Finishing the Q and A

Two Sunday’s ago we dedicated both our worship services to a “question and answer session” so that our members, attenders, and visitors could text or email questions in real time. I promised to answer all questions, providing answers to those texted or emailed but not answered in the church blog. Here goes:

Should Christians get out of debt? This is a persistent, yet complex and nuanced, question. Proverbs is full of warnings about indebtedness, “the borrower is the slave of the lender (Proverbs 22:7).” On the other side of the coin you have, “The wicked borrows and does not pay back but the righteous is generous and gives (Psalm 37:21).” Then you have the warning about being security or “co-signing” on the debt of another in Proverbs 22:26-27. What you have here is a call to caution and an exhortation to wisdom. The message of the Bible on money and debt is in depth and considerable. The Bible says more about money than it does sin. Money isn’t sinful and neither is debt. However, both can lead to sin when abused. Today we have people who buy on credit with no plan to pay back. Psalm 37:21 implies that this is wicked. If you spend more than you can earn or pay back you end up “stealing” from those whose credit you default upon. But that said, debt is not necessarily wrong or sinful. Who can afford to pay cash for a house… a car? Not many. But often we buy more house than we need (or can afford). Some people by a car they can’t maintain or insure—or keep up the payments on. This is immoral. People run up student loan debt and blame the lender. Whose fault is this? When we enslave ourselves to others through debt we are at fault. So, avoid debt when you can. Pay cash for all you can. Save all you can. Only borrow (i.e. go into debt) if and only if you must for a house, a car, or anything else. Part of the pitfalls of our consumer driven society is a proclivity toward instant gratification. Delayed gratification through saving then buying is wiser.

What steps does Hillside take to assure elders are above reproach? Great question. First, we try and select the right people upfront. American churches often choose people based upon prestige, appearance, popularity, and outward likeability. God’s word in Titus 1 and 1 Timothy 3 give very specific commands and qualifications for elders. We utilize a very careful process for selection using the Leadership Development Team, the Leadership Council, and the Elders. We interview the men, sometimes the spouses, and we try and assess character through confidential interviews with other in the congregation. Also, the Church Chair and one of the pastors interviews an individual and maybe his wife, as well. They elder candidate completes an extensive questionnaire and then goes into a training/assessment time with no guarantee he will become an elder. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure (as many churches learn the hard way). Next, all leaders here have to sign a leader-teacher profile that lays out what is expected of them from a moral, conduct perspective. After this, any elder or leader can be removed by substantiated, actionable claims or accusations brought by any member or regular attender. Naturally, the claim or accusation would have to be substantiated. Matthew 18:15-17 lays out Christ’s procedure and the constitution and bylaws spell out Hillside’s process. There is also a third level, mutual accountability. God’s word tells us “faithful are the wounds of a friend.” Staff and lay elders (regularly) speak into each other’s lives. From a congregational governance perspective, the elders are accountable to the people of Hillside, getting back to Matthew 18. Accusations or charges must first be made privately then the process escalates depending on the response. As for “above reproach” we find that defined in Scripture:

2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive… (1 Timothy 2:2-4)

What is congregational governance and how is it different than elder rule? Elder rule is usually found in Presbyterian churches of different stripes. Essentially, the elders make all the decisions. There are no congregational votes. The congregation may vote to sell land or affirm the nomination of elders but they do not finalize their ordination. Hillside, depending on the outcome of this week’s vote will be going to a biblical model of congregational governance as laid out in the pastoral epistles (1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 and 1 Peter 5) and also in the book of Acts. Congregational governance involves leadership arising from the people who elect or nominate representatives who are then vetted and approved. You see this process modeled and laid out in Acts 6:1-6:

The “above reproach” is described by what follows:

• Faithful to his marriage;

• Clear headed (sober-minded);

• Respectable (dignified in conduct);

• Hospitable (friendly);

• Not a drunk or a drug abuser;

• Not prone to violence;

• Not a curmudgeon (not quarrelsome);

• Not greedy (a lover of money).

• He must also be a good father, not neglecting his children or their upbringing (manages his household well). Along this line, his children should be in church…

All of these are readily observable at almost every level of public interaction. Those in their small group can “view” this as well. The same applies to deacons, “Deacons, likewise” and deaconesses—dignified and not slanderers…

When you think about it, the moral and behavioral standards God lays out for all those who lead His church apply to all Christians. Elders do, however, incur a stricter standard (James 3:1).

Now in these days when the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint by the Hellenists arose against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution. 2 And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. 3 Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. 4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” 5 And what they said pleased the whole gathering, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. 6 These they set before the apostles, and they prayed and laid their hands on them.

We essentially follow a 21st century version of this procedure. Notice the selection (nomination) process. Notice the above reproach aspect (you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom).

Much of this has been lost on American Culture and popular culture. In many churches people are popularly elected without much thought of qualifications. But as you learned in our study of church matters, God has His standards, blueprint, and design. We do well to follow the Divine Manufacturer’s specifications. Churches were never intended by God to be pure democracies. Judges warns against people doing what is right in their own sight. So, in accordance with His specifications in 1st Timothy and Titus, Hillside chooses elders who shepherd the flock as the primary leaders and decision makers. We’ve had a hybrid business model for the past few decades. However, in teaching through the pastoral epistles, the Leadership Council and the Elders have sought to realign our governance with Scripture and so we now have a purer form of congregational governance but not elder rule. And we have term limits to deal with the possibility of elders becoming self-perpetuating. We have a congregational governance led by elders but not Presbyterian style elder rule.

What is ordination? Ordination is a recognition or affirmation of an individual’s call to ministry. There may or not be a ceremony. In the West, Europe, and the United States is used to involve a pastor coming to a church, or an elder being appointed, and after a couple of years being confirmed in his new role by the laying on of hands (as in 1 Timothy 4:14). Nowadays it’s more of a procedure where there is a council that questions the ordination candidate on Bible knowledge, knowledge of systematic theology, and practical theology. There may (or may not) be a questionnaire, a paper to write, and an oral exam or discussion. In the U.S. there are IRS regulations as well for pastoral tax deductions for those who are either ordained or licensed. Licensure is akin to ordination but is temporary, renewed each year, until ordained. It’s is usually done by the local church where a res0lutin is passed. It’s also done by agencies for new missionaries or parachurch workers. Ordination can be done by a church, an association, a denomination, or a mission organization. In New Testament times it was done by the local church (1 Timothy 4:14).

Given the current socialist agenda, what is our Biblical responsibility to stand for our rights, uphold the value of human life, and protect our jobs / livelihoods? This is a complicated question (this seems to be my mantra these days). We are to willingly suffer hardship for the sake of Christ:

3 Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4 No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him. 5 An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules. 6 It is the hard-working farmer who ought to have the first share of the crops. 7 Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything. (2 Timothy 2:3-7)

We have to be careful:

Biblically, as we see from OT to NT we can protect life and property from thieves. At the same time, when it comes to being mistreated for the sake of the gospel, we want to be very careful making statements or acting (reacting). Here are the passages we might want to consider in the face of persecution.

Luke 6:27-35: “But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

32 “If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. 35 But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.

Matthew 5:38-46: (Sermon on the Mount): “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ 39 But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. 43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? 48 You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Peter, along these lines, warns us to suffer as Christians, not as murderers or trouble makers:

1Peter 4:12-19: Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. 13 But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. 14 If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. 15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. 16 Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. 17 For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? 18 And

“If the righteous is scarcely saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?” 19 Therefore let those who suffer according to God’s will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator while doing good.

Peter earlier writes:

19 For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly. 20 For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure? But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God. 21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. 22 He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. 23 When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. (1 Peter 2:19-22)

As a student of history, from what I can tell, we remember that the founders predicated the longevity of the republic to the necessity of maintaining a Judeo-Christian ethic. I'm afraid that such an ethic is pretty much a thing of the past in Western Civilization (including our beloved country). I know that people like to quote 2 Chronicles 7:14 in hopes of a revival: 14, "if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land (2 Chronicles 7:14)."

This is a promise made exclusively to Israel at the dedication of the Temple during Solomon's reign. Israel is the only Covenant Nation and the only heir to such promises. Now, there is a principle there for us, if we repent, God forgives. But 2 Chronicles 7:14, refers also to the land promises of the Abrahamic Covenant, of which only Israel is a beneficiary.

When we look at God's dealing with other nations (nations besides Israel), He employs them for a season but they all come with "expiration dates." You see this in Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the statue, which Daniel interpreted. You see this in the book of Acts. Acts 17:26 explicitly teaches this (as the rest of the Scriptures testify): "And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place... (Acts 17:26)."

For example, God raised up Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon to chastise Israel. He raised up Cyrus and Persia to eventually send Israel home from exile. He raised up Alexander the Great and Greece to give the civilized world a common language, which became the language of the New Testament. He raised up Rome to build highways all around the world so that the gospel could travel (even though Rome built these roads for military travel and commerce). Paul and the Apostles used these roads to spread the Gospel. None of these empires exist today. God raised up countries like England and the US to stabilize the world and send missionaries abroad. But now we are living in a post-Christian age. What we see is (not to be crass or callous) that countries as we know them, throughout history, are like paper cups... they fulfill their purposes and become disposable, like the cups in the church's watercooler.

As we move into our study of the book of Revelation, we will see what God has to say about the prophetic future. But one thing is certain, post rapture and with the return of Christ, whatever end times theology a person subscribes to, the only country with a future is Israel.

Jesus tells us that we will be persecuted... I'm sure persecution is coming. We know how "the Book" (the Bible ends). One thing is clear, the anti-Christ will overwhelm "the saints" who come to Christ during the tribulation periods. Daniel 7:21 and Revelation 13:7 make this clear:

And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. 7 Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation, 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain. 9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear: 10 If anyone is to be taken captive, to captivity he goes; if anyone is to be slain with the sword,with the sword must he be slain. Here is a call for the endurance and faith of the saints. (Revelation 13: 6-9)

20 and about the ten horns that were on its head, and the other horn that came up and before which three of them fell, the horn that had eyes and a mouth that spoke great things, and that seemed greater than its companions. 21 As I looked, this horn made war with the saints and prevailed over them, 22 until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given for the saints of the Most High, and the time came when the saints possessed the kingdom. (Daniel 7:21).

A servant is not above his master or a student his teacher. They persecuted Christ, they hated Christ, they'll hate us and persecute us. Were it not for the return of the Savior (see Daniel above), we'd be hopeless on earth in this time. But again, this life is temporal, and heaven, not America, is our home. I love my country. I love my wife. I love my daughters and my sons-in-law. But I love Christ more. We are to embrace the sufferings of Christ (2 Timothy 2:1-7).

When persecution comes, and it will, I will resist it with every legal means at my disposal. I'm a big fan of the second amendment. If someone breaks into my home to steal and rob and threaten, well... I'll leave that to your imagination;). But I will not fire a shot in self-defense against persecution. I might flee. I might move. But Daniel provides us an example, as does Jesus. When Jesus was persecuted, He uttered no threats. When He was reviled, He did not revile in return... but kept on entrusting Himself to the One who judges righteously:

20 For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure? But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God. 21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. 22 He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. 23 When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. (1 Peter 2:20-22)

We have been blessed with a comfortable life, here in America. It looks like that is about to change in a " the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away kind of way." The question is, "will we follow Christ in the difficult times?" I'm often asked "are we living in the tribulation period now?" Short answer: "not by a long shot." Otherwise, with Roman persecution, the plague in Europe, WWI, WWII, the Holocaust, et al, it would have have to begun almost 2,000 years ago...

But difficult times are ahead. People will turn on us because of the Gospel and people will turn to us for the Gospel. The larger question is "Will we be ready to give an answer for the hope that lies within us, with gentleness and respect?"

I think God is about to judge the country we live in (because of abortion, homosexuality, etc...). It will be hard to watch, difficult to live through, and impossible to stop. We have to remember that our citizenship is in heaven.

We are about to study 2 Timothy (Hanging in in the Hard Times). I'll be addressing some of this then. In the meantime... I hope this helps in some way.

TO BE CONTINUED!

PROPHECY (Pt 2)?!

In our previous post on this subject, we began to address prophecy. We addressed in terms of understanding what prophecy is (and is not). As we discussed then, there is so much confusion about what prophecy is. In short, virtually all prophecy falls into one of two categories: “forth-telling” and “foretelling.” Forth-telling in “Bible times” involved declaring God’s word, like preaching or teaching. You find an excellent example of this that parallels what good preachers and teachers do today in Nehemiah 8:1-7. You find another in Luke 18-27, notice verse 27 in particular: “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” Forth-telling also takes place in rare cases when a prophet declares the word of the LORD without Scripture, such as in Haggai chapter one, particularly verses 7 and 8 (and forward): ““Thus says the Lord of hosts: Consider your ways. 8 Go up to the hills and bring wood and build the house, that I may take pleasure in it and that I may be glorified, says the Lord.” Such instances often become Scripture, as you find if you read your Bible (carefully).  And they are recorded for our hope, encouragement, and instruction (Romans 15:4). This is why we said and say, prophecy is declarative rather than predictive.

 There is a second species of prophecy which is foretelling. Prophetic foretelling is declaring what the Sovereign God will bring to pass in the future. There are a number of examples of this in the Old and New Testaments. One such example is Elijah informing Ahab that God will soon send rain, ending a drought in 1 Kings 18, particularly verse 1 and verse 41: “After many days the word of the Lord came to Elijah, in the third year, saying, “Go, show yourself to Ahab, and I will send rain upon the earth.” 2 So Elijah went to show himself to Ahab… 41 And Elijah said to Ahab, “Go up, eat and drink, for there is a sound of the rushing of rain.” Jesus prophesied about His resurrection in John 2:19 and numerous other times did He foretell of His death and resurrection. We all know about foretelling from Daniel 9 and the book of Revelation. As we said before, such prophecies are not predictive. They are declarative, as God tells us through the prophet Isaiah, in Isaiah 46:10. They are fact.

 God declares the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10). God, His prophecies, and His prophets are not like a prophetic weather person trying to predict what might happen. Foretelling isn’t like some pagan astrologer trying to predict the future or a meteorologist trying to predict the weather. God’s prophecies never miss. They are accurate as they are precise. God’s prophets do not make mistakes when they foretell. Only false prophets make mistakes when they prophesy (Deuteronomy 18: 20-22). And their first mistake is claiming to speak for God in some way. If they speak for God, according to God, they will not get the prophecy wrong. And in ancient times, such prophets were to be put to death (Deuteronomy 18:20). Think about that!

 It’s a good thing for so many of today’s false prophets that we live in the church age. Another name for the church age is the age of grace. God has delegated capital punishment to the government. These people are safe, at least in this life. In our last post, we noted how today’s “foretellers” do so often undercover or outside the oversight of the local church. Their prophecies are vague, almost like… well… pagan witch doctors and soothsayers and astrologers of old. Their prophecies are vague, easily misinterpreted. There’s plenty of wiggle room. Or (my favorite) these false prophets will qualify their activities with a dead giveaway statement to the effect of… “well… now… I’m not a prophet but I’m sharing this dream.” Sometimes a false prophet makes a prediction, waffles, apologizes, rescinds the prediction and then rescinds what he rescinded hoping it “might come true” or “just in case it does come true. That’s not the biblical model.

 A true prophet speaks clearly. There aren’t two classes of prophets and we don’t grade them on a curve:

 20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ 21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22)

 What is spoken is for the common good, not personal interpretation. You don’t go to a prophet to get investment or career advice. It’s not about you, it’s about the kingdom, the greater good. God doesn’t play requests and neither do His prophets. He’s not a divine D.J. or a bellman in a hotel, at your beck and call. He’s the Master, you are the slave. You might want to reflect on Luke 17:7-10 to cultivate the right mindset.

 I believe that God’s word has replaced the office of prophet as it was once known. Jesus is His final word. Read and ponder Hebrews 1:1-2 sometime. Consider the declaration of 1 Corinthians 13, it’s not a question of if prophecy ceases but when. God has always severely restricted and regulated prophets and prophetic foretelling. He even warns if a prophet thinks he’s spiritual but doesn’t recognize His restrictions, the prophet is illegitimate—a false prophet (1 Corinthians 14:30-37). The Holy Spirit warns through the pend of Paul that this is the Lord’s commandment (v. 37).

 Common sense tells you that just about most, if not all today’s high-profile prophets are false prophets. In fact, common sense has led to a crisis in “prophetic circles” today. Why? How? Did your local prophet predict the coming of the COVID-19 pandemic before it happened with any degree of specificity? Or did they, after the fact, point back to some nebulous prophecy?  Consider all the high profile, some would say elite, so-called prophets who prophesied Donald Trump’s reelection (forget the QAnon prophets and voting machine seizures and martial law before inauguration day. You can read about the fall-out here. Then, of course, there’s this embarrassment.

Today’s prophets are more like pagan prophets of old than the prophets of the Bible. One last thought, if God has given us the revelation made sure (that’s what the Bible is) why would His word not be enough for you? After all, it is a lamp to your feet and a light to your path. If you want to learn more about prophecy, we are beginning a series on the book of Revelation and prophecy near the end of May.

Prophecy(Pt. 1)!?

No one reads the Bible without giving some thought to the word “prophecy” and its meaning. Every word in the Bible is prophecy at some level. Prophecy—real prophecy—that is prophecy that is biblical and true, takes one of two forms (be careful, I’m setting you up).

 Prophecy is “forth telling.” “Forth telling” is declaring truth. You find the first example of this in Genesis 1:1: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” You find it in Psalm 119: “How can a young man keep his ways pure?” The answer given, declared, is “by guarding it according to Your word.” Prophecy in its most common sense is stating the truth. In John 14:6, Jesus declared “I am the way, the truth, and the life… no one comes to the Father except through (by) Me.” Prophecy pure and simple.

 Look at the majority of Old Testament prophecy. The prophets confronted the leaders of Israel, the people of Israel, and others with the need to honor God as God and turn from their damning and deadly ways when each was doing what was right (for them) in their own sight. A simple example of this was Nathan’s confrontation and accusation when he told David, “You are the man!” If you want to see prophecy, look at the Decalogue (The Ten Commandments). “You shall have not steal…” Or, “You shall not bear false witness.” “Honor your father and your mother.” Forth telling… declaring truth.

 Looking to the New Testament, consider Jesus’ “High Priestly Prayer.  “Sanctify them in truth… Your word is truth.” In 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 we are told that an “elder shall be the husband of one wife…” We are told, “he must manage his household well” in order to show that he can manage the church and shepherd the flock of God. In Acts 4 we are told that there “is no other name under heaven given among men under heaven by which you can be saved.” Forth telling. Truth speaking. Prophecy.  

 Prophecy can also be “foretelling.” There so much regrettable confusion about this kind of prophecy. Ignorance isn’t bliss. It is a subset of “forth-telling.” It’s not separate. It’s a part or portion of forth-telling. Did you get that? Go back and read this again, beginning with “Prophecy can also be foretelling.” Foretelling is declaring truth before it is known, or some event before it takes place. Here’s where so much of the confusion lies.

 Prophecy is not (it is never) predictive as fallen humans, even saved ones, tend to believe. All prophecy is declarative. We read in Isaiah 46:10, “declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose…’” Here’s where many in the Church (note the capital C) lose their way. Someone once described Satan as the “ape of God.” Satan has a counterfeit, a cheap counterfeit at that, for every good thing God has. That’s why you have “fortune tellers,” horoscopes, shamans, medicine men, witch doctors, etc. in every indigenous culture and pagan religion. As but a shadow of the prophets of God, they have special powers, special anointings, and bring notoriety, attention, in some cases fame and fortune upon themselves. Balaam is one example. The witch of Endor is another. Your average tarot card reader is another. It’s a form of Gnosticism… higher, secret knowledge. They predict the future, like some mystical, spiritual meteorologist. These are false prophets.

 False prophets can be found anywhere and everywhere. Even inside the Church, your church (2 Peter 2:1). Jesus warned of them. Paul warned of them. Moses warned of them. They’ve plagued every culture. One of the better known secular examples is the Oracle of Delphi, in the history of ancient Greece. We offer this example from the history of the Oracle at Delphi as a key to unlocking the latent mystery of Christian false prophets (which should be an oxymoron):

 One day, a weary king came to the temple. He asked Apollo's oracle if he would win the battle. She smiled and told him a great king would win the battle. That was exactly what he had wanted to hear. He went away happy, leaving many gifts for the oracle behind him. When he led his men into battle, they lost. The king was killed. But people still flocked to Apollo's oracle. They knew she had told the truth. She had to tell the truth. What a pity the king had not listened.

 One of the hallmarks of pagan prophets and prophecy is a lack of specificity and clarity. “I see something like this… When I see you I see something like this…” “I think God is telling me this, but I could be wrong… so be careful.” This allows for “prophets” in the Church to garble the transmission of truth, to get it wrong—while being “truthful.” Imagine if Peter, David, Moses, Elijah, or any of the Old Testament Prophets or Apostles in the New Testament tried this! Imagine if Nathan said to David, “I think you are the man…” And David had replied, “It wasn’t me with Bathsheba, I was in Cleveland that day.” Imagine of Jesus had said, “Destroy this Temple and I think that maybe I will raise it up in three days…” Or Elijah, “it might not rain for a while… I can’t be sure, Ahab, but I think that’s what God is telling me… but don’t get too carried away. I might have missed something.’

 There is a difference between the spiritual meteorologist and the prophets of God. There is a difference between the predictions of fallible spiritual meteorologists and the sovereign, omnipotent declarations of God through speaking and writing prophets. The spiritual meteorologist is the false prophet who sometimes gets it right and other times gets it wrong (you know, like a broken clock with both its hands stuck at 12). The prophet of God, specific and clear, declares what God has decided before the foundation of the world.

 God has provided us with instruction in order to enable us to identify false prophets. Mercifully, God did this early in Deuteronomy 18—way back in the Pentateuch:

 “The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brothers—it is to him you shall listen— 16 just as you desired of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.’ 17 And the LORD said to me, ‘They are right in what they have spoken. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19 And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him. 20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ 21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18: 15-22).

 God provides us a contrast between a false prophet and a true prophet. Interestingly, here is a prophecy of the coming Messiah as well. First, all real prophets clearly state that they are speaking as mouthpieces of God. They don’t qualify, waffle, or say, “ah… well… I’m no prophet but…” Second, they don’t get the message wrong. They speak accurately and with precision as they forthtell and foretell the declarations of God. Those who get it wrong are false prophets (v. 22). Third, they are out in the open, not meeting in secret, like the witch of Endor with Saul.

 Today, in contrast to the theocratic kingdom of Israel, we do not execute false prophets. As verse 20 tells us, those who speak presumptuously in God’s name or in the name of some other gods (that’s an either… or… folks) were to experience capital punishment. As shocking as that may seem, when you consider the context of Deuteronomy 18, it is in the midst of other abominations that are capital crimes for which people were to be executed (Deuteronomy 18:9-14, for starters).

 What should a church do today? Well, since we are living in the age of grace, we show grace by walking them through the Matthew 18:15-17  process. Titus 3:10 provides a shortened process depending upon the confusion such an individual is causing in Christ’s church. In the “Church Age” we do not execute people. That is the province of duly constituted legal authority and government (Romans 13).

 There is one other hallmark of a false prophet. They operate outside the oversight of the elders of the local church. Like the witch of Endor, you will be brought to them in secret, or below the radar. You will not go through the elders of your local church to meet with one. It may happen outside the church, outside the care of your local church leaders.

 False prophets are as old as the earth. They still plague the people of God. They are more like the Oracle of Delphi than Elijah. They are vague rather than specific. Oh… and one other thing.

 False prophets often, though not always, have a word just for you. And you must then figure that word out and apply it.  There are two problems with this virtually every prophecy given in the Bible had to do with the greater good of God’s people, Israel or the Church. It wasn’t about you: “20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation…” (2 Peter 2:20). All spiritual gifts are for the common good—not personal benefit—and that includes prophecy! Think about it (and wait for part 2)!

 Meanwhile, pray for our upcoming series on the book of Revelation. Join us online or in person. Details to follow! Watch for Part 2!

What to Make of the Riot at the Capitol Building in Washington D.C.

This was indeed a sad day for our nation. People lost their lives (and their minds). Follow this link to a biblical analysis and explanation of this sad and sinful affair. https://lnkd.in/gmgGkDc

In the Fullness of Time God Sent His Son... (Galatians 4:4-5)

First let me say, “Merry Christmas!” It is okay to say this as we celebrate the “First Advent” of the Savior.

It is this time of the year when we stop and pause, remembering the greatest gift ever given. Indeed, this is the time when we tend to remember most the “good news of great joy that will be for all people… for unto you a Savior has been born… Christ the Lord.” God sent His Son to rescue fallen and rudderless humanity from an eternity of alienation from His good grace.

As the angel told Joseph “He will save His people from their sins.” “His name shall be called Immanuel (which means God with us)” as the prophet Isaiah promised, foretelling of Christ’s coming 700 plus years earlier.

“Christ the Lord” speaks to God in the manger. One uniquely qualified to achieve for us what we could not achieve on our own—rescue! God became flesh and for a time dwelt among us as Jesus our Lord and Savior.

There has been no greater act of love before or since in the person and work of Jesus Christ. For God so loved the world He gave His one and only Son that whoever believed in (entrusted their eternity and surrendered to) Him would not perish but have eternal life because He came, this time, to save the world not judge it.

God offers us a gift of forgiveness. It’s up to us to receive and embrace it. Forgiveness is only granted to those who do not push it away. This Christmas, if you haven’t already, I hope you’ll receive the gift of God, forgiveness and eternal life… a gift to be shared with others… a gift that keeps on giving, eternally!

But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. (Galatians 4:4-5)

There’s no time like the present to become a child of God! Merry Christmas!

When Good People and Institutions Do Dumb, Unsupportable Things

Don’t worry, this is not our Christmas Season post. It’s a reminder that as Christians—as Christian churches—we are called upon to recognize and discern between error and truth. As a ministry, we have devoted a lot of attention to understanding and explaining why Critical Race Theory is another gospel.

Critical Theory is also another form of racism. By being racist it hopes to cure racism. That’s like saying by engaging in murder we hope to cure murder. So much for worldly wisdom.

Critical Theory is a cancer that is spreading in and through the Christian church. Even the Southern Baptist flirted with it before condemning it. You can read about that here. Thankfully, as Christians study thoughtfully study their Bibles they tend to come to their senses. In fact, our own denominational university and seminary TIU has flirted with Critical Theory, inviting activists to speak. You can watch examples of that here and here. Hopefully, they’ll find the wisdom to snap out of this sooner than later. You can read about that need here.

Now a major evangelical leader has embraced this unfortunate ideology and theology, Rick Warren. In the name of “equality” Rick Warren and Saddleback Church have established segregated online worship services for Blacks only. You can read about it here.

Separate but equal sounds more like Jim Crowe. Why do this? Rick Warren has done it to provide “a safe space” for Black people to watch his online service. What space could be safer than watching church in your own home or computer screen or smartphone? This is another example of the church and well-intended people trying to find relevance before a fallen world by becoming more like the culture by blending in and fitting in than standing out. No doubt Rick Warren’s heart is in the right place and his intentions are good. But such ham-handed attempts to be relevant render the Church irrelevant.

We live in a fallen world. It’s the Gospel, not gimmicks, that change lives, behaviors, and eternities. God’s word says we are not to make such distinctions (Galatians 3: 27-28). There is one race, the human race. It is wonderfully diverse. But there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism and we do not have the liberty to make artificial distinctions. As long as people sin there will be sinning. Sin includes murder, rape, racism, lying, selfishness, sexual immorality, etc. That’s why we tell people about the Savior and His story of reality.

Pope Francis Endorses Gay Civil Unions?

What was he thinking? Sometimes you just have to wonder what is going on. There's no doubt that God loves gay people. God loves all people. But God doesn't approve of all behaviors. Pope Benedict represents the Catholic Church. Many believe he is the "official" representative of Christianity. In October he endorsed gay civil unions, no doubt for well-intended sentiments.

He says he opposes gay marriage because marriage is a sacrament of the Catholic Church. Moreover, assuming he's read Matthew 19:4-6 where Jesus talks about God's purposes for marriage, Jesus states that God made humanity male and female from the very beginning and established marriage to be between one man and one woman. The Jewish leaders at this time had a cavalier attitude toward divorce and Jesus, in correcting them, reminded them of what the Torah said, citing Genesis 2:24.

What's the difference between a "Civil Union" and "Marriage." Ostensibly, the difference has to do with the officiants. One is secular while the other may be a member of clergy. But the purposes of the institutions are the same. And the pope makes that point in his quotation:

“Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family," he says, "They’re children of God and have a right to a family." He added: “what we have to create is a civil union law... I stood up for that.”

For some, the word games or wordplay is more than a little frustrating. If God created marriage, the first human institution, then regardless of the officiant: a marriage is a marriage. The Pope can't have it both ways. If it is against God's will for a priest or other clergy to perform a marriage ceremony for a gay couple, then how can it be acceptable in the Pope's sight and God's sight for a judge or civil official to perform a civil or secular version (i.e. a civil union)? After all, as the Pope knows, the civil authorities, according to the Bible, (1 Peter 2; Romans 13) derive their authority from God.

Some suggest that this is a step in a longer process where Pope Francis hopes to set the table for normalizing gay marriage by setting the table for a successor to make an infallible papal declaration in the future. This type of activity is the practice of the Roman Catholic Church. Statements are made... without changing Roman Catholic Doctrine and they circulate and eventually, depending on the reception, an infallible declaration is made years, sometimes decades, sometimes 100 years in the future. You can learn more about how this works here.

In the meantime, many Catholics (including retired Pope Benedict) are left wondering what Pope Francis is up to. As a non-Catholic, I do not accept the authority of the Roman Catholic Church or the primacy of the Pope. As an interested observer, it is a head-scratcher.

As a Christian Pastor, I have compassion for homosexuals male or female. At the same time, God’s word is clear on the matter (Romans 1:18-32). Pope Francis well-intentioned as he might be has been unkind to heterosexuals and homosexuals by creating artificial distinctions between a church wedding and a civil union. If he believes civil unions for gays are needed, then he, likewise, needs to say that Roman Catholic priests are allowed to marry gay couples as well. From an integrity perspective, he can’t have it both ways.

A Society that Suffers from Structural and Systemic Racism?

I’m often asked about our nation’s systemic and structural racism. I’m reminded that Jesus said, of the saving gospel of grace, “you will know the truth and the truth will set you free (John 8:32).” There’s a principle there that speaks to not being damned or imprisoned by lies… lies about eternal life and arguably lies about anything else. Truth is liberating. One of the more confounding phenomena of our time is the New York Times’ “1619 Project.” There was a time when the New York Times functioned as a reliable newspaper. Those times are now in the past. The “1619 Project” is an attempt to propagate lies about our past which are not supported by the facts. I only write today because they’ve chosen to slander Christ as well, as well  as His Church. Now of course the New York Times and the 1619 Project have come under scrutiny and they seem to be revising the document almost daily to cover their misrepresentations. You can learn more about that here.

 Here’s why we can say our nation is neither systemically or structurally racist. Consider this  shortlist of historical facts that should provide even the shallowest of the woke thinkers food for thought.

• Yes, George Washington was a slave owner. But Washington freed his slaves at his death, providing pensions for those who could not provide for themselves and providing for the education and vocational training for some who lacked parents and freedom for them after the age of 25.  Should we then tear down his statue and expunge all memory of him for being a man of his time? The wokest of the woke fail to live up to their own ideas as well.

• Thomas Jefferson wanted slavery condemned in the declaration of independence but many feared losing the south in the war against the British. Jefferson referred to slavery as an “abominable crime.” And yet he owned slaves. Unforgiveable? Read the founding documents—Frederick Douglas and Martin Luther King (and others) relied on his ideals as the foundation of the Civil Rights Movement. Should we expunge all memory and honor of them from our past.

• The reality is that slavery never took hold in some states because the people opposed it and “freemen” were common in northern states, some serving as pastors in predominately white churches. Some in the 1700’s married white women. imagine that—how would that be possible in such a repressive and evil country like ours? Must we condemn everyone as evil and oppressive?

• An entire civil war was fought with a death toll of 750,000 men out of a total population of 31 million (2.4% of the total population or almost 5% of the male population). Remember Gettysburg (10,000 killed; 30,000 wounded). the abolition of slavery figured prominently in the war. Many believe the civil war was god’s judgement. “White men” fought for freedom of all people—including slaves. Where was their white fragility and privilege and blindness?

• President Abraham Lincoln issued and executed the emancipation proclamation (imperfectly).

• The Emancipation Proclamation was soon followed by the 13th amendment to the constitution in 1865. Effectively sounding the death knell for slavery in the United States.

• The 13th amendment  gave the newly freed slaves (and others) full rights of citizenship and the right to vote. Did that cure things and end all sin? No… souls are changed one soul at a time with the gospel, nothing less. But it was a step in the right direction. Why did a country of 31 million, with barely 3 million newly minted “African Americans” do such a thing? In a word: ideals. What should we make of the evil “white men” (women could not yet vote) who passed this legislation? What do we make of a country that did so for a small, powerless and largely voiceless minority who took such an unprecedented and bold step? Consider the amendments that followed!

• In 1870 Hiram Revels, the first black us senator, was elected in Mississippi.  He was a Republican. Since then, numerous congressmen and congresswomen and senators of all colors have since followed in his footsteps. How were such people elected in a nation with systemic and structural racism and overwhelming white majorities? Even today, African Americans make up less than 14% of the population and far less a percentage of the voting public. How is this possible in such a racist nation?

• The Federal Government frequently stepped in attempting to ensure voting rights and rights of citizenship for people of color. Why? Who took these actions? Who supported them? Why did they do this? Short answer: the foundational ideals contained in the nation’s founding documents. Did less than 14% of the population compel 86% of the population, the majority of whom are said to be evil racists to do their bidding or were they imperfect people trying to live up to an ideal?

• President Harry S. Truman desegregated the United States military by executive order in 1948, establishing the president's committee on equality of treatment and opportunity in the armed services. What moved the President to do this? Did he rely on pressure from a black majority voting populace? Wasn’t he supposed to be an evil racist? Why did he do this? Shouldn’t we tear down his statue? Should we revile his memory and achievements? All or some?

• in 1954 segregation in schools was declared unconstitutional (Brown v. the Board of Education) by “white,” male Supreme Court Justices. How is that possible?

• In 1957 Republican president Dwight Eisenhower sent federal troops to Little Rock, Arkansas to integrate public high schools and ensure the safety of Black students. Why? The founding ideals of this nation and the ruling of an all-white Supreme Court. In 1963 federal troops and the Alabama national guard were deployed to desegregate the university of Alabama.How could it happen in a country dominated by racism?

• In 1964 congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 tightening and strengthening laws against discrimination against people according to race, age, and sex. Why would a predominately racist congress, senate, and president put such legislation into law? Who elected and re-elected them?

• In 1967 the first Black supreme court justice, Thurgood Marshall was appointed to the us supreme court. Who appointed him—a Black President? Marshall was followed decades later by Clarence Thomas (1991). Who appointed Thomas? There has been a black supreme court justice sitting on the us supreme court for over 53 years.

• Presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan integrated the Space Program, demanding the inclusion of Blacks, Hispanics, Asian, and Women in the Space Shuttle Project.

• In 1987 President Ronald Reagan appointed Colin Powell the first African American national security advisor. wasn’t Reagan a racist? Shortly thereafter, in 1989, George H. W. Bush appointed Colin Powell as the first Black chairman of the joint chiefs of staff over all us military operations. His on later appointed him Secretary of State. We are told these presidents were racists and Nazi types. How could that be?

• Barack Obama  was elected president twice, 2008 and 2012. Black people made up less than 14% of the U.S. population. Who were these voters, then, who elected (and reelected) President Obama? if America is structurally racist and racism is systemic, how was he re-elected and by whom?

• Between 1964 and 2014 between $15 trillion and $22 trillion dollars were spent in the war on poverty. Who elected these politicians over time? and why did they commit so many financial resources? Weren’t most of them racists or white supremacists? Even today African Americans make up barely 14% of the population who are the other 86% who vote for such programs?

 What does all this mean? Could it be that, as history suggests, this nation isn’t as historically racist and oppressive as some would suggest? Does all this excuse racism, discrimination, etc. that has stained our history?

What does all this mean? It means that we are a nation of sinners who sometimes fail to live up to our ideals. Just as Christians fail to perfectly honor Christ? Does that excuse sin? No. Sin is sin. We can do better as Christians just as our nation can do better.

Hard Truth versus Harsh Truth (God is Love vs. Love is God)

In a church culture where too many confuse God is love with Love is God a pastor will often face the criticism for his harsh preaching. It’s not that pastors don’t on occasion say things harshly, being human they do. However, for some harsh preaching invariably has more to do with teaching hard truths. Consider some of the hard things Jesus said:

Mark 7:8-13: You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” 9 And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ 11 But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, “Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban”’ (that is, given to God)— 12 then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, 13 thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.”

How about this one:

Matt. 7:21-27 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ 24 “Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.”

These are example of hard teachings. And then there’s what Jesus said to an old religious man:

John 3: 3-4; 9--10: Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 9 Nicodemus said to him, “How can these things be?” 10 Jesus answered him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?

Was Jesus being harsh? Or was He being very, very loving and confronting a religious person who was lost and needed to hear the life-saving truth? Imagine Jesus telling a church person that all their religious deeds meant nothing without a heart surrendered to God (Matthew 7:21-23). All the works in the world won’t save. Would that be a nice thing to say to a nice person? There are too many nice people in Hell already.

Is it harsh to challenge someone to do something they normally wouldn’t want to do? Is it harsh to tell someone news they don’t want to hear? Put another way, is it loving to usher a nervous passenger into a lifeboat to rescue them from a sinking Titanic or continue to let them arrange the deck chairs as the ship goes down? Would it be more loving for an oncologist to tell a patient that “everything’s going to be alright—nothing to worry about…”letting leave the office believing they did not have cancer—- or would it be more loving to give them the hard truth that they have stage two lung cancer and are in need of immediate treatment.

Is it more loving to say the hard things or less loving? Is it harsh to tell someone things may not be alright and let them go on the path they’ve chosen as is? In our “Love is God” culture being nice is more important than being truthful. In a God is love culture we are better off speaking the hard truths even if we are accused of being harsh. That’s loving God and our neighbor. God is love and love is not God. Sometimes nice just doesn’t cut it because it’s worldly concept that elevates its version of love to God and misunderstands and wrongly applies “God is love.”

How Do I Vote?

I am often asked how do I vote. As a pastor, I do not tell people who to vote for and neither does Hillside Church. I do tell people to vote their convictions. Candidates come and go. One’s convictions remain. It comes down to worldview.

 In this election, we have two presidential candidates that claim to be “people of faith” but do not seem to be born again Christians. But I do not vote for candidates, I vote for worldviews. Behind each candidate is a group that advocates a worldview the other does not.

Only one group has a Pro-life platform. Only one group claims to support what some call “Traditional Marriage,” marriage between one man and one woman.   Only one group seems inclined to allow us to exercise our freedom of religion without onerous restrictions and persecution. One group tends to characterize Christians as homophobes and Islamophobes. One group does not. One group endorses Critical Theory and Intersectionality and one does not. Two groups… two worldviews.

I cannot support the unfettered dismemberment and murder of unborn human beings who have no voice or a group who does. And I do not support a concept of marriage that is antithetical to Christianity. I vote according to my worldview—and so should you. What is your worldview?

The Tone Police and Tone Shaming

Our words are important to God. Ephesians 4:29 warns us to let no unwholesome word proceed from our mouths but only words that build up and give grace. Proverbs tells us that the wounds of a friend are better than the kisses of an enemy as well as the words of the rash are like the thrusts of a sword but the tongue of the wise brings healing. Our words are important to God.

 Sometimes words sting (faithful are the wounds of a friend). Come to think of it, the Gospel can sting. No one wants to be told they are a sinner. We like to think we are as good as the next person.

 We need to be careful with our speech; yet, sometimes the truth hurts. We see examples of blunt speech in the Bible that hurt and healed. Nathan confronted David, “You are the man!” John the baptist confronted the Jewish leaders who came to the Jordan with mixed motives, “Brood of vipers, who told you to flee from the wrath to come?” Jesus confronted Peter who promised to die for Him, “Will you die for me… before the cock crows you will deny three times.” In these passages, Jesus and John confronted very publicly. Sometimes as Christians, as leaders, we are called to make difficult public statements. Hopefully, it’s not something like “brood of vipers…” But sometimes what we say is just as tough, just as necessary, and just as needed.

 Enter “the Tone Police.” Who, what, are the tone police? The tone police engage in “tone shaming.” Rather than grapple with the truth, they would rather deal with how they wish the truth was presented. For them it’s too often all about form and little about substance. Many are easily offended. Some engage in moral outrage or grievance. Some are more subtle. So the focus becomes all the ways it could have been said differently rather than about truth. “Couldn’t you said this nicer?” “Couldn’t you said this with less conviction?” “Couldn’t you have avoided the topic altogether, somehow?” “Did you have to be so blunt?” “Did you have to be so dogmatic?” In the end, often but not always, they would rather focus on form over substance. This sometimes reveals one of two things: (1) a lack of conviction; (2) a lack of understanding or belief.

 Jesus publicly called the Jewish leaders “sons of hell” or “children of hell. (Matthew 23:15)” He told them that they were of or like their father the devil. Hard words. And yet out of love He consistently engaged them, challenging them. Paul publicly confronted Peter to his face in a most embarrassing manner (Galatians 2:11). The writers of Scripture often named names. Jesus referred to Herod as “that fox.” Not a positive description. What’s my point?

 Many want to be liked—that’s not always possible for Christians.  Many in the church want to be seen by the culture as likeable. And while we should not go out of our way to be contentious or controversial, neither should we as Christians avoid controversy or forcefully speaking the truth (with a motive of love). Sometimes love is tough. Sometimes, as leaders we must protect the flock from wolves. Good shepherds are hard on wolves. We live in a Christian-hostile culture that opposes almost every tenet of biblical Christianity. If we are faithful, then we will not be liked. Jesus pointed that out to His followers. They hated Me, they will hate you. A student isn’t above his teacher… a slave isn’t above his master (John 15:18-20). We will have tribulation in this world. Don’t get carried away with being liked.

 When the tone police come and engage in tone shaming don’t fret. At the same time listen politely, check your motives and your speech. But do not compromise for the sake of the approval of men. We don’t want to bring reproach upon the name of Christ through careless speech. Nevertheless, we can’t serve two masters, Christ and the culture. We will love one and neglect the other. So be circumspect. And be faithful. The cross is an offense. The Gospel divides. We cannot make peace with the culture at the expense of the Truth. It’s a delicate dance. It’s a fine line. But in the end, if you had to be a little rude to get someone off the Titanic and into a life boat, in the end they’d be glad. Our culture is a Titanic and we must engage in the difficult task of getting people, humanly speaking, into the lifeboat that is the gospel. We have to wake them from their sleep or complacency, from a slumber. Sometimes we shake them. At the same time, we are frail and fallen human beings. We will make mistakes. That said, don’t worry about “The Tone Police” and their “Tone Shaming.” Worry about souls.

Critical Theory's Incompatibility with Christianity (A Position Statement)

Many people of goodwill earnestly desire to combat injustice, eradicate racism, and eliminate oppression. Who wouldn’t? I do. This is true of men and women inside and outside Christianity.

 At the same time, we know, from “lived experience” (or history) that those who forget the errors and excesses of the past are doomed to repeat them. One of the challenges society faces (including those inside and outside the Church) is that our culture over the last 75 years has become increasingly less literate, less well-read, and has largely forgotten the lessons of the past while calling others “ignorant.” Consequently, when old ideas repackaged for today (Ecclesiastes 1:9) are presented they are often accepted uncritically because they sound good to the unschooled ear (Proverbs 14:12): “12 There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.”  Such is the cost of true ignorance.

 The Apostle Paul warns us to “see to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ,“ in Colossians 2:8. Many well-intended Christians (and Christian institutions) have inadvertently ignored this warning, from the Southern Baptist Convention and at least two of its seminaries to groups closer to home. People of goodwill undiscerningly embark on the Intersectionality Train unaware that it leads to a catastrophic crash and a clash of worldviews. Having just completed a thorough examination, we want to summarize Hillside Church’s view on Critical Theory and Intersectionality within the Christian experience.

Let’s understand what Critical (Race) Theory is and is not. It is a worldview. It is not about race although race is the dominant theme in our culture—for now. Critical theory is a worldview that divides humanity into two competing, or warring, tribes, the oppressor and the oppressed.  The oppressor is anyone who has a real or perceived advantage over others. Think of it this way, Critical theory sees only two types of people in this world. Those with power are the powerful. Those without are the powerless. The base assumption of Critical Theory (and Intersectionality) is that the powerful always, always oppress the powerless. Consequently, the oppressed, or the powerless, possess a greater degree of moral authority. Vis-à-vis their oppression they tend to see the world as it is and possess greater moral clarity. The powerful or the oppressor have become numb to the plight of the oppressed. Their oppressiveness (or these days, “whiteness”) renders them ignorant or clueless. Oppressiveness and privilege are simply part of their moral and societal DNA. It’s who they are, oppressors, and what they do—oppress. Occasionally, the oppressed become so accustomed to their plight they see it as normal. Critical Theorists call this internalizing oppression. Intersectionality is a philosophy that serves as a sort of a force multiplier within Critical Theory. People may belong to more than one oppressed group or more than one oppressor group. Here is a shortlist of oppressor groups: heterosexuals, “Whites (capital ‘w’),” males, and Europeans. Here is a shortlist of oppressed groups: gays and lesbians, transgendered people, “Blacks (capital ‘b’), females, and other people of color.

Intersectionality assigns demerits based upon how many oppressor groups one falls into while assigning merits or privilege points depending upon how many oppressed groups one falls into. Based on this system society is to show you some level of partiality as determined by where you fall within the intersectional hierarchy. Typically, terms like hierarchy and privilege are considered negatives but the reality is this is true only when applied to oppressor groups to their advantage.

 On an Intersectional continuum, a white, heterosexual male of European descent would be the proto-oppressor, or the archetypal oppressor, finding himself on the lowest level of the intersectional totem. He would have the least amount of moral authority as well as the greatest amount of moral responsibility because he is part of an oppressive tribe that has mistreated others down through the centuries. When speaking into matters of race or culture the White, heterosexual male of European descent would do well, in the eyes of Critical Theorists, to “shut up and listen.” A Black heterosexual male would have more moral authority because, being Black, he is a member of an oppressed group. However, a Black heterosexual male is at the same time a member of two oppressor groups: heterosexuals and males. Consequently, he would have less moral authority than a Black, heterosexual female, who is a member of two oppressed groups: Blacks and females. Therefore, she has more moral authority or privilege. She is able to tell the Black, heterosexual male to “shut up and listen.” However, she, herself, must confront the reality that she is an oppressor, herself. After all, she is heterosexual. When confronted by a Black lesbian, it is her turn to shut up and listen because the Black lesbian is a member of three oppressed groups: female, Black, and she is not heterosexual. Nevertheless, in the ranking and privilege system of Critical Theory and Intersectionality, she is outranked in terms of moral authority by a Black, Trans woman (perhaps in transition). The lesbian is an oppressor vis-à-vis her gender assignment, resulting in her need to “shut up and listen” to the Black trans woman who is a member of no oppressor group, per se.

 Counterintuitively, the greater one’s moral authority on the scale of Intersectional privilege, the less moral responsibility they have. This is what separates “Social Justice” from “Justice.” “Justice, based on either the Bible or the rule of law, asks the question, “Was a crime committed and who committed it.” “Social Justice” asks why did the person commit this crime (and against whom)? Depending on one’s level of moral authority and oppression one has a greater privilege than others and may get somewhat of a proverbial pass for their crime if committed for the right reason against the right level of oppressor. Rioting and looting are often described as reparations. It is part of human nature to see an oppressor get his or even her ‘comeuppance.’ It is understood that some degree of partiality must be shown to the oppressed or the poor and less concern for the great or the powerful.

 Tragically, it is these types of power relationships that have led to the collapse of the attempts at Utopia via Critical Theory over the centuries. The power relationships created by Intersectionality breed new oppressor groups, many of whom were once numbered among the oppressed, as they invariably fall into the trap of embracing the oppression of others. Critical Theory and Intersectionality facilitates, if not create, a culture of revenge. This is also inspired by a desire for ideological purity. The more pure look down upon and invariably oppress the less pure, who are quite often described as counter-revolutionary or traitors. Additionally, in a quest for societal and Utopian purity, the impure are often eliminated. Today, this can be relatively bloodless. We call this canceling or de-platforming. This might involve a professor losing tenure or her faculty position. It may involve a department head’s forced resignation. An entire board could be removed. One sees this done with an increasing fundamentalist further. We are reminded that another word for Worldview is religion. Critical Theory proponents down through the centuries have evolved (devolved) a religious fervor in the quest for doctrinal purity. In almost every occasion in history, this has led to near genocide and violence (The French Revolution of 1789, the Russian Revolution of 1917 and forward, National Socialism’s ascendency in Germany from 1933 to 1945, China’s Cultural Revolution followed by the Great Leap Forward, Pol Pot’s Cambodia from 1975 onward, to the present situation in Venezuela. In every case, the quest for a utopian condition led to violence, death, and greater suffering than the previous hegemony, unbelievable as it seems. Even the autonomous zone in Seattle (CHAZZ or CHOP) things quickly went totalitarian with unpredictable detentions, interrogations, beatings, and at least 4 deaths.  Why is this?

 Christianity and Critical Theory are incompatible worldviews. They are polar opposites. Admirably, each seeks to address the challenges of a fallen world and the inequities that are bound to result. However, each as a diametrically opposed view of God, humanity, sin, salvation, and holy books. Critical Theory assumes that God does not exist. Intersectionality fails to recognize or account for that God is at work redeeming a fallen world where humanity sought autonomy from the hegemony of God, Himself. Neither understands the sovereignty of God or the fallenness of humanity. As a Naturalist philosophy, Critical Theory and Intersectionality (the two are inseparable) fails to consider that God gifts people, places people, and calls this into roles of privilege and power (think Joseph or Moses), having raised them up for a specific time and a specific mission.  Neither understands that God causes all things to work together for good (Romans 8:28) and even what some intend for evil God intends for good (Genesis 50:20). Believing humans to be divine or perfectible, Critical Theory fails to account for sin—there is none righteous, no not one… all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God… the wages of sin is death but the free gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord. While the Bible spells out and defines sin at the most basic levels in all its permutations, starting with the Ten Commandments, Critical Theory defines sin as the exercise of (or projection of) power. Sin is a collective, race, or class issue rather than a personal one. The soul, the individual, who sins shall perish (Ezekiel 18:20). Intersectionality and Critical Theory see salvation as social liberation, activism, and protest. It comes through works, as part of a works-based religion or worldview. Christ insists that salvation is by grace not works (Ephesians 2:8-9) and that each person who is saved has a special, personal mission to fulfill (Ephesians 2:10). God says I will remember your sins no more. Critical Theory insists on penance, reparations—a comeuppance. There is no grace. The artificial distinctions Critical Theory makes contradict God’s will and God’s word (Galatians 3:28-29 and Acts 17:26).

 As a result of these fatal flaws, Critical Theory makes the wrong diagnosis of what ails society and prescribes a deadly poison as its panacea for what ails humanity. While Critical Theory and Intersectionality have the benefit of surfacing issues that must not and cannot be ignored, their erroneous prescription is doomed to fail as it has for hundreds if not thousands of years. A new order and a new world start with new life, which only comes through Christ changing us from the inside out (2 Corinthians 5:17; Ezekiel 36:26-27). Races, classes, genders, and humans cannot be reconciled to one another until individuals are first reconciled to God and empowered by the Holy Spirit to change themselves, become Spirit-empowered new creations.

Invariably, as the Southern Baptist Convention did in 2019, someone will suggest we “spit out the bones but swallow the meat.” Even if one ‘spits out the bones,’ the meat is infused with the deadliest of poisons—what amounts to a satanic worldview. That’s because Critical Theory has its own canon of scriptures. It denies Scripture at it core, replacing Matthew, Mark, Luke, et al with Cone, DiAngelo, Fendi, and Marx. It has a wrong view of God, a wrong view of humanity, a wrong view of sin, a wrong view of salvation, and a wrong view of truth. Christians imbibing this dangerous brew end of with faith plus… the Gospel plus… much like the Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons have the Bible plus added holy books that “clarify” Scripture or at least purport to do so.

Critical Theory violates God’s justice, with a perverse view of justice, from holding those accountable for sins they themselves did not commit because they are members of a so-called oppressive people group to showing partiality to the poor in the name of “social justice:”

“Now suppose this man fathers a son who sees all the sins that his father has done; he sees, and does not do likewise… 16 does not oppress anyone, exacts no pledge, commits no robbery, but gives his bread to the hungry and covers the naked with a garment… 17 he shall not die for his father’s iniquity; he shall surely live. 19 “Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is just and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. 20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself… 25 “Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ … Is my way not just? Is it not your ways that are not just? (Ezekiel 18:15-25)

 “You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor. 16 You shall not go around as a slanderer among your people, and you shall not stand up against the life of your neighbor: I am the LORD. 17 “You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because of him. 18 You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD. (Leviticus 19:15-18)

 For a greater exposition of these passages go here.

 Critical Theory is, at its root, contra-Christian. It outwardly seems and seeks to do good but in reality seems determined to do harm. It is the proverbial Trojan Horse that rides along with well-intended people of good will—even in the church—but sooner or later infiltrates and destroys all it touches. This is one reason why we hosted last week’s conference on Critical Theory in our discussion Race to Reconciliation. This is why we taught an entire sermon series on Race, Racism, and Reconciliation. For these reasons, as Leadership, our elders have determined that we will not support any group that embraces or tolerates this harmful and damning worldview, despite their seemingly good intentions. This includes missionaries, mission agencies, seminaries, denominations, parachurch organizations, and Christian colleges and universities. We know that many uncritically embrace these ideas in ignorance. However, in shepherding the flock of God, we are to protect our people, given them (and their children) guidance, and exercise careful stewardship over the Lord’s resources in the process.

Let’s understand that one can hate racism and reject Critical Theory. It’s not one or the other. There is a biblical path between these. Christendom and Christians do well to understand this. We live in a world of extremes. We desire a biblical balance.