Gospel, theology and story – Page 22

Category: Gospel, theology and story

Give Joseph Prince a fair hearing

5 February 2010 blogpastor 56 Comments

Joseph Prince’s devotional

Last year I received through the post a book gift from a fellow blogger Malcolm Loh of Rootss. It was Joseph Prince’s “Destined to Reign” devotional. Malcolm wrote in the cover, “Dear BLOGPASTOR, Felt led by the Lord to give this to you. 🙂 Continue to blog for His glory.” I tried to read the devotional book day by day, but I did not make much headway. I changed tactic and simply read it like a book, as much as I wanted, whenever I wanted, and I am now at May 8. The devotional contains interesting insights and though I couldn’t agree with everything, I benefited from it. I like that it had more gospel than law (Law as in Luther’s perspective), more indicatives than imperatives. At the end of 2009, I in turn bought four of JP’s devotionals and gave them away, three to my pastor-colleagues, one to a relative. The book is expensive at $34, and I suspect a percentage went to the One North project. 🙂

Put down your guns

Pastors should not just go by hearsay and what they read of others’ comments, but actually go to the source and give Joseph Prince a fair hearing: read his books or listen to his tapes. Put down your guns and set aside the warning label called “antinomian” for the time being, roll the sleeves, and do some honest research.

Pentecostals and charismatics have been on the painful end of labelling in the past. There was a time when the label “Pentecostal” or “Charismatic” were like warning signs akin to “POISON”. Later the people who spread horror stories of tongues, rolling on the floor and swinging from rafter to rafter, are rocking and rolling from holy laughter in dignified pews and grand cathedrals…to the dismay and secret glee of the Pentecostals.

There are few who will agree with everything another pastor/writer says. There are things Billy Graham, RT Kendall, Henri Nouwen, Michael Horton, John Stott have written that I do not agree with but it never stopped me from reading and learning from them. Its the same with Joseph Prince. Or even Richard Dawkins.

Interest stimulated to study Law and Gospel

I have hesitated to comment about what Joseph Prince espouses because I have yet to give sufficient attention to what he has written. I have heard what others have written or said, but I prefer to go to the source (one thing I learned from seminary): hear his CDs (I have heard his old pre-grace cassette tapes but not any of his more recent CDs except the one on Holy Communion); and read his key book, “Destined to Reign”. Until I have read enough of his stuff, and heard enough of his messages(which Stillhaventfound has given me a fortnight back) to get a fair perspective, better to keep quiet. I have been asked to comment on his theology, but what can I comment when I have not gone to the source and done this reasonable homework?

I must say that what I heard from his supporters, and read in blogs, has also perked my interest in understanding more fully the intriguing relationship between the law and the gospel, a study that has occupied many Lutherans and Reformed folk in interesting debates over centuries, and in recent decades about the “new perspective” of St Paul. If brilliant enlightened Lutherans and Reformed folk could not come to agreement on this, what can this Pentecostal pastor add to the debate? Perhaps the missing ingredient: tongues and interpretation. 🙂

I went to Trinity Theological College and borrowed an old book, Five Views of the Law and Gospel, and I aim to study these and if possible post summaries of them in my blog and discuss. What an ambitious project. I am well-intentioned but now what I need is what Singapore pastors have little of: time, space and motivation for studying those long chapters and reflecting on them.

I probably need a year! 🙂

Holy Communion: body and blood of Christ

8 December 2009 blogpastor 6 Comments

( In 14th September 2007, I posted this piece in the old blogpastor, which I have now revised and re-published.)

Don’t miss this excellent post of the different views of holy communion by Alex Tang of Random Musings. It includes the view of Joseph Prince of New Creation Church.

John Piper’s view is the best fit and description of wrpf’s belief and practice regarding holy communion. John Piper writes:

“Let me read the key sentence from the Elder Affirmation of Faith once more and then show you in the Bible where it comes from. “Those who eat and drink in a worthy manner partake of Christ’s body and blood, not physically, but spiritually, in that, by faith, they are nourished with the benefits He obtained through His death, and thus grow in grace.”

Where does this idea of “partaking of Christ’s body and blood . . . spiritually . . . by faith” come from? The closest text to support this is in the previous chapter: 1 Corinthians 10:16-18. As I read it, ask, “What does ‘participation’ mean?”

The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ (koinōnia estin tou haimatos tou Christou)? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ (ouchi koinōnia tou sōmatos tou Christou estin)? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar (koinōnia tou thusiastēriou)?

Here is something much deeper than remembering. Here are believers—those who trust and treasure Jesus Christ—and Paul says that they are participating in the body and blood of Christ. Literally, they are experiencing a sharing (koinōnia) in his body and blood. They are experiencing a partnership in his death.

Partaking of Christ’s Body and Blood, Spiritually, By Faith

And what does this participation/sharing/partnership mean? I think verse 18 gives us the clue because it uses a similar word, but compares it to what happens in the Jewish sacrifices: “Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants [a form of the same word] in the altar?” What does sharer/participant/partner in the altar mean? It means that they are sharing in or benefiting from what happened on the altar. They are enjoying, for example, forgiveness and restored fellowship with God.

So I take verse 16 and 17 to mean that when believers eat the bread and drink the cup physically we do another kind of eating and drinking spiritually. We eat and drink—that is, we take into our lives—what happened on the cross. By faith—by trusting in all that God is for us in Jesus—we nourish ourselves with the benefits that Jesus obtained for us when he bled and died on the cross.

This is why we lead you in various focuses at the Lord’s table from month to month (peace with God, joy in Christ, hope for the future, freedom from fear, security in adversity, guidance in perplexity, healing from sickness, victory in temptation, etc.). Because when Jesus died, his shed blood and broken body, offered up in his death on our behalf, purchased all the promises of God. Paul says, “All the promises of God find their Yes in him” (2 Corinthians 1:20). Every gift of God, and all our joyful fellowship with God, was obtained by the blood of Jesus. When Paul says, “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” he means: Do we not at the Lord’s table feast spiritually by faith on every spiritual blessing bought by the body and blood of Christ? No unbeliever can do that. The devil can’t do it. It is a gift for the family. When we celebrate the Lord’s Supper, we feast spiritually by faith on all the promises of God bought by the blood of Jesus.”

John Piper’s full article is titled, “Why and how we celebrate the Lord’s Supper”.

Eating the flesh of Joseph Prince

27 November 2009 blogpastor 15 Comments

(This post is re-published so that other citations made elsewhere in the web in reference to this post can be read in its full and proper context. I have also added related posts that I think are helpful for further reading.)

Y Joeph Prince preaching es I have descended to the tabloid sewers for the title of this post. No this is not a post about new covenant cannibalism. But would you have taken a second look if the title were, “Dear pastors and preachers….” or “what pastors and preachers can learn from Joseph Prince”? Make no bones about it, I took this from the cliched analogy of eating the flesh and leaving the bones aside, when people are advised not to throw away the whole package just because of something they are doubtful about, but to take what is edible and edifying and discard what is personally indigestible.

Joseph Prince’s “Destined to reign”

Dr Gordon Wong who is the Bishop William F Oldham Professor of Old Testament at Trinity Theological College and an ordained minister of the Methodist Church in Singapore, had written a review of Joseph Prince’s book. On the whole it was positive though there were a few concerns he had. But he had gracious and good things to say about Joseph Prince’s teaching on grace. To read his whole review, go HERE. Each pastor and preacher has to discern for himself what he can “eat” of Joseph Prince’s teaching on grace and law.

Joseph Prince’s preaching

But it is in methodology, not theology, that is the focus of my post, in particular, preaching and teaching the Word. Many would agree with me that the magnetic attraction of New Creation Church is Joseph Prince and his preaching. Every Sunday can be a hassle because of the parking; and the queueing and the overflow video rooms, and yet people turn up in droves. The worship and music is equal to many other megachurches. My conclusion is that what stands out is his anointed, interesting and liberating preaching of grace.

More indicatives and much less imperatives

There are at least two things we can learn from JP as pastors and preachers. I think the first is that we need to preach more sermons in the indicatives and less in the imperatives. Too many sermons in our pulpits focus on the ‘what we must do’ (imperatives) rather than ‘who Christ is and what he has done for us’(indicatives). We assume that the foundations of understanding of the gospel have already been laid and that people see how those liberating truths are linked with our everyday struggles and temptations. But this is such a fatal assumption. We do not need to preach on these, we think, so we concentrate on the imperatives: the what, whys, and especially the hows of all the demands and commands of the word of God. So people get an overdose of what is required of them, and constant reminders of what they often fail to do and live up to. End result: sense of defeat, failure, feeling hypocritical, discouragement, and frustration about living out the faith.

The tragedy is that in some quarters they like it when the preaching is tough on the hearer and brings him to deep remorse and self-loathe. Yes give it to us preacher, we deserve a good forty minus one scourging! Such an approach is just self-defeating and unknowingly pastors and preachers are creating a performance and failure mentality in the congregation. The members constantly feel joyless, defeated, frustrated, disillusioned and the happy Christian life seems a mirage in a spiritual desert, because they are reminded every week that they are not up to God’s standard.

We can eat the flesh of Joseph Prince and preach more sermons that exalt who God is and what he has done for us, and what we have and are as a result of our faith in Him. How about three messages a month that is predominantly ‘indicative’ and one that is ‘imperative’; more promises and less commands? Do this to redress old imbalances slanted towards ‘imperatives’. To get more clarity about the indicatives and imperatives of preaching read an extract from the professor of preaching from Fuller Seminary, Ian Pitt Watson. Go HERE to a previous post I wrote in Jan 2008 and re-published recently.

Inspire faith, hope and love

The second thing we can do is to deliberately seek to inspire faith, hope and love in our preaching. Joseph Prince knows the audience well and he is keenly aware of what they need. I remember a few pastors asking one of our friends husband why he attends New Creation Church, and he gave us an lightning bolt of an answer. He said, “I’ll be frank with you guys, so don’t get offended. Do you know how torturous it is sit through the sermons you all preach. Every time I hear a sermon, I feel the worse for it, more discouraged and defeated and a failure. I work through the week and am so stressed and discouraged and worried over my job challenges and instead of getting encouraged, you guys give me greater discouragement. When I go to NCC, every week I get uplifted, inspired and more hopeful.”

Jesus himself understood the multitudes and he too often preached to inspire hope and faith. His toughest messages were reserved for the people steeped in hypocrisy, but when he speaks to the common man, he preached hope, solutions, encouragement of a kingdom and God of forgiveness, unconditional fatherly love, provision, kindness, peace and joy.

Eat the flesh of Joseph Prince and go and do likewise: go inspire faith and hope in God especially in these times of bleak, dismal future. One way we can catch the essence is to read and listen to his stuff with an eye to his methodology. Read his daily devotional which gives that constant reminder of what is needed for the congregation in terms of its encouraging slant. Too many of us are too analytical and major on analyzing the problems and focus too little on the Great Solution, the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, the indicatives of preaching.

Be yourself but do not ignore underlying principles

Of course each preacher is unique and has his own style, substance and strengths. There is only one Rony Tan; one Lawrence Khong; one Kong Hee and one Joseph Prince. And there is only one unique YOU. What we can do is to see the underlying principles at work in this transformational model of preaching and apply them diligently and discerningly, and serve out the Word in our own differing capacities, styles and strengths.