God of the New Testament: Bridegroom, King and… Judge?

Have you ever been in conversation with an unbelieving acquaintance who brings up the fact that they could never believe in a “nationalistic, genocidal God!” They then bring up a verse from the Bible such as I Samuel 15:3 which says

Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ “

 “Did God really say this?” they ask with incredulity. Many a new Christian faced with such a question flounders around a little. Although a little unfamiliar with the “Old” Testament, they were aware that troubling verses like this existed. They are however much more familiar with the “New” Testament and therefore the “New” revelation that God is no longer a homicidal killer of women and children but now instead is kind and merciful and a father to all who come. God, they now tell their unbelieving friend has changed his nature in the New Testament; God no longer reveals himself as the God of the nation of Israel – that was in the Old Testament, since the cross he is now the God of the Church, the gathering of all believers Jew and Gentile alike. Christians serve the God of the New Testament. In this way troubling verses such as I Sam 15:3 are brushed under the theological carpet. However I am troubled by this answer for I believe in a God who is the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews 13:8), so the belief in a “God of the Old Testament” as different from how God is revealed in the New Testament, (a belief which is growing in its popularity) needs to be examined to see if it rings true.

 Firstly, let’s examine the very phrase Old and New Testament. The way we understand this distinction today is to say everything from Genesis through to Malachi in our Bibles is “Old” Testament and therefore the “Old” way of God revealing himself and everything from Matthew through to Revelation is “New” Testament and therefore the “New” way of God revealing himself. However it was not always this way; this was not an understanding of the early church. When Paul wrote a letter to his protégée Timothy telling him “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,” (2 Tim 3:16), there was no New Testament canon in existence and therefore the scripture he was primarily referring to was the Hebrew Scriptures – the Law, the Prophets and the Writings. Even more so, when a disguised Jesus revealed himself to a couple of disciples on the road to Emmaus, chastising them saying

 “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory? And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself. (Luke 24:25-27)

 The scripture that Jesus used and therefore the revelation of God that he was referring to was all found in what we would today call the “Old” Testament. There is no indication in the text that Jesus was waiting for the New Testament to be written so he could present a greater revelation. There is not a small amount of confusion around the very term Old Testament, therefore for the rest of this article to avoid confusion I will, as much as possible, refer to the popular understanding of “Old Testament” meaning Genesis through Malachi as the Hebrew Scriptures (also called the Tanakh).

 God’s Last Will and Testament – To answer the question of how we received our current understanding of the Old Testament and New Testament it is prudent to examine the very word “Testament”. The Greek word for testament is διαθήκη (diathēkē); it is a type of contract often called a covenant, indeed the word testament and covenant are interchangeable in Greek. In modern usage we talk of a “last will and testament” when a person dies. Prior to their death the individual has decided what their last act in disposing of all their property will be. Then when they die, the testament is read out and those who have been named in the will become heirs to the inheritance that has been left. This modern understanding of a last will and testament is helpful in understanding covenants in the Bible.

 The covenants of the Bible are not typical contracts with parties of equal power. When God makes a covenant he has the ultimate “bargaining position” (let the reader understand there is no bargaining!). However he did make covenants which were either conditional or unconditional. Of all the covenants that are mentioned in the Hebrew scriptures, many are in fact unconditional; the Noahic, the Abrahamic, the Davidic and the New Covenant mentioned in Jeremiah 31 are all examples of unconditional covenants, this means that their fulfillment rests on the faithfulness of God alone and not on the obedience of the recipients. All of these covenants have not yet been fully fulfilled and therefore still apply today. There is however one main covenant that God made with Israel at Sinai that was conditional. This is commonly known as the Mosaic Covenant. The terms of the Mosaic covenant were dependent upon the obedience of the recipients. This is the only covenant mentioned in the Hebrew scripture that is referred to by New Testament writers as “Old Covenant” (2 Cor 3:14 – in actual fact this is the only reference in the entire Bible to the expression Old Covenant/Testament) or for that matter as a covenant that was “obsolete” (Hebrews 8:13). I am eternally grateful for the final sacrifice of the son of God that has made a way into the presence of God and that the Old Covenant has been done away with by a better Covenant, so that we no longer have to rely upon the sacrifice of bulls and goats. However, the apostles and the early church did not understand the Old Covenant to be Genesis through Malachi and everything therein contained, nor for that matter was it understood that the New Covenant is everything from Matthew through Revelation, rather the old covenant is the covenant that God made with Israel in Sinai, and the new covenant was that which was promised in Jeremiah and inaugurated at Calvary.

 Bishop Melito – The first person to coin the phrase Old Testament with the current popular understanding was a second century apologist called Melito of Sardis (d 180). He actually is attributed with compiling one of the earliest canons of the “New Testament” so I am sure there is much we have to be thankful to Melito for, but in naming the Old Testament I feel he has done the church a great disservice, for in so doing he has linked the Mosaic Covenant to every revelation of God before the coming of Jesus. I am positive the writer of Hebrews and for that matter every New Testament writer would not have swept the Old Testament away as obsolete and not applicable. How can I be so sure? Well we have testimony from history of how the church of the early centuries dealt with such a view.

 Marcion’s Story – Marcion (85-160) was son of the wealthy Bishop of Sinope in Pontus, Asia Minor (modern day Turkey). He was young, gifted and rich and as such travelled to Rome (the capital of the world and the most influential church of the day) in 140AD. Here, he was quickly accepted by the church when he donated a large amount of money. However Marcion was troubled by portions of the scriptures which presented YHWH as the God of the Hebrews and a seemingly bloodthirsty killer – scriptures such as 1 Samuel 15:3 (although please remember chapters and verses were not added to our Bibles until the 12th and the 16th centuries respectively). Marcion could not reconcile YHWH with Jesus and the “Heavenly Father” he read about in some of the writings of the apostles. He therefore wrote a book entitled Antithesis contrasting YHWH, the God of the Hebrew Scriptures with Jesus and the Heavenly Father.  Not only this, but he compiled one of the first canons of scripture, excising the Hebrew Scriptures as he believed YHWH was an arbitrary, vindictive and vacillating God instead he picked certain Pauline literature which didn’t contradict his own views of the Heavenly Father. When the early church fathers learned of Marcion’s teachings they quickly returned his money and in 144AD he was excommunicated from the church in Rome. Marcion left Rome, but his message was popular and compelling and he planted his own congregations which perpetuated his teachings for a number of centuries. All of the early Church fathers denounced him, John’s disciple, Polycarp the aged bishop of Smyrna, is reported by Iraneaus as denouncing him as “the firstborn of Satan” quite a harsh judgment from one of the most respected Church leaders for someone who could not reconcile the different natures of God!

 Although Marcion was quite extreme in his beliefs, the phrase “the God of the Old Testament” is a phrase that is growing in its popularity in church circles today, a revived form of Marcionism has infected our belief structure. No revelation of God from Genesis through to Malachi can seemingly be trusted. Everything changed at the cross we are told, God is now different. Some may soften this and say God hasn’t changed, but the way that he communicates now has changed, ultimately however the result is the same; the God of the “Old Testament” is not the God whom we serve. The early church saw this as a dangerous heresy and therefore we must  take note if this unorthodox belief slips into our midst.

 But why is this belief so dangerous? Isn’t it true, are we not in an age of grace? Doesn’t Jesus’ peaceful teaching negate such a harsh view of God presented in the Old Testament? The reason separating the God of the Hebrew scriptures from New Testament writing is so dangerous as it strikes at the very core of our belief in who God is. The knowledge of God is the fundamental area of spiritual warfare and if the evil one can deceive us as to God’s nature we will believe lies instead of truth, we will be serving a God of our own conception rather than the God of the Bible, we will pray without truth and ultimately we will not recognize the true God and therefore be offended with his actions.

Do proponents of the “Old Testament God” believe that God has changed his nature completely, since the cross? Well actually, no, there are key parts of his nature that are unchanging. What about the merciful God of the Old Testament? When God was grieved that he had made man he communicated this to one of his friends, Enoch who walked with him. Enoch saw judgment was coming to earth and therefore named his son “When he dies it will happen” meaning when his son died judgment would come to earth, yet he gave humanity almost another thousand years for Enoch’s son was Methusaleh – the oldest man in the Bible. The year he died God revealed judgment in the flood, but Methusaleh’s age is such a picture of the longsuffering God, who longs to save. What about His mercy for Israel and the leaders of Israel? Again and again providing a deliverer to bring the people back to God, again and again raising up a prophet, or providing another means of deliverance and healing such as the bronze snake in the desert (Numbers 21) so that all who were bitten could look to it and be healed. What about Amos’s word that The Sovereign LORD does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets.” What about the revelation of God’s love that Hosea displayed to Gomer demonstrating the love of YHWH towards Israel. Again and again throughout the Old Testament we see pictures of YHWH as a jealous lover and a husband to his people. Do proponents of an “Old Testament God” say that God no longer reveals himself as tender Bridegroom to his people, one of the principle faces of God in the Hebrew Scriptures… well actually, no, nothing has changed here from Old to New Testament.

What about the picture of God that we have throughout the Hebrew Scriptures as a triumphant King who rules from heaven and who wants to extend his rule and dominion amongst man, do the proponents of the “God of the Old Testament” say that this face of God no longer is relevant after the cross? Well actually, no. Jesus is the King, he rules from heaven and he is extending his dominion on earth even as we speak. The Good News is the Gospel of the Kingdom. All of Jesus teaching was about the coming Kingdom. We too can be a part of this kingdom.

So there are no problems with the face of God as a loving Bridegroom or as a triumphant King, but what about as a Holy Judge? This is where proponents of the God of the Old Testament seem to have the problem. Yes God judged the earth through the flood, yes God instructed Israel to wipe out certain nations, yes God himself repeatedly killed thousands of the chosen people himself, but God is no longer like that. So at last we have located where the rub lies, it is not really a question of Old or New at all, rather it is a problem with the face of God as a judge, or let me rephrase this in New Testament language, the face of Jesus as judge. Judgment we are told finished at the cross and we now live in an age of grace. However when I read the New Testament I have huge problems if I hold this view, for now I cannot reconcile many, many verses.

Firstly the Christian idea of hell doesn’t come primarily from the Hebrew Scriptures, in the two thousand years between Abraham and Jesus, the idea of Sheol was at best a shadowy grave concept after death. Jesus gives us much more clarity of this place of eternal conscious torment outside of the presence of God, it is surely a scary place to think about, and admittedly there are complexities when dissecting the differences between Hades, the Lake of Fire and Tartarus, but the bottom line is there is eternal torment for those who do not make every effort to enter by the narrow gate. Even those who had some anointing and seeming gifts of the Holy Spirit will be cast out of the presence of God.

 21“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ (Matt 7:21-23)

 This certainly does not sit comfortably with our conception of a Jesus who will have grace forever, no matter what pet sins we indulge in as a practice. Yet this is not the only verse which displays Jesus the judge. When the cities of northern Galilee failed to respond to the miraculous ministry performed in their midst, the longsuffering Jesus displays the face of the judge

 20Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. 21“Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. 23And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. 24But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.” (Matt 11:20-24)

 Ultimately the point of these verses is to state unequivocally that there is only one way to the Father through Jesus and that is on our knees in repentance. Again and again Jesus is unflinching as he displays zero tolerance towards sin. It is not that he will not forgive, it is that he will only forgive repentant hearts.

 2Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.” (Luke 13:2-5)

 Many proponents of the “God of the Old Testament” however would not have a problem with these verses, eternal judgment must be taken out of the equation and ultimately that is what these verses are talking about. The thing that is done away with in the New Testament at the cross are temporal judgments, nowhere are Peter, James and John told to go to Sepphoris or Caesarea Phillipi and kill a few of the Romans because of their godlessness and immorality. Weren’t temporal judgments done away with after the cross? As the judgment fell on Jesus on the cross for all of humanity’s sin, surely there was no judgment afterwards. Again the New Testament unequivocally answers this question in a number of situations. Firstly Jesus pronounces judgment on Jerusalem because she failed to recognize him as the Messiah and son of God. This prophecy was ultimately fulfilled in the terrifying actions of the fall of Jerusalem and razing of the Temple in 70AD.

 41As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.” (Luke 19:41-44)

 It is hard to maintain after reading this verse and then the catastrophic events of 70AD in which Josephus records that 1,100,000 people were killed that this was not a judgment of God after the cross. It is interesting to note that 70AD is seen by many as the split between Messianic Judaism and Rabbinic Judaism; because the Church in Jerusalem believed Jesus’ words of judgment, the entire congregation in Jerusalem fled to Pella in the Trans-Jordan and as a result it is recorded that not one believer was killed when Titus ransacked and destroyed the Temple. However there also appears to be a fair amount of judgment in the church as well after all as Peter informs us judgment begins with the house of God (1 Peter 4:17). Soon after the day of Pentecost we find a man and his wife (Ananias and Sapphira) die as a result of lying about the size of their offering to the church (Acts 5), clear judgment. A number of years later in the city of Thyatira, in a prophecy Jesus says he will cast a female member of the church “on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways” (Rev 2:22)

 Some may contend all of these issues are just sowing and reaping, if a man sows sin he will reap death, it is nothing to do with judgment. I would answer that actually sowing and reaping is the very process by which God judges. God is not arbitrary and acts outside of his word, rather he is faithful to his word[1]. I would contend that every destructive judgment[2] of God found in scripture in relation to man is in response to man’s response to God’s word

 But why is all of this so important? Is it important that we recognize that God is still a judge today? The reason I feel it is important that the church is familiar with this face of God is because there is a day of judgment coming to the earth, known as the tribulation when unprecedented temporal judgments from God will be released. To give some shocking examples, when Jesus releases the fourth seal (Rev 6:8) we are told “Death, and Hades” are “given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth.” Then a little while later when the sixth trumpet is blown (another judgment) we are told

“A third of mankind was killed by the three plagues of fire, smoke and sulfur that came out of their mouths” . (Rev 9:18). These statistics are shocking and terrifying, yet they are in the Bible and they will happen, and not only will that, but they will be released by Jesus. If we as a church refuse to embrace the whole counsel of God and just choose the faces that seem pleasing to us, what will happen when events such as these begin to be released upon the earth by God?  What will happen if we have not embraced the God who is the judge of all men is that we will refuse to believe such judgments come from God (as that will not fit our mindset of who God is and how he acts) we will become offended at God and ultimately adversarial towards His purposes upon the earth – now that is a terrifying prospect! This is true, however not only for the final 3 ½ years of this age, but even in these last days as we begin to experience the birth pangs released by God if we do not accept the face of the Judge we will be offended.

Let me however add a word of warning to those who overemphasize the face of the Judge. Embracing the face of God as Judge can have negative implications if we do not hold it in tension with the other faces and emotions as God as Bridegroom and King. If we do not we will have a fatalistic view of the Sovereignty of God. If we do not we will start accepting injustice, sickness, bondage and death and stop reaching to see the kingdom of light destroy the kingdom of darkness, we will stop contending for a full release of the Holy Spirit’s power in our midst, and God forbid that we should be content for a form of Godliness while denying its power.

Let me close by stating boldly YHWH (which roughly translated can mean “Always”) is the same yesterday, today and forever. Although I have contended that the very phrase “Old Testament” is misplaced I still believe fervently the God of the Old Testament is the same and reveals himself in the same ways as he does in the New Testament. YHWH is Bridegroom, King and Judge in both the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament writings and has unbelievable emotions of love towards his people so much so that he will go to great measures to remove everything that stands in the way of creating a people who will love Him with their whole heart. His emotions are the same, his nature is the same and although the story may progress until the final consummation at the marriage supper of the Lamb, I will press on to embrace every face of God.


[1] This is the very context of 2 Tim 2:13 – “if we are faithless,  he will remain faithful, for he cannot disown himself”- The faithfulness of God is not toward the faithless as some contend, it is to the word of God.

[2] Although not the remit of this paper it should be noted that not every “judgment of God” is negative and destructive in nature. There are also positive judgments of which the proponents of the Old Testament God would not find issue with.

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

The Biggest Controversy of Our Age – God’s Nature

Although there is nothing new under the sun, it appears that now more than any other time in history, people have problems with the righteous standards of God and the wrath of God. What I mean by this is the concept of a “God of Love” showing wrath and killing unrepentant sinners? This is exhibited by the modern revival of Marcionism, a second century heresy which essentially splits the God of the Old Testament from the God of the New Testament, they are in effect two different people. God’s nature changed in the New Testament. This problem with the wrath of God is also seen in the raging debate over the nature of hell and eternal punishment. Surely we must dispense with such medieval notions? This problem also finally exhibits itself in a denial of the propitiatory nature of the Cross. How could the wrath of God fall on gentle Jesus, meek and mild. One “Christian” writer has called this view of the cross as “Cosmic Child Abuse”.

The reason God punishes is precisely because he is a God of Love, his Love and his Justice are two sides of the same coin. In his love and in his justice he sets the wrong things right. If I stood idly by a playground and let a pedophile attack my children your view of the love I hold for my children would probably not be very high. It is amazing the outbursts of joy that greet the death of a murderer (think Hitler, Osama Bin Laden) with exclamations that they should “rot in hell”. And yet in all reality these men were simply weak and broken people albeit probably demonically inspired, but no worse than many in the world today, just as in need of a Saviour as any one else. But who determines who is deserving or undeserving of punishment in such cases – the news media? Or is there a higher standard of righteousness. The Bible talks about “the Wicked” over 200 times. Do we think about righteousness and wickedness as God thinks about it? Do we have God’s Law written on our hearts to discern wickedness from righteousness? God’s law and justice is perfect in every way and the wrath he pours out is also perfect in every way. Which is why when Jesus absorbed the sins of the world. He became a “Propitiation” for our sins if we should repent and believe in him for life. He absorbed the wrath of God for us. His death was therefore a substitionary, vicarious death for you and me. This was the plan of God, prophesied ahead of time. Jesus was the only man in all of history who chose to be born also chose to humble himself to die upon a cross. Without the choice of Triune God there would have been no redemption. Without the propitiation of Jesus we would have to bear the wrath of God eternally but Praise God we have a way of escape. The wrath of God is and will be continue to be the biggest controversy of the age, let us repent, align ourselves with God and accept the new life found in him.

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

Was John the Baptist really prophetic?

Have you ever wondered why Jesus when comparing John the Baptist to the other prophets said: Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist.” (Matthew 11:11). How was John the Baptist prophetic? He did not provide the pages of scripture with much predictive material like Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. John did however call Israel back to YHWH and multitudes came to him to repent and be baptized. But perhaps his biggest prophetic role was to recognize and prepare Israel for both the presence and the mission of the Son of God. Jesus wept over the leadership of Jerusalem at the end of his ministry.  They had heard his message and seen the signs and wonders yet had not recognized the “time of visitation” (Luke 19:44). Yet even before Jesus began his public ministry John was boldly declaring his first cousin as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!”(John 1:29). In this prophetic declaration, John was the first to recognize Jesus mission to act as the Lamb of God to die as a sacrifice to solve the perennial problem of sin. And not only to take away the sin of Israel, but to take on the original global mandate that the world could come into relationship with its maker. Surely this was the most specific and most glorious of prophecies ever to grace the lips of a created man. He recognized the time of visitation and prepared Israel for someone whom ultimately they would largely reject. May we have a similar spirit of revelation to recognize the times we live in.

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

Webstreaming: Our Story

This last weekend I traveled down to Houston to help webstream a stadium prayer meeting. I was thinking back to my history in webstreaming, it seems improbable to me when I have never considered myself a natural techie that I have been involved with this techie thing for over 10 years. Starting with GOD TV about 10 years ago, I managed their distribution and we started to stream the channel. Then when I moved to IHOP in 2003, the first thing we did was set up cameras in the prayer room and streamed. I remember sending a 1000kbps stream to a House of Prayer in California starting on Nov 1 2003. This was a big undertaking. I had a dream of getting an army of volunteers to man the cameras (keeping in mind the media dept at the time was me and one other guy). I remember an initial reluctance from Mike, after all back then the musical competence of our singers and musicians wasn’t perhaps what it is today (I’ll leave it at that :)). Then when my dream of getting volunteers didn’t work out getting what everybody affectionately knew as “cyclops”.

A big move forward was our new venture with GOD TV in 2007, when we did get the manned cameras. The big challenge was we had a preemie baby at the same time as we were launching it. We’ve been streaming full TV quality now for over 4 years. And now the stream goes out not only to computers, but to new fangled mobile devices (Since we launched the iPhone App we’ve had over 65,000 individual users download it). On a monthly basis we are streaming about 1 million hours of video to about 150,000 unique IPs and that is a lot of bandwidth (about 400 TB per month for techies). And we haven’t stopped yet, we have a new player coming next week. The Android App is “oh so nearly” ready to launch, so watch this space.

But the thing that is even more encouraging than the new technology are the stories of encouragement that are sent in. From people who are simply curious about IHOP, but would never come to an event to people in closed countries who can now join the prayer meeting in Kansas City, to start up houses of prayer who don’t have enough musicians, but can rely on the stream. If you’re reading this and you have a story I’d love to hear it, it is always an encouragement to our team here in KC. I’d also love to hear if you would like to join the team here in KC or if you would like our help in streaming we’re usually ready to offer advice or support.

Thanks Jono

Posted in Media Stuff | Tagged , , , , , | 4 Comments

Know Your Message, Know Your Media

I have encountered many believers through the years who were “Christian” media fanatics. One of the main reasons for their enthusiasm was because they recognized the mainstream media’s power to change cultural values negatively through the sweet pill of TV and movies. Although completely valid, when such people are pressed about their vision for media I find their motivation is a determination to wrest technology and entertainment out of the hands of unbelievers, rather than passion for what the content of their media actually is.

On a basic level media is simply a conduit for a message and therefore technicians should work to make that conduit the best it can be, but the real challenge that I charge all of our Media Students at IHOPU with is what is the content of their message and whether they are consumed with passion for it. John Wesley, the founder of Methodism encouraged believers to “Catch on fire… and people will come for miles to watch you burn”. The first challenge of anyone called into media is to burn with passion for the Son of God, make his desires your own, then take this message and communicate.  I believe this is the only foundation from which anything can be built (1 Cor 3:12) especially anything to do with media.

In addition to burning with a message however it is important to realize that the medium that we communicate in can so change the message that it actually becomes the message itself. In the 1960s Marshall McLuhan coined the expression “the medium is the message”; there is undoubted truth to this. I think of something as bizarre as communicating the gospel through a television game show, the format in this instance communicates as much as the message itself.  This is not to decry any form of media, but to encourage communicators to become skilled at their art, by thinking about the medium of the message as a part of the message itself.

We live in a generation like no other. The Great Commission was given by Jesus around 2000 years ago, yet the methods through which the Gospel has been proclaimed and the nations discipled has not changed much in that time…well at least for the first 1900 years. The printing press in the 15th century was undoubtedly a big step, but the development of film, radio, TV, P.A. systems and the personal computer in the 20th century was a huge leap. And the pace of technological developments in the 21st century is nothing short of staggering.  The lightning pace of mobile technologies, online video and social media can leave one dizzied. Yet society as a whole is embracing these new methods and just as it was important for the New Testament to be written in Koine Greek, so it is important that we have messengers who are conversant in many of today’s new “media languages”. Using tools such as Twitter or Facebook may seem like a new language to some, but it can be a very effective way to drip feed discipleship to those who would never listen to sermon straight off; after all isn’t much of Jesus teaching contained in pithy sayings and parables.

One instance of our taking this to heart is the live streaming of the 24/7 prayer room which is broadcast to TVs, computers and mobile devices throughout the nations. Not only is it a tool for individuals and houses of prayer to be equipped in prayer. It is also a message itself to give courage to others that a lifestyle of prayer is both possible and necessary for normative Christianity.

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

Thoughts on The Response

This last Saturday I travelled down to help webstream a prayer meeting from Houston. It was no ordinary prayer meeting. Firstly it was in Reliant Stadium with 44,000 other predominantly Texans and secondly it was called by the Governor of Texas – Rick Perry. I have a number of thoughts about the event that I wanted to share.

The Politician

A number of IHOP-KC Staff had got involved in organizing this prayer meeting a number of months back, realizing it was rather unusual (at least in recent history) for a politician to call a day of prayer and fasting. However the ante on this event was certainly upped by the news media when it was revealed that Gov Perry had aspirations of becoming the GOP candidate for the President of the USA. Many thought he would use this platform to reveal or hint at his intentions. I was not among those who believed this, to have done so at a prayer meeting would have been completely inappropriate. I was actually very impressed with what I saw and heard about this Governor. Taking the stage he immediately dispelled the idea that this would be the platform to announce his candidacy by focusing on God “His agenda is not a political agenda. His agenda is a salvation agenda… he followed this with “He is a wise, wise God. And He is wise enough to not be affiliated with any political party.” I have to say I am uncomfortable being in a country where being a Christian is synonymous with being Republican (I really wish polemical issues such as Abortion and Sexual Morality were individual decisions and not based on party politics), but I have to say that I think these comments were very appropriate and classy.

The Prayer Meeting

The Prayer meeting itself was both familiar and unfamiliar, lots of IHOP Worship Bands, but a wide array of preachers who prayed from the Word and Faith/Pentecostal Kenneth Copeland and John Hagee to the more evangelical James Dobson and Vonette Bright to the Charismatics such Cindy Jacobs and Lou Engle (not all of these took the platform). It actually felt good that different shades of theological views were putting this aside to pray for the nation. I think everyone felt the presence of God in someway and people actually prayed rather than preached, for this I was glad. Many said it was one of the most powerful meetings they had been a part of.

The Press and Protestors

With over 300 press passes given out, there was going to be risk that this would become a media zoo. It did not. In fact the coverage that the majority of the press gave the event was remarkably favorable. As favorable as could be expected from people who do not believe in God or the power of prayer (this is obviously a blanket statement that undoubtedly does not apply to many of the journalists present). The other element which could have disrupted the day was the protestors; one facebook page said that we could expect close to 1500 protestors. I think perhaps we got a tenth of that number, (I was actually just a little disappointed J) The protestors even included the infamous Westboro Baptist Church. I’m not quite sure why they were protesting as by the time I got to their website they had taken down their rationale. But with these protestors and the commensurate security and police it certainly made it an interesting day.

As for my own part – we streamed the event and it went off fairly uneventfully. For nearly the entire day we had over 20,000 concurrent connected IPs, which is pretty remarkable for as long an event. The online audience with remote sites must have surely reached into the 100s of thousands, we should have clearer analytics this week. But the reports we are getting back from those who streamed are overwhelmingly positive. Praise God.

Posted in In the News, Personal Updates | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

Hall Baby#3 is on the way

First came Josiah in 2007

Then came Finn in 2010

Coming Next Year the Third Installment of this great Family

Hitting a Hospital in Kansas City next February

Posted in Personal Updates | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Did Jesus Understand Himself as God?

Western orthodoxy, not least within what calls itself “evangelicalism,” has had for too long an overly lofty and detached view of God. It has always tended to approach the christological question by assuming this view of God and then by fitting Jesus into it. Hardly surprisingly, the result has been a docetic Jesus. This in turn generated the protest of the eighteenth century (‘Jesus can’t have been like that, therefore the whole thing is based on a mistake’) and of much subsequent historical scholarship, not least because of the social and cultural arrangements that the combination of semi-Deism and docetism generated and sustained. That combination remains powerful, not least in parts of my own church, and it still needs a powerful challenge. My proposal is not that we know what the word god means and manage somehow to fit Jesus into that. Instead, I suggest that we think historically about a young Jew possessed of a desperately risky, indeed apparently crazy, vocation, riding into Jerusalem in tears, denouncing the Temple and dying on a Roman cross – and that we somehow allow our meaning for the word god to be recentered around that point. (NT Wright – The Challenge of Jesus)

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

Harold Camping, the End of the World and whether Bad Theology is Always Wrong?

It was May 20th and I was with some men who have been very formative in my own Christian development. I made a flippant remark about it being the end of the world tomorrow (due to the false prediction of Family Radio’s Harold Camping that Jesus would return on May 21st). One of the guys I was with said he saw the hand of Satan in this sideshow which essentially made Christian belief a laughingstock. The other guy I was with said he thought it could be helpful as at least it made the world think about the End Times. All three of us knew that Jesus would not return on May 21st due to the clear teaching of scripture. All three of us were also convinced that Jesus could not return “at any moment” without warning due to Jesus and Paul’s explicit teaching on the “signs” to look for, and therefore thought that the widespread dispensational view which has become popular in the US in the last 100 years (a view didn’t even exist before 1830) that there will be a secret rapture is a terribly misguided deception. However the alternate approaches to wrong theology made me stop and think – Is wrong theology always bad?

In his letter to the Philippians Paul rejoices that some are preaching the Gospel out of envy and rivalry while he is in prison. Does this mean that we should rejoice if people are getting it wrong, no matter what they are saying. I don’t think so, Paul is pretty clear what he thinks about people teaching bad theology – they are false teachers. In Philippians there is no mention of such bad theology just bad motivations so this is a little bit of a red herring – it seems like bad theology is still bad.

My Own Journey of Bad Theology

It is probably germane to this blog to reveal a little of my journey. I grew up in church, the Methodist tradition, the House church tradition (if you can use that word), the Charismatic and the Pentecostal tradition. I was not often challenged to think deeply. In fact it would not be unfair to say in some settings there was a distinctly “anti-intellectual” emphasis and flavor. I can think of numerous occasions where I was told that God was trying to bypass our minds to get to our hearts. I recall someone’s experience where Jesus told him that when he got to heaven God was not going to require of him perfect theology. Being fairly bookish and with a weakness of over analysing things I accepted these challenges as legitimate and I certainly appreciated the challenge to greater heart devotion to the Lord. Despite this however, it still bugged me that if things are wrong, they should be tested and rejected as such, if not we are in danger of succumbing to every wind of teaching and heresy. I really did want to worship God with my mind as well as my heart, my soul and my strength.

Because I grew up in a more Charismatic/Pentecostal setting, I grew increasingly aware of the “orthodox, straight laced heresy hunters” who would point out all the errors not only of the tradition I was a part but the churches which I had visited. The spirit of such guys was always mean and unhelpful. I really think if they lived 400 years ago, they would have been at the front of the line to burn the heretics. Theirs really was the gospel of being right – although not before God, but before the jury of the religious right. All these guys proved to me was that both sides were wrong. They often had a smidgeon of truth in their articles, but mainly it proved they were unloving, unfactual, unrighteous and just plain wrong. But the question remained, will we ever get our theology right and does it even matter.

Which Tradition is Right?

Because of this battle largely between the New Churches and the Reformed Churches, it seemed that many of my friends became confused. What was truth and who decides what truth is and because of such disagreements I have known several friends who have turned to older traditions. To the Eastern Orthodox Church, to the Roman Catholic and to the Anglican Church. While I truly appreciate different traditions and the good things that all traditions can bring to the Body of Christ. All traditions have the same problems; weak and broken people. The reason why many will jump ship to become Orthodox or Catholic is because of the belief in Apostolic Succession. This is a belief that Jesus commissioned His disciples, who commissioned their disciples, who commissioned their disciples in turn. This means the church of today (be it Catholic or Orthodox) can trace their authority back to Jesus and in this way they are authorized as THE true church and in this way they become the arbiter of truth. The evolution of this belief was to counter Gnosticism in the second and third centuries and it was useful then to counter the belief that Jesus had secret disciples with secret teaching. It was useful then, but even then it was at risk of abuse with certain churches falsely claiming an apostolic foundation to increase their prestige and importance. However the belief in Apostolic Succession has outlived its usefulness, it became a power play by about the fourth century and it has remained so. It is not an argument for blind faith in human traditions. All of the guys who claim Apostolic succession are as bad if not worse than the rest of us. Roman Catholics are hugely implicated in anti-Semitism throughout the centuries in addition to large scale child abuse in the last century. The Orthodox are not spotless when it comes to collusion with the Mafia, organized crime and everything that that entails. And the Anglican Church, well I had a Chaplain at College who was evangelistic in his sexual immorality, urging students that a “promiscuous stage” was perfectly normal, while he was very open about his homosexual exploits. All of this has led me to believe that while human traditions are not necessarily good they are also not necessarily bad, but when it is all said and done they can not supersede the word of God.

On the other side of the argument it is important for us to understand that our interpretations of the Bible are not the Bible itself. This should make us less forceful about proving our point, but should not lead us to give up the battle for truth. There are certain points from the scriptures that are as Mark Driscoll so nicely puts it “close handed issues” they are fundamental to our beliefs and the church believed in such things so much that we find them in very ancient creeds and statements of faith, issues such as the divinity and the incarnation of Jesus, The very real problem of sin (and how that is defined), the atoning work of Jesus etc. We must contend for these points as sound doctrine and not back down. While Jesus is not going to ask me if I had perfect theology when I meet him. I think he will have some things to say if I redefine “sin” as “not sin”. That said other theological points are a little more open handed. While I love my reformed brothers commitment to the Bible, I cannot accept their view on Predestination which creates a view of God which I find untrue to scripture. These open handed issues do not put in jeopardy the salvation of an individual.

So in conclusion, I believe bad theology is always wrong and we should strive for sound doctrine. Did Harold Camping’s bad theology matter? Well it certainly did to the duped guys who spent their life savings on advertising the end of the world, and on a wider scale it proved to a wider audience (including Christians) that those who talk about eschatology are kind of crazy. Considering that much of the bible is concerned with eschatology, this is not a little worrying. Having said this I think we must all be humble enough to accept the fact we will all have some bad theology be it in thought or in action (yes, how we act does reflect what we believe). But let us not give up the fight: there is absolute truth and that absolute truth is found in the Bible, but the Body of Christ at large needs one another to encourage us in our weaknesses, so that when it is all said and done, the body of Christ will come to maturity.

Posted in Bible Stuff, In the News | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Created in the Image of God – Continuously Outpouring

We were created continuously outpouring. Note that I did not say we were createdto becontinuous outpourers. Nor can I dare imply that we were createdto worship. This would suggest that God is an incomplete person whose need for something outside himself (worship) completes his sense of himself. It might not even be safe to say that we were createdforworship, because the inference can be drawn that worship is a capacity that can be separated out and eventually relegated to one of several categories of being. I believe it is strategically important, therefore, to say that we were created continuously outpouring—we were created in that condition, at that instant,imago Dei. We did not graduate into being in the image of God; we were, by divine fiat, already in the image of God at the instant the Spirit breathed into our dust. Hence we were created continuously outpouring. – From “Unceasing Worship” – Harold Best

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