Why Is It Your Business How Other People Worship - JONATHAN AIGNER

Found here. My comments in bold.
-----------------------

This incendiary writer has appeared in this blog before. His presentation is typically slash-and-burn, frequently absent a meek heart or thoughtful, logical analysis.

He is somewhat more charitable today, but nevertheless has some pretty dismissive things to say about people who choose non-liturgical worship.

In addition, he cannot bring himself to quote or even reference a single Scripture or document any assertion.
-------------------

The Plague of Lazy Pastors - by David Mathis

Found here. My comments in bold.
------------------------

This confused and errant author references Scriptures that teach something very different than what he is writing about.

Not understanding the biblical role of pastors, he dooms them to a ministry that places an unbiblical burden on them, which will inevitably result in burn-out and failure.
-------------------

The apostle Paul thought and spoke of Christian ministry as labor. He abhorred laziness in the pastorate. (Undocumented assertion.)

Paul did not see the office of pastor as a nice fit for guys with soft hands who prefer an indoor job. (The "office of pastor," apparently a reference to Ep. 4:11-12:

It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up...

This is the only reference to this office. 

The author equates the office of pastor with the titular head of the local church, a paid staffer with everyone else working as subordinates. Nothing in the Bible indicates this structure.)

How the NAR Experiential Christianity Corrupts the Role of the Holy Spirit - Anthony Wade

Found here. Our comments in bold.
---------------------

After reading Rev. Wade's blog for a few weeks, we have noticed an emerging modus operandi. The Reverend seems have a propensity for making connections between things without taking the necessary steps to arrive at his conclusions.

The author has had a lot to say about the NAR (New Apostolic Reformation), a bogeyman term indiscriminately applied to describe a branch of Christianity that frequently operates outside the boundaries of the traditional church. 

However, there is really no such organization. The NAR is not a group or a denomination. The term was coined by C. Peter Wagner in the late 80s to describe a phenomenon rising up in Christianity. Some have embraced the labeling, while others have used it against people or groups as a dismissive, a tool to lump together those Christians who believe differently about the way the Holy Spirit operates.

Within this labeling there are certainly those who are crackpots and hustlers. And it's easy for bloggers like our author to lump people into the label, characterize them as typical, and then dismiss them as heretics. 

We have no intention here of defending the NAR. We are simply going to examine the Reverend's narrative.

Also, the author is supposedly going to tell us how the role of of the Holy Spirit is corrupted. He never does.

A final note. The author quotes no Scripture, provides no Scriptural references, and in fact, no references at all. 
-------------------

Why it is important not to conflate prophecy and teaching in discussions about women preaching - by Denny Burk

Found here. My comments in bold.
------------------------

Having just recently published an analysis of the issue of women teachers, we are delighted that the below article appeared regarding the same subject. This gives us the opportunity to examine the claims of Mr. Burk.

We are not entirely convinced that conflating prophecy and teaching is the primary reason for "egalitarians" thinking that women can teach.
---------------------

In evangelical debates over women in ministry, two biblical texts have always stood as a prima facie obstacle to the egalitarian view:

1 Timothy 2:12 “But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.”

1 Corinthians 14:34 “The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.”

At first blush, these two texts seem to settle the matter in favor of the complementarian position. After all, this is the sense adopted in the vast majority of English translations. How could they all be wrong? (It's a bit odd that the author puts his total faith in the translators. He seems to suggest that the translators cannot be wrong, which is an odd idea. 

However, we have made the case that the translators were at the least imprecise, and at worst colored by cultural bias. We shall recap parts of that argument below.)

Why We Need a Wealth Tax - Robert Reich

Found here. My comments in bold.
------------------

The title actually should be, "Why we need to tax the same money again."
----------------

The crisis of income inequality in America is well-known, (Is it a crisis? Why? How?)

but there is another economic crisis developing much faster and with worse consequences. I’m talking about inequality of wealth.

The wealth gap is now staggering. In the 1970s, the wealthiest tenth of Americans owned about a third of the nation’s total household wealth. Now, the wealthiest 10 percent owns about 75 percent of total household wealth.

America’s richest one-tenth of one percent now owns as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent.

Wealth isn’t like income. Income is payment for work. Wealth keeps growing automatically and exponentially because it’s parked in investments that generate even more wealth. (This is an astoundingly ignorant statement. Wealth does not grow automatically. The markets rise and fall.  The wealthy are subject to the same investment risks as anyone else, and often they lose. 

And sometimes they lose spectacularly. Many of them are entrepreneurs. The wealthy frequently take larger risks in order to start a company, develop a new product, and expand into new areas. 

The wealthy are the ones who supply venture capital, they are the ones who are funding innovation and progress. They are the ones who have the means to push technology and development of new ideas. 

And, the wealthy took the biggest hit in the 2009 recession. Much has been made about Trump's "failure" to beat the market returns, and his many failed ventures. 

Dr. Reich is either ignorant or deceptive.) 

Women as Teachers/Leaders - a more in-depth look

Having recently posted about women preachers and leaders, we believe a more comprehensive analysis is needed. Some of this material is from prior posts.

Some have tried to establish the propriety of women teachers/leaders by appealing to Joel's prophecy reiterated by Peter in Acts 2, where our sons and daughters will prophesy; or to famous women of the Bible like Deborah, an obviously prominent and respected woman; or to the idea that Paul's commands were expressed in his particular cultural context, which some suppose should not be applied to the contemporary church.

We shall not consider these points, largely because we do not find them fully illustrative of the issue of the role of women. Instead, we shall examine various proof texts to see if they are accurately rendered. So we intend to ascertain if there is cultural bias in the translation of words to see if a reasonable alternative viewpoint is available.

As we make our case, we are not suggesting it is definitive. We are not theologians. But we do think the interpretation of Scripture has been colored by the culture in which translators are found. A translator in the 19th century would have a 19th century world view. This should be obvious.

We will also state at the outset that we do not believe women can be elders, which is the highest authority in the local church. We believe that this position is specifically reserved for men as the position of authority, but any other position in the church, like deacon, worship team, teaching, preaching, children's church, youth group, Sunday school, prayer ministry, facilities, and church fellowship can be filled by women. None of these positions are authority positions.

We should note as an aside that we do not believe the pastor or preacher is or should be the highest authority in the local church (1Pe. 5:1-2).

It should go without saying that this does not mean women are in any way spiritually inferior to men. We simply acknowledge what we discern from the Bible about proper church structure. In addition, we note once again that we are simply offering an alternative, not a definitive case.

With that in view, let's examine some Scriptures.

Should Women Preach in Church? Why Brent Hobbs is an Imbecile. - BY NEWS DIVISION (JD Hall)

Found here. My comments in bold.
------------------

A completely over-the-top offensive presentation. This author is supposedly a Christian, believe it or not. Yet he seems to have no problem at all characterizing his theological enemies in the most egregious ways.

Granting for the moment that the author is correct, what is he setting out to accomplish? Persuasion? Restoration? Correction? Nope. Everything he writes is intended to blow things up. Nothing else.

We should note that our intent here is not to defend women pastors. In fact, we oppose them. Our purpose is to examine the presentation and ideas of the author.
--------------------

Does the Bible teach the world will get darker and darker?

Recently We've been reconsidering many of the things we thought we understood regarding doctrine and faith. This shift comes as our question becomes, "does the Bible really teach that?"

It's easy to be spoon fed the conventional wisdom, but it's an entirely separate thing to search these things out for one's self. We read the Bible with these unexamined understandings and interpret what we read through those lenses. We've grown lazy about our Bible study, assuming that pastors and theologians are telling us the truth, but we rarely check it out for ourselves.

You'll find everything written about doctrinal rethink here.

Some of the more significant teachings we've examined are

• What is communion?
• Will only a few be saved?
• Does the Bible support women in leadership, or as teachers?
• Did God pour out His wrath on Jesus?
• What is the real role of pastor?
• Did God forsake Jesus on the cross?
• Did the "supernatural" gifts of the Spirit cease?

We should note that we are not Bible scholars, but we believe that one doesn't need to be in order to understand the the Word of God. God has made the way of salvation clear.
----------------

Refusing the Prophetic Word - By Bill Muehlenberg

Found here. I like this article, partly because it's written by cessationist, but also because it puts a fresh take on what it means to be prophetic.

It is strange, however, that the author offers this proviso: They will not be infallible and inspired..., a statement he repeats towards the end. It is strange because he ably chronicles the impact of  some great men of faith who spoke to their times and to the church with a God-sent message sorely needed at the time.

Ye he feels the need to in essence dismiss them as uninspired. How can someone be speaking God's message but not be inspired? This makes no sense.

Nevertheless, the author provides us with an excellent perspective on our those who have and are speaking with boldness God's message.
-------------------

More Proof of Hillsong Danger -- Cookies and Orange Juice for Communion - by Anthony Wade

Excerpt, found here. My comments in bold.

---------------

It seems to me that once you get on the Doctrinal Police's radar, every perceived misstep is a crisis situation.

Here is a video, the source of the current outrage. We have a Hillsongs person suggesting that if you're at home and don't have a pre-prepared communion package, communion can be taken with cookies and OJ. 

This, according to the Doctrinal Police, is apparently beyond the pale. It's sinful. It's heretical. It's blasphemy!

Everyone knows that only a wafer that tastes like cardboard and a splash of grape juice honors God.

The author has appeared in our blog before, with a similarly undistinguished presentation.

-----------------

Does 1 Timothy 2:11-13 really mean women can't teach men?

A hotly debated topic in Christian circles is the role, if any, of women teaching men, whether it's from the pulpit or in any church function. We are not going to attempt to answer that question here.

We are however, going to take a closer look at one of the passages used to not permit women to teach, 1Ti. 2:11-13:

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

First we should note the word "authority." The greek word is αὐθεντέω (authenteó):

Definition: to govern, exercise authority
Usage: I domineer, govern, have mastery over.

831 authentéō (from 846 /autós, "self" and entea, "arms, armor") – properly, to unilaterally take up arms, i.e. acting as an autocrat – literally, self-appointed (acting without submission).

So, it doesn't seem that Paul is telling Timothy to keep women out of the pulpit, but rather, to keep women from unilaterally taking over. It sounds more like preventing a Coup d'état. The KJV captures the nuance of this word, translating the phrase as nor to usurp authority over the man.

So it would seem that Paul was cautioning Timothy to not let a woman domineer or take over.

Should we care about climate change?

In thinking about climate change, we should attempt to cut through the hype and moral preening to get at the basic issues.

While much has been written about climate change, we have never seen anyone explain why we should care. This moral imperative that we should care is predicated on the idea that man-made climate change should be dealt with. But why?

The planet has been here four billion years. Humans, 200,000. And, humans have been industrial since the 18th century. We are a mere drop in the bucket in the long history of the earth.

It seems almost presumptuous that we could have such a profound effect in such a sort amount of time, but that's what environmentalists claim. Now granted, we do pollute. And that has measurable effects. But that's a separate moral question.

The moral question we are considering is, should we care about climate change? What if we chose not to care? Assuming environmentalists are correct, what would happen?

The earth would warm. Deserts would expand. Places like Northern Canada, Siberia, and Greenland would become more habitable and fertile. Eventually, these also would also turn into deserts. All the ice would be melted. Ultimately, the human race would die out. 

The presumption is that this is bad and must be fixed. We ask, why? Why is it bad? What is the moral imperative that human life should be preserved? The planet will go on without us. Why are we so important? Why shouldn't we go extinct?

WHEN JESUS SAYS, "MANY WILL SAY TO ME..." JUST HOW 'MANY' WILL IT BE? - By Elizabeth Prata

Found here. Our comments in bold.
---------------

Ms. Prata repeats a common idea among Christians, that hell will be full. Indeed, she seems to like the idea.

We're not by any means universalists, nor are we fatalists. We simply don't want to consign people to perdition because of some misconstrued idea that this is the way it's supposed to be.

It's not supposed to be that way! The testimony of Scripture is not what the author paints for us.

2Pe. 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

Is it foolish to think that what God wants is what God gets? Absolutely not. Why should we think that God does not get His desire? We think God should get as much of this desire as possible.

We believe it means our view might be too small. 

Ms. Prata's assertion that there will be a small remnant of saved people is not correct.

-----------------

You're Dead, Start Acting Like It - by Chris Thomas

Found here. This guy gets it.
-----------------

Or maybe I should have led with, “You’re Alive, Start Living Like It!” Both statements are true. At least that’s what Paul argues in his short gospel-rich book to the Colossian believers.

As the fragmentation of our modern, Western culture breaks its banks and washes sediment into our churches, as the gaps widen and the edges grow sharper, as the rhetoric rages ever brighter and the disenfranchised retreat in bruised hurt — now, even as much as it was needed then, we need to hear Paul’s fatherly exhortation:

If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh. (Colossians 2:20–23, ESV)

More than the implications of national politics, or the far more subtle pull of tribal allegiance, everyday gospel living is at stake. If you’re a pastor, the allure of speaking into popular topics with your tribe’s language is ever-present. If you’re a church member, then just making it through the week without feeling like you’ve let Jesus down again haunts your dreams. Both of us need to embrace the loving rebuke.

“You’re dead, start acting like it!”

The Continuation of the Charismata - by Andrew Wilson

Found here. He makes some very good points.

-----------------------

Andrew Wilson is teaching pastor at King’s Church London and is the author of Spirit and Sacrament: An Invitation to Eucharismatic Worship.


ABSTRACT:This article first defines the scope of the debate over whether or not Christians today should earnestly desire spiritual gifts, especially prophecy. The author then offers three key arguments for the charismatic position and concludes by raising and responding to the strongest argument for cessationism.

It is a huge privilege to open this discussion on spiritual gifts, with Tom Schreiner and other individuals from whom I have learned so much in so many areas.1 “The first to present his case seems right, until the other comes and examines him” (Prov 18:17 ESV).

Because this exchange is based on two books, rather than one, and because Tom’s book and mine come to different conclusions on the continuation of the charismata, it would be easy for a discussion like this to become repetitive.2 To try and avoid that, in this article I plan to do three things. First, I will try to define the scope of the debate as simply as possible, so we don’t end up talking past each other. Second, I will lay out the charismatic case in a positive way, with what seem to me the three key arguments for it. Third, I will summarise the strongest argument for cessationism, and then challenge it, before concluding. I will leave a discussion of the other cessationist arguments until we engage with Tom’s book later on.

1. The Scope of the Debate

To crystallise the debate in one sentence, I suggest this: Are disciples today intended to earnestly desire spiritual gifts, especially prophecy? I’m pretty sure that Tom Schreiner and Ligon Duncan would say no, and that Sam Storms and I would say yes. Prophecy, that is, is the most helpful focus for a concentrated discussion. We are not primarily debating the continuation of the ἀπόστολοι, since we would all agree that eyewitnesses of the resurrection have ceased (the sense of ἀπόστολος in Acts 1:21–26 and 1 Cor 9:1; 15:1–9), and that itinerant missionaries or messengers have not (the sense of ἀπόστολος in 2 Cor 8:23 and probably Rom 16:7). It is also noteworthy that in those passages where Paul urges believers to pursue the gifts, he does not include apostleship as one of them. And although we may disagree about the continuation of the gifts of languages, interpretation, healings, miracles, and discerning spirits—although maybe not so much, as we will see!—I think we would all agree that the key question concerns the continuation of prophecy. Should disciples ‘earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy’? Clarifying that might keep us from getting lost in the weeds.