He Died in My Place

Posted on September 11, 2011 by Jono Hall

Adam was annoyed. He had been so busy for so long and now his head office in San Francisco was calling him to a week long round of meetings to determine why his division weren’t meeting their goals. The airline tickets sat discarded on his office desk. Adam had been grumbling to his associate Josh for months that if they didn’t get their act together one of them would have to go to the head office. Adam had hoped that it would have been Josh.

The trouble was that Adam had a long weekend planned. He really had been working too hard for too long and a weekend at the shore was just what he needed. He REALLY didn’t want to go to San Francisco. Earlier in the month Adam had tried to cajole Josh that perhaps Josh should be the one to go to the round of meetings, Josh had politely declined. He had quite correctly stated that Adam was the senior of the two and besides which Josh had some other East Coast meetings scheduled that week.

But Adam really did not want to go. Adam didn’t mind bending the truth now and then, perhaps a little exaggerating, but he didn’t like outright lying, but perhaps… just this once.

Poking his head into Josh’s office Adam said “Bad news I’m afraid, my Grandma just passed, we’ve been expecting it for sometime, but my Mom is really cut up about it, think I’m going to have to take some time out of the office and travel down to Charlotte to help out a bit”.

Josh looked up concerned “Oh, I’m sorry, please pass my condolences onto your mother”

“The only trouble is” Adam continued “One of us is supposed to go to head office next Tuesday for the round of meetings – I know you had those meetings arranged, but is there any chance you could do it – I’ll make it up to you”

Josh looked a little crestfallen, but what other option did he have? “OK, I’ll do it, but you owe me”

Adam walked back to his office, he would have to transfer the tickets into Josh’s name. He looked at the tickets that had arrived that morning, he had to call up United. The call center operative quickly agreed to the change. “Could you please give me the date and the flight number please sir?” Adam looked it up “Tuesday September 11 2001, Flight United 93”

When the events of September 11 unfolded, how do you think Adam would have felt? Grief stricken that he had essentially killed his colleague? Or do you think he would just blown it off as fate?

The other day I was thinking about this scenario and was putting myself in the place of an “Adam”, I was considering how such an event would probably radically shake you up. “It was my lies that put Josh on that plane.” Then I considered the scenario of the death of Jesus. He also died in my place, it was also my sin which caused his death. It is also his death which gives me another chance at life. Do we just think Jesus died for the “sins of the world” or do we truly realise he died for “my sins”. And in light of this are we repentant and thankful as we ought to be?

Posted in Bible Stuff, In the News | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Holy Spirit Baptism

Posted on September 8, 2011 by Jono Hall

 THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ASCENSION?

Much is said of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, but the ascension of Jesus is often passed over as a sad day when Jesus departed, and a reminder for us that he will come again. But the return of Jesus to sit at the Father’s right hand has much more significance than we might attribute to it. I want to highlight just one significant point. Without the ascension of Jesus we would have no Holy Spirit.

“If you love me, you will keep my commandments. 16And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,17eventhe Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you andwill be in you.

Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. 8 And when he comes, he willconvict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: 9concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; 10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer; 11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.

“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.13When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 14He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (John 14:15-17 & 16:7-14)

We have already looked briefly at the Triune nature of the Godhead and it is definitely possible to do a fairly in-depth exegetical study of the Spirit of God in the Old Testament (starting in Genesis 1:2). However some key points seem to be apparent as from a cursory view of the Old Testament: Firstly there was acknowledgment of God’s Spirit. Secondly the designation of holy Spirit is fairly sparse (only in 3 places). Thirdly the pouring out of the Spirit of God is only on certain limited individuals, typically for certain purposes and for certain times. Yet there was a promise that a time would come when God’s Spirit would be poured out on all flesh (Joel 2:28) and many faith filled Jews would be looking for this day. It was into this context that Jesus came.

JESUS THE BAPTIST

 A.    JEWISH BAPTISM – The subject of baptism is an interesting one. It is fraught with disagreements throughout church history. We will look at water baptism in more detail when look at the process of the new birth. But it is important to understand a few things. Firstly the Jews would have been familiar with ritual cleansings and immersions during earlier times, these were often done repeatedly and this is why you often see “mikvah” baths at the archeological digs of places like the Jerusalem Temple and Qumran. It was also a less common occurrence amongst the Jewish community to see a “one off” baptism for Proselytes who wanted to be joined to the nation of Israel. It seems that John’s Baptism in the River Jordan was a similar “one-off” repentance baptism.

 B.    BAPTIZO  – The word baptism or baptized that we use in English is a simple transliteration of the Greek word “Baptizo”. It is not a translation, a translation of the word would yield a word like “dip”, “plunge” “submerge” or “immerse”. This is critical in understanding both water and spirit baptism.

 C.   JESUS BIG ROLE – There are few events that are recorded in all four gospels, many key doctrines that we believe (think “being born again”) are only mentioned by one writer, therefore when something is recorded by all four of the gospel writers we should take note. Jesus’ relative John was known as the “plunger” or the “dipper” because of the ministry of administering water baptism to the repentant. However John prophesied something that was recorded in all the gospels:

 I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. (Matt 3:11)

 I have baptized you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit. (Mark 1:8)

John answered them all, saying, “I baptize you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. (Luke 3:16)

 he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ (John 1:33)

Then in Acts as well, we are given indication of the role that Spirit Baptism will take

And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me; 5for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”(Acts 1:4-5)

This is a BIG DEAL – Jesus is a baptizer in holy Spirit (please note “the” as a definite article is not used in conjunction with holy Spirit in any of these references). This has to mean something and yet the teaching on holy Spirit immersion has been minimized and wrongly applied in many churches. Why is this such an important message to new disciples that we understand it?

WHAT DOES BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT SIGNIFY

 The baptism/immersion in the holy Spirit that Jesus spoke of was first experienced by the disciples (120 of them) on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. As they waited in prayer (in obedience to the command of Jesus), the Spirit of God came to rest on each one in what seemed like a tongue of fire and then they began to speak in other languages as they were given the ability. Their behaviour led many to believe they were drunk. But Simon Peter knew as the spokesman of the group that this was the promised Holy Spirit, which had begun to be poured out on all flesh. This baptism of holy Spirit was then repeated a number of times throughout Acts; to a group of Samaritans, to a group of Gentiles and then to a group in Ephesus. Although the word baptism is only used 7 times, it is is referred to in several ways most notably “receiving” the Holy Spirit, or the Holy Spirit being “poured out”. This was an important fulfillment of a promise, but what exactly did it signify?

 A.        PART OF THE NEW BIRTH – The New Testament highlights a number of activities which were normative for disciples of Jesus in their “initiation” as a believer. These things were evidences of the faith that made them sons and daughters of God and indications that they were on the “way” of salvation. These things were 1) Repentance from sins 2) Faith in Jesus 3) Baptism in Water and 4) Baptism in the Holy Spirit. The gift of the Holy Spirit was part of this New Birth process, however it is important to note that while it is part of this process, it is not synonymous with regeneration. In the same respect that baptism in water happens as a separate, but necessary event for a new believer, likewise baptism in the Holy Spirit is separate as well. I think this point is fairly well documented throughout the New Testament account, however it needs to be mentioned because it is quite common amongst Evangelicals to assume it took place when the believer repented and had faith. It might take place then, but it is a distinct process.

The New Testament speaks of this baptism in the Spirit in a number of different ways, some of the most common are to talk of this as a “down-payment”, a “first-fruits” or as a “seal”. There is indication here that all believers are given something now in order to guarantee something to come. I think this is exactly what Paul and the other apostolic writers meant when they referred to Spirit Baptism in this way. It was a way of giving the body something as a foretaste, but also as a mark of belonging and this is the second main significance of baptism.

B.    BECOMING PART OF THE BODY OF CHRIST – Not only is Spirit Baptism an initiation into life as a believer it also marks you with a seal of ownership that you belong to the body of Christ. Some may ask when does a believer become part of the body and this makes it pretty clear.

For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body so it is with Christ. 13For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body— Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—andall were made to drink of one Spirit. (1 Cor. 12:12-13)

THE PURPOSE OF SPIRIT BAPTISM

We have talked about some of the significance of Spirit Baptism, but it must be stressed that Spirit Baptism is more than symbolic, it is more than simply a rite of passage. It has profound significance in the purpose it plays in disciple’s lives.

SALVATION – We have already talked briefly about baptism of the Spirit being a key part of salvation (which it is) but the more enquiring mind might ask “why is this the case?” I think a big part of the answer to this is found in the role that Jesus plays as baptizer in holy Spirit. The word holy here is used as an adjective rather than a noun (ie it describes the nature of God’s Spirit rather than it being his name). And this is actually one of the key roles of the holy Spirit. Once people have repented of their sins and confessed belief in Jesus, what is to stop them going back and committing any number of horrendous sins. This was a problem under the Old Covenant. Yet we are told that Jesus will “plunge” us into holy Spirit. That is an immersive experience, I often picture a sponge being plunged into a bucket of water. Then after we have been immersed in Holy Spirit, we are encouraged to go on being filled with the Spirit. One of the key purposes is that we too would become like God. We would become holy. This does mean purity, but it also means Christlikeness. This is the process of sanctification that the Spirit helps us with and as we are filled by the Spirit and walk in step with the spirit, we will develop the fruit of the Holy Spirit:

 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

 19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit (Galatians 5:17-25)

SERVICE – In addition to helping believers become more Christlike in their nature/salvation, the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is also given so that the Body of Christ can operate like Christ in the “Gifts of the Holy Spirit”  The most common list mentions nine gifts

4Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; 6and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.(1 Cor. 12:4-11).

These gifts can be used outside of the Body of Christ, often to demonstrate the reality of the Kingdom of God, however their primary function is to build up the people of God.

 WRONG THINKING ABOUT SPIRIT BAPTISM

There has been much wrong thinking about Spirit Baptism throughout the Church History. While the Church in the first century exploded under the power of the Holy Spirit, dead formalism soon crept in which stifled the life of the Spirit. This led to the first big wrong teaching concerning the Holy Spirit:

A.    CESSATIONISM – This is a belief that the gifts and baptism of the Holy Spirit were limited to the first century church and do not exist today. It is fairly widespread among many in organized/reformed churches. Many who hold a Cessationist view assert that as the canon of scripture is now closed the “perfect has come” (1 Cor 13:10) and therefore tongues and gifts of the Spirit have passed away.  There are a few answers to this. The Cessationist view is not biblical, the “perfect coming” is not referring to the close of the canon of scripture, but rather to the return of Jesus, it is usually and sadly based on experience or lack thereof. The historical record shows that the age of miracles continued well into the fourth century and it was only due to a few concerted efforts of church leadership that the number of those experiencing the baptism in the Holy Spirit declined. Even after this for the entirety of church history many believers have still experienced the baptism in the Spirit and seen the gifts of the Spirit in operation. There is therefore no real grounds for this position.

B.    SECOND BLESSING? – The twentieth century has been named quite rightly by some the “century of the Holy Spirit”. During the 19th Century many holiness groups had been seeking a “second experience” of “entire sanctification”. This was essentially the Wesleyan ideal of perfectionism. It was from these holiness groups that on New Years Eve 1900 a baptism of the Holy Spirit was poured out in Topeka, Kansas. Speaking in “tongues” was seen as the “initial evidence” of the baptism. This “Pentecostal” revival spread a few years later to Azusa Street LA and from there all around the world. Pentecostalism has had the biggest denominational growth of any Christian bloc in the 20th Century. Traditional or Classical Pentecostalism has really asserted the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, this has largely been a good thing, however due to its roots in the holiness movement there are a few corrections that should be made. Spirit Baptism is seen as a “Second Blessing” separate from the New Birth. Some believers spend their whole life hoping for that “second blessing”, while Spirit Baptism is a separate part of regeneration, it is still a part of this birthing process and should not be separated. Secondly it is often true among Pentecostals that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is an anointing ONLY for service. While it is an anointing for service, we should not minimize the other purposes and significance for Spirit Baptism.

HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU’VE BEEN BAPTISED?

A.    THE EXPERIENCE – Every time Spirit Baptism is mentioned in the Bible, it is described as an “event”. Just like Water Baptism is an immersive event that you cannot ignore, the same is true of Spirit Baptism. You can “believe in faith” for Spirit Baptism, but the believing in faith is not the Baptism itself. You should experience something. Often Spirit Baptism is preceded by prayer and often (although not always) it is received through the “laying on of hands”.

B.    THE EVIDENCE – Classical Pentecostalism always looks for the “Initial Evidence” of Spirit Baptism as speaking in “tongues”. This has become a contentious issue for many in the church who do not operate in the gift of tongues. A couple of things can be said in regard to this. Although the biblical record is not conclusive that speaking in tongues is THE initial evidence, it is true that MOST times we have evidence of the Spirit being poured out that the recipients often start praising God in other “languages”. The other point is that there is always evidence. It might not be in the form of tongues, but I believe there should be some external manifestation of this immersive experience.

Thanks to David Pawson for some of the structure of this teaching 🙂

 

Posted in Bible Stuff | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Book Review: Jesus Baptizes in One Holy Spirit by David Pawson

Posted on September 5, 2011 by Jono Hall

I have just finished reading David Pawson’s “Jesus Baptizes in One Holy Spirit”. It is an excellent resource for those who want to know more about what exactly the Baptism of holy Spirit is all about. There are few events that all four gospels cover, one of them is the fact that Jesus is a baptiser (or dunker, plunger, submerger, as David is keen to point out Baptism is a transliteration not a translation and therefore loses some of the intended meaning) in the Holy Spirit. Jesus had to ascend back to the Father’s side so that he could baptise followers in holy Spirit. For those that have read David’s book on the Normal Christian Birth you will know that Spirit Baptism is one of the four normative experiences for those who are being born anew into the Kingdom of God (Repentance, Belief and Water Baptism being the other three). Yet this is perhaps one of the most controversial of the four experiences with much disagreement (or just avoidance) over the issue. David cuts through the fog with his typical exegetical accuracy. But not only is this biblically accurate, being aware of David’s own journey in the Holy Spirit, I can attest this is not just “dry” theology. It is living understanding. I pray that in our own day when many of the new reformed movement avoid this subject altogether and other more charismatic expressions may have experience but do not plumb the depths of this glorious truth we may once more discover the truth that Jesus does baptize in one holy Spirit.

Posted in Bible Stuff, Book Review, Church History | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Is the Trinity really in the First Verse of the Bible?

Posted on September 4, 2011 by Jono Hall

You will not find the word “Trinity” in the pages of scripture. Yet the belief in a “Trinitarian” God is fundamental to Christian beliefs. The Greek word for trinity was first used in history by Theophilus of Antioch in 170 but it was not until the third century that the Church father Tertullian translated this word into the Latin “Trinitas” and it is from this that we get the English word Trinity. The word might be “relatively” new, but the foundations of the belief are found from the earliest times in the pages of scripture. What I mean is the very first verse. Let’s take a look:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. (Gen 1:1-2)

 The very first words of the bible are a key to understanding the nature of God. The Rabbinic understanding of the word “Beginning” is used many times synonymously with “Firstborn”. Therefore it would be correct to interpret this “In the Beginning, by the Firstborn, God created”.

Furthermore God is introduced with the noun “Elohim”; this is an interesting designation for God. If the writer had intended a singular noun they would have written El, and they did not even write Eloha, which would have referred to two, rather they used Elohim which refers to more than two. This being the case it would be normal for a plural noun to be followed by a verb which indicated plurality and yet the verb that follows “created” is singular in nature. So right in the first verse of the Bible we have three in one! Then later in the verse we have the Spirit of God active.  The belief that the entire Trinitarian nature of the God head is active in creation is emphasized many times in scripture. Even a few verses later God says “Let US make man in OUR own image” (Gen 1:26). This is only one place where God refers to himself as plural.

It must be stressed however that belief in the triune God is not belief in Polytheism or more specifically tritheism (ie three Gods as is expressed in Mormonism). God is still one. Which is why we can along with the Jews and with Jesus strongly assert the Shema of Israel. God is one!

 One interesting point to make concerning the Shema and the nature of the “oneness” of God is to do a word study on the word “one”  -‘echad אָחַד . This word does indeed mean one, however it is also the same word used in Genesis 2:24  “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.”

 This means the oneness of marriage is somehow analogous to the oneness of God. This is a profound observation both in relation to the thought that the unity of the Godhead does not preclude different parts and also a profound insight into the nature of the marriage covenant.

Posted in Bible Stuff, Church History | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Messengers: Make Your Message Clear

Posted on September 1, 2011 by Jono Hall

I was teaching our Media Messenger class about effective messaging yesterday. One of the big points that I emphasize is the need for clarity in our writing to get the message across so that the video can be effective in achieving the set goals.

We had been talking about the changing face of technology and how the internet changes the type of video that are produced. Someone mentioned the T-Mobile Ads. These are very fun ads if you haven’t seen them. I include a couple here:

and

The T-Mobile ads show a number of things – Firstly the shift in the industry towards “content” driven advertising that can be shared virally. However despite the success of its viral nature, I am unsure as to the success of the ads to achieve the core function they are employed for – which is “Selling Phones, Calling Plans and Data Packages”. It may have risen the brand awareness of T-Mobile as people will have undoubtedly asked friends whether they had seen the “latest T-Mobile Ad”. But I do feel the overall message of the ads are much too subtle. If there wasn’t a T-Mobile logo at the end would you know that the ad is selling phones, calling plans and data packages? – I doubt it.

Although I’m typing this on a Mac Book Pro, I’m not an “apple fanboy”, but I must say the iPhone 4 ads do show a marked difference – it has not been viewed as many times, but its clarity is unmistakeable  – it is clearly about the product itself

The overall effectiveness of each ad is seen in what it moved people to do, not in how entertaining it was. I am sure the iPhone Ad moved people to buy the iPhone (Apple called this their “most successful product launch ever”) I’m not sure about T-Mobile

And the ultimate test – Apple now has more liquidity than the US govt and the best brand equity in the world…. and T-Mobile… owned by Deutsch Telecom and trying to find another buyer after the deal with AT&T has stalled – Case Closed – Clarity Wins

But this isn’t really a subliminal push for Apple, the same principles of communication remain for whatever you are communicating, telling the vision of a non-profit, sharing a theological point, the conclusion for messengers is the same – keep your message clear.

Posted in Media Stuff | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

Why was Abraham Chosen? Responding to Revelation

Posted on August 30, 2011 by Jono Hall

 

Why God “chose” Abraham has been a thorny theological question down through the ages that ultimately must be answered by the answer of God’s sovereignty. However in thinking afresh about this question a few things become apparent about this man and his sons. Firstly Abraham is described as a “friend of God” (James 2:23), secondly God appeared and spoke to Abraham (and the other Patriarchs) and thirdly Abraham obeyed and walked by faith (even if he did occasionally stumble). These points are related to one another and they all rest on one principal issue, the response to revelation.

I believe that God “reveals” himself to all mankind in different ways. In Romans Paul tells us “For what can be known about God is plain to (everybody), because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.” Even if you have never had a mystical experience or audible voice of God, God has still revealed himself to you, through a friend, through the Bible, through a dream or even just through creation itself. The question however is not about the revelation, the real question is about the response, and this is where the rub lies for all mankind. I believe if we respond with thanksgiving and with obedience, our hearts become more tender and more receptive to receiving revelation, “light” increases and we end up with more revelation and ultimately on the pathway to becoming a friend of God.

The alternate response to revelation is a much scarier proposition for me and the scriptures outline what happens when we ignore revelation (ie without thankfulness and obedience). Every time we respond in a wrong way our heart becomes calloused and hardened, then our thinking becomes darkened, we become less and less receptive to any revelation and ultimately this affects our actions as we turn to sin and destruction. I believe at any point along this descent there are opportunities for repentance and redemption (although they will undoubtedly be fewer and fewer), but this is a scary downward spiral and should put the “fear of the Lord” into any disciple of Jesus.

So the conclusion is I believe Abraham fully embraced the first option and we ought to do likewise – if you hear His voice today, do not harden your heart!

Posted in Bible Stuff | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Book Review: The Lost History of Christianity

Posted on August 28, 2011 by Jono Hall

Penn State and Baylor Professor Philip Jenkins has tackled in The Lost History of Christianity a subject which is missing from most Church History books I have read (which is a few). I am always nervous when I see titles implying a “lost” Christianity as it is nearly always a sensational look into how the early church was really gnostic and the early church fathers changed scripture. This is not that book

Most Church Histories look at the expansion of the Church into the Roman Empire, into Europe, America and then to the rest of the world. Jenkins takes an alternate view and looks at how Christianity developed in the East; in Mesopotamia, Persia, Armenia, into India and China and also Africa. Essentially the area we know today as the 10/40 window. Perhaps the reason why this is ignored is because it was the “Nestorian” or Jacobite Church which spread into these areas predominantly. Nestorius was excommunicated in 431 for views which were later upheld by the Orthodox Council of Chalcedon and largely his excommunication was for political rather than theological reasons. His followers went east. As Jenkins shows however, there were already multitudes of believers to the east at this time. And 800 years after Christ while Europe was still barely Christian, the east was largely Christianized with many metropolitan sees overseeing millions of believers.

The reason most Church Histories do not explore the Church of the East is because there is an unspoken assumption that most approaches take which thinks that when Muslim forces took over key cities of the near east in the seventh century, they automatically became Islamized. As Jenkins explores, the truth is more that an Islamic hierarchy ruled largely Christian populations for many centuries. Not only that, but the assumption that much learning, in the forms of science, literature and maths came from Islamic sources is also debunked with many scholars being of Christian origin under Islamic rule.

Jenkins does provide excellent analysis for the interplay between the different people groups especially Muslims and Christians, showing how in the early days of Islam many of the leaders of the church simply saw Islam as a Christian Heresy, in much the same way that Arianism had been a few centuries earlier. It is interesting to note that much practice that we consider Islamic today is very similar to the Christian practice of many of the lands where Islam developed. His final analysis of the reason that Christianity died out in the Near East because of the close affiliation between state and religion and the loss of the various powers who endorsed Christianity to Arabic and Ottoman forces who promulgated Islam is indeed fascinating. Christianity in the west was therefore “saved” to a large degree because it was adopted by the state in the west.

However this brings me to my main criticism of the book (and for many other “church” histories for that matter). Jenkins is writing for a wide audience. His study is predominantly anthropological in nature. It is very easy for church histories to believe and report “Christendom” and disregard “Christianity”. The USA is anthropologically a “Christian” Nation. However as Gregory Boyd has so succinctly written, there is no such thing as a “Christian Nation” (with the possible exception of Jesus’ Kingdom when he returns to earth). Much of the Church of the East was anthropologically Christian and when it fell to Islamic forces it ceased to be. The saddening thing about the story of the book is that when “Christendom” fell in these areas over time the numbers of real believers also dropped. In summary the Lost History of Christianity is enlightening,  depressing and instructive all at the same time and I would recommend it.

Posted in Bible Stuff, Book Review, Church History | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Is Webstreaming Good for the Body of Christ?

Posted on August 26, 2011 by Jono Hall

I remember the conflicting feelings I had 12 years ago as I started to work for a Christian TV station. I remember the encouragement I got from seeing others in the worldwide Body of Christ built up with solid Christian teaching and was also pleased by the way that TV was an effective way to break down walls within the church. People who would never darken the door of a church from another denomination would watch them on TV and see that perhaps their perception of the church was wrong. This was a good thing. The conflict I had was over the lack of community. There is a very real possibility for an individual to “accept Jesus” by “saying the prayer” along with the Teleevangelist and actually have a real spiritual experience on their own, and yet still hold a hatred towards that group of hypocrites called the church.

I believe that many people have been touched by God through TV ministry. As we have pressed ahead with technology with websites, webstreaming, internet applications and video conferencing there is also a great opportunity to reach an ever widening audience over the internet with the glorious gospel of God. However as with TV, new media faces the same challenges, it brings us together and also isolates us more and more. It is possible for us to “love Jesus” but hate the hypocrites who claim to be his family. It is possible in theory only however for John the Apostle tells us “Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness.” God is not coming back for a harem, he is coming back for a bride. He is passionate for his Body upon the earth as his representative, it is therefore impossible for us to love Jesus and hate the church. As disciples of Jesus we are born again INTO the New Covenant people of God, there is no other way. And in actual fact dealing with the people of God, weak and broken people just like us on the road of sanctification is our God given way of getting sanctified.

So as we press forward with new technologies as believers I am encouraged to see teaching and worship go out, but I am warned that we need to embrace technology only as far as it builds up the New Covenant people of God and need to quick to reject those technologies that tear it down.

Posted in Media Stuff | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

What is the New Apostolic Reformation?

Posted on August 25, 2011 by Jono Hall

The media has recently been writing about a movement in our nation called the New Apostolic Reformation or NAR for short. It was the leaders of this movement that were supposed to have organized Gov. Perry’s recent prayer rally. According to a recent NPR program it is a religio-political organization with Tea Party politics and an alarming view of the End of Times which is contrary to mainstream Christianity in this view believers are raptured before a great trouble coming to earth. It has a clear agenda to “re-organize” Protestantism along the lines of its ideology under the leadership of its own apostles. It has a strange view of spiritual warfare believing that it can “control” countries and cities by doing battle with demons. But more than spiritual warfare it is intolerant of toleration and has a militant call for martyrs in the “war against homosexuality and Islam”. This is quite a movement indeed, especially as it is linked with the likes of Sarah Palin and Gov. Rick Perry. I was amazed as I had never heard of this movement, it sounded an exceedingly scary conspiracy was afoot to “take dominion” of government institutions. But who does it assert are the “leaders” of this movement? Its lead architect is supposedly Peter Wagner and its apostles are supposed to be Mike Bickle and Lou Engle. With members including people like Cindy Jacobs, Bill Johnson, Word of Faith teachers and the Global Day of Prayer. This is remarkable. I am in the leadership team at the International House of Prayer, how come I have never heard of this organization? And how come much of the ideology that is reported to be from this movement is diametrically opposed to what is taught at IHOP. How can I reconcile this?  I guess I’m supposed to be an insider so let’s examine. (although please note I am expressing my own opinion and not giving an official statement from IHOP or the NAR)

What is a movement or organization? Well we think of a “movement” when we refer to things like the “Civil Rights Movement”, the way Websters defines it is “a series of organized activities working toward an objective or an organized effort to promote or attain an end”. In any typical organization or movement there is an organizing philosophy/theology that everyone can get behind, a movement typically has some kind of organized leadership that are moving these goals forward, there is also some kind of common identity that all of the adherents can agree upon and therefore label themselves to some extent with the name of the movement. Do these things define the NAR?

I thought I would start by looking up Peter Wagner as he is supposed to be the lead architect of this movement, I have never read any of Peter Wagner’s works, so I am not really familiar with his belief system (Which is kind of strange if he is a main architect and I am supposed to be in a movement which he has architected). I see on Amazon he has written a book in 1998 called “The New Apostolic Churches” – aha I guess in these books he will define which churches are included in this movement? You would think? A year later he wrote a book about “How the New Apostolic Reformation was shaking the Church”. I guess I hit the jackpot finding these books, I have not read these books yet, but a cursory look at them on Amazon I see that Peter expands the circle of those involved in this movement. I see that Bill Hybels of Willowcreek is involved, I see that Joel Osteen of Lakewood is involved, I see that Rick Warren of Saddleback is involved, I see that the Vineyard movement is involved. Wow – this is a vast conspiracy indeed, some of the leaders of the largest churches in the nation are involved in it.

Now I have a fuller grasp of what the Program on NPR was talking about I can examine it a little more. Is there a unifying philosophy or theology behind this disparate group of church leaders? From a Seeker Sensitive, Cessationist church in Chicago to “Crazy” Charismatics, to the 300 million who gather on the Global Day of Prayer from churches of all shades, I would say categorically no. I would challenge the reporters to hear all these groups and decide if they have the same philosophy and beliefs and find they do not. There is however one unifying factor that I think most would agree on, they are all part of the Body of Christ, the Church, and I would say that all would agree that we need to become Disciples of Jesus. We would unite and pray around this point but on others would not probably agree.

Let’s take an example of this. In the NPR article Mike Bickle is supposed to preach a controversial view of the end times called the “Pre-Tribulation Rapture”. Let me say this is not a controversial view in North America. Ask the 60 million who bought the “Left Behind” series of books. Ask the many ministers who are graduates of Dallas Theological Seminary or the majority of Pentecostals in North America, who hold a dispensational view. There are many who hold this view including many who would be lumped under the NAR banner like John Hagee. This is a mainstream view, however the more interesting point is that Mike actually calls this view a “major deception”, it is a view that has only been embraced by the church since the middle of the 19th Century. The eschatological view preached at IHOP is actually Classical or Historical Premillennialism. So we find in the area of eschatology there is pretty significant disagreement between the parties. I think all parties would agree that they think Jesus will return to earth like he promises in the Bible, but here again I cannot be sure what other people believe.

What about the view on Apostles? Again I am not sure what Peter Wagner says, I know in some churches, especially the Black Church they call their leaders “Apostles” I know in IHOP we have no one called an apostle. I don’t even call Mike Bickle Pastor – a simple “Mike” suffices. What about Dominionism? Well I have written about this in a previous blog.

 What about politics? I was involved in the Prayer Rally. I am also about to become an American Citizen where I can vote. I have strong views on the corruption of Corporate America especially as it relates to the pharmaceutical lobby, the petroleum lobby, the technology lobby and the lack of social mobility in the US is not a good thing, my experience of US healthcare has also not been incredibly favorable. I am pro-life and believe that abortion is killing a person. I believe in biblical standards of sexuality and marriage. So would I be defined as a “Tea-Party” advocate. If so it is a very uncomfortable fit. I know the political views of IHOPPERS besides being pro-life are wide and varied. If they are wide here, what are they amongst the whole NAR?

What about spiritual warfare? It is just that “Spiritual” we do spiritual warfare primarily through prayer and walking as disciples of Jesus, not in some kind of militant social action.

So in conclusion, I still do not know what Peter Wagner believes, I have never met him, heard him speak, or read his books, and I am convinced this would be true for most of those who have been lumped in the group the NAR. I consider Peter a brother in Christ, and if I am confronted with the fact that he is speaking heretically I am charged to go to him and present his sin (Matt 18). However I have a feeling Peter is probably as bemused by this news coverage as the rest of us. For I still do not know what the NAR is, I have a feeling that the NAR is a convenient cover for the news media and those that have a beef with the church to express their own intolerant views of how views found in the Bible and expressed by most churches in the US are somehow “cultic” and “dangerous”. If there is a movement that the media is hitting it should be described for what it is “Christianity” or at least mainstream Evangelical/Catholic Christianity.

Posted in In the News | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 9 Comments

NPR, IHOP, NAR and those Seven Mountains.

Posted on August 24, 2011 by Jono Hall

This afternoon NPR’s Fresh Air devoted their program to investigating a new religious movement in the USA called the New Apostolic Reformation or NAR for short. It was portrayed as a deviant form of Evangelical Christianity, it was actually called a “religio-political” group, which actively promoted “Tea-Party” politics among its many members. It was an interesting and “frightening” conspiracy theory and the most surprising of all was that IHOP and Mike Bickle were supposed to be some of the main members. Now it’s one thing to have IHOP misconstrued and misquoted, it’s quite another to be told by a national radio station that you are part of a political movement which you didn’t even realise existed. I for one had never heard of the NAR until the news media started reporting on it recently, which is remarkable. I had many thoughts and emotions about the program, but wanted to highlight one aspect, simply because I have been teaching our students at the media school about it: Seven Mountain Theology.

What are those seven mountains all about? Well here’s the story of how the idea was developed.  In 1975, Bill Bright, founder of Campus Crusade for Christ and Loren Cunningham, founder of Youth With a Mission were meeting together in Colorado. Unbeknownst to each man, God had given each one the same message  simultaneously in times of prayer regarding seven spheres of society that molded and shaped the way that society thinks about and approaches life. During that same time frame Francis Schaeffer was also given a similar message. That message was that if we are to impact any nation for Jesus Christ and therefore make disciples of Jesus (ie the fulfillment of the Great Commission), then we would have to affect the seven spheres, or mountains of society that are the pillars of any society. These seven mountains or spheres are: Arts and Entertainment, Business, Education, Family, Government, Media and Religion.

I have actually not heard much direct teaching on the subject of the seven mountains (which I realise is out there) but I felt it was important to talk to our media students about it.  I think there is definite truth in the assumption that these seven areas do affect society in profound ways, but I also know that there are right and wrong ways in how we apply this thought. What I mean is this, one of the greatest challenges that Jesus’ first disciples had was deciding who amongst them was the greatest (think Mattew 18, Mark 9 and Luke 9). Within us all is an innate desire for greatness and yet Jesus showed them that the road to greatness did not lie in political networking, debate and climbing the greasy pole of ambition, rather it came by pursuing the risky road of sacrifice, humble serving and radical love. Jesus original disciples had challenges with wrongly applying their desire for greatness and his disciples ever since have had the same challenges.

In the sphere of arts and entertainment I have met many believers who did not say it explicitly, but their actions betrayed they really wanted to be FAMOUS for Jesus. If they had a big platform they could REALLY affect the world for Jesus and therefore they were willing to do many things to get more influence over this sphere. Unfortunately, in climbing the mountain of Arts and Entertainment they compromised with the belief that the ends justify the means. By the time they got to the top their witness of Jesus was to say the least not a good testimony.

In the sphere of Government there is an ugly word that the news media throw around called Dominionism, essentially this is a belief that Christians should and will take over all the organs of government and the world will become a better place as we “take our country” for Jesus. From the time of the first ugly Christian Government under the “Christian” Emperor Constantine, right throughout history the desire for power, because “we are righteous” and our opponents are not has been frought with disaster and bloodshed.

In the sphere of Business, I have come across many business men who want to be rich for Jesus, they want wealth so they can give. I struggle with this approach knowing Paul’s unequivocal statement to Timothy that “those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.”

Am I against Christians being famous? No. We certainly need Christian artists, actors and producers who can be “salt and light” amongst their unbelieving colleagues and see the Kingdom of God expanded through salvation and healing and by being a faithful servant in their work whatever that may be and work at it as unto Christ.

Am I against Christians being in Government and Politics, absolutely not, now more than any time we need righteous men and women who will serve our governments. I think of someone like William Wilberforce, who I believe was raised up by God to enact the righteous legislation that he did. But his story was not a one of climbing the greasy pole of power  by compromise.

Am I against Christians being wealthy? No, not at all I believe God gives wealth (although am not a proponent of the so called Health and Wealth gospel) and wealth has always been used to further the Kingdom of God from the very earliest days until now, it is the desire for riches that is harmful.

So I believe that we need believers in all sphere’s of society, because I believe Jesus wants disciples in all spheres of society, but there are dangers in approaching this wrongly and sadly I think that the news media has picked up a wrong application of this theology

Posted in Church History, In the News, Media Stuff | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments