Rob Bell apologists, take note

Sacred cows...(part 2)

4. We should not question servants of God. Let God deal with them in His way if they are wrong. Just pray for them. This is one of my favourites. No, really. I used to mouth this pious platitude once upon a time, so it makes me cringe even more when I hear this. This is brought out when a 'servant of God' (read that any way you like) stands up on a pulpit and says something like " God remembers His covenant with David because David gave all his silver and gold to the temple" (Ergo, so should you and me. Preferably to said 'servant' of God. Crisp notes or credit cards accepted, unless you have actual Krugerrands to fork over) and someone has the temerity to say "But surely that isn't in the Bible? How can he say that?" Or another 'servant' of God makes demands for red carpet treatment, first class flight tickets, five-star hotels, etc if you want him to come and preach at your 2-day conference. Plus a five figure 'honorarium'. When someone asks "Isn't the gospel free?", out comes the weapon of choice, without fail. Trouble is, such a principle or even attitude is never sanctioned, required, encouraged or commanded in Scripture. On the contrary, in every single situation, we are told to test those who come in the name of the Lord. Under Mosaic Law, a false prophet was required to be stoned to death. While we are not subject to the letter of the Mosaic Law in the New Covenant, we would do well to remember this. In the New Testament, we are continually exhorted to test all things, test the spirits, etc, etc. What things? Things that are taught from the pulpit and 'servants' of God who say one thing but seem quite happy to do another. Like the Pharisees. And we all know how kind and gentle Jesus was with them. He showed us all how it's done. 

5.God helps those who help themselves. If I had a dollar for every time I've heard this from Christians and non-believers alike, I'd have enough to buy one of those little islands for sale off the coast of South America. In fact, it's become so cliched, I fear some people actually think this is in the Bible. Newsflash - it's not! Nada. Zilch. It's not there. What people really intend to convey in such a phrase is this: God only helps those who help themselves, so get off your backside and get a job - and this is used as an excuse to justify turning a blind eye to those who are in need. Right? Well, what does the Scripture actually say? "God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in time of trouble". Certainly God condemns laziness ("You shall eat your bread by the sweat of your brow") but from that to jump to "God will not help you unless you help yourself" is ridiculous. If you are capable of "helping yourself", why do you need God? If you're not capable of helping yourself, does that mean that God will do nothing for you? How ridiculous! Why do we insist on creating our own little pet phrases that are not based on Scripture and make that a rule for living? The Bible says that God Himself fights for the orphans and widows - does that mean they're helping themselves so He decides to throw His lot in with them?? If you answered yes to that - please, someone take me outside and shoot me.

6.  If you are truly saved, you'll stop wearing gold and jewellery of any kind. Ok, this is another one of my favourites, although there aren't too many Christians/churches that hold to this 'doctrine'; however, the ones that do are usually biblically sound otherwise - which makes it all the more surprising . And it's another one based on a faulty reading of Scripture, from 1Pe 3:3. First of all, basing an entire doctrine on an isolated reading of one or a few verses, without the witness of the entire Word of God is treading on dangerous ground. But, lt's look at the verse and then we'll see for ourselves. I've provided renderings of this particular verse in a number of different Bible versions:

1Pe 3:3  Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel (KJV)

1Pe 3:3  Of whom let not be the adorning of garments, or outward braiding of hair and wearing of gold, or of putting on clothing (MKJV)

1Pe 3:3  Whose adorning let it not be the outward adorning of braiding the hair, and of wearing jewels of gold, or of putting on apparel (ASV)

Now, let's ignore - for a moment - the necessity of context, etc and look at the verse itself. Obviously, it follows on from verses 1 & 2, where Peter exhorts wives how they are to behave towards their husbands, especially those who might not be in the faith. Now, if you read this verse in isolation it basically says that a wife's adorning should not be by braiding/plaiting hair, or wearing of gold or 'putting on of apparel'. Ok? Ok. No...wait. 'Putting on of apparel'? But...but...doesn't apparel mean clothes? So, this basically says 'don't put on clothes'? Nah! Can't mean that, surely! But, wait. Let's check out the original Greek. The word 'apparel' is translated from the Greek ἱμάτιον, himation (pronounced him-at'-ee-on). According to Strong's dictionary, 'himation' means, variously, "apparel, cloke, clothes, garment, raiment, robe, vesture". No question about it - it means 'clothes'. You say that this verse says we should not wear gold ornaments. It also says, 'don't wear clothes', by the same token.

Ok, do you agree with me that this doesn't make sense? Either this verse is contradictory to the rest of Scripture urging modesty in our clothing, or this verse has been wrongly interpreted and applied. What EXACTLY does this say? Well, you have to read the passage as a whole - for starters. Read it for yourself, and ask God to help you work it out. It's pretty simple, actually. I have confidence that you'll get it pretty quickly!

Plus, if ornaments are banned by this passage, then so is braiding/plaiting hair. Is that silence I'm hearing?

7. You have to go to church every Sunday plus the weekly Bible study, plus any other meetings there are or you'll never grow spiritually. In fact, if you take this particular sacred cow to its logical end, it would be better to move into the church building so you can be there 24 hours a day and pop out every now and then to go to work and school. That way you'll always be at church and your spiritual growth will be tremendous.

But what's wrong with going to church every Sunday and attending Bible studies, etc? Surely, I have the wrong end of the stick this time? Well, I'll put it this way. How do we grow in Christ? What does the Bible say? Secondly, going to church does not make you a part of Christ's Body anymore than a flea in a dog's hair makes it part of the dog's body. If you're born again, you're part of the  Body of Christ- period. And I didn't come up with that concept - that's what God's Word says.

Gathering with other believers to worship God is vitally important, as is gathering together to study His Word. Scripture exhorts us to do so - we, the members of the Body, encourage one another to live for Christ. But our life itself is in Christ Himself, and in God the Father, through the Holy Spirit, NOT through the gathering per se. We need to be clear about the difference. It is our relationship with Christ that makes us part of His Body, not anything else. Growing in Christ flows from our relationship with the Lord, not what we do or how many church meetings we go to. When building a house, the most important part is the foundation. Without that all the fancy balustrades and Italian marble and downlights you can think of will be like a ring in a pig's nose. Our growth derives from our walk with Christ - without a personal relationship with the Lord of Lords, through faith in Him who has redeemed us from our sin, going to church is meaningless. All the activity in the world will not substitute for this, the foundation.

Let's not put the cart before the horse. And don't get me wrong. Don't stop going to church or to bible studies, etc. Make sure that your source of life is Christ in His Word, by His Spirit. Let me put it another way - if you woke up tomorrow morning and the right to gather at a church had been taken away from you, so that from henceforth you could never go to church, or to a bible study, etc - would you still continue in the faith? Would you grow in Christ and into His fullness?

'Nuff said.

Deja vu...it's like a bad dream!

Came across this particular blog.....and this particular post....it sounds so very much like the schlepp I used to hear for a number of years. I'm not going to enter into an exhaustive dissection here of this blog before I have actually corresponded with the author so I will confine my comments here to just these: On the face of it, it does appear that Dr. Chris Martin is encouraging a highly manipulative method of raising money for the church - not for God, but for the church. I say the latter because of point #2. Also, it appears that he believes those who actually know the Lord and His Word will see through this - see comment #3.

I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

http://www.breakingalltherurals.com/2011/tips-to-a-better-sunday-offering/ 

Sacred cows... (part 1)

I've been engaged in a discussion with a dear Christian brother in South Africa, which led me to think about some of the the 'doctrines' or premises that most Christians unconsciously adopt even though these may not actually stand up to scrutiny against Scripture. Here are a few:

1) If a preacher can draw the crowds, then he's 'anointed'. Really? That's in the Bible?? Because that implies that those who can't draw the crowds aren't. Logically, that would mean that "No crowds = no anointing". Whether we like it or not, isn't that what we're actually saying? Which would then mean that the prophet Jeremiah was utterly 'un-anointed' and a failure, since those he preached to blatantly refused to obey God. Perhaps, we need to study the Word, and examine this pet theory.

2) If a church is growing greatly in numbers, God is blessing that ministry (or something to that effect). This time, we even have a Scripture passage to support this premise! In Acts 5:34 - 39, we read of how Gamaliel advised the Jewish council and elders not to stop the apostles preaching the gospel lest they find themselves opposing God. He stated that if this was a movement of men, it would come to naught, and cited two examples of such movements which came to naught, one of whom was Judas of Galilee, better know to Israelis as Judas Maccabeas. Hey presto! Suddenly, counsel given by an unbeliever (no evidence that Gamaliel was a follower of Christ - yet) to other unbelievers about being cautious not to oppose God becomes "increase in numbers and in ministry is proof of God's hand and blessing". How on earth do we make that jump? By that logic, Islam is blessed by God, since it is the fastest growing religion on the planet. Or, how about atheism/agnosticism? Are we seeing the silliness of even thinking this??

3) Those who serve God should have the best. Hmm, really? Best of what? What is the best? Usually, we've decided it means the best house, the best car(s), the best dog, the best salary, the best clothes, the best jewellery ad infinitum. Newsflash - who said those things are 'the best'?? Jesus said that a man's life does not consist of the abundance of his possessions - since we appear to be talking 'material' best. By that logic, then Paul and the other apostles clearly missed God's best, unless you count the shipwrecks and hardships and beatings with rods and the 39 lashes five times as 'the best'. Interesting how the definition of 'best' is exactly the same as that of the unbelieving world?!!

That's all I can think of right now. Sleep beckons. More in the next instalment.

Listen and be edified...

Voddie Baucham from Rasmus Gade on Vimeo.

Libya burning....

Who would have thought Brother Leader would have come to this? The self-appointed President of the United States of Africa (his own idea) is fighting for political suvival as bloodshed and violence overtakes the country that he has ruled as his personal fiefdom. It was a matter of time. Who is it who said "Even a worm will turn"?

The latest reports on Fairfax Media news sites and a live blog on the Al-Jazeera website document the turmoil in Libya, even as the official press denies the numbers of dead and wounded being reported by bloggers, twitterers and international media. Junior "Brother Leader" Saif al-Islam Gadaffi cut an almost Comical Ali-type figure in his televised interview last night - without the utter buffoonery of Saddam's erstwhile spokesman. His strident refusal to face reality, though, was frighteningly similar. It was the picture of a regime utterly out of touch with its subjects and completely dumbfounded by how quickly it was losing control - and completely incapable of dealing with it.

Gadaffi's initial response to the protests in Benghazi was to send troops out firing live ammunition and - get this - anti-aircraft guns at or above the protestors. I believe that was the moment he sealed his fate. A measured response, more reflective of the general mood may have allowed him, at the very least, to exit with some honour. At the most, he may have continued to enjoy some role in a reformed government set-up. Unlikely, but possible. All that has changed now. If he thought that getting out the sledgehammer to deal with a bunch of ants would do the job, well, the the ants came back with reinforcements. As one blogger/twitterer put it: "these people are not after Gadaffi anymore. They're after blood". The ire of a subdued nation has been aroused. 40 years of pent-up rage is now unleashed. Most recent reports on CNN and other international news media suggest that Benghazi, Libya's second-largest city, is now in the hands of anti-government protestors.

If he still listens to sound advice, it would be this: Leave now, and never come back. Ride off on your camel into the Saudi desert, where you will receive succour like the rest of your fellow dictators. Saudi Arabia, land of oil, Mecca, Bin Laden and the welcoming home for any brutal, savage dethroned despot with an Islamic name. Go now, before you share the fate of Nicolae Ceausescu.

I wonder what Nelson Mandela thinks of Gadaffi now. Does he still think "this man is our friend", as he insisted soon after taking office, when he paid a state visit to Triploi to thank "Brother Leader" for his support for the ANC while in exile. In return for his support, the ANC turned a blind eye to his brutal regime and the suppression of basic freedoms in Libya. While his support was very real and beneficial from a South African perspective, it was a morally compromised choice. Altriusm would have been farthest from Gadaffi's mind as, even back then, he entertained grandiose designs of himself at the head of a union of African states. Whatever it is, it will be interesting to see how Jacob Zuma's government responds officially to the latest developments in Libya - if at all.

Does a tree...

What's that age-old question again - "Does a tree falling in a forest make a sound if there is no-one to hear it?"

We could ask that in different ways and applied to different things.

Is an athlete the best in the world if there is no-one to compete against him?

Is someone a writer if no-one reads his work?

Would I be a house builder if no-one lives in the houses I build?

Would I be a dog lover even if I don't own a dog?

Would I be a cat lover even if I don't own a cat?

Is someone still a leader if no-one follows him, or all his followers desert him?

And we could go on and on in that vein, I suppose.

So, what's my point?

Well, it's a bit self-centred. I have this blog and I write here. I also write several other things outside of this blog. Much of what I write may never be seen by anyone. I write because I want to and I'm able to articulate things better when I think about things and put them down on paper. (Yes, I know this is a keyboard, but you know what I mean). So, am I still a writer if no-one ever reads what I write?

In my opinion, yes. Being a writer is not predicated on having an audience in the purest sense, anymore than being a farmer requires people to buy your crops. Being a farmer means that you should be someone who 'farms', i.e. grows crops, raises livestock, etc. That is a given. But if no-one ever bought your produce, it could be either that you produce only for yourself, you like to give away your surplus, or you're a bad farmer. Likewise, being a writer means that you have to be someone who 'writes'. Whether someone ever reads what you write or no, does not determine whether you are a writer or not.

Lessons from yesteryear...

If you ever thought that false teachers are a 21st century phenomenon, think again. First, read the Bible, and see how even in Paul's time, false teachers began to spring up. Simply from the witness of Scripture, there is no basis for us to consider this a new thing. However, it is good for us to know what has passed through the history of the church. Read this about Spurgeon and what is referred to as the "Down-Grade Controversy".

http://www.spurgeon.org/downgrd.htm

A Study in Disingenuity...

Let's consider a particular scenario: You're a Christian, a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. You have a wife and a family with growing teenagers. Your kids are not doing too well at school, so you decide you want to take them to a motivational coach, who will help them focus on their strengths and get themselves better organised with their school work, etc.

Ok, but then I come along and happen to notice this motivational coach coming to your home. I've done some research on his teaching methods and note, with concern, that he promotes sexual activity as a way to build confidence and 'expand horizons' and he has no qualms about encouraging teenagers and unmarried people to engage in sexual activity. So, I contact you and warn you of the danger of letting this person teach your children. Additionally, I tell others I know of the dangers of accepting this motivational coach into their midst because of his promotion of immorality. You listen to my communication and decide to ignore it because of this person's value as a motivation coach. So, you proceed to bring him in and, sure enough, he tells your children to engage in sexual activity. I and others persist in reminding you of what the Word teaches about sexual purity and that you should not be allowing someone who promotes sexual immorality to teach that to your children. We persist to such a degree that you decide to tell your children about sex and tell them how the Bible defines sex as right and necessary and set within a marriage. Then, however, you start telling them about how some very, very confused Christians - meaning me and others -  have been talking against sex and running away from sex, and tell them that there is nothing wrong with sex and they should not be dismayed by such confused people.

Is that a straw man argument or not? Nowhere did any of these "confused" Christians say anything against the Biblical definition of sex. All we did was tell warn you against someone encouraging your children to engage in sex that falls outside of the Biblical definition!! Moreover, since you clearly know what the Biblical definition of sex is, how would you explain how you allow your children to be taught to engage in unbiblical sexual activity?

Yes, I know, that's not a very good parable mainly because I have thoughts stumbling over each other and racing ahead in my mind. But, in essence, this is what the esteemed Rev. Rick Warren has just done.

To recap for the benefit of those of you who're thoroughly mystified, Rick Warren has started his Saddleback church in California on a 'Decade of 'Destiny' and has decided that 2011 will be the year of health and has set up what he calls 'The Daniel Plan' to encourage people to live healthy, eat right, blah, blah. Apparently, none of this has ever been said before, so people don't know that they need to eat right and exercise, etc. It requires Saddleback to make people aware of these things.

Ok, that was a rather pitiful attempt at sarcasm. But, I digress.

Anyway, as part of this 'Daniel Plan' - so called because of Daniel and his friends who, as captives in Babylon, decided to forego the Babylonian king's dainty dishes and lived on a diet of vegetables and fresh water, though he did it to honour God and not to 'be healthy' - he's called in three health experts, three renowned doctors, to teach his church how to be healthy. First of all, none of the doctors are believers. Ok, that's not a big deal. If all they're going to do is tell people how to lose weight by eating right and exercising, can't faut that. But wait - in checking these experts out, what if you find that they promote what is called "holistic" health, which is a euphemism for saying they try to incorporate 'spiritual' health into what they're promoting. But...but, we just noted that none of them are believers, so what 'spiritual' health can they possibly be pushing? Aha! Therein lies the rub. All of these gentlemen promote 'meditation' and laud its benefits. Two of them say 'meditation' AND 'yoga', while one pushes 'meditation'. If you're a believer in Christ, the hair on the back of your neck is standing up just about now. Anyway, several Christians began to question this, including yours truly. Scroll down to look at my first and second letters to Saddleback in this regard and you'll get the rest of the picture.

Suffice to say that these guys have been encouraging 'meditation' and 'yoga', etc to Saddleback, just like they do to the rest of the world. It's not their fault, that's what they do with everyone. At least, they're being true to what they believe and are not being hypocrites, unlike certain 'famous leaders' who will remain unnamed.

That's right, they've been telling the Saddleback church, that's people who say they are believers in Jesus Christ, to 'meditate' and practise yoga. Now this is the eastern kind of mantra meditation, transcendental meditation, the sort of kooky, occultish stuff that most Christians were warned about in Rabindranath Maharaj's book 'Death of a Guru'. This is not 'read the Scriptures and think/ruminate about what you read' meditation, which is what the Bible exhorts us to. This is the real deal - the occult, eastern, weird stuff that's done by hindus and buddhists. In short, nothing that is remotely Christian in essence or practice.

Now, watch the video below and wait for the bit where Rick Warren starts bemoaning the fact that "confused" Christians are whingeing about 'meditation' and running scared every time meditation is mentioned. He then proceeds to explain what biblical meditation and then decries all those 'confused' Christians who don't seem to understand that there is nothing to be worried about in biblical meditation.

Have you seen it yet? Have you seen the problem yet?

Yep, that very little problem - somehow Rick Warren forgets to mention that, despite his actually telling his church what biblical meditation is, this is NOT the same as the meditation his esteemed health panel has been telling his church to adopt! They're worlds apart! Somehow, he tries to make it sound like the critics are all idiots because they're opposing what the Bible does not - oh man! How does this wolf get away with it?? How does he continue to pull the wool over people's eyes?? He sets up a straw man and proceeds to tell his people how the Bible is at odds with the straw man.

Here's what I think, Rick Warren is a tool of judgement upon the church at Saddleback and American Christianity and a lot of the church across the world. I think he is the epitome of the false teacher that people love to gather for themselves today, who tells them what their ears are itching to hear. With the same mouth he teaches truth and lies. Not surprising, since the devil himself knows the Scripture thoroughly. Why wouldn't a man know the scripture and still be a wolf in sheep's clothing - a man who pretends to be a Christian, but is a false teacher par excellence. Because this biblically illiterate and spiritually lazy generation want nothing more than to be stroked and tickled and entertained, God has given them over to delusion, so that they may believe a lie. If you don't believe me, read the Bible.

So, here it is, me nailing my colours to the wall. I'm saying it out loud now. I never have before but this incident forces me to voice it out. Rick Warren is an apostate, false teacher and one of those roundly condemned in the Bible, numbered among the false prophets and teachers that Jesus warned us of in Matthew 24. And his end, and those end of those who follow him blindly, will be destruction, unless he repents.

I'll take militant atheist Richard Dawkins any day over this man. Dawkins says what he believes and sticks by it - there's no middle ground. Rick Warren, on the other hand, is a chameleon, a hypocrite, a liar and a deceiver.

If you have any love for God and the Body of Christ, pray for this man to be saved. Else, he will draw numberless millions into judgement with him. Your friends, your family, your loved ones. Pray, pray without ceasing. Pray for God to have mercy. Jesus said that for such a person who causes others to stumble, it would be better for him to have a millstone tied around his neck and be cast into the sea. His judgement will be terrible.

Even for such as he did Christ shed His blood. While there is still an opportunity for him to repent, pray for Rick Warren and his people in Saddleback, that their eyes be opened and the scales fall away, so that they may see clearly and walk after the Lord Jesus.

Spread the word around to those you care about and urge everyone to test this man and his teachings by the Scriptures.

I await the indignant emails, calls and messages from those eager to protect their 'anointed' leader.

Netbook....or not to netbook...

That is the question. Whether 'tis nobler still to suffer the weight of larger computers on one's knees, or to bite the bullet and 'netbook', and save oneself virtual arthritis.

The choice is clear.

Now, to check my money tree...

Tell me why....

It's considered that Christians are 'required' to pay a tithe, in accordance with the Law of Moses but not to keep the Jewish Sabbath or get their male children circumcised? 

Now, which was was more important under the Mosaic law? If the Sabbath and circumcision are not 'required', why is tithing? Not taught anywhere in the New Testament, none of the apostles required it of the church (i.e. the body of believers), not once anywhere in the New Testament is there an injunction or even an encouragement to tithe. On the contrary, we are exhorted several times to give to the saints in need, to give liberally and reminded that if we sow sparingly we reap sparingly. Nope, no 'requirement' to tithe. Can't find it.

Dare I say, to all those pastors out there that burden your people with this 'law', examine your doctrine and see whether it is really zeal for the Lord or your own selfishness or, perhaps, your own laziness (i.e. to test the doctrine that others have taught you) that causes you to lay a burden on believers that Israel was never able to bear (Not my words, but the apostle Peter's)? There is judgement for all you at the hands of the Lord for taking people's generous giving and applying it to buildings and programs and your own lifestyles, when the Biblical injunction is to give to the saints in need. How many of your people go hungry, lack medicines, lack a decent place to live, are unable to afford good clothes, better schools for their children, etc because of this pernicious LIE that is foisted on them by those who ought to know better? When did the church metamorphose from being 'ekklesia' - the 'called-out people' to a building, an organisation, a megachurch, a 'tv ministry', etc, etc???

In that inimitably South African expression - EISH!!!!!

A response from Saddleback and my reply (regarding the Daniel Plan)

(Scroll down to see my original email to Saddleback and the response from David Chrzan, Chief of Staff at Saddleback)

-------- Original Message --------

Subject:	Re: Truly puzzled
Date:	Sat, 12 Feb 2011 07:04:07 +0800
From:	Ron Oommen
To:	Rick Warren’s Office

Dear David

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I appreciate that.

I have been following the ongoing lectures, etc on the Saddleback website and have also visited the blog link you included in your reply.

I have to say, my initial concerns remain unaddressed. My original question about what exactly three non-believers would be feeding the people of Saddleback appears to be answered. From the videos, etc on your website I have watched the good doctors plug to Saddleback exactly what they have to the rest of the world. In the midst of the  medical jargon, I also listened to them plug yoga and similar types of meditation as highly beneficial. As a believer in Christ, you should know that there is no such thing as "Christian" yoga. Ask a Hindu and see what he/she would say - yoga is unequivocally Hindu in concept, essence and practice. What Saddleback appears to have done is legitimise such practices as part of the Christian walk through your promotion of the three doctors and their worldviews and philosophies - with nary a word or caution about testing everything against God's Word. Do you not realise that unbiblical teaching always comes with subtlety and not openly? Read the Bible and see how many times we are warned against false teachers and prophets 'creeping in' among us, or as 'wolves in sheep's clothing'.

The blog kept referring to the need to have a conversation with the culture, and that this is what the Daniel Plan is doing, especially since there are lots of unbelievers coming to the sessions who will very likely remain to be in church. Like Paul, I can commend this if Christ is being preached by whatever means. However, is Christ indeed being preached? What exactly is the point of unbelievers continuing to come to church if they do not repent of their sins and become born again? I fear that Saddleback is falling into the trap of 'enticing' people under false pretences, attracting them to come to church, and not telling them it means nothing at all unless they 'die to themselves' and become new creations in Christ. Have they repented of their sins? Or do they simply pray a 'sinner's prayer' and have a pastor/leader proclaim them 'saved'? Please look to the Word and examine your own programs and beliefs.

Since I'm nobody to you, you're under no obligation to listen to me or even pay any heed to my words. However, biblically, I see no precedent for your premise that we need to have a 'conversation with the culture' in order to save people from hell. I think you've put the cart before the horse. Redeeming people is what Jesus  shed His blood for. If people are being approached with anything less than the gospel, namely that we are all in sin and under penalty of death, that Jesus the Christ - the Word of God and God Himself - came and died upon a cross, and rose on the third day that we might repent and have remission of our sins, then we are not giving them the good news but 'another gospel', as noted in Paul's letter to the Galatians and you can read for yourself what the Word of God has to say about that. Anything less than this is manipulation. It would be akin to a timeshare shyster trying to sign you up on the basis of pictures of palm islands and pretty beaches and not telling you what it will cost and how long you will need to pay for it.

I encourage you all at Saddleback to give up your compromise of God's Word, start to study it for yourselves, and ask God for understanding to walk in His ways without compromise. The Bible repeatedly warns us to examine ourselves to see if we are indeed in the faith. Do not commend yourselves that your programs are drawing many to church, or that you have thousands of members, or that your pastor dines with presidents and kings. Jesus said that at the end, many will come to him telling Him of how much they've done for the kingdom and He will reject them, saying "I never knew you. Depart from me, workers of iniquity". Read the scripture for yourself (Matt 7:22) and tell me how you can even attempt to ignore that?

I fear, though, that Saddleback loves the things and adulation of the world too much to pay attention to this. Beware, our Lord is returning and will not tarry a single hour beyond the time fixed by the Father. Make sure that you are indeed doing His will - and not yours or the culture's or anyone else's. Remember that the Bible tells us that friendship with this world is enmity to God. You can rationalise that all you like but you cannot pretend that the Bible teaches otherwise. Do not love the world that you feel the need to 'redeem the culture'.  God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16). No mention of redeeming the culture, is there? The gospel is always good news to people. God loves people, period. When people, repent and become new creatures in Christ, their patterns, habits, practices change - they HAVE to, if they are truly Christ's. This is the only way cultures can be 'redeemed', if such a thing is possible. Anything else is superficial and dishonest because it does not present the true Gospel.

I pray for you all that God will open your eyes and enable you to judge rightly. Really, I do. It pains me no end that this shallow excuse for the gospel that appears to be endemic throughout the American church is now being fed to other parts of the world, particularly to the simple folk of Africa and Asia. Do you recall Jesus' rebuke of the Pharisees that they would travel the seas to win one convert and then end up making him twice a son of hell than they were (Matt 23:15)? Beware lest you find yourselves under like rebuke.

Disregard me, if you like. I am truly nobody. I do not feast with kings or schmooze with those in high places. Regard the Word of God, though - there is no excuse for not doing that. And remember that those who teach the Word will be judged more severely - if you are found peddling anything less than the gospel, beware lest judgement come upon you.

I pray for you all. May God have mercy on you.

Yours sincerely,
Ron Oommen

On 12/02/2011 3:02 AM, Rick Warren’s Office wrote:

Dear Ron,

Thanks for taking the time to write to Pastor Rick about The Daniel Plan.  As a result of the program’s wide popularity we’re not able to answer individual questions instead we’re asking people to visit our blog and read an article that answers frequently asked questions and explains the plan’s evolution.

All of The Daniel Plan lectures, articles, recipes and health tips are available online at our website.

God Bless,

David Chrzan

Chief of Staff

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Oommen [mailto:roney.oommen@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2011 5:48 AM
To: Communications
Subject: Truly puzzled

Dear Rev Warren and the church at Saddlesback

I happened to visit the Saddleback website today and was surprised to

find that Saddleback is promoting the "Daniel Plan" for health. No, I

wasn't surprised by that. What astounded me was the panel that you have

assembled to do this - three well-known and prominent health

professionals in Americaand the world at large who are, as far as I am

aware, not only not believers in Jesus Christ but active proponents of

non-Christian and pagan philosophies as a basis for their health

initiatives.

Since there is no indication that these men have now become followers of

Christ, do you really expect that they will put their pagan worldviews

aside for the Daniel Plan? Or is it more reasonable to expect that they

will give the people of Saddleback exactly what they give to the rest of

America and the world - Reiki, eastern meditation and the like?

I'm not sure whether one should be shocked or saddened that either : 1)

You and the members of Saddleback do not appear to be able to see why

this is so strange and unnatural, or 2) You already know this, but you

simply don't care, for reasons of your own.

I am a believer from a Third World African country. I cannot begin to

understand how you Americans think that engaging in eastern occultic

(yes, that is what Reiki and tantric meditation are) practices -

ostensibly for health reasons - can at all be reconciled to those who

are the temple of the Holy Spirit of the Living God.

Far be it from me to judge your intentions or motives. However, the

fruit that you are showing is very, very bad. I shudder to think of how

many immature and young believers will be caused to stumble because of

this and engage in things that will harm their souls and spirits.

May God have mercy on you.

In all humility I am,

Sincerely yours,

R. Oommen

Critical Issues Commentary: Richard Foster—Celebration of Deception

Critical Issues Commentary: Richard Foster—Celebration of Deception

It really boggles the mind how people can read stuff written by people like Richard Foster or Dallas Willard and not be alarmed at how far from the Word these men are. Why? Why do people WANT to believe a lie??
Perhaps 2 Thessalonians 2: 11 & 12 provide an explanation.

Stop and Think....Please

http://www.biblical-pentecostals.org/slain.htm

What does the Bible really say about 'territorial spirits'?

I don't remember when exactly it was that I was first introduced to the teaching that there are territorial spirits that exist in every human habitation, whether villages, towns or cities which have to 'warred against' spiritually and be bound and defeated in order to allow the gospel to be preached effectively and for souls to be saved. I suspect it may have had something to do with books I read by someone in YWAM (not sure if it was Floyd McClung) and also by Neil Anderson as well as the book 'He Came to Set the Captives Free' by that truly kooky character, Dr Rebecca Brown. It may also have been listening to the testimony of someone like Mike Warnke, the former 'high priest of Satan', and similar stories. It may have been the subsequent teaching of men of God I respected greatly which informed me of these things.

And, yet, all the while in the inmost depths of my spirit, there was a disquiet - because I could find none of these teachings laid out in Scripture. Of course, you had all the various verses that are quoted by teachers of this ilk to support this theory but I am talking about a consistent and emphatic witness in Scripture of such things, like the good news of the kingdom of God, the coming, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, etc. Did Scripture teach such a 'doctrine' or did men dream this up and go looking for Scripture verses to tack onto their teachings?

So, to the Word I finally went - as I should I have from the outset. (*sound of self booing self*).

This is just a simple blog so I will not go into a detailed refutation here but, suffice to say, I find it next to impossible to see ANYWHERE in Scripture that we are told to fight against territorial spirits to make the way easier for people to accept the Lord - it's simply not in Scripture. Sure, the Bible clearly talks about Satan who is the 'prince of the power of the air' and of principalities and spiritual wickedness in the high places and that we have to put on the full armour of God to stand (Eph 6). But, don't take my word for it. Do this for yourself. Start in the New Testament and find out how many times Jesus 'warred' against teritorial spirits and taught his disciples to do the same. Read about all the times that the apostles, including Paul whose missionary journeys are clearly documented for us, taught and practised this doctrine. See how many times we are exhorted to be fighting against territorial spirits and bringing down the strongholds over cities, etc, to free up the effective preaching of the gospel.

That's right - none. Nada. Zilch. Not one single instance can be found. Now, would you agree with me that such a key doctrine, if true, would have been prominently taught in the New Testament? So, perhaps, it's not so key after all! Perhaps, it's not even a true teaching.

I mean, think about it. How many times have you heard someone pray, or even prayed yourself (I've done both in the past) for Satan to be bound? With so many praying in this manner, ya gotta wonder - WHO'S THE JOKER SETTING HIM LOOSE AGAIN???

What DO we see in the New Testament? When the apostles were taken before the Council and ordered not to speak about Jesus (Acts 4), they went back and started to 'come against the evil spirit over Jerusalem' and bind the strong man.....yeah, right. None of that nonsense! They gathered and prayed to the Lord - who is sovereign over any principality or power - and asked Him for boldness to continue declaring His Word!

And so on and so forth. Show me one instance of any of the New Testament believers doing this 'fighting against teritorial spirits' thing?

It's simply not in the Bible. And, if it's not in the Bible it must be.....false.

Elementary, my dear Watson.

PS. Perhaps, I should add that Mike Warnke's testimony, on which so much teaching about Satanism was based, turned out to be one huge lie - even though he continues to maintain its truth to this day without being able to put forward any evidence to support any of the 'facts' in his book. Rebecca Brown turns out to be one paranoid, delusional individual, stripped of her licence to practise medicine. Hmm, and these are the teachers we're following?? Now wonder the church is so confused.

DOES WHAT YOU BELIEVE REALLY MATTER?

A very timely message from Pastor Ken Silva.

DOES WHAT YOU BELIEVE REALLY MATTER?

Paul Proctor - Today’s ‘Christianity’ – Nothing More Than Feelings - Part 2

Paul Proctor - Today’s ‘Christianity’ – Nothing More Than Feelings

Testing all things...

http://herescope.blogspot.com/2011/02/its-that-simple.html