Critics often fall into that category. Artists -- whether they be painters, writers, actors, directors, sculptors, or architects -- depend on satisfactory critical reviews for their bread and butter. Unflattering reviews can end an artist's career. So nobody likes a critic who is just a wise guy. But a critic who protects the public from spending its money on "flops" -- that's another story. He provides an essential and appreciated function. The same goes for consumer advocates and for the various sports commissions. They both help the pubic negotiate the promises and pitfalls of the marketplace.
In short, we have critics to help us identify false (or, at least, substandard) art, consumer advocates to help us recognize false advertising, and sports commissions to maintain the integrity of the game. But where are the "laity advocates" who help folks spot false prophets. Are we suggesting by our silence that our arts, products, and sports are worth more than our eternal souls?
As I said, nobody wants to sit next to the obnoxious fellow who finds his niche in the world by blowing the whistle on his brothers and sisters. After all, none of us has all the answers. But isn't there another extreme? One in which charlatans and outright heretics are allowed to pass for orthodox, evangelical spokesmen?
This book argues that there is indeed.
Trinity Broadcasting Network's president, Paul Crouch, has repeatedly mocked those who would confront false teachers. During a "Praise-A-Thon," Crouch stated:
There are those who spend a lifetime --we call them apologists--they spend their whole lives apologizing for the Scripture. They spend their whole lifetime defending the orthodoxy of the doctrines of the church and, as I said a while ago, what is orthodox to them is what is in agreement with their opinion of what the Bible says. . .You can spend a lifetime gazing at the orthodoxy of the church and let a world go straight to hell and never hear the message of Jesus Christ.
This book argues that the struggle for orthodoxy is the struggle for the authentic "message of Jesus Christ" that will, in fact, save those who place their confidence in it. It argues that by ignoring the orthodoxy of the message being preached by those who call themselves Christians, we are, in fact, assisting in a delusion that results in the very loss about which Crouch and the "faith teachers" say they are concerned.
"But," says Earl Polk, defending himself, "a prophet is not to be judged. And elsewhere one hears the warning, "Touch not the Lord's anointed!"
Is that really what God commands? Consider the words of the book of Deuteronomy: "if a prophet...appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder" and through it leads the people astray, "you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love Him with all your heart and with all your soul." As for the prophet? "That prophet or dreamer must be put to death" (Deut. 13:1-5).
Throughout the Old Testament and not just the book of Deuteronomy, believers are called upon to test the prophets. And in the New Testament Jesus warns, "watch out for false prophets" (Matt 7:15). Elsewhere He cautions, "False Christs and false prophets will appear" (Matt 24:24). John commands "dear friends, do not believe every spirit but test the spirits to see if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1). Whenever someone claiming to be a prophet announces, "a prophet cannot be judged" warning lights should flash!
The contributors to this volume are concerned ultimately not with air-conditioned dog houses or sexual dalliances but with the real scandal: heresy. Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, "Tell me what a person believes and I'll tell you what he'll do." Theology and ethics are inextricably bound together. Yet under the supposed banner of unity, we have harboured enemy ships -- as long as they flew our flag. That policy must change. Tolerating enemies of the historic Christian faith as though they were our brethren is not love, but adultery. The substance of the faith is the only basis for unity.
Those who embrace the apostolic substance of Christianity have a basis for unity. Essentials serve as the common denominators. When those foundational affirmations are eroded, the group loses its essential identity. And when a group loses its identity, it ceases to offer a common core of commitment that inspires unity and brotherhood. Give up the defense of the fundamentals and you give up any hope of real unity.
How ironic it is then, that only five decades after the "Modernist-Fundamentalist" controversy evangelical and fundamentalist churches find themselves in the position of harbouring -- or tolerating -- outright denial of orthodoxy. They are doing that because they have mistaken outward tokens for essential unity. So long as the preacher waves his Bible under the bright lights, or has an altar call, they do not object to what he says, even if he preaches doctrines as dangerous to the soul as those propagated by the "liberals" he so cheerfully mocks.
One consequence of this tolerance is to leave the way open for an inaccurate understanding of Christianity to be spread abroad. The world sees televangelists as the spokesmen for the evangelical movement. It does not distinguish between those who preach the gospel "once for all given to the saints" and those who preach a fraudulent gospel. So when the world examines televangelism -- its programming, its triumphs, its failures -- and concludes from looking at some, but not all, televangelists that televangelism is materialistic, exploitative, power-hungry, and success -and-numbers oriented -- in short, is just as worldly as the world itself -- it condemns the whole evangelical movement -- and Christianity -- not just fraudulent televangelists.
Does the world realize that televangelism does not necessary represent the evangelical movement? Does it know that the evangelical movement is concerned with truth? Do those who occasionally view televangelists programming know that evangelical Christianity offers an intelligent interpretation of and hope for human existence? Does the average unbeliever come away from an ordinary telecast with a better grasp of the substance of the Christian faith?
Unless the ordinary evangelical is willing to stand up and be counted, the answer will be no. If the answer is no, that may well mean that evangelical commentators, reflecting the movement generally, have not been as interested in truth as in success. After all, the incarnation is not as interesting as "Body Builders for Jesus." Or is it? The celebrated mystery-novelist, Dorothy Sayers, once asserted, "Doctrine is not boring! Dogma is the drama!" She was right. The drama lies not in the crying and the shouting but in the great truth of the Gospel.
The Apostle Peter understood the responsibility an orthodox Christian has and addressed the subject of doctrine directly. He was well aware that his Master had given him the charge, "Feed my sheep" --and had emphasized it (John 21:15-18). That command weighed heavily on Peter's conscience as he reminded the members of the ancient church that though they had once been "like sheep gone astray," they were now "returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls" (1 Peter 2:25). They needed, Peter said, to "make every effort to be found spotless, blameless, and at peace with [Christ]" (2 Peter 3:14) -- and to pay attention to doctrine. Not to do so was to bring condemnation upon themselves. The letters of "our dear brother Paul," Peter said, "contains some things that are hard to understand," but the "ignorant and unstable" who distort them, "as they do the other Scriptures," do so "to their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:15-16).
Notice the elements of Peter's warning. There is the recognition that the Bible contains a number of truths that are easily reshaped by the subtlest distortion. And there is the assertion that such distortions are caused by those who are "ignorant and unstable." That is an important clue as to the sort of person we must suspect. Ignorance among many associated with televangelism is no less prized than it was among the ranters who eschewed thought in favour of an objectless fascination with feeling during the frontier revivals of the last century. It was in that setting that many of the cults were born. "No creed but Christ," the evangelist cheered and instability has been characteristic of many religious celebrities in the past and in the present.
By Michael Horton
For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library. Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book. All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com.
For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library. Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book. All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com.
