Geraldine Theology Leads to Death – Pastor Johnny Touchet

Years ago I used to watch a TV program: “The Flip Wilson Show.” There was a character on the program, (Flip Wilson dressed as a woman), named Geraldine. Her famous line after doing something wrong was always the same: “The devil made me do it!”

It is important for us to understand that Scripture does in fact teach that Satan tempts us to Sin. Consider Gen. 3:1: “Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which Jehovah God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden?” Further, note the experience of Christ Himself: “Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil (Matt. 4:1).” (The tempter there was the same as the one in the garden). John noted, “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the vain glory of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world (1 Jn. 2:16).” Satan is behind this evil world system.

However, this Geraldine theology has caused great pain in the lives of many believers in that they are enslaved in and to their sin by not taking personal responsibility for that sin. In Jas. 1:13-16, we come to understand that there is a simple process concerning temptation that starts within our hearts. Satan may tempt us externally. But, we are responsible to deal with that which is in our hearts. The noted process of temptation includes conception, birth, and death.

First, there is the conception of temptation. It comes from within. “But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust (Jas. 1:14).” Notice that temptation comes from within, that is, from the mind, and works like a hunter or fisher (carried away) to draw out or lure forth. In hunting or fishing, just as game is lured from its hiding place, so too man is lured from the safety of self-restraint into sin.

In the same verse, the language of hunting is dropped for another picture: the seduction of a harlot. It is by our own lust, craving, longing, and desire for what is forbidden, that we find the source of our temptation is our own hearts (mind, emotions, will). This is the battlefield for temptation: our minds. If the battle is won here, though bloodied perhaps, we are indeed victorious!

Solomon gives us a warning along similar lines. “And I beheld among the simple ones, I discerned among the youths, a young man void of understanding…And, behold, there met him a woman with the attire of a harlot, and wily of heart…So she caught him, and kissed him, and with an impudent face she said unto him…with her much fair speech she cause him to yield; with the flattering of her lips she forced him along…her house is the way to Sheol, going down to the chambers of death (Prov. 7:7-27).”

The referenced young man was void of understanding. The word Solomon used that we translate “understanding” is connected to the word often used for “heart.” In a figurative sense, the word is also used widely for the feelings, the will, and even the intellect. In addition, it is used for the center of anything.

The Lord Jesus Himself confirms this teaching. “For from within, out of the heart of men, evil thoughts proceed, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, covetings, wickednesses, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, railing, pride, foolishness: all these evil things proceed from within, and defile the man (Matt. 7:21-23).”

James warns us concerning this area: “Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren.” The question is, how do we deceive our minds? We do so through television, music, or buying into teaching on self-love that tells us in regard to our desires, “Go ahead, you deserve it!” Lust may allure you with the lie, “You have a need for this forbidden fruit.” Or, with reference to your wife, you may say to yourself, “I don’t feel like I love her.” At that point your feelings are in direct opposition to God’s Word and they must be put off.

Second, there is the birth of temptation which brings forth sin. James continues, “Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin (v. 15).” We looked so forward to the birth of our children. I remember Sara when she was born. She was so cute: the most beautiful thing I had ever seen at that time in my life. I looked with great joy and satisfaction in our little one. But, not so when sin comes. When sin is born in our lives it usually produces a really sickening feeling! When lust has conceived, when the evil propensity within us works unchecked, it brings forth sin, the evil act.

Again, lust when conceived will bring us to sin. We see this truth in the garden. Eve was tempted, and then she lingered, looked, and lusted. She then leapt into sin. From the moment Adam ate the fruit, our destiny of sin was established. David looked and lusted for Bathsheba, and the result was the same: sin. Every man is overtaken from within, and once that happens, if not dealt with, outward sin is the sure result.

Third, there is the death of temptation. James says, “Then the lust, when it hath conceived, beareth sin: and the sin, when it is full grown, bringeth forth death (v. 15).” When this breach of the law of God in one’s heart is given sufficient time, it brings forth death. The spurious offspring of death is the fruit of the criminal connection between temptation and sin and is the evidence that punishment/death is due to transgressors. Sin spreads like the spider’s web hidden in a dark room; it gets on you and is terribly hard to get off. For the poor creature trapped in the web, death is only a matter of time.

I grew up in Louisana near the bayou. There we would find some good food. Among other delicacies were the crabs. When I went crabbing, I took a net and a piece of chicken on a string. The crabs loved the fresh smell of meat and they would come and bite on that choice morsel. It was then that I would slowly drag them in. All the time I was pulling them in closer and closer, they did not know what awaited them. Then, at the right moment, I would scoop them into the net! They thought they were feasting, but in reality, it was they who were becoming the feast. So it is with temptation when full grown: it brings death. You become the feast!

May Geraldine’s theology die with the show. And so beloved, don’t be deceived, temptation comes from within you. Deal with it there.

The Brave New World of Medical Psychology - Dr. Paul J. Dean

A debate has been raging in the Christian, counseling world for some time now. It concerns the difference between secular counseling, Christian counseling, and biblical counseling. Secular counseling is a catch-all term used to describe the over three-hundred models of psychological counseling extant in the United States today. Christian counseling is essentially the same as secular counseling with Scripture sprinkled in here and there. Biblical counseling relies upon the sufficiency of Scripture in that in God's Word we have everything we need for life and godliness (2 Pet. 1:3).

While some would disagree with our distinction between Christian and biblical counseling, it is nevertheless a reality. Lest anyone be too upset at this characterization, the presuppositions, principles, techniques, solutions, and counsel in Christian counseling are grounded in contemporary social and psychological theory. The Scriptures only get a nod and generally take a backseat to those psychological principles as the Scriptures are said to be insufficient for helping those with psychological problems. The Scriptures are sufficient for salvation but not solving our problems in the here and now. We live in a world that is too complex and our problems are too complex. So it is said by those who endorse Christian counseling. These presuppositions become all the more alarming when we see the general direction the secular, psychological world is taking us.

The major emphasis in counseling today is the prolific distribution of psychotropic medication. While biblical counselors have been saying for years that this practice is dangerous for a number of reasons, it is only now becoming public that some of these medications actually cause suicidality in many persons. Yet, in this Brave New World of ours, most would rather drug us and keep us comfortably numb rather than truly help us. Of course we do not imply that pushers of psychotropic medication are intentionally cruel. Most indeed want to give relief to their patients and simply don't know what else to do. On an evolutionary worldview, we are simply matter in motion. We have no soul, only brain. If we don't function right, according to them, the problem is not spiritual but physiological. Thus, the answer must be medication, even if doctors admit they have no idea what the medication does.

But the problem I truly want to address here is not the difference between psychological and biblical counseling, or the practice of medicating indiscriminately per se. The real issue is the worldview in which psychology is grounded. It is that same worldview which enables the Royal Dutch Medical Association to conclude that doctors ought to have the right to kill patients who are not ill but who are nevertheless judged to be "suffering through living." We no longer have to spend money on medicating them, we can simply kill them. We can simply put them out of their misery like a horse with a broken leg or an old dog that can't walk anymore.

According to LifeSiteNews.com, while patients could formerly request euthanasia if they had a "classifiable physical or mental condition," they may now be euthanized for simply being "tired of life." The current law does not require a medical condition for euthanasia, but only that a patient is "suffering hopelessly and unbearably." Jos Dijkhuis, the emeritus professor of clinical psychology who led the study said, "In more than half of cases we considered, doctors were not confronted with a classifiable disease. In practice the medical domain of doctors is far broader. We see a doctor's task is to reduce suffering, therefore we can't exclude these cases in advance. We must now look further to see if we can draw a line and if so where."

Note that it is the professor of clinical psychology who champions the cause of the patient's right to die, or should we say, the doctor's right to kill. Doctors take an oath to do no harm. Defining that oath is ever more slippery in an ever more postmodern world. Moreover, only when human beings are seen as no different from animals can we treat the taking of life in such a cavalier fashion. Life is cheap on an evolutionary worldview.

Let me end where I started off. If we as Christians embrace the idea that the Scriptures are not sufficient to meet our spiritual needs here and now; if we believe that Christians simply suffered helplessly for eighteen hundred plus years until Freud came along; if we believe Christ is sufficient to save but not sufficient to help us in our time of need (Heb. 4:16); if we believe that we are to farm out what the Puritans called soul work to the psychologist (who doesn't believe in a soul even though psychology comes from two Greek words referring to the study of the soul: psuche logos); or if we believe our problems are all physiological (brain) and not spiritual (soul); if we don't believe that wanting to die because we are tired of life is a sinful response to our circumstances; if we don't believe Christ can give us hope in the midst of those circumstances; then we do need psychotropic medication to fix our problems, or at least mask them, as all doctors agree that medication does not fix our problems. Again, they don't even know what the problem is; it is still a big guess. That leads me to say that when a person becomes so miserable with life that the medication won't even perk him up or even him out, then putting him out of his misery becomes a viable answer. What else would we expect from an evolutionary worldview?

We live in a day when psychologists and medical personnel alike advocate a culture of death. Doctors will continue to do no harm, unless of course they can't make you feel better. As the headline reads, "Doctors may now kill perfectly healthy adults." It's not enough that we kill perfectly healthy babies when a woman doesn't want to take responsibility for her actions, now we will kill perfectly healthy adults when they don't want to take responsibility for their feelings.

"Stupefied by soma, and exhausted by a long-drawn frenzy of sensuality, the Savage lay sleeping . . . he awoke . . . then suddenly remembered everything. 'Oh, my God, my God!' He covered his eyes with his hand . . . 'Savage!' called the first arrivals, 'Mr. Savage!' There was no answer. The door of the lighthouse was ajar. . . .They pushed it open. . . Just under the crown of the arch dangled a pair of feet. 'Mr. Savage!' Slowly, very slowly, like two unhurried compass needles, the feet turned towards the right; north, north-east, east, south-east, south, south-south-west; then paused, and, after a few seconds, turned as unhurriedly back towards the left. South-south-west, south, south-east. . . 1

[1] Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, pp. 176-177.

New Suicidality Warning for Paxil - Dr. Paul J. Dean

The issue of medication is raised frequently for the biblical counselor. Manifold are the dangers inherent in the notion that a category of mental problems exists as distinct from spiritual problems or physiological problems that are objectively verifiable. The danger increases when the idea that these unverifiable problems are associated with the physical brain and medication is embraced as the solution. Among others, biblical counselors have long warned of the dangers involved in the hit and miss method of chemical introduction when little is known concerning the effects of such. A new report from the FDA Patient Safety News is but one among many that should give us even more pause concerning psychotropic medication.

According to the aforementioned report, “GlaxoSmithKline is notifying healthcare professionals about new warnings on the risk of suicidality with Paxil (paroxetine) and Paxil CR. These labeling changes relate to adult patients, especially young adults, ages 18 to 24.”

“The company recently conducted a meta-analysis of clinical trials in adult patients taking paroxetine that looked at suicidal behavior and ideation. These patients had a variety of psychiatric disorders, including Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), other depression, and non-depressive disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder.”

“As a result of these findings, the company says that it is important that all patients, especially young adults, be carefully monitored during paroxetine therapy regardless of the condition being treated.”

The risk of suicide is a serious issue, especially when such medication is prescribed for a variety of presenting symptoms and not merely those connected to depression. Even so, it is common to treat persons who are suicidal with medication that clearly warns of increased risk of suicidality. I myself have counseled individuals in just such circumstances. Where is the logic there?

Reports of suicidality in young persons taking certain psychotropic medications have been out for some time now. And yet, consider what a pharmacist friend of mine noted: “Notice how the age range (18-24yrs) in this suicide warning is creeping upward. Remember, a similar warning was issued for younger teens with another SSRI antidepressant. Won't it be interesting when all age groups get the same warning about suicide? These neuro-chemical enhancing medications are highly specific and should be taken with caution, fully considering the risk/benefit ratio.”

It will indeed be interesting when all age groups get the same warning. One wonders if people will get the message: these drugs may produce an effect but not without great risk. And, even with the effect, do they produce a cure? The answer to that question is an unqualified “no” by all accounts. To rephrase, these neuro-chemical enhancing medications should be rejected in favor of Christ and the sufficiency of His word to help us in our time of need.

The Revolutionary Potential of Pastoral Discipleship/Counseling - Dr. Paul J. Dean

In the last quarter of the twentieth century, much of the church seemed to experience a rediscovery as it were, of the importance of the role of the pastor as equipper. Paul wrote in Eph. 4:11-12, "And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ. . . ." Rightly has it been said that twenty percent of the church performs eighty percent of the work. This estimate may even be generous with regard to the non-working majority. If the church is to function as God intended, if the church is to be obedient to the command of Christ to "make disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:19)," the pastor will have to fulfill his role as equipper while the saints will have to fulfill their role as minister.

Large numbers of persons in the church today seemingly remain ignorant to the biblical revelation regarding the respective roles of the pastor and saint. Many Christians remain ignorant not only to the equipping ministry of the pastor, but also to the equipping ministry of the Holy Spirit as He gifts His people for works of service (1 Corinthians 12). The church is in dire need of pastors who will understand their role and in turn teach the people their role that the cause of Christ might be advanced. A need exists for pastors to follow Christ, not only by way of personal discipleship, but by way of obedience to His command to make disciples by "teaching them to obey all things [He] has commanded (Matt. 28:20)." Moreover, a need exists for pastors to follow Christ in His example of training.

In his book, The Master Plan of Discipleship, Robert E. Coleman points out that in being disciple-makers, pastors are to be learners of Christ and are to make learners of Christ. "It shouldn't seem strange that the Master Teacher places such a high priority on discipling. After all, Jesus was simply asking His followers to do what He had done with them. That is why they could understand it. As they had freely received, now they were to transmit what they had learned to other seekers of truth. The mandate was the articulation of the rule by which Christ had directed His ministry. Though slow, and not accomplished without great sacrifice, He knew His way would succeed. For as individuals learn of Him and follow the pattern of His life they will invariably become disciplers, and as their disciples in turn do the same, someday through multiplication the world will come to know Him whom to know aright is life everlasting."

The goal of the pastor is to make disciples who will in turn make disciples of others. As pastors learn of Christ, they can teach others to learn of Christ. This process of learning and teaching to learn can only occur if the focus is upon the Master, Christ Himself. A. B. Bruce, in his classic work The Training of the Twelve, noted, "To be a dutiful under-shepherd is, in another view, to be a faithful sheep, following the chief Shepherd withersoever He goes. Pastors are not lords over God's heritage, but mere servants of Christ, the great head of the Church, bound to regard His will as their law, and His life as their model. In the scene by the lake Jesus took pains to make His disciples understand this. He did not allow them to suppose that, in committing to their pastoral charge His flock, He was abdicating His position as Shepherd and Bishop of souls. Having said to Peter, "Feed my lambs," "Feed my sheep," He said to him, as His final word, "Follow me." The biblical mandate is to follow Christ. As one follows Christ, one can lovingly point others to Christ.

Writing in the forward to Bruce's book, D. Stuart Briscoe commented that "Dr. Bruce would have felt right at home with the present emphasis on training people to minister. . ." Further, "Seeing the church as the Body of Christ is another healthy contemporary emphasis. It serves to deliver people from the mistaken idea that the church is something people attend and introduces them to the biblical concept that the church is something people are. For Christians to see themselves as the Body of Christ and to order their lives in loving response to each other as fellow members, committed to mutual nurture, is potentially revolutionary."

Among other things, making disciples the way Chirst did will require an investment of time in the lives of people. Periodically, a group of men and I meet for breakfast for a period of weeks to engage in some study or go through a book that we might be edified and better equipped for ministery. Rarely does a day go by that I do not meet with someone in the church for lunch for the simple purpose of biblical fellowship that we might grow in grace. Afternoons are typically filled meeting with couples or individuals for counseling and discipleship. We offer classes and small group discipleship opportunities throughout the week. The wonderful result is that many in the church are now doing these same types of things on their own. Early morning prayer meetings, couples meeting together, formal counseling, informal counsleing at the local coffee shop, and a number of other dynamics are the norm in our congregation. Of course, God gets the credit for these things as He is the One who works in our lives.

I have much to learn regarding these things as well. I am no great example. I am simply putting into practice in a small way what others have taught me and I am calling others to do the same. One of my favorite definitions for evangelism comes from D.T. Niles: "Evangelism is one begger telling another begger where to find bread." His sentiment is applicable here. I have found bread for pastoral ministry. Much has come from my good friend and former associate pastor. Much has come from reading the likes of Richard Baxter (The Reformed Pastor). Much has come from the discipline of biblical counseling and the influence of those I have met through IABC. All has come from God's gracious hand.

As Christians are trained to edify one another and make disciples of others, as they embrace Christ's now radical notion that they are the ministers, true reformation in the church and transformation of the culture could occur. To that end, we exist as the church that God might be glorified. To that end we should desire to train others, not only in our own churches, but in other churches that the members of Christ's body might make disciples who make disciples that God might be exalted in their hearts and lives. May God kindle in the hearts of His pastors a blazing desire to equip, train, and minister, that souls might be saved, that churches might be strengthened, and that God might be worshipped by many.

A Call to Sexual Purity - Dr. Paul J. Dean

The proliferation of pornography in our culture is alarming to say the least. What was years ago considered to be deviant is now mainstream and what was difficult to obtain years ago is now available with the click of a mouse button. We face a scourge today. Consider that in 1998, over thirty percent of the sites on the Web were pornographic. One wonders what the figure is today as close to one-thousand porn websites have been added daily since that time.

This scourge is not relegated to the world but has swept into the church on a wave. In 2002, a New Man Magazine online poll reported that 75% of Christian men have viewed pornography in the last three months and that 43% have done so repeatedly. 37% of pastors, in a Christianity Today survey, admitted that they struggle with Internet pornography. A local newscast highlighted the rampant sexual activity among teenagers in our high schools. When interviewed, the general tenor expressed by the teenagers was simply this: "if you think your child is not involved in sexual activity, then you are truly in the dark."

Because of this proliferation in our society, the theme of this year's International Association of Biblical Counselors annual conference is The Narrow Road. A clarion call to sexual purity is being issued to Christians. This call to purity is part of God's call to us in salvation. Three exhortations are inherent in this call.

First, regarding sexual purity, don't reject God's call. In 1 Thes. 4:7-8, Paul is completing his thought in regard to the Christian's obligation to be different from the world, particularly in the area of sexual purity: the Christian is to be sexually pure. He now conveys this obligation in theological terms connected to God's operation in the believer's life as well as to God's person. In other words, He connects the Christian's obligation to who God is. Thus, Paul affirms, "For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness."

The apostle refers to God's call. The particular call in view here connotes a two-fold dynamic. God effectually calls persons out of darkness and into light, that is, out of spiritual death and into spiritual life. He makes them alive by His Spirit in the act of regeneration. This dynamic is a work of God wrought in the individual's heart and life. Quickend by the Spirit, the individual is then enabled and willing to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ unto justification before Holy God.

Moreover, the effectual call has real consequences. God not only calls us out of darkness but He calls us to Himself. As He does so, He calls us to a lifestyle that is reflective of Him, that is, His power in our lives, His grace in our lives, and His character in our lives.

This call is both a reality and a responsibility. We are called to reflect God's glory in the sense that we will by virtue of the operation of the Spirit within us. He who does not reflect God in his life does not know God. At the same time, this reality places the onus upon us to make sure that we live to God's glory. God commands us to glorify Him.

Further, it is the reality of who we are that motivates us to live as who we are. Elsewhere, Paul says, "Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts Rom. 6:11-12)." That dynamic is in the mind of the apostle as he writes these words.

To what did God call us specifically here? He did not call us to uncleanness but to holiness. That is, He did not call is to impurity but to holiness. In context, Christians are not to engage in sexual immorality. They are called to something different and to be different than the world. Again, to be holy literally is to be different. Christians are to be different from the world in that they are not to be given to sexual impurity. They are effectually and obligatorily called to a lifestyle of purity reflective of the character of God.

Note further that God calls believers not merely to holiness, but "in holiness." The Christian is removed from the sphere of unrighteousness spiritually speaking. He is placed in a sphere or context that is holy. The Christian is no longer in the flesh but in the Spirit. He/she is no longer in Adam but in Christ. He /she is no longer in impurity but in holiness. That holiness, by virtue of union with Christ, surrounds the believer's mind and life in such a way that he/she must be different from the world. That does not mean that a Christian cannot stumble from time to time. But, it does mean that a true believer cannot live as the Gentiles. True believers are in holiness.

Second, regarding sexual purity, don't reject God's person. In v. 8, Paul draws a conclusion based upon the Christian's calling and makes plain what was previously implied. He explains, "Therefore he who rejects this does not reject man, but God, who has also given us His Holy Spirit." A few implications emerge.

The first implication is that the one who rejects Paul's teaching does not merely reject man, that is Paul the teacher or apostle, but he rejects God's word. In so doing, he rejects God Himself. Obviously, such a rejection is deadly serious, figuratively and literally.

The second implication is that the one who rejects "this" rejects God's call. No one can reject the effectual call of God. However, prior to the effectual call is the general call. He who rejects that call rejects God.

The third implication is that he who does not live a lifestyle of sexual purity proves that he has rejected God's call and therefore God Himself. He who rejects the obligation to purity rejects God Himself.

The fourth implication is that God has given genuine believers His Spirit. It is the Spirit of God who sanctifies the Christian and then calls and enables the Christian to live a holy life free from sexual immorality. The one who does not live that way does not have the Spirit of God.

Third, regarding sexual purity, don't reject God's messenger. While it is true that genuine believers have the Spirit of God and that reality is implied in the foregoing, Paul's meaning in saying that God has also "given us His Holy Spirit" is otherwise. False teachers had indeed questioned Paul's apostleship and integrity as noted in previous verses. Paul is here defending his ministry once again. As with the first implication above, Paul is saying that those who teach believers that sexual freedom is acceptable to God are not merely rejecting Paul the man's teaching, but they are rejecting God. Paul concludes by saying that he and his companions have the Spirit of God. Because God had given them His Spirit, what they were and said was representative of God. When God's representatives call persons to sexual purity, they speak for God.

This week, the IABC is calling people to purity. Don't reject God's call, God's person, or God's messengers. This week in Denver, His messengers are biblical counselors who will point you to the Word of God and the fact that it is more than enough to help individuals overcome sexual impurity and anything else not pleasing to the Lord. As Dr. Ed Bulkley, President of IABC noted, only when one sees Christ for who He is and by virtue of seeing Him in that way is given to love Him with all of his/her heart, will that person truly have peace and joy. May God grant you such today.