(I find Wolf's logic here to be flawless. I would go further and extend the argument to the issue of premarital sex. While the "good old days" were not perfect, the expectation that sex would be tied to monogamous marriage made men equal to each other and women equal to each other. If men had to get married to get sex, they would settle for marrying average-looking women. Today, most young men left to their own devices will only have sex with centerfold-gorgeous women. A minority of females monopolize male sexual attention, and less attractive women get nothing at all, or are viewed as sloppy seconds. The same is true for men of high incomes monopolizing female attention. The Sexual Revolution has created a heirarchy of elites within both sexes who are mocking the rest of us. - AT)
The Porn Myth
In the end, porn doesn’t whet men’s appetites—it turns them off the real thing.
By Naomi Wolf
At a benefit the other night, I saw Andrea Dworkin, the anti-porn activist most famous in the eighties for her conviction that opening the floodgates of pornography would lead men to see real women in sexually debased ways. If we did not limit pornography, she argued—before Internet technology made that prospect a technical impossibility—most men would come to objectify women as they objectified porn stars, and treat them accordingly. In a kind of domino theory, she predicted, rape and other kinds of sexual mayhem would surely follow.
The feminist warrior looked gentle and almost frail. The world she had, Cassandra-like, warned us about so passionately was truly here: Porn is, as David Amsden says, the “wallpaper” of our lives now. So was she right or wrong?
She was right about the warning, wrong about the outcome. As she foretold, pornography did breach the dike that separated a marginal, adult, private pursuit from the mainstream public arena. The whole world, post-Internet, did become pornographized. Young men and women are indeed being taught what sex is, how it looks, what its etiquette and expectations are, by pornographic training—and this is having a huge effect on how they interact.
But the effect is not making men into raving beasts. On the contrary: The onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real women, and leading men to see fewer and fewer women as “porn-worthy.” Far from having to fend off porn-crazed young men, young women are worrying that as mere flesh and blood, they can scarcely get, let alone hold, their attention.
Here is what young women tell me on college campuses when the subject comes up: They can’t compete, and they know it. For how can a real woman—with pores and her own breasts and even sexual needs of her own (let alone with speech that goes beyond “More, more, you big stud!”)—possibly compete with a cybervision of perfection, downloadable and extinguishable at will, who comes, so to speak, utterly submissive and tailored to the consumer’s least specification?
For most of human history, erotic images have been reflections of, or celebrations of, or substitutes for, real naked women. For the first time in human history, the images’ power and allure have supplanted that of real naked women. Today, real naked women are just bad porn.
For two decades, I have watched young women experience the continual “mission creep” of how pornography—and now Internet pornography—has lowered their sense of their own sexual value and their actual sexual value. When I came of age in the seventies, it was still pretty cool to be able to offer a young man the actual presence of a naked, willing young woman. There were more young men who wanted to be with naked women than there were naked women on the market. If there was nothing actively alarming about you, you could get a pretty enthusiastic response by just showing up. Your boyfriend may have seen Playboy, but hey, you could move, you were warm, you were real. Thirty years ago, simple lovemaking was considered erotic in the pornography that entered mainstream consciousness: When Behind the Green Door first opened, clumsy, earnest, missionary-position intercourse was still considered to be a huge turn-on.
Well, I am 40, and mine is the last female generation to experience that sense of sexual confidence and security in what we had to offer. Our younger sisters had to compete with video porn in the eighties and nineties, when intercourse was not hot enough. Now you have to offer—or flirtatiously suggest—the lesbian scene, the ejaculate-in-the-face scene. Being naked is not enough; you have to be buff, be tan with no tan lines, have the surgically hoisted breasts and the Brazilian bikini wax—just like porn stars. (In my gym, the 40-year-old women have adult pubic hair; the twentysomethings have all been trimmed and styled.) Pornography is addictive; the baseline gets ratcheted up. By the new millennium, a vagina—which, by the way, used to have a pretty high “exchange value,” as Marxist economists would say—wasn’t enough; it barely registered on the thrill scale. All mainstream porn—and certainly the Internet—made routine use of all available female orifices.
The porn loop is de rigueur, no longer outside the pale; starlets in tabloids boast of learning to strip from professionals; the “cool girls” go with guys to the strip clubs, and even ask for lap dances; college girls are expected to tease guys at keg parties with lesbian kisses à la Britney and Madonna.
But does all this sexual imagery in the air mean that sex has been liberated—or is it the case that the relationship between the multi-billion-dollar porn industry, compulsiveness, and sexual appetite has become like the relationship between agribusiness, processed foods, supersize portions, and obesity? If your appetite is stimulated and fed by poor-quality material, it takes more junk to fill you up. People are not closer because of porn but further apart; people are not more turned on in their daily lives but less so.
The young women who talk to me on campuses about the effect of pornography on their intimate lives speak of feeling that they can never measure up, that they can never ask for what they want; and that if they do not offer what porn offers, they cannot expect to hold a guy. The young men talk about what it is like to grow up learning about sex from porn, and how it is not helpful to them in trying to figure out how to be with a real woman. Mostly, when I ask about loneliness, a deep, sad silence descends on audiences of young men and young women alike. They know they are lonely together, even when conjoined, and that this imagery is a big part of that loneliness. What they don’t know is how to get out, how to find each other again erotically, face-to-face.
So Dworkin was right that pornography is compulsive, but she was wrong in thinking it would make men more rapacious. A whole generation of men are less able to connect erotically to women—and ultimately less libidinous.
The reason to turn off the porn might become, to thoughtful people, not a moral one but, in a way, a physical- and emotional-health one; you might want to rethink your constant access to porn in the same way that, if you want to be an athlete, you rethink your smoking. The evidence is in: Greater supply of the stimulant equals diminished capacity.
After all, pornography works in the most basic of ways on the brain: It is Pavlovian. An orgasm is one of the biggest reinforcers imaginable. If you associate orgasm with your wife, a kiss, a scent, a body, that is what, over time, will turn you on; if you open your focus to an endless stream of ever-more-transgressive images of cybersex slaves, that is what it will take to turn you on. The ubiquity of sexual images does not free eros but dilutes it.
Other cultures know this. I am not advocating a return to the days of hiding female sexuality, but I am noting that the power and charge of sex are maintained when there is some sacredness to it, when it is not on tap all the time. In many more traditional cultures, it is not prudery that leads them to discourage men from looking at pornography. It is, rather, because these cultures understand male sexuality and what it takes to keep men and women turned on to one another over time—to help men, in particular, to, as the Old Testament puts it, “rejoice with the wife of thy youth; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times.” These cultures urge men not to look at porn because they know that a powerful erotic bond between parents is a key element of a strong family.
And feminists have misunderstood many of these prohibitions.
I will never forget a visit I made to Ilana, an old friend who had become an Orthodox Jew in Jerusalem. When I saw her again, she had abandoned her jeans and T-shirts for long skirts and a head scarf. I could not get over it. Ilana has waist-length, wild and curly golden-blonde hair. “Can’t I even see your hair?” I asked, trying to find my old friend in there. “No,” she demurred quietly. “Only my husband,” she said with a calm sexual confidence, “ever gets to see my hair.”
When she showed me her little house in a settlement on a hill, and I saw the bedroom, draped in Middle Eastern embroideries, that she shares only with her husband—the kids are not allowed—the sexual intensity in the air was archaic, overwhelming. It was private. It was a feeling of erotic intensity deeper than any I have ever picked up between secular couples in the liberated West. And I thought: Our husbands see naked women all day—in Times Square if not on the Net. Her husband never even sees another woman’s hair.
She must feel, I thought, so hot.
Compare that steaminess with a conversation I had at Northwestern, after I had talked about the effect of porn on relationships. “Why have sex right away?” a boy with tousled hair and Bambi eyes was explaining. “Things are always a little tense and uncomfortable when you just start seeing someone,” he said. “I prefer to have sex right away just to get it over with. You know it’s going to happen anyway, and it gets rid of the tension.”
“Isn’t the tension kind of fun?” I asked. “Doesn’t that also get rid of the mystery?”
“Mystery?” He looked at me blankly. And then, without hesitating, he replied: “I don’t know what you’re talking about. Sex has no mystery.”
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/trends/n_9437/
Friday, May 25, 2007
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
IRAQ WAR'S TOLL ON IRAQI CHRISTIANS
Iraqi Assyrian Refugees Flocking to Sweden [Excerpts] http://www.thebereancall.org/node/5254
One afternoon in September last year Saed's eleven year old son disappeared. A few ours later the phone rang. They called themselves Muhammed's army and they demanded 400,000 dollars for releasing the boy. This was money that Saed did not have and did not have any chance to find. But the kidnappers did not give up. Either the money or Sargon's decapitated head in a bag.Saed panicked. He had too little money saved. He knew this day would come, but the money he had saved was not nearly enough. After two days he had sold all gold that the family could bring up and he borrowed the rest so he had 30,000 dollars. The kidnappers accepted it and released Sargon.The same night they released his son, Saed began to plan the family's flight to Södertälje. They were a relatively rich family and lived in a big house.
They sold the house and the land around it for the ridiculous sum of 90,000 dollar. This was money that actually was enough to smuggle them from Baghdad to Amman and from Amman to Södertälje. And unlike most other non-Muslim families they did not get stuck in Jordan or Syria.Today the family, two adults and two children, lives in a two-room apartment in a part of the city called Hovsjö. They do not care if they are living in a small space. They are even waiting for more relatives to come and live with them.-I would rather live in a basement in a city were my children do not get kidnapped than living in a big house in Baghdad, Saed says when he shows us the apartment.Non-Muslim Iraqis flee in thousands from Iraq and human rights activists warn that the country is soon cleansed from it's minority groups.
Muslim leaders make, in their war against USA, the Christians in Iraq look like the enemy. Because USA and Great Britain are Christian countries, fundamentalists accuse Christians for the war.- Most of them who can escape from Mosul and Baghdad do it, says an Assyrian journalist from Mosul.The organisation Minority Rights Group International calls it "The Christian Exodus". Rape, forced conversion, kidnappings, bomb attacks against churches and beheadings are a part of the everyday life of the Christians.
An organisation that for a long time has fought to help the Christians in Iraq is the Society for Threatened People. Metro has met their Middle East expert Janet Abraham in Munich, southern Germany. She says that too little is being done and that it might be to late.Christian Assyrians and other ethnic and religious minorities live under terrible circumstances in Iraq right now. The situation is also critical in the neighbouring countries where hundreds of thousands have fled. This is the biggest population movement in modern times. http://www.aina.org/news/20070319100533.htm
One afternoon in September last year Saed's eleven year old son disappeared. A few ours later the phone rang. They called themselves Muhammed's army and they demanded 400,000 dollars for releasing the boy. This was money that Saed did not have and did not have any chance to find. But the kidnappers did not give up. Either the money or Sargon's decapitated head in a bag.Saed panicked. He had too little money saved. He knew this day would come, but the money he had saved was not nearly enough. After two days he had sold all gold that the family could bring up and he borrowed the rest so he had 30,000 dollars. The kidnappers accepted it and released Sargon.The same night they released his son, Saed began to plan the family's flight to Södertälje. They were a relatively rich family and lived in a big house.
They sold the house and the land around it for the ridiculous sum of 90,000 dollar. This was money that actually was enough to smuggle them from Baghdad to Amman and from Amman to Södertälje. And unlike most other non-Muslim families they did not get stuck in Jordan or Syria.Today the family, two adults and two children, lives in a two-room apartment in a part of the city called Hovsjö. They do not care if they are living in a small space. They are even waiting for more relatives to come and live with them.-I would rather live in a basement in a city were my children do not get kidnapped than living in a big house in Baghdad, Saed says when he shows us the apartment.Non-Muslim Iraqis flee in thousands from Iraq and human rights activists warn that the country is soon cleansed from it's minority groups.
Muslim leaders make, in their war against USA, the Christians in Iraq look like the enemy. Because USA and Great Britain are Christian countries, fundamentalists accuse Christians for the war.- Most of them who can escape from Mosul and Baghdad do it, says an Assyrian journalist from Mosul.The organisation Minority Rights Group International calls it "The Christian Exodus". Rape, forced conversion, kidnappings, bomb attacks against churches and beheadings are a part of the everyday life of the Christians.
An organisation that for a long time has fought to help the Christians in Iraq is the Society for Threatened People. Metro has met their Middle East expert Janet Abraham in Munich, southern Germany. She says that too little is being done and that it might be to late.Christian Assyrians and other ethnic and religious minorities live under terrible circumstances in Iraq right now. The situation is also critical in the neighbouring countries where hundreds of thousands have fled. This is the biggest population movement in modern times. http://www.aina.org/news/20070319100533.htm
Monday, April 30, 2007
THE GREED GOSPEL
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isaiah 5:20
No one who is truly born again wants to call anything cursed that God has called blessed. Yet, many Christian televangelists and Bible teachers are doing exactly that. They routinely accuse two segments of society – the poor and the sick – as being cursed of God. They also assert that Jesus Christ himself was wealthy, and therefore His followers should be as well. If you are broke and sick, you must be doing something wrong in God's eyes. If you are healthy and wealthy, you must be doing something right in God's eyes. The common name for this heresy is "Prosperity Gospel," but it is really greed wrapped up in the guise of doctrine.
Let's examine the most fundamental claim, that Jesus was rich. Luke 8:30 says,
And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him, and certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils, and Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance.
"Substance" in this case refers to financial support. Joanna, Susanna and other disciples financially supported Jesus' ministry.
Look at Matthew 8:20:
And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.
Clearly the the idea that Jesus was wealthy has no support in scripture.
As for health and material gain being a sign of godliness, check out Luke 6:20:
And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God.
Notice that this is not the verse that says, "Blessed are the poor in spirit..." That is elsewhere, but the meaning in this context is clear: The poor are blessed of God!
Luke 6:21:
Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled.
The hungry are blessed of God!
Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh.
The sorrowful are blessed of God!
Healthy and wealthy people aren't poor, they don't weep and they don't hunger, poor and sick people do. In light of this, why do so many Christians seek out lavish-living, mansion-owning, private jet-flying "Bible teachers" for spiritual insights? Why do these teachers not simply repeat the scriptures; they always put their conclusions into their own words? They can't directly quote from the Bible because their conclusions aren't found in the Bible! The truth is, the life of a prophet in ancient Israel was difficult. So is the life of a disciple today. If the teachings you receive make your flesh feel good, they are probably not the truth.
Examine the description of behavior in Romans 1:22-26:
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections.
We should at least consider that the riches these Prosperity Gospel teachers seem to enjoy are not necessarily a sign of God's blessing. Rather, it may be a sign that they are the people whom God has given over to their reprobate desires.
On March 29, 2007, the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel reported on a boat carrying 102 Haitian migrants that landed on Hallandale Beach. The boat spent several days sailing in the water. The passengers had a strong chance of dying just making the journey. The Sun-Sentinel reported that, "...one man was dead and the other 102 on board were bruised and dazed, their bodies parched from a diet of seawater, their lips whispering Creole prayers. 'God is the only reason we didn't die,' said Cynthia Toussaint, 24, who boarded the 35-foot vessel from Ile de la Tortue with her cousin."
The above scene is descriptive of true spiritual prosperity. If that sounds incredible to our carnal minds, consider the account of Matthew 8:5-10:
And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, and saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
Indeed, Jesus would not find many in "prosperous" North American Christianity with such faith as Toussaint expressed. It is the same faith by which Abraham was justified in the eyes of God. You know, the "blessing of Abraham," that phrase "prosperity" teachers like to throw around? The blessing was faith, not material riches.
Romans 4:2-3: For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
Most Christians know the the story of the moneychangers in the temple. Do these millionaire televangelists know the story? Maybe not, but they soon will, by being on the receiving end of a large whip.
Isaiah 5:20
No one who is truly born again wants to call anything cursed that God has called blessed. Yet, many Christian televangelists and Bible teachers are doing exactly that. They routinely accuse two segments of society – the poor and the sick – as being cursed of God. They also assert that Jesus Christ himself was wealthy, and therefore His followers should be as well. If you are broke and sick, you must be doing something wrong in God's eyes. If you are healthy and wealthy, you must be doing something right in God's eyes. The common name for this heresy is "Prosperity Gospel," but it is really greed wrapped up in the guise of doctrine.
Let's examine the most fundamental claim, that Jesus was rich. Luke 8:30 says,
And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him, and certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils, and Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance.
"Substance" in this case refers to financial support. Joanna, Susanna and other disciples financially supported Jesus' ministry.
Look at Matthew 8:20:
And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.
Clearly the the idea that Jesus was wealthy has no support in scripture.
As for health and material gain being a sign of godliness, check out Luke 6:20:
And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God.
Notice that this is not the verse that says, "Blessed are the poor in spirit..." That is elsewhere, but the meaning in this context is clear: The poor are blessed of God!
Luke 6:21:
Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled.
The hungry are blessed of God!
Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh.
The sorrowful are blessed of God!
Healthy and wealthy people aren't poor, they don't weep and they don't hunger, poor and sick people do. In light of this, why do so many Christians seek out lavish-living, mansion-owning, private jet-flying "Bible teachers" for spiritual insights? Why do these teachers not simply repeat the scriptures; they always put their conclusions into their own words? They can't directly quote from the Bible because their conclusions aren't found in the Bible! The truth is, the life of a prophet in ancient Israel was difficult. So is the life of a disciple today. If the teachings you receive make your flesh feel good, they are probably not the truth.
Examine the description of behavior in Romans 1:22-26:
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections.
We should at least consider that the riches these Prosperity Gospel teachers seem to enjoy are not necessarily a sign of God's blessing. Rather, it may be a sign that they are the people whom God has given over to their reprobate desires.
On March 29, 2007, the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel reported on a boat carrying 102 Haitian migrants that landed on Hallandale Beach. The boat spent several days sailing in the water. The passengers had a strong chance of dying just making the journey. The Sun-Sentinel reported that, "...one man was dead and the other 102 on board were bruised and dazed, their bodies parched from a diet of seawater, their lips whispering Creole prayers. 'God is the only reason we didn't die,' said Cynthia Toussaint, 24, who boarded the 35-foot vessel from Ile de la Tortue with her cousin."
The above scene is descriptive of true spiritual prosperity. If that sounds incredible to our carnal minds, consider the account of Matthew 8:5-10:
And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, and saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
Indeed, Jesus would not find many in "prosperous" North American Christianity with such faith as Toussaint expressed. It is the same faith by which Abraham was justified in the eyes of God. You know, the "blessing of Abraham," that phrase "prosperity" teachers like to throw around? The blessing was faith, not material riches.
Romans 4:2-3: For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
Most Christians know the the story of the moneychangers in the temple. Do these millionaire televangelists know the story? Maybe not, but they soon will, by being on the receiving end of a large whip.
Monday, April 23, 2007
THE HAGGARD SCANDAL'S WAKE UP CALL TO AMERICAN CHRISTIANS
I was very moved by the following Gordon MacDonald article. Although it is centered around Ted Haggard's public shame, MacDonald makes some solid indictments on the problems in American Evangelicalism. I have bolded text and paragraphs that I found particularly insightful.
Leader's Insight: When Leaders Implode Ted Haggard, self-destruction, and the consequences we all suffer. by Gordon MacDonald, Leadership editor at large
(Editor's note: What are Christian leaders to make of the spectacularly painful experience of watching Ted Haggard this past week? The president of the National Association of Evangelicals and pastor of giga-church New Life Community in Colorado Springs, Colorado, gradually admitted to purchasing methamphetamines and the services of a male prostitute. We asked Leadership editor-at-large Gordon MacDonald to reflect on what we should learn from this episode.)
It is difficult beyond description to watch Ted Haggard's name and face dragged across the TV screen every hour on the news shows. But as my friend, Tony Campolo, said in an interview last week, when we spend our lives seizing the microphone to speak to the world of our opinions and judgments, we should not surprised when the system redirects its spotlight to us, justly or unjustly, in our bad moments.
We are still in the process of learning what has actually transpired over the past many months on the secret side of Ted's life. Sunday the leadership of New Life Church has announced that he has been asked to resign. His ministry at New Life Church and as leader of the National Association of Evangelicals is over.
I've spent more than a little time trying to understand how and why some men and women in all kinds of leadership get themselves into trouble, whether the issues be moral, financial, or the abuse of power and ego. I am no stranger to failure and public humiliation. From those terrible moments of twenty years ago in my own life I have come to believe that there is a deeper person in many of us who is not unlike an assassin. This deeper person (like a contentious board member) can be the source of attitudes and behaviors we normally stand against in our conscious being. But it seeks to destroy us and masses energies that-unrestrained-tempt us to do the very things we "believe against."
If you have been burned as deeply as I (and my loved ones) have, you never live a day without remembering that there is something within that, left unguarded, will go on the rampage. Wallace Hamilton once wrote, "Within each of us there is a herd of wild horses all wanting to run loose."
It seems to me that when people become leaders of outsized organizations and movements, when they become famous and their opinions are constantly sought by the media, we ought to begin to become cautious. The very drive that propels some leaders toward extraordinary levels of achievement is a drive that often keeps expanding even after reasonable goals and objectives have been achieved.
Like a river that breaks its levy, that drive often strays into areas of excitement and risk that can be dangerous and destructive. Sometimes the drive appears to be unstoppable.
This seems to have been the experience of the Older Testament David and his wandering eyes, Uzziah in his boredom, and Solomon with his insatiable hunger for wealth, wives, and horses. They seem to have been questing-addictively?-for more thrills or trying to meet deeper personal needs, and the normal ways that satisfy most people became inadequate for them.
When I see a leader who becomes stubborn and rigid, who is increasingly less compassionate toward his adversaries, increasingly tyrannical in his own organization, who rouses anger and arrogance in others, I wonder if he is not generating all of this heat because he is trying so hard to say "no" to something surging deep within his own soul.
Are his words and deeds not so much directed against an enemy "out there" as they are against a much more cunning enemy within his own soul. More than once I have visited with pastors who have spent hours immersed in pornography and then gone on to preach their most "spirit- filled" sermons against immorality a day or two later. It's a disconnect that boggles the rational mind.
No amount of accountability seems to be adequate to contain a person living with such inner conflict. Neither can it contain a person who needs continuous adrenalin highs to trump the highs of yesterday. Maybe this is one of the geniuses of Jesus: he knew when to stop, how to refuse the cocktail of privilege, fame, and applause that distorts one's ability to think wisely and to master self.
More than once we've seen the truth of a person's life come out, not all at once, but in a series of disclosures, each an admission of further culpability which had been denied just a day or two before. Perhaps inability to tell the full truth is a sign that one is actually lying to himself and cannot face the full truth of the behavior in his own soul.
But then all sin begins with lies told to oneself.
The cardinal lies of a failed leader? I give and give and give in this position; I deserve special privileges-perhaps even the privilege of living above the rules. Or, I have enough charm and enough smooth words that I can talk anything (even my innocence) into reality. Or, so much of my life is lived above the line of holiness that I can be excused this one little faux pas. Or, I have done so much for these people; now it's their time to do something for me-like forgiving me and giving a second chance.
I am heartbroken for Ted Haggard and his wife and family. I cannot imagine the torture they are living through at this very moment. Toppled from national esteem and regard in a matter of hours, they must adjust to wondering who their real friends are now. They have to be asking how these events-known by the world-will affect their children. Mrs. Haggard will not be able to go the local Wal-Mart without wondering who she may bump into when she turns into Aisle 3 (A reporter? A church member? A critic?). Both Haggards will face cameras every time they emerge from their home in the next few days until the media finds another person with whom to have its sport.
The travel, the connections, the interviews, the applause of the congregation, the organizational power, the perks and privileges, the honor: gone! The introit to people of position and power: gone! The opportunity to say an influential word each day into the lives of teachable younger people: gone! The certainty that God has anointed one for such a time as this: gone?
And what will grow each day is the numbing realization of regret and loss. In time they will be approached by people who will say in one way or another, "I used to trust you, but what you've done has made me very angry." "You've turned my son away from the gospel." "I thought I knew you, but I guess I didn't."
It will be a long time before either of the Haggards feel safe again. Suffering over this will last most of a lifetime even after some sort of restoration is rendered. How I wish this could all be lifted from them. Perhaps there will come a day down the pathway when there will be some kind of return to influence. But right now it is-or should be- a long way in the distance.
Prayer for the fallen and those they hurt Among my prayers is that the leadership of New Life Church will not assume that "restoration" means getting Ted back into the pulpit as soon as possible. The worst thing in the world would be to raise his hopes that just because he models a contrite spirit he can return to public life in the near future. He, for his own sake, must take a long time to work through the causative factors in this situation. He will not resolve whatever is wrong in his own soul by going back to work.
He and his wife must set aside a long, long time to allow their personal relationship to heal. Forgiveness is a long healing, not a momentary one.
And there are those five children. Thinking of them makes me want to weep.
And then there are countless people in and beyond their church who must take a long time to figure out what all of this means. No, the worst things Ted's friends and overseers can do is to bring him back from this prematurely. The best thing they can do is ask him to retreat into silence with those he loves the most and listen-to God, to trusted elders.
Consequences WE must suffer The statement issued by the NAE Executive Committee late Friday afternoon seems flat to me. It appears to have been written by savvy PR people who wanted to say all the nice and appropriate things which might mollify the media and cause no heartburn for the lawyers. The burden of the statement seems to be that the NAE is already on to the question of who the next leader will be.
The fact is that, all too often, we have seen the President of NAE on the news and talk shows speaking as the leader of so-called 33-million evangelicals. I'm not sure that most of us were polled as to whether or not we wanted Ted Haggard (or anyone) speaking for us. I know that last time I felt safe about anyone speaking for evangelicals as a whole was when Billy Graham talked on our behalf. But, as of late, an illusion was permitted to grow: that the NAE was a well-organized, highly networked movement of American evangelicals headed by Ted Haggard who, when he spoke, spoke for all of us. Now, unfortunately, that voice has misspoken, and our movement has to live with the consequences.
I have a fairly poor batting average when it comes to predicting the future. But my own sense is that the NAE (as we know it) will probably not recover from this awful moment. Should it? Leaders of various NAE constituencies are likely to believe that their fortunes are better served by new and fresher alliances.
Ever since the beginning of the Bush administration, I have worried over the tendency of certain Evangelical personalities to go public every time they visited the White House or had a phone conference with an administration official. I know it has wonderful fund-raising capabilities. And I know the temptation to ego-expansion when one feels that he has the ear of the President. But the result is that we are now part of an evangelical movement that is greatly compromised- identified in the eyes of the public as deep in the hip pockets of the Republican party and administration. My own belief? Our movement has been used.
There are hints that the movement-once cobbled together by Billy Graham and Harold Ockenga-is beginning to fragment because it is more identified by a political agenda that seems to be failing and less identified by a commitment to Jesus and his kingdom. Like it or not, we are pictured as those who support war, torture, and a go-it-alone (bullying) posture in international relationships. Any of us who travel internationally have tasted the global hostility toward our government and the suspicion that our President's policies reflect the real tenants of Evangelical faith.
And I might add that there is considerable disillusionment on the part of many of our Christian brothers/sisters in other countries who are mystified as to where American evangelicals are in all of this. Our movement may have its Supreme Court appointments, but it may also have compromised its historic center of Biblical faith. Is it time to let the larger public know that some larger-than-life evangelical personalities with radio and TV shows do not speak for all of us?
And so I pray:
Lord and Father,
How sad you must be when you see the most powerful and the weakest of your children fall prey to the energy of sin and evil. There is nothing any one has ever done that we -each of us-is not capable of doing. So when we pray for our brother, Ted Haggard, we pray not out of pity or self-righteousness but with a humble spirit because we stand with him on level ground before the cross.
Father, give this man and his wife the gift of your grace. Protect them from the constant accusations of the evil one who will seek to deny them sleep, tempt them to talk too much to the public, arouse conflict between them as a couple and with their children. Send the right people into their lives who can provide the correct mixture of hope and healing love. Deliver them from people who will curry their favor by telling them things they should not hear. Restrain them from making poor judgments in their most fearful moments.
Lord, be present to the leaders and people of the New Life Church. And to the NAE leadership which has to live with the side effects of this tragedy. And to people in the evangelical tradition who are wondering today who they can trust. What more can we pray for? You know all things.
We so very little.
Amen.
Pastor and author Gordon MacDonald is chair of World Relief and editor- at-large of Leadership.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/leaders/newsletter/2006/cln61106.html
Leader's Insight: When Leaders Implode Ted Haggard, self-destruction, and the consequences we all suffer. by Gordon MacDonald, Leadership editor at large
(Editor's note: What are Christian leaders to make of the spectacularly painful experience of watching Ted Haggard this past week? The president of the National Association of Evangelicals and pastor of giga-church New Life Community in Colorado Springs, Colorado, gradually admitted to purchasing methamphetamines and the services of a male prostitute. We asked Leadership editor-at-large Gordon MacDonald to reflect on what we should learn from this episode.)
It is difficult beyond description to watch Ted Haggard's name and face dragged across the TV screen every hour on the news shows. But as my friend, Tony Campolo, said in an interview last week, when we spend our lives seizing the microphone to speak to the world of our opinions and judgments, we should not surprised when the system redirects its spotlight to us, justly or unjustly, in our bad moments.
We are still in the process of learning what has actually transpired over the past many months on the secret side of Ted's life. Sunday the leadership of New Life Church has announced that he has been asked to resign. His ministry at New Life Church and as leader of the National Association of Evangelicals is over.
I've spent more than a little time trying to understand how and why some men and women in all kinds of leadership get themselves into trouble, whether the issues be moral, financial, or the abuse of power and ego. I am no stranger to failure and public humiliation. From those terrible moments of twenty years ago in my own life I have come to believe that there is a deeper person in many of us who is not unlike an assassin. This deeper person (like a contentious board member) can be the source of attitudes and behaviors we normally stand against in our conscious being. But it seeks to destroy us and masses energies that-unrestrained-tempt us to do the very things we "believe against."
If you have been burned as deeply as I (and my loved ones) have, you never live a day without remembering that there is something within that, left unguarded, will go on the rampage. Wallace Hamilton once wrote, "Within each of us there is a herd of wild horses all wanting to run loose."
It seems to me that when people become leaders of outsized organizations and movements, when they become famous and their opinions are constantly sought by the media, we ought to begin to become cautious. The very drive that propels some leaders toward extraordinary levels of achievement is a drive that often keeps expanding even after reasonable goals and objectives have been achieved.
Like a river that breaks its levy, that drive often strays into areas of excitement and risk that can be dangerous and destructive. Sometimes the drive appears to be unstoppable.
This seems to have been the experience of the Older Testament David and his wandering eyes, Uzziah in his boredom, and Solomon with his insatiable hunger for wealth, wives, and horses. They seem to have been questing-addictively?-for more thrills or trying to meet deeper personal needs, and the normal ways that satisfy most people became inadequate for them.
When I see a leader who becomes stubborn and rigid, who is increasingly less compassionate toward his adversaries, increasingly tyrannical in his own organization, who rouses anger and arrogance in others, I wonder if he is not generating all of this heat because he is trying so hard to say "no" to something surging deep within his own soul.
Are his words and deeds not so much directed against an enemy "out there" as they are against a much more cunning enemy within his own soul. More than once I have visited with pastors who have spent hours immersed in pornography and then gone on to preach their most "spirit- filled" sermons against immorality a day or two later. It's a disconnect that boggles the rational mind.
No amount of accountability seems to be adequate to contain a person living with such inner conflict. Neither can it contain a person who needs continuous adrenalin highs to trump the highs of yesterday. Maybe this is one of the geniuses of Jesus: he knew when to stop, how to refuse the cocktail of privilege, fame, and applause that distorts one's ability to think wisely and to master self.
More than once we've seen the truth of a person's life come out, not all at once, but in a series of disclosures, each an admission of further culpability which had been denied just a day or two before. Perhaps inability to tell the full truth is a sign that one is actually lying to himself and cannot face the full truth of the behavior in his own soul.
But then all sin begins with lies told to oneself.
The cardinal lies of a failed leader? I give and give and give in this position; I deserve special privileges-perhaps even the privilege of living above the rules. Or, I have enough charm and enough smooth words that I can talk anything (even my innocence) into reality. Or, so much of my life is lived above the line of holiness that I can be excused this one little faux pas. Or, I have done so much for these people; now it's their time to do something for me-like forgiving me and giving a second chance.
I am heartbroken for Ted Haggard and his wife and family. I cannot imagine the torture they are living through at this very moment. Toppled from national esteem and regard in a matter of hours, they must adjust to wondering who their real friends are now. They have to be asking how these events-known by the world-will affect their children. Mrs. Haggard will not be able to go the local Wal-Mart without wondering who she may bump into when she turns into Aisle 3 (A reporter? A church member? A critic?). Both Haggards will face cameras every time they emerge from their home in the next few days until the media finds another person with whom to have its sport.
The travel, the connections, the interviews, the applause of the congregation, the organizational power, the perks and privileges, the honor: gone! The introit to people of position and power: gone! The opportunity to say an influential word each day into the lives of teachable younger people: gone! The certainty that God has anointed one for such a time as this: gone?
And what will grow each day is the numbing realization of regret and loss. In time they will be approached by people who will say in one way or another, "I used to trust you, but what you've done has made me very angry." "You've turned my son away from the gospel." "I thought I knew you, but I guess I didn't."
It will be a long time before either of the Haggards feel safe again. Suffering over this will last most of a lifetime even after some sort of restoration is rendered. How I wish this could all be lifted from them. Perhaps there will come a day down the pathway when there will be some kind of return to influence. But right now it is-or should be- a long way in the distance.
Prayer for the fallen and those they hurt Among my prayers is that the leadership of New Life Church will not assume that "restoration" means getting Ted back into the pulpit as soon as possible. The worst thing in the world would be to raise his hopes that just because he models a contrite spirit he can return to public life in the near future. He, for his own sake, must take a long time to work through the causative factors in this situation. He will not resolve whatever is wrong in his own soul by going back to work.
He and his wife must set aside a long, long time to allow their personal relationship to heal. Forgiveness is a long healing, not a momentary one.
And there are those five children. Thinking of them makes me want to weep.
And then there are countless people in and beyond their church who must take a long time to figure out what all of this means. No, the worst things Ted's friends and overseers can do is to bring him back from this prematurely. The best thing they can do is ask him to retreat into silence with those he loves the most and listen-to God, to trusted elders.
Consequences WE must suffer The statement issued by the NAE Executive Committee late Friday afternoon seems flat to me. It appears to have been written by savvy PR people who wanted to say all the nice and appropriate things which might mollify the media and cause no heartburn for the lawyers. The burden of the statement seems to be that the NAE is already on to the question of who the next leader will be.
The fact is that, all too often, we have seen the President of NAE on the news and talk shows speaking as the leader of so-called 33-million evangelicals. I'm not sure that most of us were polled as to whether or not we wanted Ted Haggard (or anyone) speaking for us. I know that last time I felt safe about anyone speaking for evangelicals as a whole was when Billy Graham talked on our behalf. But, as of late, an illusion was permitted to grow: that the NAE was a well-organized, highly networked movement of American evangelicals headed by Ted Haggard who, when he spoke, spoke for all of us. Now, unfortunately, that voice has misspoken, and our movement has to live with the consequences.
I have a fairly poor batting average when it comes to predicting the future. But my own sense is that the NAE (as we know it) will probably not recover from this awful moment. Should it? Leaders of various NAE constituencies are likely to believe that their fortunes are better served by new and fresher alliances.
Ever since the beginning of the Bush administration, I have worried over the tendency of certain Evangelical personalities to go public every time they visited the White House or had a phone conference with an administration official. I know it has wonderful fund-raising capabilities. And I know the temptation to ego-expansion when one feels that he has the ear of the President. But the result is that we are now part of an evangelical movement that is greatly compromised- identified in the eyes of the public as deep in the hip pockets of the Republican party and administration. My own belief? Our movement has been used.
There are hints that the movement-once cobbled together by Billy Graham and Harold Ockenga-is beginning to fragment because it is more identified by a political agenda that seems to be failing and less identified by a commitment to Jesus and his kingdom. Like it or not, we are pictured as those who support war, torture, and a go-it-alone (bullying) posture in international relationships. Any of us who travel internationally have tasted the global hostility toward our government and the suspicion that our President's policies reflect the real tenants of Evangelical faith.
And I might add that there is considerable disillusionment on the part of many of our Christian brothers/sisters in other countries who are mystified as to where American evangelicals are in all of this. Our movement may have its Supreme Court appointments, but it may also have compromised its historic center of Biblical faith. Is it time to let the larger public know that some larger-than-life evangelical personalities with radio and TV shows do not speak for all of us?
And so I pray:
Lord and Father,
How sad you must be when you see the most powerful and the weakest of your children fall prey to the energy of sin and evil. There is nothing any one has ever done that we -each of us-is not capable of doing. So when we pray for our brother, Ted Haggard, we pray not out of pity or self-righteousness but with a humble spirit because we stand with him on level ground before the cross.
Father, give this man and his wife the gift of your grace. Protect them from the constant accusations of the evil one who will seek to deny them sleep, tempt them to talk too much to the public, arouse conflict between them as a couple and with their children. Send the right people into their lives who can provide the correct mixture of hope and healing love. Deliver them from people who will curry their favor by telling them things they should not hear. Restrain them from making poor judgments in their most fearful moments.
Lord, be present to the leaders and people of the New Life Church. And to the NAE leadership which has to live with the side effects of this tragedy. And to people in the evangelical tradition who are wondering today who they can trust. What more can we pray for? You know all things.
We so very little.
Amen.
Pastor and author Gordon MacDonald is chair of World Relief and editor- at-large of Leadership.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/leaders/newsletter/2006/cln61106.html
Thursday, April 5, 2007
DISPENSATIONALISM WITHOUT SENSATIONALISM
The words of Cyrus Scofield, one of the fathers of modern premillenial dispensationalism. Not exactly a fire-breathing, war-loving armegeddonite, as you shall read here:
"The Church Age" by C.I. Scofield
I believe that the failure of the Church to see that she is a separated, a called-out Body in the purposes of God, charged with a definite mission limited in its purpose and scope, and the endeavor to take from Israel her promises of earthly glory, and appropriate them over into this Church dispensation, has done more to swerve the Church from the appointed course than all other influences put together. It is not so much wealth, luxury, power, pomp, and pride that have served to deflect the Church from her appointed course, as the notion, founded upon Israelitish Old Testament promises, that the Church is of the world, and that therefore, her mission is to improve the world. Promises which were given to Israel alone are quoted as justifying what we see all about us today.
The Church, therefore, has failed to follow her appointed pathway of separation, holiness, heavenliness and testimony to an absent but coming Christ; she has turned aside from that purpose to the work of civilizing the world, building magnificent temples, and acquiring earthly power and wealth, and in this way, has ceased to follow in the footsteps of Him who had not where to lay His head. Did you ever put side by side the promises given to the Church, and to Israel, and see how absolutely in contrast they are? It is impossible to mingle them.
The Jew was promised an earthly inheritance, earthly wealth, earthly honor, earthly power. The Church is promised no such thing, but is pointed always to heaven as the place where she is to receive her rest and her reward. The promise to the Church is a promise of persecution, if faithful in this world, but a promise of a great inheritance and reward hereafter. In the meantime, she is to be a pilgrim body, passing through this scene, but abiding above.
In the New Testament we have the history of the Church down to the year 96 A.D. In the second chapter of Acts we have the birth of the Church, and oh, how beautiful she was in her first freshness of faith! It was a lovely manifestation of simplicity, unselfishness, holiness and spiritual power. Yet we pass on but a few years, and in the Epistles to the Corinthians, what do we find? Paul writes, "I hear there are divisions among you." They began then, and they have never ceased to this day. In the second and third chapters of Revelation we have the condition of the Church at that time; full of words still, but fallen from its first love.
After Ephesus, A.D. 96, comes the period of persecution. For three centuries the Church was in awful persecution. Then came a great change. The Emperor Constantine professed conversion, and Christianity became the court religion. Then the tables were turned and the Church began to persecute! And, of all things she should never have done, she became the persecutrix of the Jews! The Church, saved by faith in the Messiah who came from the Jews; having in her hand the Bible which was written by the Jews; receiving her teaching solely and only through Jewish sources, became, for one thousand years, the bitter, relentless, bloody persecutor of Judaism. With that came worldliness and priestly assumption, and the Dark Ages.
Then in the fifteenth century, came the Reformation out of which have come Protestant movements of various kinds. The Bible was put into the hands of the people, and has been translated into many tongues. With an open Bible came light and liberty again, but never union again. On the contrary, division followed division; sect followed sect. It is true that the great body of the churches believes that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, but they have turned aside the greater part of their resources, to the attempt to reform the world, to educate the world, and, in short, to anticipate the next dispensation in which those things belong, and to do the work that is distinctly set apart for restored and converted Israel in her Kingdom Age.
Is the Gospel then a failure? God forbid! The Gospel never failed, and can never fail. God's Word by the Gospel is accomplishing precisely the mission which was foreseen and foretold for it, that whereunto it was sent. And we must not forget, either, that the Gospel will yet bring this world to the Saviour. It is not at all a question of the ultimate triumph of the blessed Lord. The heathen may rage and the people imagine vain things, but the Father will yet set His King on His holy hill in Zion. Converted Israel, glorified saints, even a mighty angel shall yet proclaim the Gospel of the Kingdom, and "the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow into it" (Isa. 2:2). "The earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea" (Isa. 11:9). All this will surely come to pass, for the Lord hath spoken it--but not in this dispensation. This is the age of the "ecclesia"--of the called out ones.
Let me ask you, what is God doing in this age of ours? Is He not taking out of the Gentiles a people? A few Jews are being converted, for Paul tells us there is always a remnant in Israel according to the election of grace (Rom. 11:5), but the great, the altogether vast majority of the Church is taken out of the Gentiles. This we all see. To believe this is not at all a matter of faith, but of simple observation. Not, anywhere, the conversion of all, but everywhere, the taking out of some. The evangelization of the world, then, and not its conversion, is the mission committed to the Church. To do this, to preach the Gospel unto the uttermost parts of the earth, to offer salvation to every creature, is our responsibility. It is the divinely appointed means for the calling out of a people for His Name, the Church, the "Ecclesia."
Further, the purpose of the Father in this age is not the establishment of the Kingdom. The Old Testament prophets tell us in perfectly simple, unambiguous language how the Kingdom is to be brought in, who is to be its ruler, and the extent and character of that rule, and the result in the universal prevalence of peace and righteousness. Alas, nothing would suffice but the bringing of the prophets bodily over into this Church age! This is the irremediable disaster which the wild allegorizing of Origen and his school has inflicted upon exegesis. The intermingling of Church purpose with Kingdom purpose palsied evangelization for thirteen hundred years, and is today the heavy clog upon the feet of them who preach the glad tidings.
See how inevitably so. The Kingdom applies spiritual forces to the solution of material problems. How shall man live long and wisely? The Kingdom is the answer. How shall exact justice be done on earth? The Kingdom provides for it. When shall wars and human butchery cease in this blood-saturated earth? When the Kingdom is set up by the King Himself. When shall creation give up to man her potential secrets? In the Kingdom age. When shall the earth be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea? When the King and His Kingdom are here.
Of all these things the O.T. prophets are full. We turn to the New Testament and find what? The birth of the King, the heralding of the Kingdom as "at hand," the announcement in the Sermon on the Mount of the principles of the Kingdom, the utter refusal of Israel to receive her King, the passing of the Kingdom into the mixed and veiled condition set forth in the seven parables of Matthew Thirteen, its full revelation being postponed till "the harvest," which is fixed definitely "at the end of this age." And then the Kingdom being thus postponed, what is revealed as filling and occupying this age? THE CHURCH! Christians, let us leave the government of the world till the King comes; let us leave the civilizing of the world to be the incidental effect of the presence there of the Gospel of Christ, and let us give our time, our strength, our money, our days to the mission distinctively committed to the Church, namely, to make the Lord Jesus Christ known "to every creature"!
"The Church Age" by C.I. Scofield
I believe that the failure of the Church to see that she is a separated, a called-out Body in the purposes of God, charged with a definite mission limited in its purpose and scope, and the endeavor to take from Israel her promises of earthly glory, and appropriate them over into this Church dispensation, has done more to swerve the Church from the appointed course than all other influences put together. It is not so much wealth, luxury, power, pomp, and pride that have served to deflect the Church from her appointed course, as the notion, founded upon Israelitish Old Testament promises, that the Church is of the world, and that therefore, her mission is to improve the world. Promises which were given to Israel alone are quoted as justifying what we see all about us today.
The Church, therefore, has failed to follow her appointed pathway of separation, holiness, heavenliness and testimony to an absent but coming Christ; she has turned aside from that purpose to the work of civilizing the world, building magnificent temples, and acquiring earthly power and wealth, and in this way, has ceased to follow in the footsteps of Him who had not where to lay His head. Did you ever put side by side the promises given to the Church, and to Israel, and see how absolutely in contrast they are? It is impossible to mingle them.
The Jew was promised an earthly inheritance, earthly wealth, earthly honor, earthly power. The Church is promised no such thing, but is pointed always to heaven as the place where she is to receive her rest and her reward. The promise to the Church is a promise of persecution, if faithful in this world, but a promise of a great inheritance and reward hereafter. In the meantime, she is to be a pilgrim body, passing through this scene, but abiding above.
In the New Testament we have the history of the Church down to the year 96 A.D. In the second chapter of Acts we have the birth of the Church, and oh, how beautiful she was in her first freshness of faith! It was a lovely manifestation of simplicity, unselfishness, holiness and spiritual power. Yet we pass on but a few years, and in the Epistles to the Corinthians, what do we find? Paul writes, "I hear there are divisions among you." They began then, and they have never ceased to this day. In the second and third chapters of Revelation we have the condition of the Church at that time; full of words still, but fallen from its first love.
After Ephesus, A.D. 96, comes the period of persecution. For three centuries the Church was in awful persecution. Then came a great change. The Emperor Constantine professed conversion, and Christianity became the court religion. Then the tables were turned and the Church began to persecute! And, of all things she should never have done, she became the persecutrix of the Jews! The Church, saved by faith in the Messiah who came from the Jews; having in her hand the Bible which was written by the Jews; receiving her teaching solely and only through Jewish sources, became, for one thousand years, the bitter, relentless, bloody persecutor of Judaism. With that came worldliness and priestly assumption, and the Dark Ages.
Then in the fifteenth century, came the Reformation out of which have come Protestant movements of various kinds. The Bible was put into the hands of the people, and has been translated into many tongues. With an open Bible came light and liberty again, but never union again. On the contrary, division followed division; sect followed sect. It is true that the great body of the churches believes that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, but they have turned aside the greater part of their resources, to the attempt to reform the world, to educate the world, and, in short, to anticipate the next dispensation in which those things belong, and to do the work that is distinctly set apart for restored and converted Israel in her Kingdom Age.
Is the Gospel then a failure? God forbid! The Gospel never failed, and can never fail. God's Word by the Gospel is accomplishing precisely the mission which was foreseen and foretold for it, that whereunto it was sent. And we must not forget, either, that the Gospel will yet bring this world to the Saviour. It is not at all a question of the ultimate triumph of the blessed Lord. The heathen may rage and the people imagine vain things, but the Father will yet set His King on His holy hill in Zion. Converted Israel, glorified saints, even a mighty angel shall yet proclaim the Gospel of the Kingdom, and "the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow into it" (Isa. 2:2). "The earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea" (Isa. 11:9). All this will surely come to pass, for the Lord hath spoken it--but not in this dispensation. This is the age of the "ecclesia"--of the called out ones.
Let me ask you, what is God doing in this age of ours? Is He not taking out of the Gentiles a people? A few Jews are being converted, for Paul tells us there is always a remnant in Israel according to the election of grace (Rom. 11:5), but the great, the altogether vast majority of the Church is taken out of the Gentiles. This we all see. To believe this is not at all a matter of faith, but of simple observation. Not, anywhere, the conversion of all, but everywhere, the taking out of some. The evangelization of the world, then, and not its conversion, is the mission committed to the Church. To do this, to preach the Gospel unto the uttermost parts of the earth, to offer salvation to every creature, is our responsibility. It is the divinely appointed means for the calling out of a people for His Name, the Church, the "Ecclesia."
Further, the purpose of the Father in this age is not the establishment of the Kingdom. The Old Testament prophets tell us in perfectly simple, unambiguous language how the Kingdom is to be brought in, who is to be its ruler, and the extent and character of that rule, and the result in the universal prevalence of peace and righteousness. Alas, nothing would suffice but the bringing of the prophets bodily over into this Church age! This is the irremediable disaster which the wild allegorizing of Origen and his school has inflicted upon exegesis. The intermingling of Church purpose with Kingdom purpose palsied evangelization for thirteen hundred years, and is today the heavy clog upon the feet of them who preach the glad tidings.
See how inevitably so. The Kingdom applies spiritual forces to the solution of material problems. How shall man live long and wisely? The Kingdom is the answer. How shall exact justice be done on earth? The Kingdom provides for it. When shall wars and human butchery cease in this blood-saturated earth? When the Kingdom is set up by the King Himself. When shall creation give up to man her potential secrets? In the Kingdom age. When shall the earth be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea? When the King and His Kingdom are here.
Of all these things the O.T. prophets are full. We turn to the New Testament and find what? The birth of the King, the heralding of the Kingdom as "at hand," the announcement in the Sermon on the Mount of the principles of the Kingdom, the utter refusal of Israel to receive her King, the passing of the Kingdom into the mixed and veiled condition set forth in the seven parables of Matthew Thirteen, its full revelation being postponed till "the harvest," which is fixed definitely "at the end of this age." And then the Kingdom being thus postponed, what is revealed as filling and occupying this age? THE CHURCH! Christians, let us leave the government of the world till the King comes; let us leave the civilizing of the world to be the incidental effect of the presence there of the Gospel of Christ, and let us give our time, our strength, our money, our days to the mission distinctively committed to the Church, namely, to make the Lord Jesus Christ known "to every creature"!
Sunday, February 25, 2007
THE VATICAN, ISRAEL AND ISLAM
THE VATICAN, ISRAEL AND ISLAM IN THE HEADLINES:
Vatican Denounces Saddam's Execution as 'Tragic'
Associated Press December 30, 2006
Walk in harmony with Muslims, pope urges Christians at pilgrimage end
Catholic News Service December 1, 2006 John Thavis
Pope hailed for praying toward Mecca like Muslims
Reuters December 1, 2006 Philip Pullella and Tom Heneghan
Turkey: Pope Visit To Ephesus Highlights Mary's Interfaith Role
Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty November 29, 2006 Jeffrey Donovan
Vatican, Patriarchate both Seek Dialogue with Islam
Zaman November 26, 2006 Erkan Acar
Holy Land churches, and The Vatican's envoy, attack Christian Zionism
Reuters - Wash. Post August 31, 2006 Matthew Tostevin
Pontificating Against Israel (Why isn’t the Vatican allowing self-defense against terrorism?)
Frontpagemag.com July 25, 2006 Joseph D'Hippolito
Lebanon Turns to the Vatican to Halt Israeli Offensive
Arutz Sheva/(IsraelNN.com) July 20, 2006 (24 Tammuz 5766)
Vatican Condemns Israel for Attacks on Lebanon
Reuters July 14, 2006
(suggested alternate headline - " Vatican: 'At least Hezbollah doesn't use artificial contraception!' " - AT)
Jerusalem Church leaders urge int’l community not to boycott Palestinians
Catholic News Agency April 13, 2006
Vatican Says Jerusalem "Issue" is Too Important to Leave to Israel, PA
www.arutzsheva.net January 3, 2006 (3 Tevet 5766)
Papal Official Wants to Divide Jerusalem
Arutz Sheva December 24, 2005 (23 Kislev 5766)
Vatican: Parts of David’s Tomb to Be Under Papal Control
Israel National News Oct. 20, 2005 Naomi Grossman
The Vatican's Terrorism Omission
FrontPageMagazine.com August 1, 2005 Alan M. Dershowitz
Israel protests Papal silence on terror
Jerusalem Post July 26, 2005
Vatican criticises Israel over pope's anti-terror message
Agence France-Presse July 25, 2005
Vatican relocating Jerusalem institute for Jewish studies to Rome
Associated Press January 24, 2003
Vatican Condemns Israel’s Ban on Arafat’s Travels to Bethlehem
IsraelNationalNews.com December 24, 2001 (9 Tevet 5762)
Israel Protests Vatican-PA Agreement on Jerusalem
CNSNews.com February 15, 2000
Israel says Vatican making baseless accusations in Nazareth dispute
Associated Press November 24, 1999
Vatican condemns 'divisive' Israel
Sunday Times (UK) November 24, 1999 Sam Kiley
Pope Kisses the Islamic Koran
FIDES News Service June 1, 1999
THE CATHOLIC OPINION OF ISRAEL:
"It implied the claim that this society now constituted the true people of God that the Old Covenant was passing away, and that He, the promised Messias, was inaugurating a New Covenant with a New Israel."
"They [the Catholic Church] are the new congregation of Israel -- the theocratic polity: they are the people (laos) of God."
- New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia
THE TRADITIONALIST CATHOLIC (TO THE FAR RIGHT OF THE VATICAN) VIEW OF ISRAEL:
"Regarding religion, I am against the Jews and Muslims. Regarding politics, I think that the only solution for the Holy Land is to be a Catholic Kingdom, as established and held by the Crusaders for 200 years.... Is God behind the confusion of the interminable Arab-Israeli mutual destruction? If He is, it would explain how He is punishing those who pretend to be the owners of His Holy Land: Jews and Arabs."
- Atila Sinke Guimarães, Tradition In Action editorial, August 9, 2006
THE TRADITIONALIST CATHOLIC VIEW OF PROTESTANT CHRISTIANS:
"There is no salvation for those outside the [Catholic] Church ... I believe it ... Put it this way. My wife is a saint. She’s a much better person than I am. Honestly. She’s, like, Episcopalian, Church of England. She prays, she believes in God, she knows Jesus, she believes in that stuff. And it’s just not fair if she doesn’t make it, she’s better than I am. But that is a pronouncement from the chair. I go with it."
- Mel Gibson in a September 2003 interview with Peter Boyer for the New Yorker, on the very audience who made his film a success (the ADL should've jumped on this one and publicized it to the Evangelical Christian community).
Vatican Denounces Saddam's Execution as 'Tragic'
Associated Press December 30, 2006
Walk in harmony with Muslims, pope urges Christians at pilgrimage end
Catholic News Service December 1, 2006 John Thavis
Pope hailed for praying toward Mecca like Muslims
Reuters December 1, 2006 Philip Pullella and Tom Heneghan
Turkey: Pope Visit To Ephesus Highlights Mary's Interfaith Role
Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty November 29, 2006 Jeffrey Donovan
Vatican, Patriarchate both Seek Dialogue with Islam
Zaman November 26, 2006 Erkan Acar
Holy Land churches, and The Vatican's envoy, attack Christian Zionism
Reuters - Wash. Post August 31, 2006 Matthew Tostevin
Pontificating Against Israel (Why isn’t the Vatican allowing self-defense against terrorism?)
Frontpagemag.com July 25, 2006 Joseph D'Hippolito
Lebanon Turns to the Vatican to Halt Israeli Offensive
Arutz Sheva/(IsraelNN.com) July 20, 2006 (24 Tammuz 5766)
Vatican Condemns Israel for Attacks on Lebanon
Reuters July 14, 2006
(suggested alternate headline - " Vatican: 'At least Hezbollah doesn't use artificial contraception!' " - AT)
Jerusalem Church leaders urge int’l community not to boycott Palestinians
Catholic News Agency April 13, 2006
Vatican Says Jerusalem "Issue" is Too Important to Leave to Israel, PA
www.arutzsheva.net January 3, 2006 (3 Tevet 5766)
Papal Official Wants to Divide Jerusalem
Arutz Sheva December 24, 2005 (23 Kislev 5766)
Vatican: Parts of David’s Tomb to Be Under Papal Control
Israel National News Oct. 20, 2005 Naomi Grossman
The Vatican's Terrorism Omission
FrontPageMagazine.com August 1, 2005 Alan M. Dershowitz
Israel protests Papal silence on terror
Jerusalem Post July 26, 2005
Vatican criticises Israel over pope's anti-terror message
Agence France-Presse July 25, 2005
Vatican relocating Jerusalem institute for Jewish studies to Rome
Associated Press January 24, 2003
Vatican Condemns Israel’s Ban on Arafat’s Travels to Bethlehem
IsraelNationalNews.com December 24, 2001 (9 Tevet 5762)
Israel Protests Vatican-PA Agreement on Jerusalem
CNSNews.com February 15, 2000
Israel says Vatican making baseless accusations in Nazareth dispute
Associated Press November 24, 1999
Vatican condemns 'divisive' Israel
Sunday Times (UK) November 24, 1999 Sam Kiley
Pope Kisses the Islamic Koran
FIDES News Service June 1, 1999
THE CATHOLIC OPINION OF ISRAEL:
"It implied the claim that this society now constituted the true people of God that the Old Covenant was passing away, and that He, the promised Messias, was inaugurating a New Covenant with a New Israel."
"They [the Catholic Church] are the new congregation of Israel -- the theocratic polity: they are the people (laos) of God."
- New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia
THE TRADITIONALIST CATHOLIC (TO THE FAR RIGHT OF THE VATICAN) VIEW OF ISRAEL:
"Regarding religion, I am against the Jews and Muslims. Regarding politics, I think that the only solution for the Holy Land is to be a Catholic Kingdom, as established and held by the Crusaders for 200 years.... Is God behind the confusion of the interminable Arab-Israeli mutual destruction? If He is, it would explain how He is punishing those who pretend to be the owners of His Holy Land: Jews and Arabs."
- Atila Sinke Guimarães, Tradition In Action editorial, August 9, 2006
THE TRADITIONALIST CATHOLIC VIEW OF PROTESTANT CHRISTIANS:
"There is no salvation for those outside the [Catholic] Church ... I believe it ... Put it this way. My wife is a saint. She’s a much better person than I am. Honestly. She’s, like, Episcopalian, Church of England. She prays, she believes in God, she knows Jesus, she believes in that stuff. And it’s just not fair if she doesn’t make it, she’s better than I am. But that is a pronouncement from the chair. I go with it."
- Mel Gibson in a September 2003 interview with Peter Boyer for the New Yorker, on the very audience who made his film a success (the ADL should've jumped on this one and publicized it to the Evangelical Christian community).
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Kansas Board of Education Urged to Reject "Shameful" Proposal to Delete Tuskegee Experiment and Other Science Abuses from State Curriculum
Source: http://www.blackprwire.com/display-news.asp?id=2934
(BLACK PR WIRE) (February 13, 2007) TOPEKA--A national group is urging the Kansas State Board of Education to reject a plan to delete coverage of the historical misuses of science from state curriculum standards, including a reference to the infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiment targeting African-Americans.
"The board's plan to whitewash the history of science is shameful," said Dr. John West, Vice at Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. West sent a letter to the board on Monday opposing the change. "Especially disturbing is the board's proposal--during Black History month no less--to eliminate any mention of the infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiment from the state curriculum.”
The Tuskegee experiment, which took place from the 1930s to the early 1970s, left nearly 400 African-American men untreated during the late stages of syphilis in order to collect medical data from their autopsies. The experiment is one of the most infamous examples of the abuse of human research subjects. "
It is only by studying these past abuses that students--our scientists of the future--can learn about the critical importance of science operating within ethical standards," wrote West to the board.
Kansas' current standards call for students to understand that: "modern science can sometimes be abused by scientists and policymakers, leading to significant negative consequences for society and violations of human dignity (e.g., the eugenics movement in America and Germany; the Tuskegee syphilis experiments; and scientific justifications of eugenics and racism)."
The latter language would be deleted under the proposal to be voted on Tuesday, which is part of a package of changes being championed by the new pro-Darwin majority on the state board.Discovery Institute is a non-profit, non-partisan education and research organization. For more information please www.discovery.org.
(BLACK PR WIRE) (February 13, 2007) TOPEKA--A national group is urging the Kansas State Board of Education to reject a plan to delete coverage of the historical misuses of science from state curriculum standards, including a reference to the infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiment targeting African-Americans.
"The board's plan to whitewash the history of science is shameful," said Dr. John West, Vice at Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. West sent a letter to the board on Monday opposing the change. "Especially disturbing is the board's proposal--during Black History month no less--to eliminate any mention of the infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiment from the state curriculum.”
The Tuskegee experiment, which took place from the 1930s to the early 1970s, left nearly 400 African-American men untreated during the late stages of syphilis in order to collect medical data from their autopsies. The experiment is one of the most infamous examples of the abuse of human research subjects. "
It is only by studying these past abuses that students--our scientists of the future--can learn about the critical importance of science operating within ethical standards," wrote West to the board.
Kansas' current standards call for students to understand that: "modern science can sometimes be abused by scientists and policymakers, leading to significant negative consequences for society and violations of human dignity (e.g., the eugenics movement in America and Germany; the Tuskegee syphilis experiments; and scientific justifications of eugenics and racism)."
The latter language would be deleted under the proposal to be voted on Tuesday, which is part of a package of changes being championed by the new pro-Darwin majority on the state board.Discovery Institute is a non-profit, non-partisan education and research organization. For more information please www.discovery.org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)