Category: Theology

The issue of pain and suffering is an age-old problem for those who defend the truth of the Biblical faith.  In my apologetic text, The Biblical World View, an Apologetic, I seek to deal with this comprehensively.  The problem is summarized in Archibald McLeish’s JB, a modern take on Job who argues, “If God is God (omnipotent) he is not good.  If God is good he is not God (omnipotent).  From Augustine, we have the classic free will defense.  This is embraced by C. S. Lewis in his classic The Problem of Pain.  Basically, the idea is that the choice of our ancestors brought about a fallen world with terrible suffering, but God in his goodness and wisdom beyond our full comprehension uses this for the discipline of the human race and as the context by which he can bring forth a redeemed community for which it will all be worth it in the end.  Actually, the intellectual case is quite good.   

However, one important matter is beyond the intellectual case.   This is a psychological issue.  The real issue with the problem of evil is that people are not able or willing to believe in a good and loving God (though He is also a God of judgment for the wicked) if there is so much pain and suffering in the world.  Sometimes this response is awakened by a teenager coming into his or her first crushing disappointment.  Though Augustine in the 5th century gave us our most accepted defense of the Biblical view, most of history does not show Christians and Jews wrestling with pain and suffering.  Generally, they saw themselves in a fallen world and saw their own sins as so glaring that they did not expect to not see pain and suffering.  Somehow living with pain and suffering seemed fitting to them.  They did not see themselves as having a right to a good life without suffering. What is amazing about this history is that until the mid 19th century this problem was not much of a focus and not a great question of faith struggle.  People might struggle with universalism (all will be saved) or Unitarianism (difficulty with the logic of the Trinity) but not the problem of evil.  I think it is connected to the theory of evolution and the delusion that there is a credible explanation for creation in atheistic evolutionary naturalism.  A great book on the issue of moderns and the problem of pain and suffering was written by Timothy Keller, Walking with God through Pain and Suffering.   Keller is brilliant in presenting us with the psychological issues and showing that especially in the more pampered and spoiled West, we respond to pain and suffering with outrage rather than with faith and resignation.  C. S. Lewis makes a similar point by noting that surgery was done without anesthesia before chloroform was discovered and people of that time were in an age of faith!  Previously it was thought that we did not have the right to avoid pain and suffering.  Most people lost the majority of their children as children, and the life expectancy in the West was 45.  Those who deal with struggling people dealing with this issue need to deal both with theology and psychology.  This was so in my case where I had great mentors who were able to address both and help me through it. 

Many today pray for and believe for the fulfillment of the prayer of Yeshua for the unity of the people of God (John 17:21).  We hear of calls for humility, love, repentance form competition, prayer, cooperation, and more.  One thing we do not hear is a call for theological integrity.  What do I mean by theological integrity?  I am not speaking about judging theological integrity by any particular stream of theological commitments.  There is a tendency in some streams to dismiss others on the basis of their theological stream and claim that only their stream has integrity.  This we must not do if we are to gain John 17 unity.  The theological streams include Calvinism, Arminianism, Pentecostalism, new charismatic streams, Methodist, Lutheran, Holiness, Anglican and so many more.  These streams all have attained credibility and longevity, and it is time to allow for differences of interpretation within broad orthodoxy.  This broad orthodoxy is defined by the historic and more recent confessions of faith that have gained near-universal acceptance as rightly representing a summary of the most important Biblical truths.  Theological integrity is first based on the embrace of this broad orthodoxy.  This includes the broad orthopraxy of Biblical morals and ethics. 

However, some who claim to embrace broad orthodoxy still say very bizarre things.  When they say such things, others react and dismiss these people as false teachers and vilify them. Some go on a public crusade against these ministers.  I am very accepting of those who do not think like I do.  I also came to what was for me a very hard conclusion, that God’s anointing and power are not correlated to accurate precision in theology.  As a theologically trained person, I would that it be that anointing and power were correlated to accurate theology.  I am sure after years of examination that it is not so.  Anointing and power come from the heart of faith and love more than theological precision.  God’s work is often through weak theological vessels.  If we vilify these people and their work, we could be rejecting the work of the Spirit and in danger. However, accurate theology is still important and can prevent some sad results. Can we hope for a way through this problem?  But let me first note just a few of the kings of bizarre things that have been taught and are taught today but some who have large platforms and influence. 

In recent times we have heard those with influence teach the following. 

1.  That there is no judgment during this age, but that this is an age of grace and love without judgment or wrath.  Judgment and wrath are Old Testament realities not New Testament. 

2.  That the New Testament teaches that we are only to love God and that we are not to think that the fear of God is relevant or proper motivation. 

3.  That the Old Testament is irrelevant to believers in the New Covenant.  Yes, it is the Word of God but is now mostly irrelevant. It is as a past word of God now that we are in the New Covenant. 

4.  That God expects us to exercise faith in such a way that we can all become very rich. 

I could go on and note other aberrations  You may have your own list.  I sometimes wonder if these people carefully read the Bible, and even just the New Testament!  Do they really fully accept even the authority of the New Testament, though of course I argue always for the authority of the whole Bible.  Accepting the New requires accepting the authority of the Old since the New Testament directly teaches the continuing authority of the Old which it calls Scripture and does not use the phrase Old Testament.     

It would be very helpful if those who have a large platform of exposure due to their anointing, media, or a large Church would have a theological partner to vet writings and media presentations before launching off into the never-never land of bizarre theology and bizarre proclamations.  The theological partner would be one sympathetic to their general orientation.  My friend Dr. Craig Keener of Asbury Seminary, who wrote the brilliant book Spirit Hermeneutics, is a top Biblical theologian. His book is a corrective for Pentecostal and Charismatic scholars and applies to all Bible teachers.  Professor Keener is a very strong supporter of movements that show the power of the Spirit.  A person such as Dr. Keener could be a great aid to the large platform ministers whose presence in media: in television, videos, and writing gains a great following.  With such a platform of influence comes greater responsibility.  

God desires humility.  If the critics would be slower to condemn, this would help unity as well.  Let their writings of correction come with humility and pleading on a biblical basis.  May those with large platforms and who have power ministries have the humility to have advisors who are well trained and solid in theology.   This would be helpful to the quest for greater unity.     

I have given rational reasons as to why Christians and Messianic Jews can justly support Donald Trump in spite of this past behavior and in spite of behavior today that is concerning.  My arguments have been based on policy.  My readers know my views on policy. 

However, I have not before noted that there is a very strong consensus from credible prophets that Christians and Messianic Jews are called to support President Trump.  When I have slightly indicated such recently, there has been great push back on the fact that many so-called prophets are not trustworthy and that they don’t trust the glitzy T. V. prophets either. 

However, I have walked with prophetic people for decades.  The ones I walk with are not the glitzy T. V. prophets who make wrong international proclamations and do nothing when they turn out to be false.  I have walked closely with some who are not famous, not media personalities but have deep humility and have a very strong track record of accuracy.  I think there is a strong consensus among them.  Here is what they have said.

1. Trump’s election was by the hand of God.
2. His election was predicated since 2012 before anyone thought of him as even a candidate. 
3. He would be a great disrupter, coarse, and unorthodox.  It was for the sake of completely shaking up an evil and compromised establishment. 
4. He would restore religious liberty.
5. He would support Israel and be a Cyrus.  He is the 45th President and is connected to Isaiah 45.  He would be a Cyrus to Israel.  Note that he moved the embassy of the U. S. to Jerusalem.  This was prophesied before he was elected.  After the embassy move, Israel minted a coin with King Cyrus of Persia on one side and Donald Trump on the other side.  
6. Others have noted that Trump would also be like a Jehu and would go after Jezebel.  He would be a wild man like Jehu. 
7. He would roll back some of the evil directions re: abortion and other negative trends against Evangelicals. 

There is a lot more but I think having more than a merely human perspective helps us, though we do need to confirm prophetic words and not just follow.  Some words seem quite amazing and predictive.  

Rachmiel Frydland was one of the most beloved figures of the early days of the Messianic Jewish movement in America.  Rachmiel was a rabbinic student in Poland, and as a young man fled the Nazis in the Polish forests.  He survived the Holocaust.  He knew the Rabbinic traditions well.  Then he very powerfully came to know Yeshua.  He was a teacher to many of us.  In sharing about Judaism, Rachmiel often noted that he perceived a significant distinction between the dry legalistic arguments of the Talmud and the spirit of the Siddur, the Jewish liturgical worship/prayer book for Daily and Shabbat usage.  His evaluation of the former was quite critical but his evaluation of the latter was very positive.   

I have come to agree with Rachmiel. In my view, after study and usage, I find that the Siddur provides us with a very accurate theology of the Hebrew Bible.  Praise and prayer is based on quite a comprehensive understanding.  This shows us a tradition of some people that was very attuned to the Bible, people with a strong poetic and spiritual sensitivity.  Of the sensitive poet who is a worshipper will perceive the theology of the Bible with greater accuracy than the mere intellectual scholar.  The worship of the Siddur reveals a majestic Creator, wonderful in love and mercy, but who also is a judge to be feared.  It is a God of compassion and a God of wrath.  The Siddur also reveals that salvation is only possible through the grace and mercy of God and that our good works are not able to save.  This is in contrast to the conclusion one might draw from some other Rabbinic writings. 

Someone once remarked that when Methodists sang the Methodist hymns over a significant period of time, they were discipled in a very comprehensive understanding of Methodist theology.  The basic liturgy of the Christian Churches plus the hymns of a good historic hymnal do indeed provide quite a comprehensive and solid theology.  The hymn writers usually write from a deep life of devotion and thus perceive Scriptural truth in a very deep way.  A good hymnbook teaches well on the nature of this love and mercy but also teaches us about his justice and wrath.   It reveals the greatness of salvation in Yeshua.  It also calls us to total consecration.  The hymn writers knew the majesty of God, expressed amazement at his Creation, and the danger of his running afoul of his justice and thus incurring his wrath.  We were saved by Yeshua from the wrath of God.  The hymn writers also knew the power of the Spirit that it overwhelms us, the gifts of the Spirit, and the great hope of the return of Yeshua.  Concentrations on different aspects of the life of Yeshua provide a marvelous devotional content. 

Of late, not a few have pointed out the shallowness of popular theologies today.  Some teach a love of God where there is no fear of God and a mercy of God where there is no wrath or judgment.  There is an indulgent God who looks the other way when his Law is violated.  Some teach a salvation that does not require repentance, God’s transforming work in the heart, and consecration.  I have not done a comprehensive study of contemporary worship songs.  There are some very excellent ones.  However, I wonder if one of the problems is that today’s worship content may not be discipling us in the full counsel of God in a way that Siddur, liturgy, and hymnal did in the past.  Somehow the historic worship reflected more of a comprehensive grasp of the Bible by very spiritual people.  One of the keys to good theology is taking into account all that the Bible says on a subject.  The tradition of worship is amazing on this.  I try to do that my book series and to show this approach.   In the books, Heaven, Hell and the After Live, Spiritual Warfare, and Prosperity I try to give a trustworthy survey on the Bible’s teaching as opposed to shallow and partial approaches.  I have been amazed at how much historic worship is trustworthy.  

 

In my book Passover, Key to the Book of Revelation I argue that prophetic ministry will be greatly increased before the coming return of Yeshua.  I noted in a recent post that on this present virus situation we have had some accurate prophetic voices and several as well that simply did not measure up.  One I have known for 30 years has a solid prophetic word and described what would happen back in early January before the scientific or political community was predicting the pandemic.  However, so many voices were not correct that they drown out the quality words.  

The plagues of the last days in the book of Revelation will require strong prophetic voices in various regions of the world to give both interpretation of what is happening and direction of what to do.  This will require not only accurate and strong prophetic voices, but also a much greater sharpening of God’s people in knowing the Spirit.  This is because, in the New Covenant, we all have the Spirit and are to be prophetic.  Our inner man will need to give confirmation of what is spoken.  Without a sensitive ability for accurate confirmation, we will be subject to false prophecy.  It will be both the track record of accountable prophets and the discernment of God’s people that will be key. 

In the last days’ spiritual battles, the level of disinformation and media control will be so great that merely trying to figure out the truth by intellectual pursuit will not be sufficient.  Even today in this virus situation there is much suppression of factual information so that people will only follow the received wisdom of the establishment and the media and social networking companies.  God’s people must have a supernatural source of information and other means of communication to break though the disinformation even when those who spread this disinformation mean well.  I think we will find out more about this virus and its treatment that will show how much false information became a consensus.  This may prepare us to seek a better way. 

The Spirit will be poured out in the last of the last days. There will be a great harvest and there will be supernatural means to know how to oppose the Kingdom of Darkness and how to overcome false information.  It will be essential.  Do obtain my book to encourage you in the battles we will face.  

 

I embraced the Good News and committed my life to Yeshua in the Spring of 1960.  Some of you know my testimony.  I soon became part of a Reformed Church that was very much in the Evangelical movement. My father was Jewish and my Mother a Norwegian Christian but not involved in the Church when we were growing up.  I was not raised religiously because of the Jewish/Christian marriage.  As I entered into teen years, I became part of fundamentalist ministries, camps, and Bible clubs.  In that fundamentalism, there was much legalism.  Legalism raises extra-biblical morals to a significant importance.  There was a whole list of things that Christians were not to do:  not going to movies, dancing, drinking wine or beer, listening to contemporary music, playing billiards, mixed swimming, and on and on.  When I attended Wheaton Collage during the last of the 1960s, most of the students were reacting strongly against this legalism and fundamentalism itself (though most still wanted to be Evangelicals).  Though we were young and overreacting, we never the less did believe we saw some patterns of great concern.  The biggest concern was that we knew Christians who kept the legalistic additions not in the Bible but violated the explicit Biblical standards.  We noted such things as gossip, lack of forgiveness, not seeking to reach the poor, weakness in devotional life, questionable financial dealings.  One of the biggest was gossip and causing division in the Body.  

When I entered into Jewish ministry, I realized that my knowledge of Judaism was shallow.  One of the members gave me an English translation of the most important post-Biblical Jewish book on applying the Torah.  This is the Talmud which was first in oral form and then the first part put in writing at the end of the second century by Rabbi Judah the Prince.  This first part is the Mishnah.  The commentary was next developed over the next centuries and was compiled. This second part was known as the Gemara.   Together they make up the Talmud.  As a young leader in my 20s, I decided to read through the Talmud, but not with intense concentration.  I was amazed at the level of legalism.  The Mishnah expresses a level of concern for minutiae, laws upon laws upon laws that have less and less connection to Biblical intent.  Sometimes the applications of the Torah or Law is wise.  There is also much of value in the broad thrust of Jewish traditions; the prayer traditions, the stories of godliness, and love that are really wonderful. The celebrations of the Sabbath and Feasts and their meanings are greatly enriching.   However, this legalism is an amazing phenomenon.   Recently, I decided to read through the Mishnah and again am once again amazed.  I would invite my readers to borrow a copy of the Mishnah and just go through at least part of it.  Then you will understand what I am saying here.  

Here is my point.  Though there are stellar examples of love and godliness in Jewish history, I do not think the legalism is a contribution to this attainment.  Living near Jerusalem provides so many examples of Yeshua’s words, “Straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel.”  His words against the legalism of the Pharisees in Matthew 23 is the most devastating critique of legalism in history.  Living next to the ultra-Orthodox provides us with example after example of such legalism.  They are well known to Israelis and they are not attracted to this Orthodoxy.  Here is one example.  In the Jerusalem Post, the Rabbi of a sect of Orthodoxy ruled that the Sabbath elevator did not solve the problem of traveling on an elevator in Shabbat.  The Sabbath elevator stops runs up and down all day and stops on every floor. This constant stopping frustrates some.  However, it prevents the legalistic standard against Sabbath violation by pushing the buttons and thereby turning on lights and running a machine.  One couple with their children, one infant and one toddler, now had to carry them and their carriage down and up 7 flights of stairs.  The Sabbath elevator is frustrating because it stops on every floor automatically.  The Rabbi ruled against even that Sabbath elevator.  Living in high rise buildings was now impossible.  The couple complained.  “What kind of Sabbath is this for us to have to climb seven flights of stairs with our children, the carriage, and our equipment?”  One can see this legalism in the criticism of Yeshua for healing on the Sabbath.  Yeshua’s critique of legalism was not just applicable to Jewish legalism.  Indeed, the issue is that legalism tends to lead people to concern themselves with minor matters and to neglect the weightier matters of the Law.  

One of the saddest examples of this loss of moral perspective in ultra-Orthodoxy is the recent health minister in Israel, Yaakov Litzman.  Rabbi Litzman is accused with good evidence of protecting a pedophile.  An Israeli Orthodox woman was the leader of a Jewish girls school in Australia.  She is credibly accused of molesting many girls.  The government of Australia seeks to have her extradited to stand trial.  Yet, the Rabbi protects her as one his own.  “Blood is thicker than water.“  Her ability, with support from her community leaders, to avoid extradition, has been very amazing. Yet, Rabbi Litzman is one who fights in the coalition government to enforce legalistic norms for the whole society and threatened to bring down the government over his demands.     

Messianic Jews are loyal to our people.  We seek to present the Gospel so that they may be delivered and enter into the fullness of Yeshua and God’s Biblical New Covenant Judaism.  This includes secular Jews, ultra-Orthodox Jews, Modern Orthodox Jews, and traditional but not Orthodox Jews. 

 

Fundamentalism began as a movement to counter modernism and liberalism in the church world at the beginning of the 20th century.  Most noteworthy was the book of artless published in 1909 entitled, The Fundamentals.  Most of us who are conservative believers, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Charismatics, and Messianic Jews, would agree with many of these articles.  However, as time passed, the Fundamentalists lost many of the battles to the modernists in the denominations. One of the last lost was Princeton Theological Seminary in 1930.  Historians say that Fundamentalism turned inward, became defensive, and acted as if it was fighting a rearguard action. Fundamentalism eventually became dominated by Dispensationalism.  The issues with Dispensational theology are too complex to explain here. Suffice it to say that the same historians assert that Fundamentalism became insular, gave up the battle for the culture and expected an escape in the rapture (seven years before the Yeshua returns to earth, the born again are taken out of the earth).  For many the Church would be in decline, but the few faithful will escape. My professor of philosophy Arthur Holmes looked at these directions and stated, “We have lost 100 years.” In 1947 Carl Henry wrote The Uneasy Conscience Modern Fundamentalism.  Henry was the theological mentor to Billy Graham and the first editor of Christianity Today.   Henry exposed some of the critical weaknesses of Fundamentalism, its lack of social engagement, the disunity of the various streams and more. In 1959 the President of Fuller Seminary and the famous apologist, Edward Carnell wrote a blistering critique and claimed that Fundamentalism had become Orthodoxy gone cultic.  (See his Case for Orthodox Theology). This was typified by an article in the Wheaton College Year Book in 1968  where a student wrote, “But What if I don’t Want too Be a fighting Fundamentalist.”

 

I think the most glaring example of the problem was when Fundamentalist Christians rejected Billy Graham for inviting mainline denominational Christian leaders to be recognized at his evangelistic crusades.  For the Fundamentalists, he was compromising with the enemy.  

 

This was the era when the people began to distinguish themselves from Fundamentalists by calling themselves Evangelicals in contradistinction to Fundamentalist.  At Wheaton College, the flagship Evangelical liberal arts college, one just did not identify as a Fundamentalist. Though the description of Fundamentalism was exaggerated, much was true. 

 

Here are some characteristics.  

 

1. Simplistic theological approaches.  Sometimes doing biblical theology is not easy. There are different emphases in the Bible and not everything fits a simple black and with the system.  Fundamentalism is given to black and white thinking.
2. Inability to effectively engage the larger culture and become salt and light in it.  Since the world is going downhill, we are to just get people saved and into the lifeboat.  The culture is part of a sinking ship, the world. 
3. Fear of those who are not speaking the same language and towing the same black and white thinking. 
4. A critical spirit that easily sallies off in tirades of criticism of those who are not in the same camp.
5. A fear of contamination.  One may be holy, but if one connects to one that is not sufficiently separated, then one becomes unholy by association 
6. A sectarian spirit that easily separates from those seen as not theologically pure enough and not sufficiently holy (not by the Bible commands but extra standards of holiness in the Fundamentalist camp.)  This is part of a hypercritical spirit that heresy hunts and constantly looks for error that is greatly feared. Really the Fundamentalist is insecure.   
7. Emphasis on doctrinal points that do not hold up to sound scholarship. For example, the pre-tribulation rapture is a litmus test.  Its rejection is thought to be the first step toward liberalism.
8. An inability to understand the views of others and to engage them with respect showing that they have first been understood.  Fundamentalism is characterized by refuting straw man misrepresentation of others.
9. Skepticism and rejection of new insights, directions, and methods. 
10. Difficulty in engaging others who are not perceived as people in whom God may be working. If they are not born again, there is great guardedness. 

 

When I graduated from Wheaton, I was very glad to know that I would not have to deal with Fundamentalists. I could name names, denominations, associations, etc. but will refrain. I became a Lutheran and then was ordained in the Presbyterian Church. I was an Evangelical Presbyterian. This was before Messianic Judaism (1971).  

 

Generally, the Messianic Jewish movement has transcended Fundamentalism.  Embracing Jewish life in Yeshua was rejected by Fundamentalists who saw it as an aberration on the issue of the Church as a third race of former Jews and Gentiles.  Messianic Jews found their support among Evangelicals, Pentecostals, and Charismatics. Pentecostalism at one time was quite Fundamentalist but is not so today. This transcendence of Fundamentalism is characteristic of Messianic Jews in the United States, Brazil, Russia, Ukraine, England, and Australia.