Is the Leaving Cert cancelled or postponed?

A 38-year-old man who was stabbed multiple times in both legs and suffered a broken nose was accused by a gang of thugs of attending the funeral of slain hitman Robbie Lawlor.

The catastrophic impact of the coronavirus on the State's economy is threatening another delay to the construction of the long-awaited new €350m National Maternity Hospital in Dublin.

The executives of the country's two second-level teacher unions met last night to consider the implications of a newly-devised 'calculated grades' system that will replace this year's cancelled summer Leaving Certificate exams.

The news that a French patient tested positive for Covid-19 in December means countries will have to go back and test old samples to try to pin down when the outbreak really began on their shores, experts have told RTÉ News.

The Teachers Union of Ireland has said that it will cooperate with the newly-devised 'calculated grades' system that will replace this year's Leaving Cert exams. It said it will engage with the Department of Education to ensure that it is "fair and equitable for every student".

The coronavirus pandemic has killed more than 275,000 people worldwide since it began in China late last year, with more than 85 percent of fatalities in Europe and the United States.

It is almost ten weeks since the coronavirus emergency erupted here, following confirmation of the first case of Covid-19 in Ireland. Our world has changed in the most unexpected ways.

The government plan to re-open workplaces will be mandatory, and the Health and Safety Authority will be allowed to shut down businesses that do not comply.

At the end of the day, as last week’s Torah portion proclaims, Hashem holds most dear the principle in which he packages His halachot and mitzvot: “And you shall live by them.”

The report cited findings that suggest that even past severe influenza pandemic viruses, such as the Spanish Flu, were less infectious than the novel coronavirus

According to a report on Wednesday in German weekly Die Zeit, Israel is close to reaching an agreement with Hamas on a prisoner release in exchange for fallen soldiers Hadar Goldin and Oron Shaul.

Many of the mysteries surrounding the super-spy have been revealed over the years, others we might never learn, but Cohen’s courage and fate have returned to public consciousness lately.

Middle Israel: Some early political conclusions to draw from the pandemic.

'This is every parents' nightmare, right, that your child may actually be affected by this virus,' said New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.

Lukashenko, who has ruled Belarus since 1994, has called fears over the coronavirus a "psychosis" and variously suggested drinking vodka, visiting saunas or playing ice hockey to beat the disease.

PA paid NIS 517.4m. on these salaries in 2019, some NIS 15m. more than previous year

Diplomatic Affairs: Marking two years since the move of the embassy to Jerusalem, David Friedman talks about annexation, the peace process and rapprochement in the Gulf.

The key for people like me lies in uncoupling uncertainty from risk.

The Malta Chamber of Commerce has pledged its support to government in the formulation of a new Iindividual Investor Programme to ensure the new scheme is compatible with good governance

In many markets, the MGA license is most respected by players and many new regulatory frameworks are modelled after it

Lands Authority confirms that the FKNK has no title to Miżieb and l-Aħrax tal-Mellieha, independent candidate Arnold Cassola says 

BirdLife video of illegal hunting in Malta sent to European Commission

Opposition leader Adrian Delia meets PBS top officials

No one caught breaking mandatory quarantine

Court turns down alleged Caruana Galizia assassination mastermind's request to have compilation of evidence continue 

The 48 year old man, who understood to have a substance abuse problem, had been aggressive towards a doctor sent to treat him and died after force had to be used to subdue him.

We will never fully know what Iran and Russia actually think of Assad or each other’s historic role in Syria.

To date UNRWA has received only $586 million in pledges, of which a mere $400 million has been transferred to the organization from donor countries.

The Iranian islands of the Persian Gulf will be turned into residential areas, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy Chief Alireza Tangsiri announced on Wednesday. Tangsiri said the decision came according to an order issued by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The announcement was made as Iran marked the National Persian Gulf Day on Wednesday.

After two decades of dryness, enough rains have finally come to bring Hamoun wetland back to life in the southeastern Iranian province of Sistan-Baluchestan, reviving agriculture in the region as well. Hamoun is the third-largest lake of Iran after the Caspian Sea and Urmia Lake.

More than 12,000 Iranian lawyers have protested to a draft bill that undermines their independence and in effect replaces the Iranian Bar Association with a group of judiciary officials appointed by the government. Based on the draft the Judiciary will form a new body named the ";Supreme Council for the Coordination of Lawyers' Affairs"; that will be based at the Judiciary branch of the government ";to coordinate matters relating to attorneys.";

Iran's parliament has voted to slash four zeros from the national currency, the rial, to fight hyperinflation caused by crippling U.S. sanctions and the coronavirus pandemic. Lawmakers also decided on May 4 that the rial, which has been Iran's national currency since 1925, will be replaced by the toman, which will be equal to 10,000 rials, according to the IRNA and ISNA news agencies.

The body of Ali Ajami, an Iranian human rights activist, was discovered in McGovern Lake at Hermann Park, Houston, Texas, on Wednesday. The cause of death remains unknown. Houston Police on Wednesday started an investigation into the death of a deceased male found in a pond at Hermann Park but said no other information was available yet. Iranian social media users have reported that the body belonged to thirty-seven-year-old Iranian human rights activist Ali Ajami.

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. Of our previous blog series, none better embodies that emphasis than Frequently Abused Verses. The following entry from that series originally appeared on October 2, 2015. -ed.

Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst. (Matthew 18:18–20)

How often have you heard that passage (or at least part of it) quoted in a church setting?

During my time in the charismatic church, Matthew 18:18–20 was quoted in every prayer meeting and regularly from the pulpit. In fact, I cannot think of any other Scripture passage I heard quoted so frequently without ever hearing a sermon on the passage itself. And yet we would regularly bind demonic forces on earth and loose angelic armies from heaven. And we always reminded ourselves that Jesus was there because at least two or three of us were present.

Our church was far from alone in its dependence on Matthew 18:18–20. In fact, the passage is a favorite of self-appointed experts in spiritual warfare and those who put special emphasis on Christ’s presence. The passage has been chopped up and subdivided all sorts of ways in service to a number of doctrinal positions and practical applications.

For example, notorious faith healer and prosperity preacher Benny Hinn emphasizes Matthew 18:18 as a promise of supernatural power and heavenly authority:

Do you realize that movements on earth govern movements in heaven? Do you realize that a child of God in prayer affects decisions in heaven? The Lord declared: “Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Matthew 18:18). So awesome is this power that it releases angels to do God’s bidding on the earth and binds demons as it destroys the purpose of the enemy! ^[1]Benny Hinn, https://www.bennyhinn.org/tiyd-video/prayer-that-gets-results-part-1/

Contrast that with the conclusions of Rick Warren, who offers a far less spectacular interpretation and application of the passage, while employing similar hermeneutical technique in his assessment of verses 19–20:

Many people miss out on so much because they only pray by themselves. Yet, when Jesus gave us an outline for prayer, he spoke about praying together. There is power in group prayer. If you’re not praying with other believers, then you’re not getting the support you need. You’re missing out on one of the major benefits of being a Christian. Jesus says “whenever two of you on earth agree about anything you pray for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. For where two or three come together in my name, I am there with them” (Matthew 18:19-20 TEV). That’s the power of praying with other people. ^[2]Rick Warren, http://rickwarren.org/devotional/english/a-powerful-key-to-prayer_700

Joyce Meyer comes out of the same Word Faith stream as Benny Hinn and also enjoys a huge television following. But her ministry prefers to traffic in practical advice for day-to-day life. She actually deploys Matthew 18:20 in the realm of marriage counsel:

The Bible says that there is power in agreement. . . .

If you want to have power in your marriage and in your prayer life, then you have to get along. The big question is: How can a disagreeing couple learn to agree? Agreement comes when the people involved stop being selfish. Selfishness is an immature inward focus. The key is to care about what the other person needs, be willing to humble yourself, and do what you can to meet those needs.

When this happens, you can live together in agreement before the Lord, and “wherever two or three are gathered” in His name, God is there with them. So make a choice with your spouse today to pursue agreement and unity before the Lord. ^[3]Joyce Meyer, https://www.bible.com/reading-plans/199-promises-for-your-everyday-life/day/360

How can one passage support such disparate meanings? Are any of those interpretations the true meaning of Matthew 18:18–20? Do they skirt around the edges of the author’s original intent, or are they missing the point of the passage altogether? Bottom line: Does this passage have anything to do with spiritual warfare, group prayer, or marital unity?

As with previous posts in this series, the first thing we should check is the context of our passage. What do the surrounding verses tell us about the meaning of our text? In this case, the preceding verses are likely just as familiar as the passage in question:

If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (Matthew 18:15–17)

Just a simple reading of the text makes it clear that the focus is not spiritual warfare, unity in marriage, or empowering your prayer meetings. Instead, verses 15–17 speak exclusively about church discipline.

Therefore, all of Christ’s instructions about binding and loosing, unity, and the promise of His presence come in the context of church discipline. In other words, Matthew 18:18–20 means that when church leaders gather together to deal with unrepentant sinners, they have heavenly backing.

In his commentary on this passage, John MacArthur explains how many of the popular interpretations go wrong when they divorce the verses from their context:

Jesus’ promises in verses 18 and 19 have suffered serious misinterpretation throughout the history of the church. . . . Many charismatics use these promises—along with others, such as those of Matthew 7:7 and 21:22—to claim from God every imaginable blessing and privilege just for the asking.

But in light of the context of what Jesus had just said, in the light of common rabbinical expressions of that day, and in light of the grammatical construction of the text, it is clear that He was not teaching that God’s power can be bent to men’s will. He was not saying that men can force heaven to do things. Quite to the contrary, His promise was that when His people bend their wills to His, He will endorse and empower their act of obedience.

Jesus was here continuing His instruction about church discipline. He was not speaking about petitioning God for special blessings or privileges, and even less was He teaching that the church or any of its leaders has power to absolve the sins of its members. He was declaring that the church has a divine mandate to discipline its members when they refuse to repent. ^[4]John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Matthew 16–23 (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1988) 137.

And what about the power to bind and loose in the spiritual realm? John also carefully debunks that misinterpretation:

The rabbis sometimes spoke of a principle or action as being bound in heaven or loosed in heaven to indicate, respectively, that it was forbidden or permitted in light of God’s revealed Word. . . . Believers have authority to declare that sins are either forgiven or not forgiven when that declaration is based on the teaching of God’s Word. If a person has received Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, the church can tell him with perfect confidence that his sins are loosed, that is, forgiven, because he has met God’s condition for forgiveness, namely, trust in His Son. If, on the other hand, a person refuses to receive Christ as Savior and acknowledge Him as Lord, the church can tell him with equal confidence that his sins are bound, that is, not forgiven, because he has not met God’s condition for forgiveness. ^[5] The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Matthew 16–23, 137.

Matthew 18:15–17 is Christ’s explanation of how church discipline is to be practiced. Verses 18–20 expand on His instructions by informing us of the immense heavenly support provided to leaders who maintain the discipline of the church. Here’s how John MacArthur describes it:

Jesus also assures His people that He Himself acts with them when they work to purify the church: “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, there I am in their midst.” Not only does the Father confirm discipline when it is administered according to His Word, but the Son adds His own divine confirmation. . . . To use this statement to claim the Lord’s presence at a small worship service or prayer meeting does not fit the context of church discipline and is superfluous. Christ is always present with His people, even with a lone believer totally separated from fellow Christians by prison walls or by hundreds of miles.

The context demands that the two or three are witnesses in the process of discipline. To ask or to do anything in God’s name is not to utter His name but to ask and to work according to His divine will and character. For the witnesses to have gathered in His name is therefore for them to have faithfully performed their work of verifying the repentance or impenitence of a sinning brother or sister on the Lord’s behalf. When the church gathers in the Lord’s name and for His cause and glory, it must be engaged in self-purifying ministry under His power and authority, and with His heavenly confirmation and partnership. ^[6] The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Matthew 16–23, 138.

One could make a case that the church’s silence on the issue of biblical discipline (Matthew 18:15-17) has allowed for a cacophony of misinterpretations and misapplications of Matthew 18:18-20. Ripped from their original setting and intent, those verses have been made to serve a variety of false positions and pretexts.

Our interpretation of Scripture has serious practical repercussions. We would all do well to receive Paul’s counsel to Timothy:  “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. One of our previous blog series, Looking for Truth in All the Wrong Places, strongly emphasizes those doctrines. The following entry from that series originally appeared on June 5, 2017. -ed.

God told me.

The Holy Spirit laid it on my heart.

The Spirit is compelling me.

Those phrases and others like them are frequently thrown around the church today without giving many people pause. In fact, it seems the Holy Spirit’s primary role is laying burdens on believers and compelling them to deliver specific, timely messages to the church.

But how do we know when it’s actually the Holy Spirit, and not just a heavy conscience, a strong personal desire, or emotion-driven enthusiasm? For that matter, what’s to say it wasn’t simply some bad pizza? For all the talk about the Holy Spirit directing us, speaking to us and through us, and compelling us this way and that, how do we know when God is truly leading us?

We recently asked John MacArthur about how we can discern the Spirit’s ongoing work in the lives of believers. Here’s what he said:

We ought to look for the Holy Spirit’s leadership, but we must be cautious about assigning to Him responsibility for our words and actions. Our feelings are not necessarily a trustworthy source of information, nor are they an accurate indication that God has a special message to deliver to us or through us.

God’s people need to be circumspect when it comes to His leadership, particularly through subjective impressions and inclinations. Moreover, we need to be wary of those who highjack the prophetic seat and presume to speak for God.

In the days ahead, we’re going to look at some landmark teaching from John MacArthur regarding the propensity of many believers to look for eternal truth in all the wrong places. You won’t want to miss this engaging, insightful series that deals with the pitfalls of subjectivity and postmodernity, and the sufficiency of Scripture.

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. One of our previous blog series, Looking for Truth in All the Wrong Places, strongly emphasizes those doctrines. The following entry from that series originally appeared on June 7, 2017. -ed.

We’ve all had strange dreams from time to time. Sometimes the details are so confused and convoluted you can scarcely believe your mind concocted them in the first place. And no matter how vivid the dream appeared, you likely wouldn’t base something as insignificant as your lunch order—much less your life—on those bizarre mental images. Sadly, the same is not true for many professing believers in the church today.

James Ryle says he awoke from a strange dream one night and heard the Lord tell him, “I am about to do a strange, new thing in My church. It will be like a man bringing a hippopotamus into his garden. Think about that.” ^[1] James Ryle, Hippo in the Garden (Lake Mary, FA: Creation House, 1993), 259.

Ryle did think about it and concluded God was telling him He was going to “[return] the power of His prophetic word by His Holy Spirit into churches that (presumptuously) no longer have any place for it.” ^[2] Hippo in the Garden, 261. Ryle adds this: “Not only is the hippo in the garden the unusual thing God will do prophetically within His church, but it also heralds His release of a prophetic voice into the world through His church, bringing in a great last-days harvest.” Ryle quotes Acts 2:17–21 and then says, “A vast prophetic movement inspired by the Holy Spirit within the church in the midst of the world resulting in an evangelistic ingathering—that is the ‘hippo in the garden.’” ^[3] Hippo in the Garden, 262.

In other words, Ryle says the spirit of prophecy will come like a lumbering beast upon the whole church, making revelatory prophecy commonplace and ushering in a new wave of revival. When this happens it will seem as unlikely and out of place—and disruptive—as a man taking a hippo for a walk in a neatly manicured garden. Ryle is convinced God gave him this prophecy.

Ryle, pastor of Boulder Valley Vineyard Fellowship in Boulder, Colorado, is no stranger to dreams and visions [Ryle passed away in 2015, Ed.]. A few years ago Ryle said the Lord revealed to him in a dream the secret of the Beatles’ success: they received a special anointing from God. According to Ryle, God told him, “they were gifted by My hand; and it was I who anointed them, for I had a purpose, and the purpose was to usher in the Charismatic renewal with musical revival around the world.”

Unfortunately, John, Paul, George, and Ringo squandered the sacred anointing on fame and riches. “The four lads … went AWOL and did not serve in My army”—Ryle says he heard God say. “They served their own purposes and gave the gift to the other side.” According to Ryle, the Lord’s plan was thwarted, so He withdrew the anointing in 1970. Ryle says God has told him He is about to release that same anointing again. This time He plans to use Christian musicians. ^[4]James Ryle, “Sons of Thunder,” (Longmont, CO: Boulder Valley Vineyard tape ministry), preached 1 July 1990. Thousands listen breathlessly as Ryle recounts his prophetic message.

Ryle regularly has dreams, sees visions, and hears messages he insists come from God. “I dreamed I was literally inside the Lord,” he writes of one such incident. “I had the ability to look through His eyes and to see what He was seeing—without being seen.” ^[5] Hippo in the Garden, 128. Ryle recounts these dreams and visions with remarkably detailed interpretations. He is thoroughly convinced they all contain prophetic truth from the Lord.

Ryle does not claim to be unique. He believes all Christians who will listen can hear the voice of God through dreams, visions, and personal prophecies. “God will speak to us as He spoke to Jesus,” he declares. ^[6] Hippo in the Garden, 36. “We are not merely to look back and sigh at how wonderful it must have been to hear God’s voice and be led by His Spirit. No! God speaks to us today.” ^[7] Hippo in the Garden, 38. Elsewhere he writes, “God is a supernatural being and surely speaks through supernatural means. I refer to the audible voice of God, divine manifestations of His presence, angelic encounters and similar phenomena.” ^[8] Hippo in the Garden, 190. According to Ryle, all those phenomena are supposed to be happening today—and will happen to anyone who is receptive enough.

Ryle believes the Bible is the infallible record of God’s past speaking, but he doesn’t seem to believe the Bible alone is a sufficient word from God for today. He suggests that believers who do not listen for fresh words from God daily are missing an important source of spiritual sustenance:

Jesus taught us to pray that our Father would give us each day our daily bread. Since He declared that man should not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of God, doesn’t this imply that He wants us to hear His voice every day of our lives? I think so. ^[9] Hippo in the Garden, 39.

Ryle even offers some hermeneutical principles for dream interpretation: “Be committed to researching the symbols and sayings of the revelations given. . . . Don’t ever force an interpretation, trying to make it fit a predetermined opinion or desire,” and so on. ^[10] Hippo in the Garden, 149-150. Good advice for people studying Scripture. But are we supposed to exegete our dreams that way?

Ryle says yes. He tells his readers, “There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that God still speaks audibly to His people today. My prayer is that you will hear His voice for yourself; that will be proof enough.” ^[11] Hippo in the Garden, 199. Much of his book is filled with instructions for people who want to hear the voice of God.

James Ryle is illustrative of a growing number of pastors and church leaders who claim they receive truth directly from God. Ryle is perceived by many as something of an expert in this type of “revelation.” His teaching is peppered with “truths” drawn not from the Scriptures but from his own dreams and visions. The Beatles’ anointing, the hippo in the garden, a pig on a billboard, a rhino in a field, visions of Popeye and Olive Oyl, an angel with a vat of acid, dreams about the Colorado Buffalo football team’s success—these are the “revelations” about which Ryle writes and preaches. “The Word of God” is much broader to him than Scripture, encompassing his own dreams, visions, words of prophecy, and “personal revelations”—Scripture verses taken out of context and applied like fortune-cookie messages. ^[12] Hippo in the Garden, 77. “The Bible is not an end in itself,” he claims; “rather, it is the God-given means to an end.” ^[13] Hippo in the Garden, 74.

James Ryle represents a growing movement that is propagating extrabiblical revelations from God as the key to renewal in the church. Thousands of churches worldwide have embraced this new movement. People everywhere are listening for—and believe they can hear—the voice of God.

Whether There Be Prophecies, They Shall Fail

It is not at all hard to find examples from church history of groups and individuals who believed God was speaking directly to them apart from Scripture. But surely in two thousand years of history the quest for this kind of personal prophecy has never been as widespread and as pervasive as it is today.

Church history also reveals that since the canon of Scripture was closed, virtually every “prophet” who ever spoke a “thus saith the Lord” has been proved wrong, recanted, or gone off track doctrinally. And since the apostolic era, every movement that has depended heavily on extrabiblical prophecy has ultimately digressed from the true faith, usually falling into serious corruption or heresy.

This is precisely why the sufficiency of Scripture—sola Scriptura—is such a crucial doctrine. If the written Word of God truly is able to give us all the wisdom we need for complete salvation, and if it is able to make us adequate, thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:15–17)—then is there really any necessity for additional “prophecies” in the life of the believer? Does God need to say more to us than He has already said? This is a question advocates of modern prophetic revelation would do well to ponder carefully.

What More Can He Say Than to You He Hath Said?

It seems particularly unfortunate that there would be such an affinity for subjective “revelations” in an era when the average “born-again Christian” is so ignorant of the objective revelation God has given us in the Bible. When knowledge of Scripture is at such an ebb, this is the worst possible time for believers to be seeking divine truth in dreams, visions, and subjective impressions.

The quest for additional revelation from God actually denigrates the sufficiency of “the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints” (Jude 3). It implies that God hasn’t said enough in the Scriptures. It assumes that we need more truth from God than what we find in His written Word. But as we have repeatedly seen, the Bible itself claims absolute sufficiency to equip us for every good work. If we really embrace that truth, how can we be seeking the voice of God in subjective experiences?

In short, I reject modern revelatory prophecy because the New Testament canon is closed and Scripture is sufficient. Elsewhere I have delved into some of the biblical and theological arguments against continuing revelation. In this context my concerns have to do with reckless faith and the dearth of biblical discernment. Here I am primarily concerned with the extreme subjectivity that is introduced into doctrine and daily life when Christians open the door to private messages from God.

So in the days ahead, rather than focusing on theological and biblical reasons for believing that prophecy has ceased, I want to highlight some of the dangers we face when we treat any kind of subjective impression as if it were a message from God. This is a vital issue for the church today, and a key component of true discernment.

(Adapted from Reckless Faith.)

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. One of our previous blog series, Looking for Truth in All the Wrong Places, strongly emphasizes those doctrines. The following entry from that series originally appeared on June 12, 2017. -ed.

You have undoubtedly heard people say things like, “God is calling me to the mission field,” or “God led me to attend this college,” or “We feel God wants us to get married.” Perhaps you have even said such things yourself.

Christians who use expressions like those often mean they have had an impression or a strong feeling that they interpret as a disclosure of the divine will. Even people who believe prophecy and divine revelation have ceased sometimes fall into the trap of thinking God speaks directly to us through subjective means.

Normally people who make such claims have no intention of equating their mental impressions with divine revelation. They regard the subjective “leading of the Lord” as something far less than prophetic. Yet they believe God somehow communicates His will personally to individuals through inner promptings, signs, feelings of peace or uneasiness, strong impressions on the mind, or other similar means.

For reasons we shall examine, it is not wise to seek divine guidance through subjective impressions like these. Nowhere does Scripture encourage us to attempt to discern God’s will through such means. As we shall see, that sort of decision making can lead to confusion, disappointment, and sometimes spiritual tragedy.

And the truth is that treating subjective impressions as messages from the Holy Spirit is not really much different from claiming to receive divine revelation. Though most Christians who follow subjective impressions would not dream of listening to extrabiblical “prophecies,” in effect they are doing the same thing.

In fact, some advocates of modern prophetic revelation want to erase any distinction between subjective impressions and the gift of prophecy mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12–14. Professor Wayne Grudem, for example, who has produced the most thorough theological defense of the modern prophecy movement, believes God is giving revelation today chiefly through mental impressions. He even defines revelation as “something God brings to mind.” ^[1] Wayne Grudem, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1988), 42, 115. He suggests that when God providentially brings a thought to a believer’s mind, that is the New Testament gift of prophecy in operation. Thus he has elevated mental impressions to the level of prophetic revelation.

Grudem’s work has had widespread influence. And it is in many respects a fine study. He shows biblically why important distinctions must be made between Old Testament prophecy, apostolic prophecy, and the New Testament gift of prophecy. In places (but not everywhere) his exegesis of the pertinent texts is very helpful. He includes a crucial appendix on the sufficiency of Scripture which, if heeded by his friends in the modern prophecy movement, would provide a remedy against the serious abuses that have so plagued the movement. And he offers another important appendix showing that the canon of Scripture is closed.

But it is at this very point that Grudem’s position seems most inconsistent. If the canon of Scripture is really closed; if (as Grudem rightly suggests) “it is in Scripture alone that we are to search for God’s words to us”; ^[2] The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, 299. and if, in his words, “the Bible is sufficient to equip us for living the Christian life” ^[3] The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, 300. —then what point is there in seeking additional “revelations” like the prophetic messages Grudem advocates? It is unfortunate that Grudem relegated his thoughts on the canon of Scripture and the sufficiency of Scripture to the book’s final appendixes. If this had been the starting point for his study of prophecy, perhaps he would have reached very different conclusions.

Grudem’s defense of prophetic revelation has opened the door to a host of bizarre and misleading “prophecies” that have plagued evangelical Christianity over the past several years. Scores of churches worldwide have implemented Grudem’s theology and are encouraging people to share mere mental impressions as if they were prophetic messages from God. Ironically, Grudem’s work is frequently summoned to defend even the most outlandish aspects of a movement that has utterly ignored his many clear warnings against abuse of the prophetic gifts.

To his credit, Grudem appeals for a view of prophecy that “would still include a strong affirmation of the closing of the New Testament canon (so that no new words of equal authority are given today), of the sufficiency of Scripture, and of the supremacy and unique authority of the Bible in guidance.”^[4] The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, 15. He writes, “I am asking that charismatics . . . stop calling [prophecy] ‘a word from the Lord’—simply because that label makes it sound exactly like the Bible in authority.” ^[5] The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, 14. Elsewhere he writes, “Remember that what is spoken in any prophecy today is not the word of God, but is simply a human being reporting in merely human words something which God has brought to mind.” ^[6] The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, 262. He also warns that modern prophecy

should not be thought of as “God’s very words,” nor should the speaker preface his or her remarks with words which would give that impression, such as, “Thus says the Lord,” or, “Hear the words of God,” etc.—those statements should be reserved for Scripture alone. Something like, “I think the Lord is showing me that . . .” or, “I think the Lord is indicating that . . .” or, “It seems that the Lord is putting on my heart a concern that . . .” would all be much more appropriate, and far less misleading. ^[7] The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, 133.

If those warnings were consistently heeded, charismatic “prophets” could save their churches much grief and confusion.

But even in the denomination Grudem himself once identified with—the Association of Vineyard Churches—his words of caution are frequently ignored in the prophets’ actual practice.

James Ryle is himself a Vineyard pastor [Ryle passed away in 2015, Ed.]. He does give lip service to Grudem’s caution. He writes,

How often have you heard someone say casually, “The Lord spoke to me,” or “The Lord told me” to do this or that?

. . . Many within the church use these terms to justify their own desires and opinions. Possibly they feel that this puts what they are saying beyond challenge. After all, how does one argue with a “word from the Lord”?

In light of this problem I have found it a good policy to avoid such expressions and simply say, “It occurred to me” when I am sharing some insight which I’ve received in prayer or devotions. This removes unnecessary stumbling blocks and allows more people to hear the message without being distracted with the way the word is being presented. ^[8] James Ryle, Hippo in the Garden (Lake Mary, FL: Creation House, 1993), 30-31.

But note the significant difference between Grudem’s position and Ryle’s. Grudem believes prophecy is merely “something God brought to mind”—not “God’s very words.” He seems eager to avoid confusion on this point. Ryle’s perspective is markedly different. He says he employs terminology like “It occurred to me” to avoid “unnecessary stumbling blocks.” But he clearly does think of prophecy as God’s very words. After analyzing the dangers of saying things like “God spoke to me,” he states, “Nonetheless, the Lord does speak to us today.” In practice he cannot avoid placing modern words of prophecy on the same level with the written Word of God.

Ryle does this perhaps without even realizing it. He repeatedly cites Matthew 4:4 in defense of modern prophecy: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” ^[9] Hippo in the Garden, 32, 39, 62 (emphasis added).—taking a verse that clearly speaks of Scripture and applying it to modern words of prophecy.

Furthermore, despite his stated preference for expressions like, “It occurred to me,” Ryle never once uses that expression or any like it in his book. Instead, the book is filled with statements like, “I heard the voice of the Lord,” “The voice of the Lord spoke to me,” “God was speaking to me again,” “The Lord Himself was standing before me . . . speaking directly to me,” “Again I heard the voice of the Lord. . . . The Lord continued [speaking]. . . . The Lord seemed to pause. . . . Then He delivered the knockout blow,” “The Lord was saying to me,” “The Lord spoke to him, telling him to call [me],” “He speaks to me,” “I received a word from the Lord,” “I sensed the Holy Spirit say to me,” “I treasure these words from the Lord, holding them in my heart with the deepest regard,” “These were the exact words I was given,” “The prophetic word from the heart of the Lord was spoken,” “This is what the Holy Spirit showed me,” and similar expressions. ^[10] Hippo in the Garden, 13-14, 15, 18, 20, 25-29, 83, 91, 113, 115-116, 142. All Ryle’s interpretations of his own dreams and visions are stated with dogmatic conviction.

Ryle continually uses terminology that suggests he has canonized modern prophecy—at least in his own mind. “The Holy Spirit inspires us to speak through any number of means,” he says, referring to his prophecies as “inspired utterance.” ^[11] Hippo in the Garden, 99.] At the end of the book, Ryle suggests that when the hippo of modern prophecy comes into the garden of mainstream evangelicalism, “the church will be found in the midst of the world, speaking forth the words of God to a crooked and perverse generation, among whom we will shine as light, holding forth the word of life.” ^[12] Hippo in the Garden, 292 (emphasis added).

So in practice, Ryle finds it impossible not to equate his own prophecies with the words of Scripture, even though he appears to be trying to avoid this error. (In one place, Ryle says, “We must stop putting our own words in the Lord’s mouth. . . . Scripture alone is our sure foundation.” ^[13] Hippo in the Garden, 54-55. To that I add a hearty amen.)

He is not alone in this failing. Anyone who is truly convinced that God is speaking fresh words of revelation will inevitably view the later prophecies as somehow more relevant and more personal than the message of Scripture, which is more than two thousand years old. Inevitably, wherever personal prophecy has been stressed, Scripture has been deemphasized. Two thousand years of church history confirms that this is true.

(Adapted from Reckless Faith.)

Es significativo que uno de los nombres bíblicos de Cristo sea Admirable, Consejero (Isaías 9:6). Él es el Consejero Supremo y Definitivo a quien podemos acudir en busca de consejo; y Su Palabra es la fuente desde donde podemos extraer sabiduría divina. ¿Qué podría ser más admirable que eso? 

De hecho, uno de los aspectos más gloriosos de la perfecta suficiencia de Cristo es el consejo admirable y gran sabiduría que Él suple en tiempos de desesperación, confusión, miedo, ansiedad y tristeza. Él es el Consejero por excelencia. 

Ahora, esto no es para menospreciar la importancia de los cristianos aconsejándose unos a otros. Hay ciertamente una necesidad crucial de consejería bíblica sana dentro del cuerpo de Cristo. No debatiría ni por un momento el importante rol de quienes están dotados espiritualmente para dar aliento, discernimiento, consuelo, consejo, compasión y ayuda a otros. 

De hecho, uno de los problemas que ha llevado a la actual plaga de mala consejería es que las iglesias no han hecho tanto bien como deberían, permitiendo que las personas con esos dones espirituales ministren con excelencia. Las complejidades de esta época moderna hacen mucho más difícil que nunca el tomar el tiempo necesario para escuchar con atención, servir a otros a través de la entrega personal compasiva y proveer la comunión cercana, necesaria para que el cuerpo de la iglesia disfrute de salud y vitalidad.  

 Las iglesias han mirado a la psicología para llenar el vacío, pero no va a funcionar. Los psicólogos profesionales no son sustitutos de gente dotada espiritualmente; y el consejo que la psicología ofrece no puede reemplazar la sabiduría bíblica y el poder divino. Por otra parte, la psicología tiende a volver a la gente dependiente de un terapista, mientras que aquellos que ejercitan dones espirituales verdaderos, llevan a la gente hacia un Salvador todo suficiente y Su Palabra toda suficiente.  

Un Salmo sobre la Suficiencia de la Palabra de Dios 

El rey David fue un ejemplo de alguien quien ocasionalmente buscó consejo de consejeros humanos, pero al final, siempre recurría a Dios en busca de respuestas. Como muchos de los salmos revelan, él era especialmente dependiente únicamente de Dios cuando luchaba con problemas o emociones personales (Salmos 18). Cuando le golpeó la depresión o confusión interna, se volvió hacia Dios y luchó en oración (Salmos 73). Cuando el problema era su propio pecado, él se mostró arrepentido, quebrantado y contrito (Salmos 51). La persona madura espiritualmente siempre se vuelve a Dios por ayuda en tiempos de ansiedad, angustia, confusión o inquietud en el alma ––y se aseguran consejo sabio y liberación. 

Eso es debido a que toda necesidad del alma humana es básicamente espiritual. No existe algo llamado ‘problema psicológico’ no relacionado a causas espirituales o físicas. Dios suple recursos divinos suficientes para suplir todas esas necesidades por completo. David entendió eso. 

Sus escritos reflejaron la profundidad de la experiencia humana, emoción y conocimiento espiritual de alguien quien ha experimentado plenamente los extremos de la vida. Él conoció el regocijo de pasar de pastor a rey. Él escribió acerca de todo, desde el triunfo absoluto, hasta el desaliento amargo. Él luchó con un dolor tan profundo que apenas podía soportar vivir. 

Su propio hijo Absalón intentó matarlo y luego, fue asesinado. Él sufrió una culpabilidad horrible debido a la inmoralidad y asesinato. Sus hijos le trajeron constante aflicción. Él luchaba por entender las dos cosas ––la naturaleza de Dios y su propio corazón. De Dios, él dijo: “Grande es Jehová” (Salmos 145:3), mientras que de sí mismo él dijo: “Lávame más y más de mi maldad, y límpiame de mi pecado” (Salmos 51:2). Él le dijo a Dios lo qué sentía y clamó por alivio ––a pesar que admitió que Dios tenía todo el derecho de castigarlo. 

Al final de algunos de los salmos de David, él miró por una ventana de esperanza, y otras veces, no. Pero David siempre fue a Dios, porque entendió la soberanía de Dios y su propia depravación. Él sabía que sólo su todo-suficiente Salvador tenía las respuestas a sus necesidades y el poder de aplicar las respuestas. Y sabía que esas respuestas eran encontradas en la verdad acerca de Dios revelada en Su Palabra, que es en sí misma perfectamente suficiente. El Dios suficiente se reveló a Sí mismo en Su Palabra suficiente. 

El Salmo 19:7-14 es la declaración más monumental sobre la suficiencia de las Escrituras, que jamás se haya hecho en términos concisos. Escrito por David bajo la inspiración del Espíritu Santo, ofrece un testimonio inquebrantable de Dios mismo acerca de la suficiencia de Su Palabra para cada situación. Refuta las enseñanzas de aquellos que creen que debemos ampliar la Palabra de Dios con verdad obtenida de la psicología moderna. 

En los versículos 7 al 9, David hace seis afirmaciones acerca de las Escrituras. Cada una de las seis afirmaciones resalta una característica de la Palabra de Dios y describe su efecto en la vida de quien la recibe. 

La Escritura es perfecta, convierte el alma. 

En la primera afirmación (v.7), él dice: “La ley de Jehová es perfecta, que convierte el alma”. La Palabra hebrea traducida “ley” es torah, que enfatiza la naturaleza didáctica de la Escritura. Aquí, David la usa para referirse a la suma de lo que Dios ha revelado para nuestra instrucción, sea un credo (lo que creemos), carácter (lo que somos) o conducta (lo que hacemos). 

“Perfecta” es la traducción de una palabra hebrea que significa “entero”, “completo” o “suficiente”. Comunica la idea de algo que es integral, al punto de cubrir todos los aspectos de un problema. La Escritura es integral, corporizando todo lo que es necesario para la vida espiritual de uno. El contraste implícito de David es con el razonamiento imperfecto, insuficiente e incorrecto de los hombres. 

La ley perfecta de Dios, dijo David, afecta a las personas porque “convierte el alma” (v.7). La palabra hebrea traducida “convierte” puede significar “restaura”, “revive” o “refresca”; pero mi sinónimo favorito es “transforma”. La palabra “alma” (en hebreo, nephesh) se refiere a la persona de uno, uno mismo o el corazón. Es traducida de todas esas maneras (y muchas más) en el Antiguo Testamento. La esencia de ella es la persona interior, la persona completa, el verdadero usted. 

Parafraseando las palabras de David, las Escrituras son tan poderosas e integrales que pueden convertir o transformar toda la persona, convirtiendo a alguien exactamente en la persona que Dios quiere que sea. La Palabra de Dios es suficiente para restaurar mediante la salvación incluso a la vida más destrozada, un hecho del que David mismo dio abundante testimonio. 

La Escritura es digna de confianza, imparte sabiduría. 

David desarrolla aún más el alcance de la suficiencia de las Escrituras en el Salmo 19:7, “El testimonio de Jehová es fiel, que hace sabio al sencillo”. “Testimonio” habla de la Escritura como un testigo divino. La Escritura es el testimonio seguro de Dios sobre quién Él es y lo que Él requiere de nosotros. “Fiel” significa que su testimonio es inquebrantable, inamovible, inconfundible, confiable y digno de confianza. Proporciona una base sobre la cual construir nuestras vidas y destinos eternos. 

La Palabra fiel de Dios convierte al sencillo en sabio (v.7). La palabra hebrea traducida “sencillo” viene de una expresión que significa “una puerta abierta”. Evoca la imagen de una persona inocente que no sabe cuándo cerrar su mente a la enseñanza falsa o impura. Él es falto de discernimiento, ignorante, crédulo. Pero la Palabra de Dios lo hace sabio. “Sabio” no habla simplemente de alguien que conoce algunos hechos, sino de uno que es hábil en el arte de la vida piadosa. Él se somete a las Escrituras y sabe cómo aplicarla a sus circunstancias. De esta manera, la Palabra de Dios toma una mente simple y sin discernimiento, y la capacita en todas las cuestiones de la vida. Esto también es en contraste con la sabiduría de los hombres, que en realidad es necedad. 

La Escritura es recta, produce gozo 

David agrega una tercera declaración acerca de las Escrituras. Él escribe: “Los mandamientos de Jehová son rectos, que alegran el corazón”. Los mandamientos son principios divinos y guías para el carácter y la conducta. Ya que Dios nos creó y sabe cómo debemos vivir para ser productivos para Su gloria, Él ha puesto en las Escrituras todos los principios que necesitamos para vivir una vida piadosa. 

Los mandamientos de Dios, dijo David, son “rectos”. En lugar de indicar simplemente qué es correcto y qué es erróneo, la Palabra tiene el sentido de enseñarle a alguien el camino verdadero. Las verdades de la Escritura establecen el camino correcto a través del difícil laberinto de la vida. Esa es una confianza maravillosa. Muchas personas hoy están angustiadas o abatidas porque carecen de dirección y propósito. La mayoría busca respuestas en las fuentes equivocadas. La Palabra de Dios no solamente provee la luz para nuestro camino (Salmo 119:105), sino que establece la ruta enfrente nuestro. 

Debido a que nos conduce a través del camino recto en la vida, la Palabra de Dios trae gran gozo. Si usted está deprimido, ansioso, temeroso o dudoso, aprenda a obedecer el consejo de Dios y comparta el deleite resultante. No recurra a actividades autoindulgentes como la autoestima y la autorrealización. Enfóquese en la verdad divina. Ahí encontrará el gozo verdadero y duradero. Todas las otras fuentes son temporales y fugaces. 

¿No es la Palabra de Dios asombrosa en su suficiencia? Es perfecta, no le falta nada, es confiable y establece el rumbo para una vida productiva. Como tal, nos transforma a la imagen de Cristo, nos otorga sabiduría para cada momento y nos llena con gozo eterno.

¡Qué trágico que es cuando dejamos de lado la fuente de sabiduría divina, prefiriendo la sabiduría del hombre, que es impotente e insuficiente! 

La próxima vez, veremos las siguientes tres declaraciones de la suficiencia de las Escrituras, y saborearemos la dulzura de la Palabra de Dios. 

Únase a la conversación                                                                                                                           

¿Qué Escrituras han tenido un impacto profundo en su vida durante tiempos de lucha con el pecado o el sufrimiento? 

(Adaptado de Nuestra Suficiencia en Cristo) 

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. One of our previous blog series, Looking for Truth in All the Wrong Places, strongly emphasizes those doctrines. The following entry from that series originally appeared on June 21, 2017. -ed.

If God is still speaking to His people today—particularly through mental impressions and premonitions—how can believers exercise discernment when it comes to interpreting and applying these divine messages? Put simply, how is following the private, subjective “leading” of the Lord any more reliable than gazing into a crystal ball?

As we saw last time, biblical discernment runs contrary to the kind of subjective mysticism many promote in the church today. Without any objective criteria, there is no means for determining truth from error. Such blithe subjectivity leaves people at the mercy of whatever mystical “voice” they’re listening to.

Upper Abdominal Distress

It is therefore ironic that advocates of mysticism inevitably treat discernment itself as if it were some kind of subjective, mystical ability. One author speaks of discernment as “a spiritual function,” by which he evidently means that discernment does not involve the intellect. ^[1] William DeArteaga, Quenching the Spirit (Lake Mary, FL: Creation House, 1992), 55. For a further discussion of DeArteaga’s work, see chapter 6 of Reckless Faith. In one of my earlier books I quoted Bill Hamon, one of the leading proponents of modern revelatory prophecy. Hamon’s recipe for discernment is a classic case of mystical anti-intellectualism. He believes prophecies can be properly evaluated only by people willing to set reason and logic aside:

I have sometimes heard people say, “I did not witness with that prophecy.” But after questioning them, I discovered that what they really meant was that the prophecy did not fit their theology, personal desires or goals, or their emotions reacted negatively to it. They failed to understand that we do not bear witness with the soul—the mind, emotions or will.

Our reasoning is in the mind, not the spirit. So our traditions, beliefs and strong opinions are not true witnesses to prophetic truth. The spirit reaction originates deep within our being. Many Christians describe the physical location of its corresponding sensation as the upper abdominal area.

A negative witness—with a message of “no,” “be careful” or “something’s not right”—usually manifests itself with a nervous, jumpy or uneasy feeling. There is a deep, almost unintelligible sensation that something is wrong. This sense can only be trusted when we are more in tune with our spirit than with our thoughts. If our thinking is causing these sensations, then it could be only a soulish reaction.

On the other hand, when God’s Spirit is bearing witness with our spirit that a prophetic word is right, is of God and is according to His will and purpose, then our spirit reacts with the fruit of the Holy Spirit. We have a deep, unexplainable peace and joy, a warm, loving feeling—or even a sense of our spirit jumping up and down with excitement. This sensation lets us know that the Holy Spirit is bearing witness with our spirit that everything is in order, even though we may not understand everything that is being said, or our soul may not be able to adjust immediately to all the thoughts being presented. ^[2] Bill Hamon, “How to Receive a Personal Prophecy,” Charisma (April 1991), 68 (emphasis added).

Notice that Hamon’s emphasis is entirely on feeling, while he derides the intellect, theology, reason, understanding, and by implication, true biblical wisdom. A reaction in the upper abdominal region is supposed to be a more reliable gauge of truth than all those things.

But that is superstition, not discernment. How your upper abdomen feels about a thing is certainly no measure of truth or falsehood. Neither is “a nervous, jumpy, or uneasy feeling” apart from any rational cause. “A deep, unexplainable peace and joy, a warm, loving feeling—or even a sense of [your] spirit jumping up and down with excitement” is no proof that a supposed prophecy is reliable. Those who practice this sort of “discernment” epitomize reckless faith.

And those who seek truth by analyzing inner feelings are likely to wind up with nothing but confusion.

Dueling Prophets

My editor once attended a service at the Anaheim Vineyard where two “prophets” gave contradictory prophecies. It happened in a Sunday morning worship service. When the congregational singing was over, John Wimber stepped to the platform. Before he could say anything, a young man in the congregation stood and began loudly to prophesy judgment against the leaders of the church. “Jerusalem! Jerusalem!” he began, echoing Luke 13:34, “you persecute My prophets and stone My messengers. My displeasure burns hot toward the leadership of this church for the way you have scorned My prophets and ignored My prophecies. . . .” and so on. The man evidently was disgruntled at the treatment he had received at the hands of church leaders, and this “prophecy” seemed to be his way of striking back. He prophesied in that manner for five minutes or more, earnestly calling the elders of the church to repentance. His entire message was in first person as if from God.

Immediately when he finished, before John Wimber could respond, another “prophet” from the other side of the congregation popped up and began to prophesy exactly the opposite message. This prophet began with a loose paraphrase of Jeremiah 29:11: “Oh, pastors and leaders of this church, I know My thoughts toward you—thoughts of mercy, and not of judgment. I have loved you with an everlasting love and have laid up for you a crown in heaven, My beloved. You have done according to all My good pleasure, and henceforth all men will rise up and call you blessed. . . .” etcetera, etcetera.

When the second man finished, a woman stood and sang a song, another person spoke in tongues, and one or two others quoted Bible verses or shared something brief. Then the service continued with Wimber making announcements. No reference was made to the two contradictory prophecies. No attempt was made to explain the dilemma or interpret either prophecy. Members of the congregation were simply left to draw their own conclusions about which, if either, of the two prophecies was correct.

That illustrates the impossible situation that arises when people are encouraged to voice their own subjective impressions as if they were divine prophecy. And it also reveals the predicament we are placed in if we must allow a sensation in our upper abdominal area to determine the truth or falsehood of a prophetic message.

Notice that both prophets’ messages echoed biblical terminology. Both of them were delivered with great conviction. Both of them employed first-person pronouns, as if God Himself were doing the speaking. Yet they flatly contradicted each other. They might both be false prophecies, but there is no way they could both be true. How were the people in the congregation supposed to determine which, if either, was correct? If they followed the gut-feeling approach, all the disgruntled people in the church undoubtedly opted for the first prophecy, believing they now had a word from the Lord to confirm their displeasure with their leaders.

The obvious fact is that once we stray into the realm of subjectivity, we have no way to determine what is really true.

(Adapted from Reckless Faith.)

The Roman Catholic Church has committed the error of promoting a mere citizen of heaven to an improper place of authority and honor. Despite the overwhelming testimony of Scripture, the Catholic Church has elevated Mary—a self-described servant of the Lord (Luke 1:38)—to the same level as God, if not higher.

In the practice of the mass, the Roman Catholic Church has reinstituted an unbiblical system of repeated sacrifices, blaspheming Christ and perverting His work on the cross.

Christianity was never meant to be a haven for theological pacifists. Christ’s pure gospel is not only worthy of a vigorous defense, His chosen people have been enlisted for that very purpose (Jude 3). Doctrinal peacetime has been rare during 2,000 years of church history, as spiritual terrorists relentlessly attack and infiltrate the body of Christ. Precious truths have been tested and proven on the battlefield of worldviews. That is why the lives of men like Athanasius, Augustine, and Luther are largely defined by the doctrines they fought for.

If your Christian life is devoid of persecution, hardship, and fighting against false teaching, then you probably need to re-evaluate your faith.[Insert Tooltip: John 15:20; 2 Corinthians 13:5; 2 Timothy 2:3; Jude 3-4] The race we are called to in Hebrews 12:1–2 is not run on the path of least resistance. Yet that’s where many believers live today—blown around by the winds of church trends and without testing them against Scripture.

Prior to the advent of the Internet and social media, the life of a religious charlatan was easy. Ministries built on preposterous prophecies, outlandish miracle claims, and bizarre Scripture twisting could continue unabated without the fear of any serious scrutiny. And while heresy is still lucrative, the modern heretic has to be shrewd about disguising his schemes and covering his tracks. The bar has been raised—doctrinal deception requires going to a whole new level. And it has.

Deception from heretical infiltrators has been an ever-present threat throughout 2,000 years of church history. Fighting that deception is a war for the truth that all Christians have been called to wage (Jude 3). But in the heat of battle we must never neglect our primary calling as missionaries (Matthew 28:19–20).

God’s Word is clear—believers are not to be given over to anxiety. But it’s not simply a cold, abrupt command to stop worrying. Scripture is clear that we shouldn’t focus on the plans, needs, and uncertainties of tomorrow, but it’s also clear about where our focus should be instead.

President Donald Trump laid into some of his close Senate allies for siding with Democrats on an Iran war powers bill even as Congress failed to override his veto.

The country's Interior Ministry also announced a new round of hefty fines for quarantine violators.

The operation comes at a time of recent IS attacks in Syria and Iraq.