(Quote) May I suggest not using the standard of dead theology to discern whether or not this Lakeland phenomenon is of God. Recall it was the learned theologians who knew the Scriptures well who couldn’t recognize the Word of God standing right in front of them. Why?

(Me)
What occurred at the time of Jesus wasn’t that they just had OT scripture as their plumbline, but that in Babylonian captivity they had written books that had superceeded scripture in their eyes. They formulated the Talmud, Midrash, etc. Have you ever read any of this? If you had, then you would understand why they couldn’t understand the scriptures. They had so perverted them that they weren’t able to see what scripture said.

Jesus railed against their man made work. They placed yokes on people that were as burdensome as Pharaoh did to the Israelites in Egypt. If you ever read the Talmud, you will see just what they professed and how totally decadent it was.

Theology in a nutshell is doctrine and the role of doctrine is to reveal God’s attributes & characteristics, how we are to govern ourselves, what attributes we are assigned and what attributes that divinity holds. I heard a great sermon yesterday using a visual of fixed quantities of walnuts and rice in a jar. If you put the rice in first - all the walnuts don’t fit. If you put the walnuts in first, then all the rice fits. How we assemble our doctrines plays a huge role in understanding. Doctrine should fit like a hand in a glove…and if one doctrine contradicts another, then something is out of kilter. It’s called systematic theology and it isn’t dead.

To come to all this understanding sounds like a lot of work. It is, but it is a labor of agape love. The problem we are seeing today isn’t that scripture isn’t quite clear - but that we have so many unscriptural man made doctrines that have invaded the Church unchecked, that the waters are very muddy for many.

There are now those who say the Spirit is their guide, but I have to ask - what spirit? How and by what rule do they discern which spirit is leading them? You take the time to develop a systematic theology and you can eliminate doubts about many of these things.

There are plenty of people out there with opinions. I always say I have opinions and convictions. My convictions are based on extensive study of scripture…my opinions have not been fully studied out but are based on logical follow through. If I take an opinion and scripture reveals it to be wrong, then I have some backing up to do to find error. In the beginning, I backed up a lot, but after years of study, that has subsided dramatically.

So reasoning in scripture - is it still scriptural?

Take a look at Luke 24:27. Jesus was walking with 2 men in Emmaus - and what does he do: And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

Jesus used scripture - what a novel idea. Imagine that.

What did Peter do with the Ethiopian Eunuch - Acts 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him.

Peter used scripture - another novel idea. I wonder where he got it?

All I can do is say - study study study…there is no such thing as dead theology….or then we would have to say doctrine is dead…and Paul told us to content ernestly for the faith once delivered and to abide in the doctrine of Christ.

http://www.tboblogs.com/index.php/news/story/florida-outpouring-floods-lakeland-center/

In terms of verified healings what do you do with the guy who came up asking the Lord to restore sight in a blind eye and he leaves seeing. The church is so stuck in religion that something radical like this is attacked.

I am completely for theology and would like to see more of the word preached but if nothing else I believe because of the works…

http://www.amazon.com/Respectable-Sins-Confronting-We-Tolerate/dp/1600061400/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1211472289&sr=8-1

To be clear, again, there are many things within it that are RIGHTFULLY denounced ()….but I have noticed a trend in many abandoning it that they may say everything within it is bad/evil…and yet in my quest to be as discerning as possible with all things and check all things against the Word, when I look into the organizations which they often flee to, I’m able to quickly notice flaws in those camps as well—some of which are just as glaring as the things in those camps which they point out to others….and often, what seems to be the case is that those camps get a free pass regarding their issues and it seems the rationale is “Well, it’s not as bad as……” That, to many, comes off as a double standard since it gives the impression that one’s camp which they stand in (and for that matter, WHO THEY ARE AS AN INDIVIDUAL) is the one without FAULT and thus in a position to be above reproach or able to condemn/cast judgement or rate others.

In Biblical Terminology, it’d be like living in the Books of I-II Kings and Chronicles and telling someone “You need to get your butt OUT OF ISRAEL—IDOLATRY EVERYWHERE!!!” and then having them jump over to the sister nation of Judah, which though more righteous in some regards had PLENTY OF MESS ON THEIR SIDE OF THE STREET for which THEY WERE IN TROUBLE TOO WHEN GOD’S LAW CAME TO LIGHT. Or for a different analogy, it’s as if people are being called to come out of a country ripe with corruption and yet there’s no destination which they’re headed====with nothing but continual wandering and vunerability to a myriad of things that wouldn’t be an issue had one had a solid homebase. You’re effective sailing blind….

And this is something I’ve seen in literally ALL CAMPS to some degree or another. One camp’s Charismatic and another’s Baptist—and yet, even when both stand against post-modernism, often times both will get into disputes just as intense and label the other in SIGNIFICANT ERROR—even to the point of using the “heresy” term on one another (whether it be with the Baptist and exalting “The Sinners Prayer” or with the Charismatics and “Tongues”/Baptism of the Holy Spirit—-or the excesses seen in botH….or in the Calvinistic camp with theologies such as “Once Saved, Always Saved”…etc). And the range includes things such as worship styles, dress when attending church, casual verses formal settings, preaching from a pulpit verses preaching in a living room setting, etc.

I’ve written more about this elsewhere—( #6, regarding something a brother of mine in the Lord wrote of the danger it seems we can fall into by becoming “NEW PHARISEES”)—for it seems that much of the Christian WOrld in the West is involved in a never-ending TURF WAR, where everyone’s at War with someone else and all sides claim to have “THE TRUTH.”

Though if one leaves something on the basis that perfection/being as biblically accurate as possible is the goal that every true believer aims for, it’d seem that the rationale should flow over to all other areas of life—including the areas where one lands after leaving a place that seemed inefficient. So for the sake of consistency and in honor of the Word’s admonition to check every word against the Word of God, accepting what is true, and rejecting what is false—-take the Good, reject the bad (, 1 Thessalonians 5:18-22, Hebrews 5:11-17, Proverbs 14:15, Proverbs 19:2, Proverbs 18:13, Proverbs 18:15, Proverbs 18:17 ), and do as the Bereans did with Paul, as a preacher who gives God’s true message will never contradict or explain away anything that’s found in the Word (Acts 17:10-11)—, what would be the most flawless organization one could join in leaving FLORIDA/LAKELAND REVIVAL?

Whether one thinks it’d be Baptist, Charismatic, Lutheran, Methodist, Non-Denominational, Reformed, Evangelical, Church of CHrist, Home CHurch movement, or any other group one can think of, which one would be the best to hook up with? On what basis would you make your defense that the paticular group you’re apart of is the most valid one (or at least one valid one among others which you consider to be valid)?

Granted, one needs to deal with the issues of GRAVE ERROR verses LIGHT ERROR—or ESSENTIAL verses NON-ESSENTIAL issues (which Scripture’s Clear on)….but apart from that, what would you do? And if you or I could find a flaw/unbiblical aspect to it anywhere involved—whether big or small–would you be willing to leave? And at the point where it seemed that no organizations/groups left were flawless according to Biblical Standards, what would you do? Would you make peace and “compromise” with one or continue to search in hopes of finding it? Or would you do your own thing entirely?

If interested, it’d probably be best for saints to study the OT (specifically, the Books of I-II Kings and Chronicles), as it was just as messy as the denominational landscape is today….and QUITE REMINISIENT . Remember Jehu (II Kings 9-10 )?

I’ve always found it funny the man was raised up by the Lord to call out/repay the wickedness of Ahab/destroy his evil influence…..and yet so much error was BLATANTLY tolerated in his side of the street. Minus the fact that the man went FAR beyond the Lord’s command with his senseless slaughter/bloodbath (which he was denounced for later by the prophet Hosea, Hosea 1:4-5)The man eliminated one form of idolatry, Baal worship, only to uphold another by continuing to worship the golden calves Jeroboam had set up which CAUSED THE FALL OF ISRAEL TO BEGIN WITH:

I Kings 12:25-33

1 Kings 13-14

II Chronicles 13

When studying the actions of Jehu, one quickly realizes that his motives were more political than spiritual.

If he had destroyed the golden calves, his people would’ve traveled to the temple in Jerusalem, in the rival southern kingdom, and worshipped there (which is why Jeroboam set them up in the first place).Baal worship was associated with the dynasty of Ahab, so it was politically ADVANTAGEOUS to destroy Baal. The golden calves, on the other hand, had a longer history in the northern kingdom and were validated by ALL POLITICAL FACTIONS.

Baal Worship was anti-GOD (IN THE OBVIOUS SENSE), BUT THe golden calves were thought by many to be the visible representations of God himself, even though God’s law clearly stated that such worship was idolatrous (Exodus 20:3-6)( Exodus 32)

As the Word shows, Jehu was devoted to God only to the point that obediance served his own interests….and like Jehu, the same is happening today when men in the name of GODLINESS are denouncing the sins of others/rallying the church while excusing sin in their own lives or going against MANY OF THE STANDARDS IN GOD’S WORD THAT THE KINGDOM OF GOD ARE ALL ABOUT.

Consequently, you’re often left wondering why there is still mess taking place in the camp……

The same thing happened with King Jehosophat:

2 Chronicles 17

Jehosaphat was a righteous man after God’s heart, & he did much to reform the nation from where it once was. The people of Judah were Biblically illiterate, never taking the time to listen to and discuss God’s law and understand how it could change them. Jehosophat realized that knowing God’s commands was the first step to getting people to live as they should, so he initiated a nationwide religious education program

However, despite all of the good that Jehosaphat accomplished & how deeply he was committed to God, he permitted much sin to happen on HIS WATCH AS WELL.

At one point, he allied himself with the infamous King AHAB, in a bid to “strengthen the nation”. He solidified this alliance by arranging for his son to marry Athaliah, the daughter of wicked King Ahab of Israel, and then made a military alliance with him……..with Jehoshaphet’s popularity/power making him ATTRACTIVE to the cunning/opportunistic Ahab (II Chronicles 1

Though Jehosaphat had believed he was doing a “good thing” AND HAD MANY GOOD THINGS to help elsewhere, the effects of his alliance were devastating due to Jehoshaphat incurred God’s Wrath (II Chronicles 19:2), and it was through ATHALIAH that Judah was exposed to the EVIL PRACTICES OF ISRAEL, FOR SHE HELPED PROPAGATE BAAL WORSHIP IN JUDAG & THIS EVENTUALLY LED TO THE SOUTHERN KINGDOM’S DECLINE/downfall (II Kings 8:18-29)…and also, When Jehosophat died and Attialiah’s son, as well as her husband perished (II Kings 9-10), Athaliah became Queen, she seized the throne and almost WIPED OUT ALL THE DESCENDANTS OF DAVID (II Chronicles 22:10-12).

The same scenario isn’t an ISOLATED ONE. Anyone who’s honestly studying throughout the books of I-II Kings and I-II Chronicles will quickly find that out….

It happened with Jehosaphat’s father before him, II Chronicles 15, before his confidence in God began to slip & he began to rely on human means via alliances with PAGAN NATIONS…II Chronicles 16, rather than turning to the God who helped him earlier, II Chronicles 14…….)

It happened with nearly all of the Kings after Jehoshaphat in Judah…..

Even with King Hezekiah ( II Kings 18-20), the man was regarded as someone who had a close relationship with the Lord…..and kick this, HE WAS A REFORMER!!!!!!

The man boldly went itn and cleaned house, having altars, idols and temples completely destroyed…..however, despite all of that and the many great things he witnessed in his lifetime, he still tolerated many GREVIOUS WRONGS which served to hinder generations after him (i.e rashly showing his wealth to the Bablylonian envoys and placing Judah on Bablylon’s “NATIONS TO CONQUER” list, etc).

The list could go on, but I bring all of that up because I thought it’d be relevant to the situation.

I think that it really serves as a CHECK FOR ALL OF US. I think for those who are often contending on the issue of doctrines/theological truths and referencing the Past, it should alarm us all that perhaps our standards are in many ways HEINOUS to the Lord and our LOGIC FLAWED………

Granted, people see the Emergent/Emerging Church and say “BEWARE!!!! FALSE TEACHINGS/DECEPTIONS….

We get MAD seeing foolishness like THIS:

Yet, Would I’d be mad at a church promoting idolatry of FAVORTISM?

Quote:
1 Corinthians 1 1 Corinthians 3
,
Let’s call a spade a spade: would I be cool with GOING to a church that maintains what’s basically a Exclusivism (those who think themselves superior to all other believers because they follow Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or Christ. or some other teacher)?
….. When I as a Christian take pride in the fact that study the teachings of people like John Piper and exteem him (or Sandy Simpson and any other ministry you or I am thankful for and support) and yet I’m constantly boasting of how solid they are….and yet I look down upon others not holding to where they stand, that may be me commiting a sin of FAVORTISM… Or when I keep quiet over the fact on what the Bible says on the issue of RACIAL RENCONCILLIATION (which I’ve written about before, Does anyone here know of any MINORITY/BLACK Emerging Leaders existing? ) and not calling out those same authors “contending against errror” when they’re not fighting for that in their own churches and are SEGRATED RACIALLY—AND MAKING EXCUSES FOR IT.

And the same thing when people are proud that they as individuals or their church follows CALVIN….or ARMIUS, George WHITFIELD, John Owen, John Bunyan, Oswald Chambers…AND THEY KNOW ALL OF THEIR ARGUMENTS and yet are more loyal to studying them than CHRIST/HIS WORD AND SPREADING THE GOSPEL….would I attend a church like that and be COOL?

Or would I be cool attending a church where they put down other believers who are dilligently seeking to spread the work of the Kingdom of God and be faithful to the Gospel simply because they do not belong to the same camp (i.e. “I’m a Cessationist, you’re a Charismatic….I’m Baptist, you’re Pentacostal, I’m Prebysterian, you’re Methodist….& therefore I wouldn’t reference you as someone I could learn from or who is actually aiding the Body, etc)?

Or to a church that isn’t excited about giving FINANCIALLY to the body of CHrist.? Or one where there’re things like

* Gossip/SLANDER (#23, #118 )

* Mercy less (Micah 6:8, Matthew 23:23

* Favoritism (huge in so-called biblically sound churches)

* Respect of Person (we accept a truth of MacArthur over someone less Seminary astute) (Luke 14:7-11, Leviticus 19:15

* Lack of Compassion (Proverbs 14:31, Proverbs 21:13, Proverbs 22:2, Proverbs 28:9, James 2, ETC)

* Not showing Impartiality/Accuracy in judging matters (good and bad), whether with public figures and their actions (false prophets included)Proverbs 11:1, Proverbs 20:23, Leviticus 19:15), personal issues, offenses, or other things, etc.

* Divisiveness

* Ungodliness

* * Anxiety and Frustration

* * Discontentment

* * Unthankfulness

* * Pride

* * Selfishness

* * Lack of Self-Control

* * Impatience and Irritability

* * Anger

* * The Weeds of Anger

* * Judgmentalism

* * Envy, Jealousy, and Related Sins

* * Sins of the Tongue

* * Worldliness

Still curious.

For even if the sin doesn’t seem as OBVIOUS/UGLY as other sins such as being a pedophile or child molester, it’s still UGLY TO THE LORD……..and it makes no difference to exchange one form of idolatry/sin for another.

I’m still surprised when it seems Christians in the name of defending against error BLANTANTLY go against II Timothy 2:23-26. But What’s in the book’s in the book, regardless of frustrations (and going against that’s sin just as much as any excesses happening down there in Florida).—Saying “I’m sick of all this pussyfooting around and skirting around the issues” as many have said doesn’t seem to hold much weight if Paul HIMSELF ADVOCATED it—-and he dealt with more issues EFFECTIVELY than you or I combined. Is it “pussyfooting” as you say in being kind, not quarrelsome, gentle with others and graciously answering concerns folks have?

It basically tackles the question of “Have Christians become so preoccupied with the major sins of our society that we have lost sight of our need to deal with our own more subtle sins?” ….and I’m glad Jerry Bridges wrote it since it takes one back to the issue of what holiness truly means….aand addresses a dozen clusters of specific “acceptable” sins that we tend to tolerate in ourselves—such as jealousy, anger, pride, unthankfulness, and judgmentalism.

As Christians, we believe that all sins are considered equal in God’s eyes. Yet while evangelicals continue to decry the Big Ones–such as abortion, adultery, and violence–we often overlook more deceptive sins. And it seems we have created a sliding scale where gossip, jealousy, and selfishness comfortably exist within the church. In short, some sins have simply become acceptable.—AND that just as culture has lost the concept of sin, the church faces the same danger. As one kat said on the issue, “The motivation for this book stems from a growing conviction that those of us whom I call conservative evangelicals may have become so preoccupied with some of the major sins of society around us that we have lost sight of the need to deal with our own more `refined’ or subtle sins.” And in the book Bridges addresses these “respectable sins”–sins, that though they bring dishonor to God, are too often overlooked among Christians. We are apt to focus on the obvious ills of society and our attention to those seemingly great sins somehow convinces us that our small sins are acceptable.

Bridges begins this book, as he usually does, by laying the foundation of the gospel. He addresses the Bible’s continual exhortations that we are to “be what we are.” We are called saints and are expected by God to act like those who have been set apart to be holy. We are to act like a people who have been separated unto God. While the Bible makes it clear that any conduct unbecoming a saint is sin, and while all Christians acknowledge that we do sin, we are still prone to ignoring certain transgressions that simply do not seem that serious. “We can readily identify sin in the immoral or unethical conduct of people in society at large. But we often fail to see it in what I call the `acceptable sins of the saints.’ In effect, we, like society at large, live in denial of our sin.”

All sin, no matter how subtle it may seem to us, is malignant. It “wages war against our souls.” Some subtle sins we commit without really thinking about them, either at the time or afterward. “We often live in unconscious denial of our `acceptable sins.’” But even these sins are “an assault on the majesty and sovereign rule of God. It is indeed cosmic treason.” But, in His sovereign good pleasure, God has graciously provided a remedy for sin in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. After discussing the ramifications of Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf, Bridges transitions to a word about the power of the Holy Spirit, teaching how He works in and with us to cleanse us from our sin.

And here, after about fifty pages of important introductory material, Bridges begins to discuss individual sins he has identified in his own life and in the lives of other believers. Here is the list:

* Ungodliness
* Anxiety and Frustration
* Discontentment
* Unthankfulness
* Pride
* Selfishness
* Lack of Self-Control
* Impatience and Irritability
* Anger
* The Weeds of Anger
* Judgmentalism
* Envy, Jealousy, and Related Sins
* Sins of the Tongue
* Worldliness

Each one of these is discussed in some detail: how the sin can be identified, how it dishonors God, how it affects a Christian’s life, and what Scriptures we can use to overcome it. He encourages the reader to go slowly from chapter-to-chapter, pausing to meditate on the Scriptures he provides and seeking to allow them to challenge and, if necessary, to convict. The person who reads the book quickly will be rewarded, but the one who reads it slowly and meditatively will surely be rewarded more.

Jerry Bridges has long served the church in the area of applying the gospel to personal holiness, using the Word to convict of sin and the gospel to restore hope. This book is a welcome addition to his already powerful list of books. The respectable sins he outlines I could often identify in my own life as ones that I have been willing to overlook. I suspect the same will be true of any Christian who takes the time to read it. This book is built upon a simple premise and Bridges executes it powerfully. I don’t know of any Christian would not benefit from reading it and from considering those subtle, dangerous, respectable sins.

http://www.sovereigngracestore.com/ProductInfo.aspx?productid=A1235-04-51