esesang91.com 정태홍목사

두란노아버지학교_ A Problem With the "Promise Keepers"
두란노아버지학교_ A Problem With the "Promise Keepers"

A Problem With the "Promise Keepers"
Introduction:
A. By now, surely most of us have heard of "Promise Keepers," and many of us know someone who has participated in the movement.
B. Two Promise Keepers stadium events have taken place in our area. Last year, "Stand in the Gap," which took place on the mall in Washington D.C., brought together thousands of men in support of the group's agenda.
C. Many of our brethren support, promote and attend the Promise Keepers conventions in various places. Just how far should the Christian go in support of and participation in the movement?

What is "Promise Keepers?"
1. Promise Keepers is an organization founded in 1990 by Bill McCartney, former head football coach at the University of Colorado. It operates regional offices throughout the U.S. and outside the U.S.
  1. Their Mission Statement: "Promise Keepers is a Christ-centered ministry dedicated to uniting men through vital relationships to become godly influences in their world."
  2. From their own website: "Promise Keepers is a Christian outreach to men. Through stadium conferences, educational seminars, resource materials, and local churches, Promise Keepers encourages men to live godly lives and to keep seven basic promises of commitment to God, their families and fellow man."
2. The group addresses a very basic need in our nation -- that of encouraging men to be the kinds of leaders in the home God would have them to be. To the extent it has encouraged the formation of godly character in man, and to the extent it has saved marriages and pointed men toward God, we would salute it.
3. However, there are other issues involved. Certain things addressed and promoted by Promise Keepers give cause for concern. We shall examine some of them.
Causes for Concern
1. What could possibly be wrong with such a movement as this? After all, it is committed to:
  1. Promoting racial harmony.
  2. Healing broken marriages.
  3. Encouraging men to rise to the occasion to fill their God-given role of spiritual headship in the family.
  4. Encouraging men to be the kinds of husbands and fathers God would have them be.
2. Moreover, there is a great temptation to overlook the possibility that perhaps we should not be supportive of this movement.
  1. We might think our objections to P.K. will seem silly to the denominational world.
  2. However, similar voices of concern have been raised by denominational preachers and others. David Hagopian and Douglas Wilson, Presbyterians, speak of their promise of "obedience to God's word" as being rendered impossible by "doctrinal compromise."
3. Consider some of the areas which should cause brethren to take notice, and in some cases, reconsider their support of this movement:
  1. Compromise of truth -- The subjugation of truth to the cause of the movement.
    1. This is what happens in a movement when the biblical basis for unity (John 17:17, 20-22) is made subservient to the particular cause of the movement itself.
    2. F. LaGard Smith writes: ". . .when the line between common cause and an unbiblical 'Christian unity' is crossed, I simply can't join with them. It's that other promise I've got to keep -- to be fully obedient to God's word" (Who Is My Brother, pg. 72).
    3. Tarbet and Holton affirm: "Involvement in Promise Keepers will dull our appreciation for truth."
  2. PK's plan of salvation.
    1. Can a Christian consistently join hands with those who teach a fatal error at the most basic level?
    2. Yet, it is apparent that the PK plan of salvation is at odds with Scripture, though it harmonizes with what most denominations teach: "Pray this prayer to accept or reaffirm your acceptance of Christ: 'Father, I've come home. Please make me your son. I turn from my sin. I accept your forgiveness made possible through Jesus Christ by his death and resurrection. I place my faith and trust in Jesus Christ alone. I receive him as my Savior and Lord. I want to follow and serve you. Let today be the beginning of my new journey as your son and a member of your family. You have always kept your promises. Help me to keep my promises, too. In Jesus name. Amen.' Welcome to the family of God!" (From their Official Web Site).
  3. The promotion of open fellowship without regard to doctrinal differences.
    1. There is a standard way of dealing with doctrinal disparity among denominations, which is incorporated by this movement as well.
    2. It is illustrated well by Max Lucado's speech at the 1997 "Stand in the Gap" rally in Washington, D.C. He asked all present to say the name of their religious group at the same time. As expected, the result was a confusing noise of indiscernible words. Then, he told them to say the name of their Savior. Of course, this was a clearly recognizable corporate utterance of the word "Jesus." The longer he spoke, it became apparent that his point was that we should overlook our. doctrinal differences to promote unity among those who claim Jesus as Savior.
    3. PK perpetuates the old idea that doctrinal differences are of no real consequence. This becomes more problematic when we consider how they believe their 7 promises are derived: "The Seven Promises are not man-made rules but are each taken from biblical instruction on spiritual growth."
    4. The interest in doctrinal compromise is seen in a section from the PK Ambassador's Instructional Booklet, regarding things to avoid mentioning in promoting the movement in churches -- such things as: "eternal security; the gifts of the Spirit; baptism; pre-tribulation or post-tribulation; sacraments or ordinances."
  4. Unfair criticism of the church.
    1. I have seen in print certain negative talk about the church associated with the current discussion of Promise Keepers.
    2. Accusations toward the church, of our having been successful in addressing doctrinal concerns, but "woeful failures" in the area of relationships.
  5. Promotion of inconsistency.
    1. Church bulletin articles acknowledging the reservations one should have about the movement, nonetheless strongly endorse and promote it. What about the younger, less mature Christians, who are unable to discern the dangers of the movement? Are they warned about attending?
    2. One in defending what he saw as the good done in the movement, said he would support anything which addressed such needs in the family. Would he support and attend a meeting of the Mormons, or Louis Farrakan's Nation of Islam?
    3. As stated in David Tarbet and Kerry Holton's booklet "Promise Keepers: What are the Issues?," "It is irresponsible to promote Promise Keepers from the church bulletin and pulpit."

Conclusion: A. Naturally, conscientious brethren will be interested in doing good in whatever way is right. This raises questions about which things we can support with good conscience. For example, can a Christian support such things as the Salvation Army and the local rescue mission? Admittedly, the question is not always an easy one to answer.
B. More important than the question of which particular agencies and works one could support is the question of which principles will guide his decision. A few of the things one should consider:
1. Is the organization affiliated with a religious group or is it a religious organization?
2. Does the organization involve itself in the teaching of religious doctrine? Often, this is not as easy to determine as we might think. Some groups are not as obvious as others in their adherence to and teaching of religious doctrine.
3. Will my support of the group, either explicitly or subtly, place me in a situation in which I appear to support religious error?
C. Connected with this question is the need for the church to be all that it should be, so that brethren will not feel the need to support good works which are outside of the church.
(자료출처 http://www.discoveret.org/claxtonc/pk.htm)

RPTministries 정태홍 목사
http://www.esesang91.com
http://twtkr.com/rptministries
http://www.facebook.com/RPTministries