Search in ARCHIVES

Published Articles

Comments on Robb Bell’s ‘Love Wins’

1 Comment / Articles, Home Bulletin, Published Articles /

Robb Bell’s latest book has raised a number of issues for me. The first is his way of communicating his views. Instead of stating what he believes, he asks a plethora of questions, many of which are essentially, ‘would a loving God condemn people to eternity in Hell?’ It is good to ask this sort of question, and asking questions is a valid communication and teaching method. However, at some point or other a responsible and influential author and teacher needs to state what he actually believes to be true, and why he believes it to be true. Unfortunately Robb Bell doesn’t really do this and as a result his readers are left to draw their own conclusions as to what he is saying.

.
This leads me to a second issue, which is the way many people have responded to ‘Love Wins’. I am surprised that so many critics have had the confidence, or temerity, to state boldly that Robb Bell is a universalist, a heretic, and even a hell-inspired false prophet without even entering into dialog with him and attempting to clarify his contentions. I even read early critiques that started with the words, ‘although I have not read the book I …’ This sort of attitude to a Christian leader is more than regrettable, it is just wrong.

.
A third issue for me is the apparent way in which Robb Bell seems to attempt to establish truth. I say ‘apparent’ and ‘seems’ because I, like others, can only deduce his theology from his flood of leading questions. The approach appears to be, God is loving and just; an eternal Hell is neither loving or fair; therefore Hell cannot be of God. The problem is that the second clause of this construct is simply Robb Bell’s personal opinion. Truth, as I see it, has its basis in the Word of God. The written Word of God is the Bible and the living Word of God, the Bible’s author and object, is the Lord Jesus Christ. So, truth is established by interpreting the Bible from a Jesus-centred perspective. And here is the rub; Jesus had quite a bit to say concerning Hell. Any valid contention that Hell does not exist must be responsibly Word-based or it fails to classify as an Evangelical Christian position.

.
Perhaps a better question to ask would be, ‘Why would a loving God consign people to eternal Hell?’ We would then attempt to answer this from a Christ-centred interpretation of what the scriptures have to say concerning sin, salvation, heaven, and hell.

 

Comments on Robb Bell’s ‘Love Wins’ Read More »

Biblical Spectacles

Leave a Comment / Articles, Home Bulletin, Published Articles /

I have been asked to address the question, ‘why do different people understand the Bible so differently?’ Well, it’s really quite simple; it is because they wear different spectacles to read the Bible.

One set of ‘spectacles’ we often wear is Tradition. Those who have been in a particular church tradition for a long time tend to ‘read’ the scriptures through the lens of that tradition. The approach to preaching, the liturgies, teachings, and practices of the tradition create a sort of spiritual optical prescription. Methodists will ‘see’ differently to how, say, Baptists will. Our traditions constitute spectacles that many have fashioned over long periods of time. They are thick-lens spectacles that are really quite heavy.

Another set of spectacles is Dogma. Church dogma forms a strongly tinted lens through which we view the Bible. Five Point Calvinism, for instance, is a pervasive dogma that strongly influences how people interpret the biblical text. Dispensationalism is another dogma that tints the spectacle lenses. If Calvinism forms a blue lens, then those wearing such spectacles will not be able to read anything printed with light blue ink. If Wesleyan dogma forms a red lens then light red print will be invisible… and so on.

Perhaps the most common pair of spectacles found today is what I call Contextualisation.
Instead of viewing the current social context through biblical lenses, many people tend to view the Bible through contextual lenses. The issues, conditions, and values of current society form the lens through which they see. In my opinion, this is the main cause of the current foment in some denominations over the issue of homosexuality. The same can be said of the current divisive debate concerning female bishops. The conflict arises when one group, usually within a church tradition, view modern life through biblical spectacles while another group view the Bible through the lens of modern life. What I mean by this is that one will seek to apply biblical principles and values to life, while another will try to find scripture to justify modern values and practices.

Our presuppositions are another reason we see things differently. We all wear spiritual spectacles of some sort; no one can claim to read the Bible from a totally unbiased and objective perspective. We come to the Bible with an existing set of assumptions that we have built over our lifetimes. Assumptions concerning the authority of the scriptures, what constitutes truth, and so on. If my starting assumptions are different from yours then we will undoubtedly differ in the way we understand scripture.

The last set of spectacles I will touch on is Exegesis. Some people wear very tiny spectacles that only allow them to see one verse at a time. As a result they build doctrine on words and phrases taken out of the context of the passage, the book, and indeed the whole of the Bible. Others wear very narrow yet wide spectacles that allow them to see only the horizontal humanist dimension of the text.

So then, its all a matter of what spectacles we wear. I believe we could resolve a lot of the difference between Christians if we all chose to wear cross-shaped spectacles. If we focused our interpretation of scripture on what Jesus said and did, then we would soon find ourselves largely in agreement with one another (or am I looking through rose-tinted glasses?). Christ-centred spectacles are of course biblical spectacles. If we insist on viewing the Bible through the lens of current culture, then we will continue to divide over issues such as the role of women in the church, same sex marriage and so on.

Jesus said, “… everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.” John 15:15
A whole section of my book ‘Truth is the Word’ is devoted to the issue of Christ-centred interpretation. If you would like a copy, you can purchase it HERE or read more about it at www.truthistheword.com.

 

Biblical Spectacles Read More »

Between crucifixion Friday and resurrection Sunday

Leave a Comment / Articles, Home Bulletin, Published Articles /

I am writing this on the day after Resurrection Sunday. I don’t like to call it Easter Sunday – why should we give the pagan goddess Ishtar any credit. Friday embodies the glorious truth that Jesus settled the penalty clause of the violated covenant between God and humanity. I guess that is why some call it ‘good’ Friday. Sunday represents the equally awesome truth that through Jesus we can be born-again of the Spirit. On the cross of Calvary Jesus Christ brought to an end the line of Adam’s sin. As He walked out of the tomb, He started a new spiritual lineage for all who will believe. ‘So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.’ (1 Corinthians 15:45)

The message of Friday is clear. The truth that Sunday conveys is equally obvious. What, though, is the significance of Saturday?

According to the Apostles Creed, as we now have it, after dying on the cross Jesus ‘descended into hell’. However, the earliest versions of that creed do not contain this clause. When Rufinus introduced it in 390AD it seems that he understood the word ‘hell’ simply to mean ‘grave’. Notwithstanding this, some theologians have developed a complex doctrine of Christ’s decent into the devil’s abode. The primary texts they use are Acts 2:27, Romans 10:6-7, Ephesians 4:8-9, 1 Peter 3:18-20, and 1 Peter 4:6. Wayne Grudem has an excellent section on this topic in his ‘Systematic Theology’ (pages 586 – 594). His concluding sentence reads, ‘concerning the doctrinal question of whether Christ did descend into hell after he died, the answer from several passages of Scripture seems clearly to be no.’

From the descent into Hell doctrine has come the teaching that Jesus had to die both physically on the cross and spiritually in Hell. Saturday, for those who believe this, stands for Jesus’ torment in Hades and his eventual victory, as He was ‘born again’ from the devil’s dungeon. There are plenty of problems with this view. Was Jesus then less than ’God’ that He could be tortured by the devil? Was His death on the cross less than adequate for our salvation? (See 1 Corinthians 1:17)

Colossians 2:13(b)-15 contains a more satisfactory explanation of what Passover Saturday represents. ‘He forgave us all our sins, having cancelled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.’ The language used in this passage evokes the scene of a military court-martial. They bring the offending officer to stand before his troops. The supreme commander then strips him of the symbols of his authority and expels him. Jesus settled the death penalty of the ancient covenant and proceeded to the heavenly throne room of God the Father. There Satan stood in shame before all the angels of heaven. Jesus stripped him of his authority and expelled him from heaven. The accuser of the brethren no longer has access to the presence of God. Hallelujah! This is what the Saturday between Crucifixion Friday and Resurrection Sunday stands for.
So, instead of descending into Hell, Jesus ascended into Heaven! Instead of the devil tormenting Him, He expelled the devil! How could some get it so wrong? Part of the answer lies in how we interpret the Bible. I deal with this in the second half of my latest book ‘Truth is the Word – restoring a lost focus’.

Between crucifixion Friday and resurrection Sunday Read More »

Being filled with the Spirit

Leave a Comment / Articles, Home Bulletin, Published Articles /

In the seventies, my wife Pat and I became disciples of the Lord Jesus. The first church we attended was a traditional Pentecostal assembly, and the leaders wasted no time in instructing us in the need for baptisms. First they baptised us by immersion in water and then, some months later, they laid hands on us to be baptised in the Holy Spirit. The Charismatic renewal was in full flood then and we were soon exposed to people who identified themselves as ‘born again, baptised in the spirit, tongues talking believers’. It came as a sad shock to realise that some folk regarded themselves as higher class citizens in the Kingdom of God because of their ‘second experience’. Our naivety was also assaulted by traditional folk who thought that being ‘born again’ was some sort of cult membership initiation. On the one hand we heard Charismatics referred to as ‘holy rollers’, and on the other to traditional worshippers as ‘the frozen chosen’. My, my, my!

If we unpack the core differences concerning the ministry of the Holy Spirit from their traditional and language wrappings, it comes down to the following: Pentecostals and most Charismatics believe that there are two distinct experiences of the Holy Spirit. The first is when He gives us new spiritual life and we are born anew from above. The second is when He empowers us for ministry. The first experience is being ‘born again’ and the second is being ‘baptised in the Holy Spirit’. The teaching of the traditional non-Pentecostals is that there is only one experience, and that we receive the full blessing of the Holy Spirit when we are converted from the dominion of darkness to the Kingdom of God – “For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body — whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free — and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.” (1 Corinthians 12:13 NIV) Lying between these two positions is the path I choose to walk. I accept that when we become disciples of the Lord Jesus, the Holy Spirit gives us a new spiritual life, and we are thus born again in a very real sense. I also believe that the Holy Spirit empowers us for life and ministry many times afterwards. I understand that sometimes there is a significant time delay between conversion and effective empowerment and I can see that in these cases an encounter with the Holy Spirit can be a dramatic and radical ‘second’ experience at a level of intensity beyond subsequent anointings.

For me, the issue is not so much the label we attach to the experiences, nor the timing of these encounters with the Holy Spirit, but the fact that we need to fully embrace His presence and ministry in our lives. A key text is Ephesians 5:18 where, in the context of God’s will for us, it has; “Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit” (NIV). The Greek word translated as ‘be filled’ is a present tense imperative verb. The present tense indicates that it is something that should occur repeatedly. The imperative indicates a command, or at least an entreaty. This statement embraces both initial and subsequent experiences of the empowering ministry of the Holy Spirit. More than this, it points us firmly to the need for frequent spiritual infillings. Perhaps, to avoid any confusion it would be better to refer to being filled with the Holy Spirit rather than baptised in the Holy Spirit. In this way we will not restrict ourselves to just one formative, post regeneration, spiritual experience.

The Greek word pleeroústhe, ‘be filled’, contains a further aid to our understanding; it is in the passive voice. This means that we, the objects, receive the action, we do not generate it. We receive an infilling of power from on high and it is the Holy Spirit who does the filling. He gives and we receive. We do not ‘plug into’ some heavenly power; rather we receive from the one who is the very source of spiritual power – the Holy Spirit Himself.

When I discuss the spiritual manifestations of 1 Corinthians 12 with some folk, a fairly common response goes something like this; “Why do I need to speak in tongues and what difference would it make if I did?” I point out that tongues are a form of prayer (1 Corinthians 14:2) and provide the believer with a Holy Spirit given means of expressing adoration and dependence that goes far beyond the limitations of our mother language. A similar question can be posed; “I am saved by the grace of God, so why do I need to be ‘spirit filled’?” Well, if you have been regenerated, born again, then in a way you are already ‘spirit filled’. But are you effective in life and ministry? When you put a new rechargeable battery into a torch you will have the ability to shed light. But batteries discharge by being used, and rechargeable batteries loose their current even when the torch is not in use. We are much like that – if we are not recharged then we loose what charge we have. Being filled with the Spirit is just not an optional, charismatic, religious experience – it is a spiritual life, and light, necessity!

When Zerubbabel returned to Jerusalem from Babylonia to rebuild the Temple, the prophet Zechariah spoke this word of God to him; “‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the Lord Almighty.” (Zechariah 4:6 NIV) He could attempt to rebuild the temple by organizational group might or by personal power, and in this way erect a building. However, only the anointing power of the Holy Spirit could enable him to restore the Temple, the place where God dwelt by His Spirit. We too can do many good works in our own strength. By organizing and mobilising the church we can do even greater works. But if we are not anointed by the Holy Spirit for these tasks then that is all they will ever be, good works. NGOs’ and social societies can do good works, but only a spirit filled disciple of the Lord Jesus can make an eternal difference in the lives and destinies of people and nations. Is this a bold claim? Perhaps it is, but this is how I understand the prophetic word to Zerubbabel and the injunction of the Lord Jesus to His disciples not to leave Jerusalem but to “wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about.” (Acts 1:4 NIV)

So then, we NEED to be spirit filled, not just once, but often. But what do we need to do? ….We need to ask. Jesus said this; “Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” (Luke 11:11-13 NIV) It is so simple that it is almost impossible for us to comprehend. “Just ask?” “Yes, just ask!” However, asking is not a perfunctory or casual enquiry. To ask for empowerment is to acknowledge total dependence on God. To ask Him to fill us with His Spirit is to admit that we cannot be effective without His empowerment. Perhaps this is why we so often fail to ask… to really ask. James pinpoints the problem; “You do not have, because you do not ask God. When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives…” (James 4:2-3 NIV) This is hard to swallow, but it is often the true diagnosis of our condition.

We need to be constantly filled with the Spirit and we need to express our motive and humility by asking. If we do, then will we instantly be ‘mighty men of God’ or ‘wondrous women of faith’? Probably not, but I believe we will become more effective in ministry than we were before, and we will be more sanctified in lifestyle than we were. The Holy Spirit both empowers and frees from sin. Anything, no matter how seemingly insignificant, done in the anointing power of the Holy Spirit can make a life-changing difference and even a small adjustment towards holy living, affected by the work of the Holy Spirit, can change us eternally.

We can argue about being baptised in, by, or with the Holy Spirit. We can set ourselves above others because of our claim to a higher experience of the Spirit. We can discuss when the various acts of grace occur in our lives. But all of this will not change anything! What changes us, our church, and our world, is the power of God. Being spirit-filled is not the subject of a doctrine or a tradition, it is a spiritual life necessity.

 

Being filled with the Spirit Read More »

As with the world, so with the church

Leave a Comment / Articles, Published Articles /

From time to time members of my local church leave to join another Christian fellowship in the area. It doesn’t happen often, but when it does it is always a painful shock. The reasons given usually have something to do with one of the following: the children need a bigger church group; the music is too loud/quiet/fast, or slow; the preaching is too expository and not topical enough; or someone offended them.

These losses to the local church family sadden and confuse me. I feel like a father who comes home from work, notices that his daughter is missing and asks his wife, “Where is Sandy?” “Oh” his wife responds, “She says the food is better at her friend’s house down the road, so she’s gone to live there!”

The church is the household of God. It is a unique family, based on the relationships within the Holy Trinity, and with Christ Jesus as its head. Ephesians 3:14-15 and 21 capture this essential nature of the church; ‘For this reason I kneel before the Father, from whom his whole family in heaven and on earth derives its name…’ And, verse 21, ‘to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.’

Now I realise that the church is more than just the local church. Most of the church is already in heaven, and the church still on earth is spread across the face of the planet. Never the less, only the local church gives expression to the church universal in a particular location and time. The church universal is more a concept for most of us, but the local church is a concrete reality.

Paul addressed his letters to actual local churches in Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, and so on. When he was on route to Jerusalem for the last time, he called for the Elders of the church in Ephesus, and this is what he said to them; “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.” (Acts 20:28) Of course, Christ died for all of humanity, so that the church universal might come into being, but here Paul applies the blood of Christ to the local church. The local church is of huge value to God, but how important is it to us?

The local church is an extended family, and a family is defined as ‘a group of people, related to each other in some way, who have a long-term commitment to support, nurture, protect, and develop one another.’ A natural family has a parent as its head, but the local church has Christ Jesus as its head. The local church is a group of people related to each other through the new birth. We have the same spiritual DNA. We also have a long-term commitment to support, nurture, protect, and develop one another. A natural family produces sons and daughters whilst a local church family produces children of God.

The local church is important. Christ died for it. It is the tangible expression of the universal household of God. It is a family. So why then do members leave it to go down the road and live with another family? I believe there are two major responses to this question.

Firstly, the family model in modern society is, in many cases, corrupted and dysfunctional, and people project this broken model onto the church. Fathers leave their families and move in with the woman down the road. Mothers neglect their children for the sake of a higher standard of living. Children demand and get self-centred instant gratification. As with the family, so with the church.

The second reason is that many churches have abandoned the extended family model of church life. They position themselves instead as spiritual schools, cinemas, or supermarkets. They see themselves as suppliers of spiritual and psychological goods, and their members as consumers. I call this Ecclesiastical Consumerism.
Consumerism is all about satisfying wants; it’s about getting. “I want my church to teach me how to get on in life and be prosperous. I want the music to make me feel good. I want the church to entertain me and my children.” Now, if I regard my wants as a high priority, and I regard the local church as a supplier, then I will surely leave the church if I don’t get what I want, and I will join another church I think will supply what I want. Sadly, many churches support this attitude by having professional music groups, fog machines, constant dynamic life-skills preaching, self-improvement programmes, and so on.

How then should we respond to these two dysfunctional models? Concerning the breakdown in the family, I believe that churches need to work hard in strengthening and equipping families in every way possible. Regarding Ecclesiastical Consumerism, we need to present the local church, not as a supplier but as a participating family of God. Most of all though, each of us needs to recognise our role in the local church family – we need to live out the definition of the church as ‘a group of people related to each other through the new birth, who have a long-term commitment to support, nurture, protect, and develop one another.’ We, together as the local church, are the environment where people can come to know Jesus, become like Him, and help others to do likewise. This is our unique role and responsibility.

As with the world, so with the church? Perhaps, but this is not how it is supposed to be. It should be ‘as with the church, so with the world!’

 

As with the world, so with the church Read More »

About Me

My name is Christopher Peppler and I was born in Cape Town, South Africa in 1947. While working in the financial sector I achieved a number of business qualifications from the Institute of Bankers, Damelin Management School, and The University of the Witwatersrand Business School. After over 20 years as a banker, I followed God’s calling and joined the ministry full time. After becoming a pastor of what is now a quite considerable church, I  earned an undergraduate theological qualification from the Baptist Theological College of Southern Africa and post-graduate degrees from two United States institutions. I was also awarded the Doctor of Theology in Systematic Theology from the University of Zululand in 2000.

Four years before that I established the South African Theological Seminary (SATS), which today is represented in over 70 countries and has more than 2 500 active students enrolled with it. I presently play an role supervising Masters and Doctoral students.

I am a passionate champion of the Christocentric or Christ-centred Principle, an approach to biblical interpretation and theological construction that emphasises the centrality of Jesus

I have been happily married to Patricia since the age of 20, have two children, Lance and Karen, a daughter-in-law Tracey, and granddaughters Jessica and Kirsten. I have now retired from both church and seminary leadership and devote my time to writing, discipling, and the classical guitar.

If you would like to read my testimony to Jesus then click HERE.