Your take on the word of faith?  I am currently a member of a Four Square church with phenomenal growth, although they are moderate in context of extreme examples like Haggen, Hinn, etc.  I came from the Calvary Chapel movement which taught against this.  I have found discipleship and ministry involvement, but I still question the constant repeated claims of, “Speak this exercise, your faith is a force to change circumstances, don’t ever admit poverty, lack, sickness, etc.”  They are always alluding to financial blessings, sowing to reap, etc.  I see Biblical precedence, yet it seems a spin on what God intended to tell us through

His Word.  Declaring all God’s promises has not helped me keep my home, jobs, deliverance from bondage to tobacco, sin, and financial need.  Help me put this into perspective.

Sincerely,
More For The Money?

Dear More For The Money,

The theology that your church is ascribing to is called “the prosperity gospel” – and it is a lie.  The prosperity gospel doctrine teaches that the more faith you have, the more money, health, power, etc. you will receive.  They teach that all sicknesses, poverty, and suffering are caused by a lack of faith.  This is simply wrong.

Jesus suffered more than anyone – and yet He was perfectly faithful and never sinned (Heb 4:15).  When Jesus was asked why a certain man was blind, His answer was, “That God’s works could be revealed in Him” (Jhn 9:1-3).  That blind man wasn’t blind because He had sinned, He was blind because it gave God an opportunity to use him.  The apostle Paul had a “thorn in the flesh” (some sort of sickness) that God gave him… even though Paul was exceptionally faithful (2 Cor 12:7).  Job suffered at the hands of Satan BECAUSE he was so faithful (Job 1:8).  And last, but not least, God clearly states that we must suffer in order to enter the kingdom of heaven (Acts 14:22).

The idea that serving Christ will provide you with every physical blessing you could ever want is a perversion of the Scriptures.  It is a preaching that is based upon selfishness and the love of money – both of which God abhors (2 Tim 3:2, 1 Tim 6:10).  Christians should condemn and flee from this kind of false teaching.

If apostolic authority was meant to end with the last apostle, how are autonomous local congregations meant to settle doctrinal disputes?  The sheer number of differing Protestant denominations only proves that leaving the church with the Scriptures alone only leads to division and fragmentation.  Calvinists believe in predestination, Lutherans believe in baptismal regeneration, Baptists believe in symbolic adult full-immersion baptism, Pentecostals believe in speaking in tongues, the church of Christ believes in no musical instruments, and Seventh Day Adventists worship on Saturday.  All of these local congregations are interpreting the same Scriptures, and yet, all are divided on any one of a number of important doctrinal positions. They can’t agree on the nature of baptism, the causes of salvation, the gifts of the Spirit, the study of eschatology, and so on.  The differences are endless.  Why would Christ leave His church with a set of Scriptures but no authority to properly interpret them?

Sincerely,
Needing More

Dear Needing More,

Religious confusion isn’t because of the Scriptures.  The Scriptures aren’t the weak link; people are.  If you look at the vast majority of religious organizations, they don’t take the Scriptures as their only guide.  They allow religious tradition, personal whims, various creeds, etc. to sway them from basic Bible teachings.  It is when people warp and pervert the Scriptures that they get the divisions and fragmentations that we see today (Gal 1:6-8).  False teachers disguised as ministers of righteousness infiltrate churches and lead many astray (2 Cor 11:13-15).  False teachers are described as “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (Matt. 7:15) because they pretend to teach Bible, but instead, they teach their own devices.  False religions spring up when people are tired of the pure and simple Bible pattern and itch for a more comfortable message (2 Tim 4:3-5). The problem isn’t that we have too much emphasis on Scripture – it is the exact opposite!  If you want to remove division and chaos, return to simply studying Scripture and expel all creeds, traditions, and personal preferences from religious discussion.

Your assertion assumes that the Scriptures alone aren’t powerful enough to teach and prepare people to meet their God.  The Bible teaches that the Scriptures are the power of God for salvation (Rom 1:16).  2 Pet 1:3 says that the Scriptures provide every answer to life and godliness.  Peter said that the apostles wrote down the wisdom God had given them so that long after they departed, we would still have it (2 Pet 1:12-15).  When Jesus rebuked the Pharisees, He condemned them for their lack of Bible knowledge (Matt 22:29).  Jesus believed the Scriptures were plain enough for anyone to understand if they had an honest heart and applied some effort… He believed it enough to be angry with the Pharisees when they didn’t know their Bibles.  When Paul taught the people, he reasoned with them using only the Scriptures (Acts 17:2).  The Berean converts were praised as being noble-minded for not accepting the apostle Paul’s teachings without first examining the Scriptures for themselves (Acts 17:10-11).  The Bible is sufficient for our salvation, and there is no need for anyone to have modern abilities to “interpret” the Bible for us (2 Pet 1:20-21).

What is blasphemy?  I really don't understand it and would like an explanation.

Sincerely,
Boggled About Blasphemy

Dear Boggled About Blasphemy,

All cursing is corrupt speech, but using the Lord’s name in vain is corrupt speech and blasphemy.  Eph 4:29 tells us to avoid all corrupt speech.  We need to avoid any and all language that sounds filthy or derogatory – this would include all swear words.  However, using the Lord’s name in vain is corrupt and irreverent.  God tells us to revere Him (Heb 12:28).  All sin will equally send you to hell (Rom 6:23), but there is an attitude of disrespect behind using the Lord’s name in vain that is especially troublesome.  The word ‘blasphemy’ means ‘to speak evil of’; any language that speaks poorly of God is blasphemy.  When we use God’s name as a cuss word or exclamatory term, we demote Him in our minds from the lofty position He deserves.  All our speech needs to be both clean and reverent, so God’s name is spoken well of amongst His people (1 Tim 6:1).

Why does God command the people of Israel not to kill, but then He orders them to kill enemies of Israel… even the women, children, and livestock?  Then Jesus tells His disciples to "turn the other cheek."  I haven't been a christian for very long, but I've always been confused about this.

Sincerely,
Double Standard

Dear Double Standard,

The Hebrew word used for ‘kill’ in the Ten Commandments literally means ‘murder’.  There is a difference between killing someone in self-defense and pre-meditated, intentional murder of another human being.  The Bible has plenty of examples of faithful people going to war (David killed Goliath in battle – 1 Sam 17:49-50).  The Bible is also full of examples of capital punishment for certain crimes (Num 15:35).  Num 35:15-16 makes a distinction between accidentally killing someone and premeditated murder.  A police officer may have to kill someone while serving the community, but that isn’t murder.  There is a difference.

It is wrong for an individual to purposefully seek to harm another unless they are acting as an agent of the government (God has given national governments the authority to use ‘the sword’ of punishment – Rom 13:4) or reacting in self-defense.  God commanded the nation of Israel to kill in times of war, but He condemns vigilante murder.  The teaching of “turn the other cheek” (Matt 5:39) is an individual command that applies to everyday living.  The context has nothing to do with war-time actions.

Is drinking one’s blood or the blood of others a sin or just not wanted to be done?

Sincerely, What’s For Dinner?

Dear What’s For Dinner?,

Although there is some controversy over the subject, drinking blood is a sin.The Jews knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that drinking blood was a sin (Gen 9:4).A Jewish law is not the same as a christian law though, so we must find a New Testament teaching on the subject.In Acts 15:19-20, a letter is sent by the apostles to all the Gentile christians telling them to abstain from drinking blood or eating meat that had been strangled (thus leaving the blood in the meat).Drinking blood is put side by side with fornication as something to be avoided at all cost.The life is in the blood, and therefore it should be treated with respect (Lev 17:11).