stillhaventfound.org

C.J. Mahaney is doing an interview with Dr. Sinclair Ferguson. So far, it’s been awesome. Lots of stuff said which I resonate with. As I mentioned before, I love Mahaney’s and Sovereign Grace Ministries’ focus on the gospel and the cross.

Dr. Sinclair Ferguson is Reformed in theology, as is Mahaney. If you’re a non-charismatic, then you may be familiar with Ferguson and with a lot of authors I’ve quoted in the past and will quote in future. I’ve learned a lot from this branch of the Church, though do not agree with everything from there now. But I learned the gospel of grace from there over 10 years ago. But I have to qualify this because I think that while some of the biggest proponents of the gospel of grace come from that tradition, some of the biggest proponents of a legalistic “mixture” gospel come from there too.

So anyway, I’ll quote a lot from authors and theologians to whom many charismatics may be unfamiliar with. I think this shows two things. Firstly, for charismatics who criticize New Creation’s gospel of grace, it’s not just New Creation you’re criticizing. The most essential aspects of New Creation’s gospel of grace did not originate from Pastor Prince or New Creation at all. I would argue that it originated from the 16th Century Reformation. (I’m not going to say it originated from Paul eventhough I do think so because that doesn’t help in clarifying things, if you know what I mean). Secondly, for non-charismatics who criticize New Creation’s gospel of grace, I think it should be noted that (I believe) many non-charismatics who are firmly established in good Reformation theology would totally dig the kind of gospel message that is preached at New Creation. Of course, they have to get past the little sprinklings of the prosperity message here and there, which I believe has never been the main emphasis of New Creation. In all my years (over 10) as a believer in the gospel of grace, I’ve been to many Churches - charismatic and non-charismatic - and I’ve never heard the gospel of grace so beautifully preached as I’ve heard it in New Creation.

And so we go back to Sinclair Ferguson’s interview:

The evangelical orientation is inward and subjective. We are far better at looking inward than we are looking outward. We need to expend our energies admiring, exploring, expositing, and extolling Jesus Christ.

… I realized by looking at the literature that was being produced (including the literature I was producing), that it had more about how to live the Christian life.

…For preachers it’s much easier to seek to bring about conviction of sin and expose sin than to magnify and glory in the Lord Jesus.

A person who truly understands the gospel of Jesus Christ knows that Christ and His work on the cross is what Christianity is all about. Nowadays, churches talk more about what we should do for God, than about what God did for us in Christ. Sunday after Sunday, it’s about how we ought to live better and more Christlike lives. So much burden is placed upon us every Sunday that we start to get the idea that the most important thing in Christianity is what happens inside us. There is no doubt God changes us and doesn’t leave us the way we were before we became Christians. However, whatever change happens and no matter how much we grow in practical holiness, our lives still fall short of perfection. That’s why we need to always keep our eyes on Christ and what He did on the cross - something that is outside of us - than focus on any change in our lives. Preachers should spend less time pointing out how imperfect and sinful we are (which unwittingly occurs when they focus on how we ought to live better Christian lives) and more time pointing out how perfect and righteous we are because of Christ. This brings glory to Him and motivates us to lead a more Christlike life - not out of fear of punishment or hope of rewards, but out of gratitude for what Christ has done for us.

If grace is the essence of theology, then as Berkouwer said, gratitude must be the essence of ethics.

John Wesley once declared that if we took grace too seriously, especially the doctrine of election, it would undermine our only basis for pursuing a holy life - fear of punishment and hope of rewards. But isn’t that a selfish motivation for the Christian life? That’s always been the fear - “Too much grace! It’ll throw a wrench in the whole process of Christian growth.”

But the Scriptures insist that a legalistic view of the Christian life is what leads us right back to fear and bondage. Since the Law, though good, in and of itself can never give us the power to perform what it commands, the gospel not only reconciles us to God in the first place, it’s the only fuel we have to keep us going in the process of sanctification. Therefore, gratitude - not fear of punishment or hope of rewards - is the only proper basis for pursuing a holy and God-glorifying existence.

If our salvation depended upon us for one moment, even in the slightest degree, we would eventually either become self-righteous, pretending that we were actually pulling it off, or we would despair of ever knowing whether God really accepted us. How could we possibly love God and serve our neighbor freely if we were still caught up in the saving of our own skin?

(Michael Horton, Guilt, Grace & Gratitude)

This is my all-time favorite Christian song. It’s a hymn. The melody is not contemporary so it gets some getting used to. But once you get used to it, it’s beautiful. And the lyrics are so meaningful. This is the kind of song I like to sing. All about God’s love. All about Christ’s death. All about the gospel of Jesus Christ. It’s really a moving song. I wish more churches (especially charismatic ones) sang it. It’s normally sung in non-charismatic churches and with the organ but I love it when it’s sung to contemporary instruments - though I’ve only ever heard it like that once and that was 10 years ago.

And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior’s blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

‘Tis mystery all! The Immortal dies:
Who can explore His strange design?
In vain the firstborn seraph tries
To sound the depths of love divine
‘Tis mercy all! Let earth adore
Let angel minds inquire no more.
‘Tis mercy all! Let earth adore
Let angel minds inquire no more.

He left His Father’s throne above
So free, so infinite His grace
Emptied Himself of all but love
And bled for Adam’s helpless race
‘Tis mercy all, immense and free
For O my God, it found out me!
‘Tis mercy all, immense and free
For O my God, it found out me!

Long my imprisoned spirit lay
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light
My chains fell off, my heart was free
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

No condemnation now I dread
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine
Alive in Him, my living Head
And clothed in righteousness divine
Bold I approach the eternal throne
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
Bold I approach the eternal throne
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.

I just came back (it’s now 2am Sunday morning) from Easter service at City Harvest Church and a night out with my friend’s CHC cell group. As I write I’m still full of awe and praise towards God for what has happened in the past 9 hours or so! A bit of background first…

As some of you know, I’ve been teaching English as a Second Language (ESL) for just under a month at a private Business School. I got into this field for basically one reason. I hope to do missions in future and teaching English as a foreign or second language is in great demand throughout the world - especially in the mission field where I hope to use this skill to earn a living and reach out to the lost.

When I was in Perth last year, I saw the amazing potential that teaching ESL had in reaching out to the lost in the developed world. And I knew that I wanted to do that in Singapore. The context in Australia and Singapore is different. In Australia, there’s a lot of opportunities to reach out to those on Working Holiday visas. Many churches give free English classes to these people and reach out to them through that. The English classes aren’t just a source of free English lessons but also a place to meet other foreigners and get any help from the teachers there.

In Singapore, you don’t have foreigners coming here on one-year Working Holiday visas. Rather, you have a lot of people from Asia who come here to study in schools. For those who come here to study in Primary or Secondary school, they would be able to integrate into Singapore society. However, many also come here for their University education and go to private schools that offer degrees from Western Universities. Before they are able to start their University studies, however, they normally have to go through English lessons to get their English level up to standard. A lot of these students are of course from China, but there are many also from Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam. And I think most of of them do not integrate that well into Singapore society. This is because their English is not very good. And a lot of private schools have students which consist mainly of foreigners. The places these foreigners live (especially the hostels) are also filled with foreign students. The result is that these foreigners tend to mix around with other foreigners - and thus most likely will not come into contact with Singaporean Christians.

There is thus a great need to reach out to these foreign students. And of course, the ideal person to reach out to such students are ESL teachers. And so this is what I wanted to do while being an ESL teacher in Singapore. I loved teaching. And I loved interacting with youth. I think I can relate to them well and am able to build up a good rapport with them. And I put a lot of effort in my teaching because I want to be the best teacher I can to help my students.

I invited my students to City Harvest for its 5:30pm Saturday Easter service. I didn’t invite them to New Creation because it didn’t have any special service and I knew that New Creation didn’t have the community to be able to reach out to them. I wanted a community of people that would be able to befriend them, make them feel welcome, reach out to them and follow up with them. I had a good friend in City Harvest and had visited his cell before. I knew that they would be a community that would be able to reach out to them. One thing I love about City Harvest is their strong cell community. New Creation sorely lacks this.

On Thursday, about 12 students said they would meet me for the service. I didn’t expect all 12 to come because something always crops up! But somehow as I prayed, I prayed for 11 to come. I thought that was perhaps a bit unrealistic, but I wanted to believe God for that. In the end, 11 of my students came and 1 of them brought a hostel mate of hers. In all, 9 mainland Chinese students and 3 Vietnamese attended the service.

The Easter drama was moving at times. I didn’t watch the beginning because I was waiting for some friends who came late. But the part where Christ was crucified was very good. I was glad for my Chinese students that the drama and the sermon by Pastor Kong were in both English and Chinese so they would understand what’s going on. However, I wasn’t too happy with the sermon as I thought the gospel presentation was extremely unclear. In fact, I thought that was probably the worst Easter service message I’ve ever heard. But I won’t get into that here :)

What excited me was the response from my students. Before the service, I was praying for 3 salvations. In the end, God surprised me when 10 of the 12 students actually responded to the alter call and went to the front!! I don’t know if every one of them understood the significance of it all as I thought the message was very unclear and also the alter call. However, I also know that most people don’t understand the gospel clearly when they first accept Christ. Whatever the case, I am full of joy that they did take the step they did. I’m reminded once again that this is the reason why I’m teaching. Yes, I want them to improve their English. But more than that, I want them to know Jesus and find true meaning for their lives.

After the service, my students ate together and got to know my friend’s cell members. This is the reason I brought them to City Harvest. Responding to the gospel is one thing. But it’s so important to be part of a community. And I don’t know any other Church in Singapore that can provide such a community like City Harvest can. Nor do I know any other Church in Singapore which is as passionate for evangelism and missions as City Harvest. While I don’t think City Harvest’s teaching is as good as New Creation’s, I’m quite happy to see my students get involved in the City Harvest community.

God is a faithful God. I’ve already seen answers to some of the prayers I’ve been praying since the beginning of the year. Not just regarding the above, but also in other areas. The teachings of New Creation have challenged me in my faith - especially as it relates to believing God for what we ask for.

Now I’m actually thinking and praying about two things. Firstly, on whether I should continue on teaching in my school. I have to make that decision pretty soon. I’ve already mentioned here that the English department is a big joke. And I kind of decided to stop working there once I finish with my present class next month. However, after what happened yesterday, I am praying about it. I know there’s a great opportunity to reach out to more students in the school. That’s what’s making me think twice about quitting. Yet, I don’t like short changing my students - something I’ll have to do if I continue teaching there.

The second thing is whether to continue to stay on in New Creation. This is not something new I’ve been thinking about. Rather, I’ve been praying about it for a while. I know I’ll never be able to get as good teachings in other churches as I would get in New Creation. On the other hand, my view of Christianity as a community is just so different from the community (or lack of) I find in New Creation. I don’t want to always reach out to people and get them to settle in another church! I want to be able to bring them to my church and I want them to find a loving community there. If I were to commit myself to another church, I could still buy and listen to New Creation’s CDs (or even attend their Sunday afternoon services), but you can’t buy community…

Al Mohler, in his book Sex and the Supremacy of Christ, mentions seven principles that he believes ought to guide a Christian’s response to the issue of homosexual marriage. One of them struck me:

We must be the people who love homosexuals more than homosexuals love homosexuality.

I think that’s spot on. Whatever your view of homosexuality, you can’t go wrong with the above.

[T]here are two ways and only two ways to read the Bible. You can read the Bible as if it is all about you and what you must do, and what you have to run around doing in order to get the blessing. Or you can read every part of the Bible as all about Him and what He has done for you. Is it all about you or is it all about Him? (Tim Keller)

This is part two of my previous post here. I quoted John Piper in part one and highlighted how Piper said that “many people are willing to be God-centered as long as they feel that God is man-centered.” This statement is of course meant to be a criticism of a Christianity that places the focus on man on the premise that God is man-centered.

Is Piper’s criticism valid? To answer this, I think the question needs to be asked if God is man-centered. It’s not a question often asked, but it’s an interesting question. And I believe the answer is, yes, God is to a certain extent man-centered!

I quoted Tim Keller above. Tim Keller is someone I like to listen to and read because he talks a lot about the gospel. He’s gospel-centered. In the above quote, he points out something interesting. If you read his statement carefully, he equates the Bible being “all about Him” as reading the Bible as “what He has done for you”. In other words, being God-centered in one’s reading of the Bible is really reading the Bible to see what God has done for us. That’s why I said above that I believe God is to a certain extent man-centered.

It doesn’t sound right, does it? To say that God is man-centered. But I believe that’s to a certain extent true. I mean, what is the Bible all about? From the very beginning to the very end, the Bible is a story about God as a missionary God (Announcing The Kingdom, Arthur F. Glasser). Whether we like it or not, the whole Bible is all about God’s mission in this world - His mission to rescue man through His Son Jesus Christ. Yes, God was on a mission to rescue us! The whole Bible is all about this “mystery” (Ephesians 1:9) of God saving man being revealed progressively.

This is not to deny that the ultimate purpose of man is to glorify God. But what is it that inspires us to do that? It’s knowing that God so loved us that He sent His Son to die for us. Of course, we are to live and die for God. But what inspires us to do so? It’s knowing that God first lived and died for us in His Son Jesus Christ.

Surely, our lives should be focused on God. Surely, we ought to love Him. But we love Him only because He first loved us (1 John 4:19). It’s about His love for us first, not our love for Him:

This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. (1 John 4:10)

Dare we deny that God is to a certain extent man-centered in his love for us? After all, who is the recipient of God’s love? US! His love is centered upon us, upon man!

Let me mention one last point. Many Christians would accept the above (they really have no choice because that’s the gospel!), but still be uncomfortable with too much gospel preaching that is centered on man. They kind of have the idea that too much of such “man-centered” gospel preaching makes “Him a means to [our] self-esteem” (see Piper’s quote). For example, Paul Washer said:

Yes the Savior manifests love toward the sinner. But what you need to understand is that it’s not because of some worth or value in you. The Cross is not a sign of your great worth. The Cross is a sign of your great depravity; that you are so evil the only way you could be saved is by God’s Son being crushed under the full force of the wrath that was due you…

I agree that the cross is in a sense a sign of our great depravity. Is it also a sign of man’s great worth? By even entertaining that question, I’m getting into dangerous territory. People like Washer and Piper want to make man as little as possible and God as big and magnified as possible. And that’s why they say the things they do. I understand where they’re coming from. But I think that sometimes this can be overdone. Was the cross in any way a sign of man’s great worth? I think I’ll have no problem saying that there’s a bit of truth in that. It’s not because man deserves the cross. But because man is made in the image of God and is special in God’s eyes. I don’t think we do God or the Bible justice when we ignore the important fact that though fallen, man was made in the image of God. We’re different from animals and plants. While we’ve fallen and we’re sinners, that doesn’t mean we’ve suddenly become nothing of value in God’s eyes. I think that’s going to the opposite extreme.

But let me say this to end. I think a better statement than saying that “The cross is not a sign of our great worth, but our great depravity” is simply saying that “The cross is a sign of God’s great love for us”. It’s ultimately not about whether we’re worthy or not worthy. It’s ultimately about God’s great love for us. Whether one believes that the reason for God’s great love for us has anything to do with the fact that we were made in the image of God doesn’t really matter. (Of course, one can argue that we were made in God’s image because of God’s love for us in the beginning, and I totally accept that). Ultimately, what matters is that God loves us and God centers His love upon us when He sent His Son Jesus to die for our sins. We are the objects of God’s love. That, I think, is totally biblical. And that, I think, is to a certain extent man-centered.

J. Lee Grady has an excellent article at his Fire In My Bones blog at the Charisma Magazine website. Grady is one of the guys I like to read as he’s a charismatic who’s not afraid to criticize aspects of the movement when he feels it’s needed. See, for example, his What Happened to the Fire?: Rekindling the Blaze of Charismatic Renewal which I read about 10 years ago. In the book, he addresses problems in the Charismatic movement like shallow theology, lack of discernment, pride in spiritual gifts, flimsy biblical interpretation and exaggerated claims of healings and miracles. These are of course criticisms that have been constantly leveled against the Charismatic movement. I would consider myself a charismatic, and like Grady, I have no problems with saying that the above criticisms are valid and that I have the same concerns too. There’s no need to be defensive about a movement/tradition you love and identify with because no movement/tradition is perfect. In fact, I always believe it’s good to be critical (in a constructive way) of your own tradition/movement. There will always be excesses and abuses somewhere in every movement and it’s better for the people within to address them, than those from the outside, most (not all) of whom I think would not understand the movement and tend to be ultra-critical, unhelpful and unbalance in their criticisms.

Anyway, his recent blog article is entitled Kenneth Hagin’s Forgotten Warning (7th March 2008). Kenneth Hagin, of course, is known as the “father” of the “Word of Faith” movement. Another name for the movement is the “Prosperity Gospel” movement.

In his article, Grady points out that before Hagin died, he passionately tried to correct the abuses he saw in the movement:

But before he died in 2003 and left his Rhema Bible Training Center in the hands of his son, Kenneth Hagin Jr., he summoned many of his colleagues to Tulsa to rebuke them for distorting his message. He was not happy that some of his followers were manipulating the Bible to support what he viewed as greed and selfish indulgence.

Hagin also wrote a book entitled The Midas Touch: A Balanced Approach to Biblical Prosperity (which is sold in New Creation Church’s bookstore) in 2000, a year after the above Tulsa meeting.

Many people who either criticize or support the Word of Faith movement probably don’t know the above. I’ve been familiar with the movement for about 10 years though only got to know about this book recently. I think many who criticize the movement do so without realizing that there are people within the movement just like Hagin who would not be happy with everything about it. The fact that he was passionate to correct the abuses he saw is totally understandable. That’s because he knew that abuses and excesses within the movement would cause Christians to associate such extreme and unbiblical teachings with the movement as a whole and thus throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Of course, I think it’s totally right to criticize and throw out the very many unbiblical teachings in the Word of Faith movement, as even Hagin himself did. But it’s thoroughly unfair to paint the whole movement as totally unbiblical and wrong. As I wrote here, I think there are some good in it. Critics who only point out the bad and cannot see past the more visible and famous Word of Faith preachers (who, I admit, do say a lot of unbiblical stuff) lose out on a whole lot of good, I think.

Read these two blog entries (here & here) from two Christians who, while generally more conservative, have been able to see some good in the movement, or at least recognize (unlike almost all critics of the movement) that there are some biblical foundations to some of the movement’s teachings.

I’ll just leave you with two criticisms Hagin had according to Grady:

1) People should never give in order to get.

2) The “hundredfold return” is not a biblical concept.

There, you’ve heard it from the “father” of the Word of Faith movement.

Skye Jethani of Out of Ur argues that many of us have confused the church with the church institution. He talks about new questions many Christians should be asking regarding how to advance the gospel, which I think are worthy to ponder over:

Not: How do we grow the institution?
But: How do we grow people?

Not: How do we motivate people to serve in the church/institution?
But: How do we equip people and release them to serve outside the church/institution?

Not: How do we convince more people to come?
But: How do we inspire more people to go?

Not: How many programs can the church start?
But: How many programs have other churches started that we can help support?

Not: How many people have a committed relationship with our institution?
But: How many people have a committed relationship with another brother or sister in Christ?

Not: How do we make people dependent on the institution for their growth?
But: How do we equip people to grow independent of the institution?

Not: How much revenue can the institution generate?
But: How much revenue can the institution give away?

Not: How many buildings, pastors, and programs are necessary for the institution to have maximum exposure in the community?
But: How few buildings, pastors, and programs are necessary for God’s people to have time and energy to engage the community?

There’s too much to write regarding this issue of institutionalism. I wrote about “The organizational, the institutional and the bureaucratic” here. Many young Christians are sick of what is called organizational or institutional Christianity and I’m one of them. If businesses can be accused of placing profits about people, organizational or institutional Christianity can be accused of placing methods, size and effectiveness above people. And that’s dangerous because after the gospel (in which God’s love for us is revealed in Christ), Christianity is all about loving people. I think there is a certain extent in which good organization and structures can support the focus on people. But more often than not, it becomes more about the way of doing things than on people.

From start to finish, the whole Christian life is by grace through faith. A new life in Christ commences with faith, continues by faith, and will be completed through faith. To put this another way, the gospel is for Christians just as much as it is for non-Christians. We never advance beyond the good news of the cross and the empty tomb… Therefore, the Christian always looks back to the gospel and never to the law (i.e. performance) as the basis for his righteousness before God… There is no such thing as performance-based Christianity… Justification is a doctrine for the whole Christian life from start to finish. It is not simply a doctrine for coming to Christ in the first place… Justification is a doctrine to live by each and every moment.

(Philip Graham Ryken, Galatians)

Most churches view the doctrine of Justification as merely a doctrine to be preached and emphasized to the unbeliever (to tell the person that he/she becomes a Christian by faith alone) or new believer (to remind and assure the person that he/she was not saved by his/her own works but by faith in Christ’s works). Conventional Christian thinking and practice is that after one becomes a Christian for some time, he/she ought to move on to understand more important doctrines and teachings of the Bible. In a sense, to many, Justification is an important doctrine, but one that needn’t be emphasized to mature Christians. What ought to be emphasized to mature Christians are other doctrines - basically, every other doctrine in the Bible, especially those that talk about how we ought to live for God. The Bible, after all, is a huge book and there are so many more things taught in it than merely about Justification, so the common belief is.

I disagree with the conventional belief, of course. I think we totally miss the main point of the Bible when we think that Justification is only one doctrine, even if we do think it’s a very important doctrine. I think the whole Bible is about God reconciling us to Himself. That’s the story of the Bible. That’s what the gospel is all about. The whole Bible is all about the gospel of Jesus Christ. The Old Testament foretold it. And the New Testament is all about it, all about Jesus.

One thing I like about New Creation is that they understand this. They understand that the gospel of Jesus Christ is as much for mature Christians as for the non-Christian or new Christian. They understand that Christianity is all about Jesus Christ and what He has done for us. It gets kind of boring in New Creation if we want to hear other things. But if we understand how important the gospel of Jesus Christ is to God, the Bible and the Christian, then it’s anything but boring. It can such an exciting place to be if one wants to learn more and more about Jesus and the gospel.

Most Americans believe that what their problem is, is something that has happened to them; and their solution is going to be found within. In other words they believe that they have an alien problem that is to be resolved with an inner solution; when the Gospel says that what we have is an inner problem and the only solution is an alien righteousness. (Albert Mohler)

By an alien righteousness, the author means a righteousness which is outside of ourselves, and not one that comes from within us. It’s a righteousness which comes from Christ’s life and not from our own. Our very own righteousness can never be good enough. But thank God for Christ’s righteousness which is now ours by faith.