Menu

Polygamy: Is Polygamy a Sin?

The Bible speaks of a number of men who took to themselves more than one wife. God doesn’t seem to criticize their choice, or comment directly on it. So, does that mean the Lord approves?

No. We need to take the whole of God’s revelation into account to see what the Bible teaches on the subject. God’s Word faithfully reports cases of polygamy, but that does not mean He condones it, or views it as acceptable.

In ancient times, I suppose it could be rationalized as a protection for the women involved. There was a great mortality rate in warfare, leaving a high ratio of women to men in a community. And in a patriarchal society it was difficult for a woman to provide for herself. Unmarried women could fall prey to prostitution or slavery. But even though it was common in the culture of the day, there is evidence in God’s Word that polygamy is not His desire for families.

1) One Wife for Adam

In the beginning, “God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good” (Gen. 1:31). Surely this includes His design for the first family. If polygamy were the ideal, the Lord could easily have provided several wives for Adam in Eden, but He didn’t. God made only one wife for Adam, setting one-husband-one-wife as the pattern, right at the beginning. “A man shall…be joined to his wife,” not wives (Gen. 2:23-24).

2) Others Had Only One Wife

As far as we can tell from the record, it seems that Noah had only one wife, Job had only one wife, Isaac had only one wife. So did Joseph and others. These were all godly men. So this at least suggests that polygamy wasn’t the expected thing.

3) First Polygamy by a Worldly Man

Some Bible interpreters refer to what’s called “the law of first mention.” It seems to be the case quite often that the first mention of something includes important information about it. Multiple marriages are first mentioned in Scripture in connection with the worldly Cainite civilization, and an arrogant and violent man named Lamech (Gen. 4:19, 23-24). That is surely significant.

4) A Warning to Kings

God specifically forbade the kings of Israel from multiplying wives (Deut. 17:17). Those who disobeyed suffered the consequences. For example, Solomon’s many wives led him into idolatry (I Kgs. 11:1, 3-4).

5) King’s Wives Given to the Next King

A seeming contradiction to the last point is that the Bible says God gave King Saul’s wives to David when he took the throne (II Sam. 12:8). What’s going on there?

It was actually a precaution to preserve the monarchy. If the wife of the dead king married someone else, there could be a serious dispute about who should inherit the throne. This was the reason Solomon reacted to the possibility of Adonijah marrying Abishag, the late King David’s youngest wife. He saw it as a plot to steal the throne (I Kgs. 2:22).

6) Negative Effects of Polygamy

There was frequently jealousy and rivalry between and among the wives in a polygamous situation–for example, between Jacob’s wives Leah and Rachel (Gen. 29:30-32), and Elkanah’s wives Peninnah and Hannah (I Sam. 1:4-6). Polygamy is often connected in Scripture with backsliding and unbelief (as in Solomon’s case).

Abraham’s taking Hagar as his wife (or concubine) resulted from a failure to trust God’s promise of a son through Sarah (Gen. 16:1-4). That folly has caused the people of Israel no end of trouble since, through the descendants of Ishmael.

7) The Teaching of Jesus

The pattern set in the beginning was later confirmed by the Lord Jesus. He reminded His listeners that one wife for one husband was the plan of God, that “the two shall become one flesh” (Matt. 19:4-6, 9; cf. Gen. 2:24).

8) Christ and His Church

The monogamous pattern is also supported by the words of Ephesians 5:23, “The husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church.” There’s only one true church, the spiritual body of Christ, of which He is the Head. Further, the entire passage (vs. 22-33) deals with the husband-wife relationship, and it is always two people who are in view, a single husband and a single wife.

9) Church Leadership

An elder was to be “the husband of one wife” (Tit. 1:5-6). It is possible that this means he should not be a divorcee. But it’s also conceivable that it is a rejection of anyone who is polygamous. A literal rendering of the phrase “the husband of one wife” is a one-woman man, and there is no way this would allow for multiple marriages.

10) A Result of Hard Hearts

It seems that, like divorce (which God “hates,” Mal. 2:16), polygamy was tolerated for a time because of man’s ignorance and hardness of heart (cf. Matt. 19:8). Notice the “if” (not “when”) in Exodus 21:10. God gave a law to protect the second wife, but that is not the same as approving of the practice. It was not what He desired for families among His people.

From the time of the Jews’ return from captivity in Babylon, there’s no reference to polygamy among them. It is not so much that God cancelled something He’d allowed before, but rather that, with the returned captives, they went back to His original plan for marriage.

11) Not a Sexual Sin

I disagree with those who claim that polygamy involves adultery. Marrying a second wife is not the same as committing adultery. It doesn’t require taking another man’s wife. As indicated in Exodus 21:10, each of a man’s wives was to be exclusively his, and equally well cared for. The wrong of polygamy is different from adultery, but it is still wrong. It violates God’s design for marriage and the family.

12) The Law of the Land

As far as I know, polygamy is against the law in North America, and in many other countries. Christians are to obey the law of the land (Rom. 13:1-7), unless what we are asked to do by the governing authorities directly violates God’s Word (cf. Acts 5:29). Those cultists, sometimes in the news, that flaunt their multiple wives, are breaking the law.

On Another Subject: Some recent experiences, and choices made by families I know, have once more stirred my concern as to our attitude toward, the practice of cremation. Is the burning of the bodies of loved ones after death compatible with Christian beliefs? I encourage you to read my extended article on the subject.

Interim Pastorates: Some Benefits of an Interim Pastoral Ministry

Interim pastorates are fairly common. The dictionary defines the word “interim” as that which is temporary, provisional and intervening. An interim pastor would therefore serve the church on a temporary basis, until a regular and full-time pastor is chosen and assumes his duties. It is a ministry that takes place between longer-term, more permanent pastorates.

Interim pastor

An interim ministry might consist simply of regular pulpit supply on Sundays. Or it might extend over several days of each week. And as the depth of involvement varies, so does its duration. Often the interim man continues to serve the congregation for several months. The precise job description will vary according to need, but the underlying purpose of an interim ministry is to facilitate an effective transition from one long-term pastorate to the next.

Reasons for an Interim Ministry

A congregation may consider the option of calling an interim man after the resignation of its pastor. The end of his ministry may have come suddenly, because of illness or other occurrence. Or it may simply be that both pastor and congregation have reached the conclusion, over a period of months, that it is time for a change. (For instance, it could be that he accomplished all he could, using his particular gifts, but that someone with different gifts is needed now.)

Depending on the circumstances, it could take a considerable time for the church to find a new man. The search could extend over six months or a year–occasionally even more. Nor should it be rushed, simply to “plug a hole.” In order to find God’s choice, the right man for the church’s current needs, a period of self-examination by the congregation is worthwhile. Where have we come from? What are our present characteristics? What is our vision for the future? Such questions require thought and prayer on the part of all.

Meanwhile, there may be duties that cannot be covered easily by laymen. The Sunday pulpit ministry is one example. Or other things, such as visitation of the sick, leadership at board meetings (particularly as it relates to assessment of the church’s future needs), music ministry, conducting Bible studies, taking services at local seniors facilities, etc. Any of these could be attended to by lay persons. However, many are already busy with jobs, or perhaps feel they lack the expertise required. An interim man may be the answer.

Rewards of an Interim Ministry

Consider the Sunday pulpit ministry first. It is possible, especially if the church is situated in or near a larger centre, to have a different speaker each week. Many of these may do a fine job. However, what is often missing is continuity. There are real benefits to having a consecutive ministry connecting one Sunday with the next–such as by a series of messages on a Bible book, or on a Bible character. A series of studies gives a sense of stability, and people tend to learn more as well.

The same goes for other ministries of the Word, such as weekly Bible studies. (It might be beneficial to consider having the interim pastor lead a study of the Pastoral Epistles–the letters to Timothy and Titus–since these provide major instruction on the qualifications and duties of church leaders.)

The interim pastor should support the ongoing programs of the church, he can encourage and challenge leadership, helping them to make each ministry as meaningful and effective as possible. His emphasis should be on a positive ministry at all levels, one which encourages fellowship and interaction. (Scheduling regular fellowship meals during his stay might facilitate this.)

If the church has a denominational affiliation, he should also be one who can strengthen that link, and provide a channel of communication with denominational leadership.

As to involvement in special events, such as weddings, baby dedications, the baptism of believers, funerals, etc., these may have to be evaluated on an individual basis. Some may prefer to summon back the previous pastor, or ask that some other man be involved for the occasion, because he is better known. The interim man himself may hesitate to take on certain types of ministry, for his own reasons. (For example, perhaps he is not licensed to perform marriages, or does not feel adequate to conduct important pre-marital counselling, etc.) These things can be worked out as they come up, and practical solutions found, during the ministry of the interim man.

A word of caution. Some men may be gifted in outreach visitation in search of new prospects to build attendance. (Other interim pastors may not.) A visitation program such as this may be helpful if the church and its programs are operating effectively and flourishing. But if there are important issues to be dealt with, or if there is essential groundwork to be laid before the coming of a new pastor, it may be wise to wait on an extensive visitation program.

The period of time between full-time pastors need not be a negative thing. But losing a pastor–especially if he has served the church for some time–is almost like having a death in the family. There can be grieving, and a sense of loss. A positive and consistent ministry afterward can help to bring healing and a sense of anticipation about the future.

The interim pastor may also be able to assist the congregation in working through any conflicts that might hinder the work of the Spirit of God in time to come. And if there were problems during the previous ministry, and hard feelings toward the pastor on the part of some, this is something that needs to be addressed. Either way, it is not fair for a new man to begin his ministry with serious strife in the church. Let an interim man help you work through some of that.

There are things an interim pastor can do that are more difficult for the regular pastor. He has come into the situation without prior involvement and “baggage.” And everyone knows he will not be there long. For this reason, he can sometimes guide the congregation in addressing difficult issues–such as establishing realistic expectations of the coming pastor, or determining what an appropriate financial support for God’s servant should be.

The interim pastor can also lead the church through an examination of its past history and future vision. (Who are we? And what do we want to become, by God’s grace?) The church can benefit from a clearer understanding of its identity and a fresh vision of its ministry. In this regard, there are government assessments available for each area in Canada (“Community Profiles” assembled by Statistics Canada). These provide a helpful snapshot of the community in terms of things like age breakdown, language, education, economic status and religious affiliation. These surveys often contain some surprises! And they can be a useful tool in defining the church’s future ministry.

The interim man can help the members assess the kind of pastoral leadership that would be most helpful as the church moves forward. (I.e. what gifts would be best suited to the need.) And help them evaluate the effectiveness of each church agency. Are there ministries that have outlived their usefulness? Or ones that require some fine-tuning to meet current needs? Are there new ministries that should be explored? This can be a time of brainstorming for fresh insights. This might be done in regular meetings with the board. Or (somewhat depending on the size and makeup of the congregation) all might be included in the discussions.

In addition, the interim man may have special gifts that would be a blessing to the congregation, even in the short term (such as musical ability, a business background, or athletic skills that would interest teens, etc.). He may have administrative gifts that can be put to use if the church needs to reorganize its program, create or fine-tune a constitution, develop job descriptions, or other key documents. Or perhaps he has a special rapport with children, or with young people, or maybe seniors. Using his unique abilities can advantage the church in many ways.

In very rare cases, a church may seem to be coming to the end of its ministry. This may be because of its location and changes in the community, or because of dwindling resources (such as in a small town that is, itself, dying), or some other reason. It may be the task of the interim pastor to help the members assess the overall viability of the work for the future. If the difficult conclusion is reached that it is time to close the church, the interim man can have an important role in assisting with this (in concert with denominational representatives). Fortunately, terminating a church’s ministry fully will be unusual and exceptional work!

Requirements of an Interim Ministry

The interim pastor should be a man with previous pastoral experience. Facilitating a smooth transition between permanent pastors is not a ministry to be taken on by a green recruit. It calls for a level of knowledge and wisdom that comes from having “been there.”

The exact duties of the interim pastor will have to be discussed and negotiated in each situation (with appropriate flexibility to adjust as needs become better known). As noted earlier, some congregations will want to focus mainly on Sunday ministry. Others may engage the man for a couple of days a week or more. On week-days, he may be able to visit the sick, conduct services or Bible studies in the community, attend board or committee meetings, and so on.

It is vital to discuss and clarify expectations on both sides. A list of duties and responsibilities should be drawn up which both the pastor and the people find acceptable. Keep in mind that saddling an interim man (or a full-time pastor) with numerous duties unrelated to his gifts may rob the church of the most effective use of his time (cf. Acts 6:2-4). You will also need to include some description of assistance, financial and otherwise, which the pastor can expect from the congregation. Consider both his personal well-being and the needs of his family in this.

The termination date for the interim ministry should also be discussed, though it is wise to keep this somewhat flexible. It should be understood that if a prospective candidate for full-time ministry is invited to speak or to visit the community for several days, the interim man should absent himself and keep out of the way. If it becomes clear that this is the man of God’s choosing, the interim ministry should be brought to an end. But usually this should be done over a period of weeks, so it can be concluded smoothly, and not involve another jarring change.

It is important to realize that pastoral ministry requires adequate preparation time. Again, this varies with the individual. As a rule of thumb, a half hour sermon can take a day or more of research and study to prepare. And if there are Bible studies or other services to lead, and board meetings at which you want him to provide input as you assess or organize the church’s ministry, each of these could add preparation time too. So, two days of public ministry may well involve at least four days’ work, on average, each week. You can see that this becomes more than a half-time involvement, an important factor in determining the level of financial assistance for him.

While the man of God–if he is truly seeking to serve the Lord–is not working to make money, the Bible reminds us that it is important to materially support him. Paul discusses this in First Timothy 5:17-18, and at some length in First Corinthians 9:7-14. In the latter context, he tells the church that, though he has a right to be helped by them, he has not claimed that right (vs. 12). However, it should be noted the reason he could do this is because he was being financially supported by other congregations (cf. II Cor. 11:8).

And “support” is a better word than salary in this case. The church is not hiring the man, as the boss of a company might do. They are seeking prayerfully for God’s choice to serve among them and oversee the ministry. Technically, the pastor is not “paid” for his work. He is supported out of the Lord’s treasury so he can give a significant amount of time to the Lord’s service. (Time he would otherwise need to spend in secular employment in order to provide for the needs of himself and his family.) If the interim man you call has to drive some distance to serve in the community, this added cost needs to be covered as well. Or he may have other unique financial constraints. Consider these things when you discuss this issue.

In summation, the Bible reminds us that, in the local church, “God is not the author of confusion but of peace,” and that we should therefore see that, “all things be done decently [in a fitting and attractive way] and in order [with each element in its proper place]” (I Cor. 14:33, 40). With regard to churches between long-term pastorates, each situation has its own unique characteristics requiring both investigation and choices. But it is hoped these few thoughts will be a useful guide in determining the viability of an interim pastor in your church. In general, the congregation should look upon the interim not simply as a means of marking time, as they wait for a permanent pastor. It should involve a ministry with a mission–to facilitate an effective transition. Such a ministry can benefit your congregation tremendously, preparing the way for the coming of a new, full-time pastor, and increasing his potential for success.

Oprah Church: A Look at Oprah Winfrey’s Religion

Oprah Church will give you a look at the religion fostered and proclaimed by this influential television personality.

Question: We hear a lot about “Oprah’s church” these days. What do you think about it?

Answer: I have received comments and questions from various ones about Oprah Winfrey’s religious proclamations. They have been shown (and sensationalized) on YouTube, and described elsewhere. Let me state my position up front: Her views are unbiblical and dangerous.

Here are some further observations, mainly based on comments she has made on her television show and her website. The article will deal with what Oprah Winfrey believes and teaches: about God, about the Bible, and about eternal salvation? We will also take a look at the mind altering techniques she prescribes?

To begin with, as has been pointed out regarding other issues, it is not what I think on the subject that matters. The purpose of the newsletter and the website is to examine in the light of the Scriptures questions that are raised. What we need to ask is: What does the Bible say that is relevant?

First, a bit of background. Oprah Gail Winfrey was born in 1954, and was named after a Bible character in the book of Ruth (Orpah, accidentally misspelled). Ruth and Orpah were sisters-in-law, Moabite women who married Hebrew men. While Ruth left behind her heathen heritage and joined herself to the people of God, Orpah returned to her people and her idols when her husband died (Ruth 1:1-17). Some may see an ironic application of that to Oprah’s spiritual drift.

Oprah Winfrey began developing her own unique talk-show style over 20 years ago in Chicago. Now in her mid-fifties, her talent and drive have made her a billionaire. Not only is she the most successful talk show host in television history, but she has become a media mogul, an actress and film producer, a publisher, a philanthropist, and more. At its best her daily (week-day) show has been able to entertain and inform, making people (especially women) feel good about themselves. At its worst, it is something else again.

The question above relates to the TV host’s growing endorsement and promotion of anti-Christian teaching. To consider that, it will be helpful to summarize a few New Age beliefs. As we proceed, you will see that these are the very things Oprah is espousing. This philosophy is based aspects of Eastern mysticism, Hinduism and paganism. It has no authoritative holy book of its own, but makes use of selected passages from the Bible and the books of other religions.

New Agers desire to see world peace and unity built around their New Age religion. To them, everything and everyone is “God.” He (it) is an impersonal force, not a person. They deny Christ’s deity, and reject the Bible’s teaching that He died to save us. (They also deny the reality of sin.) They assert that Jesus is actually a New Age “ascended master,” who has tapped into the divine power within, as any of us can do.

“Salvation” for them is a growing awareness of our inner divinity and “Christ consciousness.” We can gain this through meditation, hypnosis, channelling, and other means. They use terms such as being “reborn,” but not in the biblical sense. They say human beings will be reincarnated until they reach oneness with the divine force. There is no resurrection, no heaven or hell.

Oprah’s own spiritual pilgrimage apparently began in a Baptist church where her father was a deacon–a church she faithfully attended when she was young. But her lack of understanding of the Scriptures, and input from others who reject the Bible outright, have led her further and further away from the truth.

Increasingly, over the past few years, she has been involved in what one critic has labelled the “Oprahfication of religion,” becoming a kind of unofficial high priestess of what she thinks of as a new spiritual awakening. (“Our mission statement for The Oprah Winfrey Show is to use television to transform peoples’ lives.”) But what she has in mind is as different as night and day from the spiritual awakenings in which John and Charles Wesley, Jonathan Edwards, and others were involved over two centuries ago.

This is an “awakening” through New Age indoctrination. And it is deadly. Deadly because it involves gross error. Error that will leave deluded seekers bound in sin and in danger of eternal judgment. And deadly because Miss Winfrey has the skill, the popularity, and the media platform to promote it effectively.

Oprah has a huge audience of dedicated followers, prone to take her word as gospel concerning just about anything. Her show is broadcast in 134 countries, and is seen by millions of viewers each week. Her give-aways make the news. Her Book Club selections instantly turn into best-sellers. TIME Magazine declared her one of the 100 most influential people in the world. So, exactly what religion is she peddling? What is “the Church of Oprah”?

The Oprah Church & God

As Oprah tells it, at about the age of 23 she was sitting in church listening to a message about the greatness and majesty of God. But then the speaker added that God is “a jealous God,” and that immediately turned her off. “God is jealous of me?” she thought, commenting later, “It didn’t feel right.”

Since Oprah herself marks this incident as the beginning of her divergence from orthodox Christian teaching, let us start there. The statement that the Almighty is “jealous” is found more than half a dozen times in the Scriptures (Exod. 20:3-5; 34:13-14; Deut. 4:23-24; 5:7-10; 6:14-15; Josh. 24:19-20; Nah. 1:2).

The Hebrew word translated “jealous” (qana) can also be rendered zealous. It refers to a passionate desire to protect something that is in possible jeopardy. As the Bible uses the term, this is not necessarily a bad thing. For example, we are told, “The Lord will be zealous (qana) for His land, and pity His people” (Joel 2:18), speaking of His defense of Israel. And Paul says of the Corinthian church, “I am jealous for you with godly jealousy” (II Cor. 11:2), meaning he is concerned to protect them from error.

Oprah misunderstood. It is not that God is jealous of us, weak creatures that we are. Rather, He has a zeal to defend His own glory. (“I will be jealous for My holy name,” Ezek. 39:25.) In most of the above biblical references to God’s jealousy, the context deals with idolatry. Our allegiance and worship rightfully belong to God Almighty, since He is the only true and transcendent God (cf. Isa. 45:5, 18, 21-22; 46:9; Jer. 10:10; I Cor. 8:4; I Thess. 1:9).

And, as we have seen, the Lord is not only concerned for His own honour, but for His people’s welfare. For them to bow down before impotent gods of wood or stone would not only be folly, but dangerous folly. God has a zealous desire to protect us from what can only cause us harm.

One of Ms Winfrey’s New Age gurus is author and New Age lecturer Eckhart Tolle. She quotes with enthusiastic approval his statement that orthodox Christians have merely manufactured a “God” in their own image–that He is a product of our warped imagination. The irony of this claim–obvious to anyone who will stop and think–is that Oprah and her colleagues are guilty of precisely that.

Ms O espouses a version of what is called pantheism–God is in everything and everything is God. For her, God is not “up there.” He (or it) is in every person; we have only to seek the divine consciousness or force within. And Oprah remarked to Tolle, “God is a feeling experience, not a believing experience–otherwise it’s not truly God.” She said, “We are the universe, or the source of all life, the creator, or god.” (If that is not remaking God in one’s own image, what is?) “We are…god.” Whose lie is that (Gen. 3:5; Isa. 14:14)?

That is not what the Bible says. It presents God as the Maker and the supreme Ruler of all in heaven and on earth (Gen. 1:1; Neh. 9:6; Ps. 24:1-2; 33:6, 9; Rev. 4:11). And it declares, “Without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him” (Heb. 11:6). It is not a matter of having a feeling about an impersonal “it of some kind. “Have faith in God,” Christ said (Mk. 11:22).

The Person of God is presented to us clearly in the Scriptures from beginning to end. “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17). Though our finite intellects can never grasp all there is to know about Him, God’s inspired revelation has been given so we can learn what we need to know in order to relate to Him and fellowship with Him.

In contrast to what Oprah believes and teaches, here is the Westminster Larger Catechism’s definition of God and His attributes (answering Question 7): “God is a Spirit, in and of Himself, infinite in being, glory, blessedness and perfection; all-sufficient, eternal, unchangeable, incomprehensible, everywhere present, almighty, knowing all things, most wise, most holy, most just, most merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth.” That statement accurately represents the God of the Bible.

The Oprah Church & the Bible

We can easily see what Oprah thinks of God’s Word by the way in which she repeatedly contradicts or twists its teaching. As noted above, Ms Winfrey first rejected what the Bible presents to us because “it didn’t feel right.” But is that the basis on which we are to evaluate what God has said? No indeed! The kind of messages that tickle people’s ears often turn out to be “fables” (II Tim. 4:2-4)!

The key issue here–as with other forms of heresy–is whether or not one believes the Bible to be the inspired and infallible Word of the living God. If it is merely a collection of ancient writings produced by fallible men, then we can do with it as we please. We can cherry-pick (as Oprah does) ideas we happen to like, and discard the rest. Or we can wrest the words from their context, and ignore the intention of the author, making them mean whatever we want.

But once acknowledge that in its entirety the Book is God-breathed (the literal meaning of “given by inspiration of God” in II Tim. 3:16), and we are not left with that alternative. “No prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation [it did not come from the prophets themselves], for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved [borne along] by the Holy Spirit” (II Pet. 1:20-21).

The Lord Jesus declared the Scriptures to be reliable, in the original languages, right down to the letters in each word, and even to the parts of each letter. “One jot [the smallest Hebrew letter] or one tittle [part of a Hebrew letter] will by no means pass from the law until all is fulfilled” (Matt. 5:18). Further, we are repeatedly told that any attempt to add to or subtract from the Word will be judged by a holy God (Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Prov. 30:6; Rev. 22:18-19).

One of the clever techniques practis1Ted by the cults, and by Winfrey and her New Age coterie, is redefinition–taking words that may sound familiar–maybe even Bible words–and giving them a New Age twist. Let us consider a few examples.

Oprah’s weekly online seminar based on Eckhart Tolle’s book, The New Earth, is extolled as “walking you through a new birth.” But what does it mean to be reborn in the biblical sense? Let’s take a few moments to think about it. We are both physical and spiritual creatures. Each of us has both a material and immaterial aspect of his being. In fact, there is some evidence that we can think in terms of three interrelated elements. The Bible speaks of our “spirit, soul, and body” (I Thess. 5:23).

Our body gives us world consciousness, through our senses. Our soul gives us self awareness. (The Greek word used is psuche, from which our word “psychology” comes.) And through our spirits we are enabled to be sensitive to and responsive to God. Each of us was born naturally or physically. But we were spiritually stillborn (Ps. 51:5; 58:3). “These are sensual [psuche] persons…not having the Spirit” (Jude 1:19). In this condition, apart from a work of God, we are unable to comprehend the things of God (I Cor. 2:14), and we are in eternal jeopardy.

We need a new kind of birth–a spiritual birth, which comes through faith in Christ. This is part of the work of salvation that happens at conversion (Eph. 2:1) The “new birth” (referred to as being born again or regenerated in Scripture, Jn. 3:7; Tit. 3:5)–which Oprah so cavalierly attaches to her teachings–is a work of the Spirit of God by which new spiritual life is created in the one who puts his faith in Christ. “As many as received Him [Christ], to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (Jn. 1:12-13; 3:6). And “unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (Jn. 3:3).

Tolle also misrepresents what it means for believers to serve as lights in the world. He quotes Jesus’ words, “You are the light of the world,” adding that this means “You are the consciousness in which the world appears–is seen.” But Matthew 5:14 has nothing to do with being the consciousness in which the world appears (meaningless New Age bafflegab!).

Light, in Scripture, is used to symbolize a number of things. One is truth, the truth of God’s Word (cf. Ps. 119:105). Another is righteousness and holiness. “God is light and in Him is no darkness at all” (I Jn. 1:5), while “men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil” (Jn. 3:19). The gospel of grace also makes use of the light imagery–being called “the light of the gospel” (II Cor. 4:4). “God…has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (vs. 6).

Jesus declared, “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness but have the light of life” (Jn. 8:12). Christ is the true and original light. He is the source of light–the light of life, and of truth, and true holiness. When we put our faith in Him, we become repositories and reflectors of His light, to the glory of God. We are enabled to shine forth His truth, both in word and in life.

As the Lord Jesus explains, in the context of Matthew 5:14, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven” (Matt. 5:16). And we are to “shine as lights in the world, holding fast the word of life [the gospel]” (Phil. 2:15-16). Shining for Him represents the active proclamation and witness to the truth of the gospel of grace.

And what about the New Ager’s concept of heaven. Tolle says, “Heaven is not a location, but refers to the inner realm of consciousness.” Wrong again. Heaven is not a state of consciousness, but a real place, according to Christ Himself. He says to His followers, “I go to prepare a place for you [not a state of mind]” (Jn. 14:2). And to the dying thief, “Today you will be with Me in Paradise [a Persian word describing a lovely park or garden]” (Lk. 23:43).

Where God’s throne is is called “the third heaven” (II Cor. 12:2, 4) which suggests it is just as real as the other two–the atmosphere where clouds form and birds fly, and outer space, the location of planets and stars. It is also called: “the city which has foundations….the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem….[and] the holy city, New Jerusalem” (Heb. 11:10; 12:22; Rev. 21:2). All of that sounds pretty real and concrete!

We can add to these deceptions Oprah’s total misconception and misrepresentation of what “spirituality” is. Says Gary Zukav, another of her frequent New Age guests, “Souls that have chosen the physical experience of life as we know it as a path of evolution, have, in general, incarnated their energies many times into many psychological and physical forms. For each incarnation, the soul creates a different personality and body.” (Come again?!) As Oprah puts it, “The whole point of being alive is to evolve into the complete person you were intended to be.”

Compare this to the comments about our spirit, soul, and body, above. What Ms O is offering is a soulish religion, focused on the betterment of our psychological beings–with a large dose of material prosperity thrown in. But it is devoid of spiritual life. She defines spirituality as “being reminded about the best part of who you are.” Notice how centred on the self all of this is.

“Oprah’s newly-packaged positive-thinking spirituality is tailor-made for the empty souls of our postmodern age. She promises meaning without truth, acceptance without judgment, and fulfillment without self-denial” (R. Albert Mohler). But the Bible presents us with a life that is God-centred. To be a Christian is to be rightly related to Christ. To be a spiritual Christian is to be rightly related to the Holy Spirit. If we live in the Spirit [through the new birth], let us also walk in the Spirit” (Gal. 5:25; cf. I Cor. 2:12-13; Eph. 5:18).

The Oprah Church & Salvation

What of Oprah Winfrey’s beliefs concerning Christ and the gospel of grace? Consider one source of her information on this topic. On her website, another New Age teacher, Marianne Williamson, holds forth regularly in a course on “miracles” (defined by her as “a shift in perception from fear to love”!). Williamson has made such heretical and blasphemous statements as: “My salvation comes from me….My Self is ruler of the universe….There is no sin….Do not make the pathetic error of ‘clinging to the old rugged cross.'” Her pronouncements have received the full endorsement of Miss Winfrey.

The gospel of the saving work of Christ on the cross a “pathetic error”? For shame! We must stand with Paul who says to the Corinthian believers, “I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified” (I Cor. 2:2). And to the Galatians, “God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. 6:14).

Again, let’s get back to the Book! “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all” (Isa. 53:6). “Christ died for our sins” (I Cor. 15:3). “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace” (Eph. 1:7).

Oprah states, “I am a Christian who believes there are certainly many more paths to God other than Christianity….It’s a mistake to believe that there’s only one way. There are millions of ways to what you call ‘God.'” This is a strange contradiction indeed! By definition, a “Christian” (a Christ-one) is a person who has put his or her faith in Christ for salvation, and has become a follower of Christ.

So, does the Bible leave us with the millions of options Ms Winfrey claims we have? No. In fact the Lord Jesus Himself delineated only two possible “ways,” the right way and the wrong way–the path to life and the path to eternal destruction (Matt. 7:13-14). “There is a way that seems right to a man [or woman], but its end is the way of death” (Prov. 14:12).

Over and over the Word of God presents personal faith in Christ as Saviour as the one and only possible way to be saved (Jn. 3:16; Acts 16:31-32; Eph. 1:7; I Jn. 5:11-13). “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (Jn. 3:18). Jesus stated concerning Himself, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (Jn. 14:6). “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

Winfrey is seducing her audience to swallow the lie that God is in everything, and that all roads lead to “it.” And if there is no personal God, then we do not have to acknowledge Him and discover His will. If God is only some kind of energy or force and not the sovereign Ruler of the universe, we do not have to be concerned about whether we are pleasing Him or not.

It follows then that we need not be concerned about standing before Him after death. Eckhart Tolle claims that he has not given death much thought. He believes human beings will keep on getting reincarnated until they are finally absorbed into the great All. For him there is no heaven or hell, and thus no judgment to face before God.

But what do we find in God’s Word? Speaking to believers, Paul says, “In Him [Christ] you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation” (Eph. 1:13). And “how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation” (Heb. 2:3). “It is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment” (Heb. 9:27; cf. Ecc. 12:14; Acts 17:31). “He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (Jn. 3:36).

The Apostle John saw this judgment taking place, in a prophetic vision. He wrote, “Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heavens fled away….And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire” (Rev. 20:11, 15). For more on the subject, click on Plan of Salvation.

The Oprah Church & Mind Training

Oprah Winfrey refuses to accept the plain doctrinal teaching of the Bible. She rejects the Christian “religion” because she sees it as too narrow, controlling, and oppressive. But this is merely a kind of religious sleight of hand, because her alternative is itself a religion with its own persistent dogmas, one that allows her a license to “catalogue shop” through the Bible, picking only what feels good, then mixing it with often contradictory ideas from other philosophies. This fatal mix she foists on the public.

A careful examination of the methods used by her and her colleagues reveals that she is employing standard thought reform or brainwashing techniques. Listen to what is said of the course on miracles conducted on the Oprah website by Marianne Williamson. It is called “an educational program for retraining the mind that is spiritual, rather than religious, in its perspective. Although it uses Christian terminology, the Course expresses a universal experience.” (There again is the implication of employing biblical words to mean something different from what Christians and the Bible mean.)

Williamson goes on, “Some of the ideas the workbook presents you will find hard to believe, and others may seem to be quite startling. This does not matter. You are merely asked to apply the ideas as you are directed to do. You are not asked to judge them at all. You are asked only to use them. It is their use that will give them meaning to you, and will show you that they are true….You need not believe the ideas, you need not accept them, and you need not even welcome them. Some of them you may actively resist. None of this will matter, or decrease their efficacy. But do not allow yourself to make exceptions in applying the ideas the workbook contains.”

Learners are being asked to do whatever they are told, without using discernment. In this regard, Oprah urges her listeners to “keep an open mind,” and Tolle gushes, “Nonresistance is the key to the greatest power in the universe.” Not surprisingly, Oprah makes use of the mind-emptying practice of Eastern meditation (not to be confused with meditation on the Scriptures). In one of Tolle’s visits, she asked him to “lead us in silence.” He proceeded to have listeners focus on their breathing as they sat silently. On another program, Winfrey had the entire audience hypnotized so they could supposedly regress into previous incarnations and learn about what they used to be.

This is perilous folly. To accept ideas and techniques without critically examining them in the light of God’s Word is totally wrong. God never asks us to jettison our powers of thought and blindly accept anything. He exhorts the people of Israel, “Come now, and let us reason together” (Isa. 1:18). And when Paul preached to the Jews, he opened the Old Testament Scriptures and “reasoned” with them about the identity of the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 17:2; 18:4, 19; 24:25).

The apostle commends the people of Berea, “in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so” (Acts 17:11). As for meditation, trying to empty the mind of thought, leaves it dangerously open to demonic oppression. Demons look for opportunities to fill an empty “house” (Matt. 12:43-45).

As the prophet agonized regarding Israel, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge” (Hos. 4:6). For all their social savvy and sophistication, Oprah is dealing many times with spiritually gullible, naive and untaught people. “According to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables” (II Tim. 4:3-4). They are “children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting” (Eph. 4:14).

Do not attempt to fill your mind with nothing, or focus obsessively on your inner self. Look to the Lord, and the Scriptures, and meditate on them (Ps. 1:1-3). Through the Word of the living God we find Him who is the Source of life and of spiritual health. In addition, it is through a careful study of the Word of God that we learn the truth and are armed against Satan’s lies. “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isa. 8:20; cf. Matt. 4:1-10).

The Apostle Paul declared, “There are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:7-8).

In conclusion, there is no “church” involved in all of this, whatever some may call it. Oprah’s programs and seminars are the direct antithesis to the church as it is presented in the Bible. The church is the spiritual body of Christ over which He is the ruling head (Eph. 1:22-23). Christians are bound together by a work of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 12:12-13), and by our common faith (Eph. 4:4-6).

We gather as local churches or assemblies–local expressions of the body of Christ–for worship, for teaching, for fellowship and for ministry. And as we gather, the Lord has promised to be in our midst (Matt. 18:20). That is something Oprah’s TV programs and courses cannot provide. If you do not have a home church, I encourage you to find one. One that is welcoming and alive, and one that faithfully proclaims the fundamentals of the faith.

What Oprah Winfrey is peddling is deception and deadly error. New Age teaching may well be a prologue to the end-times universal religion of the Beast (or Antichrist), when all the world will wonder after and follow the Beast (Rev. 1:1-18). “Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (I Jn. 4:1). Be like the Bereans (Acts 17:11), and evaluate everything you hear by the trustworthy Word of God. And may the Lord enable you to do that!

Pastoral Candidate Questionnaire

This is a Pastoral Questionnaire to aid the local church in examining and interviewing a candidate for pastoral ministry. (You can alter it to suit your own situation.) Answers to the following questions should be written out by the candidate, and forwarded to the church well in advance of a personal interview.

Pastoral Candidate Questionnaire

☼ If you have a formal resume, please forward a copy to us. Then you will only need to address the questions which are not covered in it.

☼ Please enclose a recent picture of yourself and (if possible) of your family.

Personal Information

1. Your Name

2. Address / Home Phone / FAX Line / E-mail Address

3. Place of Birth / Date of Birth

4. Rate your health as one of the following–excellent, good, fair, poor–and comment on the reason for your choice, as necessary.

5. List any special hobbies or interests you have, or recreational activities you enjoy.

6. Please give a brief personal testimony regarding your conversion and other significant milestones in your spiritual life.

Family Information

7. Are you married? If yes, have you or your wife ever been divorced?

8. (If applicable) Wife’s Name / Date of Birth

9. Please list the names and ages of each of your children living at home. For any living on their own, give their names and note where they are located.

10. Describe your wife’s training, work experience, and ministry experience.

11. What is your expectation as far as the amount and type of involvement of your wife in the church?

Education & Training

(Answer the following unless you have provided a resume which contains the information.)

12. Describe all post-secondary education–list each institution, graduation date, degree or diploma earned, and any degree program in progress. List any area(s) of specialization, or special studies taken.

13. Other than pastoral ministry, list any work experience you believe might be relevant to effective ministry (e.g. involving working with people, administrative skills, etc.).

14. List some books have you read in the past six months (either for personal development, leisure, or related to work)? What secular and religious periodicals do you subscribe to, or read with some regularity?

Pastoral Experience

(Answer the following unless you have provided a resume which contains the information.)

15. Present pastorate (or other occupation)

16. Length of service in present location

17. Denominational affiliation (if in ministry)

18. Why have you decided to leave your present situation?

19. List each of the churches in which you have pastored (or had other ministry involvement). Note the type of service, and length of service in each, and the denominational affiliation of the church.

Ministerial Standing & Beliefs

20. Place of your current church membership

21. Give date(s) and indicate by what body you were licensed to preach, and ordained.

22. Do you attend and support denominational meetings and conferences?

23. Have you ever been a member of any other denomination’s ministerial association? If so, give the name and connection.

24. Briefly tell what you know about [our denomination] and what particularly impresses you about it?

25. Have you previously served in [our denomination] in any way? (If so, how?)

26. Having read the [denominational / church] doctrinal statement, please state whether you are in full agreement with it. (If you have reservations, please explain them.)

27. Please write a short statement of your convictions on the following subjects (unless the item is covered by your resume, or the doctrinal statement referred to in #26).

a) Aspects of the believer’s sanctification (separation)

b) The eternal security of the believer

c) Charismatic doctrine and practice (including brief comments on tongues, healing, and the “Vineyard Movement”)

d) The distinction between Israel and the church

e) Eschatology (Include a comment on your position regarding the church and the Tribulation.)

f) Local church government

g) The role of women in the church

h) Church music (basic principles, and limits of acceptability)

i) Divorce and remarriage (Would you be willing to marry someone who has been divorced? Under what circumstances?)

j) Would you marry a Christian and a non-Christian? (If so, under what circumstances?)

k) Involvement of the pastor in the local ministerial (assuming that it includes not only evangelicals but liberals, Catholics and so on)

Pastoral Ministry

28. Describe your call to the ministry.

29. Provide a brief statement of your philosophy of ministry.

30. With an understanding of your training and gifts, and judging from past experience, which of the following would you expect to receive special emphasis in your ministry, and which would likely receive less emphasis? (Rate using 1 to 5, with “1” indicating the highest priority.) Comment on your choices if you wish.

( ) Preaching/teaching

( ) Leading Public Worship

( ) Children’s Work

( ) Youth Work

( ) Seniors’ Work

( ) Men’s Work

( ) Pastoral Care & Visitation

( ) Counselling

( ) Organization & Administration

( ) Church Music

( ) Leadership/Teacher Training

( ) Church Growth & Promotion

( ) Social Action

( ) Missions Promotion

( ) Evangelism

( ) Community Service

( ) Church-generated Welfare

( ) Other?

Note: It is recognized that no one will do all of these things equally well, or devote equal time to them. Our concern is simply to discover whether your particular gifts and priorities would suit the present needs of our congregation.

31. Describe your most common preaching style(s) (expository, textual, topical), your use of overheads and hand-outs, the usual length of your sermons. Give some examples of typical messages or series you have preached–book studies, character studies, topics, etc. How much time would you normally spend in the preparation of a half-hour message?

32. What Bible version do you customarily use for preaching and teaching? What is your view regarding the place of other versions?

33. Describe your routine and practice with regard to pastoral visitation. What involvement in this would you expect from church board members or others?

34. If you had a choice, what kind of church setting is your preference–urban, suburban, rural, industrial community, college community, etc.?

35. What is your view with regard to pastoral tenure? (I.e. Generally speaking, how long should a pastor stay in one location to be most effective?)

36. What do you believe are the strongest and weakest aspects of your ministry? (Explain.)

37. Describe the position you are seeking, or the role you see yourself filling most effectively. (In other words, write a basic job description for yourself, roughly allocating percentages of your time to the major items.)

38. Please list the names, addresses and phone numbers of at least three people who could give an evaluation of your character and ministry skills. (Include at least one pastor.)

Pastoral Support & Housing

39. Approximately what financial support per month do you feel you need to maintain your family?

40. What is your expectation regarding other benefits–housing, car allowance, book allowance, continuing education allowance, insurance, pension etc.?

41. What is your expectation regarding regular office hours, days off and an annual vacation?

42. Would you be willing, if necessary, to partially support yourself with some other source of income?

43. Do you anticipate that your wife will be working outside the home? (Part-time or full-time?)

44. Are you currently in debt? If so, by what amount?

45. Will you be purchasing your own home? (If applicable) how many bedrooms would you require in a parsonage?

☼ It is understood that returning this questionnaire does not obligate either the church or you. The information will be handled with discretion by the search committee. Should the church decide to pursue the matter further, you will hear from us as soon as possible. Thank you for your help. Your responses will provide a basis for any further discussion with you.

Teens and Physical Intimacy

Question: Is petting and kissing for young people bad in a biblical context?

Answer: It’s a great question. I’m not sure I’m the best person to answer it (since my dating years were long ago), but I’ll give it a try. And I’ll begin by making an assumption: That you sincerely want to obey God, and do what’s best, or you wouldn’t have asked the question. If that’s so, here are some things to think about, as you develop your own standards in this area.

1) I’m not sure what other countries are like, but here in North America we live in a sex-obsessed–we could almost say a sex-crazed society. Movies, television shows, music videos, and more, targeting young people, glorify a sexually permissive and promiscuous lifestyle that is far from the moral purity God’s Word sets down for us.

And because sensuality and immoral behaviour are so widely condoned and promoted, peer pressure on teens to fit in can be tremendous. Nobody wants to feel like a misfit, and it takes a lot of courage to stand alone.

I heard of a young woman who was taunted by others because she was still a virgin. They mocked her for being a religious goody-goody and an old-fashioned prude. But one day she turned on them and said, “Look, I can be just like you are any time I want to. But you can never again be just like me!” (Well said!)

Since God created us (Gen. 1:27), we know that He invented sex, and it’s one of the things He pronounced “very good” (vs. 31). However, like many other things, this gift can become “very bad” when it’s out of balance with other blessings, or not used within the boundaries God has set.

We can illustrate that with water. Water is definitely “very good,” and necessary for us. But if there’s flooding–water that overflows its proper boundaries–it can be dangerous and destructive.

2) Teen-agers have to be especially careful in this area, because their hormones are going crazy. It’s just a natural stage in their development, but it can’t be ignored, and it calls for extra caution–especially since, as I mentioned a moment ago, youth-targeted media seem to be doing everything possible to fan the flames of passion. It shouldn’t be a matter of getting as close to the flame as possible without getting burned, but of setting a clear standard to keep one’s distance.

Here’s a passage from God’s Word to think about:

“Finally then, brethren, we urge and exhort in the Lord Jesus that you should abound more and more, just as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God; for you know what commandments we gave you through the Lord Jesus. For this is the will of God, your sanctification [a clear separation from evil]: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel [body] in sanctification and honour, not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles who do not know God [not like worldly society, in other words]; that no one should take advantage of and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also forewarned you and testified. For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness” (I Thess. 4:1-7).

The word “defraud” there is important to our discussion. In the context, it means to take advantage of another person in order to satisfy selfish desires; or to arouse sexual desires in another person that can’t be righteously satisfied. This fits exactly what I was saying about staying a safe distance away from the flame!

3) There are many Scriptures that have to do with setting a godly standard in one’s relationships and moral values. Here are a few.

A) “Put on the Lord Jesus Christ [that is, behave yourselves as He would], and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfil its lusts” (Rom. 13:14). “Provision for the flesh” is talking about doing those things that you know are likely to stir up sinful desires–desires that can’t be righteously satisfied. This would include avoiding those television shows and movies, etc. that flaunt an impure standard of behaviour.

B) “Beloved, I beg you as sojourners and pilgrims, abstain from [say “no” to] fleshly lusts which war against the soul” (I Pet. 2:11). “Abstain from evil <shrink from it and keep aloof from it> in whatever form or whatever kind it may be” (I Thess. 5:22, Amplified Bible).

C) “Do not be deceived: ‘Evil company corrupts good habits’” (I Cor. 15:53). The friends we choose to associate will either support and strengthen our moral convictions or slowly wear them away and break them down. It’s important to choose good friends.

D) “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world–the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life–is not of the Father but is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever” (I Jn. 2:15-17). Temporary pleasures are contrasted there with long-term blessing. Moses provides us with an example of one who made the right choice, “choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin” (Heb. 11:25).

E) “If we live in the Spirit [that is, if we’re born again Christians], let us also walk in the Spirit [guided and strengthened by the Spirit of God, through the Word of God]….Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. (Gal. 5:25, 16). Saturating our minds with the Word of God is an important key to walking in the Spirit. “How can a young man [or woman] cleanse his [or her] way? By taking heed according to Your word….Your word I have hidden in my heart, that I might not sin against You!” (Ps. 119:9, 11).

4) Physical intimacy at too early a time can derail long-term hopes and good intentions. God has designed that sexual fulfillment be found within the faithful marriage of one man and one woman (Heb. 13:4; cf. Gen. 2:24).

How do we know who is the right marriage partner for us? Is it going to be on the basis of good looks? Or sensual excitement? Such things may seem important to some, especially early on, but they are not enough to sustain loving and productive marriage, long-term. Too many have formed a bond in the heat of passion that proves to be a mistake, and a stressful burden later on.

First and foremost, a Christian should be looking for someone who is a committed Christian. Not just “sort of a Christian,” but one who lives by a high standard of godly conduct. One who loves to study God’s Word. One who shares a desire to live for Christ, and find ways to serve Him.

Sexual pleasure in marriage is only one small part of the picture. The couple needs to get involved in serving faithfully in a local church, and perhaps in a para-church agency, with a sense that they are united in that purpose, and supportive of one another in it.

Further, the married couple needs to be committed to raising children, if God grants them, children who put their faith in the Lord Jesus, and live for Him and serve Him. The Bible explains one reason why God invented the marriage union: “He seeks godly offspring” (Mal. 2:15).

So how does one find such a future partner? By engaging in wholesome activities with wholesome-minded friends. Relationships begin with acquaintance–meeting someone. Some may go no further than that. Others move on to a casual friendship, and maybe on to a closer friendship.

In your own mind, treat each friend of the opposite sex as a potential mate. I’m not suggesting you tell him or her that. But think in terms of the future possibilities. Don’t say, for example, “Oh, this isn’t serious. We’re just friends,” as though that permits you to lower the standard of what you’ll accept. Emotional attachments can form that are difficult and painful to break. Set a high standard for dating and it’ll be much safer.

Over a period of time, you can get to know a lot about a person at this level. In that respect, group activities are often superior to a couple dating separately. You get to observe the interactions of that other person with a variety of people in a variety of situations.

The Lord has provided us with a standard to weigh the character of that other person we’re interested in–and Christ-like character should be what we’re looking for above all. Here is J. B. Philips’ insightful paraphrase of First Corinthians 13:4-7, describing what to look for in that special someone:

“This love of which I speak is slow to lose patience–it looks for a way of being constructive. It is not possessive: it is neither anxious to impress nor does it cherish inflated ideas of its own importance. Love has good manners and does not pursue selfish advantage. It is not touchy. It does not keep account of evil or gloat over the wickedness of other people. On the contrary, it shares the joy of those who live by the truth. Love knows no limit to its endurance, no end to its trust, no fading of its hope; it can outlast anything.”

J. B. Philips

5) And let me close with two more bits of counsel. Establish godly boundaries for your relationships, and consistently engage in wholesome activities.

Godly Boundaries would include:

A) Strictly limiting the time you’re alone together with that other person.

B) Establishing a time to be home from evening activities–one that’s agreed to by your parents–and sticking to it.

C) Also, limiting demonstrations of physical affection to occasional actions you wouldn’t be embarrassed or ashamed to engage in in front of your parents or your pastor–or the Lord Jesus.

D) Your standard of dress is an important factor too. It says a lot about you, for good or ill. Dress should be modest and neat, not slovenly, or revealing and suggestive (I Tim. 2:9). Notice how the Lord contrasts extremes in dress to be avoided for women, with qualities of character which should be the focus (I Pet. 3:3-4).

E) Be accountable to God, and to your parents (who are God’s representatives in authority over you). You should be able to tell your parents where you are going, and what you’ll be doing, and how they can get in touch with you if they need to.

Godly Activities could include:

A) Wholesome entertainment (I’m thinking of public events, not being home alone watching a video together).

B) If your church, or a good church you know, has youth events, you could attend those. Or what about planning some fun family activities?

C) And what about looking for some Christian service activities you could get involved in with others? Singing in a youth choir. Or helping to serve a meal at a homeless shelter or rescue mission. (That will not only be a blessing to others, it can help you set good values yourself.)

D) Or what about challenging other young people to participate in a Bible memorization program with you? One that focuses on verses that will be helpful to you all–such as the ones I’ve used here.

E) Would your school object if a few of you gathered briefly for prayer before the start of classes in the morning–even if you have to meet outside, just off school property? It would be a great time to ask the Lord to help you to live for Him and please Him in all you do that day, as well as praying for the events of the day, and for others you know are in need.

I hope these few thoughts will be of help. God bless you, as you work through these things for yourself, for His honour and glory.

Church Leadership: The Place of Women in the Church

,

Church leadership, and those who are qualified for it, are subjects much debated in our time. One reader of this website asked, What does the Bible say about women teachers, deacons, and pastors?”

There are obviously various legitimate ministry roles for women in the local church. However, we need to set some biblical boundaries for their participation. And we men cannot claim superiority or innocence for ourselves. It is unquestionable that in time past the role of men in the church sometimes has been unscriptural. That they have tried to be “lords over those entrusted to [them]” (I Pet. 5:2-3), not serving in humility, following Jesus’ example. But it seems to me the present trend is to swing the pendulum too far in the other direction. Christian women are certainly fully equal to men as to their spiritual standing before God (Gal. 3:26-28). But in the church and in the home, the Lord gives the primary leadership role to men.

And in the New Testament, local church leadership is given to a group of men (never a single individual). These men are given three interchangeable titles (cf. Acts 20:17, 28; Tit. 1:5, 7; I Pet. 5:1-3). They are “elders” referring to their maturity. (Not necessarily that they are elderly, but certainly that they are mature in spiritual character.) They are also called “pastors” (meaning shepherds), indicating their responsibility to nourish and protect the flock. And called “bishops” (meaning overseers or superintendents), describing their governance of the affairs and the program of the church. Again, this office is always given to men, and always in plurality. Though a church may have one person called “the pastor,” who is financially supported so he can give his full time to the work, as to his office he has no more authority than the other men who serve with him on what is sometimes called a “board of elders,” or a “pastoral committee.”

The office of deacon (and deaconess, Rom. 16:1) is different. The word itself means servant, and these are in a subordinate and supportive position under the elders. Though the actual term “deacon” is not used until later (cf. I Tim. 3:8-13), Acts 6:1-6 refers to those who were appointed to “serve [literally deacon] tables” (vs. 2), distinguishing this work from the ministry of the apostles who concentrated on “prayer and the ministry of the Word” (vs. 4).

The Bible declares, “In like manner also [I desire that] the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression” (I Timothy 2:9-14). Consider some comments made by others concerning this passage.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Volume 2 [commenting on the NIV]: “[Women] in the congregation should receive instruction from the male leadership with quietness and full submission. They should not attempt to turn the tables by clamouring for the office of congregational teacher, or by grasping for authority over men….Silent in vs. 12 does not mean complete silence or no talking. It is clearly used elsewhere (Acts 22:2; II Thess. 3:12) to mean “settled down, undisturbed, not unruly….Paul here based his view of male/female relationships in the church on the account of creation recorded in Genesis 2….Thus the roles Paul spelled out here are a product of God’s fundamental design.”

Lawrence Richards (The Bible Reader’s Companion, p. 834; and The Teacher’s Commentary, p. 980-981): “Teach or have authority (2:12). The two should be linked: to teach with authority. Many believe authoritative teaching is a role reserved for church elders, an office which no N.T. reference indicates was held by women….In the whole context of Scripture…it is clear that Paul is not suggesting a woman may not open her mouth when men are present. Church leadership is the topic of the pastorals, and since leaders oversee the purity of the Christian community’s doctrine and lifestyle, it is clear that the particular “teaching” Paul refers to is the “teaching with authority” that Paul urges on Timothy and Titus as their ministry. It was Timothy’s role to “command and teach” (I Tim. 4:11) the things of God as an apostolic representative. Apparently Paul did not permit a woman to be ordained to such an office of responsibility.”

Henry Morris and Martin Clark (The Bible Has the Answer, p. 241-242): “Unfortunately, some local churches do not have enough men who are serious students of the Word, or who are exemplary in Christian conduct and maturity. Yet, the twentieth century church cannot use this as an excuse to set aside biblical standards of church form, any more than it can set aside biblical doctrine….The Bible does not prohibit women from enjoying equal opportunities legally, socially, or economically. Nor does the Bible require Christian women to be submissive to all men. This would mean that godly women should feel perfect liberty to take positions of authority over men in professional, business, or social contexts. But the Bible does prescribe the form which should accompany freedom for the Christian woman in her home and in her church.”

Elisabeth Elliot (quoted by Gleason Archer, in The Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, p. 414-415): “Supreme authority in both church and home has been divinely vested in the male as the representative of Christ, who is the Head of the church. It is in willing and glad submission rather than grudging capitulation that the woman in the church (whether married or single) and the wife in the home find their fulfilment….The modern cult of personality makes submission a degrading thing. We are told we cannot be ‘whole persons’ if we submit. Obedience is thought of as restrictive and therefore bad. ‘Freedom’ is defined as the absence of restraint, quite the opposite from the scriptural principle….To attempt to apply democratic ideals to the kingdom of God, which is clearly hierarchical, can result only in a loss of power and ultimately in destruction. Christ Himself, the Servant and Son, accepted limitations and restrictions. He learned obedience.”

Ray Stedman (from the World Wide Study Bible): “The key to this passage is the word translated, “to have authority over.” It governs both the teaching and the attitude of the woman. This Greek word, authentein, means “to domineer, to usurp authority, to take what is not rightfully yours,” and to do so (is the implication) by the process of teaching. In other words, women are not to take over in a church and become the final, authoritative teachers….This interpretation of women as being excluded from eldership is confirmed by one incontrovertible fact: There were, in the New Testament, no women apostles and no women elders! Jesus could have settled this controversy at the very beginning by appointing Mary Magdalene as an apostle, but He did not do so. Neither Paul, nor any of the apostles, ever chose a woman to be an elder of the churches they founded, though they could easily have done so if it were right. There were many godly and capable women available, but none was ever put in the office of elder…Women are not given the role of final decision on doctrinal issues. They are not to be the authoritative teachers of the church.”

Robert Saucy (The Church in God’s Program, p. 160-161): “There is a difference of opinion as to whether the New Testament church had an office of deaconess. The Scriptures in question are Romans 16:1, where Paul refers to Phoebe as ‘a servant [diakonos] of the church which is at Cenchrea,” and I Timothy 3:11, where in the context of the qualifications for deacons, women are mentioned….There is much evidence to support the interpretation that these women are deaconesses, rather than deacons’ wives….The deaconess of the early church was concerned with those areas of service that could best be served by a woman. Indicative of their functions is the summary given in the Syrian Didascalia from the late third century. They were to assist at the baptism of women, especially in the art of anointing, and ‘to go into the houses of the heathen where there are believing women, to visit those who are sick, and to minister to them in that of which they have need, and to bathe those who have begun to recover from sickness.’ Deaconesses undoubtedly also served the poor and the orphans, and provided hospitality for strangers. Thus while the New Testament prohibits women from assuming the role of leadership in the church…they do appear as having a significant ministry in the church along with men in the subordinate auxiliary role of the diaconate.”

[Saucy continues] “First Timothy 2:9-15 refers twice to the needed ‘silence’ of women in the church. There, in the context (vs. 13-14), the designed headship of the man, and the vulnerability of women to temptation when the God-given order is reversed–demonstrated back in Eden– is cited as the reason. First Corinthians 14:34-35 speaks in a similar vein. “Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.”

The reference in Corinthians is particularly to married women (with Christian husbands). The husband is to be the head of the home. And in public, wives should defer to their husbands, as a public testimony to their submission. Nothing is said of single women here. It may simply be that Paul has not attempted to cover every possibility. Single women could defer to the authority of fathers or brothers–or the elders of the church.

The Scripture is saying that women should not speak authoritatively or challenge (question) the authority of church leaders. Elsewhere (11:5) Paul seems to permit a woman to pray and prophesy, provided her head is covered. That covering was a sign of submission to authority. So her participation, though permitted, was always to be done in recognition of the overruling authority of the (male) leadership. The point here is that issues of doing and saying the things that are right in the church (vs. 33, 40) should not be publicly questioned and argued by the women in the church. Responsibility for that rests with the men called to leadership (Tit. 1:9).

My own conclusion is that the uppermost governing body of the local church should be composed only of men. Or, if women need to be present to report to them “ex officio” (by virtue of their office as Children’s Church director, etc), they should not have a vote on this body. However, virtually any role in the church is open to women under the authority of this ruling pastoral council or board of elders. Though there is disagreement, some would even say that teaching a mixed adult Bible class would not be off limits, as long as it is understood that the woman teacher serves in submission to the elders. Further, there are many opportunities for service as “deaconesses” which could be explored.

Once the overall authority of the elders in the local church is established, almost any ministry is available to women under them. However, let me add one more thought. In a larger multi-staff church, where there are several “pastors,” let us say, for purposes of illustration, that a woman named Joan Smith is appointed to engage in a ministry to women. It might be tempting to call her Pastor Smith, since she does have pastoral (nurturing, shepherding) work to do. But my own conviction is that this title should be avoided, simply because it will imply to some an equality of standing with the men who are in leadership. As to her ministry, Joan may be doing pastoral-type work, but that title is more than a definition of ministry. It is also seen by the congregation as a recognition of position–a position which she cannot biblically hold. She should more accurately be thought of as a deaconess.

Movie Madness: A Corrupt Film Praised

Movie madness could refer to more than one film, though I had a particular one in mind here. Most of what is said below can be applied to other degraded and degrading productions. I trust my comments will give readers food for thought.

movie theatre

Has the world gone completely mad? Have we abandoned all decency and common sense? That was my reaction as I read about the latest Hollywood offering, a movie concerning an eleven or twelve-year-old girl who slaughters dozens of individuals in various gruesome ways, while spouting gross profanities. (Supposedly, this is a comedy. But if so, it’s a far cry from Arsenic and Old Lace!) And it isn’t just the film that bothers me. It’s the way it’s rationalized in the media. With barely a whisper of protest, we are told:

1. Life Is Like That

We must face reality. There are many violent killings in the news. It happens all the time. And visit any playground and you’ll certainly hear children using foul language. Well, true enough. But does this mean we should glorify such things, and propose them as amusing entertainment? Raw sewage is real too. But would you want to place a bowl of it in the middle of the dinner table for all to admire?

2. It’s Only a Movie

“Chill out,” they say. “It’s make-believe, for goodness sake!” Yes, it is a fictional story. But are they claiming that therefore it will have no significant affect on the viewer? Television commercials are largely fictive too, mini-tales of how the right kind of soup or soap can bring us true happiness. And advertisers spend millions on them. Why? Because they know they can influence behaviour.

3. It’s Nothing New

Columnists trot out the titles of other films that contain relentless perversion and gory mayhem, offering them as justification for the present folly. But is poison rendered harmless because it’s no worse than other poisons? Or take this twisted logic into the courtroom. Will the judge say to a convicted drunk driver, “I’m going to excuse you, because others have done much the same”?

4. These Are the Good Guys

The point is made that the masked heroes of this tale are meting out justice against various thugs and criminal types. How helpful! But in the real world, administering vigilante justice and personal vengeance will land you in jail. Were it otherwise, we’d have total anarchy. As John Locke said, “Where there is no law, there is no freedom.”

5. Her Parents Approve

The critics are falling all over themselves to praise the thirteen-year-old actress who plays the heroine in this movie. But there seems to be no concern at all for the soul-searing damage caused by filling her mind with such vulgarity and violence. You’d think we’d have learned something from all the child stars who have gone haywire later in life. And where are her parents in all of this? It’s reported that they are “very supportive.” Her mother actually brought her the screen play. Movie madness! In my opinion, they should be arrested and charged with child abuse for that kind of “support”!

6. It’s R-rated

A Restricted rating for a film means that those under the age of 17 may attend only if accompanied by a parent or adult guardian. The claim is that this protects the more immature and vulnerable among us. (I leave you to ponder Hollywood’s concept of “maturity.”) But this rating only covers in North America. Elsewhere, apparently, different standards are being applied. And when the film becomes available as a DVD for home use, even less control is possible.

7. Don’t Censor Us!

Whenever objections are raised to the scurrilous content of a book or a movie, there is a lot of finger-pointing at those narrow-minded prudes, and puritanical moralists who are trying to stifle artistic freedom. We are told there must be no censorship! But freedom of expression is not absolute. (If you doubt it, try shouting “I’ve got a bomb!” on board a plane!) Reasonable limits must be set for our protection.

8. Who Cares?

A couple of articles on the film note that fewer and fewer people seem to complain about such things any more. Sadly, this may be true. The slow degradation of society–in which the entertainment industry is surely complicit–has infected us all to some degree. We’ve become too complacent, unwilling to raise our voices in protest. Shame on us! But boycotts and letters to the editor can still make a difference. I encourage you to speak up. Perhaps the present madness can be restrained. Isn’t it worth a try?

“Jesus Calling” Critique: Is Jesus Calling a good devotional book?

Recently, two members of my family, coincidentally, were given copies of Sarah Young’s 2004 book of daily devotions, Jesus Calling. After reading the book through, I have some observations and concerns to share. My hope is that they will stimulate your thinking, even if you disagree.

The book purports to be a series of messages coming directly from the Lord Jesus Christ. This is a startling claim. Though Mrs. Young affirms that “the Bible is the only inerrant Word of God” (p. xiii), that does not do away with a significant problem here.

Jesus Calling by Sarah Young

Seeking the Source

We are left with only two or three options when it comes to evaluating her assertion. If it’s truly the Lord Jesus who is speaking, then these words too must be inerrant (Matt. 24:35; Tit. 1:2), and she has become the Lord’s inspired prophet (cf. Jer. 1:5, 9). In that case, it would seem we need to consider adding Sarah Young’s book to the other sixty-six in the Bible.

On the other hand, if the devotional meditations on these pages come from the author’s own imagination, then she is putting words in the mouth of Christ, words that in most cases (excepting when she quotes Scripture) He never spoke–and some that He never would speak. Though there are several Scripture references at the bottom of each reading, often they do not support–sometimes cannot support–the teaching espoused in what her “Jesus” says. In effect, she has created an imitation Jesus.

Mrs. Young’s account of her spiritual quest leading up to the production of the book is described in the Introduction. It includes this intriguing experience: “Suddenly I felt as if a warm mist enveloped me. I became aware of a lovely Presence [always capitalized], and my involuntary response was to whisper, ‘Sweet Jesus.’ This utterance was totally uncharacteristic of me” (p. vii).

Was this occurrence truly of the Lord? I don’t know. But its intended implication seems like that of Eliphaz in his condemnation of godly Job. Basically, he says, “I’ve had this supernatural encounter, so what I say must be right” (cf. Job 4:12-16). But he was not right (vs. 7, cf. 1:8). Perhaps Young needs to get out of the fog, and pray more with an open Bible before her!

A Sinister Alternative

This eerie incident, whatever its genesis, hints at a third disturbing possibility. That the “Jesus” who speaks to Sarah is actually what the Bible calls a “familiar spirit” (cf. Lev. 19:31; 20:6, 27). That term refers to a demon repeatedly summoned by an individual, in this case one posing as Christ. The fact that there are biblical truths found in the book does not rule this out. The devil is able to quote Scripture when it serves his purpose (cf. Matt. 4:6), and demons can also say some true things (cf. Acts 16:16-17).

When the author refers to God the Son, it is always as “Jesus.” While that is indeed His name, more often (dozens of times), after His ascension, He is spoken of as the Lord, the Lord Jesus, or the Lord Jesus Christ. This provides a fuller testimony to His deity and His present exalted position (e.g. Acts 1:21; 4:33; 11:17). In the words of Peter, “God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). He is “the Lord of glory [our glorious Lord]” (I Cor. 2:8), and deserves to be addressed as such.

But the word “Jesus” has apparently become something of a spiritual mantra for the writer. Her “Jesus” encourages her to, “Invite Me into your thoughts by whispering My Name” (p. 188). “When you feel far from me, whisper My Name. This simple act…opens your heart to My Presence” (p. 103). “Whisper My Name….Find strength and Peace through praying My Name” (p. 240).

Note: I will be putting the name “Jesus” in quotation marks, when referring to the one Young says is addressing us, as I do not believe these words come from the Lord Jesus Christ. He seems more like one of the “false christs” the Lord warns will appear in the last days (Matt. 24:24). Even to hint that these are the actual sayings of the holy Son of God presents a serious difficulty.

Beware False Prophets

We already have 1,189 chapters of the inspired Word of God, in which are found “all things that pertain to life and godliness” (II Pet. 1:2-4). Our job is to study them, apply them, and proclaim them. To suggest we need still more inspired truth impugns the sufficiency of the Scriptures. In fact, adding to Scripture is something the Word of God strongly and repeatedly forbids us to do.

“You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it” (Deut. 4:2). “Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it” (Deut. 12:32). “Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar” (Prov. 30:5-6). “If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book” (Rev. 22:18). (What a fearful thing to be found a lying prophet!)

If the author had identified her devotionals as her own thoughts, that would be one thing. We could take them or leave them on that basis. But to suggest that Christ Himself is talking directly to the reader is a serious error. What the author is doing is close to the work of the false prophets that the Scriptures repeatedly condemn.

Notice how, though they claimed to be speaking for the Lord, what they said came from their own hearts and minds. God says, “I have not sent them, commanded them, nor spoken to them; they prophesy to you…the deceit of their heart” (Jer. 14:14). “They speak a vision of their own heart, not from the mouth of the LORD” (Jer. 23:16). They are “those who prophesy out of their own heart, ‘Hear the word of the LORD!'” (Ezek. 13:2).

Fortune Telling

At one point the writer has her “Jesus” say, “My guidance for each of My children is unique” (p. 178). True enough. We are  each different, and in different circumstances (cf. Jn. 21:20-22). But she proceeds to ignore that fact, time and again. Many things are said which may have been true of Sarah Young at that particular time, but they are not necessarily true of the reader, now or ever. Yet we read such individualized and day-specific comments as the following.

“The journey has been too much for you, and you are bone-weary” (p. 40). “You are on the brink of rebellion, precariously close to shaking your fist in My Face” (p. 181). “Some of My children I’ve gifted with abundant strength and stamina. Others, like you, have received the humble gift of frailty” (p. 254). “There is one thing that displeases Me: your tendency to complain” (p. 296). 

At times these pronouncements come across as a kind of fortune telling, or the vague pronouncements of a daily horoscope. Her “Jesus” says such things as: “You are feeling wobbly this morning” (p. 277). My response on reading this was, “No, I’m not!” But there’s much more of this sort of thing.”This is a time of abundance in your life” (p. 331). Or, at another point, “You are approaching a crossroads in your life” (p. 360).

On the other hand, Sarah Young’s “Jesus” repeatedly rejects the idea of planning and looking ahead. He leaves the impression that we are simply to drift through our days, accepting whatever happens.

“Trust Me enough to let things happen without striving to predict or control them” (p. 297). “Stop trying to find a way to circumvent difficulties” (p. 241). “Don’t take yourself or your circumstances so seriously” (p. 176). “Don’t try to figure out what is happening” (p. 21). “I died to set you free, and that includes freedom from compulsive planning” (p. 117).

But this is nonsense. Christ commends those who think ahead (Lk. 14:28-33; cf. Prov. 6:6-8; 22:3; 24:27). The Lord can guide us in our planning, just as surely as He can in the moment. The key is not to become rigidly possessive of our plans, but to allow the Lord to lead us in another direction, if He chooses.

Strange Notions

How does the following measure up to the inspired Word of God, and the person of the true Christ? Young’s “Jesus” says, “I am your Father-God” (p. 197). Does the Lord Jesus ever say such a thing? No. When Jesus prayed to His heavenly Father, was He simply talking to Himself? No. It hints at Sabellianism (also known as modalism), the Trinity-denying heresy that says the one God changes Himself into either Father, Son or Holy Spirit, as needed.

And more strange notions: “Every time you affirm your trust in Me, you put a coin into My treasury. Thus you build up equity in preparation for days of trouble” (p. 11) “I have trained you to pray, ‘Help me, Holy Spirit,’ before answering the phone” (p. 226). Really? Scripture references at the bottom of this reading say no such thing. In a model prayer, the Lord Jesus of the Bible “trains” us to pray to “Our Father” (Lk. 11:1-2). On this side of the cross, we pray to God the Father, in Jesus’ name, with the help of the Holy Spirit (Jn. 16:24; Eph. 2:18; Rom. 8:26-27).

And still more oddities: “Do not feel guilty about taking time to be still in My Presence. You are simply responding to the tugs of divinity within you” (p. 211). “I made you in My image, precariously close to deity” (p. 116). “Precariously”? Well, don’t worry. Young’s “Jesus” says,  “Because I am omnipotent, I am about to bend time and events in your favour” (p. 43). Does the Lord ever do that for you or me? The providence of God (His before-seeing) makes this bizarre action unnecessary.

Sadly, almost nothing is said in all 382 pages about the importance of ministry to others, and of being a burden bearer (cf. Jn. 13:14-15; II Cor. 1:4; Gal. 6:2, 10). Instead, this “Jesus” says, “Stand up straight in My Presence so that no one can place more burdens on your back” (p. 278).

This is a very me-centred book–about Sarah’s problems, Sarah’s dreams, and Sarah’s needs. A little of such navel-gazing goes a long way. We don’t need 366 days of it. Even fellowship in the local church is rarely mentioned. When it is, there seems to be criticism of both the general atmosphere and “guilt-evoking messages” from the pastor (p. 262, 306). (One wonders what kind of church she was attending!)

A New “Light”

There is a lot about “Light” in the book (always capitalized). The Bible, of course, uses light, occasionally, to symbolize such things as purity or truth (cf. Ps. 119:105; Jn. 8:12). But this seems to be something other.

“I am with you and all around you, encircling you in golden rays of Light” (p. 284). “Shimmering hues of radiance tap gently at your consciousness, seeking entrance” (p. 9). “Let My Light soak into your mind and heart until you are aglow with My very Being” (p. 158). “Enjoy the warmth of My Presence shining upon you. Feel your face tingle as you bask in My Love-Light” (p. 262). “When a future-oriented worry assails you, capture it and disarm it by suffusing the Light of My Presence into the mental image” (p. 328). Say what?

In contrast,throughout the book, only rarely is mention made of turning to Scripture, our true source of light (Ps. 119:130). The emphasis is on the mystical voice of “Jesus,” bringing inner intuitions of some kind. The underlying premise seems to be a false mysticism proposing that, when we are quiescent, and we clear our minds of other thoughts, this supernatural being will send us new messages from himself.

“Sit quietly in My Presence while I bless you. Make your mind like a still pool of water, ready to receive whatever thoughts I drop into it” (p. 228).  “I can do My best handiwork when you sit in the stillness of My Presence, focusing your entire being on Me. Let My thoughts burst freely upon your consciousness, stimulating abundant Life” (p. 189).

And Sarah’s “Jesus” makes this startling declaration: “Only My voice tells you the true way” (p. 336). Think about that. Does he mean “only my voice, as I speak to you in these supernatural encounters”? Or “only my voice now, plus what I’ve already said in the Bible”? Either way, this is heresy.

The Needed Foundation

I do need to emphasize that I’m not trying to throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water. Times of quiet meditation in the presence of God are vital to our spiritual lives. Appropriately, daily devotions are sometimes called a “Quiet Time.” We need those. But there is a difference between that and what Jesus Calling repeatedly gives us.

The Bible is “God-breathed,” and profitable for our Christian life and ministry (II Tim. 3:16-17). The Holy Spirit, “the Spirit of truth,” indwells each believer, giving us an understanding of the Word of God, and the wisdom and power to apply it (Jn. 14:17; cf. Zech. 4:6; Acts 1:8; I Cor. 2:4, 13; II Cor. 3:5; Eph. 5:18-21).

Our personal comprehension of the Word is intended to lead to action. The actions may be such things as praise and thanksgiving to God, confession of sin, or ministry to others. But all must remain firmly rooted in the Scriptures, not be founded on some supposed latter-day addendum to them. “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no truth in them” (Isa. 8:20).

David says, “The law of the Lord is perfect [i.e. complete, sufficient], restoring the soul” (Ps. 19:7). We must be daily “taking heed [keeping watch on ourselves] according to [God’s] word” (Ps. 119:9). We don’t need new inspired messages; we need to make use of what God has already given,”the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). It is the entrance of that word that gives true light (cf. Gal. 1:6-8)

I would put Sarah Young’s book in a similar category as William Paul Young’s blasphemous novel, The Shack. Both present fiction as questionable fact, flawed human imaginings as God’s inspired truth. Both books are certainly popular. Not surprising, in the present case, as Sarah Young’s creation is a kind of feel-good book, a daily pat on the back, or a little hug from her “Jesus.” But that wide readership being so, it could do a lot of harm in misrepresenting the Lord and His holy Word. I would not use this strange book myself, nor can I recommend it to anyone.

Christian Marriage Help: Developing Biblical Expectations in Marriage

Christian marriage help will give you some more to think about, now that we’ve laid the groundwork concerning Christian marriage preparation.

If you have not yet read the first part of the article and why it was written, or would like to review it, just click on the link Christian Marriage Preparation.

When we’re talking about the Bible and marriage we need to look at the whole life of the believer. The heart of what I have been saying is that learning about marriage should not be left to “on-the-job training.” Christian marriage preparation really begins at birth, and carries right on through life. Only in that way will each person have an understanding of God-given responsibilities and expectations in marriage, and be spiritually prepared to make it a success.

But now we shall consider some other things about expectations and ongoing Christian marriage help that follow the wedding ceremony.

5) Continuing Growth

Needless to say, the lifelong learning process will continue after the wedding, and after the honeymoon. But it is to be hoped that by the time the couple gets to this point they have received valuable assistance, and have gained the tools to strengthen and deepen their relationship with one another–the tools to establish a rewarding and fruitful Christian marriage.

They should each understand God’s purpose for marriage, through a study of God’s Word and (if possible) through a life-long learning process. They should have basic agreement as to the husband’s responsibilities, and the wife’s responsibilities. They should each be committed to building a Christ-centred family life that emphasizes spiritual and eternal goals (as opposed to merely material and time-bound goals).

Here is an important principle. Picture a triangle, with the points at the bottom representing husband and wife, and the point at the top representing God. As each partner in the marriage spends regular time in God’s Word and in prayer, and draws closer to the Lord, they also get closer to one another. That is how a triangle is. The distance between the two sides becomes narrower toward the top. And this illustrates God’s plan for strengthening the marriage relationship.

Though it is not a popular view today, the Bible teaches that the wife should submit to her husband (Eph. 5:22-24). This does not imply that she is somehow inferior to him. God views both on an equal footing in Christ (Gal. 3:26-28). Rather, it is a matter of organizational structure. God’s plan is for the husband to be the head of the home, providing leadership for his wife and family.

But lest a husband begins to think this gives him the right to lord it over his partner, and demand whatever he likes, God has placed beside the above instruction an even higher and more profound standard for him.

The Bible says, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her” (Eph. 5:25). Wrapped up in that simple statement is the example of the Lord Jesus in His infinite patience and understanding, kindness and self sacrifice. Only with the help of God can a husband even approach such a high calling. But it is an ideal to which he should aspire.

Any Christian marriage help or advice that is truly biblical will include these key instructions to the husband and wife.

6) Marital Counselling

What if potholes develop on the road? What if the marriage, in spite of earlier training and the best of intentions, hits a snag? Where can the couple go to for more Christian marriage help? In such a case, it may be useful for the couple to visit a Christian counsellor (or a trained pastor) who can guide them in sorting through the issues involved, and coming to a satisfying resolution.

Sometimes there are blind spots in a marriage, things we are doing, or ways of responding to our partner, that we are not fully aware of, but which are causing hurt and harm. The counsellor becomes an impersonal sounding board, an outsider, in a sense, who can help each see what is happening in a little different way. Such a perspective from the outside can be very helpful.

The Prepare-Enrich organization, mentioned in Part One of this article, not only has tools to help those contemplating marriage but others to assist those already married. (To visit their website to learn more about this material, click on Christian marriage preparation)

7) Separation and Divorce

Are there ever situations that simply cannot be resolved? This is an issue on which good people differ widely. Some assert that divorce is never an acceptable option for Christians. I respect that position. Perhaps they are right. Yet others are just as convinced that under certain extreme circumstances, divorce, and even remarriage after divorce is within bounds. It is not possible to delve into all the points pro and con here.

Though I am open to further light on the matter, my own belief is this. Divorce is certainly not God’s ideal. In fact, the Bible says He “hates” it (Mal. 2:16). When God makes of two “one flesh,” human beings are not to separate them. It should be an absolutely last resort, when repeated efforts at reconciliation have failed.

A mutual commitment to the permanence of marriage, and to making it work, can go a long way toward bringing healing and restoration. But if a breakup does take place, divorce is always going to be painful, difficult, and destructive. As an illustration, think of two pieces of wood that have been joined by a powerful glue. If we try to separate them again, the break will not be clean. There will be splinters torn from one piece and the other.

But having said these things, there do seem to be situations where separation and perhaps even divorce are necessary. And God understands our weakness, and is compassionate toward us (cf. Ps. 103:13-14). One possible cause of divorce is marital unfaithfulness (Matt 19:9). Another is desertion–and the Bible refers particularly to an unbelieving partner leaving a Christian partner (I Cor. 7:15).

And I would add spousal abuse as a possible reason for marriage breakup. (I am thinking particularly of the physical abuse of the woman, and perhaps of her children.) The danger involved requires at least a temporary separation, until the partner has dealt satisfactorily with whatever is causing his violent behaviour. (This may take many months.) To accept Christian marriage help so often requires a lot of patience in its practical application.

8) When Things Are Not Ideal

We are all imperfect human beings. That means there will never be a completely perfect and ideal marriage. But we can each pray for the grace to be all that God wants us to be personally, and pray for patience and understanding toward one another. God can do amazing things to turn around a marriage in difficulty. We all need Christian marriage help, from God, and through His people. Let me share a brief story.

Many years ago, my mother taught a Sunday School class for young married women. Lorraine, a friend of ours, was a member of that class. And Lorraine had become a Christian, but her husband was unsaved. Not only that, but he was a heavy drinker. Over many months, my mother counselled and encouraged Lorraine, and prayed with her for the salvation of her husband.

The day came when Fred agreed to attend a gospel service with her. And he was wonderfully saved that night. He stopped drinking, and became a faithful, loving husband. Today, he is 90 years of age. But apart from some physical health problems, his mind is still sharp, and his love for Lorraine and for their grown family is evident. There is always hope. God is still on the throne!

If you are already married, and looking to strengthen your relationship, here is a second book by Wayne Mack to help you. It includes many practical exercises you can try. It’s called Strengthening Your Marriage.

Modesty: What does it mean to dress modestly?

Question: What does the Bible teach about modesty?

Answer: What an interesting question! And I must confess that until I studied the concept in more detail I tended to confine its application to women who wore too little, or too tight, clothing. It certainly includes that, but it’s a much bigger word.

Here are a few thoughts to ponder, drawn in part from the definition and significance of the English word.

It’s About Decency

The Bible talks about doing things “decently” in the church (I Cor. 14:40). There, the word means in a fitting and appropriate way. Modesty is regard for decency of behaviour, speech and dress. It involves respect for what is appropriate and in good taste, according to established standards.

The catch there is that “established standards” can deteriorate (and have they ever!). As the Lord Jesus said of His day, “What is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God” (Lk. 16:15).

What is immoral and immodest has often not only become acceptable, but the norm. In Canada we now have provincial and municipal governments bowing to pressure from women to walk around topless–arguing that men are allowed to do that. (My oh my!)

It’s About Humility

Modesty includes freedom from vanity (an excessive pride in one’s appearance, qualities, abilities, and achievements). It involves freedom from exaggeration and boastfulness, being based, instead, on a moderate and balanced opinion of one’s self (cf. Rom. 12:3).

False modesty is not modesty at all. This is when the person says things like, “Oh, I’m not really a very good piano player,” or “I’m not really that good looking.” The person isn’t stating a fact, or even what he believes to be true. He really thinks quite well of himself, and is fishing for compliments. Edward Gibbon said, “False modesty is the meanest species of pride.”

It’s About Avoiding Worldliness

What we are combating is a worldly culture that encourages women to dress so that men will look at them, and consider them sexy and desirable. The girl or woman who does that may be guilty of “defrauding” the men who see her. This is a term used in First Thessalonians, meaning to awaken desires that cannot be righteously satisfied (I Thess. 4:3-7, esp. vs. 6).

It is the spirit of the world that we must combat (I Jn. 2:15-17), while being cautious about drawing too many narrowly specific rules that we insist should be imposed on all. We are to “walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4), and to “put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfil its lusts” (Rom. 13:14).

The Bible Word

When we turn to the Word of God, the actual word (kosmios, in Greek) is only used a couple of times. It means well-ordered, well-behaved, decent, harmonious.

We are told, “That the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works” I Tim. 2:9-10).

And, “A bishop [church leader] then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior [kosmios], hospitable, able to teach.”

And this from First Peter, which describes an aspect of modesty, regarding the proper dress and behaviour of wives, though it doesn’t use the actual word modest. “Do not let your adornment be merely outward–arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel–rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God” (I Pet. 3:3-4).

Some Others Comment

To some extent, what is considered “modest” depends on a social and cultural context. The early church father Tertullian had this to say about makeup: “Whatever is born is the work of God. Whatever, then, is plastered on that, is the devil’s work.”

Relatively few would go quite that far! But among Christians there is a wide divergence when it comes to appropriate dress, makeup and so on. Some, for example, might find the woman’s slacks inappropriate. Though I’ve seen skirts that are far more offensive and immodest than a pair of dress slacks–unless, as some wit put it, the only place they’re “slack” is around the ankles!

We are to separate ourselves from whatever suggests we espouse a worldly view of life (II Cor. 6:17). Puritan Thomas Brooks, typical of the stern views of that group, said, “They that borrow the fashions of the Egyptians may get their boils and their blotches.” (Ouch!)

Contemporary author Luke Gilkerson comments, “Modesty is a respectable manner of adorning one’s body and carrying oneself, born out of a freedom from a worldly definition of beauty and worth, and motivated by a hatred of sin and a desire to draw attention to God. Mr. Gilkerson also says, “Modesty is about who you worship.” That hits the nail firmly on the head. If we want to honour the Lord Jesus Christ in our daily lives, our conduct, speech and dress must not be that which makes it more difficult for others to see the beauty of Christ shining forth in and through us.

Load More