Chocolate, Kids, and PMA
By Bob W.
Lovelace
Paul certainly knew what he was talking about when he commanded Timothy to preach the word in season and out of season, thereby reproving, rebuking, and exhorting (2 Tim. 4:1-4). As a child I heard repeated lessons concerning that being both positive and negative. Often it was said this is 1/3 positive and 2/3 negative.
The word
"sound" -HUGIES- means "whole, healthy" and is used
metaphorically of doctrine, I Tim. 1:10;
2 Tim. 4:3; Tit.1:9; 2:1. The word is applied in the scriptures to
speech, words, and being sound "in faith."
In other words there is doctrine that is
healthy in contrast to the kind of teaching that malnourishes
and leaves its recipients with spiritual anemia. The most common type of anemia
in the world is iron-deficiency anemia. The major cause is insufficient dietary
intake of iron to meet the demands of body growth. In that case there has to be a "revision
of diet" to iron rich foods such as muscle meats,liver, eggs, wheat, green leafy vegetables. If the condition is
severe as a result of a failure to
provide these items, "intramuscular injections" may be necessary.
It is not uncommon in the case of neglected children for the child to have developed a "taste" for "junk." Sadly, the greater the consumption the more sickly the individual. With an appetite for "junk" such often refuse to eat what they need in order to get well and be healthy.
Question:
What caring person would want to leave off that
which improves growth, learning, and resistance to disease?
There is "junk food" for physical
human consumption and there's such a thing as "junk" connected with
PMA motivational philosophy.
PMA exaggerated is like
"chocolate" to a child. Children love chocolate and adults love PMA.
Especially when they are being told over and over that they are the greatest,
the most wonderful, they can do, etc., etc. They also react like that child who
has always been allowed to eat sweets
and junk food rather than consume a healthy
diet. What happens when it is time to have to "swallow" the food
necessary for a complete whole diet in order for them to be healthy? They'd
really rather have candy, cokes, and deserts and they'll tell you so too! (2 Tim. 4:2-4)
I've seen brethren get caught up in this
"junk" and that's all they want. They want stories, they want to be
told how "marvelous" they are, etc. and then when it comes time for
the negative they react just like the child who's allowed to eat sweets all the
time. They throw a fit and let everybody know they're not about to
"eat" (take) that.
One major thing wrong with PMA is its over emphasis of the positive. It
"accentuates" the positive and nowhere can you find the
negative.
Another major danger is that motivational
PMA philosophy is not scripture. Those who market it and use it seldom if ever
put any scripture into it. When they do they pick and chose in such a way as to
present a distorted view of life and the things necessary to ensure salvation.
Thus, in its purest form it is indeed a philosophy of life to live by. For
those who depend upon it for survival it is their religion. PMA leaves the
impression that it is just as helpful as Gospel truths which I flatly deny. You
can read all of it that the world has to offer and it will not produce a
Christian. Neither will the cute, trite, little philosophical statements put on
the bill boards of denominations which are put there to be "cute" and
attract attention.
What has PMA promotionalism
done for Gospel preaching? Absolutely nothing constructive
and everything under the sun detrimental not only to the Gospel itself but also
to those who preach it.
There is indeed application here from what
Paul said about "itching ears" and "heaping to oneself" after their own lusts. Preachers often relate
how they could preach for several years in one particular locale and then
move, and all of a sudden the same
preaching that they've been doing for years is too negative (2 Tim. 4:2),
upsetting half of the congregation (2 Tim.
4:3), without love (2 Cor. 6:11),too
specific in naming denominations (Rev. 2:15),
digression (2 Tim. 2:17), false teachers
within the brotherhood (1 Tim.1:20),
etc.. And yet it was and is the kind of preaching that their elders appreciated
and demanded of them elsewhere.
The "crying towel" of PMA is both
wide and long. But learning to preach the Gospel didn't include, for them,
adapting what and how they preach to particular "areas" knowing full
well what is expected of them.
Does this preclude using a good
illustration? No. There are many excellent preachers, who in ability I'm sure
far exceed me, who do a wonderful job illustrating. God bless them. However, it
does preclude preaching the illustration and then illustrating the "illustration" with a
small smacking of scripture. We are to preach the Word which is "sound
doctrine." How do I know when I've gone too far with my illustrating? When
the bulk of my lesson "is" an illustration and then I throw in a
scripture, maybe, to illustrate!
I know I've gone too far if the purpose of
my illustration is to "take the edge off" the necessity of the truth,
though unpleasant to the hearers, that might be needed at a particular
moment. (2 Tim.4:2) Stephen,
accused of
blasphemy, started his sermon in Acts 7 and never stopped until it cost him his
life. At the risk of being quoted as saying I hope someone will lose their life
it needs to be said that we need that kind of preaching! I didn't say
"all" the time. I said we need that!
Have you ever had to follow one of these
"all positive no negative" fellows into a local work which for years
has been fed a steady diet of PMA and not "sound doctrine"? If not
then realize that some have. Realize that some of your brothers who preach,
some of brothers who are elders, some who teach, and some who "care"
have had to initiate that "revision of diet" along with
"necessary injections" with the hopes that soundness might prevail.