This video is convicting to me. Very convicting. Do I spend all of my energy to partner with the Spirit to save the lost? Do I actually care about them? and prove it by my actions & words?
I have so much to grow in to and learn. I must pursue courage. And honor my Lord.
I don't know if Mr. Bashir is a Christian or not. He seems to be interviewing as a normal journalist would, seeking the truth and logically applying statements to understand their conclusions.
I appreciated this interview b/c it focused on logic and formal debate. There was no emotionalism that I could detect on the part of Mr. Bashir. And since we don't know if he is a Christian or not, it makes it easier to accept that he probably doesn't have a horse in the fight of whether Pastor Bell is orthodox or not.
Pastor Bell's chief argument against Mr. Bashir appears to me to be reducible to: "It's ok to believe whatever you want about Heaven and Hell as long as you can find someone in the history of Christianity who has believed it too." This seems terribly irresponsible for a pastor to tell his followers that truth and falsehood don't matter when it comes to understanding who God is. Isn't that the whole point of the second commandment? By not being clear, he is in effect suggesting to his parishioners that it's ok to worship a false god.
I also wanted to address a tweet I read about this interview earlier in the week: "Not sure why everyone is claiming victory based on @realrobbell 's interview with Martin Bashir. Truth isn't based on who can argue better." Sure a particular position (truth) can be correct, regardless of whether someone can argue well on its behalf. If my 4 year old can't put together a cogent argument to defend the pythagorean theorem, that doesn't make the theorem false. But if a particular truth is valid, there should be a logical defense of that truth. In our math example, a college math teacher (aka an expert in the field of math) could easily make the argument.
In this case we're not talking about a 4 year old being out of their depth, but we're talking to an expert in the field, a pastor talking about doctrine. In fact it's not just any doctrine, but it's a doctrine that the pastor in question seems to have studied well enough to write a book about it. If he can't argue his point cogently against a journalist who likely hasn't been to seminary and hasn't been studying the topic for the last x months, then how can we say that the 'truth' being defended by the pastor is valid? He of all people should be able to make logical arguments to defend it.
So no, truth isn't based on who can argue better. But if a qualified agent can't argue for a position they have established, then the veracity of that position is certainly questionable. Especially if their opponent argues better for their contrary position.
Where does that leave me? It challenges me to 1 Peter 3:15: "15butin your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy,always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect," I need to: (1) Honor Christ as Holy (2) be prepared by studying and thinking about what the Bible says about who Christ is so that I can honor Him as Holy (3) Join with the Spirit, and be able to cogently dialogue with others about the truths in the Bible, in order to lead them to the truth the Bible proclaims. (4) be gentle and respectful.
Anyone want to guess which of those 4 steps are the hardest for me?
Overall I don't care if he uses visual tricks, pumping music, and cool clothes. I don't particularly identify with it, but I lump that in with the "all things to all people that some might hear the Gospel". Similar to how I think we should translate the Bible to other languages, and dress appropriately to the culture so as not to offend.
That said here are a few of the things that most disturbed me. I'm trying hard to stick to the issues he brings up in the video. If any hint of distaste for Rob himself is interpreted, please know that I bear him personally no animosity. BUT I do carry much resentment for the concepts that he espouses and then tries to label as Christianity.
-- "If Death is all we have to look forward to, then Despair is our only hope." Before I get to the stuff I didn't like, I did want to point out that the beginning of his piece is pretty right on. I completely agree that without Christ despair is our only expectation. I would probably add that there's something more dangerous than despair though, and that's the judgment of God against sinners. It's not just this world we must fear, but the next. I may have a slightly different methodology so I don't mean to throw very hard stones at the 'despair' approach. However I don't know of any examples where Jesus started a witnessing encounter with a discussion of their despair. I know of many where He began by discussing their sin.
-- "This world matters to God, this world that God is restoring and Redeeming." This particular concept is rampant nowadays. Frankly the scripture support for this concept is very slim. In fact can anyone site an example where God says He's even going to keep this world? I thought He was going to create a new heavens and a new earth and destroy this one. In contrast to 'restoration' as the church's mission, the scriptural support for the church's mission as a disciple making body is much stronger. As far as I can tell, the main reason many churches have been pushing this 'restore the planet' agenda is because its much more appealing to the rest of the world than hearing a message about man's sin and need for a savior. Can anyone point to any examples in scripture where Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, or John recommended that we redeem the world politically or socioeconomically, apart from an out-growth of our desire and ability to share the gospel? Sure they took care of the poor, but they did it either for people who were already in the body, or as a gateway to share the gospel with them.
-- "Every act of good matters and will go on" This doesn't have any scriptural basis that I can think of. If anyone has any examples I'd be interested to hear it. On the other hand there are many verses that talk about how our works are nothing more than filthy rags. I think this message, like most of Rob's messages, are meant to be out-reach messages. Hearing this is very confusing if you don't know that your works can't contribute to your salvation. In fact i'd go so far as to say the confusion is dangerous. Because if you think you can earn your way to God's good side, then you are on the 'broad road leading to destruction'
-- "Everything that elevates the soul is a taste of what will be." This sparks very much of universalism. To me, I hear him implying: "Believe whatever makes you feel good and elevates you." On the other hand, Jesus was pretty clear that He was the Way, the Truth, and the Life. And that no one could come to the Father but through Him. If Rob is serious about presenting the gospel, why wouldn't he be clear about it? Why would he twist it to try and be more 'encompassing'. The gospel is quite narrow. Paul is pretty clear about this in most of his epistles because people kept trying to broaden it. The Galatians tried to add Judaism, the Corinthians tried to add pagan practices, the Greeks tried to add philosophy. Our current culture tries to add "everything" so that no one is left out. Instead we should be pointing to the scriptures which proclaim that there is only way to heaven, and that is via the propitiating sacrifice of Jesus for our sins.
As I said in the last post I had sort of a rough summer. One of the things that God used to snap me out of it was this video. It's a little long (9 min), but it is very very worth your time.
The key point in the video is around 4:24-4:32 where the 'God' character says to the 'me' character "I made you good, so be good."
This is so true. I always want like a 5 step plan to get back to God. Or some special event that I should be doing to get Him to love me again. Really it comes down to repenting and obeying. Again at 4:52-5:05 the 'me' character confesses that he is always letting God down. The 'God' character says, "no its not you holding me. I hold you up. I'm the one that holds this relationship together" Amen.
Its hearing this that makes me want to give over to Him my anxiety and weakness. This is why I want to worship God. This is why I want to give my life to Him. Because He condescends to love and lift me up. I can't understand why He is so great and kind to me. I just want to praise Him in response.
p.s. Time 3:47 is great too. That's where the Gospel is first laid out. I'm sort of tearing up as I watch the video again so that I can write this post.
Here's a quick video (9 minutes) from Mark Driscoll, (of Mars Hill). His main points are: 1) A healthy church plant will have a lead man who is well qualified, and really more soldierly than pastoral in the early stages of his church. 2) A healthy church plant will have a mission to turn men into leaders in the church by discipling and training them how to be men of God, who care for their families and lead others to Christ. 3) A healthy church plant is all about the message: sharing about a man, Jesus, who was on a mission, to die for mankind, and redeem them from judgement.
I pray that my church would watch this video change to emulate Driscoll's teaching.
I pray that I could watch this video and change to reflect its truth.
