Touching Not God's Anointed?

Recently I have posted on my personal Facebook account some very critical statements of recent sermons from the church I used to attend. It has led to some people "unfriending" me in some cases and being critical of me in others. Now, let me be perfectly clear: I have no ax to grind with that pastor. I left his church for a number of reasons, which I will enumerate in a future post. None of them are personal, they are all based on biblical grounds, but that is for another post.

The point I wish to address in this post is whether or not a pastor is exempt from criticism based on Matthew 18:15-18, which says,

¹⁵ "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. ¹⁶But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. ¹⁷If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. ¹⁸Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

It is interesting that while I had planned on dealing with this particular scripture as part of the "Scripture Twisting" series, God has forced me to deal with this issue over the past few weeks. God is totally sovereign in how He directs the actions of man, even with this insignificant blog. Now there are a number of teachers and pastors (and their congregants) that believe they should never receive any public criticism for any publicly spoken preaching. Instead any correction should be done in private, or in my case, not on my Facebook account, according to these scriptures. Is this the case with this particular passage?

First, what is the context of this verse? The context on Matthew 18 deals with the ethics and morals of those that are following Jesus and not biblical doctrine. If a believer falls in the areas of ethics and morals, then there is loving private confrontation in hopes of restoring the believer. If the believer fails to respond to the correction, then the confrontation is escalated.

Second, the New Testament illustrates how false doctrine, when spoken in public, should be handled. Paul confronted Peter when Peter was acting in a hypocritical manner (Galatians 2:11-14). Paul publicly rebuked Hymenaus and Alexander regarding their blasphemy (1 Timothy 1:20). Paul publicly addressed the harmful actions of Alexander the copper-smith (2 Tim. 4;14). John publicly rebuked Diotrephes over his false doctrine and his failure to submit to John's leadership and the authority of others (3 John 9).

Third, there are many well intentioned Christians who have told me that this sort of public criticism give non-believers the impression that there is no love or unity among Christians. While there is to be love and unity among Christians, it is important to note that Christianity is not based on love or unity. Rather Christianity is based on truth (1 Timothy 3:15). Christians are to fight for the faith (Jude 3). Believers are to examine everything spoken from the pulpit carefully and to hold on to what is good (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Lastly, Christians should be following the example of the Bereans in Acts 17:11. Here these people who were hearing the preaching of the Apostle Paul actually had the temerity to verify what they were being taught by actually comparing what they were taught to the Scriptures! They were actually verifying the teaching of a truly  anointed Apostle of Christ, not a self-proclaimed one. All of these examples showed a commitment to truth. Without a commitment to truth there can be no true love or unity within the church.

Lastly, my criticisms are rooted in love. I do not look for opportunities to be critical of others. These issues are brought to my attention by others that are concerned by what they are being taught. They come to me. I do not go to the church's streaming video and look for issues. I do not attend that church any more, and I really don't want to hear the preaching from that pastor. It is my love, however, for the people that are concerned, and those that are not sophisticated enough to understand that they do not have to believe everything they are taught without being critical, that motivates me. These people have not been taught how to root through a sermon, discarding the bad and treasuring the good. Which is what I had to do for many years while attending that church.

True love an unity is exemplified by the pastor's love of truth, and not his adherence to his particular false teaching. True love and unity is exemplified by how followers of Christ adhere to the truth of the scriptures. That is why I write this blog; to help you, the reader, understand the truth and to fight for it.

Joshua 1:8 - Is This Verse a Key to Finding Financial Prosperity?

Joshua 1:8 states:

This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success.

In my years as a member of a borderline Word-Faith movement, I cannot tell you how many time I heard this verse used as a proof text that God wants Christians to prosper financially. The problem I saw with this particular use of the scripture is that I never saw financial prosperity as the topic in question. Based on the context of chapter one, the prosperity meant by God was military.


The conquest of the land by Joshua and the armies of Israel hinged on Joshua's commitment to meditate on and obey God's Word. The prosperity that God spoke of to Joshua included the fulfillment of God's promises in the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12:1-3). Just before his death, Joshua urged the people to continue living in submission to the Scriptures (Josh. 23:6).

Nero Burning Christians

What the Prosperity teachers fail to realize is that Jesus never promised His followers a life of prosperity and health.  In fact, He promised the opposite, adversity and tribulation. The illustration above, is a representation of that tribulation in which the Roman Emporer Nero dipped Christians in pitch and set them on fire in order to light his courtyard so that he could engage in chariot races at night. All through the Gospels and Epistles we see Christians encouraged to face persecution and tribulation with courage and hope.


Paul called the persecution and tribulation he faced a "momentary light affliction" when compared with "the eternal weight of glory". Sadly, I know of one church pastor that once told me that this hope for the hereafter was "not enough" to get people into church. He said that he needed to offer the people something for now. Interestingly, Jesus never spoke about having abundance in this life. He taught His followers to pray for our "daily bread". Meaning that we are to be content with what God gives us.


The prosperity movement is based on contentment, but on greed. In order to justify this greed, Prosperity teachers insist on ripping verses from their context in order to justify their greed and desire for a lavish lifestyles and fleecing of the people they are charged with caring for.


So what is the lesson in this abused verse? Very simply, do not smuggle ideas into the text that are not there. In this case smuggling an idea of financial prosperity into a text that promises military prosperity. We also see the importance of "not reading a Bible verse" but looking at the paragraph and chapter of the verse in order to  draw out the meaning of the verse. So remember whenever a person or a pastor wants to proof text.

The Prohibition of Homosexuality

In this post we will look at three modern objections to the biblical prohibition of homosexuality. They are:


First, that the prohibition's connection with the ceremonial Law no longer makes this ban enforceable.
Second, that barrenness was the reason for the ban, not homosexuality in and of itself.
Third, we will look at the reason why homosexuality and its connection with idolatry.

Homosexual Prohibitions Are Ceremonial

In the following scene from the television show The West Wing, the "acting President" Jed Bartlett takes a "right-wing" talk show host to task over a literal interpretation of Leviticus 18:22-24. While I expect that no Hollywood writer would ever take the time to speak to a Christian to learn the answer to Bartlett's diatribe, believers should learn how to respond to this ignorant rant.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSXJzybEeJM&NR=1


So what is the response of a Christian to this rant? Very simply, Israel was under a different form of economy. It was a theocracy in which God was the supreme ruler. The fact that "President" Bartlett brings up a number of the other ceremonial laws, and we will deal with those in later posts. What I want to focus in on is the prohibitions of homosexuality.


Many people that advocate homosexuality, especially in the liberal denominations, state that because these laws are located with the ceremonial and dietary laws, and that these laws were done away with (Acts 10:15), it follows that these laws were also done away with.

The "Sin of Barrenness"

The question that must be asked is why did Yahweh ban the practice of homosexuality? Some say it was the sin of barrenness. First, barrenness was considered a curse by the ancient Israelites (Gen. 16:1; 1 Sam. 1:3-8). Children were considered a blessing from Yahweh (Psalm 127:3). The blessing of the land was connected to children (Gen. 15:5). It would then follow that homosexuality would be frowned upon because it produces no children. Further, it is not homosexuality that is necessarily condemned, but the refusal to have children.


If you believe that homosexuality is abolished because of its connection with the ceremonial law, then you must also believe that the bans on rape, incest & bestiality are illegitimate, and that we can now engage in those practices. I wonder how the good Catholic "President" Bartlett would have responded to this during his selective diatribe? The sexual laws, however, are not connected with procreation. Putting homosexuals to death would make no sense, considering the fact that heterosexual marriage would be a more appropriate punishment.


Romans 2:12-15 states that the Gentiles do not have the ceremonial Law. The law against homosexuality, however, extends beyond Israel (Romans 1:26). Further the Gentiles have no covenental stake in producing a new generation. The Jews did. This is why Yawhew judged the Canaanites (Leviticus 18:1-3, 24-25). This is the context that "President" Bartlett failed to take into consideration during his diatribe. I diatribe, coincidentally, sparked by wounded pride. Further, the punishment for homosexuality was brutal. Death by stoning. On the other hand, those that violated the dietary laws were considered unclean and banished from the camp for a specific period of time.


If barrenness was a sin, then menopausal women in that time were sinful, since they no longer could bear children. If barrenness was a sin, then no one other than Jesus himself advocated sin, since he sanctioned singleness (Matthew 19:11-12) as did Paul (1 Corinthians 7:8). Contrast these teachings with the clear prohibition of homosexuality in the New Testament (Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9; 1 Timothy 1:10; Jude 7).

Connected to Pagan Worship

Others say that the Biblical condemnation of homosexuality was due to its close association with the pagan worship that existed in Canaan at the time of the exodus and conquest by Israel (Deuteronomy 23:17). Part of the worship practices at that time was to engage in sexual activities with temple prostitutes, female and male (1 Kings 14:24). We also see a condemnation of heterosexual pagan worship in Leviticus 18:22 and Romans 1:26-27.

While homosexuality is often associated with idolatry it is not connected with idolatry. Sexual infidelity is often used as a metaphor for idolatry (Hosea 3:1; 4:12), but it has no direct connection with idolatry. Sexual sin (hetero & homosexual) is immoral at all times and not just when associated with idolatrous worship.

It is important to point out that while idolatry may lead to sexual sin (Romans 1:22-27), they are different sins. The Mosaic Law does distinguish between idolatry (Exodus 20:3-4) and sexual sins (Exodus 20:14-17).

The Core Issue

Homosexuality is no different from any other sexual sin. Rape, incest and bestiality all fall into the condemnation of God because they pervert the teleological design of human sexuality into something that it was not designed for. While homosexuality may by connected to barrenness since no children can come from a homosexual union naturally, it is not because of barrenness that homosexuality was condemned. Lastly, while there was a connection in ancient times to homosexuality and pagan religion, idolatry and homosexuality are two separate and distinct sins that must be dealt with separately.

The reason why homosexuality is a sin is because God says it is a sin. That prohibition is sounded throughout the Old Testament and into the New Testament. Which brings us back to "President" Bartlett's rant from The West Wing. The answer to "President" Bartlett is simple. In Christianity, there is to be no one who calls himself a Christian that engages regularly in homosexual practices, or a number of other practices. If this is the case, then that person is to be removed from the church, until he comes to repentance, or dies in his sin (1 Corinthians 5:1-13). Unlike the theocracy of Israel in which these persons were given capital punishment, the church is to remove these persons from the church.

This answer did not work for the writers of The West Wing. Instead of doing the hard work of getting the story straight they opted for the easy cheap shot. Then again should we expect the world to give Christianity a far shake? According to the Scriptures the answer is no.

Ten Years Later - Reflections on 9/11

My first recollections of that morning were the frantic voices of Mark & Brian, the morning drive-time DJs on Los Angeles' KLOS radio station. You see, I always have slept with on. Their frantic talk of a horrible "accident" in which a jumbo jet had slammed into one of the World Trade Center towers work me at just before 6 AM that dreadful Tuesday morning. Immediately, I donned my bathrobe and ran to the front room to turn on the TV. There in front of my eyes was the burning North Tower of the World Trade Center. I sat on the arm of the sofa and was shocked. I called for my room mate, who was still asleep in his room, to come out and look at what happened. No sooner had I called him, I witnessed the second plane slam into the South Tower of the World Trade Center. I knew then that America had just changed. She would never be the same again. I got physically sick.


Soon the reports of a plane slamming into the Pentagon filtered out. I had to get ready for work. How anyone could demand people to work on that day was, and still is beyond me, but I guess when the dollar is more important than your employees you'll do it (Integra Marketing was my employer at the time). I dragged myself away from the TV to shower for work. It was the fastest shower I have ever taken in my life. I did not want to miss anything.


It was after the shower and as I was dressing for work, that the reports of the Pentagon attack began to air. Again, a wave of nausea passed over me. Then the towers began to fall. I watched in utter horror and morbid curiosity as the South Tower began to fall onto itself. My thoughts were for the people that were in the floors above the impact zone. There was no way they could have escaped. There were reports of people who, rather than wait for a slow death, took their lives by leaping off the Towers and into eternity.


By the time I got on the freeway to head to work, the reports of United 93 were airing. This plane crashed in Shanksville, PA. What was not known at the time, was how the passengers fought to stop the Muslim terrorists that had hijacked the plane. They fought, and as fighters truly exemplified the American spirit of fighting against injustice. It was also around this time (7:30 AM Pacific Daylight Time) that the North Tower fell. Oh how I wanted to just turn around and go home.


When I got to work, everyone was in shock. Instead of the usual music on the office radio, one of Los Angeles' all-news station was on chronicling the days events in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Shanksville, PA. People were in no mood to work. Everyone's emotions were raw and on their sleeves. It was sad. That Tuesday was one of the slowest days I have ever had to endure in a work environment. I hope to never have another day like that.


For the next week, the TV was on either Fox or CNN. I don't think I watched as much news during that week than in any time prior or since.


It's been ten years since those attacks. Attacks that were not only motivated by hate, but by religious hate. Particularly, the hate of Muslims performing Jihad on "the great Satan". Now, there are those that claim conspiracy and "inside job". These people need help. Sadly, most of the 9/11 "truthers" are just as fanatical as the Muslims that piloted those aircraft on that fateful day. I won't go into their conspiracy theories, sufficed to say that anyone who has actually dealt with conspiracy theories knows that the effectiveness of a conspiracy is severely limited by the number of conspirators, time from the event, and the ability of the conspirators to remain in contact with each other. A conspiracy the size of 9/11 requires a number of people "in the know" of a massive proportion. I won't go into it in detail, but there is no way, in my mind, that a conspiracy required to pull of 9/11 is just too massive. Someone should have talked, but no one is talking, not out of fear, but because there is nothing to say in that regard.


There are others that claim that the hens of U.S. foreign policy finally came home to roost on 9/11. Perhaps the people that espouse this view are right. However, the best and most simplest explanation is that 19 whack-jobs actually hijacked these airplanes and used them as flying bombs specifically against strategic symbols (financial, military & possibly political in the U.S.). Ultimately, God was in control, and both allowed and decreed the events of September 11, 2001 to happen. I struggled for many years to understand why those events, and subsequent tragedies happened. The answer came a few years later as I read Luke 13: 1-5 (ESV). I understood why these things were allowed to happen.

There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. ²And he answered them, "Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? ³No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. ⁴Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? ⁵No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish."

 It was verse five that struck me. Jesus said, "...unless you repent, you will all likewise perish." Jesus states this twice, and if Jesus said something twice then it behooves us to pay attention to what He said. You and I are no better nor no worse than the 2, 977 victims and the 19 terrorists that died that day. Unless we repent, however, we too will perish as they did.


So reader, let me ask you are you ready to repent?

Verse Abuse - Translation Misinterpretation

While most of the abused verses in the Bible lie on the laps of tradition, and personal misinterpretation, there are a small group of verses that have been misinterpreted by the various translation committees of a particular Bible version. A number of these are well known, and some others are not. We will be looking into a number of them in this series.


Today, we will be looking at Exodus 20:13 which has been translated by the King James Version as, "Thou shalt not kill." What is telling, is how the modern translations have rendered the Hebrew word "raw-tsakh" ("kill" in the KJV). A brief survey of the translations I use the most (English Standard Version, New American Standard, New International Version & New King James Version) shows the Hebrew has been rendered as "murder". The reason why this is important to look at is that this verse has been used by certain Christian sects and cults to justify a pacifist view regarding war in general, and what is called "just war" in particular (I will not be exploring this issue in this entry, however the reader is free to "Google" that topic). This verse has also been used to justify opposition to the implementation of capital punishment.


I believe that the following are fair definitions of "killing" and "murder":

• Killing is the taking of the life of a human being.
• Murder is the taking of a the life of an innocent human being without just cause.

This is why many criminal codes divide homicide into a number of different categories that reflect this main distinction.


That said, we must look into the broader context of the Mosiac Law in order to understand what God was demanding from the people He called His own. The main reason for the Mosaic Law is that Yahweh wanted His people to to be unique from the nations that surrounded them. Therefore, killing motivated by hatred or anger was distinguished from unintentional killing, from capital punishment, or from just war. The key factor being intentional deliberation as opposed to emotional reactions.


This misinterpretation by the translation committee of the King James Version is one of the few that modern translations have addressed. There are a couple of others that modern translation committees have not had the courage to touch because of the tradition laid down by the King James Version. We will be addressing some of these in future posts.


Of course the exposure of this verse forces us to ask the question of whether or not a person can a particular version of the Bible. To this I say that a person can trust the vast majority of the English translations available. There are a couple of notable exceptions, with the Jehovah's Witnesses New World Translation, being the most notorious of mistranslated Bibles. The reason I say this is that while other English translations have translation errors, these errors do not affect  historical essential Christian doctrine, such as the deity of Jesus and the Trinity. The New World Translation deliberately mistranslated verses that demonstrate these doctrines to support their own heretical views regarding these doctrines. So what is the best way to ensure that you are not getting a mistranslated Bible version? Very simply, use a number of Bible translations in your Bible study. 

Genesis 22:14 and The Promise of Prosperity

I continue my series on abused bible verses with one of my favorites. I say this because I used to attend a Pentecostal church that preached the so-called "prosperity gospel." This "gospel" is wrapped up in the false idea that God wants believers to have prosperity and health. I believe it is a false gospel and is based on blatent misinterpretations of Scripture that do not apply to Christians, but to ancient Jews that were under the Mosaic Law. I have addressed this a previous post.


So Abraham called the name of that place, "The LORD will provide"; as it is said to this day, "On the mount of the LORD it shall be provided." First, it is clear that "The LORD will provide" is a poor translation of the Hebrew. According to the English Standard Version, the proper translation should be the LORD "will see" or "will be seen." This forces us to ask the question, what will be seen? It is clear that according to the context that this chapter is a visual example of what the Father would do to His Son some 2,000 years after this event.


Here are some points to think about. First, Just as Isaac bore the wood that he was to be sacrificed on (Gen. 22:6). Similarly, John 19:17 states that Jesus bore the cross that He was to die on.


Second, in Gen. 22:5 Abraham prophesied to his servants that he and Isaac would return from the mountain. In Matt. 16:21 Jesus foretold that He would be raised from the dead (cf. 1 Cor. 15:4).


In Gen. 22:9, Issac willingly went to the alter of sacrifice. In Heb. 12:2, Jesus viewed the cross, His alter of sacrifice, with joy.


As the story concludes, Abraham calls the place where he was to sacrifice Isaac, "Yawhew Yireah" or "Yawhew Will Provide." Now as I have shown above, this is a bad translation based on the King James Version, but given that, the question that must be asked is what did Yahweh provide on that mountain? As I have stated, the story is a visual prophecy of Jesus death on the same mountain 2,000 years future from this event. The provision was the death of Jesus.


Sadly, Pentecostals and those who hold to the "prosperity gospel" have stripped this passage of its great soteriological (the doctrine of salvation) meaning and trivialized it into a verse that merely promises financial prosperity and good health. This is truly sad, because the gospel is not about simply about the here and now, but about "the eternal weight of glory" (2 Cor. 4:17) that Paul promised Christians.


Further, this is a sad commentary on the carnal nature of many modern Pentecostals. When I attended a Pentecostal church (i was not just an attendee, but a member of leadership there), I asked my former pastor about the emphasis on the here and now as opposed to the future in his preaching, in the denomination they belonged to, and in Pentecostalism, in general. He responded that the promises of eternal life was "not enough" for people to become Christians. Rather he said that people "need something now" to motivate them to call on Christ. Sadly, this sort of teaching merely creates false converts that are "twice the children of hell" as those that never professed faith in Christ (Matt. 23:15).


These prosperity preachers are editing the the gospel in order to win attendees as opposed to disciples of Christ. They are removing the promises of trials and tribulations which were promised by Jesus to His disciples in Luke 14:25-33 and substituting the false gospel of wealth and health. It is indeed sad that too many Pentecostal preachers are doing this. It is my prayer that they repent of this false gospel, and return to preaching the true gospel, that is, repentance from sin and belief in Jesus of Nazareth (Mark 1:15).

Back With A Vengeance!

After an interruption caused by the crashing of my old laptop, I have finally been able to get a new laptop which will enable me to post with my usual frequency. I look forward to posting on the topics I have been thinking about for the past few months, and can't wait to post them. So look for a new post in the coming week.

Above all thank you for being patient with me. I do not foresee another problem like I had. I look forward to posting and fielding questions from you, the readers.