Is Your Husband An Idiot?
During some counseling training I attended several years ago, the teacher quoted his wife in regard to marital attitudes. It was one of those quotes that really sticks with you: “Deep down inside, every wife thinks her husband is an idiot.” You may disagree, but let’s set that thought aside for now and examine the fact that the world definitely thinks your husband is an idiot. Our culture is saturated with *your husband is an idiot* messages. Almost every sitcom on TV presents the husband as an idiot. Almost every TV commercial presents the husband as an idiot as well. Point in case, the latest McDonald’s commercial; the husband jack-hammers the porch and almost all of the sidewalk when only the porch needed to be replaced. He does this to get the full rental value from the tool rental facility. Per the usual, the attractive, intelligent wife saves what’s left of the family sidewalks by enticing him away with a bag of food; the same way you would control any pet by holding up food in front of their faces. The commercial ends with the incredulous wife confiscating his paper cup because he is making noise with it as children often do. Another point in case, the latest Verizon commercial where the husband drops their children off two miles away from school to save money on gas. This presents the husband as an idiot as well as someone who cares more about money than his family, the latter being a constant theme on TV as well. Wait a minute, I see Jim Foxworthy calling in on my cell phone [uh uh, ok, ya, I got it]. Ok, I’m back. Are you entertained by the above examples rather than taking offence? Well then, you juuust might think your husband is an idiot.
It’s not just TV. I ordered some carryout at Bob Evans last night and saw a plaque for sale in their gift shop area with the following inscription: “I live with stress. I eat with him, sleep with him, and pick-up after him.” I perused the rest of the plaques to see if there was any counterpart humor to no avail; that doesn’t sell these days. As a matter of fact, it would probably offend people. Furthermore, I wish I had a nickel for every time I heard a wife denigrate her husband in public. Just this week, I heard a waitress refer to her husband as an idiot to the customers she was waiting on. Not a day later, I heard another wife referring to her family of two kids, and a husband, as “my three kids.” Do you make like references in regard to your husband? Well then, you juuuust might think your husband is an idiot.
This mentality is so saturated in our society that it is actually in vogue for men to denigrate themselves as a way to demonstrate their character traits to others. Point in case, the new Burger King commercial where Tony Stewart admits to [in jest] wearing women’s underwear. This denigration, as set against the masculine image of a race car driver is what sells today in our culture. As a man, do you want to impress the ladies? Well then, admit that you are an idiot or better yet, a pervert. Wow, see how humble you are?
Per the usual, the Church exposes it’s self to these infections because we just don’t get it; when the Holy Spirit says we are in a war, he’s not just saying that to hear himself talk. In warfare, the enemy always seeks to take out the leader first. Lest we forget, the husband is the leader of the family and his wife is the first line of defense second only to his personal relationship with God, which she can also greatly influence as well. Satan brought down the whole human race by appealing to Adam’s wife first. So you think your family is some kind of mighty fortress and you are smarter than Eve was? Oh really? Satan wasn’t only targeting Eve’s concept of God, read the account. God informed Adam of the Holy protocol before Eve was created. More than likely, most of her information about God came from Adam or at least the critical information that Satan was targeting. In other words, Satan was also attacking Adam‘s leadership role. I suggest to you that his tactics haven’t changed that much. Trust me on this one, the world definitely wants you to think your husband is an idiot. If you believe your husband is an idiot, that obviously undermines his ability to lead. If you think your husband is an idiot, your family is at risk. If you don’t think your husband is an idiot, but really you do and just don’t know it, your family is at greater risk because the deadly infection is covert. And also be aware of the fact that this worldly attitude toward husbands is alive and well in the churches, maybe even more so than the world. I hear constantly of women’s bible studies that denigrate husbands and their roles. One woman shared with me how another Christian woman shared the fact [while at a women’s gathering] that her husband selfishly woke her up at 2am wanting sex. In many churches , women are instructed to take leadership of the family if their husband isn’t “leading the way he should.” Who sets that standard? I once overheard a “I wish my husband was as spiritual as your husband” conversation between two women in a church hallway. I am also privy to women leaders who teach other women to set the household trash bags in front of the door their husband leaves by to go to work, as a way to confront him about his slothful ways. By the way, divorce statistics in the Church are no different from that of the world. Go figure.
But continuing on, back to the original question concerning the quote by the teacher’s wife. Do all women, deep down, believe their husbands are idiots? Probably. Why do I say that? Well, because of the original curse of sin. God said the following would be the consequences:
To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you [Geneses 3:16].
According to Hebrew scholars, the above text in the Hebrew words and grammar are the exact same as Genesis 4:3, which states the following in regard to Cane:
“If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.”
The key phrase is “Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” When God said to Eve that her “desire will be for her husband,” it means that her desire will be to rule over her husband in the same way sin desires to rule over us. You can see this clearly by contrast. This passage is clearly not saying that the curse will be a natural desire by the woman to follow her husband’s leadership. To the contrary, the woman’s natural tendency will be a desire to control her husband. In addition, the husbands tendency will be to rule his wife in the same way we must all rule sin in our life , as a tenacious despot. It’s good to rule sin that way in our lives, but not our wives!!! Notice God said to Adam “you will” as opposed to what he said to Cain “you must.” The embedded enemy between a man and his wife will be a desire by the wife to rule over the husband while his tendency will be to rule over his wife as an unloving tyrant. For example, a wife who is helping with the family finances comes home after a long day at work. As soon as she walks through the door, the husband, just back from enjoying a day of fishing, says the following in jubilant fashion: “Hey honey! What’s for dinner?” Ouch. As that cartoon cat often says, “I resemble that remark.” But in any case, that’s the warfare.
Of course you believe deep down that he is an idiot, that’s why you want to rule him. But you can’t let the world, or for that matter, church folks, throw gasoline on the fire [or the curse]. Its just a really bad idea. However, its interesting. Notice how the original failures of Adam and Eve duplicate the curse like a permanent brand from a hot iron. Adam failed to lead while Eve failed to respect her husband’s leadership. How different things would have been if Eve would have said “ You know, my husband was the one who originally got all of this from God; and besides that, since you are accusing God, let’s just get both of them in on this conversation.” Today, Satan ravages lives in the same way through isolated conversations without the proper people present. Satan knew the dynamics of headship that was involved. He knew that their eyes would not be opened till Adam ate. Therefore, he used Eve to bring Adam and the whole human race to ruin as Adam relinquished his leadership role to Eve. So, in like fashion, families will be ruined if this same pattern is followed.
So what to do? Well, for starters, stop loving your husband. Thaaat’s right. You see, every wife who professes her husband to be an idiot will also profess she loves him. Every time, guaranteed. Here is what the Apostle Paul said to do:
However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband [Ephesians 5:33].
That’s the ticket. Men are to love their wives and not rule over them like a despot. They are to treat their wives as they would treat themselves. Women are to *respect* their husbands. This scriptural distinction is no accident. The one who once took your breath away is not the enemy, the curse is. Thinking your husband is an idiot is the antithesis of respect, obviously. But granted, no man is the leader he should be and many are less, so what to do? Peter says the following in 1Peter 3:1,2;
Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct.
“Respectful” *conduct.* Did you catch that? Also, you can replace “without a word” and say “without trying to rule your husband.” By the way, if you have been trying to rule over your husband, how’s it workin for ya? Frustration that leads to disrespect will certainly follow. Look, the applications for respecting your husband could fill a book and there is certainly no room to address them here , but women need to avoid any form of denigration concerning their husbands and step into their high calling from Christ our Lord. Namely, the scriptures make it clear that no man sits at the city gate without a Proverbs 31 wife. The world and churchy women may not know that, but you and the Lord do. Those who receive less recognition here will receive it several fold in the Kingdom. Those who are faithful with few things will be put in charge of many things in God’s eternal Kingdom. I am convinced that the Proverbs 31 wife will rule vast kingdoms for God in eternity.
Is your husband an idiot? Its really beside the point. Choose the glorious things, not the broken cisterns of worldly attitudes that lead to ruin.
Will The Antichrist Be An Actual Person And Does It Even Matter? Part 1
I will get to that. But first, a primary question looms that must be answered first. What method of biblical interpretation will Christians use to answer these types of questions? I open discussion with another question of the compound sort; who did Jesus write the Bible to, and what do those individuals need to interpret it? The Bible its self answers those questions in many, many ways. We will explore a couple. Let’s begin with the sermon on the mount. Who was he talking to? Answer: They were the common people and peasants of that time. For all practical purposes, how was the teaching recorded in the Bible? Answer: The way it was presented to them. Did he intend for them to understand the plain sense of what he was saying? Well, since Matthew 5:2 say’s he opened his mouth and “taught” them, and “them” is the object receiving the action of the verb which means to teach, I would say yes with no hesitation. He was either teaching them or he wasn’t. So, when you are reading the sermon on the mount, who is Christ teaching? He is teaching you, and the same thing he taught them. What do you need to understand the teaching? The same thing they had, a brain, and an understanding of the language in which the lesson is being taught [not necessarily the original language]. Again, he was either teaching them or he wasn’t. `Matthew 5:2 doesn’t say “he said to them,” it says “he taught them *saying*.” What he said was the act of teaching which means to instruct with the goal of inflicting understanding within the mind. By the way, since Jesus was, and is God, I seriously doubt he lacked any ability to teach at their level. God is obviously the master of the communication he created.
This doesn’t mean we have no need of God ordained teachers; it does mean that we don’t have anything between us and understanding what God is saying , save unnecessary obstacles. As far as method of interpretation, remember the acrostic “psalm,” plain sense and literal meaning. For those who teach methods of interpretation that eradicate plain sense, it’s “psalms,” plain sense and literal meaning, stupid. Now, in addition, neither does this mean that God never uses symbolism as a teaching tool. But in every case, the symbolism is explained in specific terms and we are not at the mercy of confusion or fleshly interpretation. Also, there were times when Jesus taught in riddles as a judgment to some who were listening at the time, because of their motives. But in every case, he makes the plain sense of his teaching clear in other places. Examples of this in the Scriptures are massive. A good example would Matthew 13. Read the whole chapter and you will see exactly what I am saying. Another good example would be Revelation 1:20 where Christ explains keys to interpreting prior symbolism to the Apostle John. As a matter of fact, this is a pattern throughout the book of Revelation. Also, and in addition to the above, it does not mean that Scripture will not be difficult to understand at times. Peter said that Paul was sometimes hard to understand, but he didn’t say it was because of complex methods of interpretation. Peter also said that even the angels desire to understand more of God’s truth; more proof that understanding takes much effort at various times. Question. If God wanted to, could he give us understanding on a silver platter? Answer: Of course. Why doesn’t he? Because he wants us to be part of the process and is honored by those who seek him. Lastly on this point, neither am I saying that historical background or context, among other considerations, are not necessary to lend understanding. Praise God, lay people in this country have vast resources in this regard at their disposal.
Now with that out of the way, let’s begin to answer one of the two primary questions. We will use 2Thessalonians 2:1-9. This biblical text is a descriptive narrative saturated with the idea that the antichrist is an actual person. In this text, no less than eight personal pronouns are used to refer to him. In addition, these personal pronouns are used in every noun case possible: subjective, objective, and possessive. Furthermore, two appositive personal pronoun phrases are used to describe him as well. Also, in this same text; besides adjectives that are used to describe him, he is the object that receives action from three other subjective nouns, God, the Holy Spirit, and Satan. Any questions? Maybe one. Could it still be allegory, or referring to a spirit, or an attitudinal movement? No. In every case where the Apostle Paul uses allegory to teach, he makes it plain that allegory is being used. An excellent example of this would be Galatians 4:24 in regard to using patriarchal history to illustrate the role of the law in justification. Be not deceived. Let me say that again; be not deceived, literal forms of text in Scripture are never presented as allegory in a way to obtain some other supposed truth. And symbolism, allegory, parables, or any other teaching tool always has objective truth as its goal. If 2Thessalonians doesn’t say the antichrist is a person, then we don’t even know whether or not John 3:16 says what it says.
Listen. I have dear Christian friends who unfortunately use theology to interpret the Scriptures rather than method. Method of interpretation should always lead to theology, not the other way around. They can be my friends, but they cannot be my teachers or pastors, and they shouldn’t be yours either. But what about the second question? How important is it that the antichrist is an actual person? We will look at that in part 2.
The Missing Kingdom In Our Gospel
There is something new afoot in my brain regarding biblical truth lately. Apparently, God has a physical Kingdom with a capital city; and not only that, he likes to talk about it a lot. Furthermore, he thinks enough of it that he made his Son king over his kingdom and bankrupted Heaven [temporarily] to make a way for us to dwell with him in his kingdom forever. If this is in-fact true, and it sure looks that way to me, where is all of the teaching in regard to a literal kingdom of God? Really, it makes me want to cry “foul!” At this time, I don’t know what all this means and what all the significance is, but I have a few hunches.
First of all, let’s talk about the gospel. That’s pretty significant. The gospel is the “good news.” Teachers like Michael Horton have much to say about the “good news” and how it is often distorted in contemporary church culture. He’s written, what, about 200 books on the “good news” by now? So, what is the good news? Throughout Scripture, like, almost everywhere, it’s the good news about the kingdom AND Jesus Christ. I’m not going to wear-out my keyboard citing Scriptures that state this specifically and in context, but I will cite a few. And while I’m at it, why not eliminate a bunch of nonsense by preemptively citing quotations from the *Apostle to the gentiles* at the pinnacle of his ministry:
Acts 20:25
And now, behold, I know that none of you among whom I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom will see my face again.
Acts 28:31
proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance.
Acts 28:23
When they had appointed a day for him, they came to him at his lodging in greater numbers. From morning till evening he expounded to them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets.
By the way, just as an aside, for those who teach that the New Testament interprets the Old in regard to Jesus Christ and the gospel, Paul sure didn’t have any problem convincing people about Jesus Christ from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets [Acts 28:23 cited above]. Something to think about, but my main point is the fact that the good news is not only about Christ, but also the kingdom. “And,” is a coordinating conjunction. Throughout Scripture, the “good news” is described with both of these phrases put together and sometimes with only the kingdom stated, as in Acts 20:25. Yes, yes, I know: “Christ is the gospel and the gospel is the kingdom, it’s all the same thing.” No it isn’t. That’s a stupid idea. Here is only one of the many reasons why: The resurrected Christ appeared to his disciples and here is what the Holy Spirit says about it;
Acts 1:3
He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.
After it was all said and done, here is the question the disciples presented to Jesus:
Acts 1:6
So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Christ acknowledged the validity of their question with the following answer:
“He said to them: ‘It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth [Acts 1:7,8].’”
Here, in fact, is the good news: God will replace this present world order with his Kingdom of righteousness. He will wipe away every tear from our eyes and we will serve him and worship him in joy forever. His Son, and our Lord, will rule the nations in righteousness forever. We will rule with him as kings and priest in various roles, and this service to him will fulfill the desires of our heart because we will serve him and please him with all perfection. We were born into this present kingdom of darkness. The Son left his kingdom in Heaven and came to earth as a man to purchase us from the bondage of sin through his death, burial, and resurrection. He translated us from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of light. We were bought with a price [like bond slaves were purchased in that day] and do not belong to ourselves. We now belong to our master and Lord, Jesus Christ. We are presently aliens and ambassadors in this dark kingdom and are to live with that reality in mind. One day, our glorious king will appear with the army of our kingdom. He will destroy this kingdom of darkness and put all of his enemies under his feet. He will eradicate the earth and Heaven from all memory of evil and his kingdom will dwell on earth in all righteousness forever. All evil and it’s abode will be destroyed forever in a lake of fire. Therefore, we exhort men everywhere, BE RECONCILED TO GOD!!!!!!
That’s the good news. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ to purchase us for the kingdom of God is not the whole gospel, and who are we to make the whole gospel whatever we want it to be for whatever reason? Especially if the reason happens to be anti-Semitism. Pray tell, why did John the Apostle weep bitterly in Heaven when there appeared to be no one worthy to open the title deed to the earth? He knew he was going to get his and he was already getting a grand tour of Heaven, so what was the big deal? Perhaps the new song that was sung when Christ was found worthy to open the scroll will lend some understanding:
“And they sang a new song, saying, ‘Worthy are you to take the scroll
and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.’”
That’s the good news. Christ ransomed us to make us a righteous, literal kingdom on earth for God, and we will rein with him forever. It’s the good news of the kingdom and Jesus Christ, and there’s a bunch of folks that need to get over it.
So, what’s the significance? Well, it’s funny. As I write this post in a coffee shop [I confess, it’s Starbucks], a gentleman that has observed my Bible asked the following question: “What does the Bible say is going to happen?” Let me answer that with half of the good news: “Well sir, you don’t need to be concerned with what’s going to happen, you only need to be concerned with the fact that you are a sinner and Christ died for your sin.” Here is how I approached the opportunity instead: “Here is exactly what the Bible says is going to happen: ‘The Son of God is going to come down and destroy all of the kingdoms of this world and establish his own righteous kingdom that will be forever. Why do you think he would want to do that?’” Need I say more? I think you know where the conversation might have gone from there, and it did. A concept of the good news that doesn’t mirror scripture; does not offer the natural doors that God uses to approach people with the truth of his gospel, the women at the well and many other examples should come to mind. Furthermore, where is the significance of the kingdom in the Church ordinances? Christ said he would not drink of the cup again till he did it anew with us in the kingdom. When was the last time you heard that emphasized? What about baptism? We find this about Phillip in the book of Acts:
Acts 8:12
But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Baptism not only had the death, burial, and resurrection in mind, it was also significant in regard to belief in the kingdom of God. Something to think about.
I also strongly suspect the missing kingdom in our gospel has led to a vacuum filled with many over-emphasized endeavors. For some time, I have been disenchanted with the reformed counseling culture that is ever more prevalent in today’s Church, but unable to put my finger on the why. I now wonder if reformed theology has created, to some degree, the problem it now attempts to fix through it‘s counseling culture; due to allegorizing large portions of God’s counsel. I wonder how much counsel is needed in a marriage where both spouses are focused on all of the future and present ramifications of God’s kingdom. How much counsel is needed for those focused on the imminent return of Jesus Christ? I don’t know for sure, but I can tell you this: both concepts are all but vacant from Christian mentality these days. However, on the other hand, there is no shortage of campaigns such as making sure Christians know that God is a happy God, with hordes of Christians following behind fawning over the profundity of it all. Other spiritual endeavors that look like floating twigs on the ocean, next to the Queen Mary when compared to the kingdom, are in no wise in short supply as we speak.
paul
Will The Antichrist Be An Actual Person And Does It Even Matter? Part 2
In part 1, I contend that a literal interpretation of God’s word demands a particular verdict; the antichrist will indeed be an actual person. I think this excerpt from part 1 is worth repeating:
” We will use 2Thessalonians 2:1-9. This biblical text is a descriptive narrative saturated with the idea that the antichrist is an actual person. In this text, no less than eight personal pronouns are used to refer to him. In addition, these personal pronouns are used in every noun case possible: subjective, objective, and possessive. Furthermore, two appositive personal pronoun phrases are used to describe him as well. Also, in this same text; besides adjectives that are used to describe him, he is the object that receives action from three other subjective nouns, God, the Holy Spirit, and Satan.”
Allegory is never that grammatically specific, especially in Scripture. So, we answer the next question: does it matter? Well, considering the amount of press that he gets in Scripture, I would say yes with no hesitation. However, I will only focus on two primary reasons, even though there are many others. First, the Antichrist is an important sign post. Christ said the following in Matthew 16:3;
“And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.”
Christ chastised those who were not able to discern the signs of the times. This was the primary issue with the Thessalonians that Paul addressed in a major text regarding the antichrist. He had taught them about the antichrist in order to insulate them from harmful error, but they forgot [2Thess. 2:5].
“Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,[2Thessalonians 2:3].”
Not knowing the future can lead to deception. In this case, the Thessalonians were sent a bogus letter, supposedly from Paul, saying the resurrection had already passed. They should have known the letter was bogus because of what Paul had previously taught them, especially in regard to the antichrist. Likewise, for those in the tribulation period, it will be absolutely critical to know facts in regard to the antichrist. Why? Well, because the beginning of the tribulation period will be marked by many claiming to be Christ and backing up their claims by working wonders and miracles [Matthew 24:5, 23-25]. This time will also be marked by the Antichrist signing a major treaty with Israel [Daniel 9:27]. Other descriptions of him in Daniel will make his appearance on the world scene unmistakable by those who are familiar with scripture. According to what Paul also told the Thessalonians, the antichrist himself will also be performing miracles [ 2Thess.2:9]. Those not familiar with signs regarding the antichrist will be left wide open to deception, and will in-fact be deceived according to truth that leads to salvation. In many, many cases, what people believe about the antichrist will determine their eternal fate[ 2Thess. 2:10-12 Matt.24:4,5].
Secondly, knowledge concerning the antichrist is important for discerning truth in this present age. The Apostle John warned that many forerunners of the antichrist have gone out into the world in this present age [1John 2:18]. Therefore, knowledge of the antichrist that is coming will give us insight into the antichrists of this age. Furthermore, it seems possible, in regard to the age that we live in presently, that the antichrist could appear before his grand opening which will mark the beginning of the tribulation period. Though we will not know positively that it is him, it would certainly serve to jettison urgency in the lives of knowledgeable Christians, which is always a good idea [However, keep in mind that the Bible doesn’t exclude the possibility of a period of time between the rapture and the beginning of the tribulation period, though improbable]. There is also indication that Christians should expect a great “falling away” in close proximity to the appearing of antichrist, good information to be aware of.
Those who teach that antichrist will not be a literal person do no favor to Christianity; in fact, they may be contributing to satanic deception. God did not include eschatology within Holy writ for entertainment purposes or filler. The connections Christ and Paul make between eschatology and eternal consequences is evident, and understanding the time and age we live in, is in-fact critical to the interpretation of scripture in many instances.
paul
1 Kings 8:39: Heart Theology Is Not The Real Reformation
“Nobody ever said we change ourselves through obedience, ……..We are to learn, apply, pray, obey inwardly (thinking), obey outwardly, seek wise counsel, love, encourage, instruct, rebuke, disciple, confess, and leave the changing and knowing of the heart to God.”
It happened in the early 90’s. I was in the process of absorbing and applying truth from what I think was in fact a contemporary reformation. There is no doubt, Christianity had relinquished its faith and confidence in God’s word; specifically, in regard to solving the weightier issues of life and godliness, deferring to the so-called “experts” of our day. Jay Adams, a reformed Presbyterian, introduced a structured biblical counseling system that radically changed lives through the power and instruction of God’s word. His thesis, after it was all said and done, and in a manner of speaking, begged this question by children: “Daddy, what did Christians do about serious problems before Sigmund Freud came along?” Surprisingly, and before evangelicals barely had a chance to catch their breath, something else came along, Heart Theology. Picking up again where my opening sentence left off, the following is how I was first introduced to Heart Theology. I was an elder in a church that was a training center for what was dubbed “biblical counseling.” The elder that was primarily leading this program was also in the process of obtaining his doctorate degree from another counseling center attached to a reformed seminary. This is where he was introduced to this new counseling theology. It was added as a level 2 program, or addendum to what was already considered radical among evangelicals; namely, the concept that God’s word is sufficient for all matters of life and godliness. I was skeptical in regard to this new twist. Let me explain the basic differences in the two approaches that fueled my skepticism.
First, in regard to the original biblical counseling movement, there are two basic characteristics of biblical counseling as originally introduced by Adams. First, it changed preaching, which was predominately, and still is to a large degree, “about” the Bible. For instance, there may have been many sermons “about” the importance of communication from the Bible. For example, instances where men misunderstood God and gee whiz, bad things happened after that, so don’t do what they did. Biblical counseling went beyond that to a deeper and technical understanding that was applied to real life situations. An example would be biblical precepts of communication that could readily be brought to mind in everyday life and applied accordingly. It was and is, technical wisdom from the word of God and specific instruction on how to apply it to real life. Once pastors learned to do this in the privacy of their office, it transferred to the pulpit where it became preventative medicine for God’s people. Yet another example. Say a young couple in your church decides to marry. What usually happens? We rejoice and marry them! Right? The Jay Adams approach would ask three questions: are these two young people experts on marriage? Probably not. Does God’s word have any wisdom that will prepare them for successful marriage that honors God? Of course. So should we just let them figure it out on their own? Probably not. This introduced Premarital Counseling in the church, with many pastors making it a prerequisite to that church’s participation in the wedding.
The other characteristic was an equal emphasis on justification and sanctification. Let’s be honest, the primary focus of evangelicals is getting people saved. Once there saved, we teach them the importance of church attendance, tithing, and learning about the Bible. Christ never told us to primarily get people saved; his mandate for the church is to “make disciples.” This is done by counseling with God’s word. Premarital Counseling, like many other aspects of biblical application, is “making disciples.” Preaching from the pulpit should also keep parishioners out of the counseling office as well as divorce court. The contention by Adams that pastors are to primarily counsel and not preach was indeed a shocker to many. Preaching should always contain counsel in regard to the technical application of God’s word to real life.
But in addition to these characteristics, one of the primary elements of this biblical counseling was its emphasis on objectivity. Jay Adams was, and I assume still is, a stickler for objective instruction rather than what was referred to as “fuzzy land.” However, I must concede this one weakness in the contemporary (about 37 years old) biblical counseling movement; there was a lack of emphasis on the monergistic resources that give us the strength to apply God’s wisdom to everyday life. But this is understandable, for Evangelicals were preaching about the forest in habitual fashion. The gargantuan task of showing the importance of the individual trees and their proper application was bound to distract. So, in regard to the biblical counseling movement, I have explained two characteristics, one element, and one fault.
Strange, In the midst of this revolution that was pouring out hope, seemingly without measure, there was another movement afoot that had a compliant against the former and the new; namely, biblical counseling wasn’t vertical enough, Adams had simply refined the emphasis on the outward and made Baptist Pharisees into super Pharisees. Yes, the new reformation (Adams) was bringing about lots of change, but it wasn’t “lasting change.” Their answer?; they contended that Christians must abandon all emphasis on outward behavior and partake in emphasizing change at the “heart level.” That would be the two elements of the Heart Theology movement: change at the heart level, and real, lasting change (theoretically).
So, what does that look like (not “how,” which might imply some kind of verb to follow)? Well, the key is deciphering the “desires of the heart.” Desires reveal the idols in our heart, or anything that we love more than God (supposedly, according to advocates). So, what does that look like? Well, we analyze desires of the heart three ways. First, by how we respond to circumstances. Second, by asking God to reveal the Idols through prayer. Thirdly, by imagining future scenarios and taking note of how it makes us feel. The second means is direct, God simply reveals it to us directly through prayer. The first and third means require the use of interpretive questions. So for instance, you are watching a football game and your wife demands that you take the trash out “right now!” And this in fact makes you angry. The most common interpretive question is “what did you want?” The answer is the following: you wanted to be left alone to enjoy the game and you wanted to be shown more respect by your wife. There you have it; football and being respected are idols in your heart. If you now repent of these idols, they are emptied from your heart and God then fills that void in your heart with himself. To the extent that your heart has idols, God is not present. Depending on the presence and filling of God verses idols, obedience is a “mere natural flow” that doesn’t require effort (works) on our part.
This now brings me to the major characteristic of Heart Theology, it’s nebulous and subjective. It also brings me to the fault of Heart Theology which is fatal. Unlike the understandable (lack of emphasis on God’s promised resources) and easily adjusted error of biblical counseling, The fatal error of Heart theology is its conflict with 1 Kings 8:39;
“then hear in heaven your dwelling place and forgive and act and render to each whose heart you know, according to all his ways (for you, you only, know the hearts of all the children of mankind),
This verse emphatically states that only God can know the heart. The Holy Spirit makes it a point to use the subject (God [“you”] ) twice with no words in between (modifiers ect.). This is clearly for the purpose of strong emphasis. We cannot evaluate the heart in regard to idols. Besides, scripture often identifies sinful desires as being located in the “flesh” to begin with.
Though we depend on God’s strength, He would have us to focus on the objective and plain sense of Scripture. Following God’s wisdom and instruction is our role. Knowing and changing the heart is God’s business. Nobody ever said we change ourselves through obedience, Adams certainly never said that. We are to learn, apply, pray, obey inwardly (thinking), obey outwardly, seek wise counsel, love, encourage, instruct, rebuke, disciple, confess, and leave the changing and knowing of the heart to God. Adams said it best in a counseling conference: “The commands in the bible are not to the Holy Spirit, they are to us” and, “Quietism will ruin peoples lives.” There is no new reformation that narrows God’s precepts and wisdom for living to “deep repentance” that requires us to know our hearts. We cannot know our hearts, only God can. If there has been any reformation in the past 30 years, it has been the ability to apply the word of God to every issue of life and godliness.
paul
leave a comment