Over the course of the last week or so, the "grace to you" program has been airing messages from the "Strange Fire" conference hosted by John MacArthur. While I thought this conference was supposed to be about the more bizarre aspects of the current "charismatic movement," from what I've been hearing it appeared to be more about re-establishing the reformation doctrine of "Sola Scriptura" and the view that the Holy Spirit no longer uses Christians to perform miraculous works in the way of sign gifts. Notables like John MacArthur have said that if God speaks to anyone, that this would constitute new revelation and new ways to view the church, and that he considers anyone who claims to "hear" from God to be either deluded or under demonic influence.
This puts men like Charles Stanley into the category of "charlatan," right along side those more questionable "Christian" carnivals and hucksters and side shows. While I don't agree with everything that Dr. Stanley says, especially with regard to things like New Testament tithing, I do believe that God has blessed him with a strong faith and a strong ministry.
Since those that believe that the "sign" gifts were "apostolic" and have ceased with the completion of the "cannon" of scripture, how do they justify disbelieving what the scripture actually says regarding such things, or what the scripture says about God speaking to His redeemed to give them guidance?
At the end of today's broadcast, brother John made the request to "his friends" who support the notion that God has not changed in either His character or in His methodology take a stance against the "charismatic movement," based upon the notion that such gross error in preaching and worship adds nothing to the church and that sound theology has carried the church from the 1st century until this day. Now, if this were true, why was there any reason for a reformation in the first place? Is God's arm shortened that He is unable to correct His bride or keep the tares from choking out all of her fruit? Has our Great Shepherd become unable to bring swift destruction upon those false prophets and ravenous wolves which threaten the sheep of His pasture? If this were to be viewed as a form of "church discipline" why not meet with two or three witnesses and bring their accusation before our eternal Judge in prayer? Perhaps their faith in Christ's presence is somewhat less than they believe it to be, or perhaps they believe that delivering someone up to Satan for the destruction of the flesh was an Apostolic gift that's also somehow disappeared over time. Personally, I don't see the logic.
MacArthur actually related a story about a man who had questioned him as to why the modern church was so disoriented and confused (doctrinally) and who was it that policed the church? MacArthur thinks that its up to those brilliant scholars of the evangelical church to become the new "church police." Maybe they should form an actual police force, give them leather aprons, white gloves, and triangular shields, and call them the "bible police."
Perhaps the real story is about control, and primarily with where the dollars go, to genuine and "worthy" ministries, or to pulpit clowns. It seems uncharacteristically dumb to "throw out the baby with the bath water" in trying to squash legitimate movements of God's Spirit (such as the Calvary Chapel movement.) I started attending one of the local Calvary chapels just a few months ago and have felt greatly refreshed by the zealous spirits of the men that I've come to meet with a real heart for the Lord and for His word, that MacArthur referred to as dirty hippies, ex drug addicts, and in similar disparaging terms. May the Lord rebuke him.
Perhaps he's been under pressure from associates such as "the alliance of confessing evangelicals."
My word to brother John is that he should take a close look at his own house. The "alliance" web site and printed documentation has made ample use of masonic symbolism and at least some of it's members have made masonic references from the pulpit. As an example, I enjoyed listening to Dr. James Boyce prior to his succumbing to cancer, and have always thought of him as a wonderful scholar and brother in the Lord, yet I heard him joke while preaching about the heavenly Jerusalem, that he would prefer it's shape where that of a pyramid rather than that of a cube. Such a brilliant scholar wouldn't have used a masonic reference casually without knowing something of it's significance. Masonry bears an outward resemblance to Christianity in that it holds to the concept of a single God and Creator (the great architect of the universe), and promotes the practice of "good works" and brotherly fellowship, but that's where the similarity ends, unless you hold to biblical legalism as a means to righteousness, in which case you have more in common with the Masons than to me.
In one book that I've downloaded that was written by a 19th century Masonic scholar, it was noted that there were some disputes between lodges in England over the proliferation of Christian symbols being introduced into their ritual and practice; some desired to entirely expunge them as inappropriate to the purity of Free Masonry. If this was true of the influence of "Christian" Masons upon Free Masonry, what was the influence of Masonry within the church? Legalism? Control over church finances?
The quenching of movements of the Spirit of God? As I've been examining cults, I've noticed that most that I've encountered were begun by Free Masons and this shouldn't be a surprise as the same Masonic book that I've mentioned says that Free Masonry allows it's adherents the freedom to invent their own system of belief as long as its symbolism adheres to their basic philosophy of approaching "godliness" through wisdom and pious practice, but primarily through knowledge and according to their own understanding.
4. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5. For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Genesis 3:4-5
The devil is the king of pride and his pride is his greatest weakness; "He always gives himself away in that he's unable to restrain his pride in his accomplishment."
Have an opinion? Like to share it? Warning...Free Masons are likely to be outed, but are "Free" to try to justify themselves.
This puts men like Charles Stanley into the category of "charlatan," right along side those more questionable "Christian" carnivals and hucksters and side shows. While I don't agree with everything that Dr. Stanley says, especially with regard to things like New Testament tithing, I do believe that God has blessed him with a strong faith and a strong ministry.
Since those that believe that the "sign" gifts were "apostolic" and have ceased with the completion of the "cannon" of scripture, how do they justify disbelieving what the scripture actually says regarding such things, or what the scripture says about God speaking to His redeemed to give them guidance?
At the end of today's broadcast, brother John made the request to "his friends" who support the notion that God has not changed in either His character or in His methodology take a stance against the "charismatic movement," based upon the notion that such gross error in preaching and worship adds nothing to the church and that sound theology has carried the church from the 1st century until this day. Now, if this were true, why was there any reason for a reformation in the first place? Is God's arm shortened that He is unable to correct His bride or keep the tares from choking out all of her fruit? Has our Great Shepherd become unable to bring swift destruction upon those false prophets and ravenous wolves which threaten the sheep of His pasture? If this were to be viewed as a form of "church discipline" why not meet with two or three witnesses and bring their accusation before our eternal Judge in prayer? Perhaps their faith in Christ's presence is somewhat less than they believe it to be, or perhaps they believe that delivering someone up to Satan for the destruction of the flesh was an Apostolic gift that's also somehow disappeared over time. Personally, I don't see the logic.
MacArthur actually related a story about a man who had questioned him as to why the modern church was so disoriented and confused (doctrinally) and who was it that policed the church? MacArthur thinks that its up to those brilliant scholars of the evangelical church to become the new "church police." Maybe they should form an actual police force, give them leather aprons, white gloves, and triangular shields, and call them the "bible police."
Perhaps the real story is about control, and primarily with where the dollars go, to genuine and "worthy" ministries, or to pulpit clowns. It seems uncharacteristically dumb to "throw out the baby with the bath water" in trying to squash legitimate movements of God's Spirit (such as the Calvary Chapel movement.) I started attending one of the local Calvary chapels just a few months ago and have felt greatly refreshed by the zealous spirits of the men that I've come to meet with a real heart for the Lord and for His word, that MacArthur referred to as dirty hippies, ex drug addicts, and in similar disparaging terms. May the Lord rebuke him.
Perhaps he's been under pressure from associates such as "the alliance of confessing evangelicals."
My word to brother John is that he should take a close look at his own house. The "alliance" web site and printed documentation has made ample use of masonic symbolism and at least some of it's members have made masonic references from the pulpit. As an example, I enjoyed listening to Dr. James Boyce prior to his succumbing to cancer, and have always thought of him as a wonderful scholar and brother in the Lord, yet I heard him joke while preaching about the heavenly Jerusalem, that he would prefer it's shape where that of a pyramid rather than that of a cube. Such a brilliant scholar wouldn't have used a masonic reference casually without knowing something of it's significance. Masonry bears an outward resemblance to Christianity in that it holds to the concept of a single God and Creator (the great architect of the universe), and promotes the practice of "good works" and brotherly fellowship, but that's where the similarity ends, unless you hold to biblical legalism as a means to righteousness, in which case you have more in common with the Masons than to me.
In one book that I've downloaded that was written by a 19th century Masonic scholar, it was noted that there were some disputes between lodges in England over the proliferation of Christian symbols being introduced into their ritual and practice; some desired to entirely expunge them as inappropriate to the purity of Free Masonry. If this was true of the influence of "Christian" Masons upon Free Masonry, what was the influence of Masonry within the church? Legalism? Control over church finances?
The quenching of movements of the Spirit of God? As I've been examining cults, I've noticed that most that I've encountered were begun by Free Masons and this shouldn't be a surprise as the same Masonic book that I've mentioned says that Free Masonry allows it's adherents the freedom to invent their own system of belief as long as its symbolism adheres to their basic philosophy of approaching "godliness" through wisdom and pious practice, but primarily through knowledge and according to their own understanding.
4. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5. For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Genesis 3:4-5
The devil is the king of pride and his pride is his greatest weakness; "He always gives himself away in that he's unable to restrain his pride in his accomplishment."
Have an opinion? Like to share it? Warning...Free Masons are likely to be outed, but are "Free" to try to justify themselves.
However, I do believe his tough approach helps in some areas.
