I don’t know that I’ve ever done a book review on this blog, but there is a first time for everything, and A Cry in the Wilderness is a exceptional book.
A Cry in the Wilderness is a call to return to Biblical Christianity. David Littleford points out that too many churches today have settled for mere programs and rituals. Littleford exhorts us above all else to daily seek an experiential relationship with the Lord.
This thought began with a chapter from G.K. Chesterton’s book “All Things Considered” where he speaks on the topic of martyrdom. Summarized he states modern “martyrdom” lacks any potent worth because it no longer requires the same commitment it once did; intense physical pain and mutilation or a tortured death. Also, I would like to add that the suffering involved with most modern protests (what he refers to as martyrdom) is self-inflicted. Thus, the onlooker is not moved to any genuine sense of empathy with the protestor.
Chesterton uses the example of people chaining themselves to street posts or being arrested at town hall meetings for the Women’s Suffrage movement and, I would guess from his description of these of protests, he would have thought the same of the Civil Rights movement as well. It is important to note that he states his dislike for the form of protest does not mean he disagrees with the cause, but the way in which the protestors are presenting their cause. Basically he sees it as a waste, and a boisterous way to not accomplish anything. Since the sufferings of the protestors are merely inconveniences, they lack the ability to change the hearts of the onlookers and thus are pointless.
Though I agree to an extent with his conclusion, I also found myself thinking that there was a secondary worth that could be applied to the modern martyrdom which Chesterton missed. That value being the ability to bring awareness that did not exist before hand in the populace toward the cause of the protesting individual. Even if there is a lack of conviction created because, for all intents and purposes, the punishment received was both lacking in the finality of death and also is often self-inflicted in causality, the protest can still make people ask why the protestor would want to suffer that inconvenience. It might cause those at large who, at best, have only a base understanding of the protestor’s issue to take a second closer inspection of the rationale behind the protest.
For this secondary value to apply to a protest or martyrdom, the majority of the public, or a large minority of the public, must be mostly unaware of the issue being protested or, at least, possess a lackadaisical attitude of foreknowing and disinterest. Basically, they have to feel like they already know all there is to know about the topic and don’t really care about the details. With the example that Chesterton gives of the Women’s Suffrage movement and my personal addition of the Civil Rights movement, we can see this value added. Most men believed they knew the intellectual ability of women, and knew their place in the world. The women’s cause was dying, not because a lack of validity, but because a lack of interest and the possession of a pre-held belief by the ruling party (men) that their bias was factually accurate. By getting arrested and being able to voice their opinions in the media because of those actions, the protestors were able to show the intelligence of women to be on par with the men, and that their cause was vastly misunderstood.
The same can be said of the Civil Rights movement. Having pictures and video of firehoses turned to full blast on citizens merely standing around, or watching the act of police brutality enacted on peaceful demonstrations, showed the rest of the country that there indeed was still more freedom and equality that needed to be enacted on behalf of the African-American. What actions and lifestyles many people alien to the south thought to be either an exaggeration or conjecture was proven to be accurate and heinous. These peaceful protests did not move the nation to action because the average person felt protestors being sprayed with a fire hose or being temporarily thrown in jail to be so gallant and fearless an act that there must be some truth in the protestor’s cause. The reaction to the protests showed that the basis of the cause was in fact accurate and true, and that the cause itself, if true, was worthy of action being taken on its behalf.
This is where I then began to think of the Occupy Wall Street movement. I began to wonder if it met any of these criteria required for a protest to hold value. I do believe that some of the involved individuals had good hearts and good personal reasons for participation, but as a movement and a protest, it lacked any essential value to cause change. Let’s break it down.
Basically, the move was to camp out on major city streets to protest big business and rich tycoons. First off, we must see whether this modern martyrdom met the criteria expounded by Chesterton. Did they suffer so mightily that it would move the onlooker to believe there was a potent underlying truth to the protestor’s convictions, that only the truth of the conviction alone could cause a person to endure such hardship? I try to write this without sounding dismissive… um, no it didn’t. I said I was trying to write it without being dismissive… not that I would be able to.
Camping out in the middle of a populated city, with other humans to interact with, with sleeping bags, and many modern camping amenities is not suffering for your cause. Having to poop in a corner for a week is not moving any rational human to tears for your sufferings. In fact, many of the occupiers were being paid by unions and other special interest groups. So they were basically working. Those poor souls! Getting paid to camp out must have been life altering. Seeing as many families choose to go camping and “rough it out” in the wilderness where there are bears, wolves, snakes, etc, doing the same thing in a very controlled (at least in a natural sense) environment is anything but impressive. No rational person could say that OWS movement qualifies in any way, shape, or form for our first criteria of a worthy protest.
If anything, the fact that many of these people felt that they were experiencing some great hardship for their cause shows the lack of validity in their grasp of the society. They merely sound like spoiled brats. “You aren’t giving me a job? Then I will camp out for a few weeks to show you! Just think how upset I must be to put my self through such amazing hardship just to get my point across! I might even stop tweeting from my iphone for a day or two!” This might be one of the most damning aspects upon their protest. The very fact that they think they are experiencing great hardship as a sign of protest makes a mockery of their underlying purpose.
If the OWS movement fails to meet the first requirement for validity, maybe they find their worth in the second. Perhaps the movement brought to light more information, or more truth about a relatively dismissed cause. Perhaps the U.S. had fallen asleep and disregarded the problem of lacking job availability for qualified people. I would say in this aspect too the movement failed. First off, the movement merely produced awareness of the problem, not the solution for it. The movement could not agree on a logical and realistic goal to fix the problem, other than everyone agreeing the government should somehow force large businesses to hire more people and pay executives less. Not really a solution at all. In both the Women’s Suffrage and Civil Rights movements, not only was the problem exemplified and highlighted, but also a legitimate solution was provided. These protestors were suffering for a solution, not to just whine about a problem. Some members of the OWS movement may disagree with me on this point, but I have heard much of their rhetoric from people genuinely involved, and not one piece of useful solution was offered. Just a basic “the problem needs to be fixed” line.
So, did OWS bring to light a problem that was disregarded or ignored by the general populace? Maybe it was here that they found their worth. If any member of the OWS movement were to say yes to this I would have to call them arrogant beyond measure. They must think themselves to have a secret knowledge of the economy or a superior grasp on its workings. This movement occurred in the midst of one of the worst economic turns of our lifetime. Joblessness was so bad that the unemployment numbers began to fall simply because people gave up even the hope of getting a job and stopped registering with the government that they were unemployed. Politicians from both sides were ardently proclaiming their fixes to the jobless rate. Both conservative and liberal were united in the concept that the country needed to have jobs created, jobs that were lasting, and sustainable. Both agreed (at least publicly) that big businesses that were failing and had to stop paying their executives so much, while firing the average worker. Reports were all over the news nightly that the approval rate for all politicians were dropping like mercury in Alaska. Let’s be honest. The nation knew that both business spending and jobless rates were horrid long before the OWS movement reared it head.
The movement also failed to provide any genuinely new information to the discussion. If anything they created lies and caused more discord and dysfunction. They claimed to represent the 99% of people who weren’t wealthy on an elitist level. But we all know darn well that the movement supported the beliefs of less than that. I would say they struggled to match the hearts of at least 50% of the common men and women. I am broke as a joke and all of my friends are easily either middle class or lower middle class. None of them agreed with the movement in a manner that would cause support. Sure we all agreed that CEOs shouldn’t be making millions while the business fails, but our solution wasn’t to ask the government to force the hand of companies to create jobs, or to take tax payers money and artificially inflate jobs for a bit. The idea that the 99% of Americans were all in agreement that the government should act to take financial action against the 1% on behalf of the 99% is a flat out lie. Plus, I would go as far as to say the government IS part of the 1%.
There is no bigger business in our country than the government. It takes in the most money, it wastes the most money, it is failing worse than any of the fortune 500 businesses, and yet the congress gets paid like CEO’s. Only there is a difference, the government gets a military and police force to procure its every whim. No other business that takes money from people, gets such a privilege. So to ask, the biggest and most powerful business in the nation to take action against big businesses is in itself a little silly. But under the political system that we have, it is at least an understandable misunderstanding.
My point, being there was no new information (legitimate at least) gained from the movement. There was no enlightenment of previously ignored information. They by the very act of protesting did not present the problem for the viewing public. In all reality the movement was destined to fail from the beginning. It did not have enough support of the general public to cause politicians to quake in fear. It did not have enough self-sacrifice and suffering to move people in a position of power to change their minds. It did not re-educate, or even enhance our original knowledge of either the problem or the solution. All it did was put more needles, poop, and rape protection tents in our streets for a few weeks.
You know what? I take it all back. This movement showed us EXACTLY what the problem was. We have grown into a culture that is spoiled to the point where we believe taking a camping vacation in a public area is suffering for our cause. That taking a couple weeks to whine is the same thing as taking legitimate action to come up with rational solutions. We have grown to a point where we believe that if we simply put the effort into a degree we should be guaranteed a job, despite if there is economic viability for such an idea. Let’s ignore that almost everyone now has pretty valid access to a college degree, we should all be hired! After all we all believe we are all special, no matter how average we really are. Being genuinely special takes loads of effort and we don’t think we should be judged on such things.
We have grown to be followers. Instead of taking the knowledge from those degrees and starting our own businesses, we would rather be lorded over by a boss that was just forced to give us a job they couldn’t afford (at least in their minds). We are no longer creative. We don’t invent jobs, we whine to the government to do that for us. We look to the government to force other businesses to meet our wants. Instead of boycotting their services (seriously every other OWS person had an Iphone) we would rather use them then whine about it. We have grown lazy, unwilling to suffer for a good cause, or even unwilling to protest for a good cause, because it might induce genuine suffering. In the end the OWS was a brilliant protest. It showed us the problem plaguing our country in its truest form. And for that I thank them.
It’s crazy how I end up getting my material for blogs these days. I’m going to warn you that this is a relatively long post with lots of scriptures. It may take 10-15 minutes to read. With scriptures written out it is about 5 and a half pages on Microsoft Word.
So a friend of mine made a very good and thought provoking post on Facebook.
It said “How many Christians would watch “The Big Bang Theory” if it went by the title “Sorry Genesis, this is how intelligent people know the universe began?”
I agree with his sentiment. We are so easily duped into participating in the world’s ideals and morals through the guise of harmless entertainment (or in some cases no guise of harmlessness needed.) I would like to go ahead and state I don’t think that any show, or song not directly Christianized or if something is simply “secular” that it is automatically evil. However, this post is about the underlying thought process that we should be constantly undertaking as we experience secular media.
Anyway, one of his followers replied with two return posts. (I directly copy and pasted the posts because I didn’t feel like retyping them. So please ignore the grammar and spelling errors.)
“Its just like reading a fiction book Scott B! We know its not true its just a silly show!”
Then after a couple of replies “Thats definitely a conversation worth having but most of the people I discuss it with do know its not true and where my heart is. I would never lead someone to believe that I thought a silly show like that is true, just like Harry Potter, etc… I’ve seen some people, christian and non-christian, get more offensive watching a football game!”
I’m going to start with the fact that I agree with her (it was a her) that Christians can be just as offensive watching football. However this simply proves that we Christians should clean up how we act when watching football. What it doesn’t do is excuse away other future offenses.
Secondly let’s touch on the logic here. Basically stated, if we don’t believe something is real, or we don’t believe that something is harmful to us, then we cannot be affected by it. I gave the analogies of this concept being equivalent to us saying that if we don’t believe in calories then we can eat all we want, or if we don’t believe in gravity then we can jump off a building and fly. (Though I forgot to add in the jumping off a building part in the original post.) I think we can all agree that line of logic is faulty. Just because we decide to not “believe” in something, that does not cause it to cease its existence. God doesn’t cease to exist or lose His power just because atheists refuse to admit His existence. Jesus’ sacrifice and victory do not lose their power because two-thirds of the world does not believe in Christianity. So why do we, as Christians, believe that line of reasoning applies to participation in the fun things we like which might have deeper consequences than just their enjoyment?
But an argument could be made “She is right! Neither macro-evolution as purported by the ‘big bang theory’ or witchcraft presented in Harry Potter are real. So what is the harm?” Well, I would say first that you would be supporting people who are selling those lies to others, thus allowing it to spread. Secondly, the Bible clearly states that A) witchcraft is very real and B) we must be on constant alert as to what we open our souls to through our eyes and ears. I will focus mostly on the witchcraft concept because it is easier to make my point using such a potent point of reference as opposed to the “lie of Macro-evolution.” Not that both aren’t interchangeable in this example, but one is clearer and would take less examples to make the same point with. But if you know me you know I am not merely going to give you these opinions without proving them scripturally. So let’s do that.
First off, we will look at scriptural evidence that witchcraft is real, even after Christ’s resurrection. (In other words it wasn’t something that died out after the resurrection.)
Lev. 19:26 – “You shall not eat anything with the blood, nor practice divination or soothsaying.”
Lev. 19:31, “Do not turn to mediums or spiritists; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.”
Lev. 20:6, ‘As for the person who turns to mediums and to spiritists, to play the harlot after them, I will also set My face against that person and will cut him off from among his people.”
Lev. 20:27, ‘Now a man or a woman who is a medium or a spiritist shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones, their bloodguiltiness is upon them.’”
Isaiah 8:19-20, “And when they say to you, “Consult the mediums and the spiritists who whisper and mutter,” should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living? 20To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.”
Those were all Old Testament examples, but it shows divination and soothsaying existed but an even better example of Old Testament witchcraft is Saul and the Witch of Endor in 1 Samuel 28. (I’m starting in verse 3)
“3Now Samuel was dead, and all Israel had mourned for him and buried him in Ramah, his own city. And Saul had put the mediums and the wizards out of the land.
4And the Philistines assembled and came and encamped at Shunem; and Saul gathered all Israel and they encamped at Gilboa.
5When Saul saw the Philistine host, he was afraid; his heart trembled greatly.
6When Saul inquired of the Lord, He refused to answer him, either by dreams or by Urim [a symbol worn by the priest when seeking the will of God for Israel] or by the prophets.
7Then Saul said to his servants, Find me a woman who is a medium [between the living and the dead], that I may go and inquire of her. His servants said, Behold, there is a woman who is a medium at Endor.
8So Saul disguised himself, put on other raiment, and he and two men with him went and came to the woman at night. He said to her, Perceive for me by the familiar spirit and bring up for me the dead person whom I shall name to you.
9The woman said, See here, you know what Saul has done, how he has cut off those who are mediums and wizards out of the land. Why then do you lay a trap for my life to cause my death?
10And Saul swore to her by the Lord, saying, As the Lord lives, there shall no punishment come to you for this.
11The woman said, Whom shall I bring up for you? He said, Bring up Samuel for me.
12And when the woman saw Samuel, she screamed and she said to Saul, Why have you deceived me? For you are Saul!
13The king said to her, Be not afraid; what do you see? The woman said to Saul, I see a god [terrifying superhuman being] coming up out of the earth!
14He said to her, In what form is he? And she said, An old man comes up, covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground and made obeisance.
15And Samuel said to Saul, Why have you disturbed me to bring me up? Saul answered, I am bitterly distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and God has departed from me and answers me no more, either by prophets or by dreams. Therefore I have called you, that you may make known to me what I should do.
16Samuel said, Why then do you ask me, seeing that the Lord has turned from you and has become your enemy?
17The Lord has done to you as He said through me He would do; for [He] has torn the kingdom out of your hands and given it to your neighbor David.
18Because you did not obey the voice of the Lord or execute His fierce wrath upon Amalek, therefore the Lord has done this thing to you this day.
19Moreover, the Lord will also give Israel with you into the hands of the Philistines, and tomorrow you and your sons shall be with me [among the dead]. The Lord also will give the army of Israel into the hands of the Philistines.
20Then immediately Saul fell full length upon the earth floor [of the medium's house], and was exceedingly afraid because of Samuel’s words. There was no strength in him, for he had eaten nothing all day and all night.
21The woman came to Saul, and seeing that he was greatly troubled, she said to him, Behold, your handmaid has obeyed you, and I have put my life in my hands and have listened to what you said to me.”
Here we see that if nothing else, the lie of witchcraft was legitimate. We see that Saul had to kick out the wizards etc. Even if you believe she was faking it (which is pretty lame seeing as the Bible makes no such statement of clarification in that direction at all. It tells this story as if it were real, not as if Saul was fooled.) But even if she was faking it the concept of witchcraft was real enough. But let’s look into the New Testament and see what it has to say.
Acts 8:9,18-22, “Now there was a certain man named Simon, who formerly was practicing magic in the city, and astonishing the people of Samaria, claiming to be someone great . . . 18Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, 19saying, “Give this authority to me as well, so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” 20But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! 21“You have no part or portion in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. 22“Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray the Lord that if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you.”
Acts 13:6, “And when they had gone through the whole island as far as Paphos, they found a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet whose name was Bar-Jesus.”
Rev. 9:21, “and they did not repent of their murders nor of their sorceries nor of their immorality nor of their thefts.”
Rev. 21:8, “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
Rev. 22:15, “Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying.”
Why did God warn us of sorcery in Rev. if it doesn’t exist? The same goes for Paul. Why did he warn the Galatians in chapter 5 verses 19 and 20 against sorcery if it weren’t a real threat?
“9Now the doings (practices) of the flesh are clear (obvious): they are immorality, impurity, indecency,
20Idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger (ill temper), selfishness, divisions (dissensions), party spirit (factions, sects with peculiar opinions, heresies),”
So let’s be honest here. It is overwhelmingly a scriptural truth that witchcraft is a threat to the Christian and it still exists. (We can at least admit it is a device used by Satan to deceive, if for some reason you still don’t want to admit its actual manifestation)
So with that said all that is left is to decide if it is actually all that important to guard our hearts. How big a deal is it to God that we watch what we let into our souls (intelligence and emotions)?
Proverbs 4:23 – “Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life.”
Romans 12:2 – “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.”
Romans 10:17 – “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.”
(So we see that faith is established via hearing {which in this context means the intake of truth, but we only really hear if it is God’s word that we are listening to}. Thus, what we hear helps to determine what we have faith in and what we don’t. It may be a small difference but when Jesus says all we need is a mustard seed’s worth to move mountains, and we are spiritually weak within our own power, every little bit makes a huge difference.)
1 Peter 1:13-15 – “Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
14 As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:
15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;”
I could keep going but let’s all just agree that it is undeniably a biblical principle to “guard your heart with all diligence”. Let’s add into the mixture the fact that the Bible says Satan is a thief (John 10:10 though some dispute Jesus was talking about Satan), appears as an angel of light in order to deceive (2 Cor. 11:12-15), and desires to devour as if he were a lion (1 Peter 5:8). Also note that Peter tells us to “be sober, be vigilant” to thwart Satan in the last scripture. Sober is a state of mind and saying we are to be vigilant tells us how earnestly we are to stay alert.
So with Satan out there just trying to sneak into our lives through any means necessary, and both Paul and Peter using incredibly potent words to describe the necessity of guarding our hearts and minds, can there be any more doubt that A) Satan WILL use any form of entry including entertainment to get a foothold, and B) That we are to be EXTRA cautious that doesn’t happen?
Think about this. We as Christians believe that praise and worship can bring in the very presence of God. But then we act like music with lyrics that are ungodly or even from people with just an unrenewed spirit is harmless?! We act like The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, are great tools for God, and a great way to slowly change people’s minds about Christianity, but then we say Harry Potter, Big Bang Theory, The Golden Compass, etc couldn’t have the same seeping result for Satan even though we are clearly and intently warned against that very thing in scripture! This reasoning is simply illogical.
We, as Christians, who are part of a dying Church (both numerically and spiritually), have got to stop settling for what makes us feel good or popular. Yes, all our friends may talk about the funny shows and we will feel left out, or they may even think we are being “holier-than-thou” if we are simply honoring God’s Word. But we have got to stop trying to be relevant, and start being godly. Do you know what will really change people’s lives more than them thinking we are one of them? Them knowing that we actually are different and that God dwells with us. The world is actually seeking something different, not simply another shade of the same thing. So, it’s not a big deal if they think something is wrong with us when we have high standards. Because in the end the presence of God does more for the evangelistic side of our relationships than all the idle chit chat about shows and music we all like. I’m not saying be an elitist and aloof from the world, but I am saying follow God’s word and to be very alert with what we allow into our souls.
When something as blatant as Harry Potter, which Rowling has admitted in interviews has real witchcraft spells from real life witchcraft books, and that it was intended to make children comfortable with homosexuality, is widely accepted by the Church because “we don’t believe in that stuff”, we are in serious trouble. We are letting our guard down and letting the enemy sneak in the gates.
Here is what that mentality says. Either A) God is a liar and the scriptures are lies, B) Scripture is unreliable and doesn’t actually relate what the perfect all-knowing God thinks, C) We love ourselves more than God, or D) we just happened to be scripturally illiterate about the subject. I would like to state that I do not believe the last two states of logic to always be intentional. I would say that at some point in time (and that point in time being somewhat recurring) we all fall under C) and until we are taught scriptural truths we all fall under D) as well. So this is not to say people who have said these things or believe these ideas are evil, or stupid. They are simply human and were not following God in these particular thoughts.
But really, shouldn’t we, as children of the Most High, be pushing ourselves to grow as close as possible to Him? Shouldn’t we be taking every chance we can to delve deeper into His presence? Let’s stop trying to fit in with the World’s standards, and stop trying to baby our flesh nature, and start really taking God at His Word, and then we can see the fullness of what He wants to do through us.
I was reading a chapter of A.W. Tozer’s “Experiencing the Presence of God” titled “Hindrances on the pathway to God’s presence” and found some good quotes to express exactly what I have thought, said, and written in the past. It is always good to see other godly men and women who have had the same revelation, and are able to voice that revelation clearly. Like the Bible points out in Proverbs 11:14 and 15:22 wisdom is found in the multitude of council. So with that in mind here are some potent quotes that quite clearly outline and get to the core of what is ailing today’s Church.
(Up to this quote he had been talking about how we are preoccupied with so many other things. Making a living, having fun, growing our families, making friends, engaging in hobbies etc. Basically, God gets whatever time and emotions we have left over.)
P. 36 “The simple fact is that God gets the left overs, never the main meal. God never gets anything new. He gets the hand-me-downs. We give to God that which we do not need in stead of giving to Him that which we need, thus earning a crown for ourselves.”
P. 38 “The difference between spiritual things and earthly things is that the things of the spirit are so modest; the things of the spirit are not pushing in on you; they are not singing commercials to you; they are not knocking on your door and urging you to buy; they are simply waiting for you to notice.“
And thus why so few Christians find themselves enveloped in the spirit realm and in His Spirit. We must seek it earnestly, not simply await for them to come barging in like every other stimuli. His presence must be sought like silver and gold, for it is even far more precious. Think about it. If someone left a million dollars hidden in your house, would you simply look for an hour then proclaim you are bored and move on to something else? Or would you seek night and day, until you had found the prize set before you?
P.40 “Society is an elaborate conspiracy to make us alike. Society is in a conspiracy to make us all bad; not too bad because if we got too bad we become a problem to the police. But not too good, for if we got too good, we are fanatical, so they say. So society wants to keep us nice, trimmed down, going to church, supporting boys’ clubs and girls’ clubs and hospitals. Certainly those things are all right. The general society wants to keep us just good enough not to be a problem to the police but bad enough not to bother their conscience.”
This is why the question “What do you want people to say about your life and your message?” is so erroneous. Because it gives the world, governed by the fallen human nature, the power to control we who should only answer to God. This is exactly why no amount of sociological ministry books can aid us in our quest for His presence, nor in our evangelism. Because no rationalization can convince a man’s heart of the inherent Truth of Christ like a move of the Spirit can. Nothing is as valuable as an actual experience with God. Telling people about God can never trump meeting Him themselves. Plus, as I stated before, if you gauge your success in life based on whether the world accepts your message and lifestyle, then your message and lifestyle will begin to reflect the world’s system a.k.a. fallen human nature. Your life will conform to their design not God’s. This is why we, the Church, are failing to experience His presence. Our lives emanate a fallen nature; the nature that opposes God as it drives and fights against Him. We cannot be acceptable to both the world and God. They are complete opposites. I am not saying that we are to intentionally make ourselves out to be goofballs, or separatists. We are called to he IN the world. But we are equally called to not be OF the world. We must stop trying to meet the world on their terms. That is an earthly way of thinking. That is a flesh driven manner of ministry and of life. We must begin to value God’s presence above all else. Like I have stated in my book: we must first have His presence in our lives ourselves before we can ever hope to relay it to theirs. We must give up control. Whether it is in evangelism, our sermons, our entertainment, our diets, our lives, etc. we must seek Him first, and then trust and know that He knows best. He will work all things out for the good of those who love and serve Him.
Mathew 6:33 - “33But seek ([a]aim at and strive after) first of all His kingdom and His righteousness ([b]His way of doing and being right), and then all these things [c]taken together will be given you besides.”
Ok, here is my take on Tebow’s Spiritual life and how he portrays it in public view. Anyone who says Tebow is too forward with his beliefs is simply not watching his interviews and media events in their entirety and in context. They are merely letting the hype cloud their minds. If you actually watch his media events in their full context, he very rarely (if ever, from what I have been able to find, which is most if not all of his public interviews) offers up lengthy explanations about his Christianity unrequested. When Tebow is asked about football, he answers with a football answer. However, (and this is a big however in this discussion) when the media member asks Tebow about his Christianity, he won’t shy away and hide his faith either. He is who he is, and he answers any question about his faith honestly.
But if you look at the actual tape of what Tebow says during interviews, he never answers a football question with an answer pushing Christianity out of context with the question.
For instance if the interviewer asks:
“How did you make that drive at the end of the game when you were struggling to move the ball all game long?”
Tebow answers:
“Well the team really stepped up to the plate. We just believed we could make the drive and play to the top of our abilities. The Coaches put us in a position to win and the defense got us the ball back.”
What Tebow does not answer is:
“Well I prayed and asked Jesus to get us a win. And because I believe that Christ is the Messiah and the only way to God, He sent angels down to make the other team fumble and make my passes more accurate than they had been all game. If you also want to be successful at whatever you put your hand to you too should accept Christ as your savior. I will now lead us all in prayer.”
He has NEVER tried to push his Christianity on the public through a football interview.
The reason that it can seem like he is so forward about his beliefs is two fold. The first part of this equation is how the media has made a huge story about his faith. They, NOT TEBOW, have pushed this aspect of his life into the lime light. They are the ones who publish videos of his mission trips or his speaking engagements at FCA (Fellowship of Christian Athletes) dinners all over the television. And for the record, both of those events are exactly where you SHOULD be talking about Christ and the effect He has on one’s life. As a matter of fact, at these events, Tebow takes the exact opposite approach to his ministry as opposed to the method his detractors accuse him of. He speaks of how meaningless the athletic accolades and rewards are, and that the only thing that truly makes him happy is his relationship with Christ. He NEVER, (let me type that again in all caps for extra effect here), NEVER equates belief in Christ to success on the field or stardom etc. If anything he tries to separate them.
When Tebow does speak at any length about his faith in Christ it is because the media personnel asks a question directly about that subject, or they themselves talk about it, make reference to it, and show video of it to then ask for a comment. But Tebow’s comments about Christianity are never unprompted and presumptive.
The second part of this equation as to why many feel Tebow is too forward with his religion lies within the detractors themselves. They are personally uncomfortable with any religious talk, or at least Christianity. So any mention of a persons belief, and how large a part it may play in their lives, then makes the hearer feel uncomfortable. The fact that Tebow takes a maximum of two seconds after a touchdown or a win to point to the sky, or that he takes anywhere from 10-20 seconds and kneels in prayer by himself on the sideline amidst all the other players, brings out a level of discomfort. Basically the fact that he is religious at all in a public view is too public for their tastes. This attitude results because they are either simply insecure in their own beliefs and feel threatened or challenged by others who do possess strong, convicted faith in their differing spiritual beliefs, or they don’t understand how personal and real a spiritual belief can be. (As a passionate Christian myself I would go as far to say how REAL and consuming it is when it is Christianity.) I think Tebow had a great answer to this query when asked about some retired ahtelete’s comments to the effect that he showed his spiritual beliefs too much when he points to the sky, praying on the sideline and, sometimes thanking God briefly after a win (which loads of other athletes do.) Tebow answered (really close paraphrase) “Do you only say ‘ I love you’ to your wife on the wedding day or do you tell them you love them constantly? I feel that strong of a passion about God so why shouldn’t I thank Him when I am grateful?” And THAT is the exact point I am making. Basically, we Christians who possess a real relationship with God, and not merely a social club experience that we then title Church, or Christianity; we know God personally and we passionately love Him. Since this is the case it is ONLY RATIONAL AND LOGICAL, that we would express that love and passion when we deem it fitting to the occasion. IT IS BIGOTED AND SELF-SERVING for those who don’t share our faith and our passion towards the love of our lives, to expect us to hide who we are and what we feel simply because they do not share in that experience. There is a vast difference between being open and passionate about something, and pushing a belief on someone else.
Tebow has never proclaimed that non-believers were evil. He has never made an alter call during a press conference. Heck, he has never offered a detailed and lengthy praise of God without someone directly asking him to do so or asking a question that would lead him to do so.
So my only conclusion to these baseless accusations that Tebow is a Bible thumping pusher of Christianity on the public, is that they are either results of the media, not Tim Tebow, or they are bigoted accusations by those who merely don’t share his faith and thus feel he should hide who he truly is and what he truly believes for their sake. If they are uncomfortable with who he is then he must pretend to be who they want him to be or else he is offensive and forceful with his beliefs. (Which by the way statistically America’s population still a VAST majority Christian, thus he isn’t even being different than most of society, or offensive to their delicate sensibilities… in theory at least) .
Thus the criticism of Tebow is, as I stated earlier, baseless, and often bigoted. Blame the media or be introspective to find the problem, but don’t blame Tim Tebow for being Tim Tebow; a passionate person who loves Christ, and also plays football, and knows when to separate the two and when not to.
The second most common objection, (which I have even heard or read from ministers I deeply respect and who have inspired much of this book with their lives) is that tongues were only for those who were present in the upper room on the day of Pentecost. One of my favorite authors and ministers A.W. Tozer even went as far as to say that tongues never occurred after that day, thus it is proved to be an anomaly and not something Christians should seek after. To be honest I was astounded when I read this statement from him. He is an incredibly intelligent man who follows scripture meticulously in his teachings. Yet, he is so blatantly wrong it shows just how hard it is for all people to allow scripture to invade every aspect of their lives and theology.
Simply by looking at the above scriptures in Acts we can see multiple times when the gift of tongues was administered after the day of Pentecost. Also, we can see in (1 Corinthians 14:18) that Paul spoke in tongues constantly. Yet he was not in that room. He was also not one of the original 12 apostles. As a matter of fact he came to be saved much later than the day of Pentecost. Plus in that same book of the Bible we see Paul teaching the church in Corinth about how to manifest tongues in the congregation properly, because they were already manifesting it and he was merely correcting the process. So, we must conclude that scriptures dictate the idea that tongues never again manifested after the day of Pentecost to be tremendously erroneous. It is simply inaccurate and false.
Connected to that idea is the concept that only the apostles were able to administer the gift of tongues. My first question is “which apostles?” The ones who were present on the day of Pentecost? Because again that discounts Paul, whom we know scripturally administered this gift. Also, where in the Bible does it say that it was only for the apostles to administer? True, in the book of Acts it only mentions the apostles as ones administering tongues, but that book is only focused on the acts of the apostles during a specific time frame. That’s where the name of the book even comes from: Acts. It was not meant to tell every supernatural happening that occurred in churches everywhere. Shoot, it didn’t even cover all of the acts that the apostles manifested or encountered during their lives. It simply told a portion of what happened, during a specific time frame to build the faith of later generation saints to walk in the same blessings.
As a matter of fact, when we read the rest of the New Testament, it is impossible to deny that the supernatural was occurring in the Church abroad and that it was expected to occur in all congregations, even when the apostles were not around. Why would Paul write a letter to the Corinthians about how to manifest the supernatural and tongues if he were the only one to be able to administer the gift, or have the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit move through him? He would have already been there to make sure everyone knew what to do properly. Thus making his letter of no use. But also just look at the manner in which he spoke. He was talking to them in a matter of fact manner about their ability to speak in tongues and teaching others how to speak in tongues without him around. The fact is, there can be no doubt that the Biblical Church was walking in the supernatural and that there is no scriptural text, short of end time prophecy being fulfilled, that states the supernatural was only for that immediate time frame. As a matter of fact, if anything the Bible strongly states that it is to continue as long as the Church is active in this fallen world and from Jesus’ own mouth the supernatural was to manifest in “those who believe.” Now, there is a bit of an off shoot from this line of thinking, in which people claim that all the gifts of the Holy Spirit were only for that generation. But I believe the preceding scriptures and the following scriptures puts that concept to rest as well. (for the record this came from my book so basically there are about 200 pages worth of scriptures and teaching that I am referring to lol)
I will be touching on two main points of debate that are often used to dispute the existence of Tongues in a Christian believer’s life. The first I will look at is 1 Cor. 13 where many state the Bible tells us tongues will pass away once the written scripture is completed. As you will see below I will look at the entire chapter and break down, whether that is a proper reading of the chapter or not. (hint: I honestly don’t see how in the world it gets interpreted this way by logical intelligent human beings yet it does.)
The first and most common scriptural “piece of evidence” used to debate the concept that all Christians have the availability of tongues (for personal edification at least), is found in 1Corintians 13:1-13. Within these scriptures a phrase is found that roughly stated (because translations differ, the basic idea and wording is the same) “when the perfect has come the need for the supernatural will cease.” And to a degree I agree. The problem lies in what the opponents of tongues see this “perfect” being. I have heard most commonly that they claim the “perfect” to be the Bible, because it also mentions a perfect knowledge. Thus, since the Bible has been written all need of the supernatural has passed away or at least certain aspects of it.
Before we go any further with this discussion I think it would be proper that we read the ACTUAL scripture and then decide if this is an accurate description. Also I am going to include the first verse of chapter 14 to ensure context.
1Corinthians 13:1-14:1-
“IF I [can] speak in the tongues of men and [even] of angels, but have not love (that reasoning, intentional, spiritual devotion such as is inspired by God’s love for and in us), I am only a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
2 And if I have prophetic powers (the gift of interpreting the divine will and purpose), and understand all the secret truths and mysteries and possess all knowledge, and if I have [sufficient] faith so that I can remove mountains, but have not love (God’s love in me) I am nothing (a useless nobody).
3 Even if I dole out all that I have [to the poor in providing] food, and if I surrender my body to be burned or in order that I may glory, but have not love (God’s love in me), I gain nothing.
4 Love endures long and is patient and kind; love never is envious nor boils over with jealousy, is not boastful or vainglorious, does not display itself haughtily.
5 It is not conceited (arrogant and inflated with pride); it is not rude (unmannerly) and does not act unbecomingly. Love (God’s love in us) does not insist on its own rights or its own way, for it is not self-seeking; it is not touchy or fretful or resentful; it takes no account of the evil done to it [it pays no attention to a suffered wrong].
6 It does not rejoice at injustice and unrighteousness, but rejoices when right and truth prevail.
7 Love bears up under anything and everything that comes, is ever ready to believe the best of every person, its hopes are fadeless under all circumstances, and it endures everything [without weakening].
8 Love never fails [never fades out or becomes obsolete or comes to an end]. As for prophecy (the gift of interpreting the divine will and purpose), it will be fulfilled and pass away; as for tongues, they will be destroyed and cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away [it will lose its value and be superseded by truth].
9 our knowledge is fragmentary (incomplete and imperfect), and our prophecy (our teaching) is fragmentary (incomplete and imperfect).
10 But when the complete and perfect (total) comes, the incomplete and imperfect will vanish away (become antiquated, void, and superseded).
11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; now that I have become a man, I am done with childish ways and have put them aside.
12 For now we are looking in a mirror that gives only a dim (blurred) reflection [of reality as in a riddle or enigma], but then [when perfection comes] we shall see in reality and face to face! Now I know in part (imperfectly), but then I shall know and understand fully and clearly, even in the same manner as I have been fully and clearly known and understood [[8] by God].
13 And so faith, hope, love abide [faith--conviction and belief respecting man's relation to God and divine things; hope--joyful and confident expectation of eternal salvation; love--true affection for God and man, growing out of God's love for and in us], these three; but the greatest of these is love.
14:1 EAGERLY PURSUE and seek to acquire [this] love [make it your aim, your great quest]; and earnestly desire and cultivate the spiritual endowments (gifts), especially that you may prophesy (interpret the divine will and purpose in inspired preaching and teaching).”
Now my first thought after reading this in context is how on earth did any functioning human brain think the “perfect” and “perfection” mentioned by Paul here was finishing the written Bible? It is quite obvious he is talking about when the saints are perfected and when we can see not in part but “face to face” with God. I’m sorry, have we died and can now see God face to face? NOPE. Now we can see his face, but it is from a distance still. We as the Church have not been perfected. Again I must state this perfection comes via one of two paths. Christ’s return, thus a new heaven and a new earth, or we die. But there is much more to this discussion than that.
We also see that Paul says once the perfect has come then knowledge will pass away, Prophecy will be no more and all prophecy will be fulfilled. In both of these cases it is all too blatantly obvious that the perfection spoken of by Paul has not occurred. We still possess imperfect knowledge. Even the Bible as perfect in inspiration as it is; is not perfect in knowledge alone. It still requires a supernatural knowledge provided by the Holy Spirit. Let me explain. It is still up to us to hear from the Spirit what the Bible is truly saying. If it we were perfected and the scriptures were perfect in current knowledge, then we could read it and know exactly ever single tidbit of theology immediately. There would be no disagreement on the interpretation of the Word. Yet we have hundreds of denominations, loads of debates about what the scriptures mean, and loads of incorrect teachings based on these scriptures. Why? If it were totally perfect and we had NO NEED of knowledge (a.k.a. Godly knowledge inspired by the Holy Spirit), we would all understand the Bible perfectly and without debate. So I ask you, has knowledge passed away? Nope. Then by definition the perfection has not occurred.
But let’s also look at the fact that Paul says Prophecy will have passed away. Thus all form of prophecy will have been fulfilled and we will know all the truth and will know that those who prophesied for God were proven to be in the right. Well, there is still a lot of Biblical prophecy that has yet to be fulfilled. Daniel. Isaiah, John, the list could go on for a while. But basically stated Prophecy is still with us. It has to be because none of the end time prophecies have been fulfilled. And it is blatantly scripturally true that active prophecy is still occurring. Either way, this part of the passage also shows us that the perfection spoken of in this scripture has not occurred. For we still need both knowledge and prophecy in today’s society. Shoot, even Jesus said in the last days there would be prophecy. Has Christ come back? Have we gotten out of the last days? Nope.
Let’s be honest. These verses were in no way referring to the writing of the Bible as the perfection that would end tongues and other supernatural manifestations on earth. You would have to either be illiterate, actively misleading, or actively mislead by someone else to state as much. It is just too blatantly clear that Paul was trying to make a point about Love being the most important value in our lives and that even once we, the Church and humanity, have been perfected and there is no need of the supernatural to manifest and correct this fallen world, even then Love will still persist. I just think this is too blatant a fact for anyone with a logical mind to read in context and still debate. This scripture could only disprove tongues if it is taken out of context and manipulated to do so. Thus, this set of scriptures is in no way a reproach on tongues for personal edification, and the supernatural in general.
Welcome to WordPress.com. After you read this, you should delete and write your own post, with a new title above. Or hit Add New on the left (of the admin dashboard) to start a fresh post.
Here are some suggestions for your first post.
