraign. Hoph. be set, placed before. (pg 416)

**The root meaning is defrauding or depriving someone from something. The context determines what is being deprived: house, justice, sex, etc…