At a tutorial a few days ago I was told of a priest who had been studying Aquinas. When posted to a parish he placed all the volumes of Aquinas he owned under his bed and got on with serving his parish, not returning to them again until he retired.
I look around at my books, I read snippets of this theologian, and segments of another. I skim-read works I would like immerse myself and wonder whether, if it is deemed that I should be a parish priest, the volumes will go unread. I am an arrogant man, I believe that I am capable of being a great theologian. If I have the time to read, to study, to really think, it is my hope that other time I will be able to develop such grand sounding papers as “an integrated theology of providence and intervention in post genesis Christianity”. I would like to write things which would actually make a difference to the shape of theology, to the way church is done, to the way people think of God. A lofty and arrogant ambition indeed, and one ultimatly self-serving. Is my desire that God be known, or that I be knowing?
I find it unlikely that I will be offered a position as theologian-in-residence somewhere, with my task being predominately one of thinking with the odd lecture thrown in for good luck. My life in ministry is likely to be far more about conducting marriages and funerals, than it is about reading the works of great theologians. Maybe though, just maybe, this is a better road. Maybe it is only after 35 years of ministry that I will even begin to have a right to write on theology, and by then – I probably won't want to.
I know there has to be a balance between theory and practice. That often silence is better than speech, that its more important to learn to listen than learn to speak – and oh it’s a lesson I am in need of. I am far to much a fan of the sound of my own voice – or rather ideas (I dislike the sound of my own voice rather intensely).
So…enough rambling…I am going to go and be silent for a while
Yours as ever
The Broken Man
Showing posts with label theology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label theology. Show all posts
Thursday, 22 January 2009
Monday, 22 September 2008
Stories for my Baby
A friend recently objected to our desire to avoid "children's bibles" for our baby. I can't stand them. Everything about them winds me up, and yet, as my friend pointed out, possibly having made sure that their christening present is an interlinear Bible (one that shows the Hebrew, Greek and English translation) might be going to far. The thing is – for me, that’s the whole point – I don’t want to present something watered down – but I do want to tell the great stories – to bring them to life, and I think sometimes we try very hard to avoid doing that with children; the Bible is full of blood and gore, and so we steer clear of certain passages.
For me, I can't think of a more exciting story – I want to tell my child the stories of our ancestors, the story of the people of God. I want to paint pictures in the air of the King who ran naked down the street, and the man who set lions on yobs, and the God who walked upon the earth. I want it vivid and vibrant and full of life, but, in that, I don’t want the point to get lost, I don’t want it dumbed down. I want it told as the sages of old told tales.
And so...while a story needs speaking not writing, I am going to write as a starting point. Saturday has been my traditional day for theology on this blog, and so I am going to stick with it, using Saturdays on here to tell each week a different story – a taste of the bible. If I manage it I will get them together with time, and bind them together, but, more importantly, I will try my best to let them loose - to let them sing, dance, twist and turn through the air; stories of selfish brothers, of wicked uncles, of love and romance, and yes even lust! Stories of peeping toms, and murders, of tent pegs through the head, and a God who screams out from creation "I love you", and then whispers it in our ear on the darkest night as a crown of thorns is pressed onto our God.
Yours as ever
The Broken Man
For me, I can't think of a more exciting story – I want to tell my child the stories of our ancestors, the story of the people of God. I want to paint pictures in the air of the King who ran naked down the street, and the man who set lions on yobs, and the God who walked upon the earth. I want it vivid and vibrant and full of life, but, in that, I don’t want the point to get lost, I don’t want it dumbed down. I want it told as the sages of old told tales.
And so...while a story needs speaking not writing, I am going to write as a starting point. Saturday has been my traditional day for theology on this blog, and so I am going to stick with it, using Saturdays on here to tell each week a different story – a taste of the bible. If I manage it I will get them together with time, and bind them together, but, more importantly, I will try my best to let them loose - to let them sing, dance, twist and turn through the air; stories of selfish brothers, of wicked uncles, of love and romance, and yes even lust! Stories of peeping toms, and murders, of tent pegs through the head, and a God who screams out from creation "I love you", and then whispers it in our ear on the darkest night as a crown of thorns is pressed onto our God.
Yours as ever
The Broken Man
Friday, 12 September 2008
The Conference and my Studies
fI was trying to work out what to blog about today, and the long suffering wife has suggested that my write-up about the conference might be seen as somewhat...well "lacking" is the expression she used.
The difficulty with trying to talk about the conference is – that let's be honest – you don’t care. Do you really want to know about a lecture I attended given by the very brilliant Dr Hannah Holtschneider of the University of Edinburgh ‘Regarding the Pain of Others reflections on the use of photography in Holocaust musems.’? No, if you were that fussed, you would have been there, or have all ready done some reading on the subject. Even if you did decide from my description of it that this is a topic you want to know more about, I wouldn’t necessarily be the best person to ask...she would.
I suspect then my wife is suggesting that I talk about the room I was sleeping in – (it had a bed and sink) or about how wonderful Cambridge is as a city (very) ..or… you see, the problem is, I really am not sure what small talk I can make from all this, and even how worth while doing so would be.
Having returned – panic still high about money, working 8.30-6pm in a 9-5 job (so to speak), I am ever more certain that this is not where I want to be – that I would love to be studying full time, that I would love to be learning and with that learning, hopefully, changing. This brings me onto my new Degree course. This is a course which approaches theology not as just an academic discipline in which one can develop an ever better argument, and attempt to answer the question, for example “”Is there a God?”, or “What does God require of humanity”, but rather “How will I become what God requires me to be”. This is a substantial shift for me – not because I don’t look for the application of knowledge, but, up to this point, if I was to submit a paper which revealed a “faith biais” I would have been dragged over burning coals while academics pointed at me while murmuring “shame”. My new course is designed to consider the application of learning not in the presentation of a compelling paper (although that is gladly recived) but in the application of these principles.
This raises an interesting question about the course in my mind as a “Degree”. Please don’t get me wrong – I believe that the focous is a good and positive one – it is training for ministry that the course aims to provide after all – but should training of this type – which requires a particular religious belief within the practical ministrial modules – be termed as an academic degree?
Yours as ever,
Studiously, the broken man
The difficulty with trying to talk about the conference is – that let's be honest – you don’t care. Do you really want to know about a lecture I attended given by the very brilliant Dr Hannah Holtschneider of the University of Edinburgh ‘Regarding the Pain of Others reflections on the use of photography in Holocaust musems.’? No, if you were that fussed, you would have been there, or have all ready done some reading on the subject. Even if you did decide from my description of it that this is a topic you want to know more about, I wouldn’t necessarily be the best person to ask...she would.
I suspect then my wife is suggesting that I talk about the room I was sleeping in – (it had a bed and sink) or about how wonderful Cambridge is as a city (very) ..or… you see, the problem is, I really am not sure what small talk I can make from all this, and even how worth while doing so would be.
Having returned – panic still high about money, working 8.30-6pm in a 9-5 job (so to speak), I am ever more certain that this is not where I want to be – that I would love to be studying full time, that I would love to be learning and with that learning, hopefully, changing. This brings me onto my new Degree course. This is a course which approaches theology not as just an academic discipline in which one can develop an ever better argument, and attempt to answer the question, for example “”Is there a God?”, or “What does God require of humanity”, but rather “How will I become what God requires me to be”. This is a substantial shift for me – not because I don’t look for the application of knowledge, but, up to this point, if I was to submit a paper which revealed a “faith biais” I would have been dragged over burning coals while academics pointed at me while murmuring “shame”. My new course is designed to consider the application of learning not in the presentation of a compelling paper (although that is gladly recived) but in the application of these principles.
This raises an interesting question about the course in my mind as a “Degree”. Please don’t get me wrong – I believe that the focous is a good and positive one – it is training for ministry that the course aims to provide after all – but should training of this type – which requires a particular religious belief within the practical ministrial modules – be termed as an academic degree?
Yours as ever,
Studiously, the broken man
Tuesday, 26 August 2008
Studying
With my new course due to start in September (BA theology) I have received information on study skills from my training provider. I think the advice provided is worth sharing in case anyone out there is thinking of doing some study, or is on a course which hasn’t provided some of the information they have given me...
"Just think what you might need to start off studying:
Paper – preferably A4 size
Ring binders for notes and handouts
Stapler or paper clips – you need to keep things together in order
Filing box of cabinet to keep all course materials
Writing implements
Markers
Shelf to hold the files and folders
Post it notes or the like"
I know! Not things most of us would have thought of. I am having to do some work readjusting my thinking to study. Paper! That hadn’t crossed my mind. Writing implements? I was intending to use my own blood, but now they have suggested writing implements I am thrown into confusion. Should I be using a ball point pen, roller ball, fountain pen, or pencils? I will have to ask my tutor which is best.
I have not the words…
Yours as ever,
The Broken Man
"Just think what you might need to start off studying:
Paper – preferably A4 size
Ring binders for notes and handouts
Stapler or paper clips – you need to keep things together in order
Filing box of cabinet to keep all course materials
Writing implements
Markers
Shelf to hold the files and folders
Post it notes or the like"
I know! Not things most of us would have thought of. I am having to do some work readjusting my thinking to study. Paper! That hadn’t crossed my mind. Writing implements? I was intending to use my own blood, but now they have suggested writing implements I am thrown into confusion. Should I be using a ball point pen, roller ball, fountain pen, or pencils? I will have to ask my tutor which is best.
I have not the words…
Yours as ever,
The Broken Man
Tuesday, 19 August 2008
Frequently & Infrequently Asked Questions
There are some questions which I am asked on a fairly regular basis, and often the answers are buried in other posts. My apologies if you have been reading for some time and all ready know the information below, but I thought it would be worth doing a recap for those who are new here. I will put a link up to this post in the “about me” section so new people can find this post if they so desire! If there are other regular questions that come up I will add the answers to this post .
Why do you call yourself the Broken Man?
Depending on the day I have a different answer:
I am a Broken Man because of the experiences I have gone through. My parents divorced when I was 9, my father died when I was 16, my older brother died of a heroin overdoes, and I am on my second marriage. All of this has contributed, and much more beside.
I am the Broken Man, because I am broke; I owe, I owe, it's off to work I go.
I am the Broken man, because my body aches; I dropped a TV on my head and things haven't been right since.
I am a broken man because, to quote Morrissey, "the things I have seen could turn a good man bad". And I never was much of a good man.
I am a broken man because I suffer from depression. I have up days, and down days. On down days I want to drive my car into a brick wall and it feels like nothing will ever be okay.
I am the Broken Man, because I have spent a long time living in the dark – however – in the darkness I have found a light, a voice in the deafening silence, that calls to me, and a God who works through my brokenness, and holds the pieces together.
How did I find your blog?
When I am bored I start trawling through blogs, and it seems very rude to me to go into someone’s house without at least saying "hello". Hence, I left you a comment. I found you by putting key words into a blog search, or by following a comment you posted somewhere else, or by finding you on a blog roll of someone else, but I have a very bad memory and it is very unlikely I will now remember which route I took to your blog.
When is the baby due?
December. The wife and I are not too convinced about hospital predicted due dates – for first babies the studies we have looked at suggest that 42 weeks is more normal than 40, and when you tell people your due date they start asking lots of questions near the due date, like – "is it here yet?" So I prefer to just say “December”.
What branch of Christianity are you going to be a priest in?
I am training for ordination in the Church of England, which is an Anglican Church. I describe myself as a Christian (when I must), but rarely by denomination, as I tend to think denomination isn’t that important. Having said that, I like the way that theology is “done” in the Anglican church and hence this is where I am.
Why are you anonymous – how anonymous are you?
By being anonymous I feel I can say things I couldn’t if I wasn’t. For example – I can be rude about my church without offending anyone. I realise I am not incredibly anonymous and it would be very easy for someone with a burning desire to find out who I am to identify me, but I would prefer it this blog isn’t the first thing that someone finds if they put my name into Google.
How did you become a Christian?
This is a question I tend to avoid, as in honesty it’s a long and complex story, involving, much like the people of Israel in the Hebrew Bible account, following God for a while, and then falling away, before returning a little later. There is not a clear break where I can give you a date on which I became a Christian, rather there were many times when I made commitments which I then fell away from. The primary place that got me interested though was a youth discussion group which I attended with the express intention of disproving the existence of God. The thing that turned me off Christianity the most was those Christians who said that there were some things you shouldn’t ask questions about and just had to accept. The thing that impressed me the most was Christians who, no matter how much they disapproved of my life style, continued to care about me, and wanted me as their friend.
Where are you studying?
I am currently studying a Masters Degree in Jewish-Christian relations at the Wolfe Institute, Cambridge. My studies for ordination are taking the form of the first year of a degree course at a local theological collage, followed (probably) by a transfer to the Masters Degree in the second year of training. I am training part-time due to the financial constraints on me, but prefer not to name the place I am studying for Ordination with so that I am free to whine about the course if I want to!
Why do you call yourself the Broken Man?
Depending on the day I have a different answer:
I am a Broken Man because of the experiences I have gone through. My parents divorced when I was 9, my father died when I was 16, my older brother died of a heroin overdoes, and I am on my second marriage. All of this has contributed, and much more beside.
I am the Broken Man, because I am broke; I owe, I owe, it's off to work I go.
I am the Broken man, because my body aches; I dropped a TV on my head and things haven't been right since.
I am a broken man because, to quote Morrissey, "the things I have seen could turn a good man bad". And I never was much of a good man.
I am a broken man because I suffer from depression. I have up days, and down days. On down days I want to drive my car into a brick wall and it feels like nothing will ever be okay.
I am the Broken Man, because I have spent a long time living in the dark – however – in the darkness I have found a light, a voice in the deafening silence, that calls to me, and a God who works through my brokenness, and holds the pieces together.
How did I find your blog?
When I am bored I start trawling through blogs, and it seems very rude to me to go into someone’s house without at least saying "hello". Hence, I left you a comment. I found you by putting key words into a blog search, or by following a comment you posted somewhere else, or by finding you on a blog roll of someone else, but I have a very bad memory and it is very unlikely I will now remember which route I took to your blog.
When is the baby due?
December. The wife and I are not too convinced about hospital predicted due dates – for first babies the studies we have looked at suggest that 42 weeks is more normal than 40, and when you tell people your due date they start asking lots of questions near the due date, like – "is it here yet?" So I prefer to just say “December”.
What branch of Christianity are you going to be a priest in?
I am training for ordination in the Church of England, which is an Anglican Church. I describe myself as a Christian (when I must), but rarely by denomination, as I tend to think denomination isn’t that important. Having said that, I like the way that theology is “done” in the Anglican church and hence this is where I am.
Why are you anonymous – how anonymous are you?
By being anonymous I feel I can say things I couldn’t if I wasn’t. For example – I can be rude about my church without offending anyone. I realise I am not incredibly anonymous and it would be very easy for someone with a burning desire to find out who I am to identify me, but I would prefer it this blog isn’t the first thing that someone finds if they put my name into Google.
How did you become a Christian?
This is a question I tend to avoid, as in honesty it’s a long and complex story, involving, much like the people of Israel in the Hebrew Bible account, following God for a while, and then falling away, before returning a little later. There is not a clear break where I can give you a date on which I became a Christian, rather there were many times when I made commitments which I then fell away from. The primary place that got me interested though was a youth discussion group which I attended with the express intention of disproving the existence of God. The thing that turned me off Christianity the most was those Christians who said that there were some things you shouldn’t ask questions about and just had to accept. The thing that impressed me the most was Christians who, no matter how much they disapproved of my life style, continued to care about me, and wanted me as their friend.
Where are you studying?
I am currently studying a Masters Degree in Jewish-Christian relations at the Wolfe Institute, Cambridge. My studies for ordination are taking the form of the first year of a degree course at a local theological collage, followed (probably) by a transfer to the Masters Degree in the second year of training. I am training part-time due to the financial constraints on me, but prefer not to name the place I am studying for Ordination with so that I am free to whine about the course if I want to!
Wednesday, 6 August 2008
What's your theological worldview?
Just took a quiz on my theological worldview - thanks to http://episcopalpadre.blogspot.com/ for the link. If you fancy giving it a go click here!
Here are my results:
You scored as a Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan
You are an evangelical in the Wesleyan tradition. You believe that God's grace enables you to choose to believe in him, even though you yourself are totally depraved. The gift of the Holy Spirit gives you assurance of your salvation, and he also enables you to live the life of obedience to which God has called us. You are influenced heavly by John Wesley and the Methodists.
Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan 75%
Emergent/Postmodern 75%
Roman Catholic 57%
Neo orthodox 57%
Modern Liberal 54%
Classical Liberal 50%
Reformed Evangelical 46%
Charismatic/Pentecostal 21%
Fundamentalist 4%
Friday, 25 July 2008
The Proof in the Pudding
“J” has kindly posted a comment to my post on “All that Glistens isn’t Gold”, and as it raised some interesting issues I thought I would try and respond in a full blog entry instead of just posting a reply to my comments page. J wrote:
"When it comes down to it, we won't be judged on our theology, or need correct theology in order for God to empower us for miracles. Look at Peter, God used him to heal people when he still believed that you had to follow The Law to be saved.
We will also not be judged on our personality, and whether we shout BAM when we pray for people. Samson was a most disagreeable fellow, but is listed as a Hero of Faith in Hebrews 11.
We will be judged on our character, and "the deeds done in the body, whether good or bad" (2Cor5;10), and that will be the proof of the pudding when it comes to Todd 'BAM' Bentley.
“If God is in this, then I want a slice. If God is pouring out healings, then I want a part. I can leave the ranting, the tattoos, the dodgy theology, the shouting, but if God wants to perform a miracle, then that is what I want to.” J
I really don’t want to get into a specific look at Todd Bentley’s ministry, there are lots of websites that have done so, and there are lots of videos on YouTube which show him in action. I think there are some general principles we can apply to looking at and assessing ministries, and deciding if it’s something we want to be a part of.
Some comment is required, I think, on whether we will be judged on our personality – J points out that Samson was a disagreeable fellow but is listed as a Hero of Faith. I am not sure that I agree that Samson was a disagreeable fellow; I assume that the bit of him which J considers to be disagreeable is him slaying people who were, at the time, considered enemies of God and were oppressing Israel. I think we get into a dangerous game if we use this as the measure for someone being disagreeable!
The issue of Peter is an interesting one. First of all, I do not think that Peter believed you needed to follow the law to be saved. That isn’t really a Jewish belief; the belief was far more along the lines of; “having been saved, we should follow the law as God has commanded us to”, in the same way that today Christians don’t believe that they follow Jesus teaching in order to be saved, but because we are saved. The debate that followed was, “should gentile Christians take on the requirements of the Jewish law?” I think that this doctrinal difference is very different from someone who teaches things which are in conflict with the Bible.
Doctrine does matter and can be an issue of salvation. 1 Timothy 4:16 reads “Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers". This seems to suggest that if you do not watch them closely you will not save yourself and your hearers.
I agree with J that if God wants to perform a miracle then I want to be part of it, but I think it’s worth taking time out to decide what we are chasing after, before we go in search of the miracle workers.
So my question is, how do we assess a miracle, or a miracle worker? Sometimes we want to believe so much that we suspend disbelief and call it faith, yet we don’t want to become people who refuse to acknowledge and see when God is working.
The first difficulty, as I see it, is that when something that seems miraculous appearing to happen, as good Christians, we can say either “this is God” or “this is the Devil”. As we see these as the only two options open to us when something unexplained happens we try and shoe horn it into one of these two boxes.
MAGIC, MIRACLE, OR DECEPTION?
I am an illusionist. This means that among other things I can make it look as if I am floating off the floor. Some years ago, when a certain American illusionist was becoming a big thing and using this trick a lot, I demonstrated how easy it was to give the appearance that you can float to a couple of friends while having coffee after Church. Two other people saw this, and were deeply concerned that they had seen me levitate. Okay, this was a stupid thing for me to do, but putting that aside for a moment, they went to the leadership of the church and expressed deep concern that I was involved in the occult and, as such, was able to levitate.
I showed the elders how the trick was done and it was all cleared up. My point is that just because something looks like “magic” or a “miracle”, it doesn’t follow that it is a miracle, or from the devil. On some occasions we believe things because we want to, or because we cannot think of any other logical explanation for how they could have happened. So, when looking at anything “unexplained”, I think a good starting point is trying to work out whether there are any other possible explanations for what has happened.
MAGIC OR MIRACLE?
If we have got to a stage where we can absolutely rule out illusion, misdirection or “flim flam” and are sure that something has happened that is not of this world, then we do need to work if this is from God or another source. J points out that the proof is in the pudding, that we can to a degree assess something by the results of it; does it look and taste good? I would like to ring a few alarm bells here. If I got a whole bunch of 7 year olds over to my house, and set them up baking puddings, with ingredients I had stolen, if I beat them and made them work 16 hours a day, and then presented you with an incredible tasting pudding, you might say to me, while tasting it and looking at it, “I can tell that this is something that is good”. No. The final item on display does not necessarily indicate that the process is a good thing that we want to involve ourselves in; when looking at whether the pudding is good, we need to not just look at its final appearance, but the process that was used to make it.
In Matt 7:22-23, Jesus said; “Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
When looking at an event which is claiming to be miraculous I want to know whether it points to God, whether it draws people to the cross. Is it coming from a good place, and leading to a good place. When 1000s flock to see a particular speaker who is said to be able to perform miracles but has theology that is “dodgy” then is it God who is glorified or the speaker? Are we chasing after speakers who have a gift, or after the God who gives?
THEOLOGY MATTERS
We are told that “even if we or an angel from heaven preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned” (Gal. 1:8,9)
I don’t think we can ignore “dodgy” doctrine on the basis that the person concerned appears to be displaying miracles; in fact if things which are apparently miraculous are happening, then this is a time where I believe it’s even more important for this to be underpinned by sound doctrine.
A good site to look at on this issue is http://pastors.crossmap.com/article/why-we-need-doctrine/item321.htm, where it’s pointed out that Paul tells us that we need to keep to a pattern of sound teaching with faith and love in Jesus Christ (2 Tim 1:13) that we need to hold firmly to the trustworthy message and encourage others by sound doctrine (Titus 1:9) and that we need to teach what is in accord with sound doctrine (Titus 2:1). Christ’s ministry, the apostle’s ministry and the early churches’ ministries all revolved around sound doctrine (Matt 7:28-29; Acts 5:28; Acts 2:42).
"When it comes down to it, we won't be judged on our theology, or need correct theology in order for God to empower us for miracles. Look at Peter, God used him to heal people when he still believed that you had to follow The Law to be saved.
We will also not be judged on our personality, and whether we shout BAM when we pray for people. Samson was a most disagreeable fellow, but is listed as a Hero of Faith in Hebrews 11.
We will be judged on our character, and "the deeds done in the body, whether good or bad" (2Cor5;10), and that will be the proof of the pudding when it comes to Todd 'BAM' Bentley.
“If God is in this, then I want a slice. If God is pouring out healings, then I want a part. I can leave the ranting, the tattoos, the dodgy theology, the shouting, but if God wants to perform a miracle, then that is what I want to.” J
I really don’t want to get into a specific look at Todd Bentley’s ministry, there are lots of websites that have done so, and there are lots of videos on YouTube which show him in action. I think there are some general principles we can apply to looking at and assessing ministries, and deciding if it’s something we want to be a part of.
Some comment is required, I think, on whether we will be judged on our personality – J points out that Samson was a disagreeable fellow but is listed as a Hero of Faith. I am not sure that I agree that Samson was a disagreeable fellow; I assume that the bit of him which J considers to be disagreeable is him slaying people who were, at the time, considered enemies of God and were oppressing Israel. I think we get into a dangerous game if we use this as the measure for someone being disagreeable!
The issue of Peter is an interesting one. First of all, I do not think that Peter believed you needed to follow the law to be saved. That isn’t really a Jewish belief; the belief was far more along the lines of; “having been saved, we should follow the law as God has commanded us to”, in the same way that today Christians don’t believe that they follow Jesus teaching in order to be saved, but because we are saved. The debate that followed was, “should gentile Christians take on the requirements of the Jewish law?” I think that this doctrinal difference is very different from someone who teaches things which are in conflict with the Bible.
Doctrine does matter and can be an issue of salvation. 1 Timothy 4:16 reads “Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers". This seems to suggest that if you do not watch them closely you will not save yourself and your hearers.
I agree with J that if God wants to perform a miracle then I want to be part of it, but I think it’s worth taking time out to decide what we are chasing after, before we go in search of the miracle workers.
So my question is, how do we assess a miracle, or a miracle worker? Sometimes we want to believe so much that we suspend disbelief and call it faith, yet we don’t want to become people who refuse to acknowledge and see when God is working.
The first difficulty, as I see it, is that when something that seems miraculous appearing to happen, as good Christians, we can say either “this is God” or “this is the Devil”. As we see these as the only two options open to us when something unexplained happens we try and shoe horn it into one of these two boxes.
MAGIC, MIRACLE, OR DECEPTION?
I am an illusionist. This means that among other things I can make it look as if I am floating off the floor. Some years ago, when a certain American illusionist was becoming a big thing and using this trick a lot, I demonstrated how easy it was to give the appearance that you can float to a couple of friends while having coffee after Church. Two other people saw this, and were deeply concerned that they had seen me levitate. Okay, this was a stupid thing for me to do, but putting that aside for a moment, they went to the leadership of the church and expressed deep concern that I was involved in the occult and, as such, was able to levitate.
I showed the elders how the trick was done and it was all cleared up. My point is that just because something looks like “magic” or a “miracle”, it doesn’t follow that it is a miracle, or from the devil. On some occasions we believe things because we want to, or because we cannot think of any other logical explanation for how they could have happened. So, when looking at anything “unexplained”, I think a good starting point is trying to work out whether there are any other possible explanations for what has happened.
MAGIC OR MIRACLE?
If we have got to a stage where we can absolutely rule out illusion, misdirection or “flim flam” and are sure that something has happened that is not of this world, then we do need to work if this is from God or another source. J points out that the proof is in the pudding, that we can to a degree assess something by the results of it; does it look and taste good? I would like to ring a few alarm bells here. If I got a whole bunch of 7 year olds over to my house, and set them up baking puddings, with ingredients I had stolen, if I beat them and made them work 16 hours a day, and then presented you with an incredible tasting pudding, you might say to me, while tasting it and looking at it, “I can tell that this is something that is good”. No. The final item on display does not necessarily indicate that the process is a good thing that we want to involve ourselves in; when looking at whether the pudding is good, we need to not just look at its final appearance, but the process that was used to make it.
In Matt 7:22-23, Jesus said; “Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
When looking at an event which is claiming to be miraculous I want to know whether it points to God, whether it draws people to the cross. Is it coming from a good place, and leading to a good place. When 1000s flock to see a particular speaker who is said to be able to perform miracles but has theology that is “dodgy” then is it God who is glorified or the speaker? Are we chasing after speakers who have a gift, or after the God who gives?
THEOLOGY MATTERS
We are told that “even if we or an angel from heaven preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned” (Gal. 1:8,9)
I don’t think we can ignore “dodgy” doctrine on the basis that the person concerned appears to be displaying miracles; in fact if things which are apparently miraculous are happening, then this is a time where I believe it’s even more important for this to be underpinned by sound doctrine.
A good site to look at on this issue is http://pastors.crossmap.com/article/why-we-need-doctrine/item321.htm, where it’s pointed out that Paul tells us that we need to keep to a pattern of sound teaching with faith and love in Jesus Christ (2 Tim 1:13) that we need to hold firmly to the trustworthy message and encourage others by sound doctrine (Titus 1:9) and that we need to teach what is in accord with sound doctrine (Titus 2:1). Christ’s ministry, the apostle’s ministry and the early churches’ ministries all revolved around sound doctrine (Matt 7:28-29; Acts 5:28; Acts 2:42).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
