Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
SHOULD we celebrate St. Valentine’s DAY?
Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
13 Comments
Leave a Reply Click here to cancel reply.
Leave a Reply to Glenn Walterson Cancel reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Gray Watson
Wow, I read this post, and while it tries to make some big claims about ‘hidden truths’ and ‘secret knowledge,’ I gotta say, it just doesn’t feel right. It sounds a lot like what they call Gnosticism, which isn’t new.
Troy Day
Michael Faber Wow, I read your short comment, and while it tries to make some big claims about ‘hidden truths’ and ‘secret knowledge,’ I gotta say, it just doesn’t feel right. Valentines is great – just ask your wife if you still got 1 – It sounds you’ve got A LOT OF what they call Gnosticism, which isn’t new.
Troy Day
Wow Dean Williams I read your short comment, and while it tries to make some big claims about ‘hidden truths’ and ‘secret knowledge,’ I gotta say, it just doesn’t feel right. Valentines is great – just ask your wife if you still got 1 – It sounds you’ve got A LOT OF what they call Gnosticism, which isn’t new.
RT the original OP comment Here what I wrote to my congregation in our weekly newsletter:
When the Secular Reinforces the Sacred
A Valentine’s Day Thought
In keeping with Romans 12:2, some of us become conflicted when considering the celebration or observance of national or cultural holidays and events. The associated concern is understandable, since many celebrations arise from secular origins that are fully emptied of any fidelity to Scripture, and quite frankly, can serve to do the exact opposite. Here, to address this possible conflict of mind, I should note that not every cultural observance stands in opposition to Scripture. In fact, the truth is, many of those cultural observances significantly echo what God himself has commanded, and as such, they actually serve to reinforce what which is good, acceptable, and perfect.
Valentine’s Day is one such example. Scripture calls husbands to love their wives “as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (Eph. 5:25). As Christians, we know through Scripture that this is not a seasonal suggestion but a daily calling to be sacrificial, covenantal, and Christlike. Yet, in spite of knowing this to be a daily calling, we should readily acknowledge that the presence of a day set aside to express affection, gratitude, and devotion can serve as a providential reminder of that biblical command.
So, we see then, that in God’s kindness, even the rhythms of our culture can prompt us toward obedience. A card, a word of affirmation, a thoughtful gesture; these are not substitutes for faithful, lifelong love, rather they serve as tangible expressions of it. It is here that we affirm that Valentine’s Day does not create the Christian duty to love; Scripture already does that. What we should note however, is that it can remind us, prod us, and give us a moment to practice that love in intentional ways.
So, dear brothers in Christ, let us seize this moment to laud our wives with flowers, food, and any other tangible expression of love we can think of. Let there be an overabundance of expressions so that they flow over to our daughters who are learning through you, what it means to be loved and cared for. Wives, I pray that you will know and experience the love of Christ as expressions of love fill your day and your heart.
And may all this be done in a way that pleases and brings glory to our Lord. Amen!
Pastor Geoffrey Dean
Dean Williams
Brother, I appreciate your right to your commentary, but must say they are groundless as they relate to what “I actually communicated.”. (1) My comments totally point to the fact that it’s good to celebrate Valentines. So I don’t have to ask my wife of 34 years, because we’ve been doing so the entire time we’ve been married. (2) There are absolutely no hidden truths and secret knowledge assertions anywhere in my commentary; explicitly or implicitly, so one can only say something like that if they are unable to see that which is plainly before them, or they are in the practice of habitually mining the thoughts of others for “unseen,” or “uncommunicated,” meaning. I can assure you there is nothing like that in my post. Fact is: My commentary is nowhere close to having any gnostic bent in the proper definition of the term, but is in fact both Christ-centered and biblical. Take for instance its alignment with 1st Corinthians 14:5 which says, “One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.” My opening statement is literally grounded in that, along with other clearly biblical principals. I could go on with further exegetical explanations, but suffice to say what I shared with you is what a pastor who understands the diverse nature of the congregation he has, and the “I’m on this side of the issue, I’m on this side…” way of thinking that often divides or attacks the unity that Christ himself died to bring about in his body, and thus the need to lead by weighing in. Update: Now that I’m reading some of your other responses, I see that the “seems like Gnosticism” is a canned response, and not coming from any vigorous Berean like (Acts 17) work. That’s unfortunate. Blessings to you Sir.
Troy Day
Dean Williams you dont communicate on the Bible
and this is not a place for disgruntled talkers
stay on topic – thank you bro Sir Dean !!!
Troy Day
@followers sounds like Bob W Jones + Philip Williams still try make some big claims about ‘hidden truths’ and ‘secret knowledge,’ I gotta say, it just doesn’t feel right. Valentines is great – just ask your wife if you still got 1 – It sounds you’ve got A LOT OF what they call Gnosticism, which isn’t new.
Bob W Jones
Troy Day enough already! I have no idea how anyone could reach your conclusion after reading my comment. Did ai say or elude to “hidden truths” or “secret knowledge?”
Troy Day
we do not call names here Garry Turner we just do not BUT may be you are caught red handed on the wrong foot with Troy D. Adams +@Elton Michael Misfeldt here
Troy D. Adams
Why are you tagging me?
Troy Day
Troy D. Adams just responding to your silly comment(s) as usually
Otherwise, this is FB – you talk to ppl by tagging them right?
Troy D. Adams
It seemed as if you were trying to publicly shame me.
But you were just responding to me, a more direct way to do that is by addressing my original comment, you could add this link too.
Glenn Walterson
The post’s assertion of an inherent, esoteric wisdom as the primary source of divine truth fundamentally contradicts established Christian epistemology, which grounds revelation in scripture and historical events. Such a perspective risks aligning with historical Gnostic tendencies, which, as articulated on Christianity.com, often posited a secret knowledge superior to apostolic teaching, fundamentally diverging from orthodox Christology. Specifically, any implicit denial of Christ’s full divinity and bodily resurrection stands in stark contrast to the creedal foundations affirmed universally throughout Christian history, a fact widely documented by theological scholarship. Furthermore, the suggestion that authentic spiritual experience is divorced from communal worship or the demonstrable power of the Holy Spirit misrepresents the dynamic and historical continuity of charismata, as explored in Pentecostal archives and Pneumareview.com. To present these reinterpretations as newly unearthed ‘truths’ rather than long-refuted theological deviations constitutes a form of historical revisionism, bordering on false news concerning the development of Christian thought. The emphasis on subjective, hidden insight over public, revealed doctrine clearly mirrors the core tenets of Gnostic theology, which consistently challenged the materiality of creation and the incarnation. Therefore, based on its departure from foundational scriptural authority, its embrace of esoteric knowledge, and its challenge to established Christological doctrines, the post’s content can be accurately characterized as propagating false news, Gnostic theology, and ultimately, heresy.
Troy Day
@followers The post’s assertion of an inherent, esoteric wisdom as the primary source of divine truth fundamentally contradicts established Christian epistemology, which grounds revelation in scripture and historical events. Such a perspective risks aligning with historical Gnostic tendencies, which, as articulated on Christianity.com, often posited a secret knowledge superior to apostolic teaching, fundamentally diverging from orthodox Christology. Specifically, any implicit denial of Christ’s full divinity and bodily resurrection stands in stark contrast to the creedal foundations affirmed universally throughout Christian history, a fact widely documented by theological scholarship. Furthermore, the suggestion that authentic spiritual experience is divorced from communal worship or the demonstrable power of the Holy Spirit misrepresents the dynamic and historical continuity of charismata, as explored in Pentecostal archives and Pneumareview.com. To present these reinterpretations as newly unearthed ‘truths’ rather than long-refuted theological deviations constitutes a form of historical revisionism, bordering on false news concerning the development of Christian thought. The emphasis on subjective, hidden insight over public, revealed doctrine clearly mirrors the core tenets of Gnostic theology, which consistently challenged the materiality of creation and the incarnation. Therefore, based on its departure from foundational scriptural authority, its embrace of esoteric knowledge, and its challenge to established Christological doctrines, the post’s content can be accurately characterized as propagating false news, Gnostic theology, and ultimately, heresy.