I don't believe in Evolution but...

I do however see why the Darwin Awards exist. For those who don't know about the Darwin Awards they are "individuals who contribute to human evolution by self-selecting themselves out of the gene pool, through putting themselves (unnecessarily) in life-threatening situations". Sometimes these Motards get exactly what is coming to them. I've heard of some pretty stupid people, but the Darwin Awards tops them all. And last night, a man in Greensboro decided he was going to enter himself into the next publication. Click on the link to be sent to the MyFox8 site telling about what this idiot did.

See the next Darwin Award recipient here

On a side note, people who huff refrigerant to meet "Mr. Womp Womp" are as equally stupid. All the refrigerant does is deplete the oxygen to your brain. It doesn't get you high like so many of my HS classmates thought. It does the same thing as a California Dream except gives you a much worse taste in your mouth. And APHS wondered why there were only 50 people that had a high enough GPA to sit in the numbered section at graduation. People are stupid.

Article made me giggle.

I read this the other day and it tickled me in a way that only good computer humor can. I ahooed like the Pillsbury Doughboy.

Read this article to see where you stack against the rest of the world!

For those who use IE I will say it plainly so you don't make your head hurt by reading too many words. IE users are retarded. Don't get mad at me, I didn't do the research. Sadly what is not said here just implied, is that Firefox may not be retarded, but you are riding the short bus and taking the extra "Special" classes because you just need that extra umph to stay with your class. Again don't get mad at me. I only brought that out because I didn't think you could read between the lines. After all, you do use Firefox.

So where does that leave chrome? Well, Chrome can't be in the first two categories. No, Chrome users are much higher on the intellectual totem pole. They are the 12 year old that is already performing surgery. I say that because I am a little biased. Someone who who could give an objective comparison because they don't have a stake in the argument, say a safari user (whom we already know is pretty smart because they bought a mac and not a pc), would say Chrome users are more like the valedictorian of their high school that is ahead by only a year or two.

So do yourself, and the World Wide Web a favor, and switch to Google Chrome. It's good to be smart. Because well, stupid people make me want to punch them in the face, and you don't want to be on the receiving end of a hay-maker do you? For you simpletons out there, the answer is noooooooo.

Praise filled update and continued prayer request.

As many of you know, one of my favorites profs (for more reasons than his tendency to hit more rabbit trails than Iwo Jima has tunnels, which meant my add followed him perfectly. lol) up at school has been going through some serious health issues. He was diagnosed with a level 4 glioblastoma (Click to learn more about disease)a couple months ago. The local news paper just did an article on him and I wanted to pass it on to you. To know him for the past two years has been a great pleasure, and I look forward to knowing him for many years in the future Lord willing.

Click here to read about this great man of God that I truly admire and look up to.

I continue to ask for your prayers, and if you are from the triad, please make a visit to one of the benefits, for moral support! Thank you,

In His Grip,
Jake

Family doesn't always have to be blood.

You have heard it said that blood is thicker than water. While this is true sometimes a bond can be just as thick if not thicker than blood. There have been to people in my life that are such good friends; I count them as my brothers. I recently connected with one of those guys after four or five years and seems like the cd never skipped.

This cat basically lived at my house for two years. He became family as much as anyone could, and still is. Even though there have been miles and years between, all it takes is the word, and a help, an ear, a shoulder, a sarcastic retort, and a place would be given at the drop of a hat no questions asked. That’s what family is and family does.

Family is a bond. The only thing blood means is genetic relation. Sometimes, the bond that is cultivated between certain friends is thicker and stronger than blood even the blood that pumps through a Chicago Bears fans veins. (If you are younger than 20 or have no appreciation for great comedy, you will not understand that reference so just move on.)

I hope this doesn’t seem sappy; I just have a difficult time expressing myself sometimes, I’m just excited that Facebook got a couple brothers back in touch. So this one’s for you Mikey, love ya brother. (And by this “one” I of course mean this monster glass of milk…) Don’t worry Mooch. I didn’t forget about ya. You’re right up there with us brother. And remember what I said guys, I got your back.

Tongues, and I'm not talking the Rolling Stones.

To Speak or Not To Speak, That is the Question

            The issue of speaking in tongues is a topic that has plagued the Church and even split local churches in the last 150 or so years. It is something that the Apostle Paul swiftly dealt with in the early church, and something preachers throughout Church History have had to battle whenever a sect would pop up. The speaking of tongues saturates the movement known as Pentecostalism, but extends to other denominations that have a bent for the charismatic influence. Nothing is safe from the reaches of the teaching of tongues. They are in everything from the ultra-charismatic Assemblies of God, to the predominately conservative Baptist, to the Roman Catholic Church. The vastly different, hard-line, stuck in the mud views people have on tongues has split churches, placed strains on families, and caused a great division between people in the local churches, and that is the place where there should be the most unity.

            So the question still remains, should tongues be spoken today, or did they cease to have any purpose, after the apostolic era ended? It is the hope of this writer that through this piece, the reader will be able to make a humble, educated decision as to whether tongues should be spoken in today’s church services, or even in one’s private prayer closet.

            Before one can determine if the gift of tongues is for today, a definition is required. A clear concise definition of tongues is difficult to nail down. For each view there are different definitions. The first view, held by most people within Pentecostalism is an unknown, ecstatic prayer language in which the Holy Spirit prays as intercessor for your needs to God through you (Busenitz 62). The view held by most people in the camp that teaches tongues has ceased, believe that tongues were known languages, but foreign to the person because it was a different unlearned language, than what the person speaks (Busenitz 62). Acts 2.4, 7-8 gives proof that this was indeed a miracle, and a known language; “Then they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in different languages, as the Spirit gave them ability for speech. And they were astounded and amazed, saying, "Look, aren't all these who are speaking Galileans?  How is it that each of us can hear in our own native language (HCSB)?”

            So where then does teaching of tongues come from? Even though the Old Testament (Mills 21) does refer to tongues, they were spoken both in pagan rituals such as voodoo (Erickson 879), and also legitimate tongues spoken by Prophets, Charismatic’s typically make a bee-line to the book of Acts to give support to their view. Further support is given by 1st Corinthians (Gromacki 10-11). To understand where they are coming from and the basis to their entire argument, these verses must be unpacked to see what tongues are and if they should still be used today.

            The Charismatic epicenter of the gifts of tongues has to deal with the Day of Pentecost in Acts chapter two. Dr. George W. Dollar in his book The New Testament and New Pentecostalism says that Acts 2 “is the Belgium chapter of Acts, if not the whole New Testament (Dollar 47).” Dollar says this because Belgium was fought over more than almost any other European country, just as is Acts two in continuous strife and a battle within the Church. In Acts 2.2-8, the events that lead up to 3000 getting saved were, a sound of a violent wind, flames were over each head, and the people began to, by the Holy Spirit, speak in other tongues (HCSB). The Greek word in Acts 2 for tongues is the plural word Glōssa, this was to show that what was being spoken was more than one language (MacArthur 226). To take the argument even further, what happened at Pentecost was a known language and not just ecstatic utterances, is the word (often used interchangeable with glossa) Dialektos, which when transliterated to English, is our term dialect (MacArthur 159). A Dialect is multiple forms of a language, no matter how many ways gibberish is sliced it is still gibberish. This further proves that tongues are a language and not senseless utterances.

            Also most charismatics will say, the purposes of tongues are a sign that salvation has taken place and the person was baptized by fire of the Holy Spirit (Arthur 47). Aside from all the times, people where saved in the Scriptures and didn’t speak in tongues, this view can be refuted within the same chapter! This is why it is important to use context when studying, instead of taking a single or a cluster of verses and making an entire doctrine of it. In the beginning of the chapter we see the breaking out of tongues; however, it is not until after Peter preaches the Word, do 3000 people get saved (HCSB). Also, not all believers have the gift. 1 Corinthians 14.5 says “I wish all of you spoke in other languages…” logically proving not all believers spoke in tongues, thus negating the argument that tongues are a proof of salvation (HCSB). In summation tongues cannot be evidence of salvation and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, because tongues were spoken before salvation and not all believers spoke in tongues.

The question can then be raised, “What then is the purpose of tongues?” There is one purpose for tongues, and two sub-purposes. Those sub-purposes stem from the main purpose in Acts chapter five. Luke writes in verse twelve, “Many signs and wonders were being done among the people through the hands of the apostles (HCSB).” So the head of the purpose of tongues flowchart is that they were a sign to the Jews. They are then sub-categorized into a sign to unbelievers not a sign for believers, (1 Corinthians 12.22). The second category was a sign to the Jews that the Gentiles were now brought into the fold (Burdick 30)! Acts 10.44-48 tells the account of Peter going to Cornelius, and Cornelius getting saved. Because of this the Gentiles spoke in tongues and solidified to the Jews that the Gentiles, were now able to be saved like the Jews.

Now that the definition of tongues and the purpose of tongues are understood, it should do well to understand the practice of tongues. Paul deals with the guidelines of speaking in tongues in 1 Corinthians 12-14. The Corinthian Church had the problem of abusing or over-using this Spiritual Gift. We know this because it is only in this epistle that tongues are mentioned, let alone a rebuke and establishment of guide lines (Hayes 17).  1 Corinthians 14.26 says that tongues were to be used to edify the church during the service (HCSB). In addition to building up the church, there must be an interpreter present (Gromacki 130). 1^st Corinthians 14.28 says, “But if there is no interpreter, that person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God (HCSB).” The tongues spoken must be in a known language. Nowhere in the Scripture is it ever mentioned that the spiritual gift of tongues was ever ecstatic utterances (Gromacki 131). The next requirement for tongues in a service is who is allowed to speak. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14.27 that no more than three people should be allowed to share the gifts of tongues in any given service, and they must speak separately as not to over talk one another (HCSB). Also, in following the same thought, only men are allowed to speak. 1 Corinthians 14.34 says “the women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says (HCSB).” 

While many people continue to speak in tongues, no matter the reasoning or kind, there are a large group of people that believe the gift has ceased and is no longer operative today. It is impossible to deny that the gift has an end, whether it was during the early church or in the future, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13.8 “Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for languages, they will cease… (HCSB).” So what is the reasoning for the cessationist view? The only time tongues were mentioned was in an early epistle, and never mentioned again in the later letters (MacArthur 231). Tongues were a miraculous gift, if the other miraculous gifts died out with the Apostles, why would just one remain? In both Letters to Timothy, Paul wrote telling Timothy that he was unable to heal a person. In 2^nd Timothy Paul states, “I left Trophimus sick at Miletus.” (HCSB), thus showing the waning of the gifts within the Apostle. If the reader recalls, it was mentioned that one of the purposes for tongues was to signal to the unbelieving Jews that God was now working within the Gentile Nations. Because the Gentiles church came to fruition, the Jews understood that God is working among the Gentiles nixing any need for tongues. Lastly the complete absence of the gift in the rest of the writing of the Bible, and Church History (except for pockets of fringe groups that were swiftly dealt with) shows that tongues have ceased (MacArthur 234).

To bring about the end, it was shown that tongues are known languages and not gibberish utterances. Also, they were used for signs. It was shown that there are regulations to the speaking of tongues, and one of those regulations was the disallowing of women to speak them. Because of this it was proven that not every person possessed the gift, crushing any argument for tongues being a proof of salvation. The question still remains. Should tongues be spoken today, or did they cease to have any purpose, after the Apostolic era ended? The only logical answer is yes! Even though there is strong argument for tongues to have ended, a date or time was never given to mark an explicit end. Therefore on the cessationists side of the argument, judgment should not be cast upon the charismatic brother if they so choose to believe in tongues. Just the same, if tongues are going to be spoken, they should be done in the exact way that the Apostle Paul organized and mandated they be done in, and judgment should not be cast on the brother who believes in the cessation in the gift. After all, the Church is one, and should be united because of the completed work of Christ, not split because of something of little importance as a gray area doctrine that could in theory go either way!

Re_churching church step 1

This will be an extension to my previous post on re-churching church. First I should preface by saying that I have become more and more in love with the writing of the Puritans. My latest gem in discovery is Thomas Watson. I recently purchased “Glorifying God” it’s a yearlong devotional collection of his writings. I first read an entry on sin. It blew me away, but that’s a different post. Now, continuing on with re-churching church.

Today’s entry was titled “Settled in the Faith”. Colossians 1.23 says, “Continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel…” to apply this verse, Watson used as an illustration of celestial bodies. He said that 1 Peter 5.10 (look it up) means that “we might not be meteors [wandering] in the air, but fixed stars. Aristotle says of meteors, “They do leap up and down, and wander, into several parts of the heaven; and being but dry exhalations, not made of pure celestial matter as the fixed stars are, they often fall to the earth.”

Basically he is saying that Christians who are not rooted and settled in their faith will float around from one opinion to another, and can be deceived very easily. (i.e. the Prosperity Gospel) Kind of like the old adage, If you don’t stand for something you’ll fall for anything.

Before I give my attempted take on all of this I will give you an excerpt from the end of the devo. “Just as feathers will be blown easily everywhere, so will feathery Christian. Therefore such are compared to children: that “We be no more children, tossed to and fro” (Ephesians 4.14). Children are fickle, sometimes of one mind, sometimes of another; nothing pleases them long. So unsettles Christians are childish; the truths they embrace at one time, they reject at another.

Now it’s my turn. I’m not going to try and unpack this verse. I’m not even going to deal with this topic directly. It is, however, at the bedrock of my thinking as to begin re-churching church.

First, I think we are not teaching enough doctrine in the church today. (I am using church in general terminology. I am not trying to point out specific flaws within a single church) This is one of the reasons why I use the Word of Life Curriculum for Engage’s material. I feel the church has taken on too much of a seeker/come and see mindset. I have been in too many churches where they hold a meeting to discuss “what can we do to bring more people into the church?” Let’s talk about topics that can enhance our standard of living and make up feel bubbly inside has replaced I want to understand the Bible and tenants of my Faith. 

I also feel that we are lacking in knowledge of Church history. I'm sure you have heard the saying, "if we don't learn from history we are destined to repeat it."? This is for the church as well. Because we have become anemic with our teaching, false and heretical doctrines have been sneaking in, the latest of which is the prosperity gospel and Rob Bell's latest kindling stack. Had Christians have known church history, we could have seen these heresies on the horizon and Barney Fifed them. (nipped em in the bud)

We need substance in our churches. I believe the way that will happen is to have pastors do what they are called and hired to do. Lead and exhort the flock. For him to be able to do this he had to be able to have deep study and have the time to do so. It has become the norm of churches today to expect the pastor to clean, visit, mow, be a buffer, and do any number of odd jobs instead of adhering to what his purpose is and that is to teach the Word of God. It is the deacons and deaconess' responsibility to do these other things. Thier purpose is to serve. Sadly, people refuse to see this. I will explain more on this later. For re churching church to work we will almost have to start a new church, in order for there to be a smooth transition.

At my church we are attempting to do this WHAT ABOUT BOB style (baby steps). Not without opposition, but still a whole lot smoother than I first anticipated. We have decided to break tradition at Crestwood and in lieu of sunday evening service, we are offering many different opportunities to grow spiritually, grow in unity with one another, have outreach to the community and other places, also some sundays people can take just to rest. Holding to a dispensationalist hermeneutic, I do not believe that we are bound to a sabbath let alone a"Christian sabbath" (another soapbox for another post) however, we were created to work six days and rest one. It doesn't matter what day we rest just so we do.

There will always be something going on at Crestwood on sunday nights but sometimes I may just want to stay home and rest.Other weeks throughout the months we will be having various outreach opportunities, deep study modules, or small groups where we learn how to apply the awesome teaching pastor gives us to our lives and live the lesson. What pastor wouldn't want an extra hour for application time at the end of a sermon.

I am very excited about the direction we are taking in rechurching church. As I said earlier there will be some opposition, but that should be expected, and be ready to be dealt with. I.e. the weeks heading up to our vote to discontinue sunday evening services, I had someone approach me and ask what I thought. (you would think people would learn not to ask me that. Its my favorite question, and I WILL tell you what I think.) After I gave my fact, the person clearly agitated with my response curtly said what does he need sunday night off for all he had to do is peach three times a week. (wrong statement to say to me) so I politely explained exactly how much pastor does and that not only is it draining to peach a sermon, but not many people know how much sweat, tears, and prayers go into a sermon. So I explained that with this, it could make a great pastor that much better because it will give him more time to do his calling.

I know it has been a long time since my last post. I have been really busy with school and church. But this is the first of many steps I believe will improve church and begin to revive America's churches and resuscitate a dying religion. It is only by Christ and closening (my word) our relationship to Him, that we will return to a Church that actually serves and fulfills its purpose.

An awesome presentation of the G.O.S.P.E.L.