Carol K. Tharp, M.D.: [Paul] Tripp Proffers a False and Misleading Gospel
“But the crux of Tharp’s contention in regard to the gospel staggers the imagination for the following reason: the contradictions between ‘Broken-Down House’ and ‘How People Change’ are so extreme that there are no words that could begin to describe them.”
“What is this guy’s deal? Is he teaching two different dimensional truths (eschatological and something else) to be all things to all people for the purpose of selling books? Or is he just confused?”
Imagine my shock when I opened the newest newsletter from PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries; and lo, an expose on Paul David Tripp’s latest book: “Broken-Down House.” If somebody writes an evaluation of your book in a newsletter called “PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries,” you usually don’t expect a good review, and the review of his book by Carol Tharp is certainly no exception. The reason for my shock is due to the fact that Tripp, until now, has enjoyed a significant degree of freedom from criticism by mainline evangelicals.
In her introduction of part one, in this review, as she is giving a lay of the land in regard to Tripp’s book, she notes some of Tripp’s weird word-craft in quotations as a sort of Huh? commentary. Welcome to my world. She notes how Tripp describes the book as, “drawing a ‘word picture’ of our life.’” Huh? Still in disbelief that the theological Alice in Wonderland work of “How People Change,” also written by Tripp, did not end up on anyone’s radar screen, and regardless of bazaar concepts like asking ourselves “x-ray questions” in order to analyze desires of the heart; I was indeed thankful for this book and the fact that I don’t have to read it. But what an education it was in regard to another major dimension of Paul Tripp’s theology, who is sort of a behind the scenes minion of the Christian Counseling and Education Foundation (CCEF).
The primary doctrine of this book that Tharp concentrates on is the belief that creation is in progressive renewal and that we as believers have a part in that renewal. Put another way: an eschatological, progressive renewal of creation. Tharp notes well that this is blatant error:
**Concerning the future, Tripp claims that the world is “in the process of being restored” (18), but offers no Scriptural support for this optimistic eschatology. He ignores Scripture’s clear message that “the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition” (II Peter 3:5-7). Tripp assures his readers that “evil is in the process of being defeated” (105) and that “the enemies of God and good are being progressively defeated” (106). He ignores Scriptures such as 1 John 5:19 stating clearly that “the whole world lieth in wickedness,- in the power of the evil one. After 222 pages of how to be Living Productively in a World Gone Bad, he claims that -you can, beyond any question. be one of God’s tools of rescue and restoration … with the sure expectation” that God will “put a tender hand on— your tired shoulder and say, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant. You can do these things” (222, bold added).**
Tharp also notes:
**In contrast to all of this, Scripture presents the world as guilty and groaning under the curse and waiting for the redemption of our bodies. The biblical promise lies in “him who hath subjected” it, not in us. Believers have hope but not in their redeeming creation.**
……and also:
**When Scripture speaks of the restoration of the fallen creation, it speaks of a future restoration which is solely the work of God. Nowhere does Scripture support a notion of “restoration” as being “in process” and something accomplished by man…..There is nothing in Scripture to indicate that we are helping God restore the creation.**
An eschatology that teaches a progressive renewal of creation stands as a blatant and stark contradiction to biblical truth, especially when a supposed role by us is included. Furthermore, Tharp also notes how this eschatology echoes the same beliefs as the emergent church:
**In these assertions, Tripp reveals his kinship with the emergent church. A belief held in common by emergent church leaders is their “eschatology of hope.” For example, Tony Jones says, “God’s promised future is good, and it awaits us, beckoning us forward … in a tractor beam of redemption and recreation … so we might as well cooperate.”6 Emergents Stanley Grenz and John R. Franke declare, “As God’s image bearers, we have a divinely given mandate to participate in God’s work of constructing a world in the present that reflects God’s own eschatological will for creation.”‘ Elsewhere, emergent church advocate Doug Pagitt claims, “When we employ creativity to make this world better, we participate with God in the re-creation of the world.”‘**
But the crux of Tharp’s contention in regard to the gospel staggers the imagination for the following reason: the contradictions between ‘Broken-Down House’ and ‘How People Change’ are so extreme that there are no words that could begin to describe them. Anyone who has studied Tripp’s teachings and actually paid attention in a thoughtful way, would initially find Tharp’s assertions extremely hard to believe. However, she makes her case that Tripp propagates; get this, “environmental determinism.”:
**Foundational to Tripp’s message [in Broke-Down House] is the psychological doctrine of environmental determinism. Most counselors, secular or Christian, counsel as if people’s problems are caused by their environment. For Tripp, this environment is the “broken- down house” in “a world gone bad.”**
Tharp continues to make her case:
**As he asserts, “It conditions what you face … shapes what you experience … structures the struggles … creates the stresses … determines the issues … molds the work of the church … shapes the struggles of your heart … and even determines the things you deal with in your body” (19). According to Tripp, the reader has been chosen “to embrace the promise and possibility of a restoration lifestyle” (20). He is called “away from self-focused survival to the hard work of restoration” (21). He says that the broken-down house is “the only environment you have” (19), but by “the hard work of restoration,” you can achieve freedom from these environmentally determined problems and lead a “life that can truly be called successful” (209). In other words people have become broken down through external circumstances, but have the ability not only to fix themselves but to fix the world.**
This is in stark contradiction to HPC, which teaches that environment has absolutely nothing to do with heart issues, other than to reveal what the sinful desires of our heart are by asking “x-ray” questions like “what did you want?“ In BDH, he says creation [or environment] “shapes the struggles of your heart.” At the very least, he is teaching (in BDH) that the renewal of creation can facilitate inward change. Is Paul Tripp really that confused? Or, does he just want to sell books? Furthermore, according to Tharp, he says the following in regard to righteous anger:
**Tripp informs his readers, “In a fallen world, people of character and conscience will always be angry” (129) and asks, “What will be the legacy of this week’s anger for you?” (134). He declares, “God is not satisfied with the state of this house, and he calls us to share in his holy dissatisfaction” (20). He says that “the ongoing dissatisfaction of our Redeemer is a theme of this whole book” (196). In seeming denial of Christ’s last words on the cross, “It is finished,” Tripp says that “God cannot and will not be satisfied with His work of redemption as long as the physical world suffers the effects of sin” (197). No explanation is offered as to how God, who creates and destroys by the Word of His mouth, who knows the end from the beginning, and whose ways are beyond our understanding could ever be “a Dissatisfied Redeemer” (196).**
A continuing theme of Tripp’s teachings has always been that anger is almost always the result of sinful desires, and usually treats the whole idea of righteous indignation with a knowing smirk. Also, in HPC, he spills gallons of ink dissing practical application, methods, and “living by list’s.” But yet, according to Tharp, he says the following in BDH:
**Having established this doctrinal base, Tripp, like most psychotherapists, proceeds to offer a number of methods by which a troubled person can supposedly restore his own broken-down house. Describing the Bible as “a copy of [God’s] repair manual” (85), Tripp offers “five ways to pursue the character qualities to which God calls us” (30), forty-four ways to be “an instrument of cross-shaped love” (172-174), five ways to “Celebrate Grace” (188), three approaches to “daily living” (201), and five “principles that help create the sort of legacy each one of God’s children should want to leave for those who follow” (209-222)…..Tripp’s talk of becoming “more authentically human”(91) “in a step-by-step way” (188), **
I’m I here right now? The antithesis of HPC is using the Bible as a “repair manual.” In HPC, he presents the Bible as a gospel narrative and nothing else. What is this guy’s deal? Is he teaching two different dimensional truths (eschatological and something else) to be all things to all people for the purpose of selling books? Or is he just confused?
Never the less, Tharp’s focus is on BDH, and concludes the following:
**As such, Tripp proffers a false and misleading gospel, one that is all too familiar among psychotherapists, both secular and Christian. His gospel is false because it presents an unbiblical view of the problem of man and offers an unbiblical solution.**
“Gospel Driven Divorce”: Is Your Marriage in Imminent Danger?
Rush Limbaugh often says he knows liberals like every inch of his glorious naked body. I must confess, even with all of the study I have done on the *gospel driven life*, or *gospel driven sanctification*, I think I still know my body much better. New revelations concerning GDS are often so bizarre that it takes time to finally come to grips with the fact that its proponents actually advocate various elements. First, for those who are not familiar with GDS, here is a thumbnail of what it teaches:
The same gospel that saved us must be meditated upon every day in order to grow spiritually. The whole Bible is about the gospel and nothing else. According to John Piper: “That’s why the Bible is so big; there’s a gospel application to every event in life” (slight paraphrase-see video entitled “The Gospel in 6 Minutes” Sept. 12, 2007- Desiring God Ministries). Therefore, we meditate on the gospel through looking for it in the Scriptures, and as we meditate on the gospel as seen in the Scriptures, “we are changed from glory to glory,” or in other words: “Beholding as a way of becoming” (John Piper, “The Pleasures of God” pg 15 ). Also, according to John Piper, we should “never, never, never, never, never, never, never, think that the gospel saves us and then we move on to something else”(“The Gospel in 6 Minutes”). In fact, most proponents of GDS think that any “moving on to something else,” even if it falls under the category of discipleship, is a false gospel and you therefore forfeit both justification and sanctification. In other words, if you believe in synergistic sanctification- your lost.
So then, everything in the Bible must be seen in light of the gospel, and interpreted accordingly; marriage and divorce would not be an exception to this rule in any regard. In short, if you are a believing spouse, and your marriage doesn’t “look like the gospel” ( the relationship between Christ and his bride, the church) you are free to divorce your spouse. Buckle-up, here is an article that advocates this GDS view:
Gospel Love, Marriage & Divorce
“Recently, I have been studying the Scriptures and paying closer attention to how it is most of us as Christians have understood love, marriage and divorce. Surprisingly, although we say we believe that the most intimate of marriage relationships is to be modeled by Christ and his relationship to the Church, we do not, in our theology, really seem to believe or practice that.
We seem to have allowed our understanding and definition of marriage be something that is not a reflection of Christ and the Church. Marriage, we are told, is between a man and a woman. Agreed. That is a principle definition of marriage that definitely stems from God’s design of marriage back in the garden of Eden. However, that is only part of the formula for what constitutes a marriage. The most important ingredient that we as the Church have allowed our secular influences to omit is none other than God himself. Biblically, God is necessarily 1/3 of the relational equation in order for a marriage (or a church!) to be “joined together by God.” Likewise, apostate churches that do not properly include God, are not recognized by God. By definition, a true marriage or Church must include the one true God as a common denominator.
As the Church, we have then failed to see the legacies of Divine love, marriage and divorce throughout the Scriptures. And because we have embraced a marital world-view that can be devoid of God, we have found ourselves struggling with the whole subsequent understanding of how to understand divorce.
In Scripture, where divorce is sanctioned by God, the aim is always redemptive in some sense. It is always gospel driven.
Abraham divorced his 2nd wife, Hagar, because of gospel unbelief (Genesis 21:10-12; Galatians 4:29, 30).
Ezra, the prophet, counseled the entire nation of Israel to divorce their foreign/unbelieving wives…”according to the Law” (Ezra 9, 10).
God gave Israel a certificate of divorce for her antinomian apostasy: gospel rejection (Jeremiah 3; John 15; Romans 11).
The men who divorced their wives in Malachi were rebuked for doing so due to the fact that their wives remained faithful to God. These men divorced their “believing” wives only to marry non-believers. This, God hated.
Paul exhorts the believers in Corinth who are still in a mixed marriage to “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers…come out from among them and be separate” (2 Corinthians 6:14-18).
Again, Christ divorced the church of Laodicea for its gospel rejection, for embracing an antinomian apostasy as well (Revelation 3).
The common denominator that is found amongst every single divorce that was sanctioned by God was a HEART denominator, a GOD denominator that was identified as not being existent in the marriage.
So when we read the words of Jesus, “Except for fornication, a man must not divorce his wife,” we do not take his meaning of fornication (GK: pornea) as being literal. From the consistent revelation given elsewhere in Scripture, he was understandably speaking of a spiritual fornication: love for the world.
Once this God centered understanding of marriage and divorce is understood, we no longer have to struggle with the idea of “what kind of sins can qualify as “pornea”? We no longer have to tell married wives, “I know your husband beats you, occasionally, and perhaps he only beats your children. However, God never said it would be easy to be a follower of Jesus, so you need to understand that it is His will for you to remain married to your miserable and unbelieving husband (or apostate spouse).”
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus said to them, “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God will fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life.” Luke 18:29, 30.”
Get the picture? The crux of the article is this excerpt: “In Scripture, where divorce is sanctioned by God, the aim is always redemptive in some sense. It is always gospel driven.” Basically, what it boils down to is this: in reformed circles where GDS is propagated, all bets are off; any marriage that doesn’t “look like the gospel” is possible fodder for divorce court. But who in the world would be the judge of that? No marriage is perfect; at what point would one decide that it is or isn‘t? Well, welcome to the nebulous world that is GDS.
However, in this environment, any mixed marriage (believer and unbeliever) would certainly be doomed to failure, for no unbelieving spouse could live up to a picture of God’s marriage with the church. The believing spouse, once in such a church, will have a green light to divorce the second the ink is dry on the membership application. But here is a problem as well: now you have a situation where the marriage is only valid if a certain standard is met. Isn’t that the antithesis of the gospel? Well, welcome to the contradictory world that is also GDS. But you say, “hey Paul, at least the other spouse has to be an unbeliever. If your both saved; and in such a church, your safe, right?” Yes you are, if you both are proponents of GDS. Remember, more traditional views of the relationship between justification and sanctification are deemed to be a false gospel in GDS circles.
The proof is in the pudding. I predict that divorce will soon become rampant in reformed churches, if it isn’t already. I know of a few that actually pride themselves in “building marriages that look like the gospel.” Unfortunately, this is often done through divorce and remarriage, with God’s supposed stamp of approval. Some of these churches, even small ones of 200 or 300 members, average a divorce and remarriage to the tune of one per year. I also predict that as the word gets out, spouses will begin to go to these churches with the ill intent of getting a church-sanctioned divorce. Stay tuned.
paul
When Sarcasm Becomes Reality: Horton’s Call for Potted Plants to Report to the Grow Center
I have written many times on the new easy believism sweeping through reformed groups. The *gospel* is now a mystical narrative that we merely sit under in all its various forms at any given time; we are then automatically transformed from “glory to glory,” a “beholding as a way of becoming.” Oh, and by the way, every verse in the Bible is about the gospel. Yes indeed, it is like the grow-lamp that me and my bros formally used to make our pot grow. You are the plant, and the Bible is the light; groovy dude. But what about those commands God talks about that don’t seem to include gospel subject matter? Well, that’s supposedly due to the fact that “God is the Gospel.” Amen, pass the bong dude, and somebody turn out that hall light, it’s taking away from the strobes and the lava lights.
Here is how I sarcastically stated it in another post: “You can also greatly enhance change in your life by showing up at the “glory center” every time the doors are open and thereby putting yourself under the glorious light of the gospel that passively effects your life like sunlight causes flowers to grow.” Well, here we go again, sarcasm becomes reality as the *gospel driven life* movement becomes wackier with each passing day. The Gospel Four: Horton, Tripp, Powlison, and Piper, are always busy with the next concoction that will save God’s people from the former days of wilderness wondering under the heavy hand of the “perfect law of liberty” (James 1:25). Micheal Horton’s latest book, “Christless Christianity,” puts forth the whole grow-light idea in regard to corporate worship on pages 189-191:
“ God gathers his people together in a covenantal event to judge and to justify, to kill and to make alive. The emphasis is on God’s work for us – the Father’s gracious plan, the Son’s saving life, death, and resurrection, and the Spirit’s work of bringing life to the valley of dry bones through the proclamation of Christ. The preaching focuses on God’s work in the history of redemption from Genesis through Revelation, and sinners are swept into this unfolding drama. Trained and ordained to mine the riches of Scripture for the benefit of God’s people, ministers try to push their own agendas, opinions, and personalities to the background so that God’s Word will be clearly proclaimed. In this preaching the people once again are simply receivers – recipients of grace. Similarly, in baptism, they do not baptize themselves; they are baptized. In the Lord’s Supper, they do not prepare and cook the meal; they do not contribute to the fare; but they are guests who simply enjoy the bread of heaven. As this gospel creates, deepens, and inflames faith, a profound sense of praise and thanksgiving fills hearts, leading to good works among the saints and in the world throughout the week. Having been served by God in the public assembly, the people are then servants of each other and their neighbors in the world.”
We see five elements of the wacky world of *gospel sanctification * in this excerpt. First, this whole concept of born again Christians still being dead, and in need of daily salvation via the gospel that saved us: “The emphasis is on God’s work for us – the Father’s gracious plan, the Son’s saving life, death, and resurrection, and the Spirit’s work of bringing life to the valley of dry bones through the proclamation of Christ.” Christians today have come to like this whole idea that we are still spiritually dead. Why? Well, “when you are dead, you can do nothing.” Translation: we don’t have to do anything but gaze upon the gospel narrative; after that, whatever happens, happens. If we do something good, the Spirit did it, not us. And if we sin, hey, what do you expect from dead people? Sweet, no fault Christianity, if Christ didn’t make me do it, it’s not my fault.
Secondly, the sole purpose of the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation is to sweep “sinners” into the “unfolding drama”: “The preaching focuses on God’s work in the history of redemption from Genesis through Revelation, and sinners are swept into this unfolding drama.“ Forget about the Scriptures being profitable for “reproof, instruction, correction,” etc., Horton’s view of Scripture is here evident.
Thirdly, like Catholicism, interpretation of the Scriptures is best left to the experts and not the laity. Finding and making every verse in the Bible a “gospel narrative” is deep business indeed. So the news gets even better; you don’t have to labor in the word on your own: “Trained and ordained to mine the riches of Scripture for the benefit of God’s people, ministers try to push their own agendas, opinions, and personalities to the background so that God’s Word will be clearly proclaimed. In this preaching the people once again are simply receivers – recipients of grace.” In other words, real preaching is 100% vertical and has no instruction. It is totally grace oriented, and we are “simply receivers.” Anything that is more than the *gospel* alone in preaching is someones “agenda.”
Fourthly, our role in the corporate assembly is strictly passive. We are there to be served by God via the gospel alone: “As this gospel creates, deepens, and inflames faith, a profound sense of praise and thanksgiving fills hearts, leading to good works among the saints and in the world throughout the week. Having been served by God in the public assembly, the people are then servants of each other and their neighbors in the world.”
Lastly, We are also passive participants in the church ordinances, which also impart grace to the passive participant. This actually smacks of a transubstantiation like view of the ordinances: “Similarly, in baptism, they do not baptize themselves; they are baptized. In the Lord’s Supper, they do not prepare and cook the meal; they do not contribute to the fare; but they are guests who simply enjoy the bread of heaven.”
Furthermore, Horton then gives a contrast to the above concerning corporate worship:
“In this scenario, the people assume that they come to church primarily to do something. The emphasis is on their work for God. The preaching concentrates on principles and steps to living a better life, with a constant stream of exhortations: Be more committed. Read your Bible more. Pray more. Witness more. Give more. Get involved in this cause or that movement to save the world… Many of us were raised in conservative evangelical contexts in which preaching was chiefly an exhortation to do more, baptism was our act of commitment rather than God’s, the Lord’s Supper was a means of our remembering rather than a means of God’s grace, and many of the songs were expressions of our piety more than a recounting of God’s marvelous mercies in the history of redemption. The expectation that God was actually visiting his people to apply the benefits of Christ’s victory to sinners – both believers and unbelievers – was less obvious than the sense that we were primarily regrouping to get our marching orders.”
In closing, I am not going to address Horton’s exaggerations and numerous straw man arguments in his second scenario. But note how he makes no distinction between the lost and saved: “God was actually visiting his people to apply the benefits of Christ’s victory to sinners – both believers and unbelievers – was less obvious than the sense that we were primarily regrouping to get our marching orders.” His glaring contradictions to the plain sense of Scripture should be abundantly obvious. The book of James, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, and Hebrews, are replete with instructions concerning corporate gathering and worship. Horton chides believers for doing the very thing that Christ commands us to do in regard to the Lord’s table: “Do this in remembrance of me.” Furthermore, anyone who thinks that we gather together to “encourage each other unto good works” should apparently know better than to try personal interpretation of the Bible at home.
paul
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
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
6 comments