"Where Do You Go to Church?"

Where do you go to church?

It’s a normal question, and I’m not offended by it.  But in the year since I stopped going to conventional church, I have yet to figure out an easy answer to this question.  I see the horror in friends’ eyes when I tell them I don’t go.  We’ve all known people who walked away from fellowship with believers, or who become apostate to the faith.  There is pity and skepticism if I tell friends I’m still looking.  And when I explain what I’m doing as a matter of practice without going into the reasons, it sounds apologetic.  I’m not sorry for my choices.  I believe in them.

So why do I not go to a church?

Five years ago I led a Bible study on the spiritual gifts.  We looked at what the gifts are, examples of people using them, how they build up the church, and how other believers should respond to them.  In that study I, at least, became convinced that not only was my church broken – but the whole model for “church” that I was familiar with neglected the body-participation and Spirit-ual power and guidance described in the New Testament.

For four years I studied ecclesiology – what the Bible says about the gatherings of believers.  After I’d worked out an idea, mostly based on 1 Corinthians 11-14, of what a church meeting should be like, I discovered some websites about house churches.  My favorite website was New Testament Reformation Fellowship.  On their site are articles about the exact points and questions raised by my study.  The men who contribute to NTRF are from several countries and about ten congregations.  There are people really practicing church like you read about in Acts and the epistles.

But though I was gaining conviction on these things, God was not releasing me from the church I had attended since I was 15.  Church is about God and people, God’s purposes in people.  I am not (even now) released from loving those people or even from fellowshipping with them as I have occasion.  My church was broken, more than its model and more than a church has to be broken (consisting of redeemed sinners).  Many people attending that church were trying to stay to help, to heal, to influence towards the holy and faith-ful.

Finally in 2009 conflict came to a head at my church.  I prayed hard.  God taught me a lot about love.  The result for the church was essentially a split.  For me, I was released from my commitment to that body and that authority.  My family also left that church.  We were then faced with the question of what to do next.  As a family and independently we visited several area churches, without finding any to belong to.

A group that had met for fellowship and Bible study before they left the church continued to meet and my parents joined, contemplating a church plant.  They met in a house and held Sunday meetings.  Members of that group began to explore models for church that appealed to them.  Family-integrated ideas and house church ideas were blended with more traditional ministry models.

Some wanted to expand out of the house.  Others wanted to stay small.  Some wanted to support a full time pastor and others sought bi-vocational leadership.  There were different ideas about the purpose of church: discipleship, evangelism, worship, fellowship?  Which one is the primary goal?  Instead of seeking as a group what the Bible teaches about church, the families mostly went separate ways according to their preferences.

My family had heard about house churches from me for years.  They decided that they believed in house churches, and also in some associated concepts like co-leadership and family integration.  For my part, I am unwilling to join an institution I don’t believe in; I think it would cause problems for them and for me.  I would still like to find a church that follows the 1 Corinthians pattern for church meetings.  Though my parents still meet with some families from our old church, in a house church format, I am concerned that there is still division about the meaning of church and that their practices are somewhat arbitrary and not Bible-based.  I attend a few meetings a month with my family.

Close friends from Awana – and friends of those friends – had developed in 2008 and 2009 a prayer meeting and Bible study.  It was informal, meeting every week or two to share what God had been doing in our lives, the things we were burdened for or convicted about, and Scriptures God had laid on our hearts to share or that had spoken to us during the week.  We spent about an hour each meeting in Spirit-directed prayer, each praying as led.  Our fellowship before and after was sweet, and we often gathered at other times to do ministry or to have parties or to encourage each other.  This was my support during the difficult church split.  And it continues to be God’s provision for a “church”, the closest meeting in my experience to what I’m looking for in a church.

On the side, I also visit a few friends’ churches on Sunday mornings, about 2 out of 4 Sundays.  I visit Sovereign Grace, Cornerstone Chapel, Agape Bible, and Summitview Community in Fort Collins.  Each of these churches has good, God-loving and Jesus-following people who believe in community and whose theology is orthodox and God-exalting.  When I visit them, I think of it as a sort of worship and Bible conference.  I’m also open to visiting other churches occasionally, especially to see people I don’t often get to see – but also to meet new people and see what God is doing in the lives of Christians all over Colorado.

I have a concern about this church practice I’ve adopted, and it is that I have no pastor.  There is no good example of walking in the Spirit whose gift is to shepherd other Christians, guiding and feeding them – none who knows me and my spiritual state whose authority I could submit to and whose leadership I could follow.  But I have been in many conventional churches whose men titled “pastor” do not fit that description, and so I know that there is no easy way to find one.  A pastor, like so many other things, is a gift from God.  And I’m asking God for one still.

To God be all glory.

Two Stupid Comments I Should Have Rephrased

Two Stupid Comments I should have Rephrased

Once upon a time way too close to the present, I was sitting at a table with an over-tired 3 year old.  We were eating a snack after visiting the museum and the park that day.  This little boy was all wound up, and began pretending to bite his finger.  And then he actually bit it.  My attempt at stifling and disguising laughter at his reckless accident failed, and in the middle of please-pity-me-crying (no blood, no marks, no permanent damage), the child screamed his demand that I stop laughing.  I mastered myself.  He didn’t.  While still in the throes of his crying, he put his other finger in his mouth and pretended to bite it. 

In disbelief, I gave a warning.  “You’re stupid,” I said.  Three year olds, they don’t like that very much.  Especially not when their parents taught them that “stupid” is a bad word.  (Really, parents?  Wouldn’t it be better to teach your kids the spirit of respect instead of just limiting their vocabulary?)  He screamed again.  And I realized that I should not have said that.  I apologized, and went to instruct the foolish boy against repeating the same behavior that caused him pain just a moment before. 

Of course the word “stupid” exists for just such a lack of forethought, applies perfectly to the decision to continue the game.  With the information that their household considers it a bad word, I know that the child received no instruction from my diagnosis.  I don’t expect “foolish” would have communicated any more.  Which leaves me with the common option of “silly,” a dangerous thing to say.  A child is silly when he makes a face AND silly when he bites his own finger?  Pretending to bite a finger might be silly, but risking a real bite is not. 

Even aside from my word choice, I criticize the grammar of my sentence.  To be more accurate, the behavior was stupid.  A pattern of neglecting known consequences could justify labeling a person “stupid.”  A one time event doesn’t. 

Fresh off that experience, I went to a friend’s house for a Bible study.  Afterwards, I sought my friend to give her a compliment – a retraction of an earlier criticism.  I believe my words went something like, “You know how I have told you that everyone is like you, not knowing some things – but that we just do a better job of covering it up?  I think if I were in your family, I would look stupid, too.”  Her mom was right there, and hadn’t heard the earlier conversations.  And given the subject of my compliment, more planning for how to word my admission would have made a lot of sense. 

She and her mom looked confused and questioned me whether they were being insulted.  I spent the next five minutes trying to explain what I meant.  The truth is, people quite often say things and I don’t know what they’re talking about, or I don’t know if they’re teasing.  A little quiet observation usually enables me to discern the truth, and in the mean time I pretend to be in the know.  My friend makes the point that a person learns more by admitting their ignorance and asking.  I think there should be balance.  But the other day I was reflecting on the way her brothers treat people, how they push a matter and don’t let anyone pretend to know something they don’t – they tempt a person to doubt what they do know, even.  And I concluded that if I had grown up with that experience, I would also have given up long ago.  My ignorance would always be exposed, just like hers tends to be. 

Anyway, I’m starting to see the value in being more like her: more open, more humble.  I understand at the very least that I could be a better communicator and better friend if I took harsh words like “stupid” out of conversational use lest I give the wrong impression again.  Thank God for patient and forgiving friends!

To God be all glory.

Summer Reading Reviews

I’m so behind, reporting to you on the books I’ve been reading!  Let me catch you up.

Back in August, I read The Oath by Frank Peretti.  It is the second grown-up book I have read of his.  (Monster was a fantastic book!)  I have to say that I was disappointed.  The story started slowly, and dragged on with way too many “climaxes.”  At the end of the book the real climax was not nearly as redemptive as I hoped for.  And I think that reflects the central theme of the book that dissatisfied me: sin when it is full grown gives birth to death; men who are not redeemed are slaves to sin.  That is true enough, but there was precious little in the story about the power of God over sin, to save us from death.  What was there didn’t ring real or powerful or even theological. 

The Oath centers around two vivid images of sin: a dragon growing, hungry, but hard to see and hard to fight; and a oozing sore over the heart – a sore that people want to avoid, want to deny, want to ignore, and ultimately insanely forget. 

Of all the characters, the one that stood out to me wasn’t a main character.  It was the pastor of Hyde River.  He sounds like a lot of pastors: downplaying the power of evil, giving the benefit of the doubt to the intentions of wicked men, avoiding confrontation, and dreaming of bigger ministries.  His was not the blatant rebellion against God embraced by much of the community – but he tolerated and excused the sin around him, even rebuking those few in his congregation who stood for the truth.  The pastor enabled the sin in the community, did nothing to stop the men who were hurrying to hell.  At the end of the story you see which side that puts him on. 

In summary: the writing wasn’t all that good; the idea not that compelling, but there were some high points of description both of human character and of the nature of sin. 

After that I dabbled in a book by Philip Jenkins: The Lost History of the Church in Asia, but it wasn’t what I hoped or expected, so I gave up half way and sent it back to the library.

This was partly because I was busy reading a novel lent to me by a friend, Barchester Towers by Anthony Trollope.  That was a pleasant read!  Mr. Trollope confides in you, author to reader, but also uses polite denials to manipulate one into suspecting the accusation denied.  His characters are, sadly, typical of the human race.  Even his hero and heroine have their faults and foolishness.  But he begs you to love them and forgive them, just as they would treat you.  And the spell he casts worked on me.  I do love Mrs. Bold and Mr. Arabin.  From the very beginning the author painted such a picture of his characters that I was curious to see how they would perform whatever dramas and comedies he submitted them to.  I was not disappointed. 

Shortly after I finished Barchester Towers, I was babysitting.  After the little boys were put to bed, I raided their father’s bookshelf, and began to read GK Chesterton’s The Man Who Knew Too Much.  Unrelated to the two movies by the same name, the book is a series of mysteries solved by a genius who knows too much about the dark side of man.  He has too often seen bad men get away with their crimes.  I marvel at the commentator’s skill at weaving into story a sort of poetic metaphor of philosophy along with his critique of politics, aristocracy, and press. 

In response to a friend preaching on hyper-dispensationalism, I took the time one evening to read and make notes on Galatians with a view to the theology of dispensationalism.  Though I sympathize with the concept of dispensations, I must admit that as a whole the book says nearly the opposite of the point my friend was trying to make.  My study has prepared me for our next confrontation. 

While recently on vacation I began The Letters of JRR Tolkien.  So far they are not very interesting, as they mostly predate The Lord of the Rings and any correspondence with fans or critics. 

A partial viewing of Peter Jackson’s Return of the King inspired me to pick up my copy of JRR Tolkien’s Trilogy again.  What delight to revisit The Fellowship of the Ring! 

As always I have a huge stack of books I desire to read in the near future: a couple about AnaBaptists, one about the Great Depression, John Piper’s Don’t Waste Your Life, Pilgrim’s Progress, Emma, Wives and Daughters, Passion and Purity, Quest for Love, From Eternity to Here, Instruments in the Hands of the Redeemer… 

To God be all glory.

Galatians and Dispensations

I'm not even sure I am any kind of Dispensationalist.  And if you don't know what Dispensationalism is, you probably won't understand this skeleton commentary of what it has to do with Galatians.  But if you do, I hope you'll appreciate it.  (Intended to be read with Galatians, not independently.)


Notes on Galatians with an emphasis on Dispensationalism:

1:1 – Paul, an apostle (defending equal authority with the others)
1:6-7 – “different gospel” is really no gospel at all
1:7 – “gospel of Christ”
1:11 – as a Jew, Paul persecuted the Church – at that time mostly made up of Jews
1:17 – in Jerusalem were those who were apostles before Paul
1:22 – before Paul began preaching (to them, at least), there were Churches in Judea that were in Christ, who did not know Paul
1:23 – it was reported that Paul was preaching the same faith he had tried to destroy
1:24 – the Churches of Judea praised God because of Paul and his preaching
2:2  - Paul submitted his gospel to the leaders of the Jerusalem Church to make sure his “running” was “not in vain”
2:3 – the leaders in Jerusalem did not compel Titus the Greek to be circumcised.
2:4 – this is contrasted with false believers who wanted to make the Church slaves (to the Law)
2:5 – Paul resisted those false believers completely.  Compare to Acts 21:17-26 (esp. v. 26): Did Paul change from resisting completely to compromising with the Jewish elders?
2:6 – those in Jerusalem held in high esteem added nothing to his message
2:11 Cephas was to be condemned for his actions – hypocrisy – when he came to Antioch.  Not “ok, you were following the gospel Jesus gave you even though it’s different from mine” but “you’re being a hypocrite, seeking to please men rather than God.” (vs. 12-13)
2:12 – (says the “circumcision group” came from James.  Did he endorse them? Was James wrong then, too? It does say that before that, Cephas found it ok to fellowship with Gentiles, which is the testimony of Acts 10-11)
2:13 – this hypocrisy is described as being led astray
2:14 – they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel (see Eph. 3:6, Rom. 10:12-13, and Gal. 3:28)
2:15 – we Jews know no one is justified by keeping the Law, but by faith
2:21 – if it were possible for righteousness to come by the Law – if we could fully keep the “house rules” of the Mosaic Dispensation, the Old Covenant would not have needed a better one – the New Covenant for which Christ died!  (see also Heb. 8:7, 13)
2:11-21 – Paul says he (past tense) stood against and rebuked Peter.  He does not follow this with a “gave him up to God for correction” or a warning against following Peter, though that was his custom (II Tim. 2:17-19, 4:14-15)
3:6 – Even Abraham was considered righteous only because of faith – though he lived in a covenantal Dispensation
3:10 – All who rely on observing the Law are under a curse, according to the Law itself!  This even in the Mosaic Dispensation!  And still in Paul’s day, today, and forever.
3:13 – Christ, by hanging on a tree, redeemed us (Paul writing to Galatians – Jews and Greeks – 3:28)
3:17 – God’s promises to Abraham to bless all nations predate and outlast the Mosaic Law
3:19 – the Law was added because of transgression of those hoping for the promise to be fulfilled to Abraham’s Seed, Christ.  Blessing to all…
3:22 - …nations could not come through the Law or the people of the Law because it was promised to come through one Seed of Abraham.
3:25 – Now that this faith (in Jesus Christ, by which all nations may receive the blessing of the Spirit – 3:14) has come, we are no longer (implies we once were) under the supervision of the Law
4:9 – How is it that you turn back to weak and miserable forces: observing special days, etc.?
4:29 – It is the same now, that the son of the slave (Mt. Sinai covenant) persecutes the son of the free (Promise)
4:30 – the slave woman’s son (Mt. Sinai covenant) will never share in the inheritance with the free, so cast out the slave!
5:5, 6, 16, 18 – so you’re saved, but transgression is still there?  Adding the Law won’t help and never has.  But we have now, through faith in Christ, received the promised Spirit who enables us to not fulfill the lust of the flesh when, rather than trying to walk by the Law, we walk by the Spirit.  And we continue to have faith that the righteousness for which we hope will come.  But we’re awaiting it, not building it out of the Law.
6:12 – the only reason many insist you must be circumcised is to avoid (for themselves) persecution for the cross of Christ.  (This is a different motive than Paul’s “all things to all men” in 1 Cor. 9:19-23)
6:13 – Even those [believers] who are circumcised do not keep the Law.  They just want to boast to the (unsaved?) Jews that they got you to be circumcised!
6:14 – May Christians only boast in the cross of Christ – the real power for life and godliness!

To God be all glory.

One's Own Motives

Isn’t it strange to be curious about one’s own motives?  Almost as an outside observer I watch myself stop blogging.  And then I wonder what is going on in my life or my psyche or even in my spirit that distracts me and stifles me and prevents me from writing.  This inquiry has produced a few related theories, and though I cannot prove that they are the explanation, they are at least interesting enough realities to share with you, my few remaining readers.

First, I believe myself to be undergoing a change.  Some effects of this are conscious and others, I am proposing, subconscious.  You may understand better if I tell you about the effects.  If you have read my blog for a while, you probably realized that I more or less left the institutional church.  This was not merely a reaction to problems in an individual church, but to learning about how God designed the Church to function.  I left in hope, seeking a more organic and interactive body driven by the Spirit of God and led by the Captain of our Salvation, Jesus Christ.  The man-made programs and pre-designed roles into which traditional churches tend to insert members I have particularly rejected.  Instead, I believe in ministries of pouring into each others’ lives, dependent on “walking in the Spirit” for the words and abilities required to edify our fellow Christians.  This is considerably harder than a clearly-defined responsibility for two hours a week at a church building.  I used to be an Awana leader, one of those established and exemplified jobs in the systemized church.  I did a lot with Awana.  But a year and a half ago, I decided to quit.  I pulled out, grateful for what I had learned and the springboard it had been into a lifestyle of serving God. 

Since I left those two things behind I have spent a lot of money on gas, getting to the homes and activities of my friends; and a lot of time on Facebook, keeping up with the thoughts and feelings and doings of my friends; and a fair amount of hunger on restaurant and fast food, fellowshipping over meals somewhat as prescribed in the Bible.  Sidewalk counseling is another ministry I do that is fairly open.  The times are established, but I’m not scheduled to be there (though I do sometimes promise in advance to see others on specific days).  We have speeches, but sometimes new admonitions or offers or explanations come to our lips.  There is much prayer there, and cooperation by which we are supported outwardly and spiritually. 

When I began this blog, it was an overflow from mass emails I had been sending to several friends (with rare responses).  It was a chance to practice writing – something I still believe God has gifted me to do.  And in writing new ideas down, I learned new things and worked out a lot of what I believe as a twenty-something.  The hope was to find interested people who would interact with me here.  In that way, my blog was less successful than I had hoped. 

The craving all along has been for profound communication – and community.  As I caught up to that desire intellectually, and my life caught up practically, a circle of friends has replaced blogging in my hopes for sharpening and encouragement.  I found an audience that speaks back to me – not on demand, but when I need to be reminded.  And they share new things that I wasn’t seeking.  Or they answer questions before I’ve spent weeks trying to answer them on my own.  In doing ministry in community and praying as a group and studying the Bible together, I’ve continued to learn (and grow in my application!). 

I’m in a learning phase of life, changing and questioning and uncertain how things will work out.  A lot of what consumes my thoughts is personal, unsuited to the wall-less worldwide web.  To write down what I think with as much confidence as I used to just isn’t my mood. 

Now when I get online and have something to say, I tend to say it in a personal email or on Facebook: that great responsibility of a social networking site.  It’s a way to know and be known.  That web-world invites cooperative exploration of ideas.  People can be encouraged and challenged when they didn’t go looking for it.  I can find out when a friend is sick and needs orange juice, or discouraged and needs a phone call, or tempted and needs prayer.  Though the danger is that the Facebook world lets people live outside of reality, for me it connects me to reality much more than blogging. 

Sir Francis Bacon once wrote that “Acorns were good until bread was found.”  That’s my life now. 

Though, I always have had a fascination with acorns…

To God be all glory.

Flight

I have been marveling at flying things lately.  Flocks of birds from bushes in the mountains.  A hawk above hills by a lake.  Cranes landing on a riverbank.  Dragonflies just overhead along the sidewalk.  Butterflies in my garage.  Grasshoppers along hot summer paths.  Mayflies and houseflies and wasps and bees and millers landing on walls and ceilings and bouncing their ways along.

Paper airplanes.  Jets.  Helicopters.

Bats.  Pterodons.

"Who am I?  That the voice that calmed the sea would call out through the rain and calm the storm in me?" - Casting Crowns

To God be all glory.

Sunglasses and Sunscreen

Maybe you've seen it.  One of your friends comes up to you on a summer's day and his face is all red except for a raccoon-like mask around his eyes.  The day before he'd been out in the sun, wearing his sunglasses, and gotten a sunburn.

Why was he wearing sunglasses?  To protect his eyes from the sun.

Is there nothing to protect his skin from the sun?  There is, but he didn't use it.

Why not?  I suppose he was uncomfortable with the brightness of the sun in his eyes, and sunglasses relieved that.  But the sun on his skin was less troublesome at the time - and sunblock wouldn't relieve the discomfort from the heat.

So the friend took care to make sure that he was comfortable in the moment, but had no thought for the comfort of tomorrow.  He went on feelings.  The only good he would accept was immediate relief.

What can we learn from this?

To God be all glory.

The Game (Guest Post)

(a guest post by my brother)

...Maybe...Maybe...the silence is part of the game. What fun is hide and seek if you can see what's around the next corner? The fun is not only in the excitement of finding the one you're looking for...so much of the fun of the game is the suspense of not knowing what the next minute will bring. Where would the excitement be if you didn't have to search? If you didn't know the sorrow of failure? If you never felt the surge of pure exhilaration of knowing you're close to the one you're searching for. The joy is intensified by the separation...Success would be just another senseless word if we didn't know the crushing sorrow of being defeated and alone. The closeness you feel when you are finally standing beside your friend is intensified by the gut-wrenching frantic searching, wondering if you will ever be together again.

So try it. I know it sounds simple, silly even. Just try it though...play that game that many of us forgot...Hide-and-seek...a simple name...with divine overtones of something much deeper. The silence is part of the game! =) - NOTW_7-1

Courtship Roadtrip

My brother called yesterday.  He is a Marine finishing up training in Virginia.  And he’s had a lot of time to think the last few months.  His conclusion is that I am jinxing the rest of the family.  Because I, the oldest, am not married, none of the rest of my brothers and sisters have a chance. 

The truth is, I’m not avoiding marriage.  I believe I’m doing everything I can do.  There are still some questions about whether I should do things differently: Talk more or talk less?  Wear more skirts or fewer?  Use makeup or not?  My (single) best friend and I read a book a while back called “Get Married,” which suggested that single women be very careful not to throw away the interest of a good man.  We were comparing notes recently and wondering whether there really are girls who get that chance!  Anyway, on the major things, I’m doing what I can.  I don’t hide.  I am friendly.  I speak to men.  I let it be known that I want to get married.  I prepare to be a good wife. 

A lot of my friends are on the lookout for a good husband for me.  “When did this plan start?” brother Marine asked.  I shrugged and told him that when my friends ask how to pray for me, I tell them that I want to be married.  They get the idea.  Several of them tell me, “I wish I knew a man to introduce you to.”  During the past year or so, I have gotten about a half dozen suggestions of potential mates, thanks to my helpful friends.  Unfortunately, they all live out of state.  That fact inspired my brother’s plan.

It’s something like how high school students are choosing colleges.  They load up the car, bring their dad along, and travel the country side visiting the schools on their short list.  This is the Courting Roadtrip. 

You gather from your helpful friends the names and addresses of every out-of-state man they have suggested you may be destined for.  Plot them on a map and work out a route.  Show up at each door and say, “I’m Lisa.  Hear you’re looking for a wife!”  Then you try to get to know them and let them get to know you, before you move on to the next victim of matchmaking.  I think you might have to do some explaining to the poor unsuspecting men.  I’d say to have your friends call and warn them, but that might take them off your list of “potentials” too quickly. 

All in all, my brother’s plan sounds a bit more aggressive than my personality, and I don’t want to give false first impressions.  So I might just wait this out.  Actually I don’t mind if a single man takes a Courtship Roadtrip.  (Without the startling introduction, “Hear you’re looking for a husband!”)  Go find a wife.  That’s what I say. 

The truth is I believe in responding.  I believe in being pursued by a man, not the other way around.  I believe I’m waiting on God and His timing for this.  My younger siblings aren’t really bound by my singleness.  They’re waiting on God’s timing, too.  Knowing that, it is all the more important that I wait well, setting them a good example, at the same time being honest with them about how hard it is.  Meanwhile, we're laughing a lot.

To God be all glory.

Unfruitful Works of Darkness

“Have nothing to do with the unfruitful works of darkness.”

I’m a discernment person.  Heresies are a big deal to me.  I tend to notice when teachers or authors or pastors are preaching a different gospel.  But there are other issues, too.  Focusing on tolerance and friendliness with the world – the “seeker-sensitive” movement, for example – is dangerous.  Christians are a light set on a hill, not light camouflaged to look like darkness.  Or another popular… what should I call it?  Not a heresy in the traditional sense, but a dangerous and unchristian worldview or spiritual practice?  Anyway, another one is the borderline gnosticism.  This encompasses mysticism and individualism, focusing on poetic ideas of light versus darkness, denial (or even mistreatment) of the physical, and meditation.  I see connections between seeker-sensitivity and the postmodern mysticism.  Primary in these connections are the exaltation of human effort and experience.  They are ancient perversions of the Christian life, not new, but addressed in the New Testament.

Lately it has become popular to cite “church fathers” in theological debates.  This even if the quote or position contradicts the New Testament.  Though I’m not persuaded of the “sola scriptura” of the Reformation, it did rescue us from centuries of heretical tradition enforced as the authority of the fathers.  (Jesus rebuked the same sin in the Pharisees.)  Many of those historical theologians flirted with or embraced the para-Christian spirituality mentioned above, emphasizing either their personal wisdom or their own mystical experiences as sources of truth superior to the revelation of Scripture.  They practiced this outside of the protective peer-regulation of a Spirit-led Church.  Somehow the doctrine of the indwelling Holy Spirit got exchanged for a belief in inner divinity belonging to an individual.  All of which was much more compatible with the pagan religions encountered as the ancient “Christianity” spread.

And isn’t that something to be concerned about?  Rather than being excited that the enemies of God, the spiritually dead men of planet earth, have portions of truth preserved in their religions, shouldn’t we be devastated at the subtlety of the deceits of the Evil One that has kept men captive to their sin?  (“What fellowship has light with darkness?”)  Instead of finding commonality in spiritual practices of meditation and monasticism and sacrificing to appease the gods – shouldn’t we question those practices?  If the pagans do those things, and if those things are not prescribed by our Lord in the early letters to the churches affirmed by the apostles, why not rather fear a resurgence of paganism within our faith – that the spiritual forces of wickedness have been also distracting us and leading us astray?

In our modern times we tend to disdain the primitive superstitions of pre-Christian peoples.  We think they should have been able to see through the cheap tricks of the medicine men, to rise up against the oppressive shaman and assert reason, the intelligence and ability of individuals.  But a Christian worldview suggests a different interpretation.  It teaches that the devil and demons are real, powerful, able to produce counterfeit signs and wonders to deceive men.  Demon possession is real.  And maybe those pitiable people, observing that reality, live with rituals and talismans approved by their devils – for a time – as a tax on the slaves of the Devil before they are consumed.

For us who have known only the relatively Christian Western world, it is difficult to remember the spiritual battle that is engaged even here.  We are not trained to recognize the spiritual activities of our enemy.  This may be because we haveadopted it,  or excused and tolerated it…  False teaching, we believe, has been perpetrated by confused but well-meaning people.  Cultists are mostly nice people whose theology is just a little different from ours.  We wouldn’t want our children converting, but no big deal if our neighbors and coworkers believe in Jesus andgood works for their salvation, God and their own divinity.  Many who identify themselves as evangelical Christians see no cause for concern when their church services begin to incorporate incense, or a ladies’ conference suggests repetitive chanting of a spiritual word or phrase as a means of getting closer to God.  Millions of us read and identify with a book that includes a manifestation of Sophia, the Gnostic “goddess” as the incarnation of wisdom.  These ideas and practices are more attractive to the unsaved world, after all (and to many inside the church).  And why shouldn’t they be; they’re familiar whispers, that we are like God, that we come to God on our own terms.

The word profanity is known as a synonym for cussing.  But who knows the word profane?  Who believes that there is a way God wants to be worshiped, a way He has set for people to come to Him – and any other way is so offensive to Him as to bring His righteous wrath?  What is fallen man to tell God why He should accept him?  Who is the liar and deceived to believe he has a hold of truth and wisdom apart from the deliverance and revelation of God?  How dare we think our filthy rags – our own righteousnesses – are acceptable sacrifices to pay for our trespasses against the ways of God?

But it is hard to reject these things, hard to point at those profanities and warn that they are part of the wide path to hell.  I don’t want to believe that my church leader is a false teacher.  I like to believe that my friends are going to heaven.  But how does that honor God?  Is my allegiance to Him or to men?  And how is that compassionate, to ignore the condition of my friends?  Making excuses is easy.  If a man says he believes in Jesus, is it such a big deal if he tolerates sin, if he keeps company with the world?  Also far too simple is reassuring myself that even though a person has not trusted in Jesus, he still seems to be a good influence, telling people to pray and read their Bibles and love their families and be wary of governments and religions out to destroy us.

Yet more and more I believe that those excuses and those subversive people are the biggest threats.  By them people are led from the power and truth of God, or worse – away from the gospel of the grace of God.  People are soothed into ignoring their spiritual neediness.  Those people, those false prophets, are the enemies of God.  And if they are enemies of God, they are enemies of His people.  They are not in your fellowship to encourage you or point you to God.  Though they may feign friendship, it is for diabolical purposes, and they can turn on you at any moment.

So what can we do?  Monasticism and individualism belong to the false religions.  We cannot run away from these dangerous people.  Tolerance and acceptance also correspond to the faith that exalts man over God.  So we cannot be silent or friendly.  Truth and God’s glory invite us to discern the lies and cast them down.  Holiness insists that we take our cues from God, supported by those men and women who exhibit the fruits of being His.  Love demands that we warn people of destruction.  Faith in God teaches us to hope for revival and redemption.

To God be all glory.