I. Conclusion:
The Biblical view of natural disasters is complex. Fundamentally they are part of the order of things in a good but fallen creation awaiting renewal and liberation (Rmns 8). To analyze specific events as the direct result of sin and judgement is to make the mistake of Job’s friends who only bring condemnation and it is to read all Scripture incorrectly through the lens of the specific context of the Old Testament prophets enforcing the Mosaic covenant. My reading of the New Testament is that God is not bringing judgement against cities but is commissioning his people to be agents of his redemption throughout the world, sharing the good news, planting and growing churches, and being salt and light in the world.
There is something incredibly psychologically powerful about the sense that we are caught up in an apocalyptic scenario where God is specifically acting in powerful ways in our context. Actually that perspective has some positive spiritual benefits – of passion, prayer, concern for others, dealing with sin etc etc.
However I think there is a fundamental distortion and therefore error in the intercessory prophetic movement when it is not aligned with and submitted to what I would call apostolic missional leadership i.e. a tool in the Father’s work of evangelism, church planting and societal transformation. It tends to overemphasize sin, prayer and judgement and underemphasize action in the world for good and God’s grace. It is a passive, reactive, separatist and very intense form of spirituality.
So I would make the following points:
· I do not agree that the earthquakes should be viewed as acts of God’s judgment against Christchurch.
· I do not accept as biblical the idea of the inevitability of God’s judgments
· I believe the Bible emphasizes a future final judgement for the world and cities and a present mission of gospel proclamation of grace and salvation, with a call to repentance, and therefore a willingness on the part of Christians to live with a present vulnerable mission that can be rejected
· I do believe God is using the situation of the earthquakes to awaken the church from slumber
· I believe this prophetic word clearly positions itself outside the normal parameters of a prophetic word, adopting a position that if authentic would represent an extraordinary authority, clarity and specificity of insight
· I believe we are warranted in expecting God to confirm such an unusual word that violates the usual suspicion of directional prophecy and precise dating.
· I believe the Christian movement needs to be led by missional leaders, leading a movement of gospel initiatives
· I acknowledge that the reaction this word provokes stretches people towards some biblical themes. It signals many values that should be there anyway in light of the more general truths regardless of the specific prediction – anyone could die at any time and there is a future final judgement: SO dealing with sin, heartfelt prayer for our city, humility before the holiness and majesty of God, boldness in sharing with our loved ones, passionate involvement in God’s mission, seeking to find rest and security in God, seeking closeness with God, desiring to hear his voice and obey… those are all good things that so easily slip away or lose their intensity in apathetic, comfortable slumber. It is helpful to have those stirred up. So thank you!
· I believe the worldview of the prophecy actually suggests some distortions of a biblical worldview particularly overemphasizing wrath, judgment, intercession and evil in the world and underestimating the impact of the cross, and thus the present age of church, grace and spirit-filled mission and the commission to a mission of positive harvest and growth and transformation.
· I acknowledge that the prophetic and intercessory movement adds something important to balanced ministry in the church. However I would suggest such prophetic people need to be in close relationship with apostolic, pastoral, teaching and evangelistic ministries (Eph 4). In particular they need to find their functioning within apostolic leadership of God’s mission in our city and province and such partnerships will in fact significantly alter the dominant ethos of the movement –towards mission, harvest, grace and growth rather than a remnant theology of the faithful praying about the inevitable judgement on sinners.
· I believe that such a word should have been submitted to significant, recognized, godly leaders in the city and unless there is multiple witness to it, it should be shelved awaiting confirmation.
This seeks to take seriously a person of God putting out there what they believe they are hearing from God (Good on them!) but also my responsibility to weigh it and to listen to the church weighing it, my understanding that any word will be a mixture and reflect a person’s theological framework while also acknowledging my own limited framework and seeking to make sense of it all in the light of Scripture and to offer pastoral advice on how to respond.
So unless a number of key mature recognized leaders say either that yes God has also spoken to them of another major earthquake coming soon OR they say this word witnesses with them, then:
1. I will embrace the call to passion, prayer, turning to God, finding security in God and urgency of mission and I will seek to take my part in the further awakening of God’s church in Christchurch.
2. I will reject the emphasis on present judgement and wrath and the interpretation of the earthquakes as judgement (because I believe God’s mode of operation between Jesus bearing his wrath of the cross and the final judgement is God sending his people in gospel proclamation of salvation).
3. I will ignore the specific details of prediction and leave them on the shelf requiring further confirmation for such an out of the ordinary, specific date-setting prophecy, knowing that I am not responsible to act on just a single “word”.
I think that is about the wisest course of action I can come up with right now. What about you?
