thoughts concerning the Supreme Court's attempts to redefine morality

I would guess that most of you have heard about the Supreme Court's decision to somehow find gay marriage in the Constitution. Much like the so-called Constitutional right to kill children who have not yet been born, one has to wear special glasses to find this new so-called right, I guess. But, be that as it may, here we are. Hardly a day for rejoicing, when evil is call good and celebrated.

So, what now?
 

Take these thoughts for what they are worth, I'm putting them out there for consideration. No doubt, others have and will give their opinions and thoughts.
 

Separation of God and country
 

For a while, we've accepted a couple of curious ideas —the notion of the separation of church and state along with the notion of a mixing of God and country. I can listen to AFR and hear this in their motto “faith, family, freedom”, I have been to churches which have the country's flag almost as prominently shown as the cross, I can hear and read the non-stop cacophony of calls revival revival revival because that is the only hope for our country and we need to attend the next big conference or rally or stadium event and show people how serious we are and we need to cry out to God for revival and so on and so forth.
 

Maybe it's time to stop trying to dress God up in the American flag.
 

Is patriotism and love of country wrong? I don't think so. One can read the biblical book of Romans and see Paul's love and concern for his kinsmen, even as they were rejecting him and his message. One can read the gospels and see Jesus' concern and heartbreak over Israel, even as He was pronouncing judgment on them for rejecting Him.
 

But love isn't blind. Israel was (and is) a people with a covenant from God, but while Paul lamented his kinsmen's blindness, he also saw that he had another set of kinsmen. He called those who believed in Jesus Christ, who had repented of their sins, his brothers and sisters.
 

Let me give another example. The family is a good thing, something God created, and is one thing being attacked by this attempt to create a new morality. But Jesus also said that those who follow Him are to hate their father and mother and even their own lives, and said that for those who follow Him that their enemies will be those of their households.
 

This is a difficult way to think. We'd rather have a simple dichotomy, “This is good here, that over there is evil”, but we are given a more difficult way of thinking, “Love of country and family is good, but that country and family can become your enemies if you follow Christ”.
 

I'm a citizen of the US, and that's fine as far as it goes. But for Christians, our ultimate citizenship is in Heaven. The bond I have through Christ with the Christians in various prisons across the world, with those being persecuted in various ways, is far stronger and more eternal than the bond I have with anyone claiming only national citizenship.
 

There are no white hats
 

To employ this way of thinking in a more negative way, it's become plain that both side of the aisle, politically and religiously, are simply wrong.
 

It's easy to see how the people on the left are wrong. What evils do they not condone and celebrate? The murders we call abortion and assisted suicide, the various kinds of sexual perversions, government theft and corruption and greed and control.
 

But it's when I have looked to the right, thinking I'm with the “good guys”, the white hats, that I've seen that they really aren't all that good. I may agree with many of the things they stand for, but...

When I look at the religious right, I see much the same kinds of lust for power as I see on the left. I see compromise, even in regards to the basic Christian beliefs. For political reason (and perhaps other reasons, too), Franklin Graham stopped referring to Mormonism as a cult. I can look at the speakers for the Values Voters Summit, and see a Mormon, a few Roman Catholics, and someone with connections to the New Apostolic Reformation. The leaders of the religious right are people like Peter Wagner, a man who is a partner with the worst of the worst in regards to false prophets, false teachers, fake healers.
 

If you don't know the word “dominionism” and the ideas behind it, get acquainted with it. To put it simply, Wagner and those with him want power. They think they have a divine command and even right to run the world, to take over what they call the spheres of society, that they must do those things before Christ will return for His mature warrior-bride.

Now, don't think that dominionism is only a religious right thing. Though he may not use the word dominionism, Brian McLaren is just as set on remaking the world into his own image as Peter Wagner is. But my main concern for the moment with the supposed “good guys”, the ones trying to sport the white hats. But when I look at Wagner and has cronies, I see their hats are just as black as those of people on the left.
 

I'm not a prophet, and not going to pretend to be one, but I'm going to make a non-prophetic prediction, one that I have a small hope will be wrong but I'm pretty sure is going to happen, because it's already happened to some degree, for example with Graham's compromises concerning Mormonism. I predict that many in the NAR will continue to drift to the left, and will even embrace this new morality. They will dress their compromises up in pietistic rhetoric, they will find sad stories they can use to make themselves appear compassionate, they will end in devouring those who stand against them.
 

In other words, when power and wealth are your goals, then compromises will find their needed excuses. The NAR is already built on lies and distortions, they have no solid ground to anchor themselves to anything.
 

Broadly speaking, the Bible tells us these kinds of things will happen
 

Contrary to the rhetoric coming from the dominionists, the Bible tells us that the world will become a darker and more evil place in these end times. Evil men will grow worse and worse, deceiving others and being deceived themselves. The times will be perilous for those with faith in Christ. False messiahs and saviors will rise, and many will be deceived by them.
 

Mankind doesn't want to change, unless it is that it wants to dive more and more into sin. And it will continue to the demand that the Church accept its sins, approve of its perversions, check off on what it wants. The world will demand that the church become its friend, and if the church doesn't, well, the church will have to pay.
 

And the US church has not helped itself. It has fed the people in its pews and stadium seating a steady died of theological fluff, promising people their best lives now if they follow the prescribed rituals and say the correct positive words, promising a life of fulfillment and adventure if people make prayer circles and tell the sun to stand still and be audacious and other such things. People in churches think they are lions when they are merely lambs, and not even God's lambs, only meat for the world's grinders. Pastors who pose as tough guys will topple like houses of cards, and their people will follow them.
 

We are being disillusioned. Let us rejoice in that, and repent of believing the earlier illusions. The US is not Heaven, it is not God's Kingdom. I have a greater kinship with many of the people whose sufferings are told on the Voice of the Martyr's website then I do with many politically conservative and liberal politicians and activists.

book review--The Other Side of the River by Kevin Reeves

good account of one way the church is going wrong

For several years, I was kind of on the edge of a lot of the things this author writes about, going to some of the types of churches he mentions such as Vineyard churches, and being a member of a missions organization that while claiming to be nondenominational was still very much Charismatic and taught things like taking our cities for God and spiritual warfare that involved activities like rebuking and binding Satan and claiming territory and resources.

The author of this book does a good job of comparing what he was being taught to what the Bible says, and finding the things being taught to not be taught in the Bible. It is a sad testimony about churches that far too many of them don't do the same. The author points out some of the lame excuses church leaders' use to allow unbiblical activities and spiritual manifestation to be practiced in their churches.

One of the best things this author does is to point out what is really behind these practices—elitism. These bizarre manifestation like drunk in the spirit and acting like animals are all dressed up in pride—this is the next big move of God, this is cutting-edge stuff, this puts you ahead of the average church-goer. And going further, if you accept what is being taught and attend the conferences and school and stuff like that, then you'll walk in miracles all the time, you'll become the head and not the foot, you'll be a part of the Elijah or Joshua Generation or Joel's Army or become a super-apostle or some other thing meant to play to your pride.

This book is well worth reading. I can recommend it very highly

book review—Wandering Stars by Keith Gibson

very informative

A few years ago, a church decided to have a circus perform during one of their services. The sad part isn't so much that this happened, but that far too much of the church has become a circus in its own right.

This book gives the reader a good view of one aspect of the unfunny circus that is the church today, with numerous examples of the unbiblical things taught by those who call themselves apostles and prophets, the inaccurate prophecies the so-called prophets have given, and the ways these people who call themselves apostles and prophets try to cover up their bad teachings and keep anyone from keeping them accountable.

This is a very important and informative book. Far too many people in the church today are being deceived, and books like this are there to help people see the deceptions. I highly recommend it.

book review—The Future of Us by Julia Loren and others

moon pie prophets

 

I got a copy of this book when the publisher offered it for free.

The title of this review is taken from a gathering of prophets the author mentions at one point in the book, in what is called the Blue Moon Conference. She calls these people the Blue Moon Prophets, but I think a much more apt and accurate name for them would be the Moon Pie Prophets, and this book does an excellent job of showing why that name would be so fitting.

For example, the first chapter is some kind of an attempt to explain, or explain away, the horrendous inaccuracy rates of so many of these kinds of prophets. "Some of the people I know had predictive dreams or visions that were accurate. Others were not." (p. 18). True prophets of God do not have inaccurate dreams and visions. In fact, one of the signs the Bible gives that we can know that a prophet is not from God is that what they prophesy does not take place. "No matter how long we have walked with God, we can still be deceived by our own soul or deceived by the enemy. No one is immune." (p. 19). This statement alone should put paid to any notion that these people are real prophets of God. Would Elijah or Isaiah or any other real prophet have resorted to such a lame excuse?

"Later, Terry claims that Gabriel visited him again and gave him an actual date for the Vancouver to Seattle devastating quake. That date has passed without incident." (p. 22). Umm...assuming this guy was really visited by some kind of angel-like being, then we now know that it was not really Gabriel, because that angel's prophetic message didn't happen. That angelic being, assuming there really was such a vision, was obviously playing for the other side. "Many prophets also speak about a horribly destructive earthquake demolishing Los Angeles." (p. 25). Yeah, that's so common, it's almost a meme.

Then, there is the rather disturbing rhetoric showing that this author has caved to the climate change scare-tactics. "The Blue Moon Prophets may just be seeing what is ahead if we do not repent, turn from our dependence on fossil fuels and our self-focused materialism, and change our ways." (p. 36). "According to journalist and author Mark Hertsgaard, climate change and global warming are largely to blame for the increase and destructive potential in super storms around the world." (p. 36). It's pretty clear that a lot of the climate change data was skewed and cooked, and that "climate change" is a political tool. One that I guess this author is quite willing to use.

Once you realize that these prophetic words are about as solid as the marshmallow filling in a Moon Pie, you can pretty much put this book own, or read it for the entertainment value. You might find it amusing, for example, when Shawn Bolz claims God led him the false prophet Bob "I prophesied falsely hundreds of times" Jones. Sorry, but God didn't lead this man to a false prophet who was also guilty of sexual misconduct.

So, there you have it. These prophets are completely untrustworthy, their prediction are about as likely to be accurate as the nearest Tarot card dealer and palm reader. You'll know about as much about the future by gazing into a crystal ball as by gazing into this book. These false prophets are just like Moon Pies--flimsy, squishy, not very solid, may taste good to some people but offering little to no real nutritional value.

What works would I recommend? First, regarding these false prophets, I'd recommend Strange Fire: The Danger of Offending the Holy Spirit with Counterfeit Worship by John MacArthur, as his book details the kinds of unbiblical things these kinds of false prophets say and teach, along with Christianity In Crisis: The 21st Century: The 21st Century by Hank Hanegraaff. Concerning how serious and unbiblical this hit-or-miss attitude is concerning prophecy, I'd heartily recommend The Fallible Prophets of New Calvinism: An Analysis, Critique, and Exhortation Concerning the Contemporary Doctrine of "Fallible Prophecy" by Michael Beasley, an excellent book about this issue. All of these books are order of magnitude superior to the drivel in Loren's book.

Comment | 

Looking for voting buttons? Sorry, we don't let customers vote on their own reviews.

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?

book review--Introduction to the Old Testament Template by Landa Cope

questionable

There are some things about this book that I found rather annoying, and other, more serious things that seemed to be more than a little off to me.

Among the annoying things, for example, were things like this. The author kicks off the book talking about a time she was watching some kind of news program on TV about a certain city in the US and how Christian that city really is. She claims that this program caused her pretty serious distress, calling into question many of the things she had previously taught. But for such an important event for her and for this book, there is very little information about this program itself. We are not given the program's name, nor the name of the channel that broadcasted it. We are told that the journalist was British, but that doesn't do much to narrow things down. We aren't even given the year in which the author saw it. The author says that several pastors, "...the kind of pastors Christians would respect." (Kindle Location 170), were interviewed during the program, but we are not told who they were, nor are we told what they said except for the author's summation.

Another annoying thing the author does is constantly blame the church for the state of things in the world. For example, in regards to a trip she made to Africa, "In each nation the story was the same. Poverty, disease, violence , corruption, injustice, and chaos met me at every turn. I found myself asking, Is this "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven"? 2 Is this what the blessing of the gospel brought into a community looks like? Is this what a nation looks like when it is "reached"?" (Kindle Locations 218-221). One question that could be asked, though, is what gospel is being spread through Africa and all over the world? Very often, it's not the Gospel of Christ crucified for our sins, but the name-it-claim-it prosperity gospel. Let me recommend this book, Where Are We Heading To?, where the author tells of how these kinds of apostles and ministers are in it to build their own wealth instead of to minister to their people, who brag about their cars and how much their clothes cost instead of using the money the people give in wise and godly ways. Foreign Policy magazine did an article called "Angels and Demons", one part of which is about how supposed healing services in Malawi are causing people to claim to be healed of HIV, so they stop taking their anti-retroviral drugs. And at the site for the 2013 Strange Fire conference, there are two videos of presentations by Conrad Mbewe about the effects of this false gospel in Africa.

Mostly, I think the author's two primary claims are open to being questioned.

One is this, "As Christians, we do say our faith, lived out, will influence a society toward good." (Kindle Locations 176-177). "Our transformed lives are to be salt and light to our families, neighborhoods, communities, and nations, making them better places to live." (Kindle Locations 259-260).
Can we say that Jesus ever taught this kind of thing, or the apostles? Could we say, for example, that Jesus made Israel a better place to live in during and after His time? Did such things happen during the time of the Apostles and the early church? Jesus was the one who told His disciples that if the world hated Him, it would also hate them for loving and following Him. He was the one who told them they would have troubles in this world. He was the one who told them that they would be put into prisons and persecuted. He was also the one who prophesied over Jerusalem about the city's coming destruction for having rejected Him. And the apostles were not any more positive in their messages to the early churches.

"The early church transformed Israel, revolutionized the Roman Empire, and laid foundations for Western European nations to become the most prosperous in the world." (Kindle Locations 263-264). Israel was destroyed in the war that led up to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Christianity struggled in the Roman Empire for a few hundred years, and even when Constantine recognized it, it is questioned how much that helped and hurt the Church.

The other claim that should be questioned has to do with what she calls her Cornfield Revelation. "The light flashed into my poor little brain. Revelation hit like a laser beam. Moses' job was to disciple a nation , to teach a people who had been slaves for four hundred years how to form and run their nation." (Kindle Locations 427-429). Where is it taught in the Bible that Moses was discipling a nation? Where does any New Testament writer point to Moses as the example of what Jesus meant when He told the apostles to teach all nations? Where does any New Testament writer tell us that in order for a nation to be considered discipled, the church needs to put that nation under the Law of Moses, or at least some contextualized version of some principles someone claims to have found in the Law of Moses?

This is a pretty serious claim on the part of the author. Is the Gospel really about putting people back under the Law? Can "discipling" really be summed up as simply making sure a nation's laws are based on someone's ideas of biblical principles taken from the Law of Moses?

To my mind, the author is failing to make what I've heard some in Lutheran and Reformed circles call "The proper distinction between Law and Gospel". How can there be discipleship apart from conversion? But for the unconverted, the law is not designed to make them righteous, it's designed to show them how far they have fallen, to show them their sins, and how much they need the Gospel of Christ crucified for their sins. Imposing the Law of Moses cannot lead to discipleship, it would be merely to clean up the outside of a dirty cup, and perhaps lead to the kind of result that Jesus accused the Pharisees of, that of making converts who are even more children of Hell than before their supposed conversion.

One of the signs that this author is not making this distinction is in statements like this, "He encouraged that if they would obey his teachings, they would not have poverty in their land." (Kindle Locations 830-831). There is a very big "if" in there, because none back then, and none now, are able to fully obey God's law. We have all sinned, we are all fallen, there is not a one of us who is righteous by our own works and attempts to keep the law. But this author holds it up as something we can attain, as if we can make even the churches, let alone the unconverted, fully obey God's laws.

For more on this, let me suggest a few resources. The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel (ESV) and The World-Tilting Gospel

There is some wisdom in this book, but there is lot that could easily lead one into some very questionable areas, too. And I can't ignore the similarities between what is taught in this book, and what Seven Mountain Dominionists teach, too. While this author is much more sensible than someone like Johnny Enlow, her works point in that same direction.

book review--Is That Really You, God? by Loren Cunningham

hearing unreliable voices and getting the Gospel wrong

As an autobiography of Cunningham's life and how he came to start Youth With A Mission, and how the organization grew, the book is all well and good. If that was all it was, I'd likely have little real problem with it.

But it's not. Worked through it is the notion that there are things we can do to somehow hear God's voice, and ways of determining if what we're hearing (to a loose definition of "hearing") is really God or not. It is these things that I simply cannot buy into, because they simply are not biblical.

One example would be what he calls the Wise Men Principle. "This really is amazing, I thought to myself. It was like the Three Wise Men. They each followed the star--their individual perceptions of God's direction--and in doing so came together to be led to Jesus." (Kindle Locations 1165-1167). "What a great idea! Maybe, in fact, it was God's idea! If so, perhaps I could see the Wise Men Principle I'd just learned in New Zealand work in the lives of young people, where two or more people see the same guiding star at the same time." (Kindle Locations 1301-1303). The account of the magi following the star to Jesus can be found in Matthew 2, and you'll find nothing there or in other parts of the Bible which teaches this Wise Men Principle. The account of the magi was not recorded to tell us to follow stars, literally or metaphorically, but to show us that Jesus is indeed the King.

"I had come as a speaker, but it turned out that I was the one who was learning new ideas on this isolated island. The first came from the New Zealand kids themselves. They had a guidance practice that intrigued me. In their minds they would be "given" a chapter and verse from the Bible without knowing what the reference said; then they would consider whether or not that reading was a special guidance for whatever they were facing. "You'd be surprised how often God uses that as a way to speak," they insisted." (Kindle Locations 1135-1138). Can one even imagine Paul or any real Apostle telling the churches that God would lead them in such a trite, haphazard way? Or that they should read the Scripture in such a way? That isn't hearing the voice of God, that's closer to fortune telling.

Then, there's what I've seen referred to as the Magic 8-Ball way of reading the Bible. "I was sitting quietly praying with my Bible open to Hebrews. Suddenly the words of chapter 12, verses 26 and 27, leaped off the page. "Yet once more I will shake not only the earth, but also the heaven...that those things which cannot be shaken may remain" (NASB, italics added). A rock hit the bottom of my stomach. "Oh no! I hope that doesn't mean the ship!" (Kindle Locations 1767-1770). Umm...no, Hebrews 12 had nothing to do with that ship, sir. It was written well before that ship had been constructed, well before you ever planned to make use of it. A look at the context of the verses in question would show you that.

"Yes, God had told us to get a ship, and repeatedly He had confirmed His guidance, using all the ways we had learned for hearing His voice. He used the Wise Men Principle; He used scriptures that He seemed to lift off the pages for us; He used provision of money and people; and that inner conviction--but we had failed in the way we had carried out His guidance. We had subtly turned from the Giver to the gift." (Kindle Locations 1827-1830). There are two things to be learned from this. First, these supposed confirmations are hardly confirmations at all. God can give all these go-ahead signs, but then pull the rug out from under their feet? Is that really God, period?

But instead of wondering if maybe these ways of getting confirmations were really sound, he resorts to the second thing to be gotten from this, what I think of as the Cheap Guilt Trip. A bunch of people who have been trying hard to determine if what they are doing is really what God wants them to do suddenly get broadsided by a guilt-trip of them taking their focus off of God? Is the really God, period?

But this brings up perhaps the biggest error Cunningham makes, an error in regards to the Gospel itself. "My calling was clear: to preach the twin character of the Gospel. Through Jesus Christ it is possible to love God with all our hearts and to love our neighbors as ourselves." (Kindle Locations 2099-2100). "Jesus told us there were two important things to do. One was to love God with all our hearts, souls, minds, and strength--teaching people to do that is evangelism. The other command was to love our neighbors as ourselves--to take care of people, as much as is in our power to do. These were two sides of the same Gospel: loving God and loving our neighbor." (Kindle Locations 1003-1005).

Those commands, as important as they are, are not the Gospel. Those are commands, laws, things we must do, things we fail to do every day, every hour, every minute, every second. The Gospel is not a command, but the message of God's gift of salvation and forgiveness of sins through the sacrificial death of His Son Jesus Christ. One of the important aspects of the services of the Anglican church I attend is the confession of sins, where we confess "We have not loved you with our whole heart, we have not loved our neighbor as ourselves". It's not an excuse, it's a confession, a reality. For a good look at the division between Law and Gospel, please read The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel (ESV).

And this is not just a matter of semantics. Of course, they let their focus get off of God, and they continued to do that even after their Cheap Guilt Trip, every day and often. When your gospel is a gospel of law, know going in that you're going to fail at it.

But the happy news is, the Gospel is for saved sinners as well as unsaved ones. As Paul said in I Timothy 1:15, "The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost"

In the end, I cannot recommend this book as a guide to teachings about hearing the voice of God. It's principles and techniques are without sound biblical support. Though they may tack a verse or two on to what they say about the principle or technique, when one looks at the passage they refer to, one sees that they simply don't teach what the principle or technique says. For example, the account of the magi coming to the Christ child does not teach the Wise Men Principle, Isaiah 30:21 says nothing about a "quiet inner voice". And, even more important, the Gospel is made into something we do (law), not something God has done for us (gift).

i don't believe in revival

This post is similar to the one where I say that I don't believe in social justice, and in many ways, it's very similar, though in much the same way a photo negative is similar to the photograph.

In the religious section of the liberal and conservative divide, revival serves much the same function among conservatives as social justice does for liberals. It is the goad that makes people get out and do whatever the people in charge want them to do. It is the carrot that is hung before the crowds to make them respond.

Revival is a nebulous concept, and perhaps all the more useful because of it's lack of clarity. What is revival? Hard to say. A church, particular of an older mindset, might have a week of “revival meetings”, which might mean that the church has invited a guest speaker to preach every night that week. But that doesn't seem to be what some today mean by revival.

One might think that the seemingly endless stream of conferences, gatherings, and events that fill stadiums and large mega-churches might qualify as revival, or at least an indication of it. But while such things may be considered good things, they aren't themselves really revival.

Like social justice, revival isn't really something one arrives at so much as something one is constantly trying to arrive at. Just as things are never just enough in the social justice mindset, things are never revived enough in the revival mindset. If you surrendered yourself completely last month, well, that was last month, have you done it today? Are you at this moment completely surrendered now? If not, well, you'd best do it!

And like social justice, revival is tied in to the political and social ambitions of the leaders. In other words, revival is closely tied with Dominianism. Just as a liberal dominionists might dream about a society which embodies their notions of social justice, conservative dominianists dream of a society which embodies what they mean by revival.

Revival isn't just conversion. It's always something more. One must always do more, surrender more, give more, pray more, pray longer, pray more extremely, take a bigger risk, live larger, want more, have bigger experiences, want more and more to change the world, and so on.

I do not believe in revival, just as I do not believe in social justice. I do not believe that revival is the answer, I do not think that if the church prays enough, surrenders enough, gives enough, whatevers enough, then all of a sudden the world will start to like us more, and will finally do what the church wants it to do. I do not believe that if somehow the people in charge of the various aspects of society were to become Christians (in it's loosest definition), then suddenly the country will become a much better place, and might even be well on its way to becoming christianized.

I do not pursue revival. I do not attend all-night meetings where people over and over and over ask God to send revival. I do not go to various places where people say “the Spirit is moving there!”. I sure don't go to church to fall down, bark like a dog, act like a drunk, or any of the inane and bothersome signs of what people have called revival in the all-too-recent past.

I believe in conversion. I believe in the Gospel of salvation through faith in the crucified and risen Christ. I believe that Christians have good works God has given them to do, and that a lot of those works are very mundane things—doing honest work well, looking after your families, loving and serving the people around you.

I also believe that the world hates God, and thus will hate those who are God's. I believe what Jesus said about the same world that hated Him will also hate those who follow Him. I believe what Jesus said about how in this world we will have trouble, but we should be of good cheer because He has overcome the world. I believe that we are more than conquerors while in the midst of lots of terrible stuff like tribulations, persecution, trials, and all kinds of bad situations.

The emotional appeals of revival have grown stale to me. The constant stress on wanting God more does not do much for someone who knows that God is with him. The straining to hear some kind of hard-to-hear voice that may or may not be God has become very suspect, since seeing that such a thing is not taught in the Bible.

If our hope is in revival, our hope is in the wrong place.

book review—The Path (Fire on the Mountain) by Rick Joyner

massive self-aggrandizing

For a while, I had thought to call this review “disney theology”, because of lines like this, “The familiar things you are looking for to give you bearings are not the same, and you are not the same. Therefore, your guidance must come from your heart, your spirit.” (Kindle Locations 156-157); “After a few minutes, Mary walked up to Elijah and looking him directly in the eyes asked, “Are you the real Elijah?” “What does your heart tell you?” he replied. After a minute, Mary answered with less boldness, “You really are Elijah. I’m sorry, but it’s just hard to believe that we would be so special to have you come to help us.” (Kindle Locations 1076-1080). We needs to get guidance from our hearts? This girl's heart tells us this guy is the real Elijah? That is one of the main problems with this book—subjective standards like feelings and “your heart” are set up as our guides, and the objective standard of what the Bible says is at best secondary.

But after a while, another bit of something started to become more obvious—the way the book boosts the egos of certain people with rhetoric like this, “ “Every one of these is a messenger. They are being prepared to shake cities and nations with the power of the message they will be given. In time, they will capture the attention of the entire earth, and everyone on earth will marvel at them. These will be ‘the mighty ones’ that Enoch prophesied would come. They are alive now, and they are starting to find this path,” Elijah concluded, and walked away.” (Kindle Locations 1725-1728). “He (Elijah) stopped , hesitated for a moment, and then turned and said, “I have never seen so many in one group who are called to be the mighty ones that Enoch talks about. Every one of these is called to walk in more power than I did. Obviously the time is now close.”” (Kindle Locations 844-846).

One thing statements like those brings up is, where does Enoch say anything about these “mighty ones”? The Bible says precious little about Enoch, and gives only one prophecy of his, mentioned in Jude. It is about Christ returning with His saints, which seems to be supported by Revelation 19. Joyner, though, spins this differently, “You are a forerunner of the forerunners. You are to help prepare those who will prepare the way for the King.” (Kindle Locations 269-270). This notion of preparing the way for the Lord is made much of in the book, which combined with his rhetoric about how great these coming “mighty ones” will be, leads to one conclusion—Joyner is teaching dominionism. It goes by a few different names—Joel's Army, Manifest Sons of God, Elijah Company, Seven Mountains, et al—but the notion is that the church has to essentially take over the world before Jesus will return.

Now, that's questionable and important, but I came to think that the main message is something else—that this is self-aggrandizing for Joyner. Look at what happens in the book. Joyner has the prophet Elijah hanging around him and his group, approving of everything Joyner is teaching them. Joyner has a group of people following him about, hanging on every word he says, some asking questions but none really challenge anything he's teaching them, and they constantly heap praise on him and what he's teaching. Enoch gives him a staff made from wood from the Tree of Life itself, which is suppose to represent some kind of authority Joyner now has. This is self-aggrandizing on a pretty large scale..

There are also reasons to be concerned about the nature of this story, if Joyner is claiming it's some kind of prophetic vision.

For example, early on Elijah tells him, ““You must also have the living water. You must never let it out of your sight again. You must drink from it as soon as you begin to thirst.” (Kindle Locations 164-165). This living water is usually found in a stream close to the path they are suppose to take. But later, when they start going uphill, this stream disappears from sight. Enoch tells him, “You must always stay close to the living waters, and they are always flowing, but here they are not on the surface. As you go into higher places like this you will often have to dig for the living water. The higher you go the deeper you may have to dig for them, but they will be near you. They will always be close to the path you are to walk,” (Kindle Locations 2489-2491). So, there's a contradiction—Joyner is not to let the water from his sight, but it's underground so he can't see it. These two things contradict each other.

Another has to do with the staff Enoch gave to him. The group's prophetic kid says this to Joyner, “You think your rod is new and freshly cut, but it is much older than you can imagine. It seems like it is new and fresh because of the life that is in it, and life will stay in it as long as you walk with God and do not depart from His path. This was cut from the Tree of Life before the world was formed, and it was sized just for you at that time.” (Kindle Locations 2629-2631), but a moment later he tells him in private, “Your rod was a bud that was given to you when you were very young in the Lord,” (Kindle Locations 2662-2663). Those two statements contradict each other.

One of the big problems, then, is how we are to understand what this book is? If it is simply an allegory, then such contradictions could be noted as maybe being some clumsiness on the author's part, but not serious problems. But if Joyner claims that this book is a record of a prophetic vision, things like he's claimed to have written before, then we have serious problems, 'cause such contradictions would not exist in a godly prophetic vision.

Honestly, this book is very disappointing, and doesn't even succeed at being interesting reading. It's like Joyner just mailed it in. There's not much new here, and reading obviously stilted conversations gets very dull very quickly. Despite an occasional good nugget, overall the last thing the reader should do is act like the people in the group, who just take whatever Joyner says without discernment. If you do read this book, do it as the Bereans in Acts, looking to the Bible to see if what this book is saying is what is taught in the Bible.

book review—Manifesto for a Normal Christian Life by Bill Johnson

vain imaginations

In regards to the book itself, a good portion of it could have been left out, as it consists simply in Johnson repeating himself, even to the point of repeating the same stories. Even knowing that these are transcripts of speeches Johnson gave, one would assume that the editors would have done some work at avoiding such needless repetitions.

Concerning the contents, well, it's basically typical Bill Johnson—a bunch of made-up ideas he claims to have gotten from out-of-context Bible verses, which don't say what he says they say, all with the intent of boosting the egos of the people listening.

It could be said that Johnson's problems begin with how he says he reads the Bible. “It has not been given to us to try to assign the scriptures to particular seasons...The Bible is filled with rich promises. It is theologically irresponsible to take the great promises of scripture and ascribe them to a period of time for which I have no responsibility.” (Kindle Locations 361-363). This seems to be saying that the context of the biblical passage, who is being addressed and the context of the statement, are not important to Johnson. “If I could encourage you to do anything in your life it would be that, any time you have a problem, get into the Book and read until he speaks to you.” (Kindle Locations 837-838).

There is a way of reading the Bible that I've seen compared to the Magic 8-Ball toy, where you basically read until something “jumps out at you”. This is not a valid way of reading the Bible, and this seems to be something like what Johnson is recommending.

This reckless use of Scripture is evident through the book, when he bothers to use Scripture at all to support his ideas. “In Matthew 10: 8 we have this commission, one of the commissions that Jesus gave his disciples: ‘heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give.’” (Kindle Locations 155-156), and he tried to make it seem like this is something we should do today, without regard to either whom Jesus was speaking to, nor even all the instructions Jesus gave here. For example, Johnson doesn't touch on Jesus' command in verse 5 for the disciples to not go to the Gentiles or Samaritans, nor verses 9 and 10 where they are told to not acquire gold or silver for their journey, nor take a bag with them, nor an extra change of clothes or shoes.

“What was it about the shadow of Peter that could heal people? There is no substance to a shadow. Your shadow will always release whatever overshadows you, whatever you live conscious of, whatever you carry.” (Kindle Locations 175-176). The account of people trying to get Peter's shadow to fall on them is found in Acts 5:12-16, and you will not find any mention of a teaching like “ Your shadow will always release whatever overshadows you” in that passage. Johnson is simply making that up. Regarding the account in Mark 4 were Jesus slept during a storm at sea, he says “Do you know why he could sleep in a storm? Because the realm he was dwelling in has no storms.” (Kindle Location 1081). He even gives the passage in his book, and you will not find any such statement in the passage, nor anything like that even hinted at. Johnson is simply making that up. Again concerning that same passage, he writes, “You have authority over any storm you can sleep in.” (Kindle Location 1095). Jesus doesn't even come close to saying that, Johnson has to twist and change Jesus' words to make it seem like He's saying that to the disciples.

Of course, he doesn't limit his ideas to things he claims to have found in the Bible. “People ask me often about a lifestyle of miracles. How do you come into a lifestyle of miracles?... But I found out something. You need to take time to get alone with God, to get in a secret place with God and cry out to him.” (Kindle Locations 680-685). He offers not biblical support for such a claim, and the Bible does not teach this. “Nothing happens in the Kingdom until first there is a declaration. Everything hinges upon the simple faith of people who will make decrees.” (Kindle Locations 880-881). Johnson offers no biblical support for this statement, because the Bible doesn't teach that. This if Word of Faith heresy. “He always manifests himself opposite to his surroundings. He manifests himself opposite to the spirit of the day that has captured the affections and the attentions of a generation. Because he has a better way. He has a better solution. That means that when you live at a time when people are going broke, bankrupt, when there is financial crisis and chaos, and fear is spreading all around you, that’s the time God wants to prosper you.” (Kindle Locations 1245-1248). The Bible doesn't teach that, this is just Prosperity Gospel heresy.

This is only a small sampling of the ludicrous things Bill Johnson teaches in this book.

Where are the church leaders who hold this guy accountable, that tell him that his teachings are not biblical and that he should step down from his pulpit and actually study the Bible before he's allowed to speak before anyone again? It is a testimony to the sad state of the church today that Bill Johnson is considered a successful minister, when he has no idea how to properly handle the Word of God.

For better, far more biblical teachings, I would recommend The World-Tilting Gospel  by Dan Phillips.

book review–Invading the Seven Mountains with Intercession by Tommi Femrite

prostituting prayer

A lot could be said about this book, little if any of it good.

It’s basically unbiblical. The author constantly makes claims that have no biblical support. "The kingdom of God encompasses all Seven Mountains. That means God already has a strategy for each mountain in every culture around the world." (p. 14). She gives no place where this is said in the Bible. "Our prayers have the power to stir up the heavens and create an atmosphere in which the Holy Spirit has complete freedom to move in power." Whatever. Unless she can show where that is taught in the Bible, which she doesn’t, I’m not going to buy into it. "The truth is, apostolic intercessors are the ones who open the pathway between heaven and earth. Our value as apostolic intercessors is far greater than we can ever imagine." (p. 83). For one thing, you’ll find nothing in the Bible about "apostolic intercessors"; for another, this notion that any human opens a pathway between heaven and earth is, at best, borderline blasphemy. Only One has opened the way to God, Jesus Christ.

It’s more than a little loopy. "Simply put, whoever ascends to the top of the mountain conquers— and therefore rules—the mountain." (p. 11). Really? I would guess that the last person who would claim to rule Mr. Everest would be one who has scaled it and lived to tell about it. "...God is waiting for us to apply His divine strategy in every area of every society on the face of this earth. And He knows we can bring about His victorious kingdom!" (p. 14). We bring about God’s kingdom? Huh??? God believes in us? Wow, ego-boosting much? Playing to pride? A bit high on yourself? "As Psalm 103:20 indicates, angels are assigned to "perform His word, obeying the voice of His word." Because we are God’s voice on earth, then, we have the power to initiate heavenly activity." (p. 98). Psalm 103:20 has nothing to do with us being able to order around angels, and that sure isn’t taught anywhere else in the Bible.

The claims of this book are rather...questionable. One thing you have to understand is that people connected with the NAR, like this author is, are not the most trustworthy, and that has been shown over and over. Faith healers may claim to have healed untold thousands of people, until someone actually investigates those claims and learns that, in reality, no one was really healed. So, when this author claims that your business will do better if you get their people to pray for you, well, there is a phrase I’ve heard a few times, "Rely but verify", which would be wise advice. Or better yet, verify first, and then still don’t rely, because this author’s teachings and organization are not biblical at all.

Finally, there is simply the reality that this book is little more than an extended infomercial for her organization, that essentially sells these "intercessors" to the reader, if the reader meets the correct criteria, of course. "Despite the potential for such turnaround, many people balk at the notion of paying intercessors to pray for a business." (p. 206). Gahh–lee, I wonder why? She tries to rationalize it, but the truth is, there are things that lose something when they are put on the market. A man making love to his wife is fine, but if he pays another woman so he can make love to that other woman, that’s something else entirely. Concerning this author’s attempts to prostitute prayer, well, I’ll point you to Acts 8, where a man tried to buy powers given by the Holy Spirit, and in no uncertain terms was rebuked by Peter.

　
That should be enough to show that this book is rubbish, and should be avoided.

peter wagner: Jesus could have decided to sin

That certainly seems to be what Wagner is saying in this quote from his book "On Earth as it is in Heaven", emphasis mine.

A fresh look at Jesus’ temptation will remove any lingering doubts that Satan had acquired true dominion over the earth. What I am going to say now assumes that we believe the three temptations were real. They were literal, not just figurative. In each of the three, Jesus could have decided to sin, which, of course, He didn’t.


On Earth as it Is in Heaven (Kindle Locations 796-799).

This is more than a little bizarre. Jesus could have sinned? Really? Doesn't that mean the Jesus was less than divine? If Jesus could decide to sin, then that's essentially saying that God could decide to sin.

I think Wagner needs to consider his words a bit better, at the least. In fact, perhaps he should stop pretending to be a church leader, after that one.

book review--The Voice by Don Nori

faulty premise leads to other faulty teachings

I received a free copy of this book through the Destiny Image Book Review program.

The main problem with this book is that it's based on a faulty premise. "Yes, the Voice of God speaks to true intercessors", p. 38. "The Voice has much to say; as we hear, feel, and respond to the Voice, Heaven and Earth are forever changed." p. 41. We must let the River of His Voice literally gush forth from deep within our spirits, and then flow out to the spiritual wasteland that is all around us." p. 12

The problem with this striving to hear some kind of voice inside of us is this--the Bible never tells us to do that. When God spoke to the prophets and apostles, He did not do so through some ultra-quiet, difficult to hear inner voice. He came in instances like the burning bush, He gave them dreams and visions, He spoke directly to them. Even when he spoke to the prophet Elijah in a still, quiet voice, he did not speak to him with quiet inner voice, but with a voice that the prophet heard with his ears. God's messages to them were clear, they did not have some vague inner feelings that they had to try to create some interpretations for.

Seeing this faulty premise, it's easy to see how much of the rest of the book goes astray. For example, he tries to create a type of elite "true intercessors" that the Bible says nothing about, and the things he teaches about these "true intercessors" are rather odd. "True intercessors don't take prayer requests." p. 40. Really? Ok, I'll be sure to not tell any "true intercessor" my concerns. "There is only one allegiance, to God alone. Personal desires have no place counseling God." p. 40. Considering that it is God Himself who has invited us to "let your request be made known to God", then I can only think that there is certainly a place for letting God know our personal desires. It may be said that our prayers should be about more than just our wants, but there seems to be no biblical call for us to try to be so spiritual that we ignore our own needs and wants.

Another thing he contends has to do with the Most Holy Place. "For instance, if Christ dwells within, why do we sing, "Come into the Holy of Holies" when we are the Holy of Holies?" p. 134. "Our hearts are the Most Holy Place within which the Presence dwells." p. 180. However, he gives no scriptural support for this contention that we are the Holy of Holies, or that our hearts are the Most Holy Place; in fact, the Bible is rather uncomplimentary about the state of our hearts, calling the heart "deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, more than we can understand".

In his chapter titled "Quiet Anarchy", he writes this about the word "anarchy", "This is the word that many folk fear. If you are one of those people who fear this word, close this book and go home. I am sorry. You are not a world-changer." p. 113. Since I see no place in Scripture where we are called to be world-changers, I see no reason to embrace any form of anarchy; in fact, anarchy is a very ungodly concept. It is the Apostle Paul who told the church that they needed to "do all things decently and in order". The New Testament tells us to obey and submit to rulers. We are not to be leftists who think that chaos is a good thing.

The author makes some strange, unsupported contentions. "At one time, such anarchy was seen as pure heresy, rebellion, and immaturity. At one time, though, anarchy was a way of life for all those who truly loved God and sought diligently for a greater truth; to be a believer in Jesus was to openly oppose the government in power." p. 114. Really? Tell us, please, when and where this time was. No, please, do tell, my curiosity is piqued. I'm actually studying early church history right now, and I really haven't seen any time like this, where the church was fomenting anti-government sentiments.

Or this one, "History shows us that the greatest steps in spiritual renewals and advancements were made by those who were regarded by many as heretics, madmen, or worse." p. 123. Since the author does not show us his claim to be true, then why should we believe that history shows it? Who are these "heretics, madmen and worse" that he wants us to admire? Why does he not name them, so that we may determine for ourselves if they are people to be respected and admired?

Probably the most questionable part of the book is the chapter called "Brink of Heresy", as he pretty much says that experience trumps doctrine. "Whether or not they accept the experience is not the issue, for the experience is my reality, and I will not deny it." p. 137. Welcome to Postmodernism, where the only truth is what you experience to be true. Peter Rollins or Tony Jones could write that statement, and I'm not complimenting this author when I compare him to those two.

"It's actually too bad that Bible scholars don't subject their mountains of theology to the same tests as they use on the rest of us!" p. 139. What a nonsense statement! True Bible scholars do subject their doctrine to the same test, "What do the Scriptures say?". That's the test, that's the only test, and that's why this author's teachings fail. "The decision to put their studies above what they witness with their own eyes is both frightening and arrogant." p. 139 The decison to put experiences above sound biblical doctrine is unwise, and arrogant.

While every now and again he does come up with a bit of something that's interesting, it's simply not worth wading through all the unbiblical ideas and mystical mush that he tries to feed us. His unsupported claims make his book come off more as propoganda than any kind of serious biblical teaching. His claim that experience trumps doctrine is a sure road to failure.

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.

a rather high opinion of themselves

Calling as Intercessors

In Old Testament Israel, the high priest would venture into the Holy of Holies to confess the sin of his people and carry out the vital business of intercession with God on their behalf. In the New Testament, Jesus, our high priest, extended this privilege of priesthood to all believers through the New Covenant and the shedding of His own blood. The apostle Peter proclaims that we who were washed with His blood have now become a “royal priesthood”.

So, let's see...

I Peter 2
4 As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, 5 you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.” 7 So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone,” 8 and “A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense.” They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do. 9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

Ok, so, Peter does use a phrase that has been translated as "royal priesthood" in this passage, as well as "holy priesthood" in v 5. So? As he points out, Jesus is our High Priest now, there is then no more need for sacrifices for sin. As well, we do not confess the sins of others. Our message, as is said elsewhere in the Bible, is that people should "Be reconciled to God".

As should be evident from the lack of biblical support, his contentions lack biblical support. We don't see, for example, that Peter told the natives of Jerusalem or Israel to "confess the sins" of those around them, nor does any other apostle or epistle teach us this kind of superstitious view of praying for others.

"We as New Testament followers of Christ have also been given the prophetic mantle that was once reserved for isolated prophets of old like Isaiah and Jeremiah" Good luck finding that in the New Testament.

"The Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthians that “you can all prophesy." Where did he say that? How about some context? Paul said a lot of things. He once wished some people would castrate themselves. I bet if someone tried to implement that command, someone would start looking at the context.

"Derek Prince, in his book Shaping History through Prayer and Fasting, made a stunning comment: “God has vested in us – His believing people on earth – authority by which we may determine the destinies of nations and governments. He expects us to use our authority both for His glory and our own good.” He based this astounding statement on Jeremiah 1:9-10. In that passage the Lord says He will put His words in the prophet’s mouth and in so doing will appoint him “over nations and kingdoms.”"

Well, let's see those couple of verses, with some context...

Jeremiah 1
4 Now the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations." 6 Then I said, “Ah, Lord GOD! Behold, l I do not know how to speak, for I am only a youth.” 7 But the LORD said to me, "Do not say, ‘I am only a youth’; for to all to whom I send you, you shall go, and whatever I command you, you shall speak. 8 Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you to deliver you, declares the LORD." 9 Then the LORD put out his hand and touched my mouth. And the LORD said to me, "Behold, I have put my words in your mouth. 10 See, I have set you this day over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant."

Here's a bit about v 10, from a commentary...

10. set thee over — literally, "appointed thee to the oversight." He was to have his eye upon the nations, and to predict their destruction, or restoration, according as their conduct was bad or good. Prophets are said to do that which they foretell shall be done; for their word is God's word; and His word is His instrument whereby He doeth all things (Gen 1:3; Psalm 33:6, 9). Word and deed are one thing with Him. What His prophet saith is as certain as if it were done. The prophet's own consciousness was absorbed into that of God; so closely united to God did he feel himself, that Jehovah's words and deeds are described as his. In Jer 31:28, God is said to do what Jeremiah here is represented as doing (compare Jer 18:7; 1 Kings 19:17; Ezek 43:3).
Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (Kindle Locations 41966-41973). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

The point is this--the prophet himself was not set over nations and kingdoms, but was rather the messanger who told them what was going to happen. One can see that in Jeremiah, and with other prophets. The role of the prophet was important, one can see how the response to Jonah's message caused judgment on Nineveh to not happen.

"Centuries later, Jesus erupted with fiery rage at the Jerusalem temple when He found that a preoccupation with marketing and money had subverted the temple’s ministry and priesthood’s calling to be a “house of prayer for all nations.” What a tragic diversion had taken place since apparently the very wellbeing of the world and its peoples was dependent on the prayers from that place!" Not sure how they got that last part from what Jesus said.

"It could be said that the future of our planet is now in the hands and hearts of today’s intercessors." Well, I guess that these people don't have a high opinion of themselves, oh no. Now, it would be interesting to see if they could find where anything like that is taught in the Bible. Did Paul write that to any church? Did Peter preach that in any of his recorded sermons in Acts? Did maybe John write that in Revelation?

Umm...Nope.

"Be assured that our heartfelt, faith-filled prayers will make a huge difference to the wellbeing of our world!" Well, I would be more assured if you actually taught anything biblically sound.

Ok, what does the Bible say about praying for others? Here's a bit about it.

II Corinthians 1
8 For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. 9 Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. 10 He delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will deliver us again. 11 You also must help us by prayer, so that many will give thanks on our behalf for the blessing granted us through the prayers of many.

I suppose it would not be unfair to say that this passage shows us that praying for ministers is itself a kind of ministry to them, to help them, and that it may well help their ministry be more effective.

I Timothy 2
First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. 3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

From this passage, what and who are we to pray for, and why? We are to pray for rulers, so that life can be peaceful and quiet for us.

Surprisingly, the Bible doesn't seem to have this hyper-critical view of intercession, this hyper-spiritual view of it that so many nowadays seem to have, this view that I consider a superstitious view of prayer. When Jesus ascended, His commission was to take the Gospel to all the world. He said nothing about the need for intercessory prayer.

At no point does the Bible say anything such as that the future of the planet is in the hands of intercessors. Sorry, all you who are doing all the supposedly spiritual prayer exercises, trying to stay awake all night, trying to set up 24-7 prayer 'boiler rooms' or whatever you want to call them, trying to create some kind of Tabernacle of David or an 'open heaven', but your projects have no biblical warrant.

Prayer is important, I'm not arguing otherwise. But I'm more than a little put off by the present-day superstitious views of prayer. These views of prayer do not treat prayer as us petitioning God, but us manipulating God. In superstitous prayer, God is the door that will open if we say the proper "Open, Sesame", God is the force who will respond if we have the proper kind of faith, God is the actor on the sideline who cannot act if we do not ask Him to do so. God is waiting for us to do the right things, pray all day and night, create whatever is meant by an 'open heaven', and then He will do something.

Mr. Robb, in this article, is teaching a superstitious view of prayer. History can be shaped through prayer, whatever that means. The intercessors shape the future, believe the future into being, who make the future into a "new-present" that we long for.

Notice the emphasis on "we", what "we" do, what "we" can do through our prayers. It's all about "us", our efforts, our works. We can save the world by our works.
This is starting to seem a lot like another gospel. I'm not completely prepared to go all the way there yet, but it's dangerously close.

bad tree bad fruit

My great uncle (my mom’s uncle) was discipled by a man named William Branham. Branham is still considered by many today to have walked in one of the most accurate word of knowledge and healing gifts of anyone documented. Many times he would call out a person’s address, phone number, and sickness and then declare healing over them. More often than not, that individual was healed. Many times whole hospital wards were brought to his tent meetings, and often everyone would leave healed! William Branham once said that my uncle was like a son to him. He poured much into him, and it did not go without return! My uncle was involved in the beginnings of the Full Gospel Businessmen, a ministry that God used in the mid-1900s and still continues to use today to go to the nations as well as to fund overseas missions.

Several years ago, I sat around a fireplace with my 89-year-old uncle listening to firsthand stories of himself, William Branham, and Demos Shakarian. These were compelling accounts of miraculous healings, third Heaven experiences, and most of all, radical love for God. He recounted a time he was in Japan and announced that God wanted to heal. Right away, a man with a shriveled arm and hand came up for prayer. As they began to pray, the cracking and popping of bones being formed and muscles being created filled the room as the Holy Spirit began to move in a powerful way. It was soon announced to those attending the meeting at the Pearl Ball Room in the Tokyo Hilton that revival had come to Japan. The man’s arm was completely healed. Soon after this, the room was full of reporters and the pastors began to minister deliverance and salvation to those attending.

Byrd, Andy; Feucht, Sean (2010-09-01). Fire and Fragrance (pp. 32-33). Destiny Image. Kindle Edition.

This excerpt is from the third chapter of the book, which is subtitled (Andy's Story) (yes, the parentheses are there), and so Andy Byrd is talking about his own great uncle.

So, keeping in mind that he's talking about a great-uncle who was seriously connected with William Branham, we might well ask, who was Branham and what did he teach (to overuse parentheses even more, you may notice that Byrd writes nothing about Branham's teachings).

Well, Branham was what could, most politely, be called "a piece of work".

The Teachings of "the Prophet" William Branham
William Branham's Basic Beliefs

First, and perhaps most importantly, Branham denied the triune nature of God. His ideas about Christ seem very convoluted. Jesus was a created being, Jesus at one time was not God because Jesus had to have had a point of beginning, Jesus thus was not eternal. He was against baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He was, thus, a modalist.

His ideas about the Fall are bizarre. He taught that the account of the Fall was some kind of symbolic language, that what really happened was that Eve was sexually seduced by the serpent, and thus became pregnant with Cain. Apparently, she and the serpent even set up house together for a while.

He claimed that God's word could be found in other places than the Bible, but also in the Pyramids of Egypt and in the Zodiac. So much was in influence by these ideas that his own tombstone is in the shape of a pyramid.

He was a false prophet. Like the current false prophet Harold Camping, Branham made predictions that the end of the age would occur in 1977, and that that is also when the millenium would begin.

You can see how Byrd tries to essentially equivocate and cover for Branham.

"Branham is still considered by many today to have walked in one of the most accurate word of knowledge and healing gifts of anyone documented." Notice the weasel-words "one of the most accurate...". Obviously, that means it wasn't perfectly accurate, either in regards to knowledge or to healing, a sure sign that Branham's powers did not come from God. In the Bible, a prophet is expected to be absolutley perfect and accurate in what he says in prophecy. How could it be otherwise, if the God who is perfect in knowledge is giving knowledge to the prophet? But if the spirit speaking to the prophet is not God or from God, then we may sure that, for all of it's apparent displays of occasional accuracy, it will also show itself to be very wrong, and thus false.

"Many times he would call out a person’s address, phone number, and sickness and then declare healing over them. More often than not, that individual was healed." Again, notice the similar weasel-words "more often than not..." Byrd is admitting the Branham got it wrong at times. Again, that is a sign that this spirit was not from God.

"Many times whole hospital wards were brought to his tent meetings, and often everyone would leave healed!" It would have been good if Byrd had given us some documentation of these events. Where, for example, did such things happen? Were these healings verified?

Notice that Byrd is essentially boasting of this connection, distant as it was, with this false teacher and prophet. He holds Branham up as a model or hero, someone to be looked up to, an example of a person with the kinds of powers many today or tomorrow should have.

Oh, one more thing--Branham also taught the Manifest Sons of God heresy. It goes by other names--Joel's Army, the Latter Rain, Seven Mountains Dominionism, and others. Byrd and Feucht are quite into it, too, though they are careful to avoid the names. Here are some examples from this same book.

God is longing to fill us with an accurate view of the spiritual disciplines and allow us to begin to experience boundary lines in pleasant places as David refers to in Psalm 16. I prophesy and declare that God is raising up a whole generation that will be known for both great exploits and uncompromising character—radical power and a committed life of extravagant discipline! These will become inseparable in this generation. The world will look on with amazement as a company of Daniels emerges on the earth and in the Church whose character is above reproach and whose life is full of anointing, power, and love.

Byrd, Andy; Feucht, Sean (2010-09-01). Fire and Fragrance (pp. 148-149). Destiny Image. Kindle Edition.

"Raising up a generation...", language consistent with the dominionist's heresy. Here's my own attempt at prophecy. Well, not really prophecy, since I make no claim to such a gift. All I'm doing is being a bit far-sighted--think something like what chess players do--, and taking Scripture seriously. My prediction, such as it is, is this--there will be no such generation. God saves individuals, and puts those individuals into churches. There may be people with dominionist beliefs who have spiritual manifestations, but they will not be from God, just as the manifestations associated with Branham were not of God.

Colossians 2:10 exhorts and reminds us that every believer has “been given fullness” (NIV). We must break out of an ungodly paradigm that every believer is not already fully equipped to become the solution and hope for the darkness flooding the world. It is so imperative to understand that Jehu was not a prophet or a priest but was an heir to the throne. This mandate and high calling from God goes out to all joint-heirs of Heaven to establish His Kingdom dominion in the land. This is in one accord with the prayer of Jesus in Matthew 6:10: “…on earth as it is in heaven.”

Byrd, Andy; Feucht, Sean (2010-09-01). Fire and Fragrance (p. 161). Destiny Image. Kindle Edition.

You might note the focus on us, that we are to become the solution and hope for the world.

We declare that we have been crucified with Christ and we no longer live, but Christ lives in us. The life we now live, we live by faith in the Son of God, who loved us and gave Himself for us! Oh God, we count all things rubbish compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus, our Lord! Oh God! Raise up a generation that is radically in love with You, totally surrendering to you, and completely abandoned to Your purposes.

Byrd, Andy; Feucht, Sean (2010-09-01). Fire and Fragrance (p. 187). Destiny Image. Kindle Edition.

So, can anyone claim to be succeeded in "totally surrendering"? Not even Paul, whom these writers quote or paraphrase, would likely have said that he had. He wrote quite plainly in Romans of his struggles with his sinful nature.

This is law. Not only that, but I can't think of anyplace in the Bible that speaks of us needing to practice "total surrendering" or be "completely abandoned", unless it is a law that we must confess to have broken and repent for breaking. And as with all law, we will never in this life perfectly obey it. If your hope is in some generation that will be "totally surrendered" and "completely abandoned", then you will be disappointed.

Can fruit coming from such a bad tree as William Branham be anything but itself bad? I would say, no. To borrow a quote from Luther...

At that time my wife said unto me, Sir! how is it, that in Popedom they pray so often with great vehemence, but we are very cold and careless in praying? I answered her, the devil driveth on his servants continually; they are diligent, and take great pains in their false worshipping, but we, indeed, are ice cold therein, and negligent.

Martin Luther. Selections from the Table Talk of Martin Luther (Kindle Locations 1069-1072).

mike bickle is a nut (and that's not a compliment)

Last night I just kind of gave an all-over-the-map introduction of Daniel chapter 10, we didn't really go into it, but I gave just a couple of ideas about it, and I would like to go into it a little bit this morning. But I want to say this, for those of you unfamiliar with Daniel 10. It is one of the unique chapters in the Bible for the prayer movement. Daniel 10 draws back the curtain and gives us an insight into the spirit realm, and how intercession moves things in the spirit realm. Angels and demons, how it impacts the cosmic conflict of angels and demons. Daniel 10 is very unique in that it pulls back the curtain to let us see into the realm of the spirit the conflict between angels and demons, but the important part is how the conflict is carried on related to intercession. It's not enought to know angels and demons clash, that's not the message of Daniel 10 that angels and demons clash, the message of Daniel 10 is that angels and demons clash ONLY when there's intercession on the Earth. Beloved, I want to stress that. Governmental angels move in governmental ways in the spirit only in response to intercession on the Earth. So the equation, the spiritual equation of this chapter, goes something like this. The angel comes to give Daniel revelation, this revelation invigorates his intercession. The great problem, the great need is the better way to say it, in the prayer movement, is the lack of revelation. Revelation invigorates the human spirit, makes the human spirit mighty in intercession. Intercession causes the angelic armies to move. The conflict in the spirit realm, with angels moving, dislodging demonic powers from their positions of dominance in history. Then, political events happen upon the Earth, and spiritual events happen in the natural related to that cosmic conflict. Let me say it again, because I want you to get this, this is the premise of Daniel 10. Intercessors pray, angels then move, they wait for prayer, they do not move in a governmental way without prayer. The angels then move, the demons are disrupted, the conflict happens in the spirit, then it is manifest in the natural, and history is changed. We want history to be changed by acting in the natural only, and we have to act in the natural, we have to act in the natural, everybody knows that part. History is filled with men and women acting in natural ways. But history will not be changed in its God-ordained path in the natural without the conflict in the spirit happening in the right way. Angels have to go into conflict against demons, and they will not except in response to intercession. That's part of God's governmental administration of the created order. He say "My heart with my people is so important, the entire cosmic battle is in the balance of how my people interact with my heart. If they interact with my heart, I dispatch angels. If they quit interacting with me, I tell the angels to wait."
Mike Bickle, from a video called Introduction to the IHOP-KC Structure and Model, beginning in the first few seconds.

First, here's the chapter in question.

Daniel 10

Wow. Just. Wow.

Ok, where to begin...

Almost the only thing he said here that I have anything approaching agreement with is that Daniel 10 does give us a bit of a glimpse into spiritual conflict. The angel that came to Daniel to deliver the message does say that it had been fighting, and after it left Daniel would continue to fight again. So, there is a modicum of information about this spiritual conflict.

But after acknowledging this bit of agreement, from this point on out, Bickle takes a header off the deep end.

Let's look at some of his statements.

"the message of Daniel 10 is that angels and demons clash ONLY when there's intercession on the Earth."

I've linked to the chapter above, so perhaps you can read it, and see where the chapter says that. Because I'm not seeing it.

Governmental angels move in governmental ways in the spirit only in response to intercession on the Earth.

So, where does the Bible say anything about "governmental angels"? I can't think of much of any mention about that. The closest I can think of is in Daniel 12, when it mentions the angel Michael being "the great prince who has charge of your people." And that's it. There is nothing else about such things.

So the equation, the spiritual equation of this chapter, goes something like this. The angel comes to give Daniel revelation, this revelation invigorates his intercession.

Read Daniel 10-12, or at least look through those chapters quickly. This visit by the angel to Daniel is the last event recorded in the book. There is nothing recorded in the book about anything Daniel did after this. There is nothing said about his prayers of intercession being "invigorated". The only thing the angel tells him to do is in chapter 12, verse 9, when he says "Go your way, Daniel...", and something similar at the very end of the chapter and book, "13 But go your way till the end. And you shall rest and shall stand in your allotted place at the end of the days.”

Revelation invigorates the human spirit, makes the human spirit mighty in intercession. Intercession causes the angelic armies to move.

So, because one angel came in response to Daniel's words, we can conclude that armies of angels move when we intercede? There's a jump in logic, or, dare I say, illogic.

Intercessors pray, angels then move, they wait for prayer, they do not move in a governmental way without prayer.

So, where does this chapter say that? In fact, where does the Bible say anywhere that angels essentially have their hands tied unless someone is praying?

He says, "My heart with my people is so important, the entire cosmic battle is in the balance of how my people interact with my heart. If they interact with my heart, I dispatch angels. If they quit interacting with me, I tell the angels to wait."

This is the most questionable part. True, the quotes are my own insertion, but you can see from his language that Bickle is talking as if God said this. Whether it is a direct quote or a summation, Bickle is still saying that God said this.

Now, where did God say that?

Does this Bible contain those phrases? Where, for example, does the Bible say anything about the importance of "my heart with my people" having any sort of influence on spiritual conflict? Where does the Bible say that God will "dispatch angels" if His people "interact with my heart"?

You can read Daniel 10 again, and see plainly that it ain't there, despite what Bickle claims.

Bickle goes on in this speech about how crucial this chapter is to the church, and how it addresses the modern-day "prayer movement", even comparing his own House of Prayer in Kansas City to the Temple. While this passage in Daniel is important, because it is in the Bible and is a prophetic message, one may wonder why, if it is so important, the New Testament writers do not stress it? While there is teaching in the epistles about the end times, little if any of it references Daniel 10-12.

And if you read Daniel 10-12, you can see why. This prophecy addresses things that relate to Daniel's people, Israel. But so far as I can tell, the Church is basically a non-entity in the things prophecied about, except insofar as it early in Daniel 12 it mentions those whose names "shall be found written in the book", and of those who have died being raised, and some of them "to everlasting life".

How can something who spews such nonsense gain a position of leadership in the church? How can anyone even take him seriously? His words are not in the Bible, they aren't taught there, they aren't even a reasonable supposition from the events in the chapter. This is pathetic. Bickle is shameful, and the church should be ashamed to have allowed this nut to spew his filth in the church.