On October 31, this ministry had experienced ‘an amazing visitation of Heaven’ and are hearing lots of testimonies coming in. Should we be concerned?

- – - – - -

Ministry Update

Glory Explosion at The Wine Barrel!

Dear Partner’s and Friend’s

We have been experiencing an amazing visitation of Heaven since Saturday October 31st.

With awesome testimonies coming in every day. From miracle healings, salvations, incredible deliverances and full blown revelations of Jesus.

The atmosphere here is amazing. As soon as you get near the building you can feel the Holy Spirit as electricity all over your body.

We have had several phone lines installed which will enable us to live stream all our meetings via the internet.  This will be enabled as soon as we can. Until then, the majority of nights will be available for free download from our media web site. www.fireitupmedia.com

We have cancelled Matt’s current travel plans, excluding this weekend with John Crowder and Benjamin Dunn, so that we can run meetings every night. While Matt is away Pastor’s Peter and Andrea who are The Wine Barrel senior pastors will be running the meetings.

To see who is on staff at Fire It Up check out our team page here.

We will endeavour to keep you up to date with what is happening, it’s just a bit difficult with everyone pinned to the floor

…

Big Buttery Blessings!

I’m sure by now if you’ve read a few articles on www.groupsects.wordpress.com, you’d be familiar with a site called Cult Watch (http://www.cultwatch.com/)

On the very first page:

Tithing, is it really for Christians?
Does the Bible really instruct Christians to tithe? Check out CULTWATCH’s new web site www.TithingDebate.com and discover what the Tithing Teachers don’t want you to know. The following is a sample of the wealth of information you’ll find at TithingDebate.com: You’ll discover that the Tithing Teachers are taking Malachi out of context. That Christians are not under the Mosaic law discussed in Malachi. That the term “storehouse” cannot equal the “local church”. That the pattern of the tithe being taught today (ten percent of your gross income per year) is not found anywhere in the New or Old Testament. Also, Jesus never instructed Christians to tithe, and the early church did not tithe. These and other startling Bible facts revealed at www.TithingDebate.com

On the Tithing Debate, they say:

Paul de Jong’s Tithing Arguments Fail

In our opinion Paul de Jong, unless he can defend his tithing teaching, can no longer be held up as a tithing expert.

Paul de Jong is held up as a defender of Christian Tithing doctrine in Australia and New Zealand. But when his confident assertions on the subject were examined by tithing expert Dr. Russell Kelly they failed to stand up Biblically. And confronted with this in-depth review of his teaching Paul de Jong has, so far, not provided a rebuff to any of Dr. Kelly’s points. Read for yourself Dr. Kelly’s point by point analyst of Mr. de Jong’s teaching. Paul de Jong is pastor of Christian Life Centre in Auckland, New Zealand and a board member of Riverview Church in Perth, Australia. Dr. Russell Kelly is a USA based theologian who earned his doctorate with a thesis on tithing, and is author of the book “Should The Church Teach Tithing?”.

Stay tuned. Paul de Jong has been challenged to provide answers to Dr. Kelly’s rebuttal. If Paul de Jong provides answers then we will publish them.

This is  Phil Baker’s church.

http://www.riverviewchurch.com.au/church/index.php

So Riverview Church are being monitored by cult-watch eh?

S&P

Ok – the discussion on men kept getting sidetracked into a discussion on the roles of men and women in leadership, so it looks like its time to look at that thorny issue.

Bull said:

I put it to you that if we made eldership truly about being a servant … we’d have really good elders. We could make Deacons the leadership then … and there were women deacons so there is no problem with that is there?

This is a point that has often occurred to me. Most of the debates I hear about leadership are really about who should make the decisions or who should be allowed to teach. For this particular thread, I’d like to look at the decision aspect of leadership, since these days most of the leaders in churches are really those who are in charge of the administration.

We have a trend where we see megachurches frequently becoming corporate entities with board members rather than traditional elders. Senior pastors set a vision, which the rest of the leadership supports; those attending home groups etc support the leader of their group in the outworking of that senior pastor’s vision. At least that’s how some churches do it. Others expect that congregation members will ’submit’ to what their leaders ask them to do, and we’ve recently had a look at that teaching in another thread. In that thread, the example was given of a senior pastor teaching congregation members to submit to those who ‘rule over them’. In other churches, the leader is more of a facilitator, who also has responsibility for teaching that supports people in their daily ongoing walks and making a call on the church’s direction, but may not push the line of the congregation getting behind that vision so strongly that it takes over from the congregations other callings in life.

So, the leadership debate seems to me to be about who can rule over others and to what extent that ‘rule’ should go – if it is there.

Whereas what Bull stated, is that eldership – a form of leadership? – is about servanthood, rather than ruling over others. Jesus himself said that we shouldn’t seek to rule over others, and the greatest among us is he who serves the most. Is preaching and ‘ruling over’ others a form of servanthood?

Perhaps the debate about women in leadership would be less of an issue if the church was based around servanthood, because who would object to a woman being a good example of a servant? Who would object to a woman organising things if it is an act of administrative service that bears the needs of others in mind, rather than an exercise of power or a seeking for glory? Who would object to any man doing these things either?

What is male about being the kind of leader that serves? What kind of male leaders do we see the most of in churches?

If one takes the traditional view that women should not lead, then perhaps if women are actually served by the men that do lead, there is no problem? Or if we take a more contemporary view that women do lead – then if they are genuinely serving and not getting caught up in a more ‘alpha’ style of leadership, where is the problem with that?

Both views on women in leadership can be argued from scripture. I agree with a comment in the reference that Heretic recently gave that we can’t take issue with people for genuinely seeking to understand scripture even where we have opposite views on what it says. The debate doesn’t involve the authority of the Bible; it involves the interpretation of the Bible.

Heretic’s link is worth a read if you have time.

To me, the issue could be addressed more helpfully if the issues regarding what actually construes leadership were addressed first. If a leader is seeking to serve, they will listen, and not coerce people or leave them out in the cold without hearing their views. They won’t do it for power or glory. Regardless of views of men or women in leadership, which cover a broad spectrum, the type of leader is most important.

Are leaders only ‘alpha’ males? How ought it to work? Where we’ve seen good leaders, what have they done well?

How men should ‘be men’ crops up as a religious topic from time to time. It would seem that according to some teachers, there is in fact a type of man that is manly, and another type of man who for various reasons is not a ‘real man’.

I’ll preface this with my personal bias. I think that the idea that anyone has to be a particular way to be a ‘real man’ or a ‘real woman’ is rubbish. In my opinion, there is a broad spectrum of personalities spreading across both genders, and even though there may be different weightings of characteristics on average in each gender, you can’t confine a particular characteristic to a particular gender without demeaning those who aren’t typical. An average is only an average. It is neither the right nor the wrong way to be.

I have both a son and a daughter, who in their early development are definitely showing gender stereotypes in their interests – he loves technical things and building; she loves dressing up and fairies etc. How much I’ve reinforced these, I don’t know – I tend to let them follow their interest. So I’m not inclined to say that there is no basis for some gender differences on average.

However – to say that _all men_ are a certain intrinsic way, or _all women_ irks me. It just seems like too big a generalisation, which I find myself always seeing exceptions to. Maybe I just like to argue – because I’m a woman, of course!

Wild at Heart by John Eldredge is a very popular book with some men. I have a friend who tells me that reading that book was incredibly impactful for him, and he seems to believe it absolutely. On the other hand, my husband, Heretic, read it, and really didn’t like it. John Eldredge, in his introduction to the book, says that men need,

…permission to live from the heart and not the list of ’should’ and ‘ought to’ that has left so many of us tired and bored.

No, men need something else. They need a deeper understanding of why they long for adventures and battles and a Beauty – and why God made them just like that. And they need a deeper understanding of why women long to be fought for, to be swept up into adventure, and to be the Beauty. For that is now God made them as well.

(Quotes are from the Introduction to Wild at Heart, by John Eldredge, to give an idea of the direction of the book.)

At the very least, this book is a different take on manhood from a lot of others, and is very popular, so there must be some kind of appeal to its message out there. Is this really how God made us to be though? Does scripture say anything about this subject, or present any immutable patterns? 

John Eldredge has also written a book with his wife, Stasi, called ‘Captivating’, about women.  According to wikipedia,

It also proposes that God made woman as the “Crown of Creation”, an embodiment of God’s beauty, mystery and vulnerability. The concept of woman as the “Crown of Creation” has become the subject of much controversy surrounding the book, critics claiming that it exalts women above men in the Creation.

See wikipedia entry here.

And then we have Mark Driscoll, voicing his opinion on the lack of manhood in his congregation, it appears:

Most of you have probably already seen this one.  The bit that gets me is at the end, when he refers to a ‘handful’ of men picking up the pieces.  Makes it sound as though there aren’t many men in his audience whom he is not addressing!   Of course, his message that men shouldn’t abuse women is good.  Elsewhere, Driscoll says that real men are those men who take responsibility – in particular, responsibility for the covenant of marriage.

Personally, I agree that men should take responsibility – I think women should also be responsible though.  Driscoll seems to say that those men who will not take responsibility are like children.  Well, I ‘d agree again – but that anyone who does not take responsibility for themselves and their part in the world remains like a child.

I do wonder how effective the tone of his messages is, in that light, because his angry manner makes his audience into children, in my view.  They are being ‘belittled’ if they fall short of his standards – though there is nothing wrong with the standard here.  Is shaming the way to change people?  I am not sure that is even effective with children – it can just assist them in learning to hide perceived wrong behaviours, rather than ceasing them.  Still, in a ministry which could be perceived as very ‘masculine’, its good to be clear that some things, which may once have been acceptable ‘masculine’ behaviour, are not.

Most churches have ministries for men and for women.  At C3, the men’s ministry is called ‘RealMen’; the women’s ministry is ‘Everywoman’.  At Hillsong, there is ‘Hillsong Men’, ‘Hillsong Sisterhood’ and ‘Colour Sisterhood’.   Anyway, if anyone here would like to share their views on whether scripture says that men do need to be a certain way to be ‘real men’ – and likewise women, ‘real women’, and whether Eldredge or Driscoll have some good/bad points here, then here is the thread.

The Herald reports…

Mercy Ministries home to close

Many of us over the years have seen marriages fail within the pastoral teams leading church plants; often it is the senior pastors’ marriages. This is a painful tragedy when it happens; no one wants this. Often there are children involved as well. Most of us here I imagine would agree that these marriages are as important as their church plant; Jesus taught that marriage was designed to be permanent – if a marriage falls apart due to pressures from a church plant, then some priorities must have gone wrong somewhere as it is the last thing that He wants for us.

In some church cultures, people are taught to make great personal sacrifices in the name of serving God. At times, it is right to choose to make these sacrifices. But when do these sacrifices become the sacrifice of a marriage, which is never God’s plan for us? This can only happen regularly if there are false beliefs or teachings prevalent that lead some people to take this path in this situation.

Perhaps this applies to other pressure situations as well – however in some churches there could be a difficulty in learning where to draw the boundary around one’s family life for its own health. Or possibly one partner may wish to give everything to the church plant, leaving the other to fend for the family on their own while feeling unable to share their difficulties with the other congregation members (’share up, not down’), with no nearby friends, having left them all in their previous distant locale, and at the same time, feeling that they have to keep up an image for the sake of the project. Not very easy. Particularly if the couple have no time left to support one another. God did not design us to be alone. Perhaps there are other couples who go through this and survive it with their marriages intact – but could their struggle have been avoided?

What are these teachings or beliefs that lead people into this? Is it teachings, or just pressure and the response to it? Are there any teachings that Jesus gave us which could help couples in these situations sort their priorities out and come through?

Perhaps I’m coming at this from the wrong angle, but I don’t think its just that the people were unsuited to one another. These are people very committed to the ideal of a marriage lasting, as well as very committed to personal sacrifice in the name of ‘building the kingdom’. I’m not suggesting it always happens this way, however it happens often enough to make the issue worth looking at.

**********************
RavingPente

I was reading a message by Simon McIntyre (a Senior Pastor at C3 Oxford Falls). I’ve often enjoyed his preaching in the past. At first, he made some reasonably good points on the subject of us saying ‘God told me’ – using this to justify doing things that we want to do even when it contradicts scripture. Ps McIntyre pointed out that often God doesn’t tell us – we tell us. Except that he didn’t use the word ‘often’. Reading his message, he seems to be teaching that God never tells us – we always do. There were no qualifying words to soften the blow!

I know that I hope I don’t do this, but its possible I’ve fallen into the trap. Hopefully, by applying scripture in my life, I do it less often. This shows the value of using scripture as a measure in our lives, as we’ve been discussing on several threads here recently. However, I’ve definitely come across the odd example of individuals doing what Ps McIntyre describes – for example, when God ‘tells’ them to get romantically involved with someone other than their current husband or wife.

So reading on in his article, I was disappointed, though not completely surprised, to see what followed, on the last page. Using the logic that we need to apply scriptural principles to our lives rather than rely on the idea that God tells us things directly, we should follow the principle of submitting to those who have the rule over you – in this case church leaders – when this contradicts or postpones what we think God has told us. That is, if we think that God told us to do something, this is overruled if a church leader ’suggests’ to us that we do something else.

This could sound innocuous to start with. However, Ps McIntyre seems to be insisting upon submission to those who ‘rule over us’ regardless of our own judgements about our circumstances. Is this how leadership in the church is to be? Do we ‘rule over’ one another at all? Of course Ps McIntyre insists that leaders are to suggest, rather than demand, but if we are to submit regardless, dismissing any reservations we may have, what is the difference? I’m sure Ps McIntyre would not turn his brain off upon demand! He’s too smart for that.

Matthew 20:25-28
25(U)But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them.
26″It is not this way among you, (V)but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant,
27and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave;
28just as (W)the Son of Man (X)did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

Who is our head?

Who are we to submit to?

What form does submission take?

Does it involve doing what we are told, even when told very nicely, regardless of any other judgement we may have made upon the matter in line with our understanding of scripture, and in prayer?

Does this kind of teaching encourage the same culture of leadership that Jesus encouraged?

Surviving is either remaining in or coming out of your megachurch/church with your faith and heart intact. How have you done it?

Here are some thoughts that Heretic and I have come up with.

1. Roll your eyes back and think of the Church of England. (Hmm – my motive for going initially was that I wasn’t going back to the Anglicans.)
2. Keep something back to live on – whether it be your money or your own time and energy.
3. Don’t be fooled into thinking that you can only access the Presence of God at church.
4. Maintain your friendships and love for people who do not go to your church – for the sake of the relationship, not just for evangelism.
5. Don’t believe your pastor is above temptation.
6. Don’t believe your pastor is God.
7. Is your church a corporation – then they probably want your money as much as any other corporation.
8. Do love the genuine believers around you and continue to value them as God does, not because of their position in a hierarchy or their external degree of success.
9. Ignore any pressure to look good for marketing purposes.
10.Only go to as many meetings as you can go to without putting pressure on your family life, genuine friendships or work life.
11. Don’t believe that serving God first means putting your family second to your church.
12. Don’t believe that tithing is more important than feeding your family and paying your bills.
13. Don’t put should on people.
14. Do think for yourself.
15. Test everything you hear and know that this is what we are meant to do.
16. Do nothing out of guilt.
17. Do just ask God when you or others need something – don’t think you have to do anything to earn his love or answers.
18. Be kind to your pastors and leaders – just don’t feel you need to take everything they say as gospel.
19. Know that your work is an important part of your life, not just a way to raise funds for God or to evangelise. God designed us to work in all kinds of ways.
20. Know that your key relationship is with God, not your church. Body life is vitally important – but we need Him to come first.

I could keep going, but I’m sure there are many more thoughts out there. What are yours?

Do you think any of this contradicts a Purpose Driven methodology, Prosperity Gospel, or any other current fashion?

******************************
RavingPente

Do you now trust Benny Hinn after this ‘exclusive’ interview?

Recently I was reading an article on the value of discipline in achieving end goals. The article pointed out that discipline is not the end in itself, but plays a valuable part in forming consistent habits which help us achieve whatever level of the activity that we deem helpful to our end objectives.

There are long traditions of various spiritual disciplines across the spectrum of Christian faith. Undoubtedly various disciplines can be very helpful to us at times, particularly when we are in season with whatever it is we are doing.

Does the practice of a discipline sometimes replace the end itself as a goal? Are people sometimes judged (or do we judge ourselves) for how consistently we perform particular disciplines, forgetting that the end goal is a deeper relationship with our Father and a growing ability to live in Him?

How many things do we do, or are we encouraged to do, where the commitment to the activity becomes the important thing, rather than our relationship with our Father and one another?

On the other hand, are there particular disciplines or regular practices which we’ve found particularly helpful over time?

****************
RavingPente