Christ healing the blind man, by Andrei N. Mironov (2009).

When Jesus was on Earth, he spent much of his time in ministry healing the body and souls of those around him. There are several instances in scriptures where we see this. In John 4:43–54, Jesus healed an official’s son in Galilee. He drove spirits out of a man in Luke 4:31–36. In Matthew 8:14, He healed Peter’s mother-in-law. In Mark 1:40–45, He healed a man with leprosy. These are only a few of the dozens of healing miracles Jesus performed.

When Jesus called His disciples to continue His ministry, He, through the Holy Spirit, gave His followers the power to heal. Take, for example, Peter. In Acts 3:1–11, Peter healed a beggar who was unable to walk. In Acts 8:5–7, Philip healed several sick believers. Paul also healed the sick on several occasions.

As Charismatics, we believe wholeheartedly that the gift of healing still remains, 2000 years later. Through the Holy Spirit, Christ still gives some the power to heal in His name. This can, of course, still happen through one who is given the gift. Believers have also been known to come together and storm Heaven with prayers over a loved one, resulting in their healing.

While in biblical times, we saw true miracles and instantaneous full healing of those with physical, mental, and spiritual disabilities and health issues, what does the gift of healing look like today?

Let’s face facts, we are all going to face some type of pressure in our ministry. How are you reacting to pressure and how do you overcome it?

My nearly-sixteen-year-old daughter’s favorite movie is Braveheart. Naturally, if William Wallace can capture Mackenzie’s heart I want to be all that Wallace is and more. In my more delusional moments I envision myself with a huge sword, blue paint on my face and looking to “pick a fight.” When I return to my senses and look in the mirror, I hardly resemble the Scottish hero.

We all face pressure. What separates good and great leaders from average and failed leaders is how we handle that pressure.

I wonder if that’s who is needed today. As a matter of fact, if I arrived at church on Sunday morning clad in a kilt, swinging a sword, and yelling FREEDOM, it is highly likely that I will be given a very long vacation.

While most leaders long to be as brave as William Wallace, most will not be called upon to face an English sword. (Then again, William never faced an angry church secretary.) Seriously, what does a modern day warrior look like? Underneath all the trappings of a thirteenth-century Scot (1270-1305) or a twenty-first-century church leader … pressure is pressure.

When I say words like courage, risk, abandon, sweat, passion, and sacrifice, I can see myself, and hundreds if not thousands of other church leaders.

We all face pressure. What separates good and great leaders from average and failed leaders is how we handle that pressure.

How about you? What kind of pressure are you under? How are you coping with the debt load of your church? You’ve outgrown your building, so how do you keep growing when you are out of space and short on parking? How are you holding up under the pressure of being way behind in budget and losing some key givers? Then there is the matter of staff. Now there’s a piece of cake without any pressure whatsoever. Remember your youth pastor? What do you mean you aren’t getting along? Then there’s that small group that wants to break away and start their own church. Let’s not go there. One of your trustees is having an affair …OK, enough!

Are you taking care of yourself?
Image: Marcelo Leal

But wait, we haven’t even started on your personal life yet. How are you dealing with the pressure of your family acting more like animals than angels? Your spouse and kids are struggling and demanding more of your time. You want to give them time, but …Then of course you have your health to reckon with. Are you exercising regularly? Are you still eating double-cheese bacon-burgers, fries and topping it all off with ice cream? Your kids are getting close to college age and how are you going to pay for that? And last but not least, being the spiritual leader you are, how well are you doing in your passionate pursuit of God and hearing His clear voice of direction for you and your Church? I have one word for all that. PRESSURE! Like it or not, leaders are called to higher standards than non-leaders. 1 Timothy 3:1-7 gives a good picture of those standards. We are not called to be perfect, but we are called to live lives above reproach and be productive at the same time. Isn’t that the real pressure?

In response, professors and theologians turned to early Christian church fathers, their doctrinal commitments, devotional practices, and a variety of early ways of worship. In so doing they found their lives transformed in a modern movement of intense intellectual curiosity as well as a questioning scrutiny by traditional believers. Familiar names, writings and stories included in this issue are Tom Oden, Bob Webber, Richard Foster, Dallas Willard, Kathleen Norris, Thomas Howard, and William Abraham. (The title of this issue echoes Abraham’s 1995 book Waking from Doctrinal Amnesia, a critique of liberal United Methodist theology.)

“Compiling this issue has reminded me of my own personal revival,” said Jennifer Woodruff Tait, Managing Editor of Christian History magazine. “At seminary, I learned of the riches of early church theology and devotion, and found my spiritual life strengthened by fasting, disciplined scripture study, and frequent Holy Communion. Webber describes people somewhat like me in his most famous book, Evangelicals on the Canterbury Trail—that “trail” being a metaphor for a spiritual journey.”

CH issue #129, contains 10 feature articles and 4 shorter side-bar articles; a chronology time-line; an archive of rare art-work & photos; a ‘letter to the editor’ section and an extensive reading list compiled by the CHM editorial staff. The magazine is available on-line and can be conveniently read on screen at: https://christianhistoryinstitute.org.

Highlights from the Issue 129 table of contents:

Fulfilling a longing for the early church by Thomas C. Oden and Christopher A. Hall

An excerpt from Oden’s Ancient Christian Commentary

Acid rain and Christian truth by Jonathan A. Powers

Why do we need to recover from modernity?

“He made no new contribution to theology” by Christopher A. Hall

Tom Oden’s influential return to orthodox faith.

Living a “with-God” life by Tina Fox

The friendship of Richard Foster and Dallas Willard and the birth of Renovaré

Going behind Aquinas by Hans Boersma

Nouvelle théologie and The Catholic retrieval of mystery

Freedom for tradition by Robert Saler

The Lutheran tendency to defy denominational categories has been a strength as they seek renewal

Restless and reforming by D. G. Hart

The Mercersburg Theology presented Reformed Christians with a link to the past—if they chose to use it

“We’re not done with virtue yet” by Jennifer A. Boardman

Many different approaches to recover from modern amnesia

A church of the ages? By Jason Byassee, Chris Armstrong, and Greg Peters

We asked some pastors and professors to reflect on what it means to recover from modern amnesia and how the ancient and medieval faith can inform the church of the future

Christian History Institute
www.ChristianHistoryInstitute.org
Worcester, PA, April 16, 2019

What I Don’t Like About the Charismatic Movement

1. I don’t like the super-spirituality that is constantly giving rise to new and bizarre teachings and experiences. In this super-spiritual milieu, individuals are constantly seeking some new experience or some new revelation or giving themselves and others impressive sounding titles. All the while, the simplicity and power of Jesus and the Gospel are neglected. This is exactly what was happening in the city of Colosse when Paul wrote his letter to the church in that city (see my article “The Colossian Heresy Revisited“). I think the inhabitants of heaven must weep when they observe the self-centered, religious antics in our movement today.
2. I don’t like the celebrity mentality that is promoted by so many, nor the entertainment culture that has captured so much of the movement. This culture has more in common with Hollywood than with the New Testament. In it, worship leaders have become entertainers, preachers have become performers, and church has become big business. At one time, commitment to Christ involved giving up personal fame and fortune. Today, people come to the church to seek their personal fame and fortune. Oh, for a mighty heaven-sent revival that will sweep through the churches of North America.
3. I don’t like the money-driven antics of preachers who promise blessings and gifts from God to those who will send them an offering. These are the new charismatic indulgences. Scripture is twisted and integrity is compromised as the gifts of God, purchased by the blood of Christ, are offered for a price. These are those of whom Jesus spoke in Matt. 23:14, Woe to scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows’ houses and for a pretense make long prayers. What a terrible reckoning these will have to give when they stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

What I Like About the Charismatic Movement

1. I love the thousands of Spirit-filled believers I have met in many parts of the world, including North America, who are sold out to Jesus Christ and the advancement of His cause.
2. I love the world-wide outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Wherever He is allowed to work in unscripted, spontaneous ways there is a melting and breaking, often resulting in tears and sometimes in laughter. These times also include healings, miracles, and conversions. These times cannot be duplicated and mass marketed, although that is attempted in our business approach to Christianity. These “times of refreshing” come as we are totally dependent on Him and humble in His presence.
3. I love the empowering of the Holy Spirit in preaching, teaching, and in the manifestations of the gifts of the Spirit. The only means Jesus gave for fulfilling the Great Commission was for His people to be filled with and empowered by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit once said to me, “Life in the Spirit is a life without limitations.” Hallelujah! Keep coming Holy Spirit!

This article, used with permission, appeared on the Pneuma Foundation website on February 7, 2008. The Pneuma Foundation is the parent organization of PneumaReview.com.

Bruce L. McCormack, Orthodox and Modern: Studies in the Theology of Karl Barth (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008).

Bruce McCormack is the Frederick and Margaret L. Weyerhaeuser Professor of Systematic Theology at Princeton Theological Seminary. He instantly became one of the world’s leading interpreters of Karl Barth’s thought with the publication of Karl Barth’s Critically Realistic Dialectical Theology: Its Genesis and Development, 1909-1936 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1995). The present book, a collection of essays from journals and books, is the long-awaited follow-up punch to that 1995 book. “Punch” is not too strong a word, as these essays should go a long way toward revising the dominant North American view of Barth’s theology. It will be interesting to see how it stirs things up.

I personally do not agree with Barth’s theology, so there is much about this book that I cannot accept on a prescriptive, theological level. But when judged in comparison with other books on Barth, especially those under the influence of “Yale theology” and its attempt to turn Barth into a narrative theologian, I find the theology here much more philosophically consistent than anything that English-speaking Barthians have produced in the past forty years. It is also much more palatable to a student of the New Testament. I am thus torn. I am not in favor of Barthianism, but if there must be Barthians, then I much prefer that they be of the McCormack sort (which appears to be more faithful to Barth himself) than of the Hans Frei sort.

The writing in this book is always clear, even when the subject is obscure. One drawback for the beginning reader, of course, is that much of the discussion will seem in-house, as inevitably is the case with anything that is Barth-related but which is not an introduction. Those coming to Barth studies from the side of biblical studies will especially have a difficult time making out the terrain. Nevertheless, the importance of Barth for understanding present-day theology makes this an important book for teachers of theology.

This book is unfortunately marred by an instance of verbatim repetition: some of the wording on p. 273 is identical with wording found on pp. 296-97. (If students are punished for recycling their own words, then why is it alright for scholars to recycle their own words? That spate of laziness comes back to bite when the essays in question are gathered into a single collection, as they are here.)

Reviewed by John Poirier

Preview Orthodox and Modern: books.google.com/books?id=60bomlwgOB0C

Excerpt from the publisher: assets.bakerpublishinggroup.com/processed/book-resources/files/Excerpt_McCormack_Orthodox.pdf?1362589720

Kelly Kapic and Bruce McCormack, eds., Mapping Modern Theology: A Thematic and Historical Introduction (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), x + 421 pages, ISBN 9780801035357.

Most books on contemporary theology trace key themes in theology or focus on the contributions of influential theologians. While these approaches are helpful, it can be easy to miss how contemporary developments in theology have influenced each of the traditional topics in systematic theology. We can be grateful that Mapping Modern Theologyhelps us to see how this is the case.

Mapping Modern Theology is not technically a book on “contemporary theology” broadly speaking, however. Rather, the authors focus specifically on how theologians in the last couple hundred years have responded to modernity. The book begins with an essay by Bruce McCormack which introduces the concept of “modernity” within a theological context. He suggests that “modern” theology emerges when “church-based theologians ceased trying to defend and protect the received orthodoxies of the past against erosion and took up the more fundamental challenge of asking how the theological values resident in those orthodoxies might be given an altogether new expression, dressed out in new categories of reflection” and that philosophically  there was a “shift from a cosmologically based to an anthropologically based metaphysics of divine being” (p. 3).

Kelly M. Kapic is professor of theological studies at Covenant College in Lookout Mountain, Georgia.

The remainder of the essays by various evangelical (broadly defined) authors each focus on a different topic in systematic theology (e.g., creation, Christology, Holy Spirit, the Church), primarily from a Reformed Christian perspective. The chapters will be helpful for both non-specialists (although those who have never studied theology would be easily lost) and specialists. For example, the chapter on the Trinity (a topic in which I am well-versed) helped me to better grasp the impact of the “historical” approach to the Trinity in contemporary theology.

This book serves as a good reminder of the impact our philosophical assumptions can have on our theology, even when we are not conscious of them (or even deny them). The book will also serve well anyone who wants to know how the various topics in systematic theology have been influenced by modernity.

Bruce L. McCormack is Charles Hodge Professor of Systematic Theology at Princeton Theological Seminary.

Mapping Modern Theology could serve as a helpful textbook to a course on systematic theology or contemporary theology. At the same time, the strength of the book could also be its weakness, as far as being used as a primary rather than supplemental textbook. That is, in the systematic approach of the book, one could miss the big picture changes happening in theology today and might not get a good sense of who the most influential theologians have been in contemporary theology. This would not be an issue if the course lectures took a different approach than the book. Another concern (which is true for many books) is that readers might get the impression that theology is only about debates where theologians disagree on things, and readers might therefore miss the depth of the historical consensus of the Church on doctrine. While being aware of these concerns, readers will benefit greatly from the contributions in Mapping Modern Theology.

Reviewed by Andrew K. Gabriel

This review first appeared on Andrew Gabriel’s blog, www.andrewgabriel.wordpress.com and is reprinted here with his permission.

If we want to live our lives according to the Bible, how we approach Scripture means everything. What differences in interpretation can we see between the contemporary Word of Faith movement and the classic Faith movement?

This chapter is from Paul L. King’s book Only Believe: Examining the Origins and Development of Classic and Contemporary Word of Faith Theologies.

Many, perhaps even most, of the controversies regarding contemporary faith theology and practice have involved the interpretation of various passages of Scripture. Regarding the “health and wealth gospel,” Fee affirms: “The basic problems here are hermeneutical, i.e., they involve questions as to how one interprets Scripture. Even the lay person, who may not know the word “hermeneutics’ and who is not especially trained in interpreting the Bible, senses that this is where the real problem lies. The most distressing thing about their use of Scripture … is the purely subjective and arbitrary way they interpret the biblical text.”¹

Hermeneutics and the Contemporary Faith Movement

James W. Sire, in his book Scripture Twisting, addresses ways in which cults misuse the Scriptures: inaccurate quotation, twisted translation, ignoring the immediate context, collapsing contexts of two or more unrelated texts, speculation and overspecification, mistaking literal language for figurative language (and vice versa), selective citing, confused definitions, ignoring alternative explanations, among others.² Many of these misuses of Scripture in the contemporary faith movement have been pointed out by their critics. However, this does not mean that the contemporary faith leaders are cultic as some have claimed them to be, but it does demonstrate that there is a serious problem with some contemporary faith exegesis.

This is nobly said; but what does it mean? Implied is the hint that interpretations that differ from his are based on what people think, not on what the Bible says. But also implied is the truth that good interpretation should begin with the plain meaning of the text. The plain meaning of the text, however, is precisely what Copeland and the others do not give us, text after text. … But “plain meaning” has first of all to do with the author’s original intent, it has to do with what would have been plain to those to whom the words were originally addressed. It has not to do with how someone from a suburbanized white American culture of the late 20th century reads his own cultural setting back into the text through the frequently distorted prism of the language of the early 17th century.⁴

To illustrate Fee’s apprehension, a popular saying in the contemporary faith movement proclaims, “God said it; I believe it; and that settles it.” That statement is true as far as it goes. But it leaves something out: what is it that God really said, and what does it mean? Often this is presumed, rather than thought through and studied exegetically. Lovett, formerly a professor at Oral Roberts University, also writes of his concern, explaining, “The problem with exponents of the Rhema [word of faith] interpretation is their biased selection of biblical passages, often without due regard to their context. The self-defined phrase ‘confessing the Word of God’ takes precedence over hermeneutical principles and rules for biblical interpretation. This approach not only does violence to the text but forces the NT linguistic data into artificial categories that the biblical authors themselves could not affirm.”⁵ Simmons concludes that the shaky hermeneutical foundation of the contemporary faith movement stems from its acknowledged founder: “In Kenyon’s hands, even the texts that were a major focus of Keswickeans in general proved to be remarkably elastic. … Kenyon’s tendency was to stretch a term or metaphor to a literal extreme that the original word or figure of speech did not intend.”⁶

Calvin L. Smith, ed., The Jews, Modern Israel and the New Supercessionism: Resources for Christians (King’s Divinity Press), 164 pages, ISBN 9780956200600.

Finally—a single book that treats Replacement Theology, Israel, and the Jewish people with respect, reason, and biblical integrity. Over many years working with Christians I have encountered too many who will ardently profess that they are not anti-Semitic, yet continue to hold to the premise that the universal Church supplants biblical Israel. Consider for a moment how that must make the average Jewish man or woman feel to be told that God is done with them, that their role in God’s plan has ceased, that the blessings in the Bible proclaimed for Israel have been transferred to the church, and you begin to realize how thoroughly anti-Semitic this theology is.

The Jews, Modern Israel and the New Supercessionism (American spelling: Supersessionism) takes a multi-faceted approach to Replacement Theology to help set the record straight. Editor Calvin L. Smith has collected works from a number of scholars, all of which were submitted for a weekend conference at the King’s Evangelical Divinity School in England. As Smith writes, “A series of papers were presented which, while academic in nature, were designed to be accessible to everyday Christians.”

That goal was achieved. In chapters such as “Who is the ‘Israel’ of Romans 11:26?,” “Apostolic Jewish-Christian Hermeneutics,” and “Israel and the Purposes of God”—to name a few—readers are given a well-rounded background in how Protestants derived their supersessionistic doctrines. These doctrines are then graciously dissected, discussed, and debunked.

The second edition (2013) cover of the New Revised and Expanded Edition.

There is a great deal of common sense as well. In Smith’s contributions in chapters two and seven: obvious, and not-so-obvious facts about the nation of Israel are brought to light, giving the reader new concepts to consider. He also handles “multiple fulfillments of prophecy” nicely, helping readers understand that prophecy does not have to be locked into an either this/or that dimension.

I was grateful for Andy Cheung’s chapter on “Who is the ‘Israel’ of Romans 11:26?” His examination of how Paul uses the word “Israel” to help us grasp the underpinnings of this epistle is well presented. I do, however, wish some time had been given in the book to verse 11:25 as well with a presentation on the implications of, “until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.”

What can the Reformer teach us about revival?

The emphasis by Martin Luther and other Reformers on the ultimate authority of Scripture and the priesthood of all believers opened the way for all the great revivals of the modern era. Luther’s work broke the paralyzing hold of a religious hierarchy that claimed final authority over the people, quenched the work of the Holy Spirit in their midst, and confined Biblical knowledge to the priesthood. His emphasis on the priesthood of all believers unleashed the masses to pray and expect answers from God. If there had been no Luther, there would have been no Methodist revival, no Great Awakenings, no Cane Ridge, and no Pentecostal-Charismatic revival.

Luther’s Early Life

One of the monastic cells at the Augustinian Cloister in Erfurt, Germany where Luther lived from September 1505, until he left to take up his position as a professor at the University of Wittenberg in 1511. Few monks lived in such a cell permanently. Image: Paul T. McCain June 2006

Luther was born into a poor, peasant German family where he was taught to pray to God and the saints, to revere the church and the priests, and was told frightful stories about the devil and witches. One day, at the age of 22, he was caught outdoors in a terrible thunderstorm and feared for his life. In a state of panic, he made a vow to become a monk if his life was spared. True to his vow he entered the Augustinian monastery at Erfurt that same year of 1505.

As a monk, Luther’s chief concern was to become a saint and earn a place in heaven. He, therefore, observed the minutest details of discipline, living a very austere life and learning the principles of mystical prayer and meditation. His days were spent in reading and studying, prayer and fastings, night watches, and self-mortifications. His fellow monks held him up as a model of sanctity and envied his self-denial. He later said, “If ever a monk got to heaven by monkery, I would have gotten there.” However, in spite his austere lifestyle and many religious works he found no peace with God.

While a monk, Luther continued his studies and in 1507 he was ordained to the priesthood and celebrated his first mass. In 1511 he was sent to Wittenberg to be the professor of Bible at the newly formed university there, and, in the same year, he received his doctor of theology degree. He began to lecture in the vernacular on the books of the Bible and, to do so intelligently, he began to study the Bible in the original languages. It was while teaching through the New Testament, particularly Romans and Galatians, that Luther began to see the truth of justification through faith in Jesus alone.