Author Archive for Tony Hedrick
14
Feb
12
Seminary and Simony
This is simply an opinion piece. I have made no attempt to be scholarly with the following observations. I just have “sand in my craw” and need to vent a little. Over the years I have encountered my fair share of people that I suggest were either not called into the ministry at all or if they were, they were without spiritual gifting and therefore totally inept and had no business leading anyone. They were “blind leaders of the blind.” I have also spent time with over educated “pastors” who held few conservative views of scripture. Some were simply glorified social workers or MC’s at a religious country club.
I have exhaustively taught the Book of Acts every year for almost twenty years. I have also read at least twenty commentaries on the book. Hence, I have come to know it, as they say, “like the back of my hand.”
I doubt if anyone hardly takes notice when in chapter eight they come across Philip in Samaria. I reckon most just read through it as though it is necessary history on the way to somewhere else. Whenever did you last hear a sermon preached on Simon the sorcerer? There may be a good reason for this. At first reading there seems to be little useful contemporary evangelical application for this portion so we quickly leap to the Ethiopian eunuch and preach a message on election, evangelism, baptism or perhaps astral travel. After all, we are not regularly encountering sorcerers and witch doctors. This passage was for another time and place.
Have you ever heard of the term, “Simony?” I almost always get blank stares when I use the term in a lecture. Even when I explain the concept people don’t quite get it until I apply an illustration or two. Simply put, “Simony” is the buying of religious position and privilege. Of course, position and privilege (power and sometimes money) go together.
How can I make the connection between Simon in the first century who wanted to buy the gifts of the Holy Spirit with something happening today? Perhaps it would be easier to illustrate the idea by citing historical examples from the Roman Catholic church where prominent families, like the corrupt Florentine Medici’s, who used their money and influence to advance a family member from local priest to a Bishop and on up the ladder of Apostolic succession.
In recent years, various Pentecostals and charismatics have generated modest fortunes by “trading” in the supposed gifts of the Holy Spirit (real or imagined). For many the Holy Spirit has been the means to influence, admiring adherents and though none would admit it – money – lots of money. Similarly, witchcraft and New Age is all about power and regrettably, it might be said, that in many ways the Pentecostals in America and especially in Africa have emulated this obsession for power and money.
Before I tie Pentecostalism to a post like a goat and then whip it to death, let me offer another way in which “Simony” has popped up all around us. It often goes unnoticed that folks don’t get far in the “denominational” church without credentials. The more credentialed one is the more prominence they seem to have. It is easier to be invited as a “keynote” speaker or find a publisher if one has a Masters degree or even better yet, a PhD.
The gaining of credentials means that one must be prepared to invest somewhere between four and seven years as well as belly up to the cashier’s wicket and pay about $120,000 for a Bachelors degree and an additional $50,000 for a Master’s of Theology or even more for a Master’s of Divinity. There is an expeditious reason for pursuing higher and higher degrees. Who wants to start out and get stuck in a small rural church at $28,000 a year? Yet, without a degree from a denominationally approved seminary (the more prestigious the better), no matter how naturally intelligent or gifted a person might be, one can expect to be relegated to whatever church is desperate enough to have him. It is assumed that one is not fit to minister without the appropriate classroom attendance, papers and grades. Someone once said, “A Ph.D. does not prove how smart or spiritual anyone is. It only tells us how long the person has spent in school.”
We often forget that most of the first two or three centuries saw none of this type of pecking order as a requirement for ministry effectiveness. It might be also noted that the church grew by leaps and bounds not through upward mobility but by being fed to lions after signs confirmed the preaching of the word. Furthermore, though there are exceptions, it may be entirely missed that many of the Christian leaders we most like to read about and imagine ourselves duplicating often had none of this formal training much of which amounts to little more than wrestling with theological speculation and acquiring skills that one will rarely be called upon to use.
In writing this, I do not mean to infer that seminary training cannot be beneficial. Attending schools may vastly improve the learning curve once one has completed his or her studies. In spite of this admission, there is no sense in which anyone (even summa cum laude) should walk into a church office, hang their degree on the wall and assume they are a spiritual leader. Trust me; this person will not be given the chief seat in the synagogue for three years. They will never rise to leadership until they have proved their mettle through proficiency and service. Sadly, few have learned this lesson.
My point is this; seminary education is no guarantee that one will be effective in ministry at all. Neither is seminary education a guarantee of orthodoxy. There is no evidence that spending one hundred seventy thousand dollars in the graduating from seminary makes anyone more sound in their theological views. In fact, the opposite has often proven true. Seminaries (even protestant and evangelical) have produced more than their fair share of heretics. The same “publish or perish” pressures found in secular universities have perhaps caused seminaries to become hotbeds of heresy. When it comes to orthodoxy it may be as dangerous to come from a seminary as some backwoods hollow of the Smokey Mountains.
I, for one, am tired of employing Greek pedagogical method as being the primary requirement by which one is qualified for ministry. I think it is ridiculous that religious privilege and position can be purchased by money and an investment of a certain amount of time. It was Keith Green who asked the question, “Where are the Elijahs of God?” If the kingdom of God does not come in word (philosophy and intellectual surmising) but in power then why do we make such investment in acquiring the very thing that the scriptures caution us about placing our confidence?
“For the kingdom of God is not in word but in power.”
1 Corinthians 4:20
So then, am I being anti-intellectual? Not at all! I teach in Bible colleges and training centers. If you mean, do I oppose denominational structures that rely heavily on academia as a means of qualifying clergy, then, “Yes, I am.” I suggest that academic accomplishment as a way of certifying people for ministry is completely wrong headed and more secular than biblical. I would argue that it is wrong to elevate anyone solely because of academic performance. We should stop giving the ministerial edge to those who have gone to school. On the contrary, why shouldn’t search committees be suspicious of those with seminary training?
I believe the biblical approach is to look around and see who is effectively doing ministry and already demonstrate the call, gifting and grace of God for the work and then intellectually mentor those individuals while they are in the ministry. Biblically, ministerial candidates should be honest, filled with the Holy Spirit and wisdom. Of course there are other qualifications as well. These we find in the scriptures but none of the scriptural qualifications require academic proficiency. It amazes me how those who should most know better turn out to be in the vanguard of not employing the biblical standards – the very standards they supposedly teach in the seminary. Most of what we have been doing has come from the Greek academy rather than the Bible and this methodology has created a generation of Simons many of whom are only in it for the notoriety or the money and perhaps both.
“Young man, with all of your getting, get unction!”
Attributed to Leonard Ravenhill
26
Jan
12
One tough Arab lady!!!
This is going around and needs to be heard by everyone.Contrary to what anyone might tell you, this is IT(!) in a nut shell and what separates authentic Biblical faith from all of the other impostors.
Name any RELIGIOUS SYSTEM you like, Islam, Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and they have one thing in common, a person is saved through their particular doctrines, practices, dogmas and/or officials. People are turned into slaves.They place their hope in a human organization. Any real Christian never depends upon his pastor, priest, sacrament, religious affiliation or church to obtain for him acceptance with God. This is why no Christian is afraid of men and what they might do to him. Religion despises Jesus and the Bible believer because they will not play their idiotic Pharisaical games.
25
Dec
11
“Totemism” Chronically American
The reader will immediately recognize that I have only a cursory knowledge of what I am writing about. I am good at bluffing but privately I make no pretence to being a credible intellectual. I have met a few of these folks here or there so I know what they are. I hear something once and I’m off and running with it.
Perhaps twenty years ago I heard preacher, sociologist and “comedian” Dr. Tony Campolo discuss the concept of “totemism.” I had taken both cultural anthropology and sociology in university and had heard the term but paid little attention to the concept at that time. Campolo referred to anthropologist Margaret Mead as one of those who studied the phenomena and went on to explain some of her observations.
Though the word seemed ponderous the concept did not. Campolo handily explained that the idea came from the totem. He went on to use the totem pole as a way of unraveling how the concept works.
Mead, pointed out that almost all cultures, though centuries and miles apart, are notable in that they are incurably religious and have totems of one kind or another as a way of expressing their mystical beliefs. Whether it happens to be the enormous stone and lava heads of the Easter Islands in Rapa Nui National Park or the totem poles of the northwestern American aboriginals, the Nootka, Haida, T’simshian, Tlingit to name but a few, totems appear almost everywhere in the world. Sometimes they show up as glyphs rather than something made of stone or wood. Nevertheless, various mascots universally occur.
Campolo made the following application: every culture adopts totems of one kind or another. It might be, as in the case of American Indians, a Thunderbird. This bird doesn’t exist in reality, but the idea sums up all of the cultural values of the tribe(s) so they build a tribute to it. What existentially follows is the interesting idea. They worship or pay homage to the pole. We might refer to this practice as idolatry.
In primitive societies this plays itself out in thousand ways throughout the history of man. The image might have been a scarab, owl, cat, cow, frog or turtle. In more sophisticated cultures these might be a bear, lion, dragon, beaver, eagle but you get the idea. The animal or some other thing, whether real or imagined, embodies the qualities the culture wants to project regarding its own perceived strengths, character and qualities. Of course, we should expect this from primitive societies. What should we expect? They don’t know any better until we reach them with the Mustang, Cougar, Viper, Ram, or the gospel, right?
About a year ago I happened to be in an American denominational church in the south on Independence Day. They made quite a thing out of this special national holiday by recognizing those who had served in the military, to which there was much-deserved applause. Next, however, they struck out to sing “America the Beautiful,” a song to which, without prompting, people all around began to stand to their feet with hands over their hearts and sang at the top of their lungs. In fact, I made note that I had not heard this sort of worship all the while I have attended there. I’m afraid that in the same way, the Jesus of Roman Catholicism plays second fiddle to Mary. While “American Jesus” plays second fiddle to Caesar and his agenda. It was theologian, Francis Schaeffer who said, “Caesar and God cannot both be God. One must make up his or her mind.”
Are we guilty of pagan “Totemism?”
It occurred to me, have we dressed Jesus up to look like us so we might actually worship ourselves? I think so. This isn’t just true of Americans. It’s equally true of the Chinese, Guatemalans, Kenyans, Tutsi, and Massai, Southern Baptists or members of the Assembly of God. In some circles we have imagined a “Reformed,” holiness, charismatic or Pentecostal Jesus. The great challenge of every believer is coming to terms with the authentic Jesus. This becomes a lifetime of re-calibration. Whatever we have gathered up about Jesus probably isn’t Him.
It’s election time again and some Americans are trying to figure out how they might turn Jesus into a Republican. In many minds he’s certainly not a Democrat! Jesus doesn’t live downtown. He’s not black. You won’t find him with “nappy” hair, low pants or sporting a tattoo. He lives in the suburbs. He graduated from university, drives a SUV and several other late model cars. He has a Jacuzzi and a hot tub. For some he might be a cool Jesus or a “Gap Jesus” in the same way Central America had fashioned a “Liberation” Jesus with a bandoleer and Uzi machine gun.
You see, we have all done this to Him. We have invented a Jesus that embraces our cultural values so that we can indirectly worship ourselves and our values. This is classic narcissism. We fail to honestly examine Him and take Him as He really is. We have laid our grid over Him rather than His grid over us. We have turned Jesus into the culture learner.
“Okay, Jesus, we’ll let you be God but only our terms.”
“In answer to your inquiry, I consider that the chief dangers which confront the coming century will be religion without the Holy Ghost, Christianity without Christ, forgiveness without repentance, salvation without regeneration, politics without God, and heaven without hell.”
William Booth (1829-1916), Founder of the Salvation Army
The chickens have come home to roost.
I recently made this statement on my Facebook wall, “Deism is not Christianity.” It was simple enough but some people wanted to know why I would post such a cryptic comment. What did I mean by the statement? Who is it for? I admit to having a motive. I am addressing folks that I know so this is no accident. A nod of the hat toward Jesus will not do in the day of judgment. One does not have to be blasphemous to be a Christ rejector. You may go to church every Sunday and still reject Him. All one has to do is say at heart, “I will not have this man to rule over me. He won’t ell me what to do. I will think and do as I please.”
As usual, I just say what I mean to say. Both churches and hell are full of Deists and Humanists masquerading as Christians. Let me remind the reader of James 2:19, “You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.” At least the demons go farther than the impostor. They have a fear of God. They know the authority of Jesus. Deists have no special place for Christ. He is simply one among many.
There is most probably a God but He has taken His hands off of human affairs. He does not interact with history or time and man is left to his own devices. Because of this, there is in fact, a direct link between Deism and Humanism as ideologies. Since God is not involved then man must do his best to go it alone. Humanism puts man at the center.
I am always suspicious of those who claim to be Christians but Jesus’ name never comes up in their life story. They will talk about God well enough but have no place of affection for Jesus Himself. As a Bible teacher I see this far to often expressed or should I say, not expressed by members of the student body. Some do not hold him dear. Many who do not find Jesus attractive – all together lovely. He is not in any sense precious. People absolutely will not come outside of the camp and bear his reproach. We will gladly bear a cross as long as it is not brutal and blood stained.
Jesus is central to what it means to be Christian and there is no Christian faith, no saving faith, without Him. He is the unique manifestation of the only One, true and living God in the flesh. Again, here is support for what I have to say, “Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son.” 2 John 1:9
It is critical for people to get this right.
16
Dec
11
When foolish minds are darkened…
Ultimate Questions
Sometimes I have said from the pulpit, “Some people just aren’t smart enough to get saved.” Of course I say this to shock the ambivalent back to their senses but I mean what I say. I don’t mean they aren’t intelligent I just mean they never think about anything very large. They don’t think about the main questions of life-like,
1. Where did I come from?
2. Why am I here?
3. Where am I going?
4. Does it make any difference?
5. What went wrong?
6. What if I’m wrong?
7. What makes a human being incredibly different from all of the animal world?
I can tell you. We have only five shared senses.We have an additional two. We are made with two senses they apparently do not have. Perhaps we should ask ourselves, “Why?” We have reason (the ability to plan and reflect) and conscience (the ought of right and wrong). Where did these intellectual attributes come from? Evolution will not account for either.
They prefer rather to whistle through the graveyard of life, living unconsciously – being occupied by stupid trivialities and momentary amusements like the Oscars, the Golden Globes, American Idol, Charlie Sheen and Lindsay Lohan, et al. There is nothing wrong with any of these trendy things when kept in the cellar rather than allowing them to take over the living room. Most (even Christians) have elevated the small things and from those (albeit shallow) they find existence rather than purpose. Socrates was right, “An unexamined life isn’t worth the living.” We used to say of people who would not face the facts as those who “played the Ostrich.”
Please, to see why this is all such myopic nonsense read my blogs on Calvinism. They honestly believe that they have the “full counsel of God” and the only one’s who are preaching it.
May I also refer you to the small booklet entitled, “The Larger Place, Detecting Spiritual Imbalance in Christian Groups.” Calvinism (Reform by its proper name) is something but it is not everything. Election has to do with God’s prerogative not His practice.
How many readers… do harm to themselves?
By Philipp Jacob Spener
1635-1705
“If… they read the Scriptures without sincere prayer and the purpose to obey God, but only to get knowledge, to make a show, and to exercise their curiosity upon them…
If they do not observe what is useful for their edification, but only what they can use for their glory and against others…
If they despise what the Scriptures simply stated and what is easy to comprehend.
If, on the contrary, they take up only difficult passages, about which, about which there is much dispute, in order to discover in them something unusual and to make a show before others.
If they use what they have learned with pride and for their own glory…
If they think they alone are wise, obstinately refuse better instruction, love to quarrel, and receive nothing from others with modesty.”
Taken from…
“The Life You’ve Always Wanted”
John Ortberg
ZONDERVAN
Part 2
“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.”
John 6:63
In Part 1, “A Prophetic Warning to the Prophetic Movement,” I addressed the danger of giving too much attention to and placing too much confidence in just anyone who says they are prophesying in the name of the Lord. Without discrediting prophesy all together, I called for believers to be discerning. I further encouraged leaders to take more responsibility for what takes place in the prophetic settings.
An Evangelical Priesthood
Now, here in Part 2, I am making a similar call against placing too much confidence in our current evangelical priests. Yes, we have an evangelical priesthood. In both cases we are doing what we should never do. In both cases we have adopted intermediaries.
It is easy to take shots at people who say and do flaky things. On the contrary, it is more difficult to call into question those who, in every respect, appear to be well-educated, well-groomed, refined in manners and level-headed.
For instance, Mormons appear refined and level-headed. Millions of otherwise intelligent, thoughtful people follow Mormon teaching. In Mormonism perception becomes the reality. Regrettably, many evangelicals are falling for the same thing and lining up in a similar fashion. They buy the glossy promotional cover without carefully thinking about the content. Mormonism simply has better packaging than Scientology. Take it from me, Mormonism is “crackers” – as “crackers” as Scientology but somehow they get a free pass.
In order to justify their legitimacy, Mormons go so far as to point to their apparent success – prominent nationally recognized personalities, sophisticated universities and institutions, wealth, numerical growth, etc., as clear evidence that what they teach is the product of divine revelation. Of course, this is no evidence at all and to prove my point, I ask them how many people managed to get onto the ark? Thousands, even millions of adherents is no guarantee of truth. In fact, according to scripture, success may indicate the exact opposite ( “wide is the gate”). Perhaps we should be suspicious of some evangelical success stories? Are we enamored by the packaging or the content?
“Churches with the word GRACE in their names are often the most legalistic.”
Harry Hedrick
Here’s a case in point. I grew up in a very prominent evangelical denomination. If I mention the name, everyone would immediately recognize it. They made the claim that they were, without doubt, the most biblical denomination in the world. Since people I greatly admired made this claim I never questioned the truthfulness of it. I believed this until I left home and discovered that there were countless ways in which they failed to teach the “full counsel of God.” While there were many good things about this group, there were many ways in which other churches and denominations held to truths they had either ignored or missed entirely. I should have had this mind, the whole truth belongs to the whole church and no prophesy of scripture is of any private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20). We have come outside of the camp, bearing His reproach (Hebrews 13:13) and here we have no continuing city (Hebrews 13:14). Our preachers, theologians and denominations belong to us. We do not belong to them (1 Corinthians 3:21-22).
“For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,”
1 Timothy 2:5
“Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other.”
1 Corinthians 4:6
Understanding the following may take an exercise of making very fine distinctions – or a high level of discernment.
In the whole of the Bible the word “flesh” is mentioned four hundred twenty times in about four different ways. The earliest and most often use has to do with all living men and animals, re: the body itself. It continues to be used in the same way in the New Testament but predominately we now have the introduction of the idea of the human nature without divine influence and prone to sin. Flesh (sarx) in this sense is called carnality.
Paul gives us a nice, tidy list of carnality in Galatians 5:18-21. You know what these fleshly acts are. Perhaps you have memorized the list. In case you have forgotten, here it is…
“Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like;”
Galatians 5:19-21
This sums it up. Or does it? The text indicates that it is not as exhaustive as it could be. Look at how it concludes, “…and the like.” We do however get the idea of what the “and the like” is, don’t we? We are left to fill this in for ourselves. Add to this list all of the nasty business you can think of and that constitutes what we may call, “the works of the flesh.” The text seems to indicate that carnality (fleshliness) is the out working of the ego or the assertion of self. The assertion of self always results in the sins of the flesh. Bad behavior and the out working of evil activity are rather easy to identify so we don’t have to analyze this reference to the flesh hardly at all. We all get it.
This is what disturbs me! “Flesh”, as Paul understands it “flesh” moves beyond this list and shows up in other, less identifiable ways. I have friends involved in religion of the flesh and they don’t have a clue. When I read scripture and survey the present spiritual landscape, I see “flesh” as something more pervasive. It shows up in the most polished settings – even among the most groomed spokespersons for the Christian faith.
Theological elitists are the masters of a carnal faith.
When Paul says in Philippians 3:3, “For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh…,”
Here, Paul is not referring to either the human body or acts of unethical or immoral behavior.
“Our virtues are but splendid sins.”
St. Augustine
What do you think Augustine meant? He meant the same thing that Paul meant. Paul had already explained his philosophy by renouncing confidence in human ancestry, national legacy, social position, religious devotion, physical strength, intellectual skill, eloquence, ability, educational achievement or professional notoriety. All of this influence becomes meaningless when facing the cross of Christ. As tricky as it is, this confidence in status is as much the flesh and carnality as is bad behavior and the out working of evil activity. Here in Paul’s own words, is what he calls flesh and carnality.
“…though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisees, concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death,if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.”
Philippians 3:4-11
What makes God mad?
I have often thought, “What were those occurrences that seem to have aggravated God the most?” I haven’t compiled a thorough list and in the interest of time I will provide just a couple of incidences of the many and all of them was of a similar kind. God was clearly annoyed when Israel complained and murmured, particularly when they questioned his ability to provide meat in the wilderness. Again, he wasn’t pleased with the Tower of Babel or when David numbered Israel. Many incidents of God’s displeasure had to do with God’s people doubting him and taking things upon themselves. God is displeased when any man thinks he can go it alone.
Unfortunately, this is American evangelicalism. Along with the Pharisees, western evangelicals have made the claim, “We have Abraham as our father.” Here’s a bit of news for you, God “can raise up children of Abraham from stones,” so we dare not make the same mistake of thinking too much of ourselves as the Pharisees did.
“Without faith it is impossible to please Him.”
Hebrews 11:6a
Early in scripture we see God admonishing His people for putting confidence in the “arm of the flesh” or trusting in the strength of horses or chariots rather than the power of the living God.
We see this surface again in the New Testament, when in Paul’s First Epistle to Corinth he warns them about trusting in human wisdom or philosophy. Paul is not telling them to be stupid. He does say that “Knowledge puffs up” – makes folks self-confident – arrogant. God always resists the proud. Human cleverness, intellect or eloquence will not be the means by which the kingdom advances so, dear brethren, as good as it is, don’t put too much confidence in it. After all, “The kingdom does not come in word (intellectual gymnastics and philosophical speculation) but in power.” Though we know this, there is a part of the western church that doesn’t seem to believe it. They have seemingly come to the conclusion that God moves through intellectual refinement.
A friend of mine who has an earned Ph.D. once said this to me, “A Ph.D. doesn’t prove how intelligent anybody is. It just lets us know how long they’ve spent in school.” May I add that a Ph.D. – for that matter, all theological education – doesn’t certify a persons’ spirituality, orthodoxy or ministry effectiveness either. In fact, it has often been the case that just the opposite proves to be true. The more education a person has had results in them being less spiritual, orthodox or capable of ministry. We are immediately suspicious of those who do not have formal theological training. Why? Why shouldn’t it be the other way around?
Another friend, a career missionary added this, “I have never seen a Ph.D. cast out a demon.” This may not be one hundred percent true but I can concur that often class attendance or academic achievement does not seem to enhance one’s spiritual authority when real power encounters are required.
These then are two equally dangerous errors. There is on one side of the church an over spiritualization and anti-intellectual mood and in the other over confidence in academic skill, formal ministry preparation and this posture often spawns a suspicion of the spiritual.
I might call this mood, “Evangelical Gnosticism.” This is the notion that spiritual sensitivity cannot be trusted. “The heart is deceitful above all things and who can know it?” For this side of the church, the kingdom does come in words. The more a person knows about Greek, theology, scripture – the more books they have read, written or names they can drop, etc. – the more spiritual he or she becomes. Friends, this is just christening the Gnostic heresy and making it acceptable. Knowledge may enhance spirituality but it is not the means of gaining it.
We clearly see that Paul ran up against this same spirit in Corinth.
“And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,” that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.”
1 Corinthians 2:4-5
It is this writers’ view that seminaries are responsible for more heresy, speculation and theological confusion than all of the amassed, uneducated country bumpkins combined. Those preachers who make up sentences with double negatives can be easily dismissed but not so when someone has a masterful command of language and academic credentials to go with it.
Recently, I have been reading in Joshua and referring to James Montgomery Boice’s little commentary by the same name. He points out that, in strictly human and/or as military strategy, Joshua did a foolish thing when, as soon as he crossed the Jordan, he commanded the circumcision of all of his men. God had a good reason for disabling, immobilizing and leaving the troops defenseless for at least three to five days. He wanted them to clearly understand that the battle was the Lord’s and that confidence in human strength would only end in defeat as it did when they went up against Ai.
The quest to gain acceptance with the secular world?
Perhaps this is why the American church with all of its seminaries, PhD’s., billions of dollars invested in buildings, technology and so forth is so pathetically weak and ineffective. With all of their knowing I doubt if our theological halls have figured this much out. Those who write most of the books we read have never fought a skirmish in their spiritual lives. They are as, John the Baptist called them, “those that wear fine raiment and live in King’s palaces.” Rarely will we find a hair or a comma out-of-place.
Then there are the followers who think to themselves, “Oh, if I just claim this truth, I will be a spiritual giant like Dr. This ‘n That.” I personally tire of the constant reference to this author or that pastor. In many respects some of these people have been elevated to almost demigod status. Perhaps it is only in America that we have this luxury of having our own personality cults. I have friends who hang upon these priests to breath or type their next word. See there, just like the world, we have our celebrities too. Is this a form of idolatry?
How they love their scrolls and books. This was the problem with the Pharisee’s and the scribes. They were masters of academic detail. In fact, they were so fastidious regarding the Torah and zealous toward academic excellence they adopted the rabbinical commentaries (Talmud) with the same vigor. These were the seminarians, the PhD’s. They were devoted to jot and tittle. They had it figured out how things must be. As we say, “They had their ducks all lined up in a neat row.” Everything was measured by rightly dividing the word of God. It all boils down to an accurate exegete of the past. “Does any prophet come out of Galilee?” They built their houses of cards, sat back in admiration but then God blew it down. He (Jesus) arrived as a surprise package. Is this why the last to recognize a move of God are those in seminaries and church hierarchies?
It didn’t take long before the emerging infant church had their minds made up as well. In less than a decade they had it figured out how things ought to go. That was until Cornelius’ house when God blew all of the neatly stacked cards across the gentile world.
We have placed too much confidence in this form of flesh and thus have established a new evangelical priesthood
This same attitude has found its’ way into the twenty-first century. There is a side of the western evangelical church that thinks this way. Without ample evidence, they have decided that the gifts are not for today. These have all ended with the Apostles. We no longer need the gifts because we now have the completed canon and we can rely on our exegetical skills. Leave this business to the professionals.
These folks, like the Pharisee’s admire academic certainty. They don’t like any coloring outside of the lines.
For me, this represents a carnality of another kind.
It reeks of the high-mindedness of Corinth, doesn’t it? Does this surprise you that someone might call this carnality? Nevertheless, for me it amounts to a sinful trust in the flesh. The flesh will prevail and save the day. We don’t need power when accurate exegete will suffice. Well, let’s see if exegesis bears this out. I ask you, what is Paul saying here in these passages? What constitutes and who were the “puffed up?”
“Now some are puffed up, as though I were not coming to you. But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord wills, and I will know, not the word of those who are puffed up, but the power. For the kingdom of God is not in word but in power.”
1 Corinthians 4:19-20
This is the same Paul who was touted as one of the greatest intellects of the ancient world. This is the Paul who also wrote, “Study to show thyself approved.” Study all you like but avoid placing any confidence in it. This is one of the prevalent contemporary errors that we must be on guard against. I am not being anti-intellectual. After all, I am a Bible teacher and apologists so not opposed to learning all that we can. What I am opposing here is the carnal pride that comes with anyone claiming they or their group have arrived at the full council of God. “We see but through a glass darkly.”
Vance Havner, that great country preacher from Jugtown, North Carolina (I’m serious, it was Jugtown) said, “I have never yet heard a sermon that I got nothing out of it. But, I’ve had some mighty close calls.”
I will not be as charitable as Havner. I have sat through some sermons that were down-right content less in one of two different respects. Some were so eisogetic, esoteric and ethereal I gave up on the premise right early. There were others so impressively intellectual, academic and ponderous that I didn’t want to encourage the speaker in his powerless, self infatuation.
Whether apocryphal or not, it has been often told that somebody once told John Bunyan that he had preached a delightful sermon.
“You are too late,” said John, “the devil told me that before I left the pulpit.”
The problem is not education or those who have it. The problem for me is the false assumption that those who do have it are somehow more insightful, spiritual or gifted than the rest of the church. There is evidenced far too much false humility. I am afraid that too many popular evangelicals have been too busy with self promotion and pretending that all they do is for the glory of God. Perhaps they would do well (as would their followers) if they took leave off the reading of their press clippings and cease from seeking the media limelight.
“Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.”
Colossians 2:8-10
