“Christian Voodoo”: OK, NOW I’ve Seen Everything
February 8, 2010
A friend sent me info about a family that is attempting–with the encouragement of their “church”–to incorporate voodoo (or, more technically as they call it, “vodou”) into their “Christianity” for the sake of two adopted kids from Haiti. Now, of course it’s great that these folks adopted a couple of kids from Haiti–well, let’s put it this way: it’s great that they had it in their hearts to do so–but what kind of silliness is this?
More disheartening is that the pastors of a Baptist church would tolerate this instead of (lovingly) offering the family the kind of counsel they need to put away the works of darkness as they embrace the saving gospel of Jesus Christ. What fellowship does the light of Christ have with the darkness of voodoo? None. And the most loving thing that Revs. Thompson and Haak could possibly do would be to disabuse this misguided family of any notion to the contrary–rather than affirm their idolatry.
John MacArthur on Oral Roberts
December 21, 2009
This is a sobering post on the legacy of Oral Roberts:
Measuring Oral Roberts’ Influence
One certainly hopes that Oral Roberts is now rejoicing with Jesus in Heaven, and there is little doubt in my mind that some very good things happened as a result of Mr. Roberts’ influence. At the same time, there is little doubt in my mind that much harm was done through his spurious Prosperity Theology teaching (I always had associated such with the Kenneths–Hagin and Copeland–as well as Benny Hinn, Smilin’ Joey, and a few others, but MacArthur points out the difference between Prosperity “Theology” and Word-Faith “theology”, and it’s clear that Mr. Roberts must assume a lot of responsibility for this awful movement). The gospel of Jesus doesn’t square with Prosperity teaching, and we must never, ever be fooled by the size of one’s ministry as an indicator of the blessing of God or of the rightness of one’s theology.
Why I Can’t Sign the Manhattan Declaration
November 30, 2009
Recently, a group of evangelicals, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox folks came together and drafted what has been called the “Manhattan Declaration”. In it, these leaders pledge to stand together and refuse to accommodate themselves, or the religious institutions they represent, to the encroachment of pagan society with regard to human life issues, issues of the fundamental definition of marriage, and issues of religious liberty. In short, there is much to agree with in this document, and a number of folks whom I deeply respect have chosen to add their names as signatories to the document. Charles Colson, whom I admirea dn respect deeply, but who seems committed to these types of ecumenical, gloss-over-the-issues types of things, spearheaded this one. Christian pastors are being called on to sign; indeed, any Christian can “sign on”.
I won’t.
In a nutshell, this document glosses over the gospel. And the gospel cannot be compromised for anything. Not for anything. Because if we don’t have the gospel, we got nothing. Zero. Bupkus. At several points, the document lumps together all of the above group under the name “Christians”. Granted, in one sense of the word, that is true–just as in some sense of the word, we could use that term to refer to pseudo-Christian cults like the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. At other points, it uses terminology such as “proclaim(ing) the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in its fullness, both in season and out of season”, and suggests that this is our common mission.
The problem ought to be obvious: while I am certainly sympathetic with the overall gist of the document (apart from the issue of the gospel), I cannot agree that I share a common mission with Rome, for instance. I’m not “doing the same thing”. My goals, my mission, my preaching, my teaching, my life is not devoted to a “gospel” which is no gospel, which glosses over the fundamental differences that divide these branches of “Christendom”. The gospel is the issue–and rather than linking arms with Roman Catholics as brothers/sisters in Christ (though on a different basis, we could stand together); rather than smoothing over the unsmoothable differences in our beliefs, it is incumbent upon me to stand first and foremost for the gospel.
Now, when it comes to the particular social actions advocated by this document, I would find myself in substantial, if not total, agreement with its aims. But I refuse to act as if the Reformation didn’t matter; I refuse to compromise sola fide; I refuse to embrace any “greater good” than the specifics of the gospel–because without its specifics, we have no good. And I thus refuse to sign the Manhattan Declaration.
Just to give you a little more food for thought, here are two respected Christian bloggers who have written on the subject:
Tim Challies on The Manhattan Declaration
Pyromaniac’s Dan Phillips on Nineteen Questions for Signers of “The Manhattan Declaration”
And here, further, are the responses of John MacArthur and Alistair Begg.
Most Christians Think Jesus is Lying
November 9, 2009
“Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.” That’s Luke 12:15–and most Christians think that Jesus is mistaken–at least by the way they behave.
This is going somewhere.
Talk amongst yourselves….
UPDATE: Apparently, it’s going nowhere…
What About the “Canaanite Genocide”?
April 22, 2009
How does one answer the charge that God sanctioned genocide among the Canaanite peoples? Phil Johnson makes some great points in Truth and Apologetics. There is an answer, a Biblical answer, the right answer, and the only answer necessary; while we “speak the truth in love”, it’s not up to us to defend God or to satisfy every concern of an unbeliever.
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
