Strange Fire: Problems in Asia Series

In light of the Strange Fire Conference, we just completed our mini series focused on the problem of Charismatic excess/Prosperity Gospel influence in Asia.  The following are the links not only from the past two weeks but also over the years on Veritas Domain.  Lord willing, if we were to write more on this topic we will put the links on here as well.

Foundational

Why will we focus our apologetics on Prosperity Gospel/Charistmatic Excess?

The Prosperity Gospel’s Functional Idol and its fruit

Kong Hee and City Harvest Church

Incorrect: Kong Hee say we love God because of what we can give him

Sun Ho the Pastor’s Wife or the Pastor’s Ho?

Kong Hee: Jesus was not Poor…but does that mean He was rich?

Jaeson Ma

Jaeson Ma’s New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) roots

Jaeson Ma: False Prophet about Los Angeles 2006?

Keeping ‘Prophets’ Accountable: Jaeson Ma on Korea Revival by 2021

Frequent Objections defending Jaeson Ma Answered

A Closer look at another defense of Jaeson Ma’s False Prophecy

Jaeson Ma: Epitome of the unbiblical Hipster and ‘Celebrity’ Pastor

Jaeson Ma spiritual confusion with Aziatix

Jaeson Ma’s New Song “Rise and Fall” is heretical  NEW!

Was it right to associate Jaeson Ma with Pelagianism?  NEW!

Joseph Prince and New Creation Church

Joseph Prince: Tongues, The Key To A Spirit-Led Life? Part 1

Joseph Prince: Tongues, The Key To A Spirit-Led Life? Part 2

Joseph Prince: Tongues, The Key To A Spirit-Led Life? Part 3

David Yonggi Cho Guitly and  Yoido Full Gospel Church

“Pastor” David Yonggi Cho Guitly, another case of Strange Fire in Asia     NEW!

Related

October Links Related to Strange Fire and the Charismatic

Aftermath of Strange Fire    NEW!

Review of  Strange Fire: The Danger of Offending the Holy Spirit with Counterfeit Worship by John MacArthur  NEW!

Read Full Post »

Joseph Prince: Tongues, The Key To A Spirit-Led Life? Part 3

We continue with our closer look at Joseph Prince’s arguments for his position that every Christians should speak in tongues.  For those who may not know, Joseph Prince is a Pentecostal preacher from Singapore, who’s popularity is felt not only in Asia but even here in the United States.

The video we have been examining is this particular clip from Joseph Prince’s channel:

Eight seconds into the video he tries to argue that it is biblical for Christians to ask other Christians whether they speak in tongues, implying that believers should speak in tongues:

One time the Apostle Paul passed by a group of people and he asked them, ‘Have you received the Holy Ghost?’  And the Bible says they were disciples, they were believers in Christ.  ‘Have you received the Holy Spirit?’ he asked them.  Now, today that is not the question we ask people after we see that they are saved.  We don’t asked them, ‘Have you received the Holy Spirit?’ because it is insulting to many “denominations” to suggest that, to ask the question ‘Have you received the Holy Spirit?’ is insulting.  Yet I think it is in Acts 16, or 19…and in Acts 19 when you look at it the Bible says that Paul passed by a certain region and then he found disciples.  The word there is disciples.  These are believers in Christ.  Christians.  And he asked them the question, ‘Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed?’  So they said, “We never heard of anything called the Holy Spirit.’  ‘So unto what baptism were you baptized?’ “John’s baptism.’  Well Jesus said what?  You will be baptized by the Holy Spirit.  And the Bible says that he prayed for them, laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit and the Bible says what was the evidence for those of you on the page?  They spoke with tongues and prophesied, right?  So we don’t want to compromise just because some denominations are of the persuasion that tongues has ceased alright, we don’t want to compromise because our standard is the Bible.  Can I get a good Amen?”

(0:08-1:35)

Joseph Prince is appealing to Acts 19.  Let’s take a closer look:

1.) Prince makes much out of the point that its to “disciples” (verse 1) that Paul asked his question “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”  (verse 2).  Specifically though, these disciples were those of John the Baptist since they didn’t know about the Holy Spirit (verse 2) and only knew about John’s baptism (verse 3).  This observation should make us cautious in assuming these are regular New Testament Church era Christians.

2.) In light of the fact that they were John’s disciples who only knew up to the baptism of repentance and never even heard about the Holy Spirit, one must be sensitive to progressive revelation and how redemptive history unfolds.  This particular episode is unique in that as the church began and started from Acts 2 onward, there were a number of believers who were disciples before hearing about the Holy Spirit such as John’s Disciples.  Yet by God’s providence the Lord brought those like the Apostle Paul to fill them in about the Spirit.  We expect that as the book of Acts progress, with the church growing more and more, that the number of such disciples of John who didn’t know about the Spirit would decrease.  When we fast forward to today, there are not John’s disciples who haven’t heard of the Holy Spirit.

Thus, if one is sensitive to the context, Acts 19 is not a text to justify asking other Christians whether they have the Holy Spirit and implying that they should speak in tongues.

Don’t forget also how earlier in part two we established the biblical truth that baptism of the Holy Spirit is not the same thing as speaking in tongues, since one can be baptized by the Holy Spirit without speaking in tongues.

Read Full Post »

Review: The Roots of Obama’s Rage by Dinesh D’Souza

Get it on Amazon

I must say I was skeptical of this book before reading it since I am biased against the author. My reading of Dinesh D’Souza in the past has been rather disappointing. But this is probably his better work and he did a good job enough that I’m thinking about reading his follow up work on Obama. D’Souza is a better author on politics than he is on Christianity (the subject of the first two books I read by him). Here in this book D’Souza presents the biography of president Obama and argues that Obama’s public policy is best understood in light of the narrative of Obama’s upbringing. D’Souza argues that it’s not so much the narrative of Obama as the African American that is the predominate theme explaining Obama’s presidency but Obama the child who grew up in the third world and lived in the imagination of his father’s home country of Kenya. Typically I’m cautious with psycho-assertions of why people do what they do but I think this book does make the case powerfully that Obama’s radical upbringing by his mom to be like his dad and his experiences in Indonesia living with his mom that shaped him to become the man who’s ideology is to bring equality between the US and other third world nations. The strength of D’Souza’s argument to me is his analysis of Obama’s book on his father written before he publicly campaigned for president. It’s amazing to think of how Obama barely knew his father growing up but sees him almost as a god. It was quite sad reading this book to imagine the young Obama who looks up and idealized the father he never really knew. It’s no secret to those who follow Obama today that Obama’s father was far from a saint, a radical ideologue who was a dead beat husband, a drunkard who fathered many children with multiple women through affairs. Obama’s infatuation of seeking his father’s approval at times from Obama’s own word seems almost religious, with even the motif of crisis of faith and renewal. D’Souza book is captivating and made me want to learn more about Obama—not just policy but who this man who keeps much to himself is and his worldview.

Read Full Post »

Jaeson Ma spiritual confusion with Aziatix

Earlier I wrote a post identifying the fruits of Prosperity Gospel and extreme Charistmatics preachers and how it reveals their functional idol.   Among the “fruits” mentioned is an infatuation of trying to enter the entertainment industry.   I think the preachers in the reality show, “Preachers of LA,” is an example of my thesis and another case study is the anti-nominian, false prophet and Pastor Jaeson Ma.

Although Jaeson Ma retains the title “Pastor” (see this video of him in Malaysia), he has been spending most of his time being a musical artist.  And for Jaeson Ma that means hanging out with artists, music industry reps and insiders.  Of course, there is nothing wrong in of itself reaching out to people who are lost and being their companions so long as one doesn’t compromise their belief and behavior before the Lord.  Has Jaeson Ma been above reproach?  Here I am not merely trying to catch him on a “slip-up,” a moment of weakness when he fails to be consistent to the standard he holds to;  rather, I’m trying to ask a more foundational question, of whether it is biblical with his particular approach in associating with those in the Asian entertainment industry?  I’m more concern about the method driving him than an inconsistency to one’s method since after all, we are all prone to sin and deviate from our professed standard.

One such association (among many) that Jaeson has is with the group Aziatix.  Note Jaeson Ma’s facebook:

Here I quote again what Jaeson Ma wrote just in case the picture on facebook disappear:

Ones up to the sky with @aziatixallday at their new music video shoot single produced by @redone_official They are the first Asian American group signed to @ymcmbofficial (Young Money) and they didn’t get here by chance these four brothers got here by faith. Faith is spelled R.I.S.K. & I saw how each of these men risked it all to follow God and start @aziatix this is just the beginning & I’m serious when I ask all of you following me to pray daily for them as they make this God given music and shine light in the darkness. Aziatix all day!!!!! #salute #respect #proud #pray4aziatix

Note how Jaeson Ma describe this group as following God, having faith, being a light and them taking risk for Him in their musical career.

Apparently, this prompted one of Jaeson Ma’s fan to comment his concern about Aziatix:

Those guys have such amazing music n talent, its crazy. They are humble brothers, though not to hate just being honest, their album Awakening is amazing, but Godly isnt on the menu, especially one of the songs talking about taking some other guys girl and clubbing.

One can find online and read Aziatix lyrics and it seems that Jaeson’s fan had this particular song in mind.

Jaeson Ma’s response is very telling:

Michael what you need to understand is that music is a gift from God that expresses emotion, experience and personal truth for each artist. A song can talk about God explicitly or not explicitly. I personally don’t believe music should be categorized as Christian or not, what matters is that the music is good, is true to ones experience and honest. Sadly most so called Christian music is not honest or authentic, rather it is predictable and created in a certain way to fit a specific religious expectation. Study the gospels and you will see that when Jesus spoke to the masses He didn’t use religious jargon or language, but He spoke in parables with culturally relevant stories that the everyday person could relate with. When Jesus spoke to His disciples He spoke plainly about kingdom truths. there is music inspired by God for the world and there is also music inspired by God for the church, neither one is more acceptable than another. What God loves is that we use our musical talents by, through and for Him, Aziatix is doing just that and before casting a stone of judgment you should spend more time praying for them then judging them or any musician because you don’t know where they are coming from. I really do pray that people who follow Christ would follow His example of loving and appreciating each person human experience, for the only judgment Jesus made was against the religious who saw themselves as better and holier than others. With that being said, Aziatix all day and much respect to my man Jae Chong and the whole crew! God bless & God is love!

What are we to make of his comment?

Point 1: Note how Jaeson Ma comment doesn’t address his fan’s chief concern at all, that Aziatix’ musical content isn’t godly with the specific example of girls and clubbing.  Ma doesn’t even acknowledge his fan’s concern but goes off in a different direction.  He is committing the logical fallacy of red-herring.

 Point 2:  Jaeson said, “A song can talk about God explicitly or not explicitly.”  It seems reasonable that not every song has to be about God explicitly.  Moreover, if every song was about God explicitly there’s nothing wrong with it.  But what if the band’s entire musical career has never explicitly shared about Jesus and the Gospel at all?  How could Jaeson describe them as taking risks and who “shine light in the darkness”?

Point 3: Jaeson said: ” I personally don’t believe music should be categorized as Christian or not, what matters is that the music is good, is true to ones experience and honest.”  Note here that what matters for Jaeson is not the category of Christian and non-Christian but whether it’s “true to ones experiences and honest.”  But how do we know if that person’s experience was honest?  Or is really true?  Here it is important to see that there is a need for a Christian worldview to be worked out and applied to the area of music–and that in order to even talk about “honest” music even require things that ultimately can only make sense in a Christian worldview.

Point 4: Jaeson points out how “Sadly most so called Christian music is not honest or authentic, rather it is predictable and created in a certain way to fit a specific religious expectation.”  I’ll grant that, but what does this “wrong” have to do Aziatix’s worldliness in their music?  We must also remember that two “wrongs” don’t make a right.

Point 5: Jaeson Ma asserts that “Jesus spoke to the masses He didn’t use religious jargon or language,” which is quite unbiblical if one were to realize Jesus’ claim to being the Messiah involve Messianic titles there were explicitly religious and Scriptural (Old Testament) in nature!  One must understand that titles such as “Christ,” “Son of Man,” “Son of God” is rooted in the Old Testament!

Point 6: Jaeson also present a false dilemma between using “religious jargon or language” and speaking in ways “that the everyday person could relate with. ” The two are not mutually exclusive!

Point 7: Jaeson is begging the question when he asserts “What God loves is that we use our musical talents by, through and for Him, Aziatix is doing just that…”  One can’t really make a song for Him that glorifies Him if one goes about it in a worldy way or end up glorifying the lust of the eyes, and the love for this World.

Point 8: Jaeson use a popular line used by those who engage in verse abuse: “and before casting a stone of judgment you should spend more time praying for them then judging them or any musician because you don’t know where they are coming from.”  In essence, “Don’t judge,” says Jaeson Ma, who a few lines ago was the same one who said “most so called Christian music is not honest or authentic..[and] fit a specific religious expectation.”  If one looks at the context of Matthew 7 where the verse of not judging comes from, one will realize it’s against hypocritical judgement.  Jesus points out the irony of someone with a larger serious problem pointing out someone’s lesser problem in Matthew 7:3.  I submit such is the case with Jaeson Ma: When a fan points out the problem of his “spiritual” promotion of a band that’s worldly, he goes ahead and points out the speck that’s in the musical “authenticity” of Christian music.  He needs to remove his log out of his own eye!

Point 9:  Again the irony:  “for the only judgment Jesus made was against the religious who saw themselves as better and holier than others.”  Isn’t this truly the case that when a fan points out the issue of holiness and godliness, Jaeson Ma then proceed to make himself better and holier than his fan’s biblical conviction of being holy (set apart)?

Read Full Post »

Kong Hee: Jesus was not Poor…but does that mean He was rich?

 

This Youtube clip of Kong Hee, the founder of City Harvest Church is going around the internet.

2 Corinthians 8:9 states

For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich.

Note also Luke 9:58:

And Jesus said to him, “The foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head.”

Read Full Post »

Review: Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament by John D Currid

Purchase: Westminster | Amazon

This is a great book that contributes to the discussion of the relationship of the Ancient Near East (ANE) to the Old Testament.  Have you ever heard people assert that the Old Testament is merely plagiarism of ancient pagan religion or that the authors of Scripture indiscriminately borrowed from the heathens?  Is the Old Testament compromised syncretism or simply a literary copy cat of another religion’s myth?  This book helps the Christian navigate through such questions and challenges.  For starters who might need to be caught up to speed, chapter one gives a nice survey of the history of the study of the Ancient Near East painting a portrait of how these studies originated and its trajectory since.  While the author acknowledges in the introduction and conclusion that the discussion of how ANE relate to the OT can be quite complex, he advances what he calls “polemical theology,” as a paradigm that help make sense of OT and ANE religious parallels.  “Polemical theology” basically describes a conscious ploy by Biblical writers to use the thought forms and stories from cultures of the Ancient Near East in order to apply it to Yahweh exclusively while often using the same motifs in an ironic fashion against the polytheistic gods and goddesses it originated from.  After delineating what polemical theology means in chapter two, the bulk of this book is an examination of the data from ANE sources and the application of Polemical theology.  Here the author John Currid brings his scholarship and knowledge of the ANE record to bear.  For instance, chapter three concentrate on Genesis 1.  In light of how some have attacked the Genesis’ creation account for “borrowing” from other mythologies, Currid demonstrates how the Creation account essentially is antithetical to the creation account of the Egyptians and other Ancient Near East religion, especially with the Bible’s account of not deifying the stars, sea creatures, etc.  Currid is fair:  He acknowledges parallels, documents it well but he always argue that the differences are significant, since it is at the level of worldview and theology.  The differences are not incidental—the polemical and at times poetical jabs that the Old Testament makes shows these differences are intentional on the part of the writers of the Bible.  Much of the book focuses it’s case on Genesis and Exodus, a familiar territory to the author’s area of expertise. I wished we could have seen more of Currid’s analysis of polemical theology with other parts of the Old Testament.  One chapter stands out:  Currid has an excellent study on the rod of Moses that is a good demonstration of what lexical word studies and the proper use of Ancient Near East data looks like:  After noting that Moses’ rod was more of a typical rod versus the significance of the rod of the Egyptian Magicians, Currid shows how there is a polemical “smack” against the Egyptian’s religious worldview at play.  Currid note how the Bible says it’s Moses “rod” that swallows the Egyptian rod rather than saying it is a “snake,” thus retaining the polemical force.  I think this book is helpful in light of what Peter Enns, Walton, Longman III and Waltke has to say.  I highly recommend this book.

NOTE: This book was provided to me free by Net Galley and Crossway without any obligation for a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.

Read Full Post »

Biblical Covenants and Hermenuetics Part 8: Ramification of Biblical Covenants in Christian Thought and Life

GO TO PART 7

I. Introduction

a. Covenants were not given in a vacuum that is in the absence of other covenants.

b. The beauty of Christianity is the coherence of the multifaceted aspect of Christian theology.

c. Although not exhaustive, the ramification of Biblical Covenant in relations to other aspects of Christianity is explored here.

II. Hermeneutics

a. Hermeneutics concerns the rule and method of interpretation in general and the Bible in particular.

b. Relationship

i.      Hermeneutics in light of the Covenants

1. Covenants are the thread that goes through the entire Bible.

2. An understanding of the Covenants allow fuller contextual background in making sense of the passages.

3. Understanding elements of the Covenant illuminates Biblical passages:

a. How does God’s promise in the Covenants illuminate this text?

b. Does the passage reveal God’s covenantal blessings and curses taking place?

c. What is God’s Covenantal requirement here in this passage?

ii.      The Covenants in light of hermeneutics

1. How one properly understand the Covenants is the result of proper hermeneutics.

2. Understanding the Covenants begin with the basic hermeneutical principles used in beginning to interpret any passage of Scripture.

3. Historical-Grammatical approach still applies to passages that discuss about Biblical Covenants.

III. Apologetics

a. Apologetics is the art and science of defending the Christian faith as true and refuting error contrary to the faith.

b. Relationship

i.      Apologetics in light of the Covenants

1. There are Covenantal promises given which have been fulfilled.

2. There is an evidential value to these Covenantal promises that have been “prophesied” and “fulfilled”.

a. Example: Jesus Christ is the Messiah in light of the promise of the Davidic Covenant.

b. Example: Uniformity of Nature such as set days, months and season is accounted for within the Christian worldview because of the Noahic Covenant (Genesis 8:22).

ii.      The Covenants in light of Apologetics

1. Future Covenantal promises will be fulfilled because the Word of God is true.

2. The truthfulness of the Word of God is the domain of apologetics.

IV. Soteriology

a. Soteriology is the area of theology pertaining to Salvation.

b. Relationship

i.      Soteriology in light of the Covenants

1. Details of Salvation is slowly revealed in the Covenants.

Example: Salvation for the Gentiles is revealed in incipient form through the Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12:3)

2. The fullest expression of Soteriology in the Covenants is found in the New Covenant.

ii.      The Covenants in light of Soteriology

1.  Any proper assessment of the relationship between the Mosaic Covenant to the Abrahamic Covenant must take into account Scripture’s clear testimony of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (Romans 3:27-4:25; Galatians 3).

2. In light of progressive revelation, New Testament understanding of soteriology gives us a fuller perspective of one of the ways that Gentiles has been blessed through the promise found in the Abrahamic Covenant (cf. Romans 1:16).

V. Israelology

a. This is the area of theology that pertains to the doctrine of Israel.

b. Relationship

i.      Israelology in light of the Covenants

1. God is a Covenant keeping God who does what He promise.

2. Biblical Covenants proves that God still has a place for Israel in the future.

ii.      The Covenants in light of Israelology

1. Outside the passages mentioning the Covenants, what does the data of Scripture shows concerning the truth of the promises God covenantally made to Israel?

VI. Eschatology

a. Eschatology is the area of theology that pertains to last things and end times.

b. Relationship

i.      Eschatology in light of the Covenants

1. What are the Covenantal promise of God and concepts from the Covenant that will be fulfilled eschatologically?

Example: There is no unfolding of heaven without the “root of David” (Revelation 5:5)

2. In light of the Biblical Covenants, does Israel as a nation have a role in the future?

ii.      The Covenants in light of Eschatology

Can a Bible-centered eschatology provide any further insight as to when certain Covenantal promises be fulfilled?

VII. Sanctification

a. Sanctification is the initial act of God and the progressive work of God of setting believers apart for Him.

b. Relationship

i.      Sanctification in light of the Covenants

Believers can be sanctified in their hearts and obey God’s law because the New Covenant has promised God’s law written in their hearts (Jeremiah 31:31).

ii.      The Covenants in light of Israelology

Fulfilling God’s Covenantal requirement can only be possible because of God’s sanctification of believers.

VIII. Glory of God

a. The fame of God.

b. Relationship

i.      The glory of God in light of the Covenants

1. Worship- All the great truths about God’s Covenants should lead believers to worship God even more deeply!

a. Give glory to God for the revelation of His Covenants!

b. Give glory to God for what His Covenants promises!

c. Give glory to God for the great and deep truths of the inter-relationship of the Covenants!

d. Give glory to God for how majestically wise He is, to have the Covenants be tied in inter-relationship with other aspects of Christian theology!

e. Give glory to God for how majestically wise He is, to have the Covenants bear implications for the Christian life!

f. Give glory to God for how majestically wise He is, to have the Covenants bear implications for Christian thought!

g. Give glory to God for the beauty of the coherence of the Covenants and other aspects of theology!  The beauty of the great design He has in the intricate inter-relationship and implications of Covenantal truths with other spheres of study!

2. Hope- The Covenants should give believers hope

a. Because as part of the Word of God, the Word of God by design gives hope (Romans 15:4)!

b. Because God has given His promise!

c. Because God is Covenantally faithful!

d. Because the truth of God’s Covenantal promises is a part of the “defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you” (1^st Peter 3:15)

ii.      The Covenants in light of the glory of God

1. No matter what the requirements might be in each respective covenant, “Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1^st Corinthians 10:31).

2. “Whatever you do,” including studying the Biblical Covenants, “do all to the glory of God!”

3. Studying the Covenants itself, no matter how trivial, boring and unimportant some non-Christians and even Christians might think it is, is totally relevant if it glorifies God since all we do should glorify God!  Glorifying God is also relevant!

Read Full Post »

Joseph Prince: Tongues, The Key To A Spirit-Led Life? Part 2

We continue with yesterday’s evaluation of a sermon by Joseph Prince that argues “Speaking in tongues make you supernatural.  So that is the prayer language that every believer should have.” (8:05-8:13).

We are responding to this video:

And for today, we will concentrate on the following excerpt:

They [Note: “non-Charismatics”–Slimjim] will say that we are also baptized in the Holy Spirit.  It’s one thing to have drunk some water, it’s another thing that when you jump into the swimming pool.  One is the water is in you the other is that you are in the water.  How many understand?  Once you received Jesus Christ the Holy Spirit is resident in you.  But once you are baptized in the Holy Spirit the Holy Spirit is president over you.  And you want Him to control your life…For all those who are wondering what’s the benefit of this language?  Well, let me just reason, come let’s reason together, would God on the most important day, on the day of Pentecost, of all the gifts, alright, of all the things God could have done, God gave them the baptism of the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, would you for one moment that God would give them something that would not benefit them, glorify Christ, magnify God?  So whatever the reasoning that people have for not speaking in tongues alright, it is not coming to the level of God’s Word and God’s personal opinion about it.   

(1:35-4:36)

Note in the quote above that baptism of the Holy Spirit is seen as the same thing as speaking in tongues.  Or at least that speaking in tongues is a necessary sign of being baptized in the Holy Spirit.  Joseph Prince even says that those who disagree with his articulated view is contrary to God’s Word.

But the Word of God teaches that the Baptism of the Spirit is distinct from speaking in tongues.  1 Corinthians 12:13 teaches that all believers are baptized by the Spirit into one body:

For [j]by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

Then a few verses later 1 Corinthians 12:29-30 states:

All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of [t]miracles, are they? 30 All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?31 But earnestly desire the greater gifts.

Note verse 30, which ask rhetorically whether all speak in tongues, with the answer being assumed as no ( unless one disagree, in which case then he or she must believe all are prophets and teachers, etc, stated in verse 29, but that would conflict with 1 Corinthians 12:4-11, and 12:14-26 that teaches that the members of the body of Christ have different gifts).

So we see here all are Spirit-baptized in the Body of Christ but that does not mean all will speak in tongues.  One see Paul making that distinction.  Moreover, Paul teaches that all true believers are baptized by the Spirit, while not all speak in tongues.

However, Joseph Prince in our video tries to take the force out of the argument from 1 Corinthians 12:29-30 by making a distinction between the gift of tongues and  speaking in tongues which all believer should have.   But we have already shown in part one that this false distinction does not hold up.  1 Corinthians 12 does have bearing against Prince’s position.  Verse 30 itself says “speak with tongues.”

Concerning his argument from Acts 2, no Christians would deny that on Pentecosts it was beneficial to the believers and that it glorified God.  The question however is whether speaking in tongues is something all believers must have today, so his argument from Acts 2 does not reaches it’s goal posts, since one can logically affirm the benefit and glory to God of the speaking in tongues in Pentecosts without embracing the view that all believers today should speak in tongues.

Read Full Post »

Christian Voter’s Guide for Los Angeles County, November 5th, 2013

From the Election Forum Website.

Ratings:

Every candidate is considered after thorough research; we also have a questionnaire for candidates to complete.

•  : Strongest endorsement for values voters
•  : Above average
•  : Better than opponent, vote represents “lesser of two evils”
• No Endorsement: We either oppose the candidates or have found no reason to support a candidate. If you don’t vote for a candidate or issue, all your other votes still count.

City

Member, City Council; City of Bell Gardens(3 Elected)

• Sergio Infanzon
• Daniel Crespo
• Yvette Silva 
• Jazmina Saavedra 
• Jose J. Mendoza 
• Priscilla Flores

Member, City Council; City of El Monte (2 Elected)

• Norma Macias
• Frank Amezcua 
• Juventino “J” Gomez 

Member, City Council; City of Hermosa Beach(3 Elected)

• Carolyn Petty 
• Jeff Duclos
• Nanette Barragan
• Greg Savelli
• John Bowler
• H. S. Fangary
• Patrick “Kit” Bobko 

Council Member; City of Lomita(3 Elected)

• James Thompson 
• Mark Waronek
• Dave Albert
• James Gazeley
• Ben Traina 
• Cynthia Segawa

Member, City Council; City of Pico Rivera(2 Elected)

• David W. Armenta
• Gustavo Camacho
• Adrian L. Diaz 

Member, City Council; City of Rancho Palos Verdes(2 Elected)

• Anthony Misetich  (I suggest Anthony over Ken)
• Brian Campbell 
• Ken Dyda 

Member, City Council; City of Rolling Hills Estates(2 Elected)

• Clark Davis 
• Cat Spydell
• Steve Zuckerman
• Britt Huff 

Member, City Council; City of South Pasadena(2 Elected)

• Philip C. Putnam 
• Alan Reynolds 
• Diana Mahmud
• Michael A. Cacciotti

 

School

Governing Board Member; ABC Unified School District (3 Elected)

• Olympia Chen
• Daniel Fierro
• Soo Y. Yoo 
• Ethan L. Robinson
• Lynda Johnson

Governing Board Member; Antelope Valley Community College District(3 Elected)

• Betty J. Wienke 
• Barbara E. Gaines
• Steve D. Buffalo 
• Michael R. Adams 
• Richard S. Balogh

Governing Board Member; Antelope Valley Joint Union High School District(3 Elected)

• Barbara Willibrand 
• R. Michael Dutton
• James T. “Jim” Lott 
• Paul O. Scott
• Dana F. Coleman
• John Hutak

Governing Board Member; Culver City Unified School District(3 Elected)

• Robert Zirgulis 
• Claudia Vizcarra
• Kathy Paspalis
• Karlo Silbiger
• Steven Mark Levin
• Susanne Robins 
• Vernon L. Taylor 

Governing Board Member; El Camino Community College District; Trustee Area 2

• John Vargas 
• Nilo Michelin

Governing Board Member; El Camino Community College District; Trustee Area 5

• G. Rick Marshall 
• Cliff Numark
• Aria Shafiee

Governing Board Member; El Rancho Unified School District(3 Elected)

• Rachel D. Canchola 
• Joe Rivera
• Aurora R. Villon
• Fernando Centeno 
• Jose Lara 
• Magdalena “Maggie” Cardenas

Governing Board Member; Garvey Elementary School District(3 Elected)

• John Yuen 
• Maureen Chin
• Ronald Trabanino
• Antonio “Tony” Ramos 
• Bob Bruesch

Governing Board Member; Lancaster School District (3 Elected)

• William “Bill” Buck
• Keith Giles 
• Diane V. Grooms 
• Chris Grado 
• John Michael Rosario
• Sandy Price

Governing Board Member; Palmdale School District (3 Elected)

• Joyce Ricks
• Sandy Corrales
• Carol A. Stanford
• Jeffrey E. Ferrin
• Nancy K. Smith 
• Michelle D. Whitaker
• Jeffrey D. Moffatt
• Don F. Wilson 
• Stacy Fournier
• David Markov
• Juan Carrillo

Governing Board Member; San Gabriel Unified School District(3 Elected)

• Maribel Arreola-Gonzalez
• Ken K. Tcheng 
• Gary Thomas Scott 
• Philip Hu

Governing Board Member; Torrance Unified School District (3 Elected)

• John Paul Tabakian 
• Michael Patrick Wermers 
• Martha Deutsch
• Mark Steffen

Governing Board Member; West Covina Unified School District (3 Elected)

• Mike Spence   
• Dibbie Touhey  
• Karen Ambrust  

 

Local Measures

NO –  Measure A Four-Year Term for Mayor — City of Hawthorne (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required)

Shall the directly elected mayor for the City of Hawthorne serve a four-year term of office rather than a two-year term of office, so that all members of the City Council of the City of Hawthorne serve four-year terms of office, effective for the 2015 election?

NO – Measure B Postmidnight Business Hours — City of Hermosa Beach(Ordinance – Majority Approval Required)

Shall an ordinance be adopted to incrementally, over a five-year period, reduce the postmidnight operating hours of specified businesses in the downtown area of Hermosa Beach?

NO –  Measure S Oil Extraction Tax — City of Santa Fe Springs (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required)

Shall Ordinance No. 1044, which would increase the oil barrel tax charged to operators of oil wells in the City from $.20 per barrel to an amount ranging from a minimum of $.41 to a maximum of $.52 per barrel, be adopted?

YES – Measure W Formation of a Wiseburn Unified School District — Proposed Wiseburn Unified School District

         (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required)

Shall the Wiseburn School District be reorganized to form the Wiseburn Unified School District from part of the territory formerly covered by the Centinela Valley Union High School District?

NO –  Measure EM Extension of Mayoral Term to Four Years — City of El Monte (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required)

Shall the term of office for the elected office of Mayor be extended from two (2) years to four (4) years, commencing with the 2015 General Municipal Election cycle?

NO –  Measure GG Temporary Essential City Services Preservation Measure — City of El Monte

         (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required)

To preserve and stabilize funding for essential public services such as keeping the City’s four fire stations open; maintaining staffing levels for emergency response police services; street lighting and repair; senior services; and youth parks programs and to build the City’s “rainy day” general fund reserves, shall the City’s existing one half of one percent (1/2%) transactions and use tax be extended for five years?

YES – Measure RM Rotating Mayor Measure — City of El Monte (Ordinance – Majority Approval Required)

Shall the City Council be reorganized to replace the current structure of one elected Mayor serving a two-year term and four elected Council Members serving staggered four-year terms with a structure composed of five elected City Council Members who will share the title of Mayor on a rotating basis subject to voter approved procedures for accomplishing the rotation?

Read Full Post »

Joseph Prince: Tongues, The Key To A Spirit-Led Life? Part 1

I have not heard of Joseph Prince before our mini-series focusing on popular leaders of the Charismatic movement in the Asian scene.  Our other blogger, EvangelZ, was the one who told me about him and how I should look him up.  It seems like he is a Charismatic prosperity gospel preacher with a big church in Singapore call New Creation Church.  His popularity is beyond Asia, and even here in the US.

His ministry uploaded a clip on Youtube from his sermon titled “Tongues–The Key To A Spirit-Led Life.”

The purpose of his message is clear:

Speaking in tongues make you supernatural.  So that is the prayer language that every believer should have.” (8:05-8:13).

He believes Christians SHOULD speak in tongues.  But in order to make his argument, he has to make two assumptions necessary for his case:

• Speaking in tongues is not the same thing as the gift of tongues.
• Those baptized in the Holy Spirit will speak in tongues.

In this post we will focus only on the first premise, that speaking in tongues is not the same thing as the gift of tongues.  Joseph Prince articulates and argue for this distinction between speaking in tongues and the gift in tongues seven minutes into the clip, saying:

So the biggest problem, the body of Christ today is that Charismatics who is baptized in the Spirit see it as a sign, alright, that they are baptized and that’s it but they don’t exercise the gift.  Now, many a times they exercise the gift when they come to church.  And that was the problem in the church of Corinth where Paul wrote trying to control of the gift of tongues.  Now gift of tongues, not everybody has the gift of tongues mentioned in 1 Corinthians 14, 12 and all that, where it talks about where you don’t have an interpreter, keep quiet.  Now that’s the gift of tongues.  All of us have the sign that Jesus said in Mark and this sign will follow those that believed, alright?  One of the signs is that they shall speak with new tongues.  Our Lord Jesus said that.  This sign will follow the believers.  Didn’t say pastors.  Believers.  Didn’t say Apostles and prophets.  Believers.  One of the biggest sign is what?  They shall speak with new tongues.” (7:01-7:58)

So while “not everybody has the gift of tongues,” Joseph Prince believes that the Bible teaches all believers “shall speak with new tongues.’

Joseph Prince might say this distinction parallel evangelism and giving:

1. While some have the spiritual gift of giving (Romans 12:8), yet all believers are commanded to give (Romans 12:13, 1 Corinthians 16:1-2, 2 Corinthians 9:6-7, etc).
2. While some have the spiritual gift of evangelism(Ephesians 4:11), yet all believers are commanded to evangelize/witness (Matthew 28:19-20, 1 Peter 3:15, etc).

Spiritual gifts will differ from individual to individual (Romans 12:6) but that doesn’t mean if we don’t have the spiritual gift of evangelism or giving that we cease giving and witnessing.

But does this distinction applies to the issue of speaking in tongues?  It doesn’t seem likely.  Note that in order for the gift/general function distinction to apply, it is necessary that God’s Word gives a command to believers in general to practice it.  While God does tells believers in general to witness and give, there are no imperative verbs in the New Testament ordering believers to speak in tongues.  Thus, Joseph Prince is not biblically warranted to make such the distinction between spiritual gift and practice of tongues.

However, Joseph Prince does attempt to show from the Bible that all believers should speak in tongues.  Recall how in the quote above he said, “All of us have the sign that Jesus said in Mark and this sign will follow those that believed, alright?  One of the signs is that they shall speak with new tongues.”  That passage in Mark in Mark 16:17, which says

These [d]signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues

As Prince stated, here in verse 17 it says “those who have believed,” and not just a subset of believers such as Pastors, apostles, etc.

But there are two good reasons why Mark 16:17 doesn’t support Prince’s cause.

First off, there is an issue of textual criticism with the end of Mark 16, in which verse 9 and following is disputed to be part of the original since many of the older and reliable manuscripts does not attests to anything beyond verse 8.  I myself believe the Gospel of Mark ends in Mark 16:8.

Secondly, even if we assume Mark 16:17 is part of the Greek autograph and therefore is legitimately part of God’s Word, this still doesn’t help with Joseph Prince’s cause.  I believe that the context of the immediate verse in Mark 16:18 strongly imply that we see a limitation of Mark 16:17 applying universally to all believers at all time.  Note verse 18 states:

 they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

I would not want to see Joseph Prince pick up dangerous serpents and drink poison today.  If he believes that there are some exclusion to verse 18 being the case today, then I would say that to be consistent the context strongly demands an exclusion for the application of verse 17 for today also.  Thus Mark 16:17 does not provide (1) the warrant for Joseph Prince to assert that all believers are obligated to speak in tongues, (2) nor that which is necessary to establish the distinction of the gift of tongues and the act of tongues.

Read Full Post »

More October 2013 Presuppositional apologetics Links

The following are links on Presuppositional apologetics between October 15th-21st, 2013.  Enjoy!

1.) Review of Van Til’s An Introduction To Systematic Theology

2.) Van Tilian Poetry

3.) Presuppositions and Harmonization: Luke 23:47 as a Test Case By Vern Poythress

4.) Peripatetic 20 – Islam and the Continuing Assertions of Yasser Ali

5.) A recent teaching by Jeff Durbin on Presuppositional apologetics:

Read Full Post »

Strange Fire confiscates Mark Driscoll’s books?

This video says it all.  No additional commentary needed.

Read Full Post »

October Links Related to Strange Fire and the Charismatic

Here are some great links that I encourage you to read if you want to know more  in order to sharpen your discernment in the area of the Charismatic.

1) Here is an open letter to Mark Driscoll by a seminary librarian who I know and have made various conversations with.  This is an excellent post clarifying the Mark Driscoll arrival at Strange Fire Conference: Open Letter to Mark Driscoll

2) Here is a great post by a brother concerning the charismatic chaos in Africa: Strange Fire – The African Import of Charismatic Chaos – Conrad Mbewe

3) Here is a video of an individual who reveals a major flaw by implying that cessationism has a deficient Gospel.  But how does Cessationism impact soteriology?  Sovereign Grace, Spiritual Gifts, and the Pastor: How Should a Reformed Pastor Be Charismatic?

4) Great summaries concerning the messages at Strange Fire by Tim Challies:

• Strange Fire Conference: John MacArthur’s Opening Address
• Strange Fire Conference: John MacArthur Tests the Spirits
• Strange Fire Conference: A Case for Cessationism
• Strange Fire Conference: Scripture Alone
• Strange Fire Conference: Preachers or Witch Doctors?
• Strange Fire Conference: MacArthur’s Appeal to His Continuationist Friends

5) Here is a classic book written by the great B.B. Warfield, a  bona fide scholar: Counterfeit Miracles

6) Here is another book to read that provides the exegetical basis for cessationism.  It is written by NT scholar, Dr. Robert Thomas, Understanding Spiritual Gifts: A Verse-by-Verse Study of 1 Corinthians 12-14

7) Strange Fire Audio is now up: Audio

8)  Here are some other articles on Cessationism and Continuationism that was complied by Fred Butler (http://hipandthigh.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/articles-on-cessationism-and-contiuationism/) and Lyndon Unger’s “Quick Thought: My Response to Mark Driscoll on Cessationism and the Trinity” over at http://mennoknight.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/quick-thought-my-response-to-mark-driscoll-on-cessationism-and-the-trinity/

9) Here is a website that has great Cessationism resources: The Ultimate Cessationism Resource

Read Full Post »

Review: Memoirs of the Way Home: Ezra and Nehemiah by Gerald M. Bilkes

NOTE: This book is provided to me free by Reformation Heritage Books and Cross Focused Reviews without any obligation for a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.

Purchase: Westminster | Amazon

This is a short paperback devotional commentary on the book of Ezra and Nehemiah.  It is written by a faculty member of the Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary.  I appreciated the work’s devotional flavor.  Reading through the book I wanted to see how the author would go about using other Scripture for cross referencing in light of the fact that Gerald Bilkes is a professor of biblical theology.  He definitely is Christ-centered and Gospel driven.  In addition, he gives New Testament priority in his hermeneutics.  Thus, Bilkes sees both the book of Ezra and Nehemiah as being about the journey of conversion which leads him to notice that both Ezra and Nehemiah resembled the parable of the Prodigal Son: The fallen son has returned home to the Father.  However the author sees it more than mere similarity since Bilkes invokes this parable again and again: It would be correct to say that Bilkes sees Ezra and Nehemiah through the interpretative lens of the parable.  I think this can downplay other details and movements within the passage of Ezra or Nehemiah.  I also wished that the book could have gone deeper in it’s exposition of Ezra and Nehemiah; I was yearning for more moments in the book where perhaps the author might have given exegetical insights that I would have not gotten if I were to read Ezra and Nehemiah on my own.  Nevertheless this devotional was spiritually profitable and I appreciate Bilkes format of ending each chapter with some follow up questions.  One definitely sees the influence of Puritans upon the author, with the book’s probe of the reader’s heart and motive.

Read Full Post »

Jaeson Ma’s New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) roots

We have written in the past concerning the Charismatic preacher turned Music Artist Jaeson Ma.  Although Jaeson Ma is no longer actively pastoring, he still preaches though it seems that he has been focusing more on his career with entertainment in the Asian and Asian American market than pastoring.

I think one cannot understand Jaeson Ma without understand the root that is driving his theology and specifically of his root with the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR).

On the Elijah List, a website that collects Charistmatic and Third Wave types of “prophecies,” one find that Cindy Jacob’s claim of Jaeson Ma as a “son in the Lord”:

Cindy Jacobs: God Says: “I Want My People to Pray In a New Pentecost that will Sweep the Face of the Earth”
by Cindy Jacobs
Apr 15, 2010

On December 31, 2009, the Holy Spirit spoke through me and said, “I’m going to shake the earth. You will begin to see earthquakes—I am going to shake everything that can be shaken. Look where the earthquakes are hitting because God is going to release a wind of Pentecost in those places.”

…
Another place of shaking was Los Angeles, California. Jaeson Ma, my son in the Lord…

Accessed here: http://www.elijahlist.com/words/html/textonly-041510-Jacobs.html

Cindy Jacobs is herself a false prophet.  That has been documented by Sandy Simpson and another example of her failed predication can also be seen here.

So in dealing with Jaeson Ma’s theology, one must come to grasp and refute the New Apostolic Reformation.  Check out the following link with many helpful articles HERE.

Read Full Post »