Well, it’s the either of December and I’ve posted once so far this month. My rather frequent posting has come to a standstill, mostly because of 2 things:
1. I’m not also blogging at the CrippleGate (which is great and giving me some wide exposure, but also eats up a lot more time than I realize).
2. I’m currently moving my library into some office space and freeing up a bedroom in our basement suite so that our little ones can have a place to nap/play/whatever we decide to do with it…but once I have some office space I’ll be doing a whole lot more writing and will tackle a book project in the new year, as well as at least 1 blog series that I have in my head (and have already started a bit).
Just a little note for all my readers who have been hoping for more output from me.
In around 2 weeks, I’ll be back in full swing.
Until Next Time,
Lyndon “getting organized comes before getting productive” Unger
Breaking from my Charismatic and Christmas writing, but keeping along with the alliteration, let’s talk a little about Creationism! Not just general Creationism (which could be theistic, deistic, old earth, young earth, day-age, metaphorical, etc.), but what I’ve heard called Biblical Creationism. For the sake of clarity, Biblical Creationism is a little different than Young Earth Creationism (YEC) because, at least from my understanding, it doesn’t really make an evidentialist fight over the age of the earth but rather is more concerned with the biblical text itself and talks far less about the age of the earth than YEC. Seeing that the Bible doesn’t directly address the age of the earth, as a Biblical Creationist I simply leave it as a logical necessity demanded by the text of scripture, regardless of the state of contemporary empirical research, but I’m not really interested in debating things like geomorphology or carbon dating (simply because I recognize that I lack sufficient understanding of those things to discuss them accurately).
Now, a while ago, I wrote a comment that turned into a whole blog post while I was interacting with someone. I’ve edited it a bit, and here are my three biggest reasons why I’m a Biblical Creationist: Continue reading →
(Hat tip to one of my longest standing readers. You know who you are!)
A little while ago, I wrote a post that apparently made me somewhat famous (for around 15 seconds). My readers may remember the post were I documented the Twitter followers of the two avenues of the charismatic movement; that post eventually was referenced by John MacArthur and Phil Johnson at Grace Community Church in the Sunday Night Service Q & A from November 17, 2013.
Apparently some of my writing on charismatic issues has been enjoyed enough by others that I’ve been invited to do some writing for The Cripplegate. That Twitter post has been updated with a bunch of new links and information, as well as some reworked and rather shocking numbers (and 2 or 3 great new pictures!). It’s live on the Cripplegate right now, so check out version 2.0. That’s one of the reasons why I haven’t been blogging over here too much as of late, but for those of you who enjoy my writing, I think you’ll enjoy seeing some of my “greatest hits” re-worked, updated and posted on the Cripplegate. I’m not sure how often I’ll be on there, but I’ll queue up some posts and have something up there every now and then.
I’ll remember to link things when they come up, but don’t worry; this blog isn’t going anywhere. I’ll be mainly blogging here and tossing things up on the Cripplegate as well, though I’ll probably do a unique post there from time to time (which I’ll link, of course). This blog won’t be running as frequently since the Cripplegate gets around 10x the traffic as this blog, which means that comment interactions will be far more demanding. Still, I hope to become a better blogger with learning tricks from those pros over there: I’ve learned at least 5 cool things already today and that should all trickle back here!
(I’ve already stopped doing this…)
Until Next Time,
Lyndon “Learning how to blog at a whole new level of non-mediocrity” Unger
A name I see every time I go to the Christian bookstore, and a name I remember from my days in the charismatic movement. Back then, I didn’t know much about him…but I knew that he was beloved by people that I thought were a little bit out there, so I didn’t read too much of his stuff. As I was researching something completely unrelated tonight, I found a link that placed me on a rabbit trail that led me to some interesting stuff about this fellow: Continue reading →
Okay, I’ve been doing more research (as is often the case) and I came across the answer to questions that have been asked frequently:
- Why don’t the Charismatics police their own movement?
- How bad does someone’s doctrine need to be in order to be labelled a heretic?
We’ve heard from some people that they do police the movement, but the only examples that I recall are things like impropriety among women in church, or personality worship, or something general like that. I don’t recall too many people actually naming names and calling people out for actual heresy. I have seen one or two examples, but they’re extremely rare. Continue reading →
So in the StrangeFire aftermath, one of the complaints that has been lodged at the conference and the whole cessationist case is that we always grab the “low hanging fruit” on the fringe of the movement as some sort of normative representation of the movement as a whole. We’re told that we grab absurd examples and try to pass them off as some sort of example of the mainstream. The level-headed folks are the obvious mainstream representatives, and the entranced glossolalaholics and Fletch-clone healers are the fringe, right?
This argument has always made me puzzled since it’s so horribly obvious to me that the theologically absurd charismatic church of 20,000 obviously has far more influence in the movement and “on the street” than the theologically restrained charismatic church of 2,000 (and that’s being generous since the theologically absurd churches aren’t just bigger, but far more numerous).
So, I thought to myself, how can I give some sort of objective measure of influence? How can we say who is mainstream and who is fringe? Then I had an idea. Its not a great idea, but an idea none the less. I’m going to look at online presence in the form of Twitter reach (as measured by followers) as a general indicator of just how many people are paying attention to whom. Continue reading →
I’ve previously posted on the initial definition of the apostolic sign gift of tongues (namely the gift of tongues as practiced by the apostles and the believers in their era) as it was defined in its initial occurrence in the New Testament: Acts 2:4-12. The two terms there are dialektos and glossa, and the first term (dialektos) only occurs in the NT in the book of Acts. Besides Acts 2:6 & 8, it appears in Acts 1:19, 21:40, 22:2 and 26:14. One can look at those passages and clearly see that, outside of Acts 2, it’s uniformly used as a term for an earthly language. The second term glossa is the one used for “tongues” in New Testament (outside of Acts 2:6 & 8), so as we trace that term throughout scripture, we can look at how where it appears, how it’s used, and whether or not it’s redefined from it’s usage in Acts 2:4-12 where dialektos and glossa are paralleled. For the sake of making this a Bible Bite (and not a lengthy post), we’ll simply look at the 2 other occurrences of glossa in the book of Acts: 10:46 and 19:6:
Acts 10:46 -
- in Acts 10: 1-8 Cornelius (a Roman centurion described as “a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God” – Acts 10:2) was told that “Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God. And now send men to Joppa and bring one Simon who is called Peter.” (Acts 10:4b-5). Cornelius then sent his some of his underlings to get Peter (Acts 10:7-8). Continue reading →
Seeing that this idea has come up in a comment thread, based on a common misunderstanding of 1 John 2:27 (that utterly ignores the immediately preceding verse and the seven verses before that one…which some might suggest is the context…), I thought I’d share a just one passage of scripture relevant to the idea so that the conversation can move to this thread and not clog up other posts. Read and consider the following:
Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Rise and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” This is a desert place. And he rose and went. And there was an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure. He had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning, seated in his chariot, and he was reading the prophet Isaiah. And the Spirit said to Philip, “Go over and join this chariot.” So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. Now the passage of the Scripture that he was reading was this: Continue reading →