REFORMATION, RESTORATION, REVIVAL, OR RECOVERY?

Over the past 5 centuries western Christianity has seen a variety of movements that have spread around the world.  First, we see the Reformation led by Luther, Calvin, and others.  This movement gave rise to the oldest mainstream Protestant denominations.

Then, about two hundred years ago, two movements came up together.  One was Restorationism, and the other was revivalism.  I'm not sure which came first, but I suspect restorationism.

One element they have in common is an interest in end-time prophecy.  The core of restorationism is the view that God is restoring the church before Jesus returns.  Revivalism seeks to re-energize Christianity through displays of enthusiasm, and maybe even emotionalism.

These two merge with the belief that we must achieve a worldwide revival before Jesus can return.  The mis-named New Apostolic Reformation (which is neither new, nor apostolic, nor a reformation) seeks to make this happen with prayer, fasting, confession, healings, miracles, signs, wonders, and emotional, erratic behavior.  The danger here is that this puts pressure on people to appear to be spiritual, while they struggle to live up to an external standard, instead of walking in faith from their hearts.  The expectation is on us and not on Jesus.

Why do I say this is a danger?  The pressure over time leads to burn-out, leaving people exhausted, confused and hopeles as to why their efforts didn't produce revival.  This can cause people to lose their faith, and others to become resistant to the Gospel.

Adding to the danger is the fact that all the revivals of the past have died out and become an echo of history.  Present day revivals will do the same.  Future revivals will probably stay there in the future.  Evangelists have been predicting billion soul harvests since the Latter Rain Movement in the late 1940s.

I would love to see large numbers of people come to faith in Christ before He returns.  But, we don't need another revival that will just die out.  A reform movement that brings only superficial changes won't help either.  We need something else.

I propose that what we need, is a new way to view what has been going on since before Luther.  What we need is recovery.

Several years ago, I got curious about reform movements that happened before Martin Luther.  I was aware of several, but most had been eliminated by the Roman church.  I found three groups that had a lasting effect.  They were the Waldensians, the Lollards, and the Hussites.

A merchant in Lyon, France named Peter Waldo asked a priest to give him Scripture to help him live a more Christlike life.  That priest pointed him towards Matthew, chapter 10.  Waldo later began to encourage Bible reading by lay people, and paid to have the Bible translated into French.  His followers included lay Bible teachers.  The Roman church tried to use military force to eliminate them, but did confine them to one valley, where they stayed isolated for several centuries.

Around that same time, John Wycliff began to translate the Bible into English.  His followers sought to grow spiritually through Bible study and prayer at home instead of going on pilgramages to holy sites, and other religious observances, so their critics thought they were lazy.  Thus the name, Lollards.

One of Wycliff's followers was a Bohemian servant of a British noble woman.  That woman returned to Bohemia where she passed on Wycliff's ideas to a priest named John Huss.  Huss began to preach a message very similar to Luther's.  His reward was that the Roman church burned him alive.  Before they lit the fire, he said, "They think they are burning a heretic, but all they are doing is cooking a goose."  'Huss' means 'goose.'

Was God restoring truth to the Body of Christ through all this?  Maybe.  By saying that God started these movements, are we saying that people were just sitting around doing nothing unusual, and then, unexpectedly, God started doing something to get the people's attention?

Or, were people seeking God?  Were people seeking to recover something lost or forgotten?

I believe that is what has been happening all along.  From justification by faith and the priesthood of all believers, to the gifts and fruit of the Spirit, believers have been seeking and recovering truth.

But we do see problems.  Of course, the enemy is going to interject false doctrine and temptation whenever and wherever he can.  And these are the same lies and temptations he has always presented.  He might change the words, but they always point to the same target - death.

MIRACLES, SIGNS, AND WONDERS, OR WHY I AM A CHARISMATIC, NOT A CHARISMANIAC

Very early in my Christian experience, I became a Charismatic.  For those who don't know, a Charismatic Christian is similar to a Pentecostal in that they both believe in speaking in tongues.  For a long time, I believed the only difference was in the church organizations they came out of.  Now I know that is not the case.

Pentecostals separated from the traditional Protestant denominations in the early 20th century.  In the late 1940s a new movement emerged from  Pentecostalism called the Latter Rain.  Most Pentecostal dominations renounced the Latter Rain because they taught esoteric doctrines.  However, no new denomations formed within the movement.  Many new local congregations formed and stayed indepentent.  Then some of pastors began to form alliances and/or spin off new congregations from their original group.  These became cults, such as the Branham cult.

Then, in the late 50s, many traditional Christians started speaking in tongues, but they stayed within their denominations!  Because Pentecostals tended to be viewed as legalistic, these decided to identify as Charismatic instead.

Somehow, the Latter Rain and WOF movements got labeled as Charismatic as well.  So, in my opinion, two Charismatic movements may have been going on at the same time.

Today, we see another movement called the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR for short).  In my opinion, it is a resurgence of the Latter Rain, but this time, it's on steroids.

The major trait of the Latter Rain/WOF/NAR is the emphasis on miracles, signs, and wonders.  This often comes with emotionalism and sometimes strange behavior that has nothing to do with Christ.  Because of this, this new movement has been called Charismania.

What makes all this possible is a misunderstanding of miracles, signs, and wonders.  I am not going to claim to be an expert on these things.  I just want to give people a better understanding of them, so they won't be misled.

What is a miracle?

In general, a miracle is an event that someone can't explain, and that an invisible agent, such as a spirit or God must have made it happen.

But an unseen agent could be hidden instead of invisible.  When someone performs an act that appears miraculous, it is an illusion.  If done for the purpose of entertainment, we call it stage magic.  When they do the same same thing to persuade people that a real supernatural event has taken place, it is deception, no matter if anyone calls it a miracle.

A true miracle happens when God intervenes in the physical realm.  It is not just a supernatural effect.

False miracles can be performed by demons.  Consider the confrontation between Moses and the Pharaoh's priests.  All three serpents were physically real, but only one remained.

Sometimes things happen that someone can't explain how it happened, so they assume it was a miracle, especially after they prayed for it.  If some time passed between the prayer and the answer, the event could still be totally natural.  I once heard of an incident where someone wanted an air conditioner turned on, but it didn't start blowing until later.  They said it was a miracle, but I had my doubts.  I've had box fans that when they got old, the blades would turn slowly until speeding up to a full blow.  In the case of the delayed AC, the same thing could have happened, but because the people involved could not see the fan, they assumed a miracle.  They still had reason to be thankful - the AC wasn't dead yet.

Healing sometimes does occur naturally.  Let's say you get a small scratch on your arm without any redness or bleeding.  You don't even need a bandage, maybe just a little lotion, cream, or ointment.  You don't pay any more attention to it.  Then you notice it's gone a couple of days later.  God gave our bodies amazing ways to heal and fight diseases.

God also gave us the intelligence to discover and develop medical treatments.  But, our intellects are finite, so medicine is limited.

I believe that God heals through miracles as well as through medicine, and natural processes.  Sometimes, God speeds up the natural processes, and those instances are miracles too, because those processes can not speed up on their own.

What is a sign?

A sign is a miracle.  So, what makes a miracle a sign?  What makes anything a sign?  It has a message on it.

You drive down a main street and see a thing that is shaped like a cowboy hat.  It has a name on in, Arby's.  The message is, You can get roast beef and other kinds of sandwiches here.

So a supernatural sign is a miracle with a message attached.

What is a wonder?

A wonder is a sign, but you do not know or cannot figure out what the message is, so you wonder, What is God trying to say?

The best example of this that I know of is in Acts 2.  The crowd that gathered knew that the speaking in tongues they heard was a miracle.  They also knew it was a sign.  But they couldn't figure out what the message was, so someone asked, What does this mean?

They did not ask if it was a miracle.  They could tell that it was because they could understand what the tongue-speakers said.

Since nothing like this had happened to them before, they saw that it was also a sign.

Too many reports are coming out about staged 'miracles' performed by big name leaders in Charismania and it's predecessor movements.  Many of their practices come from Spiritualism, and their doctrines come from Gnosticism.

People need to be aware of the deception and the deceivers out there.

NEW TESTAMENT TITHING

Tithing is commonplace in the Body of Christ today.  Is it supposed to be that way?  Yes, and no.

Yes, if done according to the New Testament.

No, if done according to the way it is commonly taught by many, especially in the HAW-WOF (Health And Wealth - Word of Faith) circles. You know, you have to tithe, or you will be cursed.  That is legalism, trying to put people under the Law of Moses that don't belong there.

Well, what is the New Testament way?  I am glad you asked me that... Let's see what the NT says about tithing.

What Jesus said about tithing

In the accounts of the Widow's Mite, the texts incidentally mention that Jesus watched as people placed tithes and donations into the collection box in the Temple.  This was a normal practice at the time, under the Old Covenant.

But this passage gives us a more meaningful glimpse:

Luke 11:37-44 Legacy Stantard Bible

Now when He had spoken, a Pharisee asked Him to have a meal with him.  And He went in and reclined at the table.  But when the Pharisee saw it, he marveled that He had not first aceremonially washed before the meal.

But the Lord said to him, “Now you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but inside of you, you are full of robbery and wickedness.  You foolish ones, did not He who made the outside make the inside also?  But give that which is within as charity, and then all things are clean for you.

“But woe to you Pharisees!  For you pay tithe of mint and rue and every kind of garden herb, and yet disregard justice and the love of God, but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others.

"Woe to you Pharisees!  For you love the best seat in the synagogues and the respectful greetings in the marketplaces.  Woe to you! For you are like concealed tombs, and the people who walk over them are unaware of it.”

Jesus tells us the Pharisees went to painstaking extremes to fulfill their obligation to tithe, but neglected the more important issues of the heart.

Tithing under the Law of Moses applied mostly to crops.  The Pharisees, whether or not they owned farms, orchards, or vineyards from which they would tithe, they might also have grown herbs in their homes the way many do today.  They made sure to keep track of how much their herb gardens produced, so they could give a tenth of their "crop."

Jesus just pointed out that in going to such extremes to keep the Law, they forgot more important issues, like justice and love.  So, if a "pastor" talks more about "tithes and offerings" than he does about heart issues, you should probably wonder about who he is following, the Pharisees, or Jesus.

What the Apostles said about tithing

The Acts of the Apostles does not mention tithing.  I am sure the first disciples tithed, if the Old Testament tithe applied to them, because they were Jews who still saw themselves as Jews.  But even when Gentiles began to believe in Jesus, the Apostles never said anything about them having to tithe.

Paul's letters do not say anything about tithing, not even when the issue about Gentile disciples keeping the Law came up.

No one knows for sure who wrote the letter to the Hebrews.  Many say Paul wrote it.  I can see Paul being involved, because the next to last verse in the book mentions that Timothy was just released from jail.  My personal view is that it was written by a committee, and Paul was on it.  Any speculation about who the other contributors are is just that: speculation, conjecture, guesswork.

I go into that because Hebrews was written to Jewish disciples who were beginning to experience persecution from the Roman government.  They could escape the persecution by rejecting Jesus and claiming to be just Jews.  Judaism was protected by Roman law.

The writers wanted to encourage the Jewish disciples to stay faithful to Jesus while facing persecution, whether it came from government or religious authorities.

The writers focused on showing that Jesus is better than elements of Judaism: angels, Moses, the Old Covenant, the temple, the priesthood, etc.  When it came to the priesthood, they wrote this:

Hebrews 7:1-8 LSB

For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham as he was returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham apportioned a tenth part of all, was first of all, by the translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then also king of Salem, which is king of peace.  Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest continually.

Now observe how great this man was to whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth of the spoils.

And those indeed of the sons of Levi, who receive the priest’s office, have a commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people, that is, from their brothers, although these are descended from Abraham.  But the one whose genealogy is not traced from them had collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed the one who had the promises. But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater.  And in this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on.

That passage shows us that the Levitical priests, while still in the loins of Abraham, tithed to a priest of a superior order, the one Jesus belongs to.  When did this happen? Before the Law!  This even happened before God changed his name from Abram to Abraham:

Genesis 14:17 - 24 LSB

Then after he came back from striking down Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the valley of Shaveh (that is, the King’s Valley).  And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of aGod Most High. Then he blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram of aGod Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand.”

Then he gave him a tenth of all.

And the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give the people to me, but take the possessions for yourself.”

Then Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have raised my hand to Yahweh God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth, that I will not take a thread or a sandal strap or anything that is yours, so that you would not say, ‘I have made Abram rich.’  I will take nothing except what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their share.”

So, disciples of Jesus are not obligated to tithe.  If you desire to tithe on your income, you can do so.

If you choose to tithe, don't follow the model of the Law, as if you have to continue tithing forever. I recommend the model of Abram:

1. Abram tithed voluntarily.  He did this only once that we know of.  Even if you make tithing your regular practice, you still have the option to not tithe.

2. Abram's tithe was an act and a statement of faith.  His exchange with the king of Sodom shows his mindset in this event.  He saw himself as one bound to God in a covenant, and God was his provider, not man.