More on Jesus camps

[nebula]

To accept an intellectual backing is to acknowledge there is an intellectual backing to EVERYTHING.

Does that mean we will "know all things"? Even that is denounced in 1 Cor. 13.

Which was what?

7And they were amazed and astonished, saying, "Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? 9Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians--we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God." 12And all were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, "What does this mean?" 13But others mocking said, "They are filled with new wine."

14But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them, "Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words. 1

If there was no rational basis, why does Peter try to explain what is occuring? You can't explain something with authority and make it universal unless there is reasoning behind it.

Well, I've never heard of someone explaining that the diciples acting like they were drunk had a rational basis before - but fair enough.

As I have proven in this thread and in my other thread in Controversial issues, you cannot have compassion or mourn with others unless you use reasoning at a base...even if you do not realize you are doing this, it is still done on a subconscience level.

No, you didn't prove.

Can you give a rational explanation for why, as I was trying to find the words to answer you, I suddenly burst into tears.

Never mind . . . I don't want hear what rational reason you want to give for my pain.

[apothanein kerdos]

Does that mean we will "know all things"? Even that is denounced in 1 Cor. 13.

No, it means there is a rational basis behind everything. I never said we have a complete epistemology though.

Well, I've never heard of someone explaining that the diciples acting like they were drunk had a rational basis before - but fair enough.

And you haven't responded to it....if it was irrational then how could Peter respond and explain it? This was the core of the existential movement, that if something was irrational it was unexplainable.

Can you give a rational explanation for why, as I was trying to find the words to answer you, I suddenly burst into tears.

For the third time, read my essay in controversial issues, there can be irrational emotional responses, but they are generally negative responses and not appropriate to the context.

[nebula]

Unlike you I like to keep some things private.

Maybe that is why I cried.

I feel your wall.

Dear Jesus, such a terrible wall.

I can't fight it any more.

It hurts, Lord! It hurts!

[apothanein kerdos]

Unlike you I like to keep some things private.

Maybe that is why I cried.

I feel your wall.

Dear Jesus, such a terrible wall.

I can't fight it any more.

It hurts, Lord! It hurts!

It's not a wall, it's that I don't share things when I don't find it necessary. That is prudence in who I release information to and who I don't. When applicable, I share it with ease.

For someone who complains about being judged, you do A LOT of judging, especially on this issue. I've given you two good books to read, and this isn't the first time. You've had a chance, at this point it's willfull ignorance of my position.

[Kabowd]

I've watched two reports on this now on ABC, and watched the interview with the camp Pastor (the lady in the clip). There is no doubt in my mind that these kids are being manipulated and encouraged to produce emotional responses. That's not to say that they aren't being taught truth, but it's imbalanced and will ultimately end up being a detriment to their faith rather than a benefit. Gah, it really disturbed and infuriated me.

[Marnie]

I've watched two reports on this now on ABC, and watched the interview with the camp Pastor (the lady in the clip). There is no doubt in my mind that these kids are being manipulated and encouraged to produce emotional responses. That's not to say that they aren't being taught truth, but it's imbalanced and will ultimately end up being a detriment to their faith rather than a benefit. Gah, it really disturbed and infuriated me.

I agree. G-d made us both thinking and feeling beings, but this is so obviously a case of brainwashing and manipulation. Like I said earlier, it's creepy. Things like this make the whole church look ridiculous.

[sierra21]

Yes- these "Jesus camps" are bogus. It scares me to know that people actually send their children to places like these....we are looming into a whole other realm of cult activity here. Seriously.

When I was a kid I never went to Bible camp. My fiancee did and some of his stories are downright scary. The thing that scares me even more is that he doesn't think there was anything wrong with some of the things that they were told to do...still brainwashed? Maybe so. All I know is that he's agreed that we are never sending our children to camps such as these....so at least I can rest easy knowing that.

[LadyRaven]

btw, the way I know it is because it's something I believed, and not long ago. If you look back to some of my stuff from 2003 and 2004 (when I first joined) you'll see I was teaching the same dualism...I came to later realize that I was wrong.

So if you were wrong then, why do you suppose that you are not still wrong now?

But my real question is this: Are you saying that we can know God through reason alone?

Can the mind of man really understand the mind of God? If so, what part does revelation play?

I think of Peter and I don't see much intellectual reason in that stubborn guy who was frequently putting his foot in his mouth - one minute being praised by Jesus and the next minute being chastised by Him. I see a simple untrained and uneducated man (Acts 4:13) who had a personal encounter with the Living God that changed him in a way that impacted people (Acts 2:14).

So tell me again that we can only know God through reason and not revelation ... ?

We cannot know God outside of revelation. However God has provided several types of revelation. He is active in our lives and speaks to us individually through the work of the Holy Spirit in us and also through His word. The first is primarily experiential and thus we always have to evaluate it via the second, as the second is solid and unchanging while the first can be misinterpreted by us... or we can be fooled by the enemy or the influence of our SELVES or OTHERS also.

I don't know what to make of the camps without visiting one. I have hunches and they aren't particularly favourable.

[LadyRaven]

Then what do you mean? If you are supporting an intellectual basis for faith, then how can you support these camps?

How do you know that camps are not also giving intellectual faoundations? The way the video is presented, I don't even know if the producers are praising the camp or are giving them an appearance of evil (Dumpalink? What kind-of a website is that anyway?)

These websites are like Youtube and whatnot. Clips can be stored there to be played over and over once it has left the mainstream media sites. Nothing sinister in and of itself.

But before I answer your question, I'd like for you to answer something:

Do you have a problem with the kids cheering back and forth at each other: "I love Jesus, yes I do! I love Jesus, how about you?"

Do you have a problem with the boy preaching?

(Please answer.)

I do very much have a problem with a boy preaching. He's not a mature adult male as indicated by scripture. Scripture is the final authority as to what is correct and we should follow it. If the child has the gift, he will eventually be ready to exercise it in time.

I don't care one way or another about cheers, so long as other teaching is going on. Again...a five year old concerned about abortion can be a symptom of a very skewed approach to this or a very intense doctrinal approach and this clip doesn't indicate which. If the child does not completely understand what abortion is, then it's wrong to have her ask God or anyone else to end it. That is the job of we who understand. Of course this church project could be producing children with a secure heavy duty doctrinal knowledge, but I have to wonder for a while about that because of many reasons, which I will get to later on.

I guess I'll try to explain this way. If were a parent, and I had to chose between sending my children to a camp and I had to chose between one that increased their intellect and one that taught them how to live the Bible, I'd chose the one that taught them how to live the Bible.

\

And how would they know that what they are being told is the correct way to live the Bible? They could be being fed spiritual garbage and they would never be able to discern it without a spiritual foundation which is based on actually studying and understanding the word.

I'm not against experiences, I've had many powerful ones. I'm against experiences which have no foundation in scripture or for which the people having them cannot discern that they are biblical. (I'm not sure that sentance is correct, I'm on pain killers but I hope you get what I'm attempting to say).

These camps have brough up a few issues about how we bring our children (by our children I mean the church's children...not just those who have parents who are believers) up in the faith. I'll share them and probably offend both sides of this camp...in another post.

[LadyRaven]

OK, now I'm gonna royally tick everyone off I think. I hope not, I don't decide to go out and do so, however I am quite aware that given the "culture" of Christianity today on this issue I run a very high risk of doing so.

I don't believe in Children's Church. I don't believe in Church Camps which separate child from parent. I'm even against age graded Sunday Schools, with the exceptions of temporary studies on some topics which are...more appropriate for people who know the facts of life. I believe it violates the nature of the way the family and the church is supposed to operate and is actually a form of becoming like the world. Yes, I used that evil "worldly" indicator I'm not fond of using but this is one thing I do believe is from the world and not from God.

Therefore and on that fact alone I disagree with these camps. I have to go no further into this discussion as the rest is really not all that important. To divide the youth from the parents is wrong biblically, it's one of those things we learned from the world.

I could start explaining myself, however this person here has done a very good job of making my point so I'll let him do it. What is below is a cut and paste from the website linked here.

The following article is from Credenda/Agenda:

Presbyterian: Volume 3, Number 6

** While we do not agree with all of the points and principles espoused in the following article, we believe the author's survey of the history of youth ministry, and his call to churches to better equip parents as disciplers of their own children is a timely and helpful message.

A Critique of Youth Ministries

by Chris Schlect

You can purchase a booklet copy of this excellent critique from:

Canon Press, Box 8741, Moscow Idaho 83843

1-800-488-2034

Just 150 years ago, our attitude toward time drastically shifted this was the result of societal circumstances coupled with evolutionary theory. Before the mid1800s, time was arranged according to significant events. European history, for example, was seen in terms of ruling families: the Stuarts, Hapsburgs, Bourbons, etc. Today, by contrast, we speak of the fifties, sixties, and seventies.

Before the last century, the phrases on time, ahead of time, and behind time meant nothing. The

industrial revolution forced a new concept of time upon us. Railroads ran on schedules and factories

paid hourly wages rather than performance based wages. In 1884, representatives from 25 nations

met in Washington, D.C., settled on Greenwich, England as the prime meridian, fixed the exact length

of a day (for the first time in world history), and divided the globe into 24 time zones. We have been

carrying Father Time on our shoulders ever since.

This new spotlight on time, though beneficial in many respects, shone in areas it shouldn't have,

particularly in the new stress on individual age. Prior to the mid-nineteenth century, birthdays were

neither mentioned nor celebrated. Age wasn't even included as a category in the 1850 census it

wasn't considered important. It wasn't uncommon to graduate from a university at age 17, or age 28,

or any age between. Students matured at their own rate. What's more, there was no impetus to

segregate based on maturity level; the one room schoolhouse was the norm. Even in social gatherings,

children, who were considered to be miniature adults, mingled with people much older than

themselves.

Horace Mann changed this first in the classroom by fastening students to a fixed learning pace.

Consistent with the onset of evolutionary thinking, progress had become synonymous with the

passage of time. For the first time ever, students were segregated by age. Based on some

demographic norm, they would be judged "ahead" or "behind" their peer group. "Normal" was an

arbitrary standard superimposed upon the wealth of data that indicates wide disparity between rates

of maturation.

In 1904, G. Stanley Hall's multivolume tome, Adolescence: Its Psychology, and its Relations to

Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion and Education was published. Using

social applications of Darwin's work in biology, Hall suggested that individuals evolve through the

same stages through which human history has evolved. He associated infants and toddlers to

presavage periods of history; he thus counseled parents and teachers to leave their young children to

Nature and encourage play which fosters motor development. A crisis transition period led to the

adolescent years of 8 to 12, which were likened to the early pygmies and other savages; these

children could be drilled and disciplined in school. He claimed that another period of crisis came at

adolescence, which he considered the most critical period in one's life. This time in life was seen to be

so important that it separated teens from those older and younger to them.

In short, G. Stanley Hall invented adolescence.

Like most evolutionists, Hall also taught that each generation is or should be superior to the previous

one, and therefore needs to break free from those which precede it. In practical terms, this thinking

has come to mean that rebellion is youth's destiny, and is a natural characteristic of adolescence.

John Dewey, Hall's most renowned follower, put these theories into practice in the public school

system. Dewey's prescriptions were implemented in classrooms all over the country.

In order to isolate the "crisis period," high schools were created to segregate the teens from other

children and from adults. Within a generation after Dewey, we saw, for the first time in the history of

the Western World, an adolescent subculture. By the 1950's, teens had their own music, literature,

styles of dress, language and etiquette. Generational differences hitherto unheard of became obvious.

(Hall, of course, had noticed the "peer orientation" of adolescents at the turn of the century: he forced

young people to study and associate together and then pointed out that they were doing so.)

Tragically, the modern evangelical church has followed the trends set by Mann, Hall and Dewey. We

have developed AWANA programs for young children who later move on to junior and senior high

youth groups. Senior highs graduate to the college/singles group; when they marry, they join the young

couples group. Bible studies are structured for parents of toddlers, parents of teens, and

"empty nesters." Elderly women congregate to quilting groups and elderly men are left out, wondering

what kids these days are coming to.

In other words, evangelical churches have honored divisions which have no basis in either Scripture

or common sense. These divisions breed immaturity, for they prevent younger people from

associating with and learning from their elders. The prophets and apostles didn't assume such a state

of affairs at all, but seemed rather to assume that all ages would interact together in harmonious

fellowship within the church. The Scriptures contain directives which promote cross generational

interaction; consequently we should avoid any cultural patterns which may hinder our obedience to

such directives.

Bearing this in mind, we need to reconsider the structure and methods of the modern phenomenon of

"youth ministries." Many churches have them, but few have built them according to biblical patterns

for the church. This will be specifically addressed in the next issue.

Hear, my children, the instruction of a father, and give attention to know understanding; for I give you good doctrine: Do not forsake my law. When I was my father's son, tender and the only one in the sight of my mother, he also taught me, and said to me: "Let your heart retain my words; keep my commands, and live..." (Proverbs 4:14)

You shall rise up before the gray headed and honor the presence of an old man, and fear your

God: I am the Lord (Leviticus 19:32).

Let no one despise your youth, but be an example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love,

in spirit, in faith, in purity (1 Timothy 4:12).

Flee also youthful lusts; but pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace with those who call on the

Lord out of a pure heart (2 Timothy 2:22).

Our society has taken a shocking turn. In the 1950's we saw the development of a subculture that

was peculiar to young people. This was the first time the Western World had ever seen an

age exclusive subculture. Now, a little more than a generation later, that youth subculture has become

the dominant culture in our society.

In terms of culture in all its forms, art, dress, music, etiquette, and entertainment, we train up our little

ones to make the most of their youth. High school is the pinnacle of life. Young people dream of

being high school seniors, and when they reach the age of eighteen they are on top of the world.

What's worse, the world, old and young, bows down to them.

By age thirty we are already past our prime. We begin the frantic post twenties pattern of fitness,

facelifts, weekend recreation, and spicy relationships which "make us feel young again." Late

twentieth century America is not allowing itself to grow up. We have established a pattern of

perpetual regress that is tearing down the last vestiges of maturity that our fathers labored to achieve.

This regress happens when we ignore the mandates in Scripture which implore the young and old to

interact with one another. With age comes wisdom that needs to be passed on to young

people. Older people must be eager to share it, and younger people must be eager to receive it.

The so-called "generation gap" (a twentieth century invention) has been used as an excuse for age

segregation, but Scripture speaks of no such thing. Our Lord prohibits the perpetuation of immaturity

that results when the younger generation is left to itself. Instead, our children should be standing on

our shoulders.

When young people exclusively interact with one another and make their own rules, a "herd

mentality" develops: they follow in the footsteps of one another rather than those of adults. The

problem is not peer interaction per se, but irresponsible parental oversight. Young people should

never be allowed to form a herd. Though peer interaction is often profitable, it is only so when it

promotes maturity. From their birth, children should see themselves as adults to be, growing into an

adult world. They must never be trained to think that perpetual youth is life's aim.

Therefore the church ought to be wary of what some call an ideal youth ministry. Such a ministry pulls

teens away from their elders, brings them together, and encourages them to revel in their youth. Even

worse, children are drawn away from home in order to keep church commitments. I have seen youth

ministries where the "deeply committed" kids are at the church four nights a week!

Some are frustrated that the church is too slow in keeping up with societal trends. But they are

encouraged to see the church closing in: Amy Grant and Michael W. Smith have made the top 40,

and This Present Darkness is being made into a movie. And, most important of all, youth ministries

are learning to follow the latest fads in order to sell Christianity to today's teen.

Perhaps we should step back and ask ourselves if our standards are too low, patterned after the

standards of our declining culture. Youth ministries have not solved the problem, they have become

part of it. Our goal has been to provide a place where kids will have fun in a wholesome atmosphere.

We don't want our kids to be immature in a worldly way, but rather in a "Christian" way. So we

reject a pagan immaturity, and embrace a "Christian" immaturity. In the name of good clean

wholesome fun, immaturity is perpetuated.

Building on our foundation, our children ought to move far beyond the goals we achieve. Our

grandchildren should be raised better than our children. They should have a deeper understanding of

God's word, their Christian worldview should be more refined, and their fear of God should be more

profound than ours.

The biblical standard is "godly offspring" (Mal. 2:15): descendants of whom we will not be ashamed,

sharp arrows who rise up and contend with our enemies at the gate (Ps. 127:5). If this standard is not

met, parents bear the full responsibility. The Scriptures couldn't be more clear: the responsibility for

the upbringing of children in every area is given primarily to parents (Deut. 6:7, Eph. 6:4, passim).

Responsible youth ministry in the church involves teaching and exhorting parents.

The focus of next month's essay will be to cover specific problems with modern youth ministries, and

to suggest alternatives for those who are tired of imitating the world.

Now Eli was very old; and he heard everything his sons did to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who assembled at the door of the tabernacle of meeting. So he said to them, "Why do you do such things? For I hear of your evil dealings from all the people. No, my sons! For it is not a good report that I hear. You make the Lord's people transgress." . . . Nevertheless they did not heed the voice of their father. . . (1 Samuel 2:2225).

Was the behavior of Eli's sons inconsistent with their upbringing? After all, they were raised in the

tabernacle what better environment could there be for raising young people? In spite of this, the text

reveals important factors which indicate that Eli's sons were not brought up well.

Notice that the detestable practices of his sons were not apparent to Eli until he was an old man.

Furthermore, he did not witness his sons' public sin himself, instead he heard about it from someone

else ("it is not a good report that I hear"). Eli fell far short of his responsibility for the oversight and

discipline of his sons, a pattern that had apparently continued for years. Eli was an unfaithful father,

and the judgment of God fell on him accordingly (1 Sam. 2:27ff). And at the very least, he provided a

poor example for Samuel, whose sons also turned out badly (1 Sam. 8:1-3).

Sadly, many parents today shun their parental responsibilities just as Eli did. This is clearly evidenced

by the thriving day care industry and overcrowded public schools. Evangelicals bemoan this breakup

of the "traditional family" and call for a return to "profamily values." It is ironic that many vocal

proponents of "profamily values" advance "solutions" that are either political or ecclesiastical. But this

does not face the heart of the problem. The breakup of the family isn't due to a deterioration of our

legislators' values, but rather to a deterioration of fatherly values.

Scripture clearly places the responsibility for child rearing on fathers: "And you, fathers, do not

provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord"

(Ephesians 6:14). Many parents feel that they are "doing their job" by seeing their children off to

youth group on Wednesday nights. Most do little or nothing more, and thus fall far short of what God

demands of them as parents. Fathers are responsible for directly overseeing their children in spiritual

matters a responsibility which cannot be delegated to a youth pastor. Today we speak well of

parents who support church youth activities, but they ought to have much more than a supporting

role.

Effective youth ministry is the father's task; he has the responsibility to establish a godly atmosphere in

the home. Fathers must be leaders in worship, prayer, reading and studying the Bible, and in

fellowship with other saints. Moses demanded that the fathers of Israel rear their children in an

environment of God's law; its majesty was to be plainly manifest to them everywhere they turned

(Deut. 6:69). This standard remains, and fathers today are required to meet it. If children do not

come face to face with God in every aspect of their lives, their fathers, through abdication, are

bringing them up in practical atheism.

Where does this leave the modern church youth ministry? When fathers are doing what they ought to

be doing, youth ministry as we know it has no place. Where fathers have abandoned their

responsibility, churches should not focus on the abandoned children, but rather on the fathers. This is

to be approached in three areas:

First, the elders of the church should provide other fathers with examples of godly child-rearing in

their own households. Elders with harmonious households and faithful children are required in the

body of Christ (1 Tim. 3:45; Titus 1:6). As elders practice their fatherhood biblically, they will grow

better equipped to work with and teach other fathers (Heb. 5:14). Witnessing biblical family life at

work provides a great encouragement to cultivate it in one's own home.

Second, fathers should be taught their responsibilities in the home and how they might be practically

met. This requires a great deal of labor in the Scriptures for all men in the body, beginning with the

elders. Fathers are shepherds in the home, and must acquaint themselves with the Word of God in

order to lead their families in worship, doctrinal instruction, prayer and Bible study. Attention to this

responsibility should constantly be brought to fathers when the believers gather. Diligence in this area

produces fruit. And because it is diligence that is biblically mandated, it produces fruit that lasts.

Third, biblical standards of fatherhood must be established and protected. Our cultural revolt against

maturity tempts us to lower our standards for child rearing. We may think we are doing well as long

as we do better than the pagan world around us, but God never patterns His norms after human

culture. Standards are established and maintained in the church by looking to God's Word, not by

looking at the world. God demands obedience of fathers, and anything short of obedience is sin. The

saints must have the courage to practice encouragement, admonishment, and rebuke within the

church whenever biblical standards of fatherhood are not met.

Most importantly, it must be remembered that godly families are a gift from the Lord they are the

result of His gracious work. Apart from the work of the Holy Spirit, no youth program or strategy for

fatherhood will amount to anything.