Words in the Word – Agape and True Love?

I’m currently putting together the bible study for tomorrow night, and I got a bit side-tracked in my study and thought I’d share the solution to a common Bible Myth:  The myth about the word Greek word for love; “agape”.

Now I remember when I was in junior high school and some Christian musician (who I don’t remember the name of) came to my high school and talked about something that I completely forget, but I never forgot how amazed at how smart he was with the Bible.  He told everyone that the Bible has 4 words for “love” – agape, phileo, eros and storge.  The story went that storge is “familial love”, eros is “sexual love”, phileo is “friendly love” and agape is “true love”.  The musician milked this word study (fallacy) for around 10 minutes and talked about how girls want phileo but guys only want eros, and encouraged everyone to seek what they truly wanted; agape.  He then told a story about a cute little puppy getting hit by a train (or something along those lines), everyone cried, and he closed with “if you want to hear more about finding the agape that you’re looking for, come to (insert church name) tonight and I’ll be giving a concert and I’ll be explaining it to everyone!”

The students all left; girls crying about the poor little puppy and the guys wondering how they could best maximize the female emotional trauma for their benefit…but not me.  Being the teenage geek that I was, I was daydreaming about how one day, when there was a vast network of interconnected computers, I may one day share this nugget of truth with a few people via that network on some sort of personal web log of my thoughts and ideas. Something like this:

(My first WordPress BBS web log, hosted on ARPANET, circa 1986 – source)

Okay.  That might not be totally true, but what is true is that I’ve heard that myth repeated probably a hundred times over the years.

It’s total bunk.

Only agape and phileo (and their cognates/derivatives – lovely, loving, etc.) appear in the New Testament; eros and storge are nowhere to be found in the NT (except for one related word: astorge, meaning “unloving”, in Romans 1:31 and 2 Timothy 3:3).  1 Corinthians 16:22 & Titus 3:15 are the only times that phileo is used by Paul, which basically derails this “Bible myth”.  Consider these verses:

“ If anyone has no love for the Lord, let him be accursed…” – 1 Corinthians 16:22

“…Greet those who love us in the faith.” – Titus 3:15

Both of those verses use phileo, and they’re the only two usages of phileo in Paul’s writing.  I don’t think Paul’s suggesting that the Corinthians should only have some sort of 2nd tier “friendship love” for the Lord, do you?

Also, D.A. Carson has some interesting comments on this issue in his book Exegetical Fallacies.

I apologize if that bursts any balloons out there, but them’s the facts.

(source)

Until Next Time,

Lyndon ‘Loving the Beloved” Unger

Quick Thoughts: Matt Chandler on the Gift of Prophecy

People all over the place are tossing out what they consider “knockout” arguments against Cessationism.

(source)

I’ve read a few of them, and I’m…erm…unconvinced.

Here’s an example:

I missed this when I was doing research before on Matt Chandler for my Outreach top 50 Churches.

Here’s Matt Chandler giving an example of prophecy:

(source)

So what do you think?

First, Did Ezekiel ever get 3 ideas and then run across the country-side trying to find out what God was *trying* to say?

Did Isaiah?  Samuel?  Anyone prophet in the scripture, ever?

Now before you jump the gun and bring up some of the occurrences where something like that happened, ask yourself if those events are ever referred to as “prophecy”?

– An example of something sorta similar was Joseph’s dreams in Genesis 37.  He had a couple of strange pictures in his mind that didn’t make sense until many years later, but Joseph is never referred to as a prophet and his dreams are never referred to as “prophecy”.

–  Another example of something sorta similar is the dreams of Pharaoh (Gen. 41) and Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 2 & 4).  The prophecy wasn’t the dreams but the interpretation of the dreams (and any OT text used to understand the NT gift of prophecy undermines the whole continuationist idea that there’s a lack of continuity between the OT office of prophet and the NT gift of prophecy).

– I could go on and on, but this is a future post in and of itself (and will come…in a few weeks as my schedule clears up a tad).

This whole issue assumes a broad definition of “prophecy” that isn’t in the Bible, and I’ll try to address this at some point.  I’m currently compiling a list of some of the foundational issues that need to be addressed, and this is one of the big ones.

Secondly, are the only options for explaining these occurrences that they’re either acts of true prophecy or demonic misleading?

How about this option:

It is a work of God’s providential orchestration of lives and minds, but it’s not prophecy.

I know, that’s possibly a little hard to swallow.

It is God, but it’s not prophecy.

Here’s one more thought for you all:

Almost all of these “knockout” punch arguments that are making their rounds fail on the basis that they broadly assume the definition of the gifts in question on the basis of weak exegetical support without accurately deriving them from scripture.  (Big claims that I should back up with a few hundred pages of research, but this is a blog and I have many other things that demand my time.  If anyone wants to start a $100,000 kickstarter project for me to quit my job and start writing books on this stuff, I’ll gladly comply and start pumping out books…)

Most of the “spiritual gifts” books and tests that I have read all simply assume the definitions of the gifts that they’re discussing and don’t exegetically establish them.

(source)

That’s where Matt Chandler is wrong in giving his illustration of “prophecy” in his life: his error lies in his interpretation of his experience.

I don’t argue with his experience; I basically take it at face value and praise the Lord with him, but I don’t have to take his interpretation of his experience as authoritative.  The Bible interprets my experience and tells me what happened, not the other way around.

Just some late night thoughts.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “Those stairs would definitely get me into shape!” Unger

Mark Driscoll, James MacDonald, Strange Fire and Leslie Nielsen – Part 2

Well, judging from the fact that the blogosphere is going nuts (and I’ve had more hits in the last seven days than I got more blog traffic than all of last year), people in Evangelicalism are all pretty aware of the whole Mark Driscoll showing up at Strange Fire shenanigans.  I wrote about the situation here, but at that time I was waiting on the facts.

My friend Jules LaPierre, over at Jules Diner, has posted the video footage of the incident.  The facts are now plain as day:

.

Watch for yourself and ask yourself whether or not this was some sort of angry exchange, or some sort of security crackdown where they wrongly took his stuff.

You tell me what you think.

So how should we respond to this?

Well, I’d say two things are important:

1.  We don’t need to hound him and call him a liar. If you’re reading this, please don’t pursue him on Twitter or Facebook or Instagram and demand his repentance.  The only thing that will do is annoy him and make you look like this:

(photo credit)

The message might be accurate, but the delivery basically makes you look like you’re nuts.

In situations like this, we have to remember that Exodus 20:16 isn’t the only verse in the scripture.  Ephesians 4:29-30 and Colossians 4:6 (among other passages) still apply, so don’t take it upon yourself to be the Holy Spirit in his life.  He’s not your pastor, you’re not his pastor, you don’t know him, and Matthew 18 doesn’t apply between you and him in this scenario.

2.  We should watch to see if he does admit his deceit.  The evidence is pretty clear and the facts speak for themselves, and this is honestly not really a massive offense…which should make repentance fairly easy and non-threatening for a guy like Mark Driscoll.  All it would take is a message like “Yeah, I spoke out of turn and said that security took my stuff when really I gave it to them as a gift.  I wasn’t exactly being honest about the whole scenario and I’d like to ask for the forgiveness of the Grace Church people who I misrepresented.”

If Mark Driscoll doesn’t do that, then that would be something definitely worth noticing.  Refusing to repent in the face of hard facts about statements of untruth that came from his mouth would place him in some rather dubious and uncomfortable company:

(Photo Credits)

The last thing I’d like to see is Mark Driscoll heading down a similar path.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “Okay, Driscoll isn’t quite Caner yet…” Unger

P.S. – Just so the title doesn’t leave people feeling ripped off at this point:

See what I mean about MacDonald and Principle Strickland?

Also, Leslie Nielsen shopped at the same glasses store as the other two.

Random Thoughts in the Aftermath of Strange Fire

So the internet  pretty much looks like this right now:

Strange Fire talk is everywhere.

With all the rebuttals, responses and defenses being tossed out from everyone and their intern, I don’t even know where to start in addressing a tiny fraction of the stuff that’s being said.

Here’s an article by Trevin Wax on how to go about debating the conference.

Here’s a sliver of the rebuttals/attacks:

1.  C Michael Patton over at Parchment and Pen (and also Credo House Ministries) has declared that MacArthur is losing his voice among Evangelicals, and has also informed the whole world what someone who’s never been part of the charismatic movement thinks a Charismatic is.  Michael Patton’s fellow team blogger Clint Roberts has tossed out some thoughts on lessons to learn from the Strange Firestorm.

2.  Sam Storms has been on full alert.  He’s tossed up an alert that not all Cessationists are divisive meanies and he’s also posted the first part of his response to the conference.

3. Wallace Henley, over at the Christian Post, has vented his thoughts about how MacArthur is an extremist.

4.  Joel McDurmon, over at American Vision, basically has condemned the conference because it painted with a broad brush, and also because speakers at the conference spoke negatively about Dominionism and Postmillennialism (I don’t think they really cared much about the conference, but their two hobby horses got kicked and they had to put on their angry eyes).

(photo credit)

5. Adrian Warnock had written a bunch of stuff on why Cessationists are wrong about prophecy, how there is plenty of good that has come from the Charismatic Movement, and has written a response to the conference.

6.  Ed Stetzer has written an overview of the whole Pentecostal/Charismatic/Third Wave Movements, and has also written a highly similar article on the Charismatic Movement.

7.  Andrew Wilson, over at Theology Matters, has posted his defense of continuationalism/Charismatic theology.

8.  Bob Hayton, over at Fundamentally Reformed, has tossed his rather bland response into the fray.

9. Kevin P. Emmert (white guy from North America) has written on Christianity Today how Conrad Mbewe (a black pastor from Africa) is wrong about the spiritual condition of Africa…after talking with a two American pastors, two American Bible College professors (one at a Pentecostal school), and two African Bible College professors (one at a Pentecostal school).  Someone needs to send Mr. Emmert this book badly.  He spoke with two pastors from Africa but he never spoke with a single pastor in Africa.

10.  Frank Viola has offered his thoughts on the conference.

11.  Samuel Rodriguez, over at Charisma, has come out guns blazing and writes that MacArthur is “ignorant of the (charismatic) community’s unbridled commitment to biblical orthodoxy”.  Ironically, this article and this article and this article were above it in the feed.

12.  Luke Geraty, over at Think Theology, has addressed the Strange Fire conference in general as well as attempting to rebut Tom Pennington’s case against Continuationism.

There’s a whole lot more, but those dozen should give you a good sampling of the responses from both the well known and not so well known.

Here’s a sliver of the defenses/affirmations:

1. Jeremy Egrerer, over at the Christian Post, has given out a thoughtful defense of MacArthur.

2. Melissa Barhnart, also over at the Christian Post, has interviewed John MacArthur about the conference and allowed him to defend some of his statements.

3.  Karl Heltman over at ParkingSpace23 has given his take on why he thinks the Strange Fire conference was not divisive and his co-blogger Darren Wiebe (who was one of the people that met and talked to Mark Driscoll when he showed up on campus) has written an open letter to pastor Mark regarding his misrepresentation of the whole scenario.

4.  Tim Challies has weighed in with his thoughts on the conference.

5.  Mike Riccardi has transcribed a response by John MacArthur to the conference complaints and tossed it up on the Cripplegate.  His co-blogger Clint Archer (also, an African pastor) has also written some thoughts in response to complaints.

6.  Over at the Pyromaniacs, Frank Turk has issued a debate challenge to serious continuationists and a previously linked response to Dr. Michael Brown, and someone anonymous has posted a Spurgeon quote on cessationism.  We’ll forgive them as they’re all really busy after the conference.

7.  Fred Butler has compiled a list of some relevant posts to the conference (from the day before the conference), and has written a short note on how he’s now working on picking which topics to address (and there’s a LOT).

8.  The Domain For Truth has been buzzing out posts (like this one and this one and this one) dealing with the prosperity gospel and signs & wonders movement; how it’s absolutely run off the rails in Asia (I have a draft that I’ve been working on along those lines, and I might just post it as is and add some firepower to the fray).

There’s definitely more as well, but the Cessationist side hasn’t been overly busy yet…

Here’s one great thought that I’d like to see milked out a little more:

Over on Facebook, my friend Dave Mora linked to John Piper’s conference where Tope Koleso slapped Cessationists and asked “Anybody remember this conference? I do. Anybody remember Cessationists accusing Piper of being divisive? Nope – I didn’t think so…”

That got me thinking.

How many Charismatic Conferences have Cessationists been bashed at?  How many times have we been lambasted as second class Christians?  How come nobody ever calls Charismatics “divisive” when they bash Cessationists?

So, a half dozen guys host a few thousand guys in a single conference and write a single book and get right up in Charismatic faces about theological error, and everyone gets wet diapers.

Charismatics will publish dozens of books in response, write thousands of pages of blog articles, and will have dozens of conferences where the level of rhetoric will escalate beyond what was said at StrageFire…but they won’t ever see any of that as possibly being divisive for that…will they?

Not in a million years.

I’ve heard it said many times that only an arrogant person thinks that they’re the measure of what is humble.

Only a divisive person thinks that they’re the measure of what is not divisive.

All the people who cry out “you’re being divisive” are already being divisive.  They’re assuming that they’re the ones who are being exemplary (in their silence, lack of conviction about the matter, or even toleration of sin and heresy) and using themselves as the measuring stick for the rest of Christianity, myopically dividing and judging who is building up and who is beating up the body of Christ.

In all these matters, the scriptures are the judge of what’s building up and what’s beating up.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “All this confirmed prophecy is bad for my Cessationism” Unger

Quick Thoughts: Why is it that whenever I heal someone, I can’t find a pen?

I was doing some research online today and found a video that was too good not to share.

Here’s a video from Daniel Kolenda, the faith healer who has taken over from Reinhard Bonnke (the world’s “most successful” evangelist/faith healer).  Pay close attention to what he says (don’t worry, it’s a short one):

He says some pretty clear and straightforward things.

1. He claims to have the gift of healing, and he claims that he has prayed for someone who has been healed of HIV.  Not a sore elbow or low self esteem: HIV…like the infection that leads to AIDS.

2.  He claims to have personally talked with the guy for at least a few minutes (or long enough to find out about his life and situation)

3. Not only that, but he claims that when he talked to the man, the man provided paperwork to substantiate his claim.

Now I’m a cessationist.  That means that I believe God can and does heal people of HIV.  That’s not the issue at hand.  God heals miraculously in response to prayer, even overturning terminal and incurable illness, when he chooses to (which isn’t regularly, but it definitely can happen).

The issue at hand for me is whether or not Daniel Kolenda has the spiritual gift of healing (like Jesus and the Apostles did in the New Testament).

When Daniel Kolenda markets himself as having the NT gift of healing, one might expect it to look like it did in the NT.  One of the things that Jesus did was instantaneously and completely heal people of external physical infirmity, like blindness, paralysis, etc.  None of this “sore throat” or “bad back” stuff.  I’m talking “sell your wheelchair” kinda stuff.

Daniel Kolenda claims to have done so twice in the video, and I’ll focus on the second testimony.

Why does Daniel Kolendatalk about the guy healed of HIV and call him “one young man”?  Didn’t anyone have the presence of mind to take down his name and photocopy (or take pictures of) the paperwork?

The guy came back with medical documentation that apparently verified the authenticity of the healing!

Could Daniel Kolenda not find a pen?

That’s got to be it, because if I claimed to have the gift of healing but lots of people doubted me and contested my claims, then I healed someone of AIDS or HIV and they came back with medical paperwork that confirmed their healing, I’d probably think “well, this will shut up my critics once and for all!”  I would make absolutely sure I had his name, number, e-mail, picture, and all the paperwork photographed or photocopied.

This is so painful, and such obvious misrepresentation of facts, that I cannot take it seriously for a second.

I’d guess that Daniel Kolenda, who claims that this sort of thing happens to him regularly, would eventually encounter enough skepticism that he would finally think “Since so many people doubt my claims, maybe I should ask these folks if they’d mind me taking down their names and a short video testimony, and maybe we’ll keep a good quality camera around to photograph any medical records people give us.  That would surely shut up the doubters!”

If these “healings” were legitimate, he could maybe do that in a few nights…that is, if the quantity and quality of healings that he claims occur are *actually* occurring, right?

Maybe?

Forgive me for doubting you Mr. Kolenda, but here’s some advice:

Next time you’re back in the west, stock up on pens. 

I’ll be the first in line to recant all my accusations and pronounce you an authentic healer, and I’ll then send you a resume and hit the road with you, bringing them in from the highways and byways.

Let’s all hold our breath.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “Pens and Friends…you have neither when you need them most!” Unger