| Author |
Message |
Raven
Registered user
Username: Raven
Post Number: 500
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, July 03, 2006 - 6:31 pm: |     |
In reading Amazon Book information on various Max Lucado books, I came across this description in the ìFront Flapî section of the book ìAn Angelís Story.î
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0849917786/ref=sib_dp_pt/102-6374137-6208900#reader-link
Does anyone else have a problem with this? It made me wonder if Lucado has been exposed to the SDA Great Controversy teaching. How could anyone, not exposed to SDA teachings, ever come up with the idea that there was a confrontation between ìthe King of Creationî and Satan, or that the future of mankind was ever hanging in the balance? The Revelation 12:7 verse referenced speaks of Michael and his angels fighting the Dragon (Satan) ñ so how could any mainstream Christian think that means the confrontation was between Jesus (the King of Creation) and Satan?
Maybe Iím subjectively reading too much into it, but it sure seems to me like Lucado is placing Jesus and Satan on a similar level, and giving the idea that Jesus could have failed ñ both of which are outright and unbiblical heresies, but match up perfectly with EGWís writings.
Lucado places this imaginary confrontation as surrounding the imminent birth of Jesus instead of at some point before the earth's Creation - does that make a difference?
|
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1839
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Monday, July 03, 2006 - 8:19 pm: | |
Raven,
Just about every problem Adventism has today, there can be a parallel in popular evangelical Christianity. There are prophets in pentecostalism that are treated like O.T. prophets, like in the Kansas City Prophets movement.
The only unique doctrine in Adventism that has no parallel is the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment, and 1844, and the sanctuary. However, some of Arminianism does have similar themes that still take away assurance of salvation.
Max Lucado has written some excellent material. But he is not a theologian. He has been very prominent in endorsing the Trinity-denying ministry of T.D. Jakes.
Yes, that material on the front flap section is eerily familiar to the Great Controversy theme.
Stan |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1840
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 04, 2006 - 12:26 am: | |
I want to emphasize again that Max Lucado is a Christian, and has written a lot of helpful material for a lot of people.
However, with a lot of Christian leaders today, there seems to be a lack of discernment. Lucado was effusive with his praise for how Pope John Paul was such a great man of God.
The other thing that bothers me about Lucado is his knack for marketing that seems overly excessive. Here is an excerpt of a blog discussion on this:
" Once a writer becomes popular, Christian publishers put out a constant stream of product from that author. Examples: Beth Moore, Joyce Meyer, Brian Mclaren. What is the good and bad of that phenomenon? (We can talk about the irony of Beth Moore being the top Bible teacher in the SBC some other time.)
iMonk: you missed Max Lucado. These others are their own special kind of franchise, but Max is the current king of CBA retail when it comes to franchise. Heís got it all: greeting cards, journals, I think there were t-shirts for Come Thirsty Ö dude: the only one who tops Max is (of course) your doppelganger Rick Warren, and Pastor Warren is in a class by himself ñ thanks to Zondervan and Inspirio. And I canít say more about individuals here without getting myself in trouble.
But that said, letís start with what little good there is in media franchising. You know: one buys Coke because you know what flavor it will be every time, and if thereís anything true about CBA media franchises, each one has its own flavor and they maintain consistency. Max always tastes like Max; Mrs. Meyerís work always reads like she speaks. So in a sense, the good thing about these works is that one knows what one is getting.
A big question to follow up, however, is whether what one gets is what one needs. For example, I really donít have a problem with Pastor Lucadoís books in particular or in general. If you want to read something that makes you feel good about the Christian life in a ìPrairie Home Companionî kind of way (and thatís not a great one-to-one correspondence there, so donít read too much into it), read Max Lucado. The problem, of course, is when one only reads Max Lucado ñ in place of oneís Bible, for example. That seems like a really easy conclusion to come to, but you have no idea how many people will only read Lucado and Maxwell and Smalley and Dobson and Mrs. Meyer, but they wonít take a minute to read anything of substance.
And as the readers read that, letís read it carefully. One of my favorite books to sell ñ and by ìfavoriteî, I mean, ìwe always have it in stock, and I try to sell it as inexpensively as possible, so we donít make a lot of money selling it most of the timeî ñ is Max Lucadoís childrenís book God thinks youíre Wonderful. I think everybody should own one and read it to kids as often as the kids will listen to it. Itís a great book that will make you smile, and help you enjoy some of Lucadoís interesting takes on Godís prophetic claims of love on His people, and I just love it.
But itís not a substantial book. Iíll go out on a limb here and say that nobody ever reformed their lives in an act of sanctification after reading and considering the finer points of this book. Itís fine for the kind of book it is, but itís not great exhortational licks which will take you years to understand and then ìdoî.
On the other hand, John Piperís Donít Waste Your Life is a substantial book. Itís a book that, if such a thing is possible, grabs you by your baptism and says, ìDude: thinking about this stuff is not enough. Christ didnít die for your mocha double-latte.î It demands more from you than a smile or a warm fuzzy feeling. And itís not 500 pages with tiny little type and a bunch of endnotes and a bibliography you have to wade through in order to ìget itî.
The trouble with these franchises, as it turns out, is not so much content (although some on your list are certainly problematic) as it is the environment that the franchise produces. People become ìMaxî fans, and they only read this lite stuff which is ìlikeî Max ñ when what they need is to open up a copy of Ron Habermasí The Complete Disciple, (Ron teaches at the local university and is a great guy) or Gary Thomasí Sacred Marriage.
And the other problem, of course, is what constitutes ìfranchisingî. For example, Iím an idiot for Piper ñ canít get enough. I love John MacArthurís stuff ñ heís got this great book from Nelson called Welcome to the Family for new believers which I think is fabulous, and you donít have to be a nutty Baptist to think so, and of course heís always on about the Cross and the Gospel and this Jesus to whom we owe so much. So why is a 4-ft shelf of Dr. Mac ìnot a franchiseî and a 4-ft shelf of Rick Warren ìa franchise which is problematicî?
I think the answer is ìJohn MacArthur doesnít turn his books into greeting cards or slap his face on a calendarî. Without getting all Walter Martin on anybody, itís a little cultic to have all this paraphernalia floating around with peopleís pictures on it..."
I guess one way to summarize what is out there in the Christian world is "different strokes for ifferent folks".
Stan
|
Raven
Registered user
Username: Raven
Post Number: 501
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 04, 2006 - 6:34 am: | |
Thanks, Stan, for your comments. I agree that Max Lucado has a lot of great books out there; we have several and love much of what we've read. But you're right that he's not a theologian!
It did shock me to see something so similar to EGW in Lucado's book! The reason I was even looking at the book was because someone at our church suggested it for Sunday School class. I don't know that it will be under consideration and I certainly hope it won't.
But I guess my issue is over a couple things. Why would anyone want to do a class using a book to study someone's imaginative speculation that doesn't even agree with the Bible? And you're right about the lack of discernment issue. The more classes that use this type of material, and the less that teach straight Bible truth, and you have people who assume Lucado and others like him are teaching things that are good for Christians and at least don't contradict the Bible. It makes it harder to even know what's in the Bible and very hard to discern truth from error.
It's not that I'm against ever using fantasy for teaching. I think it would be neat to have a class on the Chronicles of Narnia. We have a couple books that take the many ways C.S. Lewis weaved in Bible truths on the Christian's life into the story, and explains it while giving the Bible verses that support it. Now that would be interesting teaching that is faithful to Bible truth. |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 571
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 04, 2006 - 9:09 am: | |
Stan, I think there was a jewel hidden with the quote that you posted. "The problem, of course, is when one only reads Max Lucado ñ in place of oneís Bible." Of course we could substitute any number of authors' names in that place. Even when an author has plenty of good stuff in their writings, this trend is problematic. I have a number of Lucado books that I have enjoyed reading quite a bit. And he has made some very good points at times. But a regular diet of Lucado could never replace Scripture. And we need to approach these authors with care, rather than treating them as authorities. If I had my way, every church study class (and small group) would be directly from Scripture. But others conclude that there isn't time for sufficient prep work for everyone to do that. And a prepackaged study may be more reliable than a teacher (and participants) who doesn't have (or take) the time to prepare. |
Loneviking
Registered user
Username: Loneviking
Post Number: 461
Registered: 7-2000
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 04, 2006 - 5:12 pm: | |
I wouldn't be so quick to say that Max is not a theologian. He is an Church of Christ minister and many of them do have theogical training.
Further, the CofC does not have a well formulated 'end time' viewpoint. I've found that CofC pastors are all over the map from those who believe in soul sleep and an SDA like second coming to pre-eterists to pre-trib. rapturists. Some of these views, as filtered by CofC doctrine, lead to a 'great conflict' scenario much like Adventism.
Bill |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1842
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 04, 2006 - 7:33 pm: | |
Thanks Bill for that insight. We have had a discussion in the past on this board about the problems of the Campbellite movement. I remember you saying that you were once a part of that movement. From what you are saying above, we should not be surprised that Max Lucado thinks very similarly to SDA.
Because that statement that Raven posted from Max Lucado above sounds very much like the Great Controversy theme.
Stan |
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz
Post Number: 1853
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 07, 2006 - 11:36 am: | |
Speaking of things that sound familiar to us as former SDAs, here is an interesting article about ongoing false prophecies and false prophets in the church today. There are even several pentecostal churches claiming the office of OT prophets like Ellen White claimed.
But what is disturbing in the article is how false prophecies are defended by the likes of Jack Deere. His arguments for defending false prophets and false prophecies are so similar to the way EGW apologists have defended her. See what you think. the article is linked here:
http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain23.htm
Stan |
Lynne
Registered user
Username: Lynne
Post Number: 461
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, July 07, 2006 - 7:00 pm: | |
I'm very careful about what I read now. I do like Charles Stanley and always have. But I really haven't found much depth in what his son Andy writes and teaches. I had a couple of Max Lucado devotion books and they were definately too light for me. I find many authors just put a lot of pages in their books to make them books, demanding too much of my time when they are really only making one or two small points.
Just as I see the Christians I know as individuals, like myself, subject to error, I must keep this in mind when reading Christian books. No matter how educated the author. They are oftentimes subject to error.
Many people have a tendency to believe something because of scientific studies and/or statistics or because so and so says or merely because it is in print by Thomas Nelson Publishers or Zonderman. Before, I believed a book if it was in print by Review and Herald.
There are many similarities out there to Adventism in other churches making it very difficult for me to feel as disconnected from Adventism as I want to feel. If it is so much like Adventism, am I still believing.....
It just seems like there is deception everywhere at times. This church teaches tithing, and other churches have leadership issues. And then there is doctrine. And this verse of the bible is taught this way, and that church teaches that verse that way. And all the pastors are certain that the way they teach it is true! This church is conservative, this one is not. This doctrine is true, this doctrine is not. This denomination has this truth, but not that. Too much OT, too much greed. Too many feelings, not enough feelings, too little bible, something is twisted here...
I just want all truth, no lies, no sin and a completely safe church. Is that too much to ask? I guess it is.
But regardless of all this frustration, I'm really not confused. I suppose it is just the natural after effects of having been an Adventist for so long.
But substantially, I now really know that I have Jesus and am really saved. I feel safe inside, even if I can't yet find anywhere in the world where I feel safe.
My 3 year old drew a picture of God for me the other day. The pupils in His eyes were hearts. I thought that was really neat.
|
Randyg
Registered user
Username: Randyg
Post Number: 222
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 07, 2006 - 11:07 pm: | |
Stan,
Thank-you for that article on letusreason.org about the required accuracy of a prophet.
This article is an abolute MUST READ!
It sure does sound familiar doesn't it. I will print it off for the File Cabinet. This is exactly what the EGW apologists sound like.
She can be wrong, theologically.
She can be wrong, historically.
She can be wrong, in her medical advice.
All because she never claimed to be a Theologian, Historian, or Physician.
And yet she severely chastised and denounced any in these groups that challenged or disagreed with her.
Making mistakes, and putting forth her own theories doesn't make her a false prophet to some Adventists.
Whether she was incorrect, or not, doesn't negate her inspiration to some Adventists.
The "all or nothing" claim made by former SDAs and the Historic wing of SDAs apparently is also the the position of the Bible, and oddly enough Ellen White herself.
Strange bedfellows, eh!, and ironic too.
Trying to make sense of the dissonance,
Randy |
|
