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--Growing in the Prophetic by Mike Bickle

one reason the prophetic is a joke

Assuming, at least for the moment, that the prophetic is still something for today (debatable), it would still be true that no small amount of what Bickle writes in this book is not just unhelpful, but damaging, and I've little doubt that it is one of the reasons that the prophetic has deservedly earned itself a bad name.


For example, take this statement, "The primary way that the Father will show us what He is doing is by speaking to us in the “still, small voice.” The Father will also give us whispers or hints of what He is about to do. The “divine hint” may come as a subtle prophetic impression on our mind." (Kindle Locations 3386-3389). He tries to tie this to the account of the prophet Elijah hearing a still, small voice while he was on the mountain, but what happened to the prophet is not what Bickle says he and others experience. Elijah heard a real voice, not some kind of vague internal 'voice' that's actually little more than a feeling that can be interpreted any number of ways.

I would dare say that few modern-day teachings has been the source of more confusion, mistakes, hesitancy, and just all-around goofiness than the stress so many put on trying to hear some kind of quiet, inner voice. The Bible teaches nothing about our need to hear such a thing.

Another example is how he waters down the biblical requirement that anyone who prophecies be 100% accurate. "The New Testament doesn’t require the same standard of its prophets who prophesy by faith and often from subtle impressions of the Holy Spirit. (Kindle Locations 1121-1123). He gives no place where that is stated in the New Testament, but simply tries to extrapolate it. "In the New Testament, Paul taught us specifically to “let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge” (1 Cor. 14:29, emphasis added). The Revised Standard Version translates the passage this way: “ . . . let the others weigh what is said.”" (Kindle Locations 1124-1126). But he does not explain how that means that prophetic accuracy is no longer required, or how it downplays the importance of accuracy, or for that matter what the church was to do to those who prophecied falsely.

And in the New Testament, we are not given any instances of someone prophecying something wrong. All of the prophets in the New Testament were just as accurate as those in the Old. If one is going to say that prophecy is still for today, then watering down the need and requirement for absolute accuracy is dangerous.

But to work around this, Bickle spend much of this book explain his rather convoluted measures for determining who can prophesy, what kinds of prophecies they can give when, who has what level of prophetic ability, how to handle it when prophecies are wrong, and so on. It makes one long for the blunt simplicity of the Old Testament--you'd better be right, or the consequences will be serious. In other words, you'd better be very sure it's God telling you to say this and that. If all you got is a vague inner feeling, you'd best keep your trap shut.

One serious warning sign about Bickle's teachings has to do with what he says about a false prophet and teacher of yesteryear, "However, Branham ended up preaching some doctrinal heresy, although never to the extent of denying Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior or doubting the authority of the Scriptures." (Kindle Locations 2244-2246). But the truth is, those are the very things Branham got very wrong. He was a modalist who even taught that "In the beginning He (Jesus) wasn't even God", and he taught that the Zodiac and the pyramids were equal to the Bible. Bickle is flat-out wrong in his statement about Branham.

All in all, this book is a theological mess.

this isn't biblical prophecy

I happened to be out of town that morning, which is not to say that it
wouldn’t have occurred if I had been there. One of the members of the
prophetic team received a word from the Lord for a man in our congregation.
This man was horrified as the prophetic person publicly shared that he
lacked integrity in his finances.

When I returned, I went to the person who gave that prophecy and asked
him exactly what he had seen. He told me that he had seen a dark cloud over
the area of the man’s finances. He interpreted this to mean that the man was
stealing money, but his interpretation was totally wrong!

Soon after this prophecy, the man’s business partner embezzled a large
sum of money from him. The prophetic word was a warning to the man
to watch out for someone who might steal money from him, but it was
mistakenly pronounced as a judgment against his character. The brother was
humiliated publicly by the prophetic word, and he missed the warning that
someone was stealing from him.

Mike Bickle, Growing in the Prophetic, pp 29-30

It would be true to say that the Old Testament prophets had dreams and visions and even encounters that could be called very strange. But did they have them like what is recorded here by Bickle?

Zechariah, for examples, had several strange vision--a flying scroll, a woman in a basket and two women flying with wings like storks, lampstands and olive trees.But along with these vision, there is also an interpretation given. Granted, the interpretation is not often very clear, at least for me, but it is there, and I suppose if I did more research into the visions, I'd understand them better.

Most of Zechariah's prophecies seem to be rather broad, addressing Israel as a whole, though there is one or two that address the king, Zerubabel, and the High Priest Joshua. The interpretation of these seems to be clearer.

Other prophets prophecied to other people, often king or religious leaders. What they said was usually not obligue. Nathan told a story to David, then told him what it meant. Others were more still more direct.

What I can't think of, though, is something like in Bickle's example, where someone claims to see something, something with a pretty clear meaning, only to have it mean something else. To look at an example from Zechariah 3

Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him. 2 And the LORD said to Satan, l “The LORD rebuke you, O Satan! The LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?” 3 Now Joshua was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments. 4 And the angel said to those who were standing before him, “Remove the filthy garments from him.” And to him he said, “Behold, I have taken your iniquity away from you, and I will clothe you with pure vestments.” 5 And I said, “Let them put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with garments. And the angel of the LORD was standing by. 6 And the angel of the LORD solemnly assured Joshua, 7 “Thus says the LORD of hosts: If you will walk in my ways and keep my charge, then you shall rule my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you the right of access among those who are standing here. 8 Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who sit before you, for they are men who are a sign: behold, I will bring my servant the Branch. 9 For behold, on a the stone that I have set before Joshua, on a single stone with seven eyes, I will engrave its inscription, declares the LORD of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of this land in a single day. 10 In that day, declares the LORD of hosts, every one of you will invite his neighbor to come under his vine and under his fig tree.”

Could you imagine Zechariah having only one part of the vision, then being left to interpret it for himself? And having to tell the priest Joshua was it meant?

Consider what happened in Bickle's account. This 'prophet' claimed to have seen some kind of black cloud over the man's finances. And that's it.

That isn't the only time something like that is recorded in Bickle's book. In another place, on page 25, he relates a time when one of his 'prophets' saw musical notes around a man, whether floating or bouncing like in some old cartoon, I don't know. In this case again, the prophet wasn't given any kind of interpretation, though he though he knew what it meant. He told the man something that was, well, nonsense.

None of this seems to in any sense be like biblical prophecy. I simply can't think of any time recorded in the Bible when a prophet was given a vision, then let to either interpret it on his own, or even allowed to try to interpret it on his own.

That isn't biblical prophecy. It's more like reading card, or any other form of divination. You get a vague message, you have to figure out what it means, and you have about as much chance of getting it wrong as getting it right.

Bickle wants to say that many examples from his ministry that are consider false prophecies were really bad interpretations. I rather think that it's doesn't matter which it was. The fact that Bickle's 'prophets' spoke falsely makes them false prophets. Consider this passage.

II Peter 1
19 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

A true prophet does not speak presumptuously in prophecy, but only the Spirit tells them to say. The fact that Bickle's 'prophets' spoke presumptuously makes them falst prophets, period, no matter what excuses he makes for them.

more rotten fruit

I will warn you, if you choose to watch this video, it is more than a little disturbing.



It's sad that this is where we are now. Godly living and character and sound doctrine are of little to no consequence, despite the occasional verbal bone thrown to them to give a surface appearance of orthodoxy; instead, what we have now is a pursuit of "manifestations", suppose spiritual things that the Bible says nothing about unless it is to condemn them. And some ignorant little girl can get on stage, twitch and spasm and talk about giving some 'sermon' that isn't even about the Bible, and be not accepted but encouraged to continue in this madness.

Let's go ahead and call Bickle's IHOP what it is--a cult. There is nothing godly here. There is nothing of any worth here. God is not in these spasmatic manifestation, God has not part in being "drunk in the spirit" or "slain in the spirit".

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.