-------------------------
The author is a cessationist; he believes that God does not speak today, that miracles ceased in the first century, and that the Bible alone is all that is available to Christians.
The author is a cessationist; he believes that God does not speak today, that miracles ceased in the first century, and that the Bible alone is all that is available to Christians.
In this long article (3400 words) the author quotes but a snippet of one Bible verse, 15 words. For this we must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.
We should note, we are not here to defend Blackaby or his book. We want to examine the author's extraordinarily faulty and ironic presentation.
We should note, we are not here to defend Blackaby or his book. We want to examine the author's extraordinarily faulty and ironic presentation.
Introduction
Henry T. Blackaby is a Southern Baptist pastor and the main author of the book Experiencing God as well as its related “family of Bible studies” (which also include study guides, an Experiencing God Study Bible, a devotional journal, and, of course, a youth edition). Experiencing God remains popular even after it was first written 30 years ago. Blackaby’s goal in writing the book is expressed as such:
“I invite you to interact with God throughout the reading of this book so He can reveal to you the ways He wants you to apply these principles in your own life, ministry, and church.”
There are 7 “steps” that Blackaby proposes for knowing God’s will:
- God is always at work around you.
- God is always at work around you.
- God pursues a love relationship with you.
- God invites you to become involved in His work.
- God speaks by the Holy Spirit through: the Bible, prayer, circumstances, and the church to reveal this.
- God’s invitation always involves a crisis of faith for you.
- You must make major adjustments to your life to join God’s work.
The remainder of the book contains examples of how these principles worked out in the lives of Biblical characters and how to apprehend them for your own life.
I will simply state at the outset that I believe Blackaby’s approach is not only unbiblical, but dangerous. Below I list the main reasons why. (Biblical reasons, perhaps?)
I will simply state at the outset that I believe Blackaby’s approach is not only unbiblical, but dangerous. Below I list the main reasons why. (Biblical reasons, perhaps?)
Note that Blackaby sometimes makes statements that appear to contradict others. For example, he appears to both affirm and deny experiential truth seeking in Scripture (pg. 9 cf. pg.95). These statements, in turn, may seem to contradict some of the criticisms presented below – so each must be taken in light of his overall approach.
General Problems with Experiencing God
There are some ideas Blackaby uses to back up the above points that have the potential for dangerous conclusions. But before we go on to these particulars, it will be beneficial to point out the questionable nature of the hidden foundations of this teaching. While points 1-3 seem true at face value, points 4-7 pose large enough problems that they must be analyzed a bit more carefully.
While many Christians today will be surprised to hear this, the very idea that God has a personal will for your life separate from His Sovereign or His Moral will is not uncontested. (??? "Sovereign or His Moral will?" What is the author talking about?)
Blackaby simply assumes that his readers already agree with this view without giving any evidence for it (Irony Alert.)
(nor even bothering to state it). This assumption has gone unnoticed by most Christians, for this view of God’s will is prevalent among Baptist and Evangelical churches. But the fact is that the idea of God having an individual will for every believer that can be known in advance may not be true. (Oh. Do tell us why, sir.)
Blackaby’s further assumptions (such as God’s means of communication) are themselves based on this questionable premise. This opens the door for questioning not only Blackaby’s methodology, but the most fundamental aspect of his teaching. For Blackaby’s system to work, he must in fact prove the following:
- That God has an individual will for your life besides His Moral will that is expressed in Scripture.
- That God’s method of communicating this will in Biblical times was consistent and normative for all believers.
- That God continues to speak to all believers today just as He did in biblical times. (And of course the author must disprove these...)
He simply assumes what he is trying to prove and then uses “evidence” that will only convince those who already hold to his unproved presuppositions. (Irony Alert.)
The bottom line is that Blackaby is building his particular brand of “finding God’s will” theology on a stack of assumptions that may or may not be Biblical to begin with, and for which he offers no support. (Irony Alert.)
These are shaky grounds on which to construct an entire ministry.
Particular Problems with Experiencing God
In summary fashion, there are at least four major dangers found in Experiencing God which will be expounded upon below. They are:
- A Dangerous View of God’s Methods – Does God speak today like He spoke then? And to whom?
- A Dangerous View of the Christian Life – Does the Bible always portray a radical believer’s life?
- A Dangerous View of Scripture – Are only parts of the Bible God’s word for us?
- A Dangerous View of Christ – Did Christ have crisis of faith or make major adjustments for the Father?
According to Blackaby, since God spoke directly to people in the Bible, He will also speak to you: He spoke to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden in Genesis.
He spoke to Abraham and the other patriarchs . . . God does speak to His people, and you can anticipate that He will be speaking to you also.
There is a hidden assumption that Blackaby does not state nor does he attempt to support in his argument, yet without it the argument is meaningless. In logical form, Blackaby asserts that:
Premise 1: God spoke to people in Bible times.
Premise 2: (missing)
Conclusion: God speaks to people today.
That missing premise is that this was God’s normal method of communication and God continues this practice. (No, this is not the missing premise. There is no missing premise.)
This is the only way to make the argument logically valid, yet neither part of this hidden premise is proven correct. Blackaby jumps right from Premise 1 to his conclusion, which I believe is demonstrably false. (No, the initial premise is sufficient to logically arrive at the conclusion. It may be an incorrect conclusion, but it is a logically sound one.
Though we may see God’s past works through past circumstances, answered prayers, and other believers, the only way He speaks directly to Christians today is through the Bible. (This is why we issued the Irony Alerts. The author makes a completely unsupported assertion.)
Actually. the author simply disagrees with the conclusion.)
Though we may see God’s past works through past circumstances, answered prayers, and other believers, the only way He speaks directly to Christians today is through the Bible. (This is why we issued the Irony Alerts. The author makes a completely unsupported assertion.)
Many Christians are being told that God speaks directly to them today (“just like in Bible times”) through subjective impressions, signs, and other means. Believers seem to find this true even when what God supposedly said ends up being contradicted by someone else’s “revelation.” A subjective approach such as this has lead to a distrust of careful scholarship, anti intellectualism, sloppy interpretation, and a general lack of true Scriptural knowledge. (None of these assertions are documented.)
Note how Blackaby admits to the subjective and unverifiable nature of these “revelations”:
Is it important to know when the Holy Spirit is speaking to you? Yes! How do you know what the Holy Spirit is saying? I cannot give you a formula. I can tell you that you will know His voice when He speaks.
No one of these methods [circumstances, answered prayers, other believers, and the Bible] of God’s speaking is, by itself, a clear indicator of God’s directions. But when God says the same thing through each of these ways, you can have confidence to proceed.
The Bible, then, is just one of many ways God speaks to Christians – and apparently we cannot know God is “speaking” unless the Bible itself is backed up by our own experiences! (Is this a point Blackaby made, or is it an assumption made by the author? And when did the Bible get mixed in here?)
One must ask, what if one’s impressions contradict another’s? (The author is apparently unacquainted with the biblical test of prophecy:
1Co. 14:29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said.
This is the operation of the gift of discernment.)
Are they expected to wait on an experience before they can understand the word of God? (Again the author mixes in the Bible without explanation.)
Are someone’s feelings about Scripture indicative of its meaning? Can experience contradict Scripture? It is easy to see the problems that can crop up with a mystical view of God’s leading. (??? What is this mystical view of God's leading? What might be the non-mystical view of God's leading? Is the author going to explain anything?
The author seems to have knowledge about certain things that he isn't sharing with us. These objections keep popping up without explanation or context.)
Dangerous View of the Christian Life
Blackaby uses the unusual experiences of unique men in the Bible to support his view that God speaks directly to Christians today. That explains the emphasis on the experiences of men such as Abraham and Moses. But are we really supposed to appropriate the details of some unique individual’s life in order to live the Christian life? There is no evidence that this is case.
First, the unique experiences at unique times of unique people in the Bible should not to be taken as normative for all believers. It simply is not correct to conclude that since certain people in the Bible had an experience, we should too. To state that this is so requires evidence, (And to state otherwise likewise requires evidence, sir.)
yet Blackaby simply makes his assertions and moves on without objective support:
God clearly spoke to His people in Acts. He clearly speaks to us today. From Acts to the present, God has been speaking to His people by the Holy Spirit.
How does Blackaby know that God “clearly speaks to us today”? (How does the author know He does not?)
Of course he can get away with this, as most Christians today also assume this to be the case although biblical evidence is missing for such a belief. (The author appeals to the Bible, but refuses to quote it.)
The truth is that God used these men for a special purpose at a special time. Scripture had not yet been completed, so God used miraculous signs to verify His chosen one’s messages (2 Corinthians 12:12). (A reference to an unquoted Scripture. Let's actually quote it:
2Co. 12:12 The things that mark an apostle — signs, wonders and miracles — were done among you with great perseverance.
Unfortunately for the author, this Scripture has nothing to do with validating "His chosen one’s messages." Paul was quite clearly appealing to miracles to affirm his apostleship, not to verify his message.)
Second, even back then their experiences were not normal – that’s why they were recorded! (Hmm. A premise followed by a conclusion. It's now our turn to ask what is missing in between.)
It is not correct to assume that since God spoke to the prophets and apostles, that He speaks to Christians in the same way today (The author's quote of Blackaby does not contain the idea of "in the same way today."
(in fact, Scripture indicates that He does not – Heb 1:1). Let's quote:
He. 1:1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways...
Since we assent the truth of this Scripture, will the author explain how it refutes Blackaby?)
Blackaby uses the example of Moses to show that God still speaks to His people today. But to whom else did God speak in this manner? No one according to Deuteronomy 34:10! (Sigh. Let's quote:
Blackaby uses the example of Moses to show that God still speaks to His people today. But to whom else did God speak in this manner? No one according to Deuteronomy 34:10! (Sigh. Let's quote:
De. 34:10 Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face...
The author deceptively employs the phrase "in this manner." In what manner? Well, face to face. So Moses had a very special position before God. But there were other prophets of course. They did not know him face to face, yet they were nevertheless prophets.
Other people heard from God who were not Moses, therefore Moses' uniqueness was not that he heard from God.)
Scripture itself testifies to the fact that this event was incredibly unique when it states that “no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face.” (Wow, the author quoted the Bible! Hooray! This will be the only time.)
Yet Moses is pictured on the cover of his book as if he were the template for all Christian experience after him. (The author jumps to an unwarranted assumption. "As if" is merely an inference.)
Should we model all the details of our lives after Moses’ life? (No.)
Are we to all seek a burning bush? (No.)
Tend sheep? (No.)
Drink from a well? (No.)
If not (as Blackaby admits!), then why act like Moses’ other experiences should reflect ours? (Did Moses walk on his feet? We shouldn't assume we are to walk on our feet. Did Moses breathe? This might not be normative for today.
The author ridiculously requires that hearing God requires we do everything exactly like Moses did. This is puerile.)
Blackaby’s approach to Christian living is not consistent with what the Bible says about the normal Christian life. (Sir, what does the Bible say about the normal Christian life?)
He uses examples of Moses at the Red Sea, Joshua and the Jordan River, and Daniel’s three friends in the fiery furnace . . . but the very fact that these stories stand out should tell us that they are not normal! (The author needs to explain why hearing from God is not normal.)
Blackaby actually sees normalcy as a problem in the church. He speaks of “miraculous signs” that believers should be seeing and about Christians doing “God-sized assignments” so that everyone around will know they are from God. He states,
Blackaby actually sees normalcy as a problem in the church. He speaks of “miraculous signs” that believers should be seeing and about Christians doing “God-sized assignments” so that everyone around will know they are from God. He states,
When they [unbelievers] see things happen that can only be explained by God’s involvement, they will come to know Him.
In fact, according to Blackaby it is the average Christian’s lack of the miraculous that causes people to reject Christ! This, according to Blackaby, is because God’s people lack the faith to attempt those things that only God can do. If you or your church are not responding to God and attempting things that only He can accomplish, then you are not exercising faith. (The author invents without explanation an entirely new category: things only God can do.)
What our world often sees are devoted, committed Christians serving God. But they are not seeing God. They do not see anything happening that can only be explained in terms of the activity of God. Why? Because we are not attempting anything that only God can do.
If this is true, it seems odd that nowhere in the New Testament are churches told that performing miracles must be a part of the Gospel message, (??? The author just told us that "God used miraculous signs to verify His chosen one’s messages." If God doesn't do that today, the author needs to explain why.
Further, the supernatural was at certainly work in the early church as part of the Gospel message:
1Co. 14:24 But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, 25 and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, “God is really among you!”Ga. 3:5 Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?
The author cannot see past his doctrine to see what the Bible really says.)
and not once are they ever reprimanded for not doing miracles. (The author makes up inane strawmen and immediately shoots them down.)
Of course God who (sic) can do extraordinary things. But does the New Testament tell us that these extraordinary things will be available for the average Christian on a regular basis? No, it does not. (Jn. 14:12 I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.)
Living for God is not about seeking after one “God-sized assignment” to the next. (Is this actually what Blackaby teaches?)
With Blackaby’s emphasis on extraordinary experiences, the reader is left with the impression that he is only “experiencing God” and doing His will if he sees big things happening in his life. Is this actually what Blackaby teaches?)
This is not a biblical approach, however, (Sir, what is the biblical approach, and where in the Bible do we find it?)
and no Christian who takes this approach will be satisfied with their relation to God.
Dangerous View of Scripture
Blackaby makes several statements in his book that sound dangerously similar to the idea that the Bible only becomes God’s word to you through your experience:
Blackaby makes several statements in his book that sound dangerously similar to the idea that the Bible only becomes God’s word to you through your experience:
Have you ever been reading the Bible when suddenly you are gripped by a fresh new understanding of the passage? That was God speaking!
No, God speaks in all of the words of the biblical text – not just those that make an impression on the reader. (Siiiigh. Really, the author just makes things up. Of course God speaks in the whole Bible. That's not the topic as presented by Blackaby. He asserted that God illumines the mind of the Bible reader and suddenly there is new understanding. This does not contradict that the whole Bible is inspired.)
Someone buying in to this statement might very well come to the conclusion that a lack of “fresh new understanding” of Scripture means that God was not speaking to them. (Why is that dangerous, since the author himself believes that God is not speaking to them???)
The reverse is also true – it may be that you do have an emotional experience when interacting with the text and think God has given you “a word.” (Indeed, this could happen.)
Yet which book in the Bible was written to 21st century believers? Not one! (??? The whole Bible is intended for 21st century believers! Who it was written to as a historical fact is different matter from who it is applicable to in the 21st century.)
We discover God’s will for us by reading what He has said (to others) and then apply God’s principles to our lives. (Undocumented assertion.)
The words of Scripture only have one correct interpretation and if they were written to all believers in every generation then there would never be a fixed meaning! (Undocumented assertion.)
The Bible was written for us, not to us. (A distinction without a difference, and an undocumented opinion as well.)
In fact, Blackaby asserts that God’s truth comes through the Bible to the reader – not that the text itself contains truth:
You may ask, ‘Can’t I get a word from God from the Bible?’ Yes, you can! But only the Holy Spirit of God can reveal to you which truth of Scripture is a word from God in a particular circumstance.
Scripture is only a word from God in particular circumstances? (No, that is not what Blackaby wrote.)
This is highly problematic in that it leads to private interpretations (what does this text mean to you?), rather than to the text’s objective meaning. (A distinction without a difference.)
A text’s meaning is not found in ourselves, nor in our interpretations – whether they are supposedly aided by the Holy Spirit or not. Meaning is located in the text itself whether or not someone “gets it.” (The author continually makes assertions unrelated to the matter at hand, and never documents these assertions. Frankly, we have no reason to believe him.)
Blackaby demonstrates these private interpretations when he spuriously applies texts to himself that were not written to him. This can be seen in his testimonial application of John 11:4. Blackaby takes “this sickness is not unto death” to refer to his daughter’s illness (pg. ). But the context of Jesus’ statement in John 11:4, is the raising of Lazarus from the dead. It is not a promise to him that his daughter would live through her illness (the fact that she lived is no evidence that he was correct – other particulars could be given to support the opposite conclusion. That is why we must rely on principles not particulars). This kind of fallacy not only makes one believe a conclusion that may be false, but it also obscures the original intent of the passage so that its true meaning is lost. What if every parent thought that John 11:4 was for them when their child died? We know the children of Christian parents sometimes die. What would that do to their trust in God’s Word? (Again the author has us at a disadvantage. We don't know what facts and knowledge he possesses about these matters and what Blackaby has to say about them. Did Blackaby claim that every parent of a sick child could claim this verse?)
And Blackaby doesn’t stop there. He takes passages that speak of unbelievers and applies them to believers and verses that refer to salvation are applied to Christian living, such as John 14:6:
Blackaby demonstrates these private interpretations when he spuriously applies texts to himself that were not written to him. This can be seen in his testimonial application of John 11:4. Blackaby takes “this sickness is not unto death” to refer to his daughter’s illness (pg. ). But the context of Jesus’ statement in John 11:4, is the raising of Lazarus from the dead. It is not a promise to him that his daughter would live through her illness (the fact that she lived is no evidence that he was correct – other particulars could be given to support the opposite conclusion. That is why we must rely on principles not particulars). This kind of fallacy not only makes one believe a conclusion that may be false, but it also obscures the original intent of the passage so that its true meaning is lost. What if every parent thought that John 11:4 was for them when their child died? We know the children of Christian parents sometimes die. What would that do to their trust in God’s Word? (Again the author has us at a disadvantage. We don't know what facts and knowledge he possesses about these matters and what Blackaby has to say about them. Did Blackaby claim that every parent of a sick child could claim this verse?)
And Blackaby doesn’t stop there. He takes passages that speak of unbelievers and applies them to believers and verses that refer to salvation are applied to Christian living, such as John 14:6:
Who is the one who really knows the way for you to fulfill God’s purpose for your life? God is! Jesus said, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life’ (John 14:6).
Jesus is teaching about salvation here, not making a statement about knowing God’s will. (Is that only what Jesus was teaching? Jesus began His statement by saying:
Jn. 14:1 “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me.So Jesus was talking about trust, not salvation.)
Blackaby quotes Jeremiah 18:1-6, stating that the point of that passage is that, “to be useful, the clay has to be moldable.” The point of Jeremiah 18:1-6, however, is that God can sovereignly do what He pleases with those He has created – whether or people are moldable or not! This kind of sloppy scholarship should call Blackaby’s authority on Bible study in general into serious question. (Perhaps this verse not the best example, but the author doesn't bother to refute the concept itself. We shall provide an assist for Blackaby:
Ro. 12:2 Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.
Dangerous View of Jesus Christ
The picture of Jesus that Blackaby paints is difficult to square with the Jesus that Scripture presents. Consider the following statements:
The picture of Jesus that Blackaby paints is difficult to square with the Jesus that Scripture presents. Consider the following statements:
He [the Father] pursues a love relationship and invites Jesus to be involved with Him by revealing what He is doing. Jesus then makes the adjustments to do what His Father is doing
He [the Father] even required major adjustments of His own Son
God used circumstances to reveal to Jesus what He was to do. The circumstances were the things Jesus saw the Father doing. There are some things that only the Father can do
The Son kept on looking for the Father’s activity around Him so He could unite His life with the Father’s activity
Jesus did not simply look around for “what God was doing,” Jesus knew exactly what His mission was from the beginning.
(Jn. 5:19 Jesus gave them this answer: “I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.Jn. 8:28 So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.12:50 I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.)
And while His human will did not desire death on the cross, He never had to “majorly adjust” His life to “fit” God the Father’s plan. Would Blackaby also suggest that Jesus had to go through a “crisis of faith” before He could serve the Father? What does this do to his suggestion for us?
Your job as a servant is to follow Jesus’ example: Do what the Father is already doing-watch to see where God is at work and join Him!
Besides the fact that this is most certainly not how Jesus did it, the New Testament does not teach that Christians must try to figure where God is at work around them so that they can then join Him. (Ga. 5:25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit.)
They can know that God is at work right where they are. This can be done at home, in the workplace, in school, or in any place God has put them. God does not have to ask them, in fact when God speaks He doesn’t ask – He tells! (Undocumented counter claims.)
Blackaby discusses the account of Jonah. He states, “When God had a plan to call Ninevah to repentance, He asked Jonah to join Him in His Work.” But God never asked Jonah to do anything . . . He commanded him! When even the very examples that Blackaby (spuriously) uses as evidence for his position fly in the face of his own system some flags should go up. A self contradictory system is automatically false. (Irony Alert.)
Begging the Question
As with many other “knowing God’s will” schemes, the question that is consistently begged is this: how do you know that you know? Even if we were to grant every one of Blackaby’s assertions, allowing for all of the logical leaps and out of context Scripture usage, the whole system still fails at this critical point: how can one know by experience what God is doing? (Again we note that there are biblical tests.)
For any activity you see going on you always have at least two ways to look at it: it is God or it is Satan. (Actually, there are more alternatives. Is it simply a mistaken impression? Is it the result of bad advice?)
What if you “saw God working” in a neighboring city, “went to join Him”, and saw hundreds of people come to Christ? Vindication? Not necessarily. Perhaps God had actually wanted you to go to Africa where you would have led thousands to Christ instead of only the few hundred that you reached? What if it was really Satan who set it up so that you thought you were supposed to stay local? (The author descends into idiocy. There is no such way to make a mistake. If a person does what he thinks God wants him to do and there is fruit or no fruit, it doesn't matter. Nor does the unknowable result of another choice matter.
Such speculation is fruitless and just dumb.)
The problem is that there is always an alternate explanation. People must read what they think God is doing into their interpretation of each situation – but if they already know what God is doing then why look at the situation? (??? This makes no sense.)
Such speculation is fruitless and just dumb.)
The problem is that there is always an alternate explanation. People must read what they think God is doing into their interpretation of each situation – but if they already know what God is doing then why look at the situation? (??? This makes no sense.)
Conclusion
In light of the very questionable and unsupported assumptions Blackaby relies on for his whole system, the objectively false philosophy he espouses, the confusing and sometimes contradictory methodology he supports, the dangerous consequences that many of his principles could lead to, and the impossibly subjective and circular means of verification that the system is tested by, it is my conclusion that Experiencing God should not be taught as a means for discovering God’s will today. At best it might be useful as a resource for learning how God spoke to unique men and women in Biblical times in order that they might fulfill their truly “God sized” assignments – but that would completely undermine Blackaby’s purpose in writing it.
The New Testament does not teach that Christians must try to figure out where God is at work around them so that they can join Him. (So when is the author going to explain this Bible he keeps talking about? Oh. We're at the end. Never mind.)
It does, however, have plenty to say about God’s will for our lives (more, indeed, than most are willing to accomplish).
No comments:
Post a Comment