Friday, January 20, 2012

Mindfulness For Children: Buddhism For Tots

By Marcia Montenegro (Christian Answers For the New Age)
“We are here to awaken from our illusion of separateness.”
― Thich Nhat Hanh, Zen Buddhist and author of bestsellers

“Be a lamp unto yourself.” ― Reputed to be the last words of Gautama Buddha
A friend at church gave me an article from Scholastic Parent and Child Magazine (October 2011), which had been given to her son and the other children in a public school kindergarten class to bring home. The article, “It’s All In Your Mind,” by Lynne Ticknor, promotes mindfulness, a Buddhist concept and meditation practice, and offers a brief interview of Goldie Hawn and her Mind-Up program for schools.

 THE RELIGION OF IT 

The article refers to mindfulness as “based in the philosophy of Buddhism” and quickly adds, “But it’s not religion” and “there are no spiritual overtones.” However, the very concept and practice of mindfulness is religious; mindfulness is the 7th step in the Buddhist Noble Eight-fold Path. Its increasing visibility and acceptance in the West is largely due to its promotion by Buddhist adherents, such as Jon Kabat-Zinn, a Zen Buddhist who has heavily influenced the health community, and by Thich Nhat Hanh, a Buddhist monk and bestselling author.

Buddhism is known as a world-denying religion. It teaches that reality as we see and experience it is not, in fact, reality.* We think it is only because we identify with  our body, feelings, thoughts, sensations, and reactions, as a result of having been born into this world. There is no self (no-self is called anatman or anatta); the concept of self is a result of these false identifications with the world. Suffering is caused by desire; and birth in this world, along with our physical and mental processes, feed desire, thus continuing the cycle of desire and suffering through continual rebirth (samsara).

The only way to stop this cycle and be free of samsara – which is the goal of Buddhist practice – is to detach from desire. One of the chief methods to accomplish detachment is the practice of mindfulness. Mindfulness involves altering one’s thinking and outlook via Buddhist mindfulness meditation and practices by detaching from mind and self through nonjudgmental observation. This includes the commonly heard maxim, “Be in the present,” since the goal includes detaching from past and future.

Practicing mindfulness supposedly prepares one for a breakthrough in perception, an awakening to reality as it really is, which is formlessness (sunyata, usually translated as “emptiness”). Mindfulness is particularly emphasized in Zen Buddhism and, aside from TM (Transcendental Meditation), is the Eastern practice that has most infiltrated the West.

Although presented as spiritually neutral, the origin and goal of mindfulness belies that stance. Many are not aware that the true goal of Buddhism, nirvana, is not some kind of Buddhist heaven, but is actually the state one reaches when one has shed all attachments and illusions, thus freeing oneself from desire and rebirth. Nirvana means “to extinguish” and is the state of cessation of desire and illusion, and therefore of suffering. What is this state like? Buddhism offers no clear answer.

 THE BREATHING OF IT 

The article states that children are taught to focus on their breathing, “an age-old exercises in finding calm and balance – or their ‘center.’”  One photograph shows a mother and a child sitting in lotus position with eyes closed.  Another shows two young children (about age 6) sitting side-by-side, in a lotus position with eyes closed. Clearly, there is more than just breathing going on. The breathing technique is part and parcel of the mindfulness meditation.

Mindful meditation involves breathing a certain way, but it is also a way to transcend thinking. In fact, the mind is seen as a barrier. Focusing on slow breathing is meant to transcend conceptual thinking. Breathing in this way brings one into an altered state where critical thinking and judgment are suspended. In Buddhism, such thinking interferes with spiritual insight.

Buddhism absorbed much from Taoism, which sprang from early Chinese shamanism that believed a universal force, chi, infuses the world. In fact, Zen Buddhism is a mixture of Taoism and Buddhism which came from China and was called Chan (called Zen in Japan). Controlling breath was part of controlling and balancing chi, thus achieving health and longevity (in Taoist thinking). This idea of the breath as centering is very similar to the Taoist teaching that one must base one’s self in the flow of chi and thus balance the two forces of yin and yang.

Even if the children are not doing a full-on mindfulness meditation (which would be difficult for most children since they cannot stay so still for long), they are being introduced to it, taught it, and told that it is the way to deal with their feelings and “intense emotions.” Being told that this is how to deal with anger or fear may also give the subtle message that emotions are a bad thing.

While it’s true that taking a few deep breaths when upset may calm one down, mindfulness goes way beyond that. Mindfulness as promoted in schools is communicating to a child that he should always be calm, always clear-headed, always in control. This certainly could convey a negative message to more emotional children, and to children with various psychological, neurological, and emotional problems as well as making them self-conscious about their feelings.

We have a right to ask: Is this a healthy teaching for children? Are children, especially in the lower grades, able to handle such information? Should they be worried about their emotions? At the very least, using mindfulness should be a decision for a parent, not for the school or educators.

 THE STUDIES OF IT 

The article cites “studies” that mindfulness has done amazing things, such as improving memory, boosting the immune system, rendered child practitioners more optimistic, more socially adept, more compassionate, and less judgmental of themselves. Really?

Whenever we see references to studies with no further information, we should ask: Who did these studies? How were they done? How big were the studies? Have the results been published in professional peer-reviewed journals? None of that information is provided here, leading this writer to wonder if such “studies” were done by mindfulness-friendly followers or organizations.

Also, there is no way to prove that anything “boosts the immune system” since the immune system is too complex and involves many systems of the body. “Boosting the immune system” is the common claim of many fraudulent health products**

Moreover, how would one measure if a child is more optimistic or compassionate? Is this not a subjective assessment? What standards are being used? In short, this reference to studies should be dismissed since no scientific references or data is given, and the claims are unreasonably overstated. These are all indicators of claims with little or no factual data or basis.

 THE HYPE OF IT 

Some educators are using visualization, meditation CDs and an iPad or iPhone app called BellyBio, “that helps regulate breathing rhythms.” Guided visualization is a form of hypnosis, so this should cause alarm, if indeed this form of visualization is being used.

Most meditation CDs also use forms of hypnosis. In fact, this writer cannot conceive of a meditation CD that would not be inducing a state of  hypnosis; that is just the nature of meditation CDs. And do parents really want teachers trying to “regulate breathing rhythms” in their children?

Mindfulness is now being marketed as aggressively and as deceptively as yoga has been. The word “compassion” is being joined with the term “mindfulness” (one example is a book recommended at the end of the article, Mindfulness: Mothering with Mindfulness, Compassion, and Grace by Denise Roy). Buddhist teachers make frequent use of the word “compassion” (this is very common with the Dalai Lama) but the problem is that non-Buddhists do not know what is really meant by this term.

Compassion in Buddhism is not simply having empathy or care for people. Compassion includes the Buddhist view that all non-human beings (called “sentient beings”) are in need of rebirth as humans, because only humans can attain enlightenment. Since rebirth can bring a human into a non-human state, the Buddhist must spread Buddhist teachings and work at his own enlightenment in order to help advance Buddhist truths so that all can eventually be liberated from the cycle of rebirth. In Buddhism, Buddhist enlightenment is the only way for such liberation. Buddhism may give lip service to an embrace of all religions, but Buddhism teaches that only the Buddhist path can liberate.

 CONCLUSIONS 

Parents needs to monitor and mind carefully what is going on in their child’s classroom. They need to ask questions about all activities!

Scholastic is the parent company of MindUP, the program started by actress Goldie Hawn, a practicing Buddhist. Scholastic, as many know, is a purveyor of many materials and programs in public schools. It is a global enterprise, creating and distributing “educational and entertaining materials and products for use in school and at home, including children's books, magazines, technology-based products, teacher materials, television programming, feature film, videos and toys. Scholastic distributes its products and services through a variety of channels, including proprietary school-based book clubs, school-based book fairs, retail stores, schools, libraries and television networks; and Scholastic.com” (http://www.scholastic.com/aboutscholastic/peoplehistory.htm).

The promotion of mindfulness by an educational corporate giant such as Scholastic is a prime example of how Eastern beliefs are being endorsed and distributed into the culture. The same thing has been happening with Yoga, which is being promoted by corporations as well as government agencies (along with such practices as Feng Shui, Tai Chi, and many forms of New Age alternative heating). Children are the most vulnerable and are totally unable to critique or assess such ideas; for that reason, they make the best targets.

I think it is too late to stop this wave of Eastern spirituality. Therefore, prayer and discernment, as well as the willingness to speak out, are needed. Parents can talk to the teacher or principal and opt their child out based on religious views. Even if the school denies that mindfulness (or Yoga) is religious, the parent can state that he or she believes it conflicts with his or her religion and how the child is being raised. There is much data online that would help make a parent’s case that mindfulness (or Yoga) is religious.
*“Developing wisdom is a process of bringing our minds into accordance with the way things really are. Through this process we gradually remove the incorrect perceptions of reality we have had since the beginningless time.” (The Dalai Lama, An Open Heart [Boston/New York/London: Little, Brown and Company, 2001], 86).
** On boosting the immune system:
“The idea of boosting your immunity is enticing, but the ability to do so has proved elusive for several reasons. The immune system is precisely that — a system, not a single entity. To function well, it requires balance and harmony. There is still much that researchers don’t know about the intricacies and interconnectedness of the immune response. For now, there are no scientifically proven direct links between lifestyle and enhanced immune function . . . < . . .> . . . researchers are still trying to understand how the immune system works and how to interpret measurements of immune function.” http://www.health.harvard.edu/flu-resource-center/how-to-boost-your-immune-system.htm
“So when something allegedly boosts the immune system, I have to ask what part. How? What is it strengthening/boosting/supporting? Antibodies? Complement? White cells? Are the results from test tubes (often meaningless), animal studies or human studies? And if in human studies, what was the study population. Are the results even meaningful? Or small, barely statistically significant, outcomes in poorly done studies? The answer, as we shall see, is usually nothing.” http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/boost-your-immune-system/ 
NOTE ON WRITER: The writer of this article was involved for about 14 years in various forms of Eastern meditation practices, particularly Zen. She is familiar with the effects of such meditation, which gradually lead to a change in one’s worldview (perception of self and reality).

Companion article by Marcia Montenegro: “Mindfulness: No-Mind Over Matter”

photo credit: papermoons via photopin cc

John Piper Tweet

Posted by Christine Pack




Our thoughts? If Dr. Piper wanted to say that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and that no one comes to the Father but by Him, there are better ways to say that. Such as, oh, I don't know, quoting the actual Scripture verse rather than coming up with an obscure Universalist haiku. Just sayin'


 Additional Resources 

John Piper Encouraging Lectio Divina

John Piper's Bethlehem Baptist Church Endorsing Books by Contemplative Spirituality Mystics Dallas Willard and Richard Foster

Beth Moore and John Piper Lead "Lectio Divina Lite" Prayer at Passion 2012 Conference

We're Really Not Out To "Get" Beth Moore and John Piper

Just Do Something: How to Make a Decision Without Dreams, Visions, Fleeces, Open Doors, Random Bible Verses, Casting Lots, Liver Shivers, Writing in the Sky, etc.  - by Kevin DeYoung

Just Do Something - by Kevin DeYoung (audio)

Secular Interview About What Mysticism Is - BBC Radio Program

What Is Mysticism? (Sola Sisters Article)

What Is Mysticism? (3-Part Series by Dr. Gary Gilley) - Part 1Part 2Part 3Part 4 and Part 5

On John Piper and Lectio Divina

Biblical Silence vs. Mystical Silence

Testimony of a Former Mystic

Rick Warren Gets John Piper's Stamp of Approval?


Thursday, January 19, 2012

Billy Graham: "There's so much that we have in common (with the Roman Catholic church)."

Posted by Christine Pack

Billy Graham
It will undoubtedly come as a shock for many Christians to realize that revered and well regarded pastor Billy Graham had strong ties to the Roman Catholic church, as well as some startling views on the exclusivity of Christ in salvation. Linking with Roman Catholics simply must not be done. Yes, the Roman Catholic Church teaches about God and Jesus and the Cross and Salvation, but they also add to the finished work of Christ on the Cross by requiring works of their adherents. This is no small thing. In the book of Galatians, Paul rebuked as Peter for allowing the Judaizers to add the "works" of circumcision and law-keeping as additional requirements for salvation.
“When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas (Peter) in front of them all, 'You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.'” (Galatians 2:14-16)
What the "circumcision party" did in this passage was heresy, but let's not just nod and embrace this truth as we read scripture without understanding that this same heresy is alive and well today. This heresy of Faith + Works is at the heart of the Roman Catholic Church and what it teaches, and this is why we must not link to them as brothers and sisters in Christ. Rather, the vast majority of them are as lost as lost can be, and need the life-giving truth of the gospel message. True, born again believers know that salvation comes by faith alone through grace alone in Christ alone. There is no additional work that can be added or must be done for salvation.
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Ephesians 2:8-10)
Now, does this mean that the Christian simply gets a Get Into Heaven free pass by claiming belief in Christ, and then will continue to live in unrepentant immorality? No, the books of James and Galatians (among others) address these fallacies of "decisional regeneration" and "easy believism." A true born again believer who is in-dwelt by the Holy Spirit will bear good fruit, will put away the sins of their former life, and will become more and more conformed to the image of Christ over time. But these actions will flow out of a heart overwhelmed with thankfulness at God's great mercy in salvation, and will be empowered by the Holy Spirit. A true born again believer does not grudgingly put away sin and do good works, as if drinking down bad medicine. Yes, there is a battle with the flesh, but it is a battle. Sin is never truly enjoyed by the regenerated Christian: it is fought against and agonized about and prayed over and repented of. Is this a sad, torturous existence, with the believer looking sadly back at his old "fun" life and doing what he "should" do instead? No, in fact it is a joy and an honor to strive to know God's precepts and pray for God's grace and enabling power to live a righteous life. It is not bad medicine grudgingly drunk down so as to get the benefit of heaven. Good works flow from a heart that is overjoyed to be reconciled to a high and holy God, and thankful for his Word which show us what a righteous life looks like that we might strive for that mark by the power of the Holy Spirit. This is sort of a nutshell view of the biblical view of salvation and the Christian's life, but this is not the Roman Catholic view of salvation, which comes through Faith in Jesus PLUS confession, going to mass, doing good works, etc., etc., etc.

So with that in mind, please read below from portions of an interview that Billy Graham gave with Robert Schuller of Crystal Cathedral (and about which John MacArthur has also commented):
Dr. Schuller: "Tell me, what is the future of Christianity?" 
Dr. Graham: "Well, Christianity and being a true believer, you know, I think there's the body of Christ which comes from all the Christian groups around the world, or outside the Christian groups. I think that everybody that loves Christ or knows Christ, whether they're conscious of it or not, they're members of the body of Christ. And I don't think that we're going to see a great sweeping revival that will turn the whole world to Christ at any time." 
What God is doing today is calling people out of the world for His name. Whether they come from the Muslim world, or the Buddhist world, or the Christian world, or the non-believing world, they are members of the body of Christ because they've been called by God. They may not even know the name of Jesus, but they know in their hearts they need something that they don't have and they turn to the only light they have and I think they're saved and they're going to be with us in heaven." 
Dr. Schuller: "What I hear you saying is that it's possible for Jesus Christ to come into a human heart and soul and life even if they've been born in darkness and have never had exposure to the Bible. Is that a correct interpretation of what you're saying?" 
Dr. Graham: "Yes it is because I believe that. I've met people in various parts of the world in tribal situations that they have never seen a Bible or heard about a Bible, have never heard of Jesus but they've believed in their hearts that there is a God and they tried to live a life that was quite apart from the surrounding community in which they lived." 
Dr. Schuller: "This is fantastic. I'm so thrilled to hear you say that. There's a wideness in God's mercy." 
Dr. Graham: "There is. There definitely is."

 Additional Resources 

John MacArthur Discussing Billy Graham's "Wider Mercy" View

Doctrinal Errors With the "Wider Mercy" Doctrine

A Chart With Christian/Catholic Views Side-By-Side (courtesy of former Roman Catholic priest Richard Bennett)

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Matt Chandler Goes To Code Orange Where He Exalts Christ, Confronts Narcissistic Man-Centered Preaching, and *poof* He's Gone

Posted by Christine Pack



For those unaware of the latest brouhaha in Evangelicalism, let me first lay out the facts. Steven Furtick, megachurch pastor at Elevation Church in Charlotte, North Carolina, is currently hosting a revival which is running from January 11-22 and is promoted as "a 12 night worship experience to set the stage for 2012." The event is entitled "Code Orange" to indicate, according to Elevation Church's website, "a heightened sense of urgency....something significant is about to happen." The line-up of speakers for Code Orange includes Craig Groeschel, Jentezen Franklin, Matt Chandler, Christine Caine, Ed Young, Israel Houghton, Perry Noble, James MacDonald, T.D. Jakes, etc.


So Matt Chandler, pastor of The Village Church in Highland, Texas, and one of the invited speakers at Code Orange, stood up at Elevation Church and delivered what turned out to be a barn burner of a sermon. In his distinctive delivery style (that is to say, humble, loving, direct and at times laugh-out-loud funny), Chandler took aim at the kind of preaching that has been so aptly termed "Narcissistic Eisegeis," and at which Steven Furtick, and so many others in the seeker sensitive movement, excel.
"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." 2 Timothy 4:3-4
Narcissistic Eisegesis ("Narcigesis") = Forcing the Bible to mean something you already want it to mean by superimposing yourself into the meaning of the passage, rather than interpreting Scripture for what it means about God, and letting the Scripture simply speak for itself. Conversely, seeking to understand Scripture for what it reveals about God is known as Exegesis, and is also sometimes referred to as the "Literal" or "Grammatical-Historical" approach to interpreting Scripture. Example: The Narcissitic Eisegesis version of David and Goliath would be about you fighting your personal "giants" (i.e., problems, difficulties, setbacks, etc.). The Exegetical approach to interpreting David and Goliath would reveal, instead, an historical account of David's faith and God supernaturally intervening in an impossible situation for his own glory.

Now, back to Elevation Church, Code Orange, and Matt Chandler's sermon. First of all, before the letters start, I am aware that Matt Chandler is affiliated with Acts 29, has contemplative authors on his site and has claimed audible words from God. I'm not putting a stamp of approval on any of that by posting Chandler's sermon. The church is in a big muddle today, and I truly do think that we're in the end times deception, such that even the elect might be deceived. But here's a thought: maybe part of that playing itself out is that some will appear to be slipping, but when push comes to shove, will stand up and preach Jesus Christ and him crucified. The desire, of course, is for the ones who appear to be slipping to demonstrate that their feet are firmly planted on the Rock of our Salvation - Christ - and it appears to me that Matt Chandler is demonstrating just that. Because really, for Chandler to go to Elevation Church and preach as he did? To stand up before thousands and thousands of people, knowing that his message would not be well received? That could not have been easy, and it demonstrates a fear of God, rather than a fear of man. So the sermon rocked, Christ was exalted, and man was humbled. I can only speak for myself, but I personally need sermons that pierce me and break me and make me lie down on the floor, repenting and crying, and also remind me of the only hope that I have, which is not that I can be great and conquer problems but that God is great and has made a way for wretched sinners (like me) to be reconciled to himself.

But now for the controversial part. Chandler's sermon was immediately pulled from the Code Orange rebroadcasts. This was pointed out by several Christian writers, including Chris Rosebrough of Fighting for Faith and Ken Silva of Apprising Ministries. Then, the sermon reappeared in subsequent rebroadcasts with a cryptic message from Elevation's graphic designer about a decision being made to "reformat the content" for the purpose of focusing "the broadcast on Jesus." So we'll let you be the judge. Matt Chandler's sermon is posted above, where you can listen to it in its entirety. Was this a sermon that should have been pulled because it did not focus on Jesus?


 Additional Resources 

Elevation Church Pulls Matt Chandler's Sermon

Grow Up. Settle Down. Keep Reforming. Advice for the Young, Restless and Reformed 

Code Orange Revival: To Focus on Jesus, We Cut The Only Sermon That Pointed People To Him 

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Beth Moore: "(God) began to say to me, ‘I’m gonna tell you something right now, Beth, and boy you write this one down, and you say it as often as I give you utterance to say it....'"

Posted by Christine Pack



 Additional Resources 

Theology......More or Less With Beth (Sarah Flashing, Midwest Christian Outreach)

An Overview of Beth Moore (CARM)

Beth Moore's Dangerous Bible Twisting (Chris Rosebrough, Pirate Christian Radio)

Beth Moore Seeking Direct Revelations from God?

Beth Moore the Mystic?

Beth Moore and the Be Still DVD - An Ode To Silence

Mystical Youth Ministry

What Is Mysticism? (3-Part Series by Dr. Gary Gilley) - Part 1Part 2Part 3Part 4 and Part 5

We're Really Not Out To "Get" John Piper and Beth Moore

Posted by Christine Pack and Cathy Mathews


The Passion 2012 conference recently finished the Atlanta leg of its tour, with notable keynote speakers Dr. John Piper and Beth Moore among the lineup. A controversy erupted when it appeared that during one segment of the conference, the speakers on stage (including Dr. Piper and Beth Moore) were engaging in some kind of mystical experience, that had similarities to the Roman Catholic mystical practice of Lectio Divina. It was also simultaneously reported that John Piper's Desiring God website had published a post by writer Jonathan Parnell in which Christians were actually encouraged to incorporate the practice of Lectio Divina into their prayer lives. The blogosphere erupted with discussion about both of these things, including our own blog and Facebook page, with some commenters confused, some not surprised by this development, and also a large contingent of commenters I'll call the Matthew Seven One-ers ("Who are you to judge!") calling us out for, that's right, judging.


Whew.

With all that in mind, my sister and I would like to answer to the charge that we're hatin' haters who just want to hate on people. So this post is written in an effort to show that neither one of us is out to "get" either Dr. Piper or Beth Moore.

First, Dr. Piper....

Dr. Piper is highly respected in the evangelical community, and for good reason. He has written scores of very biblical books and articles, he is pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church, and is known for being a staunch protector and defender of the purity of the gospel. This is why his apparent veering from the Reformation principle of Sola Scriptura (or, the idea that we hear from God through Scripture alone) by his participation in a seemingly mystical practice and his website's outright endorsement of Lectio Divina is all the more distressing.

My sister, who came out of the same New Age mysticism that I did, has written before about there being a time, when she was a very new Christian, that John Piper's teaching actually helped her get free of mysticism. In fact, she credits this particular video as being instrumental in helping her understand the biblical model for prayer:


At about the two minute mark in the above video, John Piper makes the following statement which is just a wonderful teaching on the biblical practice of prayer:
John Piper: "(You might ask me) why don't you just say that (prayer), then, is communicating with God? That would be a little less awkward than 'intentionally conveying a message.' Why don't you just say, prayer is communicating with God? And here's the reason I tried that and rejected it. It's because it sounds when you say that like you mean you're communicating that way (pointing up to heaven) and He's communicating this way (pointing down to himself), and that's prayer. And that's not prayer. The Bible never calls God's communication to us 'prayer.' Never. And we get ourselves into a big muddle when we concoct phrases to that effect. Like his talking to us is a kind of prayer. It isn't."
Cathy's comment:
"One of the saddest things to me is that John Piper actually helped me come out of my Christian mysticism. When I began realizing that a lot of what is called Christian teaching these days is just pagan practices sprinkled with Christian terminology and some Bible verses, I looked to the Bible and to good Bible teachers to help me answer two basic questions: How does God communicate with us? And what is prayer? It was some teaching by John Piper specifically on that second question that really helped me. He was very clear: prayer is us talking to God- it is not like a telephone conversation where I talk and then God talks. I came to the realization that God speaks to us through scripture. I could stop looking for signs and clues and hunches and feelings- I could just read God's Word and know that God was speaking clearly and openly to me. It was so freeing."
And in fact, after Cathy made this comment on a recent blog post, in reflecting back I also remembered how she had labored over this issue with me when I was a new Christian and she was discipling me. She really worked to help me understand this strange new concept of how it is that God communicates with us. It was extremely freeing for me as well, having come out of mysticism, where you're always trying to figure out out if the sign/nudge/dream/vision/impression/etc. that you received was really from God. It was just, open up your Bible and read. Really? Really. So freeing. So unmystical. Not to mention, so biblical.

Now for Beth Moore....
"Thank you God, that you are trustworthy. Thank you that you promise to make our paths straight. Please help us to acknowledge you in all our ways." 
This is the prayer that my 10 year old son prayed this morning during Bible study, based on principles for praying that I taught him. I learned these principles for prayer from a Bible study by Beth Moore (Praying God's Word), one of the first Bible studies I ever took.  Before the class had begun, I remember being so curious about what was meant by the title of the book: how could one "pray God's word?" What did that mean? Now remember, I had come out of New Age Hinduism and paganism. There is no concept of a personal God in the New Age. In the New Age, there are lots and lots and lots of techniques from lots of different cultures that are used as a means to get to "God" - so there is some understanding of there being a "God" out there. But it's not a biblical understanding of God: that God is not only transcendent but He is also personal. God is a God who not only hears the prayers of his people, but He also has the power to answer them. He is a God who not only intimately and deeply cherishes his people, but He also disciplines them if need be, as a loving parent would discipline his children. These are just completely foreign concepts about God for New Agers. The New Age "God" is an impersonal essence, or energy, or vibration, and somehow, people find ways to tap into this God for the usual things (power, love, success); or, they access or experience this "God," through various mystical practices.

So with this as my background, I went into the Praying God's Word Bible study by Beth Moore, and I was just completely undone when I came to an understanding that the God of the universes would not only allow us, but want us to pray directly to him, to come boldly before the Throne of grace, and into his very presence. The class consisted of each member being given an acrylic holder that contained a large number of small index cards on which Scripture was written. We were taught to read the Scripture, dwell on the passage for a few minutes, and then pray the Scripture back to God. Seems pretty remedial doesn't it? But this was an entirely new concept to me, so much so that in the middle of one class, I was so overcome with joy about knowing, finally knowing really and truly, how to speak to God, that I began to cry. So for that study alone, I have tremendous goodwill toward Beth Moore. To this day, I pray using the principles for prayer as taught to me in that class, and have now taught these principles to my own children. And that is why I'm deeply, deeply grieved to have watched Beth Moore slowly become more and mystical in both her manner of speech and her teaching over time.

So back to the Passion 2012 conference. If you happen to click on the Passion 2012 graphic at the top of this post, you will see a tagline that says:


My question is this: Do 18-25 year olds living in our postmodern culture today really need to be encouraged to think of God in mystical, subjective and experiential terms (as the Passion 2012 Conference seemed to be teaching)? Is it wise to model to them that prayer is praying, then listening for God's words in response (as Dr. John Piper, Beth Moore, Francis Chan and Louie Giglio did in Session 5)? Is it biblical?

I would submit, in fact, that 18-25 year olds of today are already far too experiential and subjective in their worldview. They need to be re-trained to understand, as John Piper has taught so eloquently in the past, that biblical prayer is "intentionally conveying a message to God," not praying, and then listening for God's audible answer back to us.

May we all strive to be more biblical in how we approach God, remembering that He detests mystical practices, and continually seek to conform our prayer life as closely as possible to the biblical model for what that should be.

 Additional Resources 

John Piper Encouraging Lectio Divina

Lectio Divina and "Hearing God's Voice"

John Piper's Bethlehem Baptist Church Endorsing Books by Contemplative Spirituality Mystics Dallas Willard and Richard Foster

Beth Moore and John Piper Lead "Lectio Divina Lite" Prayer at Passion 2012 Conference

Just Do Something: How to Make a Decision Without Dreams, Visions, Fleeces, Open Doors, Random Bible Verses, Casting Lots, Liver Shivers, Writing in the Sky, etc.  - by Kevin DeYoung

Just Do Something - by Kevin DeYoung (audio)

On John Piper and Lectio Divina

Biblical Silence vs. Mystical Silence

Secular Interview About What Mysticism Is - BBC Radio Program

What Is Mysticism? (Sola Sisters Article)

What Is Mysticism? (3-Part Series by Dr. Gary Gilley) - Part 1Part 2Part 3, Part 4 and Part 5

Testimony of a Former Mystic

Dr. John Piper's Church Endorsing Books by Contemplative Spirituality Mystics

Posted by Christine Pack

A few days ago, the Christian research and discernment community was awash in the alarming news that Desiring God's website had published a post endorsing a mystical form of prayer developed by cloistered Roman Catholic monks called "Lectio Divina." Social network sites Facebook and Twitter were covered up with discussion about this. Discernment site Apprising published several articles about it. Christian radio host Chris Rosebrough devoted an entire show to the topic. Other radio shows discussed this topic, even if only briefly.  And then something great happened: the reference to Lectio Divina was removed from the article, and this entry was left in its place:
Update: Formerly I listed Lectio Divina as a third system for prayer. I've since removed it for the confusion it has caused. We do not endorse contemplative spirituality. The main point I'd like to recommend is using the text of Scripture as an organizer for our prayers — prayers that are exegetically faithful and gospel rich. I'm sorry for introducing the category.(online source)
I really, really, really hope and pray that John Piper, Desiring God, Bethlehem Baptist Church, et al, will truly awaken to the dangers of Contemplative Spirituality Mysticism. With that in mind, and putting the best construction on the updated entry at Desiring God regarding contemplative spirituality, I've made this very brief post pointing out that there are still books by Contemplative Spirituality Mystics being endorsed at Dr. Piper's church. Maybe they just need to be made aware of who the players are in Contemplative Spirituality Mysticism.

Bethlehem Baptist Church has the following books by Contemplative Spirituality Mystics available for study:


(Prayer: Finding The Heart's True Home, by Richard Foster - Bethlehem Baptist Church, online source)





 Additional Resources 



Lectio Divina and "Hearing God's Voice"

John Piper Encouraging Lectio Divina

John Piper's Bethlehem Baptist Church Endorsing Books by Contemplative Spirituality Mystics Dallas Willard and Richard Foster

Beth Moore and John Piper Lead "Lectio Divina Lite" Prayer at Passion 2012 Conference

Just Do Something: How to Make a Decision Without Dreams, Visions, Fleeces, Open Doors, Random Bible Verses, Casting Lots, Liver Shivers, Writing in the Sky, etc.  - by Kevin DeYoung

Just Do Something - by Kevin DeYoung (audio)

On John Piper and Lectio Divina

Biblical Silence vs. Mystical Silence

Testimony of a Former Mystic

What Is Mysticism? (Sola Sisters article)

What Is Mysticism? (5-Part Series by Dr. Gary Gilley) - Part 1Part 2Part 3Part 4 and Part 5

Mystical Youth Ministry