“I mean, we have a Torah club group in Oil City, Pennsylvania that is now multiplied to 10 different Torah clubs in that area. So you see like a spiritual renewal taking place, which is incredible. But yet the pastors that have 25 people in their church are coming against the work of the Torah club because it's something that is not in alignment with their historical doctrines of their particular denominations." -Boaz Michael on Messiah Podcast #29, 05/13/23, starting at the 32:30 mark
Until a fellow Christian church leaders pointed it out to me, I didn't know that the First Fruits of Zion had responded at all in 2023 to the Franklin Christian Ministerium's effort to warn the Christian community about their unorthodox teachings. There are several interesting things in this short statement:
(1) The assumption that numeric success equals spiritual renewal. Just because people are participating in something, it doesn't mean that God is or is not behind that effort. For example: the Prosperity Gospel, Word of Faith, and New Apostolic Reformation movements are all growing rapidly in the world today, does that mean they're advancing the Kingdom of God? Are they proof of spiritual renewal? Popularity is not a measure of true discipleship.
(2) The sneering shot at the health of churches in Franklin based upon a numeric valuation. Its an insult, but it isn't even a true one. Truth be told, the pastors who signed our original statement serve churches that range from 25 to 350. Some of them, like myself, serve as a solo pastor, others have multiple staff members. Some have one service, again like us, and others have multiple services every Sunday to accommodate the crowd size. But, and hear this clearly, church size is not proof of faithfulness (or unfaithfulness). Church size is not proof of righteousness (or unrighteousness). Church size is not proof of God's approval (or disapproval).
(3) The assumption that a pastor of a small church doesn't need to be listened to. This is a problem that affects the Church in America on many levels. Almost all of the popular books, podcasts, YouTube channels, etc. are focused on pastors of mega-churches, that is, on "successful" pastors. Those of us serving faithfully in the 98% of churches that are under 250 people rarely have our voices heard. The results of this popularity-based leadership have been disastrous as popular pastor after popular pastor who had been lifted up crash and burn one after another because too many of them lacked either the moral qualifications of pastoral leadership, or the wisdom to teach biblically. But they were popular, so people listened to them, they were popular, so people followed them. If a pastor who has 9 people in his/her congregation is speaking God's Word prophetically, working within the parameters of the historic/apostolic/biblical orthodoxy of the Church, that man or woman should be listened to far more than the pastor who has 15,000 people in his/her congregation and bestselling books galore, but is perverting the Gospel with materialism, nationalism, or any number of false teachings that will not stand the test of time.
(4) The assumption that our opposition is based upon denominational doctrines. This couldn't be further from the truth, the pastors who signed represent in no particular order: Anglican, Methodist, Episcopal, non-denominational, Lutheran, Church of God, Presbyterian, and of course Baptist churches. There is nothing "particular" about our united opposition because we represent a broad spectrum of historic Christianity. What does unite us in opposition is our common defense of the historic Gospel, the kind of teaching affirmed by the Nicene Creed or the Apostles' Creed. This is a basic, fundamental, and historic defense of the Gospel. It has nothing to do with the secondary issues that differentiate a Baptist from a Lutheran, and a Lutheran from a Methodist. In fact, the objections we have stated are equally at the heart of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches as well, they are teachings that precede by 1,000 years the Great Schism and the Reformation by 1,500 years. Why? Because we object to FFOZ based upon the New Testament where God has preserved the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles.
Read the original letter that started all of this for yourself if you haven't, look at what we are objecting to: The Franklin Christian Ministerium's warning about the First Fruits of Zion
{Note: Our objections would have been even stronger if we knew in Feb of 23 what we know about FFOZ in April of 24, what we knew then was enough to convince us all to reject it.}
The Trinity is not a "historic doctrine of our particular denominations."
Jesus' fulfillment of the Law as the ultimate and last sacrifice for humanity's sins is not a "historic doctrine of our particular denominations."
The Fruit of the Spirit as the test of true discipleship, not the keeping of the Law of Moses, is not a "historic doctrine of our particular denominations."
These teachings, and others like them, are what our ancestors in the faith believed, it was the Gospel they preached, and it was the truth they were willing to be martyred while believing rather than betray.
We didn't unite to oppose you, Boaz, over petty differences but over the core of the Gospel as it has been preached, received, and celebrated for 2,000 years.
We didn't unite to oppose your organization, First Fruits of Zion, to protect our own turf, but the sheep that God has given us to shepherd and the spotless Bride of Jesus Christ, his Church.
No comments:
Post a Comment