Tickled Theology

Ear Tickling. It always makes me think of a feather in my ear. Which makes my ear itch. But as interesting as this mental picture may be, ear tickling is a serious subject in the modern world. (and always will be) What does this term mean?

Well, lets take a look at what Scripture says on this subject. In Second Timothy 4:3 we find this verse. 

For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions,

One of the first thing that comes to mind when we hear this is the Health and Wealth craze we currently endure. The preachers who tell people God will bless them if only they would smarten up and send in a donation. God will just send you a check for double that amount. Its dangerous teaching that people just like to hear. Then we also have the type who are motivational speakers or comedians who are "preachers". Also dangerous. But is that all?

I don't think so. I think that there is more to this verse than we see at first glance. When Paul wrote this he was waiting execution. (most likely) Paul gives Timothy some sound final advice about preaching. I believe that in this book we have some information that is a tad deeper than some people assume.

I started looking into more ways of "ear tickling" that go on in our modern world. I found another blog (credit where credit is due, the other blog is at  http://blog.yanceyarrington.com/2012/02/14/another-kind-of-ear-tickling/) and it also dealt with this issue. I thought the list of ear tickling warnings was quite interesting. Here it is...

1. When they give the impression their people could never understand the Bible without their help.
2. When they want to dazzle the congregation with their erudite knowledge of the original biblical languages (which they clandestinely learned from a computer program in their office) even though it really has no bearing on that particular passage for the day.
3. When they refuse to use lower shelf terms in order that the message might be more accessible for the hearer instead opting to employ obtuse, technical theo-jargon because not doing so might make them sound too normal.
4. When they’ve obviously exhausted their congregation with 20 weeks of word-by-word (not verse-by-verse) teaching on three chapters in the book of Romans and, even though they’ve run the sermons series into the ground, still continue with the homiletical drudgery because they believe they’ve got the preaching chops to make it happen.
5. When they use their sermons to moralize the Bible in order to moralize their people because it’s easier to work the Law over your congregation than show them their need for the Gospel.
6. When they go over that extra 20 minutes week after week because somehow, it would be a great injustice for all they’ve learned in their study to be constrained in the 45 minutes already allotted in that hour and fifteen minute service.
7. When they walk people through the Scriptures each Sunday showing the Bible to be the best “How To” book of success on the planet but miss the truth that it’s the Story of Redemption telling us the Good News we have failed but One has come and succeeded for us.

I agree with this concept. Jesus condemned the Pharisee, not the Publican in Luke 18:9-14. What I see is many preachers who preach sermons that are taken out of context, or extrapolated to a degree that is unsustainable by any proper form of reason, or that make big, grand statements on complex subjects with far too much authority in their voices.

This last group concerns me most. In the modern world we have few leaders. So those who take a stand are noticed. This is good, to a point. But what I am seeing is too many preachers and teachers who are taking things and making a stand on a subject where they are relying only on their own interpretation of Scripture. That is what caused the Roman Catholic Church to crumble in the Renaissance, and it is happening again before our very eyes. The ironic tragedy is that those who claim to have corrected the R.C. errors are now often falling into the same pit of self-verifying Theology. Things are not true because a great preacher says them. Things are true that are in line with God's point of view. If the preacher has God's view (as far as he can) then praise God. But many preachers want to define truth completely. They cannot.

Why can't we define truth completely? Why can we not say exactly who is a Christian and who is not? Because it is God's to judge. Oh, don't get me wrong, we know it is by Faith Alone. But who has faith? How much is needed? In what? We cannot answer these questions about people completely. Why? Because to understand this completely would mean we understood God completely. We cannot do that. To understand God completely would make us God's equals.  Yes, we can understand as much of God as He shows us, but we cannot assume that only what we have seen is part of God.

This is the error that hurts me the most in the modern world. Passing finite judgement on what is a true and false conversion. Yes, I believe false conversion can exist (to an extent). But it is not ours to judge those things. (Romans 14:10) I'm very alarmed by preachers who believe that they  can judge in five minutes who is saved and who is not. If this prayer is valid but that one is not, where do we end? What "salvation prayer" is listed in the Bible? There isn't any one prayer like that listed. I believe that that is an intentional situation that the Author gave us to deal with. Remember, man looks on the outside but God looks at the heart. (1 Sam. 16:7b) The prayer cannot save, the Faith does. Let us let God judge faith. He'll do His job, let us worry about ours. I Cor. 4:1-5