The it suit of the season. Our top selling sihlouette. The one suit you must have.

Click here for more information

Apparel
(Womens, Apparel & Accessories, Calvin, Front, Klein, One piece bathing suits, One-Piece, Pleat, Skirted, Slimming, strapless, Women’s swimwear
Dhaasu Products

The it suit of the season. Our top selling sihlouette. The one suit you must have.

Click here for more information

Apparel
(Womens, Apparel & Accessories, Calvin, Front, Klein, One piece bathing suits, One-Piece, Pleat, Skirted, Slimming, strapless, Women’s swimwear
Dhaasu Products

The perfect little swimdress with a flirty attached skirt.

Click here for more information

Apparel
(Womens, Apparel & Accessories, Calvin, Klein, One piece bathing suits, Skirted, Slimming, strapless, Swimdress, Women’s swimwear
Dhaasu Products

Grant Swart

Since the initial publishing of the accompanying article, significant developments have taken place within the charismatic movement, and none for the better. The deception and lies of this enormous cult have taken on far greater proportions and the claws of the heretical movement have been sunk into a much broader section of, what is seen to be, the Christian faith, with damning, tragic and devastatingly sad consequences.

Even significant parts of the Reformed church, much of which was regarded as the guardian of relatively ‘safe’, conservative and sound doctrinal Christianity, has been infected by this cancerous and Satanic movement. New Calvinism, or Reformed Charismaticism, is fast becoming the latest fad in many church circles, who seem to have become bored with upholding the truth in the Word. Increasing the support for this demonic charismania, we have international conferences, the enormous influence of multi media and “heavyweight” proponents such as John Piper, CJ Mahaney, Kevin De Young, Mark Dever, Mark Driscoll, Albert Mohler, Tim Keller, Joshua Harris and Ligon Duncan driving the deception deep into the flesh of the church.

The fact that so few church leaders are speaking out CLEARLY and without ambiguity against this deception is cause for great concern to believers. It is even worse when our spiritual leaders are prepared to support and embrace the lies, fraud, arrogance and deception of these ravenous wolves in the charismatic sphere of the church.

The subtle horror of this deception is leaving great gaping wounds on the hearts of our people. The lifeblood of the church continues to bleed away, yet the faithful know that at the core of the church, Jesus will never forsake or let slip the hands of His children, who reach out to Him in faith and turn their backs on this charismatic failure.

The sheep hear His comforting, persistent voice clearly calling and follow the steady fall of His footsteps on the narrow path. They will cling to Him through the mists of doubt, the white out snow of human will, the smoke of the shells launched by false teachers and the muddy torrents of fraudulent messages and false prophecies. They will cross unharmed over the raging currents of lies, numbing blizzards of false doctrine and driving rain of charismania. And, blinking through their own floods of tears, next to that little narrow path they will pass the excruciatingly heartbreaking blood of those who have been murdered on the wide road to charismatic doom.

While this article by KB Napier may a few years old, it is certainly still very apt. There is nothing new under the sun, beloved brothers and sisters. Nothing new.

(Ecc 1:9)  What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun.

*******************************

For many years, I have avoided a proper examination of this subject. Whenever I have come face-to-face with it, I have tended to say something vague, such as “You are free to believe it, but I think along different lines”. The reason was that I knew many who were ‘charismatic’, or whose sympathies lay with charismatic theology and practices.  Apart from their charismatic beliefs, they are genuinely nice people with a sincere wish to live as Believers. Some I thought were rather ‘odd’ in their beliefs, some were more-or-less ‘middle of the road’ in their theology, and some seemed to be, well, extreme. (The same can be said for others who are not charismatic – but they are a separate problem).

The emergence of the ‘Toronto Blessing’ in early 1994, however, has changed my perspective.  I have come to see that my previous silence was wrong.  Paying deference to people because I know them, or pretending big theological errors do not exist, is not the way to live a Christian life.  And for one who is called to teach the verities of God’s word, it is tantamount to living a lie and being a hypocrite.  For this reason, I now submit this Article.  Its purpose is to rectify my error of the past in keeping silent about such an important matter.  In doing so, my ‘arrows’ are NOT aimed at specific persons or churches, but at the spirit behind the movement.  Let Brotherly love continue.

Childish Things

Before I start on that road of honesty, I must state that I have found charismatic theology to be very weak, Biblically.  Some beliefs are bordering on the absurd or the ridiculous.  Some of them are outrageous. It does not matter how these beliefs ‘score’ in terms of weakness, for the whole approach is wrong. The First Book of Corinthians, chapter 13, describes what has happened.  In the Article ‘Look Past the Manifestations’ (A-00031) I refer to spiritual ‘toys’.

This corresponds with Paul’s assessment of Corinthian excesses and poor knowledge. He says that a child is bound to be childish (Gk: untaught; unskilled), but an adult must act in a mature way. Sadly, many charismatics cling to spiritual ‘toys’, preferring novelty and superficiality to a steady and deepening study of God’s word.  Thus they can easily fall into error.

As it is, we cannot know everything about God or what He thinks – so to deliberately retain unskilled or untaught ways is folly indeed! Or, as I have been told on many occasions “Yes, what you say may be right - but I believe it anyway!“  That is, when confronted with Truth*, these folk may acknowledge it, but deliberately refuse to act upon it, preferring instead their immaturity.  I must admit that every time I hear such a statement it leaves me amazed. (* Even if it is not accepted as the ‘Truth’, it is a viable alternative in terms of argument).

Furthermore, when the ‘Blessing’ arrived, it began to illuminate further the errors of charismaticism.  Paul speaks of brotherly love being glad to see men acting according to God’s Truth – but not glad to see pretence, or simulation, or falsehood, or deceit (Gk)…all of which are present in the way folk respond to the ‘Blessing’.  Brotherly love (that is, agape) also enables us to bear up against such errors. So, far from displaying lack of love toward charismatics in this and similar works, I am attempting, however imperfectly, to show love toward them (re 2 Corinthians 2:4).

A Permeating Force

The title of this Article reflects the true position, as I see it, of the charismatic position. ‘Charismaticism’ is a permeating ‘force’.  It refers to the way charismatic theology crosses denominations and churches.  Its thinking affects all theological stances and changes historic beliefs. It is, then, a whole ethos rather than simply an additional form of theology.  Charismaticism is a way of life, not just something worn on Sundays, and it drives people on, almost without mercy, like a drug.  If charismaticism was based on scripture, then this could be a force for good – but the force I speak of is not good.  It is not to be desired - because it is not of God.

Satan is an excellent strategist.  His ploys and movements exactly fit the mood and beliefs of the day – mainly because they were his idea in the first place.  He and his demonic angels organise situations and ideas, manipulate men’s minds and hopes.

Thus it was that the World Council of Churches came into being.  Later, he ensured that the charismatic renewal arose, which effectively took over Christendom in the 1950′s.  It’s aim was to transform the whole church (which it has, but not for the better).  This is why a leading Pentecostalist, Donald Gee, called it “the new Pentecost”.

It is not incidental that Gee was also an ecumenist. David de Plessis, another ecumenist, used this new charismaticism as a ‘bridge’ to join the Pentecostal church and Roman Catholicism.  As an invited guest at Vatican 2 he was one of the main personalities behind charismaticism today.  Indeed, such is his influence, even now, that he has been called ‘Mr Pentecost’.

Time magazine said of de Plessis:

“No one in the twentieth century so effectively linked three of the major movements of the time - the Pentecostal movement, the ecumenical movement, and the charismatic movement.”

In the task of downgrading Christian Truth, charismaticism is aided by the Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship International. Committed to ‘spreading the word’ of Pentecostalism without outwardly trying to bring in new converts (to Pentecostalism), the FGBFI has had a big part in the ecumenical cause.  It has also assisted in popularising tongues and wonders. 

It works continuously at bringing together Roman Catholics and Protestants in the “unity and love of the spirit”, even though this is forbidden in God’s word, for no Believer may have union with the works of darkness. It’s work refuses to ’cause division’ by talking about doctrinal differences (that is, the Truth) and thus it makes much of experiences, signs and wonders. We can see that this is exactly what modern charismaticism does.

Another leader in ecumenical bridge-building was Archbishop Michael Ramsey. In 1957 he called evangelical belief “heretical and sectarian”. And, just like charismatics today, he said “We must avoid binding the Spirit by our stupidity and narrowness and lack of faith.” Is this not an echo of what is happening amongst the churches in the mid 1990′s, with the fresh onslaught of ‘movements of the Spirit’, such as the iniquitous ‘Toronto Blessing’?

The urgent plea to just ‘give in’ to the Spirit is not an honest plea.  It is a plea, rather, to cast aside all semblance of Truth and to rebuild the Church on pseudo-doctrine, as declared and interpreted by charismaticism (and ‘experiences’).

George Ashdown, Secretary of the Protestant Alliance, said:

“The Reformers saw the whole Catholic system as anti-Christian.  Luther and Calvin went so far as to identify the Papacy with the Antichrist* and they, like Wycliffe, Tyndale, Matthew Henry, Spurgeon, Lloyd-Jones and many others, saw the Roman Catholic institution as Mystery Babylon, the Mother of Harlots, vividly described in Revelation chapter 17.”

(Note:  In the Bible ‘anti’ can mean ‘substitute’, or ‘taking the place of’, or ‘against’.  One of the popes’ titles is ‘Vicar of Christ’.  This carries the same meaning as ‘antichrist’.  That is, the pope takes the place of Christ).

Of this demonic Roman Catholic system and its reliance on charismaticism, evangelist David W. Cloud has noted:

“From Rome’s perspective there could be no more effective instrument towards the agenda set forth by Rome, which is building up the Catholic church and re-establishing Catholic dominion, than the gullible, misled charismatic movement.  It is a movement which, by claiming to believe that Catholics and all people need to be ‘born again’, sees absolutely no need of warning of Rome’s wretched and blasphemous errors, or of instructing those who are saved to come out of that apostasy. Rome has found a winner!”

Some charismatics would attempt to disassociate themselves from Romanism, but such is a pointless denial, for those who run with wolves are the same as wolves.  Rome has taken charismaticism to itself and charismatics must ask the question “Why?” The answer is simple – Rome will use it and Protestant (?) charismatics, to get what it wants, world domination.

When that has been done, it will cast aside charismatics who are not fully Roman Catholic (they are already part-Catholic by their very preaching method.  See later sections).  They will be cast aside because, despite its more recent soothing statements on unity, Rome regards all who are outside of its own fold to be unsaved and unchristian.

(Quotes above taken from ‘All Roads Lead to Rome?’ by Michael de Semlyen, published by Dorchester House Publications, 1993, et al.  This book should be read by all Believers).

Overall, then, charismaticism is a tool of Satan, used to combine all manner of unbelief with belief.  This means we will see a fast moving ecumenical movement – the more ‘fresh outpourings of the spirit’ we see (coming, of course, via charismatic circles), the more we will slide down into a pit of eclectic Christo-humanism.  The more ‘outpourings’ we have, and the greater the numbers of Christians who are duped by them, the more diluted the Truth will become.

As non-charismatics are charmed into these movements, even if they attend only one meeting (which will show their underlying interest), so ecumenism will gain massive strength. Concurrently, Truth and true Christian belief will shrink and so the plans of Satan will come to fruition.  The ‘Toronto Blessing’ of 1994 has enhanced this strategy many times over.

With the dilution of Truth and the emphasis on experiences and a re-interpreted scripture, will come a denial of sources* of Truth, such as the Authorised Version of the Bible.  Unless we are careful, the AV will soon disappear forever and we will have no sure measure.  The plethora of new versions certainly brings cash into the pockets of shrewd businessmen, but these men are not behind the overall scene.  They are merely pawns in the whole strategy of Satan, whose ambitions include the removal of the AV from our shelves and minds.  Once he has achieved that, he can move very fast indeed, using regularly published newer versions to continually shift interpretations and beliefs.

Charismatics are at the forefront of calling the AV ‘archaic’ and the newer versions ‘scholastically correct’, making charismaticism more dangerous than any cult.  It is dangerous because Christians are amongst its ranks.  This is just one of the many lines of attack used by Satan. (* In a secondary, everyday sense).

What follows is an accurate assessment of the situation.  The positions and beliefs described are authentically charismatic.  To ensure that I complete my task in a proper manner, I have been assisted by one who is an ex-charismatic*. He was a church leader, trained in a New Covenant theological college and he has himself experienced several of the manifestations found in the ‘Toronto Blessing’.  He has denounced and renounced* his former beliefs and practices in favour of true Biblical faith.  Readers should seriously consider what is said, for the conclusion of what is presented here is clear – charismaticism must lead to apostasy and its beliefs must, ultimately, lead to heresy. (* Sadly, it appears that he has since returned to the things he renounced).

Necessary Definitions

Before we enter into the examination-proper, several definitions must be made.  They will serve as ‘touching-points’ and measures.  Much of what is said in these sections has been said in other Articles.

Denominationalism etc

What are denominations?  Historically, men have broken away from their churches to form other churches.  Some of them grew in strength and their members planted other churches, whose beliefs were exactly like those in the ‘mother’ church.  In time, these churches of similar ilk became denominations, with particular ‘distinctives’. That is, beliefs (such as baptism, rule by elders, etc.) that have been emphasised over other beliefs. Each denomination thinks that it has ‘improved’ upon existing denominations andtheir beliefs. 

Fundamentally, every denomination has its distinctives.  The distinctives mark out one denomination from another.  The very existence of distinctives is a sign of an unbiblical perspective. It does not matter how ‘right’ the distinctives are – for if they are the main feature of a denomination, then that denomination is automatically unbalanced in its beliefs!

As all denominations were founded in order to teach their own distinctives, this means that all denominations are unbalanced.  We cannot escape this conclusion.

Scripture teaches one Christianity and one faith.  Christian beliefs are not separate modules that can be taken out and used without reference to any other beliefs.  Doctrine is to be taught and acted-upon as a whole, not in pieces.  Denominations, however, have taken apart the unified doctrine of God and have separated one teaching from another.  The intention was to bring back to the churches certain teachings that were lacking.  That was commendable.  But those teachings became ‘distinctives’ and churches became known for them.

Thus, there were no longer ‘Christians’, but ‘Baptists’ and ‘Congregationalists’ and ‘Methodists’ and so on.  There was no longer one holy Church of God, but a multitude of unbalanced churches, such as the ‘Baptist church’, etc.  People became known not as Believers, but as ‘Baptists’ or by some other name not consistent with scripture.

Calvin taught and brought to the fore a number of excellent reminders as to what is true Christian belief.  But even his reminders eventually became yet another denomination and in some cases, some denominations split themselves even more, by adding ‘Calvinistic’ to their title. Thus, legitimate teachings were brought back to mind by Calvin but, sadly, men have taken them beyond their proper place.  They made these reminders into an ‘ism’, a separate movement.  Once this happens with any such ‘reminder’, the original impetus is lost, for the prompting of the Holy Spirit has been replaced by men’s infinite aptitude to reorganise what God has given!

The Holy Spirit speaks through His word and also through prophets.  What the prophets say must be fully consistent with God’s declared word, which is the ‘touch-point’; without it, men could say whatever they liked and no one could verify or deny it!  (We will see that this is what happened with charismaticism).

In Old Testament times, prophets spoke from God.  They reminded the people of God’s commands and requirements.  This was not a call to separate and to form distinctives based on God’s reminders. No – the reminders were given so that the people could return to the ‘old paths’, to a way of life already given by God.  Whilst His word has certainly been ‘progressive’, every new step has been consistent with the previous step…and these were always consistent with future steps. 

Thus it is that when Christ came, He exemplified and expanded what already existed.  He did not demand that people ‘come out’ from past declarations of God.  He wanted people to adhere to them!

For the Church, this means that we must live out the whole counsel of God.  Simple as that.  We are not to produce distinctives. If certain teachings are ignored by some, it is up to those called to do so to remind them of this failure, and for those who are reminded to repent and to go back to the unified word of God.  At times this does not happen and if the failures are very serious, then it is right for those with conscience to separate from their erring Brethren.  BUT NOT TO FORM A DENOMINATION OR DISTINCTIVES.  The object should be to live out the whole counsel of God, NOT to emphasise one or two teachings over all others.

What has happened in charismatic churches?  Firstly, we should distinguish charismatic churches and charismatic-type churches. The former teach and practice the full theology of what is ‘charismatic’.  The latter are influenced by charismatic theology, but they may be other denominations or independent churches (who also have their own distinctives).

‘Charismaticism’ is the influence or movement of thought that binds the two together, providing the bridge between diverse and often heretical groups (Roman Catholic being the biggest and better-known).

Teaching on the gifts was missing from the churches.  Concerned men properly reminded others of this fact.  But it did not stop there, for the reminder quickly led to yet more distinctives.  Local churches were founded upon these distinctives and so we had ‘charismatic’ churches.

Today, there are denominations that are wholly ‘charismatic’. The principle of denominationalism is that certain distinctives are taught, which always mean others are not taught, or are given low priority. Either way, there is an imbalance.  As charismatic-type churches veer toward charismatic teachings, so they, too, become even more unbalanced than they were before.

The effect of charismaticism, generally, has been to concentrate on the gifts and to minimise solid Biblical theology (exemplified by top Toronto Blessing leaders).  As with the Pharisees and other Jewish sects, charismatic denominations and churches have so emphasised their distinctives, that they have gone beyond the spirit of Truth.

A massive edifice has been built, like a modern Tower of Babel (the figure is appropriate) and it is nothing like what God has said in His word.  This is not peculiar to charismatic denominations and churches – it is rife throughout the churches, independent or not. The answer is to get back to the whole counsel of God and to remain united in all the Truth, not in distinctives.

Contextual and Universal Validity

This has been mentioned in A-00031, but there is a need to go over its concept.  The concept can apply to any set of beliefs,whether of the world or of Christianity.  It means that an apparent anomaly exists – that something can be both true and false at the same time!  The anomaly, however, is an illusion, for something is either true or it is false.  Only a Buddhist can unite the two as one!

If something is Contextually Valid, it means that it is true only within the sphere of itself.  When that ‘something’ is compared to an external environment or other claimed authority, it is either consistent with it, or it is not.  So, for example, a local council may introduce a bye-law.  To the council and the local population, the bye-law will seem to be valid.  But, all local laws in a country are subject to statutory laws.  That is, laws created by the ruling government.  If the new bye-law is not consistent with, or opposes, statutory law, then it cannot be maintained.

Thus, in its own context (i.e. its own council’s mind and the will of the local people), the bye-law is ‘valid’.  But, when exposed to a ‘higher’, more universal, law, it is not valid at all.  The bye-law had Contextual Validity but not ‘Universal Validity’. What seemed to be acceptable in the smaller context was not acceptable in the wider context.

A paranoid schizophrenic can often build his own inner-world, which is, to him, very real – more real than anything outside of his own mind.  So, if, say, he ‘believes’ a person living next door to him is a secret agent about to kill everyone in the country, he will act accordingly.  This can lead to him killing an innocent man and wreaking havoc in the community.  He will have constructed a plausible and coherent life-style, consistent with his false beliefs, but inconsistent with the outside world.

In such a situation, he is convinced of his rightness and that only he is telling the truth.  But, when compared to the wider context – that is, reality – his ‘truth’ becomes a falsehood.  His perceived ’truth’ is at odds with the actual truth.  Thus, what is contextually valid to him is, universally, invalid.  In other words, it is a lie!

In Christian terms, the application is as follows:

All Christians, in all ages and of all nations, have only ONE standard and touch-point.  It is the Bible.  Without it, we may easily believe and enact whatever we wish and whatever seems good in our own eyes.  The Bible, then, is our only actual measure of all things.  It is God’s word, actually and always.  Whatever we do, or say, or think, must therefore be consistent with that word. God’s word is our ‘Universal Validity’.

What we do in our own small corner of the vineyard is ‘Contextual Validity’.  Somehow, the two must match. If they are incongruous, then one of them must alter.  And it is always our own idea of validity that must alter!  Every time, without question.

If, for example, we believe (as many do) that Jesus Christ was not God incarnate, but was merely a good man, we can convince ourselves we are right.  We may evolve a package of beliefs that appear to support our assertion and so, to us, our beliefs are valid (this is what JW’s do).  But they are valid only in their own context.  The context, however, is also a lie, so in essence the ‘truth’ we maintain is actually a lie.  It is a lie because once it is compared to the greater, absolute measure, it fails to match completely.

If the Universal Validity is taken to be the total Truth and the ultimate touch-point and measure of all things, then all things must match it.  If something does not match it, then it must be rejected as being false, a lie. In Biblical terms, we have no option. God is always right.  We have the propensity for lies and cannot be trusted to be always right.

In the case of charismaticism, God’s word is always right. If what charismaticism says does not match what God says in His word, then what charismaticism says is automatically wrong, a lie, and must be rejected.  If what it says is not ‘Universally Valid’ (that is, consistent with God’s word), then it has no validity at all and can be cast aside as a lie.  This is because whatever is not of God is of Satan, even if men construct the lie. We will see that charismaticism is a lie – it does not match scripture.

Freedom and Choice?

Linked with the matter of validity is one’s ‘choice’ of theology.  Are Christians free to choose their theology?  Can they choose between various (conflicting) ‘interpretations’?  Indeed, are Christians ‘free’ in any real sense?  What is meant, Biblically, by being ‘free’? 

We find that only the angels and Adam and Eve had a form of ‘free choice’.  That is, real freedom to choose to do either right or to do wrong.  But even though they had this ‘free’ choice, it was bound by God’s law, which stated that they must obey Him!  God is never unconditional toward men or angels.  Thus, although Adam and Eve had virtual ‘free’ choice, they did not have ‘freedom’ in the normally accepted sense of the word.  If they did have it, they could not have been punished!

After Adam and Eve sinned, all human beings were born in sin.  Scripture tells us that the unsaved are unable, in God’s eyes, to choose between right and wrong. This is because they do not have the freedom to do so.  Rather, they are bound by sin and by Satan.  People may do what is humanly ‘good’ but this is never acceptable to God.  He only accepts as ‘good’ whatever He saysis good…and everything we do outside of the Lord is sin!

An unsaved sinner, then, is incapable of doing true good.  This means that everything he ever does in his lifetime is deemed to be evil by God.  It is evil because he is unsaved and does not possess a new life, made acceptable to God.

There are serious ramifications.   If a man is incapable of doing good, then he is totally unable to seek what is good or what is true.  We are told this in scripture. If he is incapable of choosing good, he is also incapable of choosing to accept God!  And this brings us into direct conflict with charismatic teaching – that a man may ‘choose Christ’.  No man may choose to be saved.

We can continue this very brief study of freedom, by saying that if a man may not choose to be saved, but that charismatic preaching says that he can do so – then charismatic gospel preaching is inherently false. If a man, hearing the ‘gospel offer’ to ‘accept Christ’, walks to the front, raises his hand, etc. and then ‘prays the prayer’…is he saved at all?  No, he is NOT, if he believes he has ‘chosen’ the Lord!  This may easily explain the high ‘drop-out rate’ of the products of Arminian campaigns, etc.

Now, if a man is ‘saved’ (i.e. NOT saved!) in this way, what credence can we place on charismatic claims that such folk have been given ‘spiritual gifts’?  This is not a far-fetched query, for Roman Catholic charismatics are enthusiastically accepted as being equal in terms of salvation!  And if such folk are not saved and yet are said to have spiritual gifts – what of claims that they bear spiritual fruit?  Obviously, each one of these claims, by Biblical definition, MUST BE FALSE!

Who, then, has absolute freedom of choice (or ‘free will’)?  No-one – not even God.  Free will is a fallacy.  Even God cannot act outside of His own laws and commands.  Now, if even the Creator is bound by His own laws and we, as human beings, are told that we have ‘freedom in Christ’, then ‘freedom’ must mean to think, speak and act within God’s stated laws.  It also means that we may choose to do either evil or good, whereas an unsaved man does not have this choice at all.

For a Christian, then, ‘freedom’ is to act in perfect accordance with God’s stated precepts.  That is, there is freedom only in restriction. Those who do whatever they wish, whenever they wish, are not actually free, but are bound by their own sinful desires…the more they do, the less they are free! Add to this the same man’s inability to do good even if he says he wishes to do so, and we have a man who is a slave to sin.

If we now refer back to contextual and universal validity, we can see that ALL unbelievers AND those Christians whose beliefs and/or actions are not consistent with scripture, have only a contextual validity to their lives.  Thus, they are living a lie and are not doing what is good or right. (‘Right’ being whatever God says is right and true).  The most potent fact in all this is the charismatic tendency to preach self-choice of salvation.

This is why charismatic churches are always ‘doing’ and are always trying to ‘find new ways to bring in’ people.  It is as though they are trying to ‘help’ the Holy Spirit to save people! (This is actually preached by charismatics throughout the world).

Observation and Interpretation

We all observe things, and we all interpret things, including scripture.  However, both observation and interpretation can be affected by individual perception.  That is the problem area! (It is also a problem for scientists, who struggle between what is observed and what they think those observations mean.  It is a fact that many scientists accept evolution theory to be true; if they base their own work on this theory, then their interpretation of their own work is completely false).

An interpretation can be either valid or invalid, true or false.  It is not necessary for something to be deliberately made false, for it to be false or invalid.  Something is either true or false inherently, not because we say so.  The safest way to interpret something is to allow it to interpret itself.  Where there is no such self-interpretation, then we must either not provide our own ideas, or we may provide an opinion.  But an opinion is valid only if we say it is an opinion.  When an opinion is passed off as being a proven fact, then it becomes a lie and invalid.

Charismatic theories are all opinions dressed as Biblical fact, but without Biblical support. Charismatics have observed (in scripture) the existence of, say, gifts, but instead of relying solely on scripture to interpret them, they invent their own interpretations to explain them. They then manufacture what they refer to as ‘gifts’, according to their own invented interpretation.

Thus, in their own small world, everything makes perfect sense (contextual validity).  But when put under the spotlight of God’s word, they are senseless (there is no universal validity).

Charismaticism goes beyond making ‘genuine mistakes’ – it is now blatantly anti-scripture, as it ignores or rejects what God says and replaces it with extra-Biblical theories, mixed with much that is true.

The Toronto Blessing

Charismaticism began as an ‘odd’ notion.  Today, it is starting to show its true colours.  The larger the following of an error, the bolder become its leaders and the more open become its heresies.  One preacher asked “Why are we calling this the ‘Toronto’ Blessing, when God gives His blessings everywhere?”  He said that he had been to a number of ‘Blessing’ meetings; in the first one, the people appeared to have a ‘real’ blessing and experienced ‘real’ phenomena.  But after that, people faked the experience.  Nevertheless, this preacher was still willing to look for what was positive and ‘of God’ in the whole movement.  In other words, like so many others who are afraid to speak against this charismatic evil, he approves of it and condones it, despite its obvious error.  He does not question the ‘Blessing’, but merely says that God can bless anywhere, not just in Toronto.  Thus, like others, he is deluded.

The Toronto Blessing is no ordinary error.  With this movement, evil hangs in the air.  It can be sensed from afar.  Even when I watch ‘Blessing’ meetings on video, evil exudes from the screen.  I see some who are either possessed or oppressed actively by demons.  It is so obvious that I want to shake the leaders by their shoulders until they, too, can see what is so crystal clear. The Toronto Blessing has been the catalyst to begin a new work of Satan, who set it up in the first place.

This strange movement is more potent than any other I know of.  It fascinates men, women and children, who are being drawn by the singing of the Sirens.  Although the dangers are so painfully obvious, they ignore them because of the phenomena and the perceived ‘fruit’.

Concerned Christians wonder how so many of their friends can be so quickly deluded, after possibly years of being true Believers. Let me be blunt here.  Those who are truly faithful will not fall so suddenly! It is a fact that the majority of people who call themselves ‘Christians’ are NOT Christians at all.  And of those who are left, the majority are superficial and have little true love for the Lord.  They have virtually no Biblical knowledge, no sound doctrinal beliefs based on inner faith and certainly no understanding. How do I know?  I see it, hear it and feel it – and I was myself a part of it!  For years I have warned of this superficiality – today, this superficiality has been breached, as easily as a pin bursts a balloon.

Large numbers of Believers are virtually non-starters in the race we are all to run.  They have become saved – and have then sat down!  Over the years they have imbibed the language of true faith and they have given a good outward show of spiritual respectability.  But now, Satan has removed their skin-deep appearance to reveal what is really underneath – a sham!

The Toronto Blessing is the start of something historically big.  It will not fade away.  Years of charismatic falsity (often rooted in sincerity) have made sure of its success.

A Prophecy

I will here repeat a prophecy I made in the 1980′s – that Christians will separate from Christians.  The larger number will also join with unbelievers and they will all condemn and oppress the smaller number.  The larger number will actively oppose the few, and will constantly harass and attack them.  They will follow a delusion, whilst the smaller number will remain and become stronger in faith.

This prophecy is now coming to pass and I wish this statement to be on record as a public testimony to the warning being repeated in the year 1994.

A ‘Hidden Agenda’

The effects of the ‘Blessing’ are greater than the phenomena.  They are like ripples on a pool, ever moving outward.  This so-called ‘movement of God’ produces Believers who display contempt and bitterness toward those who do not fall to the same delusion.  They openly deride Christians who are critical, becoming angry and even hateful.  This is to be expected and it will get far worse.

Those who refuse to follow the deluded are already being shunned and persecuted.  One leader told me that all the pastors in my area will shun me if I do not listen.  I was told that I will be ‘left out in the cold’ if I continue in my opposition to the ‘Blessing’.  What a very strange thing to say?  And how can they justify bitterness and anger?  Does the Holy Spirit produce this anger and hatred? Of course not!  It is Satan who is determined to crush the revolt!  It is a sure sign of his involvement.  God produces LOVE for the Brethren, NOT hatred or ridicule!  Wake up, friends!!

Leaders are telling followers that critics of the ‘Blessing’ are NOT CHRISTIANS, or they are ‘heretics/fanatics’. Yet, our only fault is that we insist on examining the movement with scripture, exactly as we are commanded to do by God.  No Believer should fear such an examination.  If they do, then it only illuminates the false spirit behind their beliefs.

But it is now getting worse.  Kenneth Copeland, a charismatic leader, has said that God will likely kill people who refuse to accept the ‘Blessing’!  It is but a very short step from expressing such a thing and acting it out.  Remember, Karl Marx said that communists must kill religious believers if they did not embrace the communistic ideal.  He said it in a book, whilst he lived in far-away London.  But, a short while later, Believers (and those with religious beliefs) were put into slave camps and put to death. Hitler did not hesitate to butcher innocent people, after receiving ‘authority’ to do so from the pope.

Throughout the centuries, Jesuits and Benedictines have sought out and murdered Believers and all who stood in their way – and they continue to do so today.  Roman Catholic leaders know that if they pronounce a curse on someone, it will have the desired effect.  They have such a stranglehold on people that the mere threat of excommunication is sufficient to make them do as they are told.

In charismatic churches everywhere, leaders are all-powerful.  They do not tolerate dissent and demand total obedience*. Followers have sold homes and moved when they are unsure it is what God wants them to do.  Yet, because leaders demand it, they have done it.  Followers are told that to disobey leaders is equal to disobeying God and that they will receive punishment if they do not do what they are told.  Disobedience to leaders, or disbelief in teachings, is proof that the person is not saved.  No wonder followers are afraid to speak out!  (* If not by word, then by attitude and ethos).

Can the reader see why I say that Copeland’s statement is not far removed from action?  People are already filled with fear and will not act against the wishes of the leaders.  If those same leaders call on them to pray against fellow Christians (who dissent), then they will inevitably do so, or risk being branded an unbeliever and shunned.  If those same leaders then called on them to actively oppose others, they would do so.  If they told them to be violent toward others, they would do so.  This is not far-fetched friends – it is within the realm of immediate possibility, for it is evidenced in the dynamics of the group.  Watch and wait.  Be diligent and be careful.

At the Right Hand of God?

Who is at the right hand of God, even now?  Yes, our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.  However much charismatic leaders preach this truth, they believe something else in their hearts.  They are telling people that God cannot save the world on His own, but He needs us (that is, charismatics) to help Him!  Of course, in order to help God we must first of all listen to the leaders and obey them. 

In saying this, they are setting themselves at the right hand of God.  God does not need anyone to ‘help’ Him to save others. Charismatics also say that they want to present the world (saved) to Jesus in the year 2000.  This statement makes me feel sick to my stomach.  It is such a wretched thing to say!  It is also what the Roman Catholic Church is saying.

Certain watchmen suggest that the whole charismatic scene was founded and is being led by Romanist infiltrators.  I find this easy to believe, given the history of Rome and of its soldiers – mainly Jesuits and Benedictines.  But even if this is not true, the effects are the same, as charismatics lead millions to Rome, in joint ventures of ‘faith’.  An antiChrist is one who stands in the place of Christ. The pope fills that position…and so do many charismatic leaders, increasingly so.  I am being blunt because the times demand it.

Not In OUR Church!

Some charismatic leaders who read this Article will shout in triumph “These things may be true in certain churches – but they are not true of ours!”  Do such men really think their disclaimer makes a difference?  It does not alter what has been said in any way.

It is a truism that the further away from the original source something is, the weaker its likeness tends to be (this is a generalisation).  Thus provincial Toronto Blessing-ism tends to be a watered-down version of the full horrors seen in, say, the USA.  Nevertheless, charismatic churches are all of the same spawn! They have the capability and the willingness to do the same things.  They are like accidents waiting to happen.

It is just a matter of time before the charismatic churches that are now relatively ‘normal’, enter more fully into the excesses of the wilder elements, because they share the same spiritual DNA!  The only solution is for these ‘weaker’ charismatic churches to come out of charismaticism and PROVE their adherence to scripture.

EXAMPLES OF CHARISMATIC BLASPHEMY AND LIES

It is not the main purpose of this Article to examine charismatic theology in detail, but to give a broad perspective.  What follows is a list of blasphemies and lies taught and practiced by charismatics generally. They have been authenticated by an ex-charismatic leader. In order to be brief, they are enumerated:

EDITOR’S COMMENTS

The evidence above, given by one who was himself a leader in charismatic circles, corresponds fully with what is already known generally, and with what this writer has discovered from a variety of sources over many years.  Without doubt, we can say that:

No doubt many charismatics will disclaim what has been said here. They will assert that their own particular church is not like the example described.  These pages speak of the general picture, not of particular churches.  However, those who are within charismatic circles must come out from them, before they are engulfed in the same heresies and Satanic ploys.  If a charismatic church does not employ the same tactics as are shown in this Article, but nevertheless uses Arminian preaching, then it is already badly tainted.  If it uses ‘strong’ leadership ideas, then it is already well on its way to being captured by the wider charismatic error. You can have gifts and use them without the need to be part of a distinctive and separate church called ‘charismatic’!

For non-charismatic churches I offer the following:

Do not deny what scripture clearly teaches – that ALL Believers have spiritual gifts; ALL Believers must display spiritual fruit, because these are the proof of their salvation and obedience; the gifts are NOT dead (or, salvation itself would be dead). The Holy Spirit is spirit and we ought to live in the spirit every day of our lives!  Charismaticism has stolen our legacy – we must now take it back.

A man at an airport was overheard boasting to his wife of his good fortune in buying a ‘genuine, solid-gold Rolex watch’ for only £4, off a street trader near a beach on Tenerife!  Those who have bought the charismatic tinsel and bluster will find the ‘gold’ rubbing off very quickly. That is why leaders are so eager to keep everyone in line; that is why they insist on holding continuous ‘testimony’ meetings to maintain interest.  Do not be fooled, friends.  Do not be tempted to open the box charismatic leaders have put ‘God’ in – for if you do, you will find it is full of worms!

Fraud, lies, arrogance, deception – these are the foundations of charismaticism.

Copyright © For the Love of His Truth 2008 – 2013  All Rights Reserved. No part of this page or its images may be reproduced without Grant and Elmarie Swart’s  express consent. See our contact us page for email details.

(By which I mean, a guide written by an idiot)

I might be wrong about a lot of this

 

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined. – Romans 8:28

Romans 8 has a section that is at once comforting and troubling. Paul talks about how we have received the gift of the spirit and that God’s will is to do good to the people who love him. But then Paul uses this strange word predestined. In other letters Paul writes that God chose his people before creation (2 Thes 2) and whilst it seems only correct that God has supreme authority over his creation, the idea that God hand picked the believers before they believed calls in to question just what faith is. In Romans 4 Paul says we are saved because of our faith in Jesus. And in Romans 10 he says that salvation comes to those who call on Jesus as Lord. But what does it mean for me to joyfully say ‘Jesus is Lord’, if predestination means that God always planned for me to do that and moreover that he planned for those who do not believe not to believe?
What kind of faith do I have, and what kind of confession can I make if I did not choose it? Surely I have some agency? I chose to follow Christ. I feel strongly that I want ownership of that choice because I want to say to God that I follow him willingly. But doesn’t predestination mean that it is in fact God who chose my choice. What kind of a follower am I if I didn’t make the choice to follow… I didn’t really make that choice.

That’s the central trouble with predestination, or at least predestination if we define it as God hand picking his people before we’ve even had a chance to hear the message. John Calvin is a looming figure in discussing the theology around this idea. So I should probably mention his name, by his reading of predestination, the picture we get puts a lot of emphasis on God’s children being a group chosen and blessed by God. Our coming to faith is an event pre-chosen by God that merely confirmed our prior earmarking for sonship.

The position makes sense of a lot of the language of scripture, phrases like the people of God being called ‘the elect’. But it seems to make a mockery of faith and of any concept of human choice. If our eternal destiny were merely the result of some hidden and seemingly arbitrary process carried out long ago, then who today can truly determine who is saved?

For me these issues cause me to differ – for the most part – from a purely Calvinist perspective. Here’s the thing, we’re dealing here with a much too simple view of predestination: One that makes out every human choice to be part of a deterministic web of inevitability with God at the centre spinning out the conclusion to every story. Yet such a god wouldn’t be so interested in what people actually did, nor would he be hurt when they turn away. Quite simply how could such a god be justified? The trait within humans that allows us to pursue or own will is really important in shaping my view of predestination. Read the account of the first people God made and you’ll see how he gives them a capacity for reason and more importantly choice. Not only does he give them the ability to make a choice but presents them with a scenario in which they could chose to reject him: At any time Adam and Eve could eat the fruit he had forbidden. God told Adam that he ate the fruit he would die. It was an opportunity to opt out of the destiny of life in Eden that God had put in place. (That same choice between God’s way and another gets presented to us daily.) The story of Adam and Eve – the Bible’s first story about the interaction between God and people establishes themes that remain at play throughout the rest of scripture and throughout our lives:
It’s about the tension between God’s plan for us and our ability to chose or reject it.

What then does that mean for predestination? Did God predestine us all for sonship but some miss out on that destiny because they’ve rejected it? Or perhaps something else is going on: Notice how in Romans 8 Paul links predestination with foreknowledge:

For those God foreknew he also predestined.

The link here seems to say that God set the destiny of those he knew would follow him. But by what means was and is their destiny secured? Is it merely by nomination? Nope, predestination was not merely a decision but an action of love put into motion before we were even born. An action outworked throughout God’s faithfulness to his people and that reached its apex at the cross of Jesus.

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace – Ephesians 1:3-7

So by this understanding, faith is paramount to our being counted as heirs as it is because of God’s foreknowledge of our faith that we are predestined. This is different from a Calvinistic view that draws a stark difference between foreknowledge and predestination. It emphasises predestination as being an act of God’s will actively determining future events in spite of human choice.
Yet the reading of predestination being guided by foreknowledge presents its own issues. Namely why should God do this?
OK, so to understand foreknowledge we need to accept that time is not experienced by God in the same way as we do. Isaiah 57 says that God lives in eternity, but of course we only live in the present. So in a sense we could say that anything God has done is true in any time, whether it has actually occurred yet from our standpoint or not. But why does Paul take particular time in a number of letters to assure recipients that their destiny was secured before the creation of the world. Why does he need to be so specific about when God chose us? I.e. why wasn’t our destiny set at the point at which we came to faith? If it is that choice and confession that our salvation through Christ relies upon then why not just predestinate us then? (predestinate? That cant be a real word)
While pondering this conundrum I couldn’t help but be overwhelmed by a couple of thoughts. Firstly that predestination understood this way is immensely comforting. Rather than seeming like a highly prejudiced and somewhat arbitrary selection process on God’s part it is instead God making good on his promise on relationship with us through Christ before I was even aware of it. Because I am adopted in his family he has carried me from eternity and is carrying me into eternity. This is true for all who count Jesus as Lord. That’s the extent of God’s love; it scales and crosses time enveloping every moment and every quark with an inescapable truth that he loves us and he has made a way for us to experience eternity with him through Jesus. Predestination is our name put into that book of life. Its in the psalms, its in the prophets, its in revelation. It is amazing to think that when the psalmist wrote of the book of life in psalm 68 that it is a book that already bore our names counted amongst the righteous even though we were yet to exist, let alone believe.
There is comfort in that thought but also there is a sense in which our destiny being set before the time we believed reminds us that it isn’t actually because of our deeds that we are saved. Though we chose to believe it was God that set that choice before us from eternity. It is only by his mercy that we can be saved, only by his grace through Jesus that we can choose life. Predestination reminds us that nothing we do can decide our status with God. It is not something God hands out by random ballot, nor something anyone can prove his or her own worth for. But it is something only the eternally loving God can offer and provide. In this sense it is totally by his decision and action and so in that sense Calvin has a point. It’s a realisation that challenged me when I was thinking about the subject. I was so sure that I wanted to own my choice to have faith, and while I think that its good that I wanted to stand before God and say that I followed him willingly, I also need to realise that the only choice I have made is to submit to his love and grace – he’s doing all the work, I’m just a sinner. If anybody owns my faith its God.

Yet foreknowledge based predestination does not give us a full and satisfactory answer to the problem, because the narrative of the Bible does not give us a picture of God as a being with perfect foreknowledge. Aside the actual future predictions of some prophets, we often read that God is surprised by the actions of people. There are even times when people pray and God seems to change his mind, but wouldn’t he have known he was going to do that all along?
Or take the example of Abraham, the first man expressly counted as righteous because of faith (Genesis 15:6). God tested him and it was only at the point when his knife was raised over the bound body of his son that God was sure of his faith.

“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” – Genesis 22:12

This doesn’t sound like a God of perfect foreknowledge. It strikes me that there are a number of ways to explain this apparent disparity between the claim of foreknowledge and the historical accounts of God’s not-knowledge. Some of those explanations are specific to the stories. Others have to do with getting all tied up with just what can be foreknown, for instance had God not tested Abraham, would he have been able to foreknow the test’s result? But those answers are nothing more than silly thought puzzles that present more problems then they solve. To illustrate the kinds of problems they create: if God did not have foreknowledge of potential events how would he have known to choose Abram, or Moses, or Gideon and not others?

I think that the answer to the question of God’s foreknowledge vs. his apparent lack thereof is one that we can only begin to answer in any kind of a satisfactory fashion by considering God’s heart and nature rather than by the consideration of any guessed mechanics.
What I reckon is that we’re dealing with a God who denies his own foreknowledge in order to give his creation true freedom. After all if all future history is laid out, then just what is the meaning of any choice in the present. It is clear from Genesis 2 and 3 (mentioned earlier) that God’s desire for the people he has made is that they should choose to be his, that they should come to him willingly. And so his denial of his own foreknowledge allows for people to have true freedom in that regard and also to be free to wrestle with and petition God.
That’s hard to get our heads around, why would a loving God give us that freedom to hurt ourselves? That needs its own massive blog post in order to unwrap but I think that we can say that what people choose to do is of primary importance to God and that therefore it is natural that he should give them opportunity to choose. Think of the story of the prodigal son. One of the strangest parts of the tale is the way that the father (representing God) just gives his son his part of the inheritance when asked. He doesn’t deny his son nor get angry that his child has essentially wished him dead. Instead he allows his son to choose his own path. I don’t get why he does this. It makes little logical sense but I think that is an accurate picture of what God does. The possibility of rebellion was not restricted from Adam and Eve and it is not so for us. It seems that God’s desire for us to be close to him is matched by his desire for us to WANT to be close to him. By denying his own foreknowledge in the stories of the Bible we see him able to extend every part of his love and every chance to people. There are no hopeless cases with God, he never stops extending his hand of love, even to those he (presumably) knows will reject it. His loves trumps his foreknowledge. He does not use it to do bad to people, only good. His foreknowledge only comes into play in order to lead and comfort his people (Daniel, revelation etc) and to make us his heirs (predestination). He does not use his knowledge of the future to punish or penalise people in the present, in those cases he seems to almost blind himself so that he can ever extend his love and offer of salvation. God absorbs the hurt we cause him and still wants to take us back. Just like Hosea who had to take back his wife every time she put it about even though he knew she’d just go and prostitute herself again.

How does God’s foreknowledge and predestination work? I don’t know that I can say for sure but I can say that however they work, they do so as expressions of his eternal love. I can say with complete assuredness that in all things God works for the good of those who love him.

Predestination to sonship is for those God choses, and those God has chosen are those who put their faith in Jesus and have received salvation through his death on the cross. This does make Calvin’s notion of God’s supreme authoritative choice completely true, but I hope I’ve argued that the story is a little more nuanced. It’s one of those strange answers in which seeming opposites can both be true. They’re both true most fundamentally not in some Doctor Who philosophy ‘timey wimey’ sense, but in an intense and profound sense in which God and his love are constantly seen to be supreme.

Merry Cartoonist Day!

I have had a life-long love affair with Calvin and Hobbes. I don’t remember when it started but it was probably far before I was old enough to understand the humor behind most of his work. If you haven’t lived on planet Earth or moved here after the early 90′s when Bill Watterson retired then here is a recap. Calvin is a very boy who drives everyone a little crazy with his ability to read the situation with startling aclarity and then make witty and accurate remarks about social or cultural folly. He has a stuffed animal named Hobbes who is his tether to reality and balances out his excitement with the perfect mix stability and playfulness. They have a variety of on-going situations and plots that are interwoven between childish exuberance for the world around and tongue in cheek pointing out the hilarity of what humans do and think is normal. One of my favorite on-going themes is about Calvin’s morose snowman dioramas that are both impractically large scaled and hilarious because of how most have no words but convey a very direct message. Genius! You can google it or here are a few to get you started.  

Hummingbird

Doing my feeding duty to stock up on cat food for my “Haustier” (translated from German that means house, or domestic animal), and replenishing a bag of bird seed as well, I wandered into an unknown aisle on my way to the pet supply store cashier, and came upon “Lizard Litter” — prompting a loud laugh at the sight. What will they think of next? I have been the reluctant recipient of various sections of lizard in the summertime before, proudly brought home by my cat Calvin — for which I praised him of course, as it was a present — but then disposed of right away, sometimes helping a tailless, but happy and relieved lizard regain his outdoor status. To keep them as “pets” seems against nature to me, but to actually sell lizard litter — absurd. What’s next, toilet paper and air freshener? I can’t make heads or tails of this matter.

A recent wave of warm weather, has caused the elms in my neighbors’ yard to sprout fresh green leaves, while at the same time dropping their blossoms. When a sudden wind gust comes up, it looks like it is snowing, as the little petals dance and drift through the air.

Many red flowers are blooming now, and this has attracted quite a few hummingbirds — my favorite birds. Sometimes they fight and chase each other at breathtaking speeds, all the while chirping at the top of their voice. God’s most delicate bird. One erred into my loft just last week, but got out by himself. I have had to help a few baby hummingbirds over the years, who would fly against the window, unable to find their way out. It is a miracle to hold something so soft and delicate in your hands. The hummingbird you see here, I carved and painted on a ceramic tile.

May red flowers and hummingbirds brighten your week, and don’t step in any lizard litter.

Commenting on this truth, Calvin expands on the relation between Law and Gospel given in this verse:

He has borrowed this similitude from the pictorial art; for a shadow here is in a sense different from what it has in Colossians 2:17; where he calls the ancient rites or ceremonies shadows, because they did not possess the real substance of what they represented. But he now says that they were like rude lineaments, which shadow forth the perfect picture; for painters, before they introduce the living colors by the pencil, are wont to mark out the outlines of what they intend to represent. This indistinct representation is called by the Greeks σκιαγραφία, which you might call in Latin, “umbratilem“, shadowy. The Greeks had also the εἰκὼν, the full likeness. Hence also “eiconia” are called images (imagines) in Latin, which represent to the life the form of men or of animals or of places.

The difference then which the Apostle makes between the Law and the Gospel is this, — that under the Law was shadowed forth only in rude and imperfect lines what is under the Gospel set forth in living colors and graphically distinct. He thus confirms again what he had previously said, that the Law was not useless, nor its ceremonies unprofitable. For though there was not in them the image of heavenly things, finished, as they say, by the last touch of the artist; yet the representation, such as it was, was of no small benefit to the fathers; but still our condition is much more favorable. We must however observe, that the things which were shown to them at a distance are the same with those which are now set before our eyes. Hence to both the same Christ is exhibited, the same righteousness, sanctification, and salvation; and the difference only is in the manner of painting or setting them forth.

 -Commentary on Hebrews 10:1

My wife and I went to the Getty Museum a couple of years ago to see the Rembrandt exhibit. There was a room full of his marvelous sketches, each one distinct and the result of crushing brilliance. I could have studied them for hours to great profit. And yet, when we stepped into the room with his finished products, the difference was unmistakable. Where before was the outline, here was the fullness, the brilliance, the subtle extravagance of his handiwork. Both unmistakably came from the same hand, while the one clearly outshone the other.

Calvin tells us here that in the same way, the Law is good and true, pointing forward to Christ. But the Gospel sets out a salvation in “living colors” that is “graphically distinct”, where there were only “lineaments” before. As different and superior as the sketch is to the finished product, so Christ’s work is from the sacrifices that prefigured it. In fact, I would argue that that even that picture falls short of what Hebrews or Calvin are teaching us here. Instead, as far as the sketch is from the living model, so the shadow of heavenly realities found in the Law, while faithful, inevitably falls short of the beauty of our living, breathing salvation in Jesus Christ.

Soli Deo Gloria

Are you looking for Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug we find a good product for you that it have guarantee by trusted supplier. We have been suggest to you to buy at .., online stores are reliable and have a lot of experience in selling products.

My team has been evaluating the Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug is a high quality product with the best features. But if you are still unsure of the Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug, you can prove by clicking the read more button below. You will see and read it for yourself on testimony from consumers who have bought Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug, and reviews can prove the value and reliability of the product. We do not want you to miss a great opportunity to get the Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug.

Also Read : Best Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug, Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug Shop, New Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug, where to buy Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug, Calvin Klein Home Lunar LUN1 2.3 Feet by 7 1/2 Feet Rectangle Rug Discount

They are leaving the church because Christianity as presented to them does not answer their big questions, and it does not seem to prove relevant in the world today. Young people continue to grow more curious and skeptical, and the church does not seem to have an answer to their deep, dangerous thoughts.

The young people in the world today are hungry. Young Christians and atheists alike are hungry for something solid, and all the while the church seems to only want to drink the milk that they were raised with, the theology that goes down easy. The young people have doubts, worries about the nature of God, how he works, why he works, and questions like: “why can’t I be a Democrat?” “why did God get nice all of the sudden?” “how does the brain fit in?”  “why Jesus?” “why evil?” “what does he want to do with me?” “is Jesus really a soft-spoken white man who just happened to be born in Jerusalem?” “what about science?” and countless more that they don’t feel are answered by felt-board or cross-stitch theology. If “mainstream Christianity” declared Rob Bell a witch and burned him for simply wondering about the existence of a physical hell, what reason should young seekers have to feel the same will not happen to them if they express their doubts about the existence of God?

The tragic part of the exodus of the deep-thinkers is that most of them do not even know that Christian thinkers before them have encountered the same questions they are. Most of them do not know that existentialism came from the ideas of a genius Christian philosopher and theologian, or about the amazing minds of men like Tillich, Barth and Aquinas. Many do not even know that the man behind Narnia used to be an atheist–and wrote many strikingly profound books on theology. Depending on their denominational lines, many will never hear of the ideas of Calvin, and many will never hear of the ideas of Zwingli. We need to allow seekers to seek, and introduce them to seekers who have sought before them.

Francis Chan, Shane Claiborne, and Rick Warren preach great messages. They write poignant, insightful books and lead exemplary lives that point to God’s glory. Still, when you walk into a Christian bookstore and struggle to find a book that pre-dates the millenia, let alone the 20th century, Christianity is selling itself short to the masses. Christians have been struggling to grasp the nature of the divine since the moment of the Ascension, if not before, and not all of the great thinkers have been published by Zondervan, or pastored a mega-church, or started a non-profit. Older and different perspectives, or at least open-mindedness, may be exactly what the younger, seeking generation needs. In fact, it may be just what the church needs.

In this blog, I am going to frequently explore some of the more original and complex thoughts produced by Christian theologians such as Soren Kierkegaard, Paul Tillich, C.S. Lewis, Karl Barth, Thomas Aquinas, Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, Philip Melancthon, and more as I read their works and learn from their reflections on God and faith, even though I will not always agree.

More than that, I want my life, and this blog to serve as a catalyst for my generation, and the generations above me and below me, to put down the milk, and mature in our faith to enjoy the solid food. Through this, I believe many seeking young people will no longer come to the conclusion that they are too liberal, or too intellectual, or too skeptical to remain in, or join, the church. Once serious Christians start to eat healthier, others may be more likely to join the table.

^“12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! ¹³ Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. ¹⁴ But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.” Hebrews 5:12-14

“The Zurichers have again petitioned our friends here with great earnestness not to hinder my departure. They have also in very urgent letters, addressed to myself, entreated me not to reject this call. Our friends here easily understand that this is done through you. Discovering, therefore, as I do your unceasing activity in this affair, I cannot avoid believing that you are suspicious of me and the others, which is not right. In order to overcome this suspicion, I wrote at once to inform you that I have been sent to this place at the express desire of Philip. I might have refused if my conscience had suffered it; for, although I excused myself with all earnestness, I would not go to extremities, lest I might have the appearance of resisting both man and God. Hither therefore have I been sent, or rather driven. I am now as it were fettered, and these fetters I cannot for the time shake off, however greatly I may wish it. But I will endeavor to loose them by degrees. As I see that even haste is in your eyes delay, I originally formed the resolution of travelling direct to Geneva. Many circumstances however require me to go home first, and I will so arrange it as to reach Strasburg before the holidays. I will preach there during the fair, and then quickly take my flight. You cannot, I think, require more of me, unless perhaps it delights you to vex me by complaints,—satisfied if you do not kill me outright. In the mean time I shall endeavor to bear it, if I cannot induce you to treat me with a little more fairness. Still I would fain obtain this from you, not to scourge me so thoroughly, except when I deserve it. Nothing could be more respectful than the letter from Zurich, but believe me it was altogether superfluous. Our friends here show, in a variety of ways, that they are no less anxiously considering how to retain me in this city.”

Higher waist than a hipster to give the added coverage.

Click here for more information

Apparel
Bikinis, Bottom, Calvin, High-Waist, Klein, Swim, Swim wear, Womens
Awesome stuff down here

Career dress

Click here for more information

Apparel
Belted, Calvin, color block dresses, Color-Block, Dress, dress trends, Klein, Womens
Awesome stuff down here

Career dress

Apparel
Calvin, color block dresses, Color-Block, Dress, dress trends, Klein, Womens
Awesome stuff down here