709 East
57th Street; Loveland, CO 80538
Services: 9:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. (7:00 p.m. June
through August)
Vol. 6, No. 13 Pastor: Rev. Garry Eriks Phone: (970)
667-9481
Homepage on Internet: http://www.prca.org
Contents:
Office of Pastor and Teacher
God's
Dealings With Israel (1)
What
About the Alpha Course? (1)
The Office of Pastor and Teacher
The office of pastor and teacher (Eph. 2:11) is the third permanent office in the church. That it is an office requiring ordination is clear from I Timothy 4:14 and Romans 10:15. Its primary task is labouring "in the word and doctrine" (I Tim. 5:17), that is, the preaching of the gospel.
Nevertheless, as I Tim. 5:17 shows, those who labour in the word and doctrine are elders along with those who rule in the church. Indeed, this verse shows us that the ministers of the gospel also rule, just as the ruling elders are also pastors (Acts 20:28). Scripture makes no absolute separation between these two offices.
That the primary task of these "word and doctrine" elders is the preaching of the gospel is clear from II Timothy 4:2 and many other passages. This office, as Ephesians 2:11 reminds us, is a teaching office therefore.
The business of the preacher, therefore, is not to entertain. His business is not even first of all to "evangelise" in the usual sense of that word. His work is teaching.
That needs emphasis. Many preachers of the gospel seem to have forgotten it. Whatever they are doing, they are doing precious little teaching. Often the members of the congregation sit under their preaching for years and learn next to nothing. That is not always the fault of the preacher, of course, but more often than not it is.
Not only does the preacher have the calling to teach the older members of the congregation but also the children (Jn. 21:15). The preacher ought, then, to give regular instruction to the church's children, teaching them both Bible history and Bible doctrine, and not using silly and useless "children's addresses" where nothing is taught or learned.
The preacher even has the calling to instruct other young men and to prepare them for the ministry of the Word (II Tim. 2:2). In harmony with this Reformed churches have always appointed ministers of the gospel to this work. In this as in all else a preacher is also a pastor, a shepherd of God's people with great responsibilities to them (Ezek. 34:1-6).
As part of his calling to teach, however, the preacher also has the responsibility to read and study (I Tim. 4:13), and to give heed to doctrine, that is, to learn and know it (I Tim. 4:16), matters that are often neglected by those who hold this office.
For this reason it is preferable that those who hold this office have opportunity to "give heed to doctrine," and to receive training and instruction before they take up their responsibilities. How this is done is not as important as that it be done.
The congregation, too, has a responsibility in all this. Like the church in Colosse, they must say to their preacher "take heed to the ministry which thou hast received of the Lord, that thou fulfil it" (4:17). The congregation must say this! They must say it often and especially when the minister is not giving heed to the responsibilities we have outlined.
This office is not meant to be an easy job for those who hold it, but is appointed by God for the salvation of His people. Woe to those shepherds that do not feed the flock! (Ezek. 34:2). Ronald Hanko
God's Dealings With Israel (1)
Hear, O my people, and I will testify unto thee . . . . I am the Lord thy God . . . . But my people would not hearken to my voice . . . . So I gave them up unto their own hearts' lusts . . . . Psalm 81:8-14.
A reader sent in Psalm 81:8-14 for comment. No question was attached, and so I presume that the reader would like to have some remarks made about these vss., perhaps particularly on the question of how God can give his people up to their own hearts' lusts. I have not quoted the entire passage because it would take too much space in these pages. The reader is asked to look up the passage and read the entire Psalm.
The verses all refer to the nation of Israel, and this nation is called, "God's people." But about that nation God says some things which seem to be contradictory not only, but which seem to conflict with the idea that Israel is truly God's people.
God speaks of the many blessings He has given the nation, particularly in delivering them from Egypt (6, 7, 10). He reminds them of the commandments He gave them (8, 9). He speaks of their evil disobedience, how they would not hearken to His voice; and how Israel would have none of Him (11). Then, in an astonishing statement, He speaks of how He punished them by giving them up to their own lusts and letting them walk in their own ways (12). And finally, He tells of how He would have blessed them if they had but obeyed His voice (14-16).
The best way to understand this is to remember that God always deals with people in their full relationships of life: not as individuals only, but as parts of families, churches, nations, races, etc. This is so true that Scripture compares the nation of Israel (and the church) to a field of wheat with tares in it (Mt. 13:24-30), a vineyard with vines which do not bear fruit(Isaiah 5:1-7), a vine which has branches which do not bear fruit (John 15:1-3, Psalm 80), and an olive tree from which branches are cut out (Romans 11).
To make clear what is the idea here in Psalm 81, let us limit our use of a figure to that of a field with wheat and tares in it.
The nation of Israel (and the church) are like a field in which both wheat and tares are to be found because in the church is to be found both elect and reprobate.
A farmer calls that field his wheat field, even though it has in it wheat and tares. So God calls the nation of Israel (and the church) "My people." A farmer calls a field his wheat field because he looks at that field from the viewpoint of his purpose with it. He would be angry if someone called it a weed field. He would point out that, although there are weeds in it, he takes care of the field for the wheat, not the weeds. So God calls Israel (and the church) His people, because that is His purpose with the nation and the church.
The farmer treats the whole field the same. He has to do this because that was of farming lies in the nature of the field of wheat. He cultivates the ground, prepares the soil, irrigates the field if necessary, puts fertilizer on it, and earnestly seeks the sunshine. If someone would say to him that he is foolish for doing all these things because he only makes the weeds grow more swiftly, then he would respond: I do it for the wheat, not the weeds.
So God delivered the whole nation from Egypt, gave the nation His law at Sinai, fed them with manna and gave them to drink from the rock, and finally brought them into Canaan. And so God does to His church. He causes the Word of be preached to the whole church. He commands that all the children of believers be baptized. He gives to all the children Christian education in the home, school, and church. If one would complain to the Lord and suggest that He does foolishly because He gives all these things to the reprobate in the church, then the Lord replies: I do it for my people.
But the presence of two kinds of people in the church means that the church (as was true of the nation of Israel) lives in a kind of perpetual tension. I am not sure that is exactly the right word to use, but it will illustrate my point.
The same kind of "tension" exists, really, in the life of every Christian. He is, by nature, a depraved sinner. God has saved him, although he has only a beginning of the new life of Christ. He is two people at the same time. He is a new man, created in holiness, and he is a depraved sinner.
Sometimes his evil nature gains the dominance in his life. The result is that he neglects the holy exercises of Scripture reading, prayer, and attending worship services in church. He walks in sin, stubbornly clings to his sin when he is rebuked, and delights in evil.
But he is also a child of God who has been regenerated. And so the new man of Christ is sometimes dominant in his life, and the old man of sin is in the background. Then his life is quite different.
But our space is taken up for this issue, and we shall continue this discussion next time, God willing. I consider this to be so important that I would be pleased if you would save this issue, lay it in a place where you can find it, and read this article again when the next issue of the Newsletter arrives. H. Hanko
What About the Alpha Course? (1)
One of our readers has asked about the very popular Alpha Course: "Are there any specific parts of the Alpha Course which would make it non-Christian or unsound?" We will, God willing, spend several issues answering this question.
There are, we believe, especially four reasons why this course needs to be rejected and avoided by God's people. They are: (1) its ecumenical emphasis; (2) its Charismatic origins and teachings; (3) its unbiblical doctrines; and (4) its lack of clear Biblical teaching on many key points. This latter, is in fact, one of its worst features.
First, however, some background. The course was developed at and is marketed by the Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Brompton, west London. It was originally produced in 1979, but has since been so completely reworked by Nicky Gumbel, curate at Holy Trinity, that he may very well be considered its author. There are different versions of the course, including one for young people, but the basic course consists of 15 lessons to be presented either by a leader or by videos over a period of 10-12 weeks.
Three of the lessons, considered to be the "high point" of the course, involve a "Weekend Away." The lessons are short and are meant to be presented in a very informal fashion. The sponsors themselves say, for example, "We believe it is possible to learn about the Christian faith and have a lot of fun at the same time." To this end, that is, to make the course "fun," the fundamental doctrines of Scripture are distorted or passed over.
As far as its ecumenical spirit is concerned, the author of the course himself tells us: "In one sense it is not so important what denomination we are - Roman Catholic or Protestant; Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, Pentecostal, Anglican or House Church. What is more important is whether or not we have the Spirit of God."
This broad appeal is evident in those who have endorsed the course. Some of them are: George Carey (Archbishop of Canterbury), Alistair McGrath (a influential Protestant scholar), J.I. Packer (of "Evangelicals and Roman Catholics Together" notoriety), John Wimber (founder of the Vineyard Churches), R.T. Kendall of Westminster Chapel (associated with the Toronto blessing and other heresies), John James (President of the Baptist Union), Steve Chalke and Gerald Coates (leading Charismatics).
This ecumenical emphasis is built on a lack of clear Biblical teaching. Thus, a Roman Catholic bishop has said of the course: "It doesn't contain anything that is contrary to Catholic doctrine. What's more, it provides in wonderful form the basis of Christian belief which many Catholics have never cottoned on to." This alone ought to cause any Bible-believing Christian to stay as far away from the course as he can.
Connected with its ecumenism is a strong Charismatic emphasis. The key question for the "Weekend Away" is "How Can I be Filled with the Spirit?" In answer, among other things, directions are given for receiving the gift of "tongues." Along the same lines the course teaches that God speaks to us through prophecy, dreams and visions, promotes faith healing (ala John Wimber, whose books are recommended), and physical manifestations such as shaking, breathing "in the Spirit," and physical warmth or heat.
This Charismatic influence comes from Holy Trinity (a church which promotes the "Toronto Blessing"). In fact, the main purpose of the course seems to be to advocate the Charismatic movement and teachings, though subtly. Be warned! Rev.R Hanko