New Year Predictions

Recently, Pat Robertson made his annual predictions for the coming year.  The bottom line: “It’s going to be another good year for CBN [his ministry], but a tough one for the world.” 

Many well-meaning but, frankly, gullible believers have been scared by Robertson’s doom and gloom scenarios in the past and 2011 is no exception.  

There’s nothing wrong with making guesses for what might happen in the coming year.  The problem is that Robertson claims that God is the one who is making these predictions.  For example, he famously claimed God had told him that in 2008 a major U.S. city would be destroyed.  That didn’t take place, unless God was speaking metaphorically about the Giants beating the undefeated New England Patriots in the Super Bowl.  But New England really refers to a region instead of a city, so I think Robertson missed that one (and many others).

I’ve seen several news articles and blogs rightly take Robertson to task for his wild predictions.   My concern with Robertson is both practical and theological.  How does his “prophetic” word undermine the confidence in Scripture of those who follow him?

In Deuteronomy 18, God commands the people to put to death those who claim to speak a word in God’s name and lie.  How will they know if the prophet is lying?  “when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.”

I don’t know what will happen in 2011.  Neither do you.  And neither does Pat Robertson or any other religious figure who claims to have a word from God.  What I do know is that Scripture offers us the hope that whatever God has in store for us, we can endure it through the grace of God working within us.  May we as believers have that confidence for the coming year!

Cyber Parents

This week, Whitney and I were talking to a woman who has opted out of the digital world. She closed down her Facebook account and feels that she is better off. “It’s awkward sometimes,” she admitted, “I don’t know as much about what is going on in people’s lives.”

It has caused her to be more committed to developing real, non-virtual relationships. “We’re going to be facing a whole wave of children with communication disorder,” she lamented. As children tweet and text their way through life, the ability to handle face to face communication will diminish.

Not all people will reach the same conclusion as our friend, but all believers should think carefully about why and how they interact with our cyber culture.  Our friend, fortunately, was savvy enough to realize the potential dangers of the digital world.  Many parents are clueless when it comes to the allure and danger of the cyber world. 

Dr. Mohler has some excellent insights into the problems parents face in his article, “The Dangerous Worlds of Analog Parents with Digital Teens.” http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/12/08/the-dangerous-worlds-of-analog-parents-with-digital-teens/

Deceit in the Evangelical World

How would you feel if you found out that your favorite Christian book was written not by the famous name on the front cover but rather an editor at the publishing company? The practice of using ghostwriters in Christian publishing has been far more common than widely known over the past few decades.


In 2002, Randy Alcorn wrote an article entitled, “Scandal of Evangelical Dishonesty,” which can be found here: http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Feb/25/scandal-evangelical-dishonesty/. In the article, he tackles the sensitive issue of deceit in the evangelical community and cites several examples of areas in which Christians seem comfortable with a certain level of deceit.

For instance, did you know that sometimes charitable organizations that help children actually pay Christian celebrities to mention them at concerts? Alcorn writes:

A disturbing recent fundraising development is purchasing celebrity endorsements of charities given at conferences and concerts. A speaker or musician gives an appeal for a ministry’s child sponsorships. For every child sponsored as a result of the appeal the performer receives $25 to $50. (In the secular world, this is called a kickback.)….

I have no problem with a ministry presenting its vision to a speaker or group and then asking them to pray about calling attention to their cause. I have major problems with offering them a percentage of “the take” (the offering). Unless this is done with full disclosure, unless clear verbal or printed recognition is made of this financial arrangement, the offering is a deception. Anything less than full disclosure to potential donors constitutes fraud. Such arrangements will inevitably promote abuse, and sometimes lead to public scandal. Consider the temptation to overstate or misrepresent needs or to speak with artificial enthusiasm for the poor, while thinking of the larger kickback they will get for doing so. Our enemies dish out enough temptations without us dispensing them to our friends. Think of a Christian speaker appealing to people to give to starving children, knowing what the audience doesn’t—his personal wealth will increase directly in proportion to what he says and how convincingly he says it.

Regarding ghostwriting, he distinguishes between collaboration and ghostwriting, which is “when the actual writer’s name is not on the cover, or when a person’s name is on the cover…who did little or nothing to write the book.”

Alcorn is right to be concerned. The evangelical community, perhaps enamored by the lure of fame and popularity, is willing to look the other way on many practices that in the secular field would be unthinkable. One day I received an email from someone suggesting that I listen to a "great message" given by a pastor of a mega-church that was about a theology of adoption. I went to a church’s website and as I listened to the message, I realized that this was a message that I had given at a conference! Illustrations from my message had been changed to make it more the speaker’s own, but my name was never cited as the original source of the material.

I don’t believe the pastor who did this had wicked motives. I like to think that he was simply unaware of proper ways to cite where material came from. (Most annoying, given his natural charisma and fine speaking voice, I think he delivered the message better than I did.) His possible unawareness that he was doing anything unethical, however, is a byproduct of an evangelical culture where we have lax standards for transparency. It is my fear that these lax standards stem from an infatuation with wanting the esteem of men.  We fear honesty and desire prominence.

Jesus has this warning for those of us who desire the approval of men:

Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven.

Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. (Matthew 6:1-4 ESV)

Holiness

During Sunday’s sermon, I mentioned J.C. Ryle’s book Holiness. There have been only a handful of books that have been more influential in my life than this book. For those who would like to purchase it, I believe the church has a few copies or it can be found online in its entirety here: http://www.gracegems.org/Ryle/holiness.htm.

It was published in 1879 and yet remains extremely relevant. Controversies over anemic doctrine and slothfulness in our pursuit of holiness are not something birthed in our modern age. Ryle laments, “I have had a deep conviction for many years that practical holiness and entire self-consecration to God are not sufficiently attended to by modern Christians in this country.” He is writing to those living in England in the 19th century, but could just as well have been writing to us.

He continues: "Yet sanctification, in its place and proportion, is quite as important as justification. Sound Protestant and Evangelical doctrine is useless if it is not accompanied by a holy life. It is worse than useless; it does positive harm. It is despised by keen-sighted and shrewd men of the world, as an unreal and hollow thing, and brings religion into contempt. It is my firm impression that we want a thorough revival about Scriptural holiness…."

These are strong statements, but I believe Ryle is correct. Sanctification is important and sound doctrine is useless unless accompanied by a holy life. Neglect of holiness is a stain upon the church.

There are many gems found throughout even the introduction to the book as he gives some glimpses into the themes he will be covering in its pages. For instance, he addresses those who believe one can simply “Let Go and Let God” (a slogan still seen in many Evangelical churches and retreat centers today).

Ryle responds: "…is it wise to teach believers that they ought not to think so much of fighting and struggling against sin, but ought rather to "yield themselves to God," and be passive in the hands of Christ? Is this according to the proportion of God's Word? I doubt it…. But, on the other hand, it would not be difficult to point out at least twenty-five or thirty distinct passages in the Epistles where believers are plainly taught to use active personal exertion, and are addressed as responsible for doing energetically what Christ would have them do, and are not told to "yield themselves" up as passive agents and sit still, but to arise and work. A holy violence, a conflict, a warfare, a fight, a soldier's life, a wrestling, are spoken of as characteristic of the true Christian. The account of "the armor of God" in the sixth chapter of Ephesians, one might think, settles the question."

And in the remainder of the book, Ryle issues his call to spiritual arms, to engage in the first of one’s life…the struggle for holiness. It is our goal at Bethany Community to engage in that fight as well with similar ardor.

A Quick Update

Dear Bethany Community Church,

Just a quick note today to encourage you to consider two opportunities provided by the Bethany Fellowship of Churches in the coming months.

The first is “A Community Christmas.” The past two years, Bethany Baptist and Living Hope have joined us on this side of the river at Five Points Washington. But this year, each church will be holding a concert in their own community. In one sense, it’s sad to have fewer people from the other churches join us at Five Points. At the same time, in years past we have been quite constrained by space. This year, we have a great opportunity to fill up the seats in the theatre with family and friends in the community who may not have a church home.

Please take advantage of this and invite your friends to a Community Christmas on December 10th at Five Points Washington!

The second opportunity is the “Engage” conference in January. This is a competition for high school students. It gives them the chance to really make their faith their own as they either prepare for the apologetic section of the competition or the preaching category. For more information, contact Joey Holland at joey@bethanycentral.org.


By His Grace,

Pastor Daniel

The Greatness of God and the Frailty of Earthen Vessels

I recently began perusing an excellent new book entitled Well-Driven Nails: The Power of Finding Your Own Voice. The author, Pastor Byron Yawn, was an associate pastor at my parents’ church for several years and so I had an added incentive to purchase it.

Yawn is writing primarily to preachers, but there are some principles contained within its pages that I believe are helpful to all.

For example, as I scanned the table of contents, one of the chapters caught my eye. It was entitled, “John MacArthur: The Most Extraordinary Average Brain Expositor I Know.” Here’s what Yawn writes:

[MacArthurs] views his “average intelligence” as a primary reason he’s been able to connect with so many people. As he put it, “…It helps to not be too intelligent. I need a simple understanding of everything. I battle with the Scripture until I can understand it.”

MacArthur, writes Yawn, takes it as a compliment that his commentaries are viewed as tools for the untrained layman:

I’ve spent my entire life talking to the untrained layman. I’m not talking to dead Germans, liberals or scholars in a PhD program. I’m talking to the untrained layman. More than anything, I’m talking to myself. I need a simple understanding of Scripture. I have to have it broken down into simple concept. As it turns out, so does most everyone else.

Pride is a terrible foe. Even as we seek to glorify God in our ministry, pride trips us up. Some of us think too highly of our ministry abilities and stumble as we seek to exalt ourselves. Others of us take a more accurate assessment of our abilities, but then our terrible foe pride causes us to resent that our ability to minister is not greater!

MacArthur here reveals an encouraging truth that should result in greater humility. God uses whatever instruments He deems fit to use in whatever ways He deems fit to use them. In the hands of a Sovereign God, each of us becomes not an extraordinary tool but rather an ordinary tool that does an extraordinary thing—encourages others to worship a holy God.

May God give you grace to humbly engage in ministry for His glory.

Adding my two cents...

After reading Ritch's article, several of you have sent me emails asking for my perspective on the race for U.S. Sentate (the State Comptroller race is a similar situation).  "Be more specific!" you say.
Let me first say that godly men and women disagree on how to apply pro-life principles.  Some believe they are promoting pro-life principles by voting for the best of two terrible candidates so that stronger pro-life candidates can be put in stronger positions.

But I personally have come to a different conclusion.  Here are the reasons I will not be voting for Mark Kirk tomorrow (nor Judy Barr Topinka).

1. A candidate’s position on life is a litmus test.  If they will not support the right every citizen has to life, they are not qualified for elective office.  End of story for me.


2. Kirk is a terrible congressman and I believe he will be a worse senator.

3. I’m not a Republican. Having the Republicans gain control of the Senate doesn't drive me.  Kirk will be a thorn in the side of the people I want to be successful.

4. I don’t want his potential work in the senate on my conscience. He will certainly cast terrible votes as a senator and I don’t want those on my conscience.

5. I don’t want the Republican party in Illinois believing they can nominate corrupt, pro-choice candidates and count on my vote.

Those are my thoughts, not the convictions of the church or even all the leaders in the church.  May God grant each of us the wisdom and courage to vote our conscience tomorrow.