Showing posts with label playing to the ego. Show all posts
Showing posts with label playing to the ego. Show all posts

Thursday, July 3, 2014

is there no shame?

So, yesterday, I'm cruising the internet, doing a bit of this of that, when a link over at Charisma Mag caught my eye. It was for something called Dominion Camp Meeting.

Now, if you've been coming here for a while, you may have seen that I will occasion voice an opinion about Dominionisms (I think they stink). So, with that being a bit of a source of curiosity to me, I clicked on the link.

Dominion Camp Meeting is something put on by Rod Parsley. The site is incredibly uninformative, containing mostly rah-rah rhetoric that kinda like cotton candy--all fluff and little substance. Still, the so-called Prayer Form page was most informative, in it's own way.

Prayer Form

Please understand, I don't link to this page to in any way encourage anyone to go there and give this charlatan money.

In the upper right corner of the page, there is a video of Parsley speaking to us viewers. It's not even really much about the camp meeting itself, though it does get some mention.

In the video, he claims...

God sent me with a divine mandate to get you dreaming again.


This kind of rhetoric is very common nowadays. Dreams are the current big selling point, claims that God wants to help you fulfill your dreams are the main message coming from far too many churches. It is, to put it blunt, one of the most popular false gospels being proclaimed today.

But Parsley's just getting started.

Proof of desire is in the pursuit. This is the time to act, this is the time to move, this is the time when we understand that our faith, to operate in faith, required a response.
Oh, a response? Well, what might that be?

Let me encourage you to take a step of faith toward God, toward your dream, your dream, by sowing a seed that God has already placed in your hand. 
And the last part of that statement is accompanied in the video by footage of someone filling out a check. Yeah, now you know what's going on. Why?

Because the realization of every dream begins with a simply step of faith and obedience toward God. 
Really? I guess people who don't believe in God don't get their dreams fulfilled, because they can't take steps of faith toward God?

Your seed is the only influence you have over tomorrow. Your tomorrow different than today, a seed is the mechanism of the deliverance.
So, don't worry about studying or getting job training or anything like that, those have no influence over tomorrow. No, only giving a lot of money to someone like Parsley will change your tomorrow. And, yes, it will change your tomorrow. It'll make you a lot broker.

So, right now, as an act of your personal faith toward God, I want to challenge you to sow a seed with a purposeful expression of the number 14, that God's opening the door to your dreams again. Maybe that seed's $30.14, $50.14, or $114, whatever it is, make sure that 14 is in there, it'll build your faith. 
I am so tempted to fill out the online giving form on that page for $.14, just to see if that would fit within his "whatever it is". I have my doubts that it would be considered acceptable to him, though, and I doubt the teaching set that comes with a generous donation is worth that $.14 anyway.

Listening to Parsley is a study in inducing nausea, though he does have a most revealing story about something he claims former charlatan Oral Roberts said to him.

Let me put this bluntly--what Parsley is saying here is blasphemy of the worst sorts. Nothing of what he says is biblical at all. Giving him $30.14 will do nothing to build your faith, it will only build his bank account and shrink yours. This is a scam, a fraud, and it is a shame to the church that charlatans like Parsley are in any way tolerated by the church.

Last year, there was the Strange Fire Conference, which got a lot of charismatics riled up. But are they riled up over this blasphemous camp meeting? Why not? Why are people like Michael Brown not getting on their soap boxes over Rod Parsley's blasphemous rhetoric? I found out about this camp meeting from an ad at Charisma Mag, why are they allowing such rot to be advertised on their site?

Can a church that tolerates people like Parsley really be expected to stand firm when the world comes knocking, demanding that their pet sins be tolerated, too?





Sunday, July 1, 2012

book review--rick joyner's "The Call"

There is an impression I get when I read the things written by modern prophets, like this book by Joyner, "The Call". It's not a subtle thing, though it's not an easy thing to correctly label. The best way I can think of to compare it to is "taste". Things like "The Call" taste funny. For me, comparing biblical prophetic books like Isaiah, Ezekial, and Zechariah to things like "The Call" is like comparing a fine, quality cheese to processed, plastic-wrapped cheese slices, or a well-prepared grilled steak to a hastily-prepared fast-food burger.

But while I think there is something to that impression, it is only an impression, only subjective. There are objective reasons, though, for a reader who practices biblical discernment to question the things Joyner has written in his book.

One is found in the Introduction, where Joyner writes, "Never are we told that prophecy is infallible, which is why we must judge prophecy" (p 22); however, Deuteronomy 18 says otherwise, "21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him."

In chapter 1, Wisdom, some kind of personification of Jesus, speaks against examining oneself. "You began to look at yourself. This will always bring confusion, making it harder for you to hear Me...You must learn to abide in My presence without becoming self-conscious and self-absorbed..." (p 31); however, in I Corinthians 11 we are told to examine ourselves when we partake of the Lord's Supper, and in II Corinthians 13 Paul tells them to examine and test themselves, to see if they are really in the faith, because they have been listening to false apostles.

In chapter 2, he gives a bizarre interpretation to Revelation 13, which he says came to him from Jonah. " If you will wake yourself up, repent and go the way that He sends you, you will not have to be swallowed by the beast... As you read in that chapter (Revelation 13), this beast is given to make war with the saints and to overcome them. This will happen to all who do not repent." (p 48); however, that is not what Revelation 13 says, "5 And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. 7 Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation, 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain." The beast will be against the saints and will to overcome them, but the unrepentent will worship it.

In another place, he claims that the Lord said to him, "...I can command the heavens and they obey Me, but I cannot command love. Love commanded is not love at all." (p 60); however, what did Christ say was the first and greatest commandment? To love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. What did He say was the second? To love your neighbor as yourself. Love isn't just commanded, but is it commanded in the two greatest commandments.

Lot tells Joyner, "What the Lord did to Sodom, He did as an example so that others would not have to be destroyed in this way." (p 42); however, II Peter 2 tells us something a bit different, "6 if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, a making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;". Peter's statement, made through the Spirit's inspiration, is rather the opposite of Joyner's.

One of the more interesting statements comes from Wisdom, "The wages of sin is death, and the wages of righteousness are peace, joy, glory, and honor. All are about to receive their worthy wages." (p 56). The first part is not the problem, but the part about "the wages of righteousness" is rather bothersome biblically. Consider this, from Romans 4, "What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,". And this, from Romans 3, "21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus," I have not found the phrase "wages of righteousness" anywhere in the Bible; in fact, "wages of righteousness" seems an oxymoronic statement. If we were to receive our wages, we would receive death. God's righteousness is not a wage, but a gift received by faith.

Another strange statement from Wisdom is this, "The truth that I am sending will not just convict My people of their sin, but will cleanse them from their sin." (p 175); however, we who believe in Christ already have been cleansed from sin by His blood, as Ephesians 1 says, "7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,"

To finish off this review, here's a bit of something Jonah tells him, "When you go through that door, you will enter the times when the Lord's power and glory will be released on the earth such as He has not done since the beginning of time. All of heaven has been waiting for the things you are about to see." This is simply an example of what seems to be the fundamental premise of the book--how important Joyner is. Because in his visions he goes through a door, something unprecedented is going to happen. Wisdom tells him all kinds of things, so that he'll be able to tell everyone else. Even when he gets rebuked, it only serves to emphasize his importance.

To sum up, we have good reason to think that the visions Joyner claimed to have receive and written about in this book are less than divine. The way the people in his visions mishandle biblical passages and statements is a sure clue that something is rotten in them. There is much sounder biblical teaching out there.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

24-7 prayer and narcigetical video teaching

"Narcigesis" seems to have become quite the popular term, at least in some circles. It's basically a mashing together of the words "narcissistic" and "eisegesis". Narcissitic, you probably know, is unseemly self-love. Eisegesis maybe a more obscure word, but it basically means reading ideas into a text or maybe other things rather then trying to understand what the text is itself saying. Narcigesis is usually being used in regards to the Bible, to how biblical passages, verses, or even verse fragments are being used or misused.

The idea goes something like this--a pastor or some kind of teacher reads a passage or verse, let's say the story of Gideon putting out the fleeces to see if God had really told him to do what he'd been called to do. The pastor then tries to replace Gideon with someone else, maybe himself, maybe his listeners. He teaches that, just as Gideon tested what he had heard from God, so we need to "put out a fleece" to make sure that what we may have heard or thought we'd heard is from God.

(Actually, "heard" is not the right word for what people today experience. Gideon had an angel give him a message, he actually heard real words. People today don't really "hear" anything, they just get strange feelings which, by and large, will be different in a few days)

So, although the Bible in no way commands us to do what Gideon did, we are told that we should do something like it. Not necessarily going outside and putting a piece of wool or other cloth on the ground, of course, but...well, come up with something.

Here is another example, courtesy of 24-7 Prayer.



This man, I think it's Peter Grieg who is the head honcho of the organization, begins by reading John 1:40-42, about Andrew getting his brother Simon and bring him to Jesus, and Jesus giving Simon the name Cephas. All well and good so far, but then...

Dont you love that? This is Jesus meeting the great apostle of the church, Peter, for the first time. And the very first thing his does is, he gives him a nickname, Cephas, Peter, it means 'the rock', of course. And in a way they would all have been sniggering, it was all a joke, because Peter was the least rock-like person ever. He was impetuous, he blew hot and cold, he shot his mouth off. But Jesus saw something different in Peter. And in fact, of course, the history books tell us he went on to be someone who was even faithful to Jesus unto death.

Isn't it amazing that God looks at you today, not as you are with all the problems and struggles you bring in to this day, or even as you were, but he sees you as you will one day be. And so my challenge, my question for you today is, "What are the seeds of brilliance that God has put in you?" "What is the destiny being out-worked in you?" "What is the unique contribution only you can bring to the world for his glory?"


Wow. Just. Wow.

First, here's the passage. Yes, he read it, but then went tangent.

jn.1.40 One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. jn.1.41 He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.† jn.1.42 And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 167503-167508). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.


Listening to Grieg speak, one would think that Jesus should have felt honored to have finally met "the great apostle of the church, Peter", instead of noting that it was Simon Peter who should have felt honored beyond the telling of it that he should be in the presence of Jesus.

Now, yes, in this passage, Jesus gives Peter a new name. Ok, very well. On the other hand, Jesus didn't seem to be in the habit of changing people's names like that. I can't think of any other disciple to whom He did that. I know there were the Sons of Thunder, the brothers James and John, though I'm not sure if Jesus gave them that nickname or if they were given it elsewhere. But, really, poor Thaddeus and Philip seemed doomed to be just plain Thaddeus and Philip.

It's always interesting to see how people read Peter's life. It seems like every two-bit pastor or teacher wants to claim Peter as their favorite, portraying him as being rather head-long, acting before thinking, sticking his foot in his mouth, if he had two thoughts in his head at the same time they'd complain about the sudden lack of space, and all that. They don't do that to Thomas or Matthew, one may wonder why.

So, does this encounter between Jesus and Peter teach us that God sees us as we one day will be? Now, why didn't Grieg try to take, let's say, an encounter between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees, and try to teach this same lesson? Well, I guess that would have been a bit more negative.

I'm rambling a bit here, I fear, so, to finally get to the point...

This passage is not about what a great guy Peter was. It's not about the "seeds of brilliance" in Peter, or some destiny being out-worked in Peter, or Peter's unique contributions. And it for sure isn't about you or me and anything about us.

Andrew did not bring Peter to Jesus so that Jesus could see what a great guy his brother was. He brought Peter to Jesus because Jesus was the Messiah, the Lamb of God who had come to take away the sins of the world.

Peter was like all of us, lost in sins and in need of a savior. Christ died for his sins, just as He died for those of all of us. Jesus loved Peter, not because Peter was a swell guy, because he wasn't. Jesus loves us, but not because we're lovable. We're not, we're filthy in our sins, we have no seeds of brilliance.

God has shown his love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

Grieg is playing to your ego. He's trying to sell you Christianity by making you think it's about you and how wonderful a person you are, how much you have to offer.

You have nothing to offer. Nothing. Christ is the one who gave Himself for you, because you couldn't help yourself. You have no seeds of brilliance, your were dead in sins and your attempts at righteousness are as the vilest of rags. Your destiny was hell, but Christ gave Himself so that you might have forgiveness of sins through faith in Him and repentence. You have no unique contribution that God couldn't do without, you are the one who needs Christ's sacrifice.

This video is pathetic. Shame on Peter Grieg for distorting this passage, and trying to make it say things that it shouldn't. Shame on Peter Grieg for teaching things designed solely to tickle itching ears and draw people, not to Christ in repentence, but to his organization so that it will grow.

This marks the official end of my attempts to like or tolerate 24-7 Prayer. I'm done, they've crossed the line, they're concerned only with their own popularity.