sábado, 24 de marzo de 2018

About the house church: John White

I went to seminary (Fuller) with John Piper and generally I find him to do a good job of interpreting Scripture and drawing appropriate conclusions.  In this case, he has missed the boat, at least to some degree.  I submit that his paradigm of church (shaped by his own experience) is preventing him from seeing what Scripture and history teach us.
I'll work through his six observations with my comments (might take several postings).
1.  John:  "Church is about people not places.  In the NT, church is never referred to as a building or a place."  Then, John goes on to largely refute his first observation with his second observation.  There he lists all of the references to church that are linked to a house.  For instance, "Greet also the church that meets at their (Priscilla and Aquila's) house"  Rom 16:5. 
I contend that every church mentioned in the NT met in a home and functioned like a small spiritual family.  And, that this practice continued until the time of Constantine (early 300s).  Consider...
*Scripture is our authoritative guide for faith and practice.  The common practice of church in the NT was meeting in homes.
*Up to Acts 10, all churches were made up of Jews.  "Foundational to all theory on the biblical concept of family is the Jewish teaching that the home is more important than the synagogue.  In Jewish tradition, the center of religious life has always been the home.  The Church has yet to grapple seriously with this crucial concept."  Wilson, Our Father Abraham, p. 214.
*"Since 1980 we have seen a flood of popular and scholarly publications on the subject.  Here again it appears most scholars are in agreement:  the fact that early Christian communities met in homes is of great sociohistorical, ecclesiological, and missional significance.”  P. 1"  Gehring, House Church and Mission, p. 1.  In other words, meeting in homes was not just a matter of convenience.  It has major theological significance.
*“Of fundamental importance is Elliott’s insight that ‘households thus constituted the focus, locus and nucleus of the ministry and mission of the Christian movement.’” Gehring, P. 6
*“For Verner this concept of church as the ‘household of God’ (1 Tim. 3:15) incorporates two aspects:  (a) the house or family is the fundamental unit of the church, and (b) the church is a social structure patterned after the household.”  Gehring, P. 7
*"On the basis of our exegesis, we can go even one step further:  in Christ, mediator of creation, neither Paul nor the churches in Colossae and in Ephesus had the freedom to choose other social structures in the place of marriage and family.  They were theologically obligated to choose these, as both had been handed down to them through the creation traditions found in Scripture, primarily in wisdom literature…This is one more reason the Pauline churches attributed such great significance to the oikos as the seminal cell of the church…” Gehring, p. 250.
*"“…the choice of the gathering place was formational for the self-understanding and the organizational structures of the individual churches to such an extent that the ancient oikos can be seen as the formational model for ecclesiology.”  Gehring, P. 255.
*"Not until the third century do we have evidence of special buildings being constructed for Christian gatherings..."  Banks, Paul's Idea of Community, p. 41.
*"The Christianity that conquered the Roman Empire was essentially a home-centered movement."  Viola, Pagan Christianity, p. 14.
I could add more quotes but you get the picture.  More to come.

viernes, 23 de marzo de 2018

¿Finney, un enemigo o amigo del evangelio?: Luis Jovel

En mi post ayer, termine con la promesa de hablar sobre Carlos Finney.  La razón por querer hablar de el viene a raíz de que es parte del pietismo, y también es criticado en The White Horse Inn y en Issues Etc de una manera desmesurada y verisímil. Pero me impacto que en la revista Apuntes Pastorales, Vol. XXIV-3, pgs. 52-53, se publico su reseña biográfica.  Si una revista como esa publica la biografía de un personaje como el, debe de ser de importancia.
Primero, veamos quien es Carlos Finney.  Nacido en 1792 y murió en 1875, Finney se le considera el “padre del avivamiento moderno”.  Comenzó predicando dentro de círculos Presbiterianos, donde fue donde se formo como cristiano originalmente.  Es de notar que su carrera como misionero comenzó en las fronteras del estado de New York, lugar que se consideraría  un campo blanco, tanto para el evangelio como también para habitantes.  Desde el principio de su ministerio, tanto su estilo de predicación, como también su teología lo diferenciaba de los demás predicadores.  Toda la área donde Finney se encontraba predicando se llego a llamar “el área abrasada”, dado a la experiencia espiritual experimentada por los residentes, pero también por el numero de nuevas sectas que pasaban por el alrededor de la ciudad.  La zona estaba muy sensible entonces, a oír a cualquiera que trajera un mensaje diferente.  Pero fue en este periodo, donde comenzó a atraer la atención de aquellos que fueron sus seguidores, como también la de sus detractores.
En mi estudio del tema, me doy cuenta que no solo los Presbiterianos, antiguos y modernos, se oponen a Finney, sino que también los Unitarios y Universalitas se oponían al mensaje de Finney.  Los dos tenían diferentes razones de su oposición. Los Presbiterianos se oponen a Finney porque estos ven que el ha modificado mucho la fe Calvinista.  Los Calvinistas Tradicionales creían que solo Dios podía llamar a salvación al hombre.  El feligrés oía la predicación, luego se iba a su casa a meditar y esperar que Dios le diera la seguridad de su salvación. Ósea, el creyente no tenia que decidir ni optar ser cristiano.  También se oponían que Finney diera mas cabida a expresar sentimientos humanos durante los servicios.  Me pregunto, estos creyentes ¿como habrán visto al Salmista con sus expresiones de sentimientos? Entre las otras cosas que ofendían a estos píos calvinistas era que Finney dejaba a las mujeres orar durante el servicio, la adopción de cultos durante la semana, en ves de tener solo los cultos del domingo, su uso de lenguaje normal en ves del lenguaje reverencial, y la admisión de los nuevos creyentes a la membresía de la iglesia. En la ciudad de New Lebanon, New York, hubo una reunión para juzgar si estos nuevos métodos eran aceptables.  Aunque hubo mucha oposición a Finney, no obstante, salio absuelto de todo cargo del que se le culpaba.
Los Unitarios y Universalistas, tomaban ofensa de que Finney mencionaba que los que no aceptaran a Cristo, irían al infierno.
Fue en los años 1830-31, en la ciudad de Rochester, New York, en los cuales Finney llego al apogeo de su ministerio.  Su estilo de predicación, que fue influido por sus antecedentes como abogado, atraían a mucha gente. El presentaba el caso del cristianismo a los oyentes, y estos tenían que tomar una decisión al respecto.  Esto era, y sigue siendo, criticado no solo por los del White Horse Inn y Issues Etc. pero por muchos otros que en su afán de hacer la salvación un acto total de Dios, pareciera que el versículo “el gozo de mi salvación” no existe para ellos. Fue un libro que escribió Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion, que lo termino por separar de su denominación, y Charles Hodge llego a condenar la posición de Finney en el libro.
Al terminar su carrera evangelistica, Finney tomo causas sociales, como la abolición de la esclavitud.  Su legacia incluye a los evangelistas como Billy Graham, Dwight Moody, y otros.  Entre otra cosas que Finney nos dejo, fue el llamado al altar, la testificación personal, y las reuniones de entre semana.
He tratado de apuntar los problemas que en su tiempo, fueron hallados en Finney tanto por Presbiterianos y otros, y que aun los reformados le siguen atribuyendo.  Michael Horton ha escrito un articulo al respecto, mientras que otros han respondido a Horton, culpándolo de crear un espanta pájaros para así derribarlo fácilmente. Horton, como muchos otros neo-reformados/calvinistas, confunden la santificación con la justificación, y por lo tanto, ven en Finney, y en todo aquel que cree que debe uno de buscar la santidad, como en un semi, o total pelagista. Esto es un síntoma de los neo-reformados/calvinistas, que ven que todo aquel que no se apega a su interpretación del calvinismo, no tiene el cristianismo completo, o no es cristiano. Esto no lo solo lo digo yo, sino que Albert Mohler, presidente del Seminario Bautista del Sur, dijo en Time Magazine que “el momento que una persona define a Dios bíblicamente, esa persona esta llegando a la conclusión que tradicionalmente se le conoce como calvinista”.  De ser así, todos los que vivieron antes de Calvino, no entendían a Dios!!!
Fue en contra de estas actitud, a la cual Finney, correctamente se opuso. No quisiera dejar la impresión que Finney fue perfecto.  Lejos de ello, creo controversia con su extremada posición sobre la santificación, pero no obstante, por medio de su ministerio se salvaron al menos medio millón de personas.  Cuando uno de estos hermanos que tanto lo critican hoy, se entreguen a la obra y salven un numero similar de personas, tendrán algo mas de credibilidad, pero solo criticar por no compartir una línea teológica, sin tener pruebas de amar a las almas que se pierden, me recuerda mucho a lo dicho por Santiago, y con ello, termino estos dos aportes sobre el pietismo.
Santiago 2:18 Pero alguno dirá: Tú tienes fe, y yo tengo obras. Muéstrame tu fe sin tus obras, y yo te mostraré mi fe por mis obras.
19 Tú crees que Dios es uno; bien haces. También los demonios creen, y tiemblan.
20 ¿Mas quieres saber, hombre vano, que la fe sin obras es muerta?
Dios les bendiga.
Luis Alberto Jovel

sábado, 17 de marzo de 2018

A veces necesitamos la ofensa: Apostol Dr. Rony Chaves

A veces necesitamos la ofensa
La ofensa tiene un valor extraño en la Biblia; aunque no es nada agradable que nos ofendan o nos maldigan, la OFENSA puede ser usada por Dios para probarnos el corazón.
Nuestras reacciones como cristianos deben siempre agradar a Dios y estar alineadas con lo que la Palabra y sus principios exigen de un hijo de Dios.
Las provocaciones, las calumnias y las difamaciones en nuestra contra pueden causar en nosotros respuestas diversas, desde las pacíficas, hasta las violentas. Más no se valen las reacciones malas con Dios; Él nos exige amar a nuestros enemigos y bendecir a los que nos maldicen y nos ultrajan.
En todo tiempo y circunstancia debemos dar la talla; debemos amar al prójimo por sobre todas las cosas. Si lo hacemos como el Altísimo nos manda, tendremos nuestra propia evidencia de que estamos caminando bien en el sendero de la FE.
Juan Wesley, fundador en Inglaterra del Movimiento Metodista, se preocupó un día porque sus opositores habían dejado de ofenderle y de maltratarle; él pensaba que el ataque o el antagonismo expreso, era señal de que él andaba bien con Dios. Así que se fue a un lugar apartado a orar por esto. Sorprendido por la oración de Wesley un borrachito que estaba detrás de un árbol durmiendo, se molestó con el predicador al reconocerlo y le lanzó una piedra en su espalda. Al sentir el impacto en su cuerpo y ver al hombre enojado con él, el Reformador levantó sus brazos y su mirada al Cielo y gritó: “Gracias Dios, ahora sé que estoy caminando bien contigo”.
La lección de todo esto es: Cada vez que venga la ofensa contra ti, levanta tus manos y tu mirada al Señor; cada vez que te venga el ataque, grita con fuerza: “gracias Dios por hacerme saber que camino en tu perfecta voluntad“.
A veces nos hace falta la ofensa para probar nuestro corazón.
¡AMÉN!

sábado, 10 de marzo de 2018

Emil Brunner Quotes about ekklesia



Emil Brunner Quotes about ekklesia

Ever since I encountered the risen Jesus in a Spirit-led meeting on a college campus, I’ve wanted to go beyond the formal way of doing church and meet the way Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 14:26. In 2008, The Salvation Army asked my wife and me to open a “non-traditional church” in Nashville on that model. In 2015 I wrote a book about meeting that way: Beyond Church: An Invitation To Experience The Lost Word Of The Bible–Ekklesia.
Today I discovered Emil Brunner, a Swiss theologian who died in 1966, and his writings about ekklesia. I am amazed at how much Brunner’s writings match what we do at The Salvation Army Berry Street and my book. Here’s a quote from him that matches how I feel about the opportunity to experience ekklesia with The Salvation Army:
“I am inexpressibly grateful that the Lord of my life has granted to me in such abundance these opportunities to take part in the life of His Ekklesia and to bear witness to the Living Christ in so many places and in so many ways.” –Emil Brunner (1889-1966)
Here are quotes from two of Brunner’s books:
Quotes from: Dogmatics: Volume III – Christian Doctrine of the Church, Faith & The Consummation
“The Spirit who is active in the Ekklesia expresses Himself in active love of the brethren.”
“The Ekklesia does not only know that God is love. The Ekklesia also lives from the love of God.”
“Christ did not give the Ekklesia the Word alone, but His life also.”
“Luther realized that the true Church, the Ekklesia, was based wholly on the Word and Spirit of God and not on the Sacrament. He realized that faith is not the obedient acceptance of a doctrine but encounter with Christ present in His Word and Spirit.”
“The more time passed, the clearer it became that the official and institutional character of the the Church hindered the creation of Ekklesia.”
“Only by starting with the Ekklesia can we understand this bond that unites faith to the fellowship of faith.”
“Ekklesia, in it’s love individuals are bound together in fellowship and brotherhood at the same time.”
“The faith which stems from the Church and not from the Ekklesia, from doctrine and not from witness, is not in itself living faith.”
“The misunderstanding of the Ekklesia as the Church, as a sacred institution, corresponds to the misunderstanding of faith, through which faith was misunderstood as affirmation of doctrine.”
Quotes from: The Misunderstanding of the Church
“The ekklesia is what it is through the presence of Christ dwelling within it.”
“The very being of God is Agape — that love which the Son brings to mankind from the Father — and it is just this love which is the essence of the fellowship of those who belong to the Ekklesia.”
“The historical Church . . .has arisen, in the course of a long and complicated history, through a process of development, transformation and retrogression, out of the New Testament Ekklesia.”
“The New Testament Ekklesia is a is not an it, a thing, an institution, but rather a unity of persons, a people, a communion.”
“The Ekklesia of the New Testament, the Christian fellowship of the first Christians, was not a church and had no intention of being a church.”
“There was in the Ekklesia a regulation of the functions— Scripture declares this explicitly— assigned by the Holy Ghost to the various individual members who were thus equipped to perform their special services — falsely represented as offices. For an office belongs to a public organization; an office is part of an institution. The diakoniai, however,
the services, should be conceived on the analogy of the organs with their specific functions which inhere in a living body. Even though it be only a metaphor, this is relatively
the most adequate expression of the truth.”

“The New Testament surprises us again and again by the multiplicity of these functions and their bearers, of the various services and those who render them. One thing is supremely important: that all minister, and that nowhere is to be perceived a separation or even merely a distinction made between those who do and those who do not minister, between the active and the passive members of the body, between those who give and those who receive. There exists in the Ekklesia a universal duty and right of service, a universal readiness to serve and at the same time the greatest possible
differentiation of functions. The metaphor of the organism illuminates one aspect of the reality; the dependence of all kinds of ministration on the one Lord reveals the other. The
head of a body is something different from the ruler of a people. Yet both sides of the reality are expressed and must obviously be expressed, in order to do justice at one and the
same time to the vertical and the horizontal relationship, on the one hand to bring out the mysterious vital fellowship, on the other hand to show that it is the one Spirit who effects
the differentiation of functions. It is therefore quite wrongheaded to describe this pneumatic ordering of the Ekklesia as anarchical simply because it is something different from an organization or institution.”

“It is the mystery of the Ekklesia as the fellowship of the Spirit that it has an articulate living order without being legally organized.”
“The impression made by the life of believers plays a part of decisive importance in the genesis of faith. People draw near to the Christian community because they are irresistibly attracted by its supernatural power. They would like to share in this new dimension of life and power, they enter the zone in which the Spirit operates before they
have heard a word about what lies behind it as its ultimate transcendent-immanent cause. There is a sort of fascination which is exercised mostly without any reference to the Word,
comparable rather to the attractive force of a magnet or the spread of an infectious disease. Without knowing how it happened, one is already a carrier of the infection.”

“It is so much easier to discuss from an intellectual and theological standpoint the ideas implied in the revealed Word of God and to analyse them conceptually than it is to allow
oneself to be transformed at the center of one’s life by the action of the Holy Ghost”

“It is so much easier to secure the life of the fellowship, its coherence and its indispensable hierarchy by means of solid legal forms, by organization and offices, than it is to allow the
life of communion to be continually poured out upon one, to allow oneself to be rooted in it by the action of the Holy Ghost. You can handle and shape as you please such things
as law and organization, but you cannot act thus towards the Holy Ghost.”

“The fellowship of Jesus discloses a paradoxical unity of terms which elsewhere are incompatible. It is a mystical unity of visible earthly persons with an unseen,
heavenly, and yet present Person, their Head, with the eternal ever-present Christ.”

“The Ekklesia is the sphere of actual and realized fellowship with the Christ — a fellowship which is as real as faith and love and hope are real.”
The Ekklesia wherein the one Spirit bestows upon each his peculiar gift and therefore assigns to each his characteristic ministry . . . is reality, heavenly divine reality.”
“The Ekklesia of which the apostles speak was thus not simply a theory or ideal springing from the vision of Christ; it was also the sphere of the new life grounded in the historical
fact of redemption through Jesus Christ, and in His effective presence and power as living Head of the body.”

“What we know as the church or churches resulting from historical developments cannot claim to be the Ekklesia in the New Testament sense.”
“The meaning of the Ekklesia is what we recognized from the New Testament as its characteristic essence: communion with God through Jesus Christ, and rooted in this and springing from it, communion or brotherhood with man. The oneness of communion with
Christ and communion with man is the characteristic mark the Ekklesia.”

“With or without the churches, if necessary even in opposition to them, God will
cause the Ekklesia to become a real community of brothers. Whether the churches yield to this recognition or on the contrary blind themselves to it will determine the question whether or not they have a future.”

Here are a few additional quotes from Emil:
“To be united with Christ through the Holy Spirit means: to be directly united with Him. Here there is no difference between an ordinary Christian of our own day and an Apostle.”
“The fact of our redemption—the history of salvation—is transmitted by the proclamation of facts, that is, by the testimony of the Apostles under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”
“Above all the teaching of the Church, even above all dogma or doctrinal confession, stands Holy Scripture.”
“The Dogmatic Theologian who does not find that his work drives him to pray frequently and urgently from his heart: ‘God be merciful to me a sinner,’ is scarcely fit for his job.”
“Theology is an assault on the sin-distorted intellect.”
“Gospel preaching, is the spreading out of the fire which Christ has thrown upon the earth. He who does not propagate this fire shows that he is not burning. He who burns propagates the fire.”
“Take oxygen away and death occurs through suffocation, take hope away and humanity is constricted through lack of breath; despair supervenes, spelling the paralysis of intellectual and spiritual powers by a feeling of the senselessness and purposelessness of existence.”
“I am trying to express a view of revelation which does not fit in any of the ready-made patterns.”
Emil Brunner