What Thinktank? Blah, Blab, Blank

What authority do Christian preachers have in 2018 when they discard the gospel for clichés and cute and fabulous slogans? When Christ was ready to roll out his church he named his leaders apostles (they were, in effect, his spokespersons, his “prophets”, see Ephesians 2:20, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone…). Very little authority remains.

Who speaks for Christ?

To call them prophets would lead to confusion with the prophets of past eras and with the prophetic gift in the church. 1 Cor. 12:28). No church can thrive without the word-ministry of one of either a pastor-teacher (accountable for the flock), or an apostle (someone with missionary accountability), or a prophet (a messenger with a God’s word account) or a teacher, someone with an interpretation account. This means that someone had better be thinking soberly about what is being said.
We are all human and let fly things that we shouldn’t especially when it comes to food… things that are concerned with life and death. People don’t need the fluff or the blah blah blah. They need certainty. People are responsible for the direction and for the safety of the environment in which word of God is studied. There must an awareness that opinions must be stated as such. People don’t want to hear our opinions, don’t want to hear us say “I think”, “I believe”; people want to hear what the biblical writer has written in its clearest version. They want to hear what Paul said in its simplest and even vernacular expression.

We should therefore not expect people to repeat the things we are saying without them hearing what it was that the writer was thinking. We must recognize that it is not mere storytelling that is happening in the gospels and the letters. What we have received is the thinking of the writer. We are trying to digest what the writer thought about a particular aspect of the great salvation.
When we get to the writer’s thought we can then say “… here is what the scripture says”.

So why is there any blah? Why is there so little proper blabbing, and way too many blank shots? Is not the voice of Christ’s chosen writing witnesses sufficient?

God’s will internalized

There is no need to think, no need to search, and therefore no assurance that Yeshua has the words of life. People seem content to adopt the delusion of “law in the heart” and the sinless achievement.

There is little thinking behind the products, offerings and talking points in the Christian “marketplace”. While I report that I keep hearing 30 minute and hour-long presentations in which the blahs are so much more than the blab, I can still say I am satisfied with the crumbs, even when the message ends up, with its numerous contradictions, as a disappointing blank.

A lot of blahs

Let me say first of all of that there is no intention to label people as blanks. There is no dark place that cannot be lit up. We need handles for dealing with expressions which seem to go nowhere. If being a witness means being acquainted with the case on a personal level then we can safely admit that it is in the exchange of findings and views that the truth and the life it brings can be seen and acknowledged.

There have been noble attempts to help people find their way to the life of the sacred text. Answering the important questions that arise in our search for God needs a disciplined approach. The word, the phrase, the sentence, the thoughts, the context, the other biblical sources are pieces we must consider before we take a stand. That discipline vanishes when denominational or organizational traditions take priority. The stories, the blahs, inform us of a drift to tell so much more about both fictional characters and events.

People who are wrong about the main event, the cross, will err in everything else. One cannot build one’s house on sand (changing law and human will) and expect it to withstand the storm. We cannot say in any shade of honesty that we have searched the Scriptures and have ended up with a horrific mistake such as when the date of the Lord’s return was calculated by the advent movement in the 19th century. Such witnesses are unreliable and all who following their footsteps in pursuing that same goal have lost their credibility. There is no new version of the gospel.

Next: Supreme Blabbing