Denominational Debauchery: Round Three

The Assemblies of God:
"God's Wackiest Children"

The Pentecostal movement is one that should be blamed, more than any other, for making Christians seem crazy.

Not that we aren't.

Good things first though, the Ass. of God has come up with more outside the box ways of reaching out to people than anything I've seen. Probably because believing in things like secret prayer languages and divine healing will always appeal to an outside-the-box thinker.

In California, the Dream Center (sounds creepy and new age right?) is pretty much the hub for outreach in the city of LA. They have some amazing ideas, my two favorites are their ministry to prostitutes where they give them white roses and share the Gospel. The other is just hilarious because it reminds me of entrapment, they get a mechanic, a minister and a driver and cruise the highways for broken down cars. They spot one, pull over and start fixing it while the minister delivers the Gospel. What's the stranded motorist gonna do? Run through the six lanes of traffic to the other side?

Now the problems.

If you look at the doctrinal statements of most major denominations you will find a some common core ideas, fundamental aspects of Christianity that even the "crazy" denominations hold to.

Pentecostal doctrine does not subtract from any of those basic elements. But it does add to them. It is in these additions where my biggest complaints rest.

They are divine healing and speaking in tongues as evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit.

Now, I don't doubt the existence of miracles or acts of healing. What I hate is the promotion of these things before Christ. If there is one consistent element in Jesus' ministry to the sick, diseased, and dying it is that forgiveness of sins is what they really needed. Any alleviation of physical ailment was secondary. Just like prosperity gospel, this emphasis on divine healing subjects God to man, using him as a bridge to something else. If you read the gospels, especially the story of John the Baptist (in Luke 7) it becomes pretty clear that the only thing we need to be fully satisfied in the Gospel is the love of the glory of God, by whatever means that may be best accomplished.

On the issue of speaking in tongues, I'm not against the idea of a secret prayer language, mostly because I've actually heard it. It was a powerful Spirit filled moment. I think people who debunk it obviously don't have the gift and should see it in practice before they start belittling. However the Ass. of God claim that when someone receives the Holy Spirit they speak in a tongue...anyone who hasn't has yet to receive the Spirit. Obviously I have a problem because I have the Holy Spirit, and I've never spoken in a tongue.

Should you doubt that I possess the Holy Spirit let me explain something...I'm on the internet at 4 am, completely alone and I have no inclination whatsoever to look at dirty pictures on the web. That addiction didn't just slowly die of old age and I didn't just all of a sudden lose the urge. For no reason other than I have a desire for things completely different than what I once desired am I writing for about an hour before going to bed every night...about Jesus.

So while the Assembly of God has made no shortage of emphasis placed on the Holy Spirit, they have in their obsession muddled their doctrine and broken the command to add nothing to scripture.

But then, haven't we all?

By the time I'm done, I'd hope that everyone could know that was the truth, not just read it and think, gee...that's an interesting idea.

Denominational Debauchery: Round Two

Churches of Christ:
"God's Meanest Children"

I've been asking this question of denominational members over the last few years, and it's for the most part proved helpful in either writing them off or identifying with them. Unfortunately for the Churches of Christ, the question is "What is your cliché? and the answer has almost unanimously been "We are the only one's going to heaven."

Apparently taking scriptures out of context, like "wide is the path that leads to destruction and narrow the path that leads to salvation" would have been a more appropriate answer to the question.

Of course, we ended our discussion of Baptists with the point that sectarian isolationism was what helped preserve doctrinal truths in the evangelical church. However, in the case of the Churches of Christ, sectarian isolationism has resulted in a combative attitude and a legalistic piety that has a lot of similarities, not to the first century church they cling to but rather the enemies of the first century church. Namely the Pharisees.

Claims that start with "You have to do this to be saved or you're not saved" always end up confusing the issue and rarely result in a relationship with Jesus.
Like I (meaning Matt Chandler said it and I ripped him off) said before, manipulation and control may sometimes achieve the desired result, but always at the expense of genuine relationship.

I don't want to seem like I'm being unfairly harsh towards the C of C, most of my jabs at the Baptists may appear light in comparison to these accusations.

But really, if you don't reach out because you think you're the only one who is right, or you don't reach out because you're uncomfortable with changing your methodology, you're still not reaching out.

The other thing the Church of Christ has to carry around as baggage is that ridiculous battle over instrumentation in worship. And the logic being that the first century didn't have musical instruments. Well, ok, if we did everything they did in the first century we'd all be sleeping with our moms, getting drunk during communion, and suing each other. The idea that the first century church was some sort of idyllic image of Christian living is absurd. You want to see a church that embodies first century values? We have them all around us. The only difference between this church and the first century one? Integrity, the sinful practices of the first century church weren't swept under the rug so they could appear pious and walk in self-righteousness. They didn't have any example to follow, they were the first draft so to speak. We however, have years of study, practice, and experience to look back on.

Next time we'll take a look at the Assemblies of God. If you removed the "embli" you'd get a better picture, but more on that tomorrow.

Denominational Debauchery: Round One

Baptists:
"God's Laziest Children"

If you've ever been to a Baptist service you might have noticed that, while it was outdated, it wasn't outdated enough to feel like the outdatedness had a purpose.

A Baptist church is one of the few places where they still use hymnals. I know most of you don't know what a hymnal is, because you're reading this on the internet.

Hymnal: a hardbound book somewhat like a bible full of songs that are at worst the 1920's version of a mashup combining spiritual lyrics full of bad theology with the music of raunchy vaudevillian show tunes and is at best filled with language that is so foreign and outdated that singing it is mind-numbing for the average layperson.

The use of the hymnal is just one example of an outdated ministry tool being clung to for purely traditional reasons. Now some traditions are valuable and should be clung to. But the reason that Baptists usually earn the title "God's Laziest Children" is because the reason for most of the outdated methods and liturgy in Baptist churches (KJV only, no projection screens, two services on sunday when nobody comes to the second that doesn't come to the first) the reason for all of this retro traditionalism is that the congregational power players (usually middle aged to "advanced in years") are uncomfortable with change. They are too lazy to learn a new way of doing things so that someone new might come to know Jesus.

I'll pause to say that maybe the popularity of the KJV in the Baptist church is that it is, like the use of latin in the Catholic church...incomprehensible. If the average layperson could hear and understand the words of the Gospel when they were preached...they might actually be convicted to do something other than disdain the consumption of alcohol or dancing.

My biggest problem with the Baptist denomination is that almost across the board they do not adhere to the Biblical example for church leadership, which is elder government. Instead we have the committee system. Which, for a denomination that is considered one of the pillars of the Republican party, is a very democratic system. And of course, it's completely un-Biblical. If you get a bunch of sinful people in a room, and put an issue to a vote, what is the chance that the decision will be governed by Scriptural authority? Almost no chance at all. If you look at Scripture there is no example where a congregational body is issuing correction. The apostle Paul who wrote 75 percent of the New Testament spends most of that time as one man yelling at thousands of church members committing every sin that had been thought of (and some that hadn't) . The number of people whose hearts are in the right place and have the years of experience to back it up are very few. Put those guys in charge have 'em spend most of the time praying and studying Scripture, and let them make the decisions. It seems like that has a chance, voting on whether or not you should change the color of the carpet is just asking for trouble. I used to hear stories all the time from the pulpit of how churches had split over silly issues like the chandelier or the color of the piano's finish. I don't know why it never occurred to them that if you don't let everybody vote, they can't really complain about it. It's also kind of humorous when a church has a 2 to 1 member-committee ratio. Kind of like how half the church is usually up on the stage on a mic at one point in the service or another.

To be fair, Baptists, for the most part, are not likely to end up confusing doctrinal issues. But the reason for their certainty isn't because of some clear understanding of the truth but a sectarian blindness to those around them, which is worthy of all the mockery that it recieves. By that I mean, saying things like "God said it, I believe it, that settles it" helps no one. If you are talking to someone who doesn't believe in God, how does that kind of thinking help you reach out to them?

I'll close by saying that, despite the fact that I will be spending this week mostly making fun of fundamentalists (I am a FUNdamentalist). We as the new generation of believers need to be grateful to our older brothers because if they had not developed that sectarian attitude back in the 60's we would probably mirror Europe. In other words, the passionate affection for the Gospel I possess now would not exist without those I will spend the week overtly mocking.

The Father doesn't look at the older brother pouting on the porch outside and say, Aww screw him. He goes outside and pleads him to come in and join the party with his prodigal brother.

Denominational Debauchery: Introduction

I was considering spending the week expounding on the thesis I hinted at in the Richard Dawkins interview post, but since I got no comments on that one, I'm going to just spend the week making fun of denominations. Why? Several reasons.

I sincerely believe that the basis for all denominational division and combativeness is the sin of pride. That whatever other motivations we may claim, the truth is that while most people will constantly church hop, they rarely cross denominational lines. The reason? Ignorant traditionalist pride...basically Party spirit for church people.

The only hope for any sort of unity will be the destruction of that pride and a return to humble return to the Gospel as our foundation (without addition or subtraction). And the only way Jesus ever humbles someone who is standing on the shaky foundation of pride is to openly mock them. Don't you just love how you can justify anything you want and still sound Biblical?

I don't think any of you are going to read Robert Lanham's book The Sinner's Guide to the Evangelical Right even though you probably should, if only to learn some humility, so consider this a far less humorous version of that book.

Before I start pointing out some of the issues with denominations (like any good humorist, I'm an equal opportunity offender, I won't finish up the week by holding up one denomination as the one everybody should join) I want to say that behind the facade of attacking denominations my real target will be the crippling pillars of blind faith, arrogant tradition, and doctrinal fractiousness that permeates all denominations.

Also, don't think that because I'll be spending the majority of the time finding fault that I'm blind to the fact that all denominations of done some good in one way or another. Nobody needs to read this with the idea that I'm trying to get anyone to change their denominational affiliation. Just realize that the best answer to any question regarding your faith never mentions your denomination (because no person outside your denomination knows anything good about what your group has done, but the media has given a mountain of evidence that shows the damage your group has done). So, hopefully your answer to all questions regarding faith start and end with Jesus.

Blog Tour...

THE SIDEBAR:

I've been slowly adding more and more features to the blog, in particular, lists on the right sidebar that highlight past posts (music updates, videos, my story of the last 2 years), a slideshow of photos and my ever-expanding list of quotes (hopefully to one day be a viable alternative to Bartlett's).

Anyway, as the blog slowly becomes more robust and as (hopefully) newer people start reading, the sidebar will be a good way to catch up or give you a good idea of where to start.

Seeing as how my readership is small right now anyway, I'll probably end up posting something like this again at a later date (though the necessity of doing so is the same optimism that says I'll acquire more readers).

I am also considering compiling the monthly music updates into a zip file and letting people download them (Mixzips would be the name for it I guess?). If this is something that excites you the reader, feedback would be appreciated.

I Pity The Fool...

Lacey and I are going over this application for Criswell College, and there is a section where I’m supposed to state my vocational goal…for some reason, none of the options look that appealing, consider the following:

Religious Journalism? Nobody reads anything anymore, and I don’t really feel like trying to convert a bunch of second rate film critics and crotchety Dear Abby types.

Media Ministry? No, I don’t want to make Veggie Tales or cheesy Left Behind Movies. Although, being the guy who came up with F.R.O.G wouldn’t be too bad.

Recreational Ministry? What the hell is this? Play kickball for Jesus?

Military Chaplain? Uhhhhhhhh…no, you join the military to kill people, not to hold funeral services for every faith imaginable…

“Private Johnson was a follower of the First Church of Latter Day Freebasers?”

“I have just the right service for him.”

Evangelist? Hmmm, a little better, but planning to go into evangelism at the undergrad stage seems like setting yourself up for a sexual harassment lawsuit twenty or thirty years later.

Other? Yes, I want to be a bi-sexual acoustic guitar playing fitness guru who drives a Prius and only eats food from companies that somehow use the proceeds to cure AIDS and solve world hunger…for Jesus.

I’m going to have to take this to the top…

“Jesus, why do all the jobs you have for your people suck?”

“Dude, have you read about my career?”

All this makes me wonder, why does our team have so many losers on it? It’s like Jesus wants to do all the work himself or something…

If I were to be honest, I’d include this in my entrance essay. Probably under the topic labeled “Struggles in your Christian walk” now there’s a vocation I can believe in.

Watch this now...

If you didn't already realize...I'm obsessed with Stephen Colbert. His interview with Richard Dawkins (the new face of atheism) is hilarious and interesting. Watch for the point where after Dawkins seems to be "winning" Stephen recollects himself and lays out pretty lucid and coherent argument for why Dawkins' reasoning defeats itself.

Video Here

I would challenge any Bible believing Christian to try to get their head around atheist argument and evolutionary concepts in order to A: See that their faith rests on a firmer foundation and B: Learn how to reach someone who is actually lost, not just some friend that is dissatisfied with their church.