I have recently had to move my blog to a new server as my ISP was shutting the old one down. I took the opportunity to switch to WordPress and updated the site appearance a little. I have tried to migrate all the posts and comments as best as I can, but there may well be a few broken links around here while I finish tidying up.

If you subscribe to this blog via my feedburner URL (http://feeds.feedburner.com/wordandspirit), then you should experience no interruption in service. Please let me know if you experience any problems.

While I’m at it, I might as well reveal a few interesting facts about my most popular posts over the last year:

1. The Wise Man Built His House Upon the Sand is by far my most popular post ever, and is one of the oldest posts on my blog. Apparently google seems to think I am the authority on it. I preached a sermon on it once.

2. Commentaries and NIV For e-Sword comes second although it is old news now.

3. Biblical Prayer Topics is also very popular – “Prayer Topics” is my top google keyword

4. Commentary Series Reviews – Bible Speaks Today – I have nearly read the entire BST series (perhaps I’ll finish in 2009) and most of them are reviewed somewhere on this blog.

5. Ern Baxter – Life on Wings – this was actually a post to host a friend’s document, but has consistently been one of the most popular items on my blog, and certainly the one I get most email about. Also, Ern Baxter – The Priestly Clothing is equally popular.

6. ESV – A breathtaking translation – is a slightly controversial post where I criticise the ESV (only a little though, it is my translation of choice at the moment and I’m hoping to get an ESV Study Bible for Christmas).

7. Book Review – Prophetic Evangelism – apparently a lot of people get to my blog by searching for Mark Stibbe.

8. The Word of Knowledge – where I ponder what exactly this gift is. Lots of comments on this one!

7. Seven Point Calvinism – not many people blogging about this, so I come near the top of the google hit list.

8. My Reformed Charismatic Journey Part 2 – part of a series where I talked about how I came to be a “reformed charismatic”

9. I do not know Rob Bell – hint for bloggers: write something about Rob Bell. It will be popular.

10. Parachurch Organizations – another slightly controversial one where I dare to question the infallible newfrontiers magazine!

11. My Commentary Recommendations – did I mention that I love reading commentaries?

12. Book Review – Total Church – absolutely brilliant book. Actually got a comment from one of the authors which is a first for my blog!

As for google search words, the top ones are “prayer topics” and an innumerable number of variations on the theme of “the wise man built his house upon the rock” (including one poor soul who got here wanting to know “how to build houses with rocks”). People in the top 20 are Mark Stibbe, Rob Rufus, Ern Baxter, and Simon Ponsonby. There are also a remarkable number of people who arrive thanks to googling a variation on the phrase “is newfrontiers a cult?”. The answer is no.

One person searched for “I was male now I am female”. No, I’m definitely still male. The person who searched for “Simon Ponsonby blog” still has to wait. He’s not even on facebook yet. But my favourite search of all goes to “I love Mark Heath”. Hopefully it was my wife… (and honestly it wasn’t me)

Earlier this year I read a book on epistemology. Not being much of a philosopher myself, some of it undoubtedly went over my head, but it did get me thinking about how I would define my own theory of epistemology. In other words, how do I know what is true? I have no doubt that my thoughts on this matter aren’t original (there is probably even a fancy name for my views). And I am sure that some of my more philosophically savvy readers can blow plenty of holes in this, but I present it here anyway.

My basic idea is that all knowledge is faith based. Everything I believe is based on some kind of trust relationship. The stronger my faith or trust is in something, the more firmly I believe what it tells me.

So for example. I believe I ate cornflakes for breakfast this morning. It is a strongly held belief because I trust my short-term memory. However, if you ask me what my phone number was while I was at university, I think I can remember it, but my certainty is not so high. The strength of my belief is based on the strength of my faith in something (my memory in this case).

Another example. I believe that Arsenal drew 0-0 with Panathinaikos on Wednesday in the Champions League. This belief is solely based on the BBC’s report of the match. I have no other evidence whatsoever for this belief. It is a strongly held belief because I trust the BBC to be truthful reporters (on matters of football results at least).

All of my scientific beliefs are also trust-based. If I believe that the speed of light is a constant, it is not because I have in any way “proved” it, but simply because I trust the superior intellects of the scientific community. If I say that the speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s, it is because I trust Wikipedia. If I perform an experiment to measure it, I must trust the accuracy of the measuring equipment, as well as my own competence to perform the experiment correctly.

So I do not consider my religious beliefs to be any special category of “faith-based” beliefs. They are again the result of a trust relationship. As a Christian, I trust Jesus – meaning that I believe him to be a speaker of truth. This necessitates that I have at least some level of trust in the Bible, first because it is the source of what Jesus said, and second because Jesus himself placed great trust in the Scriptures.

Which brings me onto my second observation, which is about how we acquire, maintain and change our beliefs. As small children we are inherently trusting of what our parents tell us. Later we go to school and believe our teachers. But sooner or later we learn that there are such things as lies, and such things as contradictory viewpoints. When we hear a competing truth claim, or see something that conflicts with our understanding of the truth, then we are forced to re-evaluate our trust relationships.

As an example, let’s return to the BBC. I consider the BBC to be a trustworthy news agency. I am strongly inclined to believe their reports are truthful and impartial. But suppose I am reading a news article about evangelicalism which I judge to be factually incorrect and strongly biased. Now my trust relationship needs to be re-evaluated. I become more cynical and wary concerning what they report.

And the same follows with my religious beliefs. Undoubtedly my early belief in God was based on the faith of my parents, and those at the church I attended. I trusted the Bible simply because I was told it was true. But as I grew older, I came across those who didn’t believe the Bible, and their arguments against it. Each time it caused a re-evaluation of my trust relationships.

Whenever there is a re-evaluation of a trust relationship because it has been challenged by a competing claim, three outcomes can occur. First of all, we might consider our original belief to have survived the challenge. In this case, our trust is likely to become even stronger. Second, we might consider the challenge to have some merit, but not enough to cause us to reject our original belief. We then enter a period of doubt or agnosticism, awaiting more evidence that will sway us one way or the other. The third outcome is that we consider the challenge to be successful. Our original trust-relationship is broken (often causing a cascading effect of tearing down other related beliefs) and a new one is formed.

So in conclusion, I cannot accept the idea often heard from people like Richard Dawkins that true beliefs are those based solely on “evidence” and “rationality”. Evidence must be trusted before we base a belief on it, and my ability to reason flawlessly from premise to conclusion cannot be taken for granted.

So the things I believe are all based on faith. I might trust a scientific theory because I trust the textbook it is written in, but when I perform my own experiments and see with my own eyes that the predictions it makes are valid, then my level of trust in that theory grows. It is exactly the same with faith in Jesus. My level of faith and trust can only grow if I take him at his word and do the things he says. Only then will I see if he is telling me the truth or not, and only then will my faith grow as he proves himself faithful to me.

Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarrelling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people. For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another.

(Titus 3:1-3 ESV)

I haven’t been actively trying to follow the American election but it has been hard to ignore. Perhaps one of the things that has stood out for me has been the level of hostility in much of the comment I have read. It is not an exaggeration to say that George Bush is "hated" by many, and many of the computer programming blogs I read have expressed their utter contempt for Sarah Palin. On the other side, there are undoubtedly those whose attitude to Barak Obama or Hillary Clinton could also be described as "hatred".

And it’s not just the arena of politics. Any celebrity, or indeed anyone who is in the public eye is apparently fair game these days. They can be freely insulted ("stupid" and "scary" are the favourites at the moment) without fear of comeback.

In short, Paul’s description of a society who are "slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another" seems remarkably up to date.

The challenge for Christians in these days is to refuse to join in with the culture of hatred, and instead "to  speak evil of no one, to avoid quarrelling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people". It is good to see people like John Piper setting an example in this way, speaking out clearly his beliefs (which are not going to be popular with everyone) yet without resorting to inflammatory or insulting language.

Maybe as Christians we are going to be called "stupid" and "scary" a whole lot more in the coming years. But let us make it virtually impossible for us to be accused of hatred because of the gentleness and courtesy that consistently characterise us.

“But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.

(Luke 6:27-28 ESV)

Much of my free time in the last few weeks has been spent preparing a sermon on the subject of idolatry, which I am preaching tomorrow as part of a series my church is doing on the Ten Commandments.

I wanted to include some reflection on how we can examine our hearts to see if we are guilty of idolatry. One way of looking at this is to take John Piper’s maxim, "your pleasure is the measure of your treasure". If something brings you great joy, it reveals that you value that thing highly.

But I began to wonder whether the reverse is equally revealing. What are the things that make me grumpy, irritable, miserable, depressed, or angry? Often it is because I have been deprived of an idol or an idol has let me down.

Here are some examples…

• A football supporter kicks a chair across the room in anger as his team concedes a last minute goal, yet again.
• A woman lives under a cloud of depression because her dress size is one bigger than this time last year.
• A teenager sulks the whole family holiday because he will miss an opportunity to attend a concert.

I like to think that money is not an idol for me, but last month when I checked the bank balance, I found that things were considerably worse than I was expecting. I was in a bad mood about it for a few days as I stewed over in my mind how we could reduce our monthly expenditure. I rationalized this at first as simply being concerned about being a "good steward" of my money. But preparing this sermon on idolatry made me realise that something else was at work too. Could I join Habakkuk in rejoicing even when things are not going my way financially…

Though the fig tree does not bud and there are no grapes on the vines, though the olive crop fails and the fields produce no food, though there are no sheep in the pen and no cattle in the stalls, yet I will rejoice in the LORD, I will be joyful in God my Savior. (Hab 3:17,18 NIV)

Refusal to rejoice in the Lord reveals that something else matters more to us. And that thing, whatever it may be, has become our idol.

I have been far too busy to blog in the last month, but I thought I would add a quick report on Acceler8, the newfrontiers regional Bible weekend I attended last weekend with my family.

It was the first event of its kind, so I was half expecting it to be something of a disorganized shambles, but I have to say I was highly impressed with how smoothly the whole thing ran. Credit to Luke Wood and the others on the event team.

Here are my highlights…

• Excellent Bible teaching from Terry Virgo. I have heard him speak on no less than four holidays this year, and he hasn’t repeated a sermon once!
• Great times of worship led by three bands who all did a superb job
• Seeing God at work in our children’s lives, particularly Ben who made a commitment to become a Christian during the week, and has developed a real passion for prayer and worship.
• With four small children, we really appreciated the relaxed schedule without having to rush between meetings all the time.
• The chill out tent and afternoon activities were well thought out. The penny sweet table was a big hit with our children too!

And of course, no camping trip is complete without a few low points…

• Freezing cold Friday night
• Flooded tent Saturday night
• The 10 minute walk from our tent to the toilets
• Crashing out the 5-aside football in the first round
• Sitting in traffic jams at Lyndhurst

I’m glad to hear that the event will be running again next year. I wouldn’t mind if they made it a day longer, to squeeze in a seminar or two (but keeping the relatively sparse schedule).

I haven’t had much time for blogging of late, so here are a few links you might be interested in…

• Terry Virgo has blogged about his “Grace Teaches Us to Say No” sermon. I first heard him teach this at Stoneleigh 99, and it made a lasting impact on me, and the others I was with. He has recently preached the same message in Eastbourne and includes a link to a download. I’m sure it is well worth a listen.
• Sovereign Grace have released a new album, called Psalms. You can download it for only $9. I think this is one of their best albums in recent years. “You Will Never Change”, “God is our Refuge” and “Out of the Depths” are my favourite tracks at the moment.
• The audio from a sermon I preached a couple of months ago at Southampton University Christian Union is now online. The subject was unity, based on Jesus’ prayer in John 17. I haven’t dared listen to it yet myself, as I felt I struggled a bit with the delivery (it was quite weird because my face was projected onto three giant screens, which meant that no one was actually looking directly at me – quite disconcerting). You can download it here.
• A thought-provoking post from Dan Edelen on who’s to blame for the prosperity gospel
• Jeremy Pierce gives us his expert opinion on commentaries on Luke, 1 Corinthians and Genesis.
• Mark Driscoll’s ‘notes’ on Genesis are available (h.t. Dave Bish). Does the man never sleep?
• Tim Chester has a new book out – You Can Change
• David Matthias posts on 20 reasons why I love Jesus.

There has been a lot of news coverage recently of the debate within the Church of England concerning whether women should be bishops or not. Naturally much of the commentary expresses contempt for those whose ‘traditionalism’ causes them to oppose female bishops. This view is considered to be outrageously sexist, and some would even like laws to be changed to make this kind of ‘discrimination’ illegal.

Leave aside for the moment the fact that I am not even sure that there should be male bishops in the church, I have to admit that my reading of Scripture leads me to side with the "complementarian" position. This position does not seek to deny "equality" between the sexes. On the contrary, it positively affirms that men and women are…

• equally bearers of the image of God
• equal in value or worth
• equal in dignity
• equal in moral responsibility
• equal in salvation (the same "way in" for all)
• equal as recipients of the gift of the Spirit
• (and I would add as a charismatic) equal as recipients of the gifts of the Spirit

However, complementarians also believe that there are differences between male and female, and that these differences are good. They come from God’s creative intention. Rather than competing with one another, men and women actually complement one another. One of the ways that complementarians see these differences outworking is in leadership of the local church, specifically the eldership. They believe the New Testament teaches that men are to be called as elders in the church, to serve by exercising authority and taking responsibility for the care and spiritual well-being of those in the congregation.

Now no matter how carefully you nuance this view, and explain that Christian leadership is about serving, not controlling or bossing people, it will still be dismissed as sexist. It would be awkward to say the least for me to explain this point of view to those I work with.

The irony of it is, that despite my ‘sexist’ views, I have found myself squirming in my seat at work recently listening to the discussions of my male colleagues. In their view on the world, a woman’s worth seems to be measured almost entirely on how ‘fit’ she is. Women are treated as though they exist simply for men’s viewing pleasure. In the ‘lad’ culture that prevails, it is apparently fine to come out with comments like "smack my bitch up" when talking about your girlfriend. Because of course, if you were to call them to order, they can simply claim that they didn’t mean you to take them seriously, and tell you to ‘lighten up’ a bit.

It has left me wondering how we have got into this state, where evangelical Christians are seen as the ones who are anti-women, while those whose attitudes seem most demeaning towards women are left unchallenged. I wonder whether I should speak up and call people to order for the way they speak about women. What would I say? Would I be perceived as a total hypocrite given my own ‘sexist’ views? Is this an issue on which actions would speak louder than words? I would be interested to hear anyone’s thoughts on this one.

Unashamed Workman posted some interesting thoughts on criteria for determining whether a healing is "authentic". He cites two lists of criteria. The first is from the noted skeptic James Randi:

James Randi’s Criteria

1. The disease must not be normally self-terminating.

2. The recovery must be complete.

3. The recovery must take place in the absence of any medical treatment that might normally be expected to affect the disease.

4. There must be adequate medical opinion that the disease was present before the application of whatever means were used to bring about the miracle.

5. There must be adequate medical opinion that the disease is not present after the application of whatever means were used to bring about the miracle.

These criteria are actually more related to the report of the healing than the healing itself. For example, a person may genuinely be healed by God without any medical professionals present to make points 4 and 5 possible. And God is of course completely free to heal someone without points 1 and 3 being met.

So while these points are not sufficient to determine whether an authentic healing has taken place, they are useful to consider when reporting a healing (in particular I mean reporting a healing outside of the circle of those people who know the person involved). Integrity is important, and to declare that a miraculous healing has taken place when several of the above criteria are not met can actually result in cynicism from those who hear rather than the desired effect of raising their faith.

Professor of Theology Richard Mayhue boldly declares that the Bible goes further and offers his own set of much stricter criteria:

Richard Mayhue’s Criteria

1. The healing must be instantaneous.

2. The healing must be of a disease that neither the medical community nor the human body can heal, such as AIDS – either instantly or absolutely.

3. The healing must be total.

4. The healing must be completely convincing, even to skeptics.

5. The healing must be done in public with no elaborate services involved.

6. The healing must be of an organic disease.

I have to say I have no idea where he gets most of these from. Point 1 is true as a general rule in the Bible, but there are exceptions. As for point 2, again I cannot see why God cannot heal a disease that does not meat this criteria. Point 3 I broadly agree with but noting the obvious caveat that all people healed in the Bible went on to die (and presumably were not immune from sickness the rest of their lives).

As for point 4, this simply is not possible. Has he underestimated the power of unbelief? We need look no further than the example of Jesus’ resurrection to see that some people will ignore the evidence if it does not suit what they want to believe. Point 5 is another tenuous one. Not all healings in the Bible were performed in public, and while there may not have been "elaborate services", a number of them involved unconventional methods. And point 6 is also perplexing. Is healing of a mental problem (e.g. depression, eating disorders) not "real" enough?

So I think Mayhue sets the bar too high to consider something an "authentic healing". And yet I do have some sympathy for his position, as it seems to me far too common for Christians to make exaggerated and even downright false claims about healing these days. Let us be full of faith in the God who heals, full of compassion for those who are sick, and full of integrity in the claims we make about healing.