Showing posts with label Bad Theology Alerts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bad Theology Alerts. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

GO BIG!

If you write a book, particularly a Christian book, you probably don't want your first paragraph to end with this sentence...
"So, we tell our story up front so it can be the foundation for your BIG dream." [Go Big (Nashville: Abingdon, 2006), vii.]

There's only one person's story that I will use as a foundation for my life...and I'm sorry to say it's not Bil Cornelius and Bill Easum's:^)

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Bad Theology Alert: Guess the Book!

UPDATE: Here's the Answer...

Captivating, by John and Stasi Eldredge



Guess what book these quotes are from… Nope not the Da Vinci Code with the concept of the “divine feminine”…No…not the book of Oprah fame called The Secret. Here’s a hint, it is labeled as a “Christian” book. And it is was published by Thomas Nelson Books 4/7/2005. AND it's really popular in Christian circles.

[I've put them in categories to show what errors I see in the book]

(1) Postmodern
He [the Son of God] came to restore the glorious creature that you are. And then set you free . . . to be yourself (pg. 95).”

(2) Divine Feminine?
“The essence of a woman is Beauty. She is meant to be the incarnation our experience in human form of a Captivating God (pg. 130)."

“[woman] is the crescendo, the final, astonishing work of God (25).”

(3) Open Theism
“The same holds true for Mary, the mother of Jesus only it’s far, far more weighty. Her life also turned on an invitation. The angel came as the courier of the King. But still, she needed to say yes. [God] would not force the whole thing upon her. Her heart needed to be willing (pg. 203).”

“And of course the salvation of mankind rested on the courage of a woman, a teenage girl. What if she had said no? (pg. 204).”

(4) An Image Of A Needy God Based Off Of Sinful Humans' Neediness??
“How many of you see God as longing to be loved by you? We see Him as strong and powerful, but not as needing us, vulnerable to us, yearning to be desired (pp. 28-29).”

“God longs to be desired. Just as a woman longs to be desired (pg. 29).”

“It might come as a surprise that Christ asks our permission to come in and heal, but He is kind, and the door is shut from the inside, and healing never comes against our will. In order to experience His healing, we must also give Him permission to come into the places we have so long shut to anyone (pg. 100).”

(5) A Hole In God's Heart??
"You’ve probably heard that there is in every human heart a place that God alone can fill. . . . But what the old poet was saying was that there is also in God’s heart a place that you alone can fill. 'It follows that there is a chamber in God Himself, into which none can enter but one, the individual.' You. You are meant to fill a place in the heart of God no one and nothing else can fill. Whoa. He longs for you (pg. 120).”

(6) This Lover Imagery is Irreverant, Unbiblical, and Sickening!
“What would it be like to experience for yourself that the truest thing about his heart toward yours is not disappointment or disapproval but deep, fiery, passionate love? (113).”

“We must choose to open our hearts again so that we might hear his whispers, receive his kisses (116).”

“He knows what takes your breath away, knows what makes your heart beat faster (116).”

“[God] wants to be known as only lovers can know each other” (120); . . . “you are the one who takes his [God's] breath away (121).”

“[each woman is] made for romance, and the only one who can offer it to you consistently and deeply is Jesus (125).”

“put yourself in the scene as the Beauty, and Jesus as the Lover (114).”

“the most intimate of all the metaphors Jesus chose to describe his love and longing for us, and the kind of relationship he invites us into (114).”

This is garbage. I can't believe a Christian Publisher would sell this stuff!

By the way women are an amazing gracious gift from God...and God does love us enough to send His Son to die for us, but these quotes miss the point of these biblical truths by a mile!

Any guesses on the book??

Friday, March 02, 2007

The Worst Bad Theology Alert [so far] of 2007: "The Secret"

This is an extremely popular book endorsed by Oprah [the idol/god of many American women].

Here are a few quotes to whet your appetite:

"Nothing [good or bad] can come into your experience unless you summon it
through persistent thoughts" (p. 28).

"Your thoughts are the primary
cause of everything" (p. 33).

"Your current reality or your current life is a result of the thoughts you
have been thinking" (p. 71).

"There isn't a single thing that you cannot
do with this knowledge. . . . The Secret can give you whatever you want" (p.
xi).

"...you will come to know how you can have, be, or do anything you
want" (p. xii).

"You are God in a physical body. You are Spirit in the
flesh. You are Eternal Life expressing itself as You. You are a cosmic being.
You are all power. You are all wisdom. You are all intelligence. You are
perfection. You are magnificence. You are the creator, and you are creating the
creation of You on this planet" (p. 164).

"The earth turns on its orbit for You. The oceans ebb and flow for You. The birds sing for You. The sun rises and it sets for You. The stars come out for You. Every beautiful thing you see, every wondrous thing you experience, is all there for You. Take a look around. None of it can exist, without You. No matter who you thought you were, now you know the Truth of Who You Really Are. You are the master of the Universe. You are the heir to the kingdom. You are the perfection of Life. And now you know The Secret" (p. 183).

"...no one will stand in judgment of [your life], now
or ever" (p. 177).



[HT: Lindsey referring me to this review by Don Whitney A Review of The Secret by Rhonda Byrne.]

Also, if you want to know what Oprah thinks of the exclusivity of Jesus for salvation check out this video...keep your eyes open to who is influencing you and your kids!

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Rick Warren and Gregory Boyd What a Pair!


No offense, but I didn't really hear a clear message about what the gospel is from Rick in this interview...what do you think?

Also, although I agree with some of the things the second interviewee [Gregory Boyd] said about Christians and politics...he's a pretty big "bad theology alert" when it comes to his Open Theism...

Warren and Boyd both think the church is to look like Jesus...unfortunately other than social issues they didn't say too much more about what that really means. What about the exclusivity of the gospel. Warren was cornered on the exclusivity of Christ and he acted like he didn't want to say...I don't think you'd see that in the book of Acts. Warren's brief summation of liberalism and evangelicalism was tragically simplistic.

Also, what do you think all of this talk on the kingdom of God? If Charlie Rose was interviewing you...what would you have said? I posted a response to the NY Times report on the sermon series that Boyd was talking about here a while back...it's interesting that he lost 1,000 members over politics...but when it comes to his heretical doctrine on the openness or non-sovereignty of God they stay. Wow!

Interesting stuff...

Saturday, February 17, 2007

Duo Set List: 2/16/2007

Here's an old picture of Steve Gilbertson and I [not very high quality, but that's the best I could do with a glossy picture:)].


Well...the gig last night was great! We played from 6:00 to 8:00pm. It was at a jewelry/art store called M. C. Ginsberg [their philosophy is a bad theology alert:)].

Anyhow, Steve and I had a blast. He was on piano and I was on guitar. We just jammed on standard jazz tunes for a few hours. I love going to a gig with no particular set list in mind and just calling tunes and playing them! Here's the set list in case you're curious...

(1) The Days of Wine and Roses [Mancini] Medium Swing
(2) Blue in Green [Miles Davis] Ballad
(3) Alone Together [Dietz and Schultz] Medium Swing
(4) Stella By Starlight [Victor Young] as a Bossa Nova
(5) There Will Never Be Another You [Warren/Gordon] Medium Swing
(6) All the Things You Are [Hammerstein/Kern] Medium Swing
(7) Calypso [Kenny Baron] Medium/Up Latin Tune
(8) Sandu [Clifford Brown] Medium Swing Blues
(9) Alice in Wonderland [Fain/Hilliard] Jazz Waltz
(10) Summertime [George Gershwin] Bossa Nova
(11) Scrapple From the Apple [Charlie Parker] Medium Bop
(12) It Could Happen To You [Burke/Van Heusen] Medium Swing
(13) Don't Get Around Much Anymore [Duke Ellington] Medium Swing

It all came back pretty quickly. Also, we didn't take any breaks, because we were having so much fun.

If you're still reading...I'll tell you something funny that happened really quickly. We started to play Stella By Starlight [bear in mind that I'm a little rusty] and it sounded terrible. Our intonation was terrible. Steve looked at me like I was messing up and I was looking at him the same way. He lifted up his book and played the first few notes of the head...and I did too and we sounded fine. Then he set his book down again and we tried to start again. It sounded terrible again!

Well, it turned out that Steve had set his music on the "whammy" bar of his piano dropping the pitch by at least a half step. Man, we cracked up! Then we played it in the correct key.

It was a ton of fun...thanks Steve!

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Bad Theology Alert: Flyer



I blurred out the phone #...but not the website...but anyhow, this bad theology alert was torn out of the local [Des Moines] paper. A friend gave this to me on Sunday.

As a church following Christ, hence Christian church, how do they reconcile this add with John 14:6?
"Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. [ESV]"

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Bad Theology Alert

Maybe a better way to say it is "bad psychology alert!"

I was on the fox news web page today and I saw this sentence…
"Some psychologists say sexy displays by your teen may be a good sign"

Wow! You can find people trying to rationalize anything these days. I’m not surprised in light of human depravity.

Thursday, December 07, 2006

"A Love Supreme" Sadly in Need of Clarification…


When I was a junior at Drake University [in DSM, IA] I started to get more serious about my relationship with Jesus Christ. As a jazz musician I tried to find any mentor I could in the Jazz world that was a Christian to justify my newfound seriousness about God. I realize now that justification for believing in the One Triune God needs no justification by men’s testimony [rather by God in His holy Word], but I was very immature in my faith.

The following is a “psalm” Coltrane wrote. It is a personal conversation between him and who he perceived to be God. It’s almost pantheistic or Baha'i in how general/universal it speaks of God. Somehow, this "psalm" and recording strengthened my resolve to seek Christ in college…I’m not sure why. I’d say that it was a was a gift of grace from the One True God [Father, Son, and Holy Spirit...I'm feeling the need to be specific]. If Coltrane was a Christian I wish he wasn’t so vague about whom he believes this God, in his “psalm”, is. Do with it what you will...

I’m thankful for the grace God showed me through this, but in the future I would say that anything that doesn’t mention the Son of God is not necessarily a Christian “psalm”. Nevertheless, the recording of A Love Supreme is a great musical work and it still encourages me to serve and pursue God [I can't say the same for the words of the "psalm" he wrote]. Coltrane musically was a beast. Amazing imagination, sound, technique and more innovative and creative than anyone has been in music since [in my opinion]. Sadly, when it comes to writing, his words and thoughts are in desperate need of clarification. However, his vague expression of who God is in his "psalm" is a good summation of what a lot of folks actually do believe about God today. All the more reason to preach, teach, and pray, because God is a God of revelation of truth...not general realities. Not all paths lead to God [as Coltrane sadly suggests]. Here’s Coltrane’s “psalm”:
“I will do all I can to be worthy of Thee O Lord. It all has to do with it. Thank you God. Peace. There is none other. God is, It is so beautiful. Thank you God. God is all. Help us to resolve our fears and weaknesses. Thank you God. In You all things are possible. We know. God made us so. Keep your eye on God. God is. He always was. He always will be. No matter what…it is God. He is gracious and merciful. It is most important that I know Thee. Words, sounds, speech, men, memory, thoughts, fears and emotions – time – all related…all made from one…all made in one. Blessed be His name. Thought waves – heat waves – all vibrations – all paths lead to God. Thank you God. His way…it is so lovely…it is gracious. It is merciful – thank you God. His way…it is so lovely…it is gracious. It is merciful – thank you God. One thought can produce millions of vibrations and they all go back to God…everything does. Thank you God. Have no fear…believe…thank you God.

The universe has many wonders. God is all. His way…it is so wonderful. Thoughts – deeds – vibrations, etc. They all go back to God and He cleanses all. He is gracious and merciful…thank you God. Glory to God…God is so alive. God is. God loves. May I be acceptable in Thy sight. We are all one in His grace. The fact that we do exist is acknowledgement of Thee of Lord. Thank you God. God will wash away all our tears…He always has…He always will. Seek Him everyday. In all ways seek God everyday. Let us sing all songs to God To whom all praise is due…praise God. No road is an easy one, but they all go back to God. With all we share God. It is all with God. It is all with Thee. Obey the Lord. Blessed is He. We are from one thing…the will of God…thank you God.

I have seen God – I have seen ungodly – none can be greater – none can compare to God. Thank you God. He will remake us…He always has and He always will. It is true – blessed be His name – thank you God. God breathes through us so completely…so gently we hardly feel it…yet, it is our everything. Thank you God. ELATION – ELEGANCE – EXALTATION – All from God. Thank you God. Amen. [John Coltrane – December, 1964]” (I put questionable theology in bold/italics)

Cited from the liner notes of A Love Supreme John Coltrane Deluxe Edition. Copyright 2002. The Verve Music Group, USA (314 589 945-2).

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Bad Theology Alert: Advertisements!

I can't help but post this. We received some advertisements two days ago in the mail...

Tell me what you think!

I. From a house cleaning service...
"[This company] values your opinion."
"[This company] values your time."
"[This company] brings value to you."

Yeah...right.

II. From a bank [this would be funny if it weren't so sad].
"Now there's a bank focused on you. Your life. Your needs. Your community."
"It's all about you. Your needs. Your life. Your community."

They sure do know how to play to the idols of the day...US!

Be careful what you are persuaded by!

Monday, July 31, 2006

Bad Theology Alert [Theory: “Natural Selection gave men souls, not God”]

This article “The Human Factor" from the Guardian caught my eye…

Here are a few snippets with analysis… This is a long one…

"Nicholas Humphrey believes it was 'natural selection' that gave us souls. God, he insists, had nothing to do with it"
[Hmmm… They're off and running.]

"...nearly 40 years later, he has reached a grand theory of how consciousness might have arisen in a Darwinian world, and why it might give us reasons to live."
[I’d like to see the reasons Darwinian evolution gives us a reason to live other than “Eat or be Eaten” this article doesn’t elaborate on this as much as I was hoping.]

"He has been a media don, a campaigner against nuclear weapons and the holder of a chair in parapsychological research who was dedicated to debunking even the possibility of telepathy or survival after death."
[This looks like a possible bias that he held prior to his research. Does that rule out all his research, probably not. Does it expose his motives, yes. So, rigid preconceptions before analyzing data gives you the result you want. Zach Kapfer emailed me this quote of Mark Twain today that relates, "Get your facts first, then you can distort them as much as you please." Looks like Mr. Humphrey’s conception of what fact is [namely Darwinian evolution] determined how he manipulated what he perceived as fact.]

" As an ambitious young man, he set his sights on the biggest biological mystery he could find - human consciousness - so he switched to psychology, and began to work with monkeys under Larry Weiskrantz."
[I find this interesting…He set his sights on the biggest biological mystery he could find…”human consciousness.” So where does he start, but by “working with Monkeys.” Now maybe I’m crazy but that’s a non sequitur. Monkey’s as far as I know do not have “human consciousness.” Once again he’s working from a bias of what he perceives as truth, namely “Darwinian Evolution.”]

"Humphrey was part of the team that first discovered how to record the activity of single nerve cells in a monkey's brain. Two other members later got Nobel prizes for this work, which underlies an enormous amount of subsequent research, since it made it possible to trace the ways in which the visual cortex receives and processes signals from the eyes. It was known in principle what was happening, but now the exact brain cells involved in image processing could be found and monitored."
[Once again…I might be wrong, but this appears to be another non sequitur. How do monkey’s “single nerve cell activity” allowing us to “trace the ways in which the visual cortex receives and processes signals from the eyes” relate to “human consciousness?” Here’s a definition of “consciousness” from wikipedia
Consciousness is a quality of the mind generally regarded to comprise qualities such as subjectivity, self-awareness, sentience, sapience, and the ability to perceive the relationship between oneself and one's environment. It is a subject of much research in philosophy of mind, psychology, neurology, and cognitive science.

Wouldn’t “consciouness” entail more than just the visual sense?]

"His next project was even more ambitious: to work on the aesthetic senses of a monkey."
[Once again studying monkey’s instead of humans. This does encompass the other senses that I was questioning on my last quote. But this bring up another question. Monkey's cannot communicate what they are experiencing through their senses, so how do "scientists" explore "consciousness" with a animal that cannot speak and then pigeonhole that humans are exactly the same way? I don't think you can.]

"Again, the question of what made us different arose: what had been the spur, or the reward, for human evolution, for our language and our consciousness."
[Once again he’s making the assumption that “Darwinian Evolution” is correct, when it is not. Maybe “consciousness” was given to men by God?? If we were to write that consciousness was given by God we would be accused of making an assumption on “Creation.” That would be the same accusation I’m making against him. So, who is correct? Well, I believe I am because I’m relying on the authority for all life and godliness, namely the Bible. I'm a fool for Jesus! The "foolishness of God is wiser than men [1 Cor 1:25]," count me as one of the fools then! Besides depraved minds can't even completely understand themselves, let alone experiments by depraved minds trying accomplish depraved agendas and purposes. I find the Bible to be more trustworthy than human ingenuity.]

"Consciousness, in this theory, is a knowledge of what is going on in our own minds, and we have it so that we can better understand what is going on in the minds of those around us, so that we can manipulate them and avoid being manipulated in our turn. This fits human consciousness into a normal biological framework: it offers the possessor of bigger and better brains the kind of advantage that natural selection can see and work on."
[Bigger and better brains have not always allowed men to “manipulate” and avoid being “manipulated.” Some of the most idiotic people who have lived have come out on top in this regard. I’m not making the connection of how control of people has to do with consciousness…namely one’s awareness of self. Also, a "maniputlator" might just end up "manipulating" ones self...now what are we to make of that?? Natural selection? I think not, try "Depravity."]

"He likes to quote Lord Byron: 'The great object of life is sensation - to feel that we exist, even though in pain.'"
[This is true, I believe. Only I would say it like this, “The great object of life is sensation, to feel and know that we exist to glorify God and enjoy Him forever – even though in pain.” I like that:o) I took that mostly from the Westminster Shorter Catechism #1.]

"In the mid-1990s he was able to move back to Cambridge, to a chair devoted to parapsychological research: since the whole burden of his interest in the subject was that he did not believe in it, he wrote Soul Searching, a book arguing that telepathy must be in principle impossible, and that Jesus was a conjuring charlatan like Uri Geller."
[Wow… is this a self contradiction?? Seems so. He was in a chair of “parapsychological research” because he didn’t believe in it. So he is the very definition of what he calls Jesus “a conjuring charlatan.” Here’s how I interpret that phrase… To evoke to mind [conjuring] elaborate, fraudulent, and often voluble claims to skill or knowledge; a quack or fraud [Charlatan].]

"Yet, at the same time, he was developing a new and more complex theory of consciousness, which puts something like the soul at the centre of human existence. In his new theory the clue to the "hard problem" of consciousness - the problem of why and how minds appear from matter - is attacked head-on. The fact that we find it so difficult and so threatening to believe, as he says, "that there is nothing more to human experience than the churning of chemicals and electrons within the brain" seems to him to contain the kernel of the solution to the hard problem. If it is so difficult for us to think that way, then the difficulty might in some sense have been designed by natural selection."
[This phrase is interesting…”If it is so difficult for us to think that way, then the difficulty might in some sense have been designed by natural selection.” How can “natural selection” design anything. Isn’t the very definition of “natural selection” pretty much randomness? So how can a logical disagreement with the thought "that there is nothing more to human experience than the churning of chemicals and electrons within the brain" be natural selection. Seems to contradict once again.]

"The theory is, like every other theory of consciousness, extremely controversial. After 200 years in which science has appeared to dethrone God and deny the possibility of the soul, Humphrey is the first man to claim that science can agree that we have souls - but that it was natural selection, not God, which gave us them."
[Here’s the punchline…wow! “Science has appeared to dethrone God,” and, “it was natural selection, not God, which gave us them [souls],” well that has been science’s attempt, but it’s ending up to prove the existence of God. Because there’s no authority that can prove that naturalistic science is completely true. They’ve tried, but how do you think postmodernism came about? Well, because modernists’ theories aren’t holding up. It is interesting that he’s the first man trying to harmonize the existence of the soul with modernistic science. I like that he’s at least honest in the fact that there’s something more to human existence and consciousness than just scientific rationalism, problem is that he’s trying to discover and experiment with scientific rationalism. I’ve never heard of a mystic modernistic scientist before:o) Maybe he’ll be the first one! Chances are that his definition of what a soul is is different than mine. Very interesting article!]

I am by no means a scientist, and am open for any correction. Those are just my thoughts. Have a great Monday!

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Beware of “Putting Your Faith in Bono”

Here’s an interesting article on CNN.com (click here to read it) about how some churches are using the music and message of U2 in their Eucharist/communion/remembrance meetings. Have they gone too far??? You be the judge. Below are some interesting quotes with some commentary:
Their focus…,“Brooks said the evening was designed to invigorate his once-aging congregation -- attracting young people and those interested in social activism. ‘We absolutely need to grow in order to survive,’ he said.”

Strong emphasis on social activism and growth...not so much on faith.

The first aim of the church is not social activism…or growth…rather the glory of God. Christ will build His church through the preaching of His Word…we have to focus on being faithful.
“Still, the band members are traditional rock 'n' rollers -- they swear, drink and sing about sex.”

I don't think these are the kind of role models for the church that the author of Hebrews was talking about in Hebrews 13:7
"Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith. (ESV)"

To me social activism and church growth coupled with immoral behavior seems like a contradiction of what the Bible teaches.
“In Providence [Rhode Island], Blair delivered a homily to pitch the One Campaign, which the Episcopal Church supports. She ticked off statistics about poverty and infant mortality in Africa, underscoring her points with equal parts Bono and Bible.”

Equal parts…Bono and the Bible?! Don’t you think that in a church the Bible should at least come before Bono…let alone have an equal emphasis from both Bono and the Bible for their message. The church should underscore its points with the Bible…not Bono too. 1 Timothy 3:16
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. (ESV)”

I don’t see Bono’s name in there…do you?
"If you're a Bono fan, you know the next line: ‘Where you live should not determine whether you live or die,’ she said, then reminding worshippers of a Gospel passage warning that taking care of the needy is what will separate the good from the bad at the final judgment.”

We are definitely commanded to take care of the needy…and this action can be a fruit of genuine faith (Matthew 25:40)…but the way this is phrased makes it sound like human works have some sort of merit to “be separated [as good] in the final judgment.” A call to social activism without mention of Ephesians 2:8-9
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast, (ESV)”

In a Christian church meeting is a big issue. To emphasize social action without mention that “it is by grace we have been saved through faith” is clearly a different gospel…let a lone no mention Christ (They may mention Jesus…but from the article it definitely doesn’t sound like Christ is the focus). But to challenge a congregation to social action because of the overflow of the congregation’s worship to God out of the faith in Christ they have received by the grace of God is more in sync with the gospel communicated in the Bible.

Check out the article...what do you think? Share your thoughts:)

[UPDATE: FYI...I like some of U2's songs...a lot:)]

Thursday, April 13, 2006

BAD THEOLOGY ALERT: On God’s Justice and Mercy

Listen for this radio spot on one of the local Christian radio stations in Des Moines. Lindsey and I were in the car the other day and she told me about one of those 30-second devotions she heard on the radio. She said a woman was talking… like a short little testimonial. Here’s the idea of what she said:
“I used to think that God was 100% merciful and 100% just…but then I went through some hard times in my life and I realized that God is way more merciful that He is just…”

I didn’t hear this quote but this is a common misconception of God. God’s attributes are equal to who God truly is. He is the most perfect form of justice that there is…also He is the most perfect form of mercy that there is. As humans it might seem easy to say something like … “There is more mercy in God than there is justice” …Christian brother and sister…it might seem that way, but that is not the case. Let us not limit God by our limited understanding of Him. To say that God is more merciful than He is just…shows us that we really don’t understand the cross. Full justice took place on that Good Friday…also full mercy took place. Don’t diminish either aspect. We are guilty as charged…Christ’s blood is the proof of justice and mercy!

Good catch Lindsey!

Let us worship the one triune God today! Give Him praise that He is fully merciful (100% mercy) and fully just (100% just)…there was more to the cross than only mercy…there was also justice…

“Merciful and Just Father forgive us of our sins! Enlighten our minds and hearts with Your Word so that we might understand…and that we Might see Your face.”

He is Risen! Let us reflect on our beautiful savior everyday!

In Christ
Noah