The Misadventures of Captain Headknowledge

Captain Headknowledge will be returning to the Fortress of Solitude for the summer. You may encounter him in the occaissional comment thread here and there, and there may be a few additions made to the Theological & Doxological Meditations now and then, but other than that, it’ll be pretty quiet around here. If you want to make sure you don’t miss something when there is new posting, be sure you are subscribed to receive email alerts (see sidebar).

May God bless you this summer. See you in the funny papers!

Ever heard of H. Vinson Synan? He’s an important Pentecostal historian, according to Wikipedia. He earned his credentials by being the first to conclude based on the facts of history that the Pentecostal movement is rooted in Wesleyan Holiness theology. This conclusion has apparently been affirmed by his peers who have checked his sources and found a there there. This is the view I’ve always heard about Pentecostal origins. I guess Synan is a scholarly force to be reckoned with.

This past week, however, on Kenneth Copeland’s daily television show, the Prosperity preacher extraordinaire has been interviewing Doug Wead, former member of George H. W. Bush’s staff, a presidential and religious historian who has written a few books and earned some experience researching history for himself. Wead is speaking out against Senator Grasseley’s investigation into the financial goings on of six major Prosperity Gospel ministries, which may have some basis, considering this is the nation built in part on the ideal of absolute religious liberty. Of course, it’s not the theology the government’s worried about, but rather the extravagent lifestyles of the heads of these supposedly non-profit organizations.

Well, as Wead was discussing issues related to the above, he blew my mind with a little historical revisionism, apparently hoping to legitimize the prosperity gospel by being able to say this doctrine doesn’t come from Copeland or Hagin or Creflo Dollar (which is the greatest last name for a prosperity preacher, if you ask me!) He said there is historical precedent for the prosperity gospel in the wealth of the medieval Roman Catholic church until St. Francis began teaching something a little less prosperity-minded. This fascinated me, because I recall in Hank Hanegraaff’s book, Counterfeit Revival, how that the Holy Laughter revivalists pointed to ecstatic outbursts of laughter and barking and what not in the revival meetings of the First Great Awakening to legitimize the same phenomena among their number nowadays. Hanegraaff pointed out in his book, though, that there was a little detail overlooked by the Holy Laughter crowd–how that Wesley and Edwards and Whitefield, et al, viewed these phenomena as inappropriate, and made efforts to curtail such disorderly outbursts.

So, the tradition continues in relation to the prosperity gospel! I looked up Doug Wead’s website and contacted him by email to inquire into more detail about such claims. After all, he just touched on it on Copeland’s show. Wead told me he read an article by Synan which mentioned this association. So, naturally, my first trip was to Wikipedia, to find out what information the online community has collected there about this seemingly important historian. You can read all about him here.

So, after reading up on Synan, I went back to one of Wead’s blogs, and did a search for Synan or prosperity theology related blogging, and I hit paydirt. Wead had recently posted on his blog an article by H. Vinson Synon on “What’s so attractive about the Prosperity Gospel?” If you haven’t had your credulity stretched lately, I recommend this read as a good opportunity to catch up for lost incredulity. Suffice it to say, medieval Romanism is just the tip of the iceberg of prosperity preaching in church history, if you ask Synan. Read the article and then join me in telling Doug and his readers what you think and then come back here and share your thoughts with me, too. I only wish I could snap a picture of the look on your face when you see what Prosperity history has in store for you!

I just read a great post over at Ligonier Ministries’ blog and viewed a promotional video about Gospel Translations, a wikipedia-like resource by Open Source Mission translating donated theological materials into many foreign languages in an attempt to make sound theology more accessible to the majority of Christians nowadays–the ones who happen to currently reside outside the European and North American realm. I’ve been concerned about this for some time, and am excited to see a new effort underway! Another seemingly worthwhile effort is Third Millennium Ministries. See what your church can do to support such worthwhile efforts, and save the growing Christian world from the pernicious influence of Word of Faith theology that is pumped into developing nations through TBN and their brood of false teachers!

Q.    Which is the first commandment?

 A.    The first commandment is, You shall have no other gods before me (Exodus 20:3).

Holy, Holy, Holy!

Holy, holy, holy! Lord God Almighty!

Early in the morning our song shall rise to thee.

Holy, Holy, holy! Merciful and mighty

God in three Persons, blessed Trinity!

Holy, holy, holy! All the saints adore thee,

casting down their golden crowns around the glassy sea;

cherubim and seraphim falling down before thee,

who wert, and art, and evermore shalt be.

Holy, holy, holy! Though the darkness hide thee,

though the eye of sinful man thy glory may not see,

only thou art holy; there is none beside thee

perfect in pow’r, in love, and purity.

Holy, holy, holy! Lord God Almighty!

All thy works shall praise thy name in earth and sky and sea.

Holy, holy, holy! Merciful and mighty!

God in three Persons, blessed Trinity!

#100 Trinity Hymnal; Reginald Heber, 1783-1826; NICEA 11.12.12.10.; John B. Dykes, 1861

Last year I heard John MacArthur on his radio show, Grace to You, talk about his philosophy of preaching. He believes that the deeper he goes in exposition, the higher it can lift up the hearers in worship of God. MacArthur has dug until he hit paydirt in his latest book, A Tale of Two Sons: The Inside Story of a Father, His Sons, and a Shocking Murder. This book is an exposition of the most famous of Jesus’ parables: The Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32). In his exposition, MacArthur goes into the background cultural implications of the words of the parable to show that at every point in the action, the story is geared to offend the sensibilities of the original Jewish hearers. Being a culture steeped in their focus on honor and shame, this parable stirs up the Jews, interrupts them in their honorable comfort zones and forces them to grapple with a concept of God that is willing to suffer the shame of filthy, worthless sinners who come to repentance. In fact, he takes great joy in doing so!

To make the long story short, MacArthur points out that the Father represents Jesus in the parable, the Prodigal Son represents the tax collectors and sinners who’d just gathered to hear Jesus speak (Luke 15:1), and the older brother represents the Pharisees (v. 2). In the two parables preceding that of the Prodigal Son, Jesus highlights the joy God takes in recovering lost sinners. MacArthur points out that Pharisees, by contrast, take no joy in the repentance of shameful sinners, but rather, take joy in the recovery of lost sheep and coins ($$$!). These themes show up in spades in Jesus’ “Inside Story of a Father, [and] His Sons.”

The worship begins when, after hearing how the son’s shameful demad for his inheritance, his subsequent prodigal living and his rock bottom experience communing with shameful swine and his eventual determination to return to his Father, MacArthur compares the compassionate, watchful father who runs through the village in the most shameful way possible [by (1) lifting his robe so he can (2) run (!)] to protect his repentant son from the violent mistreatment he would have certainly received from the honorable local citizenry, to Jesus, who, being the most Honorable of them all, suffered the shame which my shameful behavior has incurred, so he could rejoice over my repentance and return to his loving embrace! You gotta read this book, or at least look up the series on the radio show, repent of your sins and worship Christ who has given and suffered so much for you.

Now that this book is available, naturally, MacArthur has to promote the book. That’s what brought him last Friday to Crossroads Christian Church in Grand Prairie, Texas. I took the opportunity of accompanying my wife to the event to hear him preach all of the above, and then some, for just over an hour (as is his usual habit). Following, are a few pictures from the event:

With all the hubbub about Oprah and her latest guru, Eckhart Tolle (personally, I prefer, “Tolle Lege“), I’ve been doing a little digging about “spirituality.” If you’ve read Christianity in Crisis by Hank Hanegraaff, then you’ve heard of Phineas Parkhurst Quimby. He is likely the ultimate source of the errors and heresies of the Word of Faith theology of T. L. Osborn, Kenneths Hagin & Copeland, Oral Roberts, John Avanzini, Robert Tilton, Creflo Dollar, T. D. Jakes, Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer and John Hagee.

He’s also the ultimate source of the theologies of the New Thought Movement. Wikipedia summarizes New Thoughts basic beliefs as follows:

By the end of the 19th century, the chief tenets of New Thought had become stabilized:

• Infinite Intelligence or God is omnipotent and omnipresent.
• Spirit is the ultimate reality.
• True human self-hood is divine. (Christ Consciousness)
• Divinely attuned thought is a positive force for good.
• Most disease is mental in origin.
• Right thinking has a healing effect.

From its initial emphasis on the healing of disease, New Thought had developed into an intensely individualistic and optimistic philosophy of life and conduct.

Can you see the ties between New Thought and Word of Faith?

 Had Oprah been around back in the nineteenth century, she’d've had Phineas Parkhurst Quimby on her show. . .

April 8, 1978 at Maplewood Baptist Church in North Richland Hills, Texas, I, John Douglas Chitty, was the only kid in Sunday School who couldn’t raise his hand when the teacher asked, “How many have been baptized?” After the worship service, I told my mother I wanted to be baptized, so she took me to the pastor–Dr. Charles McClure. The pastor took me to the altar and we knelt and talked for a few minutes.

Brother McClure asked, “Do you want to be baptized?”

I replied that I did.

Then he informed me, “There’s something that has to happen before you can be baptized.” Then he took me down the Romans Road. I believed that stuff. I’d heard it plenty every Sunday, I guess. Anyway, I understood it, and I believed it. So, Brother McClure led me in the “sinner’s prayer” by which I received Christ by faith.

The following Sunday, April 15th, tax day, of all days, I was baptized and admitted into the membership of the church.

Thirty years ago today.

To God alone be the glory.

Yesterday, I subscribed to the podcast for The Village Church. I had noticed their statement of faith was adopted from that of Sovereign Grace Ministries, the network of Charismatic Calvinist churches founded by C. J. Mahaney, author of Living the Cross-Centered Life, (a book I highly recommend) among other titles. The Village Church is not listed among the Texas Sovereign Grace churches at the network’s website, so I suppose it’s safe to say that to look at one is not necessarily to look at the other, if you know what I mean. But, then again, that may not necessarily be so, either.

After I subscribed to the podcast, I took a long walk and listened to a “talk” explaining the philosophy of ministry at The Village Church. Before Josh delved into the “philosophy” he attempted to lay a theological foundation for it. I’ll give you the passages in the theological foundation:

• The Incarnation of the Word John 1:1-2, 14
• The Mission:
  • It’s Authority Matthew 28:19-20
  • It’s Scope Acts 1:8
  • How The Gospel Spreads “. . . and in chapter 7, a man named Stephen comes before the courts and they are trying him and he preaches a fantastic sermon as they pelt him with rockds. And Stephen is killed; he’s the first martyr of the church. But by God’s plan, He uses the suffering and the fear and the martyrdom that transpired after that to spread the church. . . Acts ends in chapter 28, and chapter 29 is for you and me to write. You see, the reality is those guys told some guys, who told some guys, who told somebody, who told somebody, who told somebody, who told somebody, who told Tom Bailey, who told me in 1996. That’s how it happens. . . This is how the gospel has spread. It’s viral. It joust goes and it inundates people, it infiltrates culture, it gets in the hears of humanity and it changes us. This is the church. The church is a group of redeemed people who sit under the proclamation of the word in fellowship as they share life with one another.”

Attraction Versus Incarnation (translation: traditional architecture vs. personal evangelism)

Next, Josh attempts to unpack the role of The Village Church in this viral spread of the gospel. First he describes a few approaches to church ministry: 1) “an attraction based approach to ministry . . . In the Old Testament, it was more of a ‘come and see’ type of religion. They built the temple. They made pilgrimages to the temple. That’s where sacrifices were made. It was a central type of religion. And so the temple was ornate, it was lavished with gold and all the jewels and all of these things because the people would come. And it was through that that you would see the beauty and majesty of God. but when Christ came, it was no longer a ‘come and see.’ Christ says, ‘Go and tell.’” This is what Josh calls an “incarnational approach to ministry.”

“You see, when Chrsit incarnates, He gives something not just to celebrate but to imitate. He is showing us how life is to be done, how ministry is to be done. Christ comes here, he dwells among us. So in one word, our philosophy of ministry is incarnational.” By this he intends that the way people are drawn to the church is not by the impressive church architecture, but in response to being told about the place by a friend, co-worker, family member, etc.

Now I’ll pause for a moment and make a comment. This dichotomy is drawn between church architecture and personal evangelism as if architecture were the primary draw in traditional churches. This is a misrepresentation. And I humbly submit that it is an excuse, in classic charismatic style, to promote their lack of worship enriching externals by putting down traditional “religion” (this word is to be pronounced with a shudder). Again, in classic charismatic style, the Village Church is not going after those who believe in retaining some sense of communion with the saints of all ages, but they are instilling the same old contemporary, “au nauturaul”, organic, reductionistic form of worship.

The next aspect of the “incarnational” philosophy is a little more encouraging. To quote Josh, “And so our hope is that we would fight against [American-style competition among churches] and what we would bring to center stage would be the gospel. But the reality is, what you win them with, you keep them with. So if we win you with some glitz and glamor and high technology and an unbelieveable building, then we’ve got to keep that up. But if we win you with the gospel, then you won’t be surprised when you realize that’s what we try to keep you with.” This I’m all for. But I still object to pitting personal evangelism against architecture alone. Some have grown up in non-traditional churches and it’s what they expect. What if God called the Village Church to build a traditional style building in the future? They’d lose some folks the same way they assume traditional churches lose traditional worshipers when they start singing praise choruses, or installing a smaller pulpit, or getting rid of it altogether. The problem works both ways, if you ask me.

Width vs. Depth

Another encouraging aspect of Village’s philosophy is that they state a desire for deep preaching and deep believers over a desire for buildings full of shallow believers with deep pockets. “. . . He clearly gave us the commission which was to make disciples . . . not even converts, not to put skins up on the wall and say, ‘Look how many converts we have.’ He says, ‘I want disciples, and discipleship is a lifelong, difficult, painful, suffering process, then you die. That’s it.’ And if you and I are not willing to be transformed and beaten and molded and shaped into the image of Christ, then we have no idea what His will is for His church. He wants to take us deep, and if we get wide during the process, hallelujah. But if we take width over depth, we have sold out the gospel.”

Humility

The final aspect of the Village’s stated philosophy of ministry is that believers are to shun a “spirit of entitlement” for a “spirit of humility and sacrifice.” This should probably be a subset of the previous paragraph. Part of going deep as a believer is learning to love others more than oneself. Josh says, “I need you to help me slay me, and you need me to help you slay you. Because it’s not about us. And when we get that, that’s the most freeing reality, because we will exhaust ourselves on ourselves.”

A Question Raised

One thing that would be instructive to note in this regard is how much width has come to the church in so few years. I can tell that it is probably due in part to megachurch contemporary trimmings with actual Word-based preaching (or “talk”-ing). For this I rejoice. But, when will the church get deep enough to not need solely contemporary disregard for the regulative principle of worship? I’m sure the Villagers think they’re abiding by the Word by reducing Christianity to the interpersonal part of it. But there has been not one single word about a Reformed concept of the “ordinary means of grace” approach to ministry. They seem to have divorced, or as usual, put on the back burner the importance of the sacraments in worship. They’ve got prayer, they’ve got praise and they’ve got proclamation. But nobody seems to know how to work the sacraments into their “approach to ministry.” For those who claim to be Reformed, and if these guys are organizing around the Sovereign Grace Ministries statement of faith, then they must be claiming to be Reformed, this contemporary, organic, “Spirit-filled” kind of worship makes you forget about “rituals” like baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Oh, sure, they’ll get around to them, but only because they know they’d be in hot water without them. But, when it comes to the Village’s philosophy of ministry, you’d think there were no such things as sacraments. At least not the Lord’s Supper. Fortunately, Jesus managed to wedge baptism into the commission so it wouldn’t be neglected, too–except, of course, for neglecting to baptize the households of believers and not individuals alone. . .  

Preface’s Teaching

Q.  What does the preface to the ten commandments teach us?

 A.  The preface to the ten commandments teaches us, that because God is the Lord, and our God, and Redeemer, therefore we are bound to keep all his commandments (Luke 1:74-75; 1 Peter 1:15-18).

What Shall I Render to My God

 What shall I render to my God for all his kindness shown? My feet shall visit thine abode, my songs address thy throne.

How much is mercy thy delight, thou ever-blessed God! How dear thy servants in thy sight! How precious is their blood!

How happy all thy servants are! How great thy grace to me! My life, which thou hast made thy care, Lord, I devote to thee.

Now I am thine, forever thine, nor shall my purpose move; thy hand hath loosed my bonds of pain, and bound me with thy love.

Here in thy courts I leave my vow, and thy rich grace record; witness, ye saints who hear me now, if I forsake the Lord.

 #637, Trinity Hymnal; from Psalm 116:12-19; Isaac Watts, 1719; DOWNS C.M.; Lowell Mason, 1832

Don’t you love all those tricky things everyone ought to memorize in the Bible? The three big lists that ought to be memorized include the Ten Commandments, the Beatitudes, and perhaps most elusive of all (it has been for me), the Twelve Apostles. But these twelve elusive guys have just been apprehended. I’ll never have trouble again remembering their names. As I studied for this week’s Sunday School lesson from Acts one on The Great Commission, Christ’s Ascension and what I’m calling “Foundation Repair” (replacing Judas Iscariot with Matthias), I noticed some things that will help me remember their names forever. Perhaps one flaw is that the replacement, Matthias, isn’t listed, but it’s a mnemonic device which includes Judas Iscariot. Since we hear more in the Bible about Judas than Matthias, I think it’s appropriate to keep him in mind, even though his office was given to another.

The thing I noticed in the list of apostles in Acts chapter one is that half of the list is taken care of with three names. There are two Simons, Peter and the Zealot; there are two Judases, Isacariot and the Son of James (notice this helpful transition); and there are two Jameses, the son of Alphaeus and the brother of John. Six down, only six to go. But how do we simplify these?

Half of the remaining six end with a “u” sound: Matthew, Andrew, Bartholomew. These, we’ll lump together, and the rest are easy: John, Thomas and Phillip. But did you notice that if you insert these last three after the first six, it provides another memorable link. Since the second James listed is the brother of John, that should help you remember that the next name in the list is John, who are bundled with Thomas and Phillip. Then all you have to remember is the “-ew” names: Matthew, Andrew, Bartholomew.

So, there you have it. A mnemonic device to help us all memorize the names of the Twelve Apostles! I have provided a visual aid that you could perhaps download for your own personal use, or go ahead and make another for yourself, if you prefer. I hope this helps with your biblical headknowledge!