by Frank Turk
If you could have seen what it took to make this happen, you'd be more impressed than if we actually spoke in tongues.
Here's roughly 30 minutes in which Dan and I discuss the high points of the last 3 weeks regarding DaGifts. Choose your file format wisely.
Enjoy.
If you could have seen what it took to make this happen, you'd be more impressed than if we actually spoke in tongues.
Here's roughly 30 minutes in which Dan and I discuss the high points of the last 3 weeks regarding DaGifts. Choose your file format wisely.
Enjoy.
27 comments:
Luv ya one star hater!
I sound auto-tuned.
(c:
(Not that that's necessarily bad)
I blame the equipment, Google, and Audacity (the software, not our mutual gumption).
I feel like "The World-Tilting Gospel for Pinheads" really needs to be a thing now.
All we need is a publisher, a cartoonist, and a marketing commitment.
Great post! Much shorter and more readable than usual. Keep it up!
captcha: 1 fanboy
Memo from the under-rowers at TeamPyro International Headquarters:
We have placed the audio clip on continuous loop and it has made the long hours chained to the oars much more gratifying. It is nice to know our stigmata is "Purpose driven," and we now feel like "Every day is Friday."
That is all.
I think the title of the Post is apropos.
In the age of Tweets, Texts and even Blogs, there is something to be said for the sit-down meeting of the minds.
I would love to hear more from the Pyro guys in the future
All we need is a publisher, a cartoonist, and a marketing commitment.
Salary?
Benefits package?
Discount at company store?
This is going to be a difficult analogy, but bear with me.
At the end of the day, the difference between Carl Trueman and John Piper is somewhat like the difference between Franklin Roosevelt and Jimmy Carter.
Both Roosevelt and Carter were honorable men. Both loved this country and appreciated the freedoms which it has enjoyed. And both had a fatal flaw in their political understanding. It was, in fact, the same flaw (the point at which the Trueman/Piper analogy breaks down - I get it.) Both believed that greater government intervention in every level of social and economic existence was the way to preserve those freedoms. They were, to put it plainly, both socialists.
But there was a difference. Each was confronted with a form of socialism far more extensive and extreme than his own. Each lived in a day when the evil of socialism taken to its extreme became a threat to human existence. Roosevelt’s response to that was to bludgeon National Socialism to death, wrecking his own health and ultimately dying in the process. Carter, on the other hand, responded to Soviet Socialism with a policy of retreat. “Not our problem” was the essence of his foreign policy.
As a result, Roosevelt is remembered as a hero in spite of the tragedy of his domestic policy. Carter, on the other hand, has become a national joke. I’ve been referring to him in the past tense because I don’t know how else to speak of the honorable man he once was.
Now Piper and Trueman do not hold to the same flaw, and one could debate endlessly which flaw matters more. But both live in a day in which others have taken their flaw to a fatal extreme. Yet Trueman’s disgust for Federal Visionism is a a matter of a record, while Piper’s response to charismatic excess remains “…” (And yes, this might be a reason why Doug Wilson does fit in the Jimmy Carter category.)
Doug Wilson : Jimmy Carter
::
Actual Basset Hound : Droopy Dog
However, Tom: that's gonna leave a mark.
C'mon, Frank--we all know Douglas Wilson would have to be a Black and Tan Coonhound.
(I'll show myself out, everybody.)
I know a really good cartoonist!
When my wife and I were seeking out a new church to be members of in our new town, we went to one where after sitting under God-glorifying, Christ-exalting music in worship, a welcoming body of believers, and a good educational sermon on the state of Israel and select passages of scripture (albeit with some Christianese "God told me" stuff that we were willing to somewhat tolerate), that the pastor closed his talk by saying "Thus saith the LORD". My wife and I quaked at that.
Well, I gave the guy the benefit of the doubt, that perhaps we just had a difference in understanding, so I emailed him my concerns. Turns out he believed whole-heartedly that because he had authority under God to lead and pastor that body, that it also carried with it the authority to claim that whatever he taught was directly from the Lord Himself and carried that authority. As you guys mentioned, that kind of thinking carries with it necessary consequences that are very damaging.
Worth the 1/2 hr to listen, and recommending!
Great Podcast! Like most great interviews and sermons I found a number of questions answered and new new questions formed. Could you or maybe even a thoughtful reader help me in clarifying when separation should take place on matters such as these?
For example, I in the city where I live there is a "Prince of Mars Hills Type" who is hosting an event and the keynote messenger is a "New Testament Commentary Survey Type" (I'm in Ohio so I am not speaking of these two individuals explicitly).
I have been flooded with phone calls. I have publicly affirmed the one for my people to invest in their books but I have also publicly warned my people about associating with the other. (By the way the "Prince Type" in the Northwest would be the shadow of the Substance here in Ohio)
I have been invited to attend and speak at one of the breakout sessions and I am honestly conflicted. Could you please offer an opinion, it doesn't have to be to this specific event, but just an overall general principle that either of you gentlemen or your readers practice in separation.
Allen
By the way, I have extremely thick skin, so if this post is off topic don't hesitate to report to the principal.
Thanks!!
Allen --
Who is Todd?
Frank and Dan,
You had extremely well reasoned and nuanced tone in that podcast. Therefore, I approve its content.
~RPB's everywhere
http://bit.ly/1eKdLaH
Jared --
You actually just hurt my feelings.
Allen/Todd:
Having a big church is not a vice. Acting like a Prince because you have a big church rather than as a pastor is a vice.
Apply directly to your forehead, no charge.
Thanks for responding. I was pretty much leaning from becoming involved so you confirmed my initial thoughts.
FYI - I am a junior and after 22 years of being referred to as "little Todd" I thought I would branch out and be my own man after college and go by my middle name Allen!!!
After years of bills..... I don't mind little Todd!!!
On a serious note, these discussions are very helpful and the way Pyromaniacs communicates is very helpful. I oftentimes walkaway from so much nice talk in blogs and fear of being mean and uncharitable I don't know if there is an actual rebuke!!!!???!?!?? So thanks gentlemen!!!
As Vance Havner says "Better you rock the boat then let them wreck boat!!!!"
Very nice chat, men. And it's always a treat to further attach voices to the print and photos of online friends.
You both have alluded to it in many ways, but I think it's worth remembering what is the CORE GOAL of this [may I say] "consipiracy".
And why, therefore, I agree with Frank and Dan that it's both "big" and "huge".
If it is, as I believe, a conspiracy among:
--Intellectuals who want to sound like wise prophets;
--Anti-Intellectuals who spit on hard-earned theology, often because they don't know how to do theology;
--Blatant Power-mongers who think they are the Star Wars Emperor shooting electric from their finger-tips;
--Pseudo-humble Power-mongers who think they are Yoda, quietly Jedi-ing around;
--Simple housewives, auto mechanics, teachers, Christian singers, etc., many of whom have been "pretending" the gifts for so long that they're just plain embarrassed to admit it's a hoax and a scam, and they've moved from the front jumping-up-and-down pew to the back how-did-we-ever-get-caught-up-in-this-? pew (if they're not already out the door); and of course,
Demons, who of course, promote doctrines of demons -- it's their job...
IF it's a Conspiracy, what is the CORE GOAL of that conspiracy?
It's this: to act as a Trojan Horse to bring into the Church questions about the accuracy and sufficiency of the Word of God.
From the Garden serpent, to the ancient heretics, to Asuza Street, to the modern quasi-christian cults, to Charisma Mag, to most of TBN, the goal has at least been consistent.
And a bunch, maybe even a majority, of the participants don't even know what they are doing.
Frank/Dan,
Is it the apocalypse? A Teampyro podcasts? Have you guys done this before? Please try to do it more often (although not to the detriment of family or ministry.)
Sorry this is a long comment guys and has to be in 2 parts. I just couldn't shorten it.
(1) When you guys brought up that a major part of the pastoral role is to stand up and speak against heresy and error it reminded me of about 6-7 years before I left the Foursquare church.
I spent some time there as a new Christian because I didn't know any better at the time. But by the time of this story I was already coming around to the conclusion that the whole charismatic thing was a sham. I was an undercover Calvinist teaching reformed doctrine to the youth group there on Thursday nights, but I was very tactful about my approach.
Anywho, I was there for several years and the church held an annual revival and brought in this 'evangelist' clown who was obviously cut from the same cloth as guys like Kenneth Copeland/Haggin/WoF. He would put on a good show, sing, spew a bunch of WoF teachings (sometimes word for word from the forked tongue of Ken Copeland or friends.) The guy spoke well and was funny at times but it was obvious what he was all about ie $$$Da Paper$$$. He would set aside one night for 'prophetic words' and we would all line up like suckers and get our very own special 'word from the lord'. The first year I participated and when I came up he said "Oh the devil hates this one a lot!", which made me happy, then he went on to say, "The Lord is going to send you back from where he found you to help others... but you're not ready, he is going to anoint you for this work". Well this made perfect sense to me because before the Lord stepped into my life, shattered it, and changed everything, I was a half crazy backwoods meth cook. So this was great and I really tried to swallow the pill and believe he was a 'prophet' or whatever but I kept regurgitating the nonsense.
One thing he did that made me sick is that he had an assistant bring up a stack of envelopes and he proceeded to 'anoint' them with olive oil. Then he said that 'the lord told him' that there was 10 people there who were going to sew a $100 seed of faith and they would recieve the 100 fold blessing. 10 people lined up and to my embarrassment, that first year I was one of those 10 saps... *face of shame*... (to be continued in next comment)
(part 2)
Anyways, I could go on and on, but eventually by the grace of God, I studied and sharpened up. The 3rd year I was well studied, and much more doctrinally sharp and had 4 lovely pedals on my tulip *the fifth came later thanks to Phil Johnson ;)*.The revival meeting came around and I did not want to go but as I was the youth pastor I was forced to go to at least 2 of the meetings. I went with my notebook and I took notes on every error, heresy, and heterodox practice the guy uttered or acted out. Then one thing really put a nail in the coffin of this so called 'prophet': During the night when they all lined up for their magic 'prophetic words', one Mexican fella who looked a little rough around the edges came up and that dirty evangelist gave him the SAME EXACT 'prophetic word' he had given me 2 years earlier... That was it! I took my notebook and all my fervent righteous indignation and I wrote a lengthy diatribe raising a number of serious allegations and doctrinal points to the Pastor. I totally and mercilessly gunned that filthy 'evangelist' down. Apparently there were others who had issues but mine had a healthy backbone of scripture and the Pastor actually appeared to listen to me. He said he would never have the guy back and the Pastor even admitted he was wrong and was bothered by a few things.
I felt like this was a victory but one thing really bothered me (and this is what you guys brought up in your talk): The Pastor never once stood up in front of the congregation to admit it was a mistake. He never once denounced any of the false teachings in front of the church. He never said anything bad about that money grubbing charlatan of a false prophet. Months later I heard a young couple who had been members there for some time talk about said evangelist fondly, and said they 'were looking forward to having him again'....My stomach turned and I was upset... So they were never told by the Pastor that the guy was actually a wolf, a snake, and a crook? Was it because the Pastor didn't want to look like he made the wrong decision in the first place to save his own face? Or was he afraid because somewhere in the back of his head that little pentecostal demon was saying to him 'don't raise your hand against God's anointed'...'dont quench the spirit'?. The Pastor either did not see the harm done or was too scared to make it public. After that I lost a great deal of respect for the Pastor and within a year I left the church. True story.
Like so many others (both who have commented and who usually lurk quietly like me), I want to thank you both for all of the great work you have done in providing a sound Scriptural basis for understanding this issue. It was invaluable to me last spring when I had to take over the teaching of our adult Bible study class on 1 Corinthians just when we hit chapter 12.
The issue you raised of not rebuking the false teachings reminded me of a survey from Bethlehem Baptist Church under the direction of Piper: http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/taste-see-articles/testing-bethlehems-charismatic-quotient
The results were troubling in so many areas. For example, they had 2 people say they definitely had the gift of healing with another 38 (25%) of the respondents saying "maybe." In the article, Piper's response to these results were:
"What if just half of the 38 people who think they may have a gift for healing really do? What a ministry they could have among the sick of our people! Should we have a “healing squadron” on alert?"
Shouldn't there have been rebuke on the people who were not using their gift (assuming they actually had it)? Should you really need a survey to find out who in the congregation has the gift of healing? And, if just 1 person had the gift of healing as described in the New Testament, there would not be need for a 2nd within the congregation since everyone could already be healed.
Similar problems came out regarding the gift of prophecy. 3 people reported having the gift of prophecy while another 32 (21%) responding "maybe." What is a "maybe prophet". Are these "maybe prophets" free to give their "maybe prophecies"? Unfortunately, they are because of the problems you two highlighted of giving cover to basically everyone and there being no test for a false prophet.
As you have noted, the big names (say a Piper) with otherwise sound theology give cover to other false prophets with much worse theology (say Beth Moore) who end up sounding a lot like yet even worse false prophets (like Sarah Young). How does someone under the shepherd of these respected individuals learn how to draw the line on this slippery slope? Most people do not have the background to make or even recognize the distinctions.
Dan and Frank Hour sounds like a plan.
Post a Comment