book review—Forever Ruined for the Ordinary by Joy Dawson

basically completely unbiblical

I simply have a hard time believing anyone takes the teachings and methods in this book seriously. How can anyone with an ounce of discernment think this author is teaching them anything biblical in this book?

“I want to make it crystal clear that we should never just open the Bible randomly, and casually put our finger on a verse, and automatically go and do whatever it says. What if we did that and read that Judas hanged himself (see Matthew 27: 5), then repeated the action, and landed upon the verse which says “Go and do likewise” (Luke 10: 37)?” (Kindle Locations 551-553). Yet what she recommends is not really any better. Many of the stories she relates about herself and others involve taking biblical verses and even phrases out of context, and pretending that they have a meaning that they don't have. She relates telling a young man to marry a certain woman because of a phrase in II Kings 14. a phrase that in context was used in a mocking way. She relates a time a woman got her pastor to pay for a friend to attend a conference based solely on the fact that she opened her Bible and found her pastor's name in Ezekial 27:15, without regard to the context of that verse.

She calls this “quickening”. Another reviewer compares it to the Magic 8-Ball toy, which I think is more accurate. The Bible nowhere teaches or encourages such a haphazard and trite way of reading and understanding the Bible. Worse, I think this is a kind of fortune-telling, and simply because it involves using the Bible doesn't make it any better; if anything, it makes it worse, because it trivializes the Word of God. Instead of encouraging people to a serious study of biblical teachings, this encourages them to simply open up the Bible and scan the pages until something “pops out!”, or to think they are getting random biblical verses in their minds and then try to shoehorn what that verse says into some kind of personal message for them and their situations.

This book is all law, all legalism. You have to do things her way, you have to do all of the steps she tells you to do, you have to follow all of her principles, and if you fail at even one point, well, you may get some bad messages from demons, you may act presumptuously, you may get kidnapped, or you may end up not being able to speak at all. But the steps and principles she's made up are not anywhere found in the Bible. No epistle teaches that, if the people in the churches want to get messages from God, then they need to silence their own voices, rebuke demons, then sit around quietly until God finally decides to give them some kind of unclear message or out-of-context scriptural passage.

“Unconditional obedience is the key to a successful Christian life. Think about that!” (Kindle Locations 1546-1547). There may be some truth there, but it's only at best half of the truth. Because none of us are completely or unconditionally obedient. There is little hint in such a mindset that one would join Paul in lamenting “Oh wretched man that I am, who shall save me from this body of death”, or in agreeing with him that “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief”.

If the misuse of biblical passages isn't enough of a bad sign for you, here's a pretty plain one—she recounts in this book a time this “god” who speaks to her in feelings and impressions wanted her to do something in support of something Benny Hinn was doing. Hinn is a known false prophet, a fake healer, a prosperity gospel shill who has enriched himself with false promises and false words he claims are from God, he has even preached that we are “little gods”. The God of the Bible would not tell someone to do anything in support of such a false minister.

But I do think that there might be a few people who could be grateful for this book, those who work at putting together conferences and scheduling speakers for them, because this author would likely be a nightmare for them to deal with or to trust.

As someone who was in YWAM for a few years, I'm very glad to be away from this kind of feelings-based way of trying to figure out God's will. Sadly, I was one of those people who took these kinds of teachings seriously, trying to look inside myself and interpret my feelings to see what God might be trying to say to me through them. Perhaps it goes without saying, but it was incredibly unhelpful and very untrustworthy. Reading a book like this now, I can see how unbiblical this author's teachings are.

well, there goes hope

Right when one might have had hope concerning this coming election, the Evangelical purveyors of superstitious hyper-spiritual practices have gone and ripped it from us.

Intercessors Set up 'David's Tent' For 24/7 Worship Outside White House

I remember they did this last year, before the presidential election. Yeah, how'd that work out, folks?

One of the sure signs that these NAR types are false prophets and teachers can be found simply in this, that when they prophecy and proclaim something, the opposite happens. I remember Lou Engle writing this,  "Standing on that basketball court, with the U.S. Supreme court beneath the feet of Jesus and my feet, I declared, "From this day forward there will only be pro-life judges." Well, that didn't happen.

And now, there's this kind of stuff, again. These 24-7 kinds of places have become very popular in some circles, such the IHOP and YWAM crowds, not to mention the group that calls themselves 24-7 Prayer. And it's all hyper-spiritual busywork, all based on a superstitious view that if they do this, God will do something.

Hog and wash.

"David's Tent" is some kind of big cause celebre among these NAR Dominionists. They think there 24-7 music fests will have something to do with making "David's Tent" a reality, even though that's not what the Bible teaches.

Anyway, having any kind of hope in the current political situation is rather a difficult thing even on the best of days, but knowing that thus bunch is out there doing their schtick of false praise and worship just took hope right out the room. Please, folks, just stop, you've already done quite enough damage.

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).

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).

the definition of spiritualized busywork

When Jesus ascended after His resurrection, His last commands were rather simple--take the Gospel to the whole world, to the ends of the Earth, baptize those who believed, and teach them what He had said. Not easy, but simple and straightforward.

Fast-forward to...today.

Project 4K

And what is this, really?

4K is a global mapping project aimed at responding to the world’s spiritual and physical needs more strategically. With the vision of reaching every person on Earth, 4K has created a framework called Omega Zones. The world always has roughly 4,000 Omega Zones, hence the name 4K.

In this Information Age of technology, the use of maps to track Gospel presence and basic life needs will make the task of reaching everyone on Earth a reality. Through the Omega Zone mapping grid, Christian workers will have a better understanding of where we are and where we are not. Every person on the planet has needs, whether they are spiritual or physical. Using 4K, the global task at hand will be more apparent on a map, and the Body of Christ will be better equipped to mobilize its resources.

Funny, I don't recall anything in the Bible about Omega Zones, or the need to map them. Maybe the book about them got schlupped off into the Apocrypha.

Look, this isn't against technology, or information, or whatever. It's about...well...

Look at what's said there. "Every person on the planet has needs..." Ok, and the most important need they have is to know about Christ. Other needs are not necessarily unimportant, but that is the primary one. You don't need a cool techie map to know that.

This is just "spiritualized busywork", kinda like prayer walking and prayer mapping and the like. Little about this is of any real worth.

I'm also going to ascribe to it a even less good motive--it's about control. It's linked in Call 2 All, which is endorsed by people like Mike Bickle, he of the off-the-wall KC IHOP (I ain't talking pancakes, either) apostles and prophets.

Can you say "Dominionism", boys and girls? I thought you could. And what says "We're taking dominions!!" like cool maps showing that you're taking dominion?

Sad, isn't it, that this is what it's come to. From Jesus' plain commission to unbridled religious ambition.

has YWAM jumped the shark?

My heart was heavy as I traveled Africa, as I thought about my own nation. My prayer became, “Lord, what has gone wrong?” Nearly two thousand years of concentrated missions effort on this continent—how could it result in this? God spoke, simply and with a dawning revelation that would change my understanding of missions and my life calling, fundamentally and permanently. He said, “The devastation you see is the result of a gospel that limits itself to the preaching of salvation.”

Landa Cope, The Old Testament Template for Discipling Nations
(2012-01-22). His Kingdom Come: An Integrated Approach to Discipling the Nations and Fulfilling the Great Commission (Kindle Locations 669-673). YWAM Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Well, if that doesn't sound like Enlow's nonsense, I don't know what does. So, what does she suggest...?

All of a sudden it was as though I were given ears to hear what I had read so many times in my life and never understood. Somewhere between Boise, Idaho, and Omaha, Nebraska, (which is about five days of corn and wheat,) I was driving along and all of a sudden I thought, Whoa! Do you know what that chapter was about? It was about Law! Moses was teaching law. Moses was forming government. A little farther through the corn I thought, Whoa! Do you know what that chapter was about? It was about hygiene! There was a passage on economics. Then one on family and health care. Now another on law, and on it went. The light flashed into my poor little brain. Revelation hit like a laser beam. Moses’ job was to disciple a nation. His job was to teach people who had been slaves for more than three hundred years how to form and run their nation. Moses was to teach Israel God’s principles of government, economics, the family, the priesthood, and every domain of human society. He had forty years in the wilderness to do it, and he had written it all down!
(Kindle Locations 709-717)

And there we go...she wants to put us back under the law.

I discovered that chapter 28 gives us what I call a national inventory. It gives us a way of measuring how our nation is doing. It says if you are experiencing these things, you are being blessed. If you are experiencing those things, you are being cursed. When I drew out the different domains that are blessed when we are following God’s laws, I realized that he talks about the whole of society. So he says, “You will be blessed in the city; you will be blessed in the country.” When I hold American cities up to this, I know we are not being blessed. Our cities are a mess...
(Kindle Locations 901-906).

God says that the weather will be blessed (bad news for California!). He says national debt will be blessed—by lack of it, that is. America is failing on this list. How is your nation doing? God basically says that if you obey this body of laws, your country will be blessed.
(Kindle Locations 916-918)

It's as if she's never read the New Testament.

ga.4.21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? ga.4.22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. ga.4.23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. ga.4.24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.† ga.4.25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.† ga.4.26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. ga.4.27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. ga.4.28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. ga.4.29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. ga.4.30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. ga.4.31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 172337-172353). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

ro.3.19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.† ro.3.20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 170524-170527). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

Is Cope right the we could be blessed if we keep this body of laws? Sure. Now, go try.

No, seriously, please try. Try to make your nation, your district, your county, your city, your suburb, your family, or even yourself perfectly keep those laws. Don't pretend that you can do pretty good, and maybe that's good enough, 'cause it ain't. If a person violates one law, then he or she is guilty of all the law.

The truth is, the law was given to us for reasons. Consider what the verse above from Romans says. The law was given, to essentially shut us up. It was given so we could know about our sinfulness, so we can stop boasting of our own righteousness, or excuse our sins. It was not meant as a means to justification, because that is impossible. It was not given as a means for us to earn blessings.

ga.3.21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. ga.3.22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. ga.3.23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. ga.3.24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. ga.3.25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. ga.3.26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. ga.3.27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 172294-172304). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

The Galatian Christians had to deal with those who wanted to put them under the law, by saying that they had to be circumcised. Those like Cope seem to want to do the same, by saying that we have to return to the law in order to have nations be fit for God to bless. Never mind the fact that God spoke those words to a particularly people many long years ago, never mind that the intent of the law was not to make them righteous, but rather to show them sin and make it exceedingly sinful, so that they would repent and believe in the Messiah.

So, has YWAM jumped the shark? Has YWAM crossed the line? Landa Cope is not some little nobody in the grand scheme of things in YWAM, when she talks, people in YWAM listen. When her 'god' tells her that the world's problems are because the church has preached only the Gospel of salvation, what other gospel is there? What else is there, except law?

And this is what Cope is saying we should return to. In order to be blessed as nations, we have to keep all of the law. If that is so, than woe unto us!! Shall any nation, composed of sinful men, fully keep the law? Shall we dare to come to God, wrapped in the rags of our own righteousness, say that we have kept all his commands, and thus demand that He bless us? Is that not what her quid pro quo amounts to?

In Deuteronomy 27:26 God says through Moses, “‘Cursed be anyone who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’” Indeed, man is invited by the Law to pronounce a curse upon himself. Only a person engulfed by infernal darkness can believe that the Law will give him no trouble.
C.F.W. Walther (2011-12-29T05:00:00+00:00). The Proper Distinction of Law and Gospel (Kindle Locations 235-238). Pirate Christian Media. Kindle Edition.

Do not be mistaken, Cope is promoting bondage and slavery, the very things that we who believe in Christ have been freed from, just as those who tried to make the Galatians be circumcised were trying to put them back under the bondage of the law.

If this is where YWAM is going, or has gone already, then they are to be rejected by the Christian churches. They are preaching law, they are preaching another gospel, they are preaching a false gospel. And just as Paul told the Galatians, those who preach another Gospel are eternally cursed.

like unto the garden of eden?

Recently while studying the history of a city in California, I came across the specific place and time when Satan seems to have gained entrance. The earliest days in a city's history are very important because one of Satan's main strategies is to interfere with the process of birth. "And the dragon stood before the woman who was ready to give birth, to devour her Child as soon as it was born" (Rev. 12:4).

In this particular town the Christians among the early settlers had gathered together to plan the building of a chapel that would be used alternatively by several compatible congregations, such as Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians and Baptists. The process was proceeding smoothly until two prominent citizens had a personality conflict. This outburst of petty bickering eventually led to a rupture of the Christian community into two factions. One hundred years later this town is still marked by division and religious controversy.

John Dawson. Taking Our Cities For God - Rev (Kindle Locations 541-547). Kindle Edition.

So, let's see...

Are we to assume that, before this conflict, this particular unnamed town (a city today) must have been something like the Garden of Eden, because Satan had not gained entrance into it until then? It must, then, have been a town of sinless people, perfect in all their ways, probably even walking about in their birthday suits but free of lust and unholy desires? These early settlers must have been on the verge of creating a paradise on Earth until, like the serpent and the apple, these two people had their conflict and paradise was lost?

If you're thinking that it would be ridiculous to assume that, I would agree. But if that is true, then we are to conclude that what Dawson says about this town is ridiculous.

Satan didn't have an entrance into this town? The only way we could believe such a thing is to assume that the early settlers of this town really were sinless. Because if they were sinners, than we must conclude that either Satan and demons were already in the area when the settlers arrived, or they tagged along with the settlers as they traveled overland or by sea, and were well with them before a tree was felled, a board was shaped, a plot was laid, an acre was tilled, a building frame was raised, and a church service was held, let alone a quarrel was started.

And let's be real...the early settlers of this town that became a city were sinners. I don't know who they were, and since Dawson gives no name for this city, I can't really do much research, but since these people were humans, I think I can safely say that whatever else they may have been, they were certainly sinful people, like all people they were born in tresspasses and sin.

As such, then, Satan and his minions wouldn't have had to have waited for this conflict to have had access to the people of this town. While the people may have been religious, I've little doubt that not all the people of the town were Christians. Given that, there is no doubt that demons were about, tempting and influencing people, lost people as well and Christians.

Having considered all that, shall we conclude that Dawson's claims are bogus and ridiculous? I think so.

DTS and nonsense about the Holy Spirit, part 3

This will likely be the last I'll do on "Prophetic Session". Not much left, anyway.

The Necessity of Faith
We need to recognize that every aspect of God’s work requires us to walk in faith.
Prophesying, like any ministry, is a step of faith that usually requires us to get past our feelings and our fears.
Since prophetic ministry is telling people things we do not know by our own knowledge, it is like walking on water every time we dot it. If we are insecure in the Lord’s willingness to cover us, we will struggle as we give prophetic words.
Faith and humility are two primary requirements for prophetic ministry.
Cheating is prophesying things you already know in the natural, which is characteristic of a false prophet.
However, mistakes are not optional. Although no one enjoys the process, the way most of us learn in through trial and error.

It is like walking on water? Another strange analogy, and one that seems to be rather questionable, too.

Remember that when Peter walked on water, he did so at Jesus' invitation. One may rightly point out that Peter did ask first, but then, there are some instances in the Gospel when Peter asked to do something that Jesus refused; for example, at Jesus' transfiguration, Peter asked to be allowed to build tabernacles for Jesus, Moses, and Elijah, and his perhaps rash request was refused. The point is, though, that Peter walking on water is not an account designed for us to focus on Peter's great, if rather brief, faith, but rather on the Christ who was already walking on the waters, who came to the disciples as they were sailing in the storm, and who calmed the waters as He rescued Peter and both of them entered the boat.

If Peter had been presumptuous in this instance, if he for example had tried to walk on the water without Jesus' permission, I have my doubts that he would have done little more than make a small splash.

Faith is one thing, but presumption is something else entirely. And I would contend that what Sollars is encouraging here is presumption.

For example, "If we are insecure in the Lord’s willingness to cover us, we will struggle as we give prophetic words". Now, if all of these supposed "prophetic words" are based solely on vague feelings and experiences, or from straining with might and main to hear some kind of still quiet inner voice that Scripture says nothing about, and it isn't based on God giving us a clear and sure message to give to someone else, then upon what basis are we to assume or presume that God will "cover us" when we dare to say that God has told us to say something when God hasn't?

And this is where her statment "Mistakes are not optional" is so misleading. If you're making mistakes, telling people that God is saying things to them that He isn't telling you to say to them, then God is not blase about that. And you're not making a mistake, you are absolutely sinning. In fact, if there is any kind of scale upon which sins could be measured from bad to worst, then presuming to say that God has spoken to you when He hasn't has to up there among the very worst of sins.

So what happens when we see something that is bad? Now we have to say something that is strengthening, encouraging and comforting.

1 Corinthians 14:32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; NAS

And here we have spin-control. Not only are we to not know for sure that what we think we've received from God is really from God, it may simply be our own imaginations or whatever, but if it's something we consider a bit too harsh, well, we have to figure out a shiny happy way of phrasing it. Apparently, rebuke is not "strengthening, encouraging, and comforting".

Judging Prophecy
The word must be congruent with the scriptures as well as the hearer of the Father God.
It must bear witness with the spirit of the one who receives it.
The fruit of the prophetic word must be that the person receiving it is brought closer to God and His people.
The prophets and leadership should be in an agreement with the word and its interpretation and application.
The interpretation of any prophetic revelation belongs to God, not to man. Therefore, we also need the Holy Spirit’s anointing to know the meaning of the word as well as what to do with it.

A prophetic word must agree with Scripture? Ok, I'm fine with that, though considering how Sollars has butchered Scripture in her message, well, I have to ask upon what basis she is to be considered one who can determine whether anything she receives really agrees with Scripture or not.

"It must bear witness with the spirit of the one who receives it." Translated: Oh, I have to agree with it. Well, that's a new one. Heaven (or maybe hell) forbid that God, or our inner feelings or whatever, should tells us something we don't like or agree with.

I like that next one, it's hilarious. "The fruit of the prophetic word must be that the person receiving it is brought closer to God and His people." Where does Scripture tell us that that is only fruit of a prophetic word? It may be the most ideal and best, but the only? Based on that, almost all of the prophets in the Old Testament would be disqualified, because very often their message was rejected. Based on that, even Jesus would have been rejected.

"The prophets and leadership should be in an agreement with the word and its interpretation and application." Prophecy by democracy? Everyone has to vote on what was said or not?

Traditionally, the church had a single dimensional way in which we judge prophecy. But God is calling us into a deeper relationship with Him. This will lead us into new ways of judging prophetic ministry.

"New ways of judging prophetic ministry". Well, there's some rear-covering for you. Apparently, in these "new ways...", well, it's ok to listen to things Scripture says nothing about, and it's ok to get it wrong. But that doesn't mean you common people can go around just poo-pooing what we maybe-not-quite-right prophetic types are saying. Sure, we may not be any more accurate than your local palm-reader or the carnival crystal-ball gazer, but you'd better take us seriously.

"We need to realize that God seldom does things all by Himself. He often requires us to be involved with Him to see our destinies fulfilled." Oh, yeah, poor helpless God. It's not we are so pathetically weak and helpless, it's God who's just waiting and hoping on us to finally let Him do something. It's not we who are need of salvation, but God who needs us to save Him from his helplessness.

Ok, so, how helpless is God?

Isaiah
is.63.1 Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength? I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save.† is.63.2 Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the winefat? is.63.3 I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment. is.63.4 For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come. is.63.5 And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me. is.63.6 And I will tread down the people in mine anger, and make them drunk in my fury, and I will bring down their strength to the earth.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 144962-144972). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

We have to understand this--God is NOT helpless, God does NOT need our permission. We are the ones who are to say that when we have done all He tells us to do, we need to realize that we are still unprofitable servants. We humans are fallen, dead in trespasses and sins, completely unrighteous, and it is God who came, it was while we were still sinners that Christ died for us, it is by God's grace that we who have been given faith are saved, and that salvation is not from our own works but the gift of God.

God seldom does things all by Himself? Rather, it is we who could do nothing without God. He is not the helpless one, we are the ones who cannot help or save ourselves.

DTS and nonsense about the Holy Spirit, part 2

So, continuing with the stuff in "Prophetic Session".

What Prophecy is?
1 Corinthians 14:3
3 But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. (from New International Version)

Ok, so, how does she see this verse.

Now this is the guidelines for prophesy (strengthening, encouragement, and comfort). If the word you receive for someone fits in those three things then it’s ok to speak, if its not then you need to seek God on how to make it fit into those three things.

And right about here, we start running into problems. When, for example, the Old Testament prophets spoke the words God gave to them, they didn't really seem to go about the process of editing it, or putting some kind of positive spin on it, and I would guess such a thing was rather discouraged. When, for example, God gave Moses the Ten Commandments, with all those "Thou shalt nots..." in the Hebrew of that day, it seems that Moses wasn't allowed to make those rules say anything else, like "How about if you did X".

Nope, it was all "Thou shalt not...".

And when, for example, the prophet Samuel was sent to King Saul when the king had fouled up in not obeying the explicit command of the Lord, Samuel wasn't allowed to put a nice spin to what God had told him to say. Nothing like "I know you did a good job in the battle, but God says he's a bit unhappy with you for not doing exactly as he commanded." Nope, it was all rebuke, straightforward and simple.

Using her take on it, I can't help but think that she would have problems with Peter in the account early in Acts when the couple Ananias and Saphira lied to the Holy Spirit, Peter publicly rebuked them, and even predicted that the wife would join her husband in death for their sin. And she sure wouldn't go along with what John wrote in Revelation, with Jesus rebuking the churches like that. I can imagine she would have insisted that John "seek God on how to make it fit into those three things".

Prophecy should be happy and positive. Wow.

And now, for a bit of double-speak.

Now once you receive something from the Lord sometimes you have to interpret it.
It is just important to ask the Lord the interpretation of something as it is asking for the word.
It is important we don’t put our own interpretation in it.
Don’t judge by what we see in the natural.
If you don’t get an interpretation and you know God wants you to share it with someone then go ahead and give the word.

So, on the one hand, "It is just important to ask the Lord the interpretation of something as it is asking for the word". On the other hand, "If you don’t get an interpretation and you know God wants you to share it with someone then go ahead and give the word". Which kinda puts the kabosh on the first statement, doesn't it.

How we say a word is also very important.
Our tone of voice.
Our wording.
Don’t say “thus says the Lord”

Oh, of course. God's speaking to you, telling you to say something (even if you are having to come up with a way to phrase in a positive, listener-friendly, politically- or religiously-correct way), but you shouldn't really say "Thus says the Lord" or anything similar, right?

Really? Why? If it's really God telling you to say something, don't you think God wants to be credited with the message? Didn't the prophets of old say that God had told them to speak, and that the words were God's and not their own?

But...wait for it...

Mistakes Will Happen
When people first begin launching out into the prophetic they will make mistakes.
God is not critical and harsh with us as we are learning to minister.
Ministering prophetically is obeying God and serving His children in love
God does not expect instant maturity from us.
We must understand that the Lord not only allows, but also expects us to make mistakes as we begin in ministry.

Ooooooooohhhh. Now I see. All this reliance on vague feelings, inner and quiet voices, and all that jazz, well, it just means you maybe-possibly-hopefully-almost positively-mathematically certainly-don't quote me on it-not completely sure-wouldn't swear by it in court that God was the one really speaking to you.

In other words, it may not have been God. Or if it was God, you may not have heard Him correctly. You know, it's just so hard to understand Him when He speaking with the still small inner quiet voice that Scripture says nothing about. You really have to have your spiritual hearing aid cranked up in your spirit ear to hear that still small inner quiet voice.

Now, what does the Bible say about this?

Deuteronomy
de.18.15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; de.18.16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. de.18.17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. de.18.18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. de.18.19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. de.18.20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. de.18.21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? de.18.22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 120747-120761). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

Jeremiah
je.28.1 And it came to pass the same year, in the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah king of Judah, in the fourth year, and in the fifth month, that Hananiah the son of Azur the prophet, which was of Gibeon, spake unto me in the house of the LORD, in the presence of the priests and of all the people, saying, je.28.2 Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying, I have broken the yoke of the king of Babylon. je.28.3 Within two full years will I bring again into this place all the vessels of the LORD's house, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon took away from this place, and carried them to Babylon:† je.28.4 And I will bring again to this place Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, with all the captives of Judah, that went into Babylon, saith the LORD: for I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon...je.28.15 Then said the prophet Jeremiah unto Hananiah the prophet, Hear now, Hananiah; The LORD hath not sent thee; but thou makest this people to trust in a lie. je.28.16 Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will cast thee from off the face of the earth: this year thou shalt die, because thou hast taught rebellion against the LORD.† je.28.17 So Hananiah the prophet died the same year in the seventh month.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 146481-146516). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

Ezekial
eze.13.1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, eze.13.2 Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel that prophesy, and say thou unto them that prophesy out of their own hearts, Hear ye the word of the LORD;† eze.13.3 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Woe unto the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing!† eze.13.4 O Israel, thy prophets are like the foxes in the deserts. eze.13.5 Ye have not gone up into the gaps, neither made up the hedge for the house of Israel to stand in the battle in the day of the LORD.† eze.13.6 They have seen vanity and lying divination, saying, The LORD saith: and the LORD hath not sent them: and they have made others to hope that they would confirm the word. eze.13.7 Have ye not seen a vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying divination, whereas ye say, The LORD saith it; albeit I have not spoken? eze.13.8 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because ye have spoken vanity, and seen lies, therefore, behold, I am against you, saith the Lord GOD. eze.13.9 And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies: they shall not be in the assembly of my people, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel, neither shall they enter into the land of Israel; and ye shall know that I am the Lord GOD. eze.13.10 Because, even because they have seduced my people, saying, Peace; and there was no peace; and one built up a wall, and, lo, others daubed it with untempered morter:† eze.13.11 Say unto them which daub it with untempered morter, that it shall fall: there shall be an overflowing shower; and ye, O great hailstones, shall fall; and a stormy wind shall rend it. eze.13.12 Lo, when the wall is fallen, shall it not be said unto you, Where is the daubing wherewith ye have daubed it? eze.13.13 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even rend it with a stormy wind in my fury; and there shall be an overflowing shower in mine anger, and great hailstones in my fury to consume it. eze.13.14 So will I break down the wall that ye have daubed with untempered morter, and bring it down to the ground, so that the foundation thereof shall be discovered, and it shall fall, and ye shall be consumed in the midst thereof: and ye shall know that I am the LORD. eze.13.15 Thus will I accomplish my wrath upon the wall, and upon them that have daubed it with untempered morter, and will say unto you, The wall is no more, neither they that daubed it; eze.13.16 To wit, the prophets of Israel which prophesy concerning Jerusalem, and which see visions of peace for her, and there is no peace, saith the Lord GOD.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 148662-148694). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

Read those passages, and see that God does not take so lightly the giving of false words of prophecy as Amy Sollars wants us to believe. See that God really was and is very critical and even harsh when people presume to say that God has told them to say something when He really hasn't. God isn't as blase about it as Sollars, and I presume those she learned from (hi, false apostles and prophets at IHOP KC).

And Sollars telling people to not say "Thus sayeth the Lord" or words to that effect is simply a cop-out. Simply saying something wishy-washy like "I feel like God is saying to you that..." doesn't negate the fact that the person is presuming to speak for God. If anything, it's a cowardly way of trying to get the respect and even fear that true prophets had, without taking the responsibility that the true prophets lived under.

If I knew nothing else about Sollars, her statements like "God is not critical and harsh with us as we are learning to minister" and "We must understand that the Lord not only allows, but also expects us to make mistakes as we begin in ministry" would be enough to convince me that she is a false prophet and false teacher.

And this woman presumes to teach DTS skulls-full-of-mush about the Holy Spirit. That is unacceptable. Youth With A Mission needs to look at this woman's teachings, see how unscriptural they are, and keep her from spreading her false ideas to the people who attend their schools and expect to be taught biblical truth. Because with her teachings, they are not learn anything biblical at all. YWAM needs to hold her accountable for misleading those who spend thousands of dollars to listen to this kind of garbage, and YWAM needs to hold itself accountable, or someone needs to hold YWAM accountable for allowing such nonsense to find a place in its midst.

It is to YWAM's shame that this woman is allowed to spread her nonsense in their schools, and they need to repent of that and ensure that all that is taught in their schools is biblically sound, and that such purveyors of false doctrine either accept correction or are given the heave-ho.

DTS and nonsense about the Holy Spirit, part 1

I have heard something to the effect that "The best of lies have a kernel of truth in them". It means that the most convincing lies are those that are clothed in the truth, or that even are composed of truth but that have certain things left out that make the words spoken untrue.

I came on this woman a bit ago, listening to some podcasts of lectures. In order to become a full-fledged member of Youth With A Mission, one must take a course called the Discipleship Training School (DTS). Apparently, you're run-of-the-mill DTS is becoming rather blase, so various YWAM bases are coming up with various flavors of DTS, and this one is called the Fire and Fragrance DTS. I'm not sure why. A part of me that knows enough about the hippie subculture to know what the use of burning incense is meant to cover up wants to make some jokes along those lines, but I'll refrain.

Anyway, this woman, Amy Sollars, is in YWAM. From her words in one of the lectures, she's also spent some time at the Kansas City International House of Prayer. And since she didn't say it in a way that seemed to say that she was repentent of having associated with such false apostles and prophets and spiritual power-brokers, I assume she still buys into whatever they are peddling.

On her website, she has some documents that seem to be lecture notes. The fourth one is about "Prophetic Session".

Just as a convincing lie is clothed in the truth, so it seems that false teachings, when thinly coated in Scripture, can somehow be convincing, at least to those who are not willing to dig. I suppose I should be all the more critical, having been such a sheeple at one time, too.

At any rate, here is a bit of Sollars' teachings from "Prophetic Session".

Still small voice of God

This is the soft and gentle voice of God, which comes as wait on the Lord in prayer or meditation.
God speaks this way for personal instruction and encouragement. It comes internally and quietly.
It must be judged in light of the desire of our own hearts

Another abuse of the account of Elijah

I Kings 19:9-13.
And he came thither unto a cave, and lodged there; and, behold, the word of the LORD came to him, and he said unto him, What doest thou here, Elijah? And he said, I have been very jealous for the LORD God of hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away. And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice. And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entering in of the cave. And, behold, there came a voice unto him, and said, What doest thou here, Elijah?

Elijah heard a real voice, one speaking outside of himself, not some voice that speaks "internally and quietly". The Bible does not teach that the Spirit speaks "internally and quietly".

So, right off, Sollars is teaching false things, things not in Scripture, things she should not teach.

Prophetic Impressions
Thoughts and Feelings
The simplest form of prophetic revelation.
He uses our thoughts and feelings.
What many people think are coincidences are actually valid prophetic impressions from God.
Acts 14:9
9 This man was listening to Paul as he spoke, who, when he had fixed his gaze upon him, and had perceived that he had faith to be made well, NAS
Acts 27:10
10 And said unto them, Sirs, I perceive that this voyage will be with hurt and much damage, not only of the lading and ship, but also of our lives. KJV
Impressions are the entry-level prophetic revelation for most people.
A Knowing

Ok, let's see.

ac.14.5 And when there was an assault made both of the Gentiles, and also of the Jews with their rulers, to use them despitefully, and to stone them, ac.14.6 They were ware of it, and fled unto Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia, and unto the region that lieth round about: ac.14.7 And there they preached the gospel. ac.14.8 And there sat a certain man at Lystra, impotent in his feet, being a cripple from his mother's womb, who never had walked: ac.14.9 The same heard Paul speak: who stedfastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had faith to be healed, ac.14.10 Said with a loud voice, Stand upright on thy feet. And he leaped and walked.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 169557-169565). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition

.

And here is what this same commentary says about this event.

and perceiving that he had faith to be healed — Paul may have been led by the sight of this cripple to dwell on the Saviour's miracles of healing, and His present power; and perceiving from the eagerness with which the patient drank in his words, that he was prepared to put his own case into the Redeemer's hands, the Spirit of the glorified Physician came all upon Paul, and "with a loud voice" he bade him "stand upright upon his feet." The effect was instantaneous — he sprang to his feet "and walked."

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 77329-77333). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

And for her second supposed supporting passage.

ac.27.7 And when we had sailed slowly many days, and scarce were come over against Cnidus, the wind not suffering us, we sailed under Crete, over against Salmone;† ac.27.8 And, hardly passing it, came unto a place which is called The fair havens; nigh whereunto was the city of Lasea. ac.27.9 Now when much time was spent, and when sailing was now dangerous, because the fast was now already past, Paul admonished them,† ac.27.10 And said unto them, Sirs, I perceive that this voyage will be with hurt and much damage, not only of the lading and ship, but also of our lives.† ac.27.11 Nevertheless the centurion believed the master and the owner of the ship, more than those things which were spoken by Paul. ac.27.12 And because the haven was not commodious to winter in, the more part advised to depart thence also, if by any means they might attain to Phenice, and there to winter; which is an haven of Crete, and lieth toward the south west and north west.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 170288-170299). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

And again, what the commentary says.

10. Sirs, I perceive, that this voyage will be with hurt and much damage, etc. — not by any divine communication, but simply in the exercise of a good judgment aided by some experience. The event justified his decision.

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 79254-79255). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

Paul's perceptions in both cases seem to be more by observation than by any kind of "entry-level prophetic revelation". Paul had eyes, he'd been around, he could observe and make decisions just like anyone else. Did he need divine revelation to know that it was a bad idea to continue sailing, when the voyage had already been difficult? Did he need divine revelation to see that a crippled man was especially interested in what he was teaching?

Moreover, you will notice that there is no plain scriptural teaching on this "entry-level prophetic revelation" of thoughts and feelings. Once we know that there is no Scripture about the idea of an internal and quiet voice, we can see that this teaching about feelings and thoughts is also nonsense. It's all internal stuff, it's all focused inwardly, which is not what the prophets did. They heard God's voice, a real voice actually speaking to them. They had real visions and dreams.

Prophetic Senses
Spiritual Sight
2 Kings 2:15
15 Now when the sons of the prophets who were at Jericho opposite him saw him, they said, "The spirit of Elijah rests on Elisha." And they came to meet him and bowed themselves to the ground before him. NAS
They saw in the spirit with there spirit eyes.
Example of seeing someone you think that looks like someone else and get a word for them about that other person. Then later they don’t look like that person.
Sometimes we do see things in this natural realm from the spiritual realm.

This one is hilarious. "They saw in the spirit with there spirit eyes." Really? Wow, I think Sollars must have taken reading comprehension from the same people who taught Mark Batterson.

2ki.2.5 And the sons of the prophets that were at Jericho came to Elisha, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the LORD will take away thy master from thy head to day? And he answered, Yea, I know it; hold ye your peace. 2ki.2.6 And Elijah said unto him, Tarry, I pray thee, here; for the LORD hath sent me to Jordan. And he said, As the LORD liveth, and as thy soul liveth, I will not leave thee. And they two went on. 2ki.2.7 And fifty men of the sons of the prophets went, and stood to view afar off: and they two stood by Jordan.† 2ki.2.8 And Elijah took his mantle, and wrapped it together, and smote the waters, and they were divided hither and thither, so that they two went over on dry ground. 2ki.2.9 And it came to pass, when they were gone over, that Elijah said unto Elisha, Ask what I shall do for thee, before I be taken away from thee. And Elisha said, I pray thee, let a double portion of thy spirit be upon me. 2ki.2.10 And he said, Thou hast asked a hard thing: nevertheless, if thou see me when I am taken from thee, it shall be so unto thee; but if not, it shall not be so.† 2ki.2.11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. 2ki.2.12 And Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof. And he saw him no more: and he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces. 2ki.2.13 He took up also the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and went back, and stood by the bank of Jordan;† 2ki.2.14 And he took the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and smote the waters, and said, Where is the LORD God of Elijah? and when he also had smitten the waters, they parted hither and thither: and Elisha went over. 2ki.2.15 And when the sons of the prophets which were to view at Jericho saw him, they said, The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha. And they came to meet him, and bowed themselves to the ground before him. 2ki.2.16 And they said unto him, Behold now, there be with thy servants fifty strong men; let them go, we pray thee, and seek thy master: lest peradventure the Spirit of the LORD hath taken him up, and cast him upon some mountain, or into some valley. And he said, Ye shall not send.† 2ki.2.17 And when they urged him till he was ashamed, he said, Send. They sent therefore fifty men; and they sought three days, but found him not. 2ki.2.18 And when they came again to him, (for he tarried at Jericho,) he said unto them, Did I not say unto you, Go not?

Brown, David; Fausset, A. R.; Jamieson, Robert (2011-06-02). Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible (best navigation with Direct Verse Jump) (Kindle Locations 128927-128956). OSNOVA. Kindle Edition.

Read the entire account, please. It says nothing about them using "there spirit eyes", whatever those may be. They had seen with their regular eyes Elijah and Elisha cross the river, the had seen Elijah part the waters, they saw Elisha return alone, they could see that he had Elijah cloak with him now, maybe they could hear Elisha's words as he used Elijah's cloak and then God parted to waters for him as he had done so for Elijah not long before. They didn't need "their spirit eyes" to see what had happened.

There's more nonsense here, I don't have time to get more into it right now, I hope to do so later.

part 2 of good article on "spiritual warfare"

Gladiator-style takedown of demonic forces, Part 2

And some excerpts.

The person we have to thank for the SWM/NAR is the "Super Apostle" of the International Coalition of Apostles (ICoA), C. Peter Wagner. This demon-battling gladiator has done enormous damage to the cause of Christ. He and his "apostles" and "prophets" have made a mockery of the good news of the gospel and are spreading a false gospel. A few of Wagner's fellow gladiators are: Cindy Jacobs, Chuck Pierce, Rick Joyner, Lance Wallnau (7-mountains), Lou Engle (TheCall), Samuel Rodriguez, Che Ahn, John and Carol Arnott, Bill Johnson, Dutch Sheets, Todd Bentley, Mike Bickle (IHOP), Patricia King, and Kim Clement. Remember their names. Flee from them!

In closing, it is important to understand that the NAR/DOM's agenda. Their intent is to take "dominion" over societal institutions and government...and then they will take over the kingdoms of this world and build a literal Kingdom of God on earth. Peter Wagner boasts:

Once we have the apostles in place we will then bring the intercessors and the prophets into the inner circle, and we will end up with the spiritual core we need to move ahead for retaking the dominion that is rightfully ours.

I really hope some people in groups like YWAM will look at this, and consider that their own group is a part of this take-over attempt. It's sad, really, because I've little doubt that many rank-and-file YWAMers are simply ignorant of what the rhetoric they hear is all about.

not-so-great expectations

When my friend Floyd finished preaching and called for repentance, I was the first to my feet. During the message I had seen myself clearly, and I was ashamed. I publicly confessed my sin that day and asked the others at the conference for prayer.

What was my sin? Embezzlement? Adultery? No, the Holy Spirit was convicting me of the sin of unbelief. In that stark moment of honesty I realized that I really had low expectations of what God would do in my city.
John Dawson. Taking Our Cities For God - Rev (Kindle Locations 367-369). Kindle Edition.

Well, glad he had his moment. I suppose we could be glad as well that it wasn't anything, you know, really big, like the things he first mentioned. How very spiritual of him.

So, I'm trying to think--what exactly would " low expectations of what God would do in my city" mean? For example, when Jesus prophecied that Jerusalem would be left desolate, was He guilty of having such low expectation? What about the OT prophets, to whom God often gave words of judgment for them to speak?

What do you expect God to do in your city? Or to put it another way, who is your God? Is He the God of the Bible? Your God is only as big as what you expect of Him in space and time. What do you expect Him to do here on earth in this generation? Don't tell me about the God of your theology. It's easy to say that He's all-powerful, but do you expect Him to do powerful things here and now?
John Dawson. Taking Our Cities For God - Rev (Kindle Locations 369-371)

"Your God is only as big as what you expect of Him in space and time"? Really? God is limited by how I think? What a weak and pathetic God He would be, almost as bad as the gods of Emergents like Rollins and McLaren.

What do I expect Him to do here on earth in this generation? What does the Bible say He will do? What prophecies in the Bible specifically address this generation? Perhaps God has given rather negative prophecies concerning this generation. Would I be suffering from this sin of low expectations by believing God's prophecies of sin and judgment?

Now, I'm trying to think where in the Bible, particularly in the New Testament, anything is given to us concerning what we should expect God to do in any particular generation. Where does Jesus tell the disciples that if they don't have such great expectations, then they were guilty of unbelief? I can't think of anywhere. Where does Paul or any other epistle writer tell the churches to have great expectations of what God can do in their city or their generation? If anything, they were told rather the opposite. They were told to expect hard times, suffering and persecution and rejection. Concerning future generations, they were told such things as that in the last days there would be dangerous times, people would fall away from the faith, lawlessness would abound. On top of that, there is Revelation, which speaks of people suffering great judgments from God, but not repenting.

In other words, it is only when Christ Himself returns that things will be set right.

So, no, Mr. Dawson, I do not have such great expectations of what's going to happen in the cities of the world and the people of this generation. I expect people to continue to largely reject the Gospel, embrace their favorite fakes that will make them feel good, try to water down the real Gospel to mean a feel-good self-help type of fluff you'd see and hear on an afternoon TV talk show. I believe a sinful and rebellious mankind will continue to be sinful and rebellious, yet in His grace God will save some, some will be brought to repentence. Evil people will grow worse and worse, but those who endure to the end will be saved.

not in the Bible

The prayer of a human being can alter history by releasing legions of angels into the earth. If we really grasped this truth, we would pray with intensity, and we would pray constantly.
John Dawson. Taking Our Cities For God - Rev (Kindle Locations 1022-1023). Kindle Edition.

As someone who used to be in YWAM, reading this book, or maybe re-reading it after several years, was rather eye-opening, and not in a way that I fear YWAM would consider good.

For example, take that statement. Keep in mind, Dawson is one of the biggest of YWAM's bigwigs, a wig with big hair, if you would. He is a former president of the entire organization.

But this book of his, Taking Our Cities For God, is chock-full of statements that are, simply, bad. Like the one quoted here.

I simply can't think of any place in the Bible where we are taught that when we pray we are "releasing legions of angels into the earth". If I were to play word games, I would find his use of the word "legion" here more than a little suspect, because of it having been the name the spirit in the demoniac gave to Jesus right before he cast them into the herd of swine.

And Dawson gives no scriptural support for his assertions here.

In the years since leaving YWAM, there have been times I've wondered if I were right to have left. Most of those times of doubts had to do with difficult times I've had since then, when things haven't worked as I would have liked. But there are things I've heard or read concerning the organization that help to convince me that I should have left. Things like reading Dawson's book are among those things. There is no truth in his statement that we should grasp. To pray for the reason of supposedly releasing angels into the earth is not something Scripture tells us to do.

In what we call the Lord's Prayer, for example, there is a distinct lack of mention of angels being released. When Jesus was praying for his disciples just before He was crucified, He makes no mention of wanting angels to be released. The closest He comes to such an idea is when He on trial, and tells them that He could command thousands of angels to come and free Him. And the epistles are silent concerning this supposed reason to pray, too.

Again, there is no truth in Dawson's statement that we must "really grasp"; rather, it is at best a made-up idea that we must cast aside and reject.

YWAM focusing on the unimportant

At the 1988 YWAM International Strategy Conference held in Kona, Hawaii the 71 leaders present recognized that God was giving the Mission a specific new mandate: they were to actively work to release more nonwesterners, women and youth into greater leadership and decision making roles in Youth With A Mission (Thompson 1988). The understanding was that the inclusion of these groupings within more senior leadership levels in the Mission would bring a broader diversity of gifts and a better representation of the constituency of YWAM. But this integration would not just evolve into being: due to the fact that YWAM was born in North America in the 1962s and grew up in Europe in the 1970s, it was understandable that many of the current senior leaders were Caucasion males in their 40s and 50s. The achievement of this goal to involve more nonwesterners, women and youth--though fully embraced at the heart--would require intentional and possibly radical efforts.
Dawn E Gauslin, Principles Made Practical: a handbook for pioneering U of N courses, p 10

I'm really starting to find this kind of thing...odd. Weird. A little off. Maybe more than a little

Let's take, for example, what the Bible itself says about leaders in the church.

Titus 1
5For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge; 6if any man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having children that believe, who are not accused of riot or unruly. 7For the bishop must be blameless, as God’s steward; not self-willed, not soon angry, no brawler, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; 8but given to hospitality, as lover of good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled; 9holding to the faithful word which is according to the teaching, that he may be able to exhort in the sound doctrine, and to convict the gainsayers.

I Timothy 3
1Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3no brawler, no striker; but gentle, not contentious, no lover of money; 4one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5(but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6not a novice, lest being puffed up he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7Moreover he must have good testimony from them that are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

8Deacons in like manner must be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; 9holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. 10And let these also first be proved; then let them serve as deacons, if they be blameless. 11Women in like manner must be grave, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. 12Let deacons be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 13For they that have served well as deacons gain to themselves a good standing, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

When I take a look at these things that should be characteristic of church leaders, there are things I do not see. Paul, a Jewish man, does not tell either Timothy or Titus that they must make sure that they try to find non-Jewish men to fill those positions, or even Jewish men since they were in Gentile cities. He does not tell them to make sure that they find people from the various Gentile peoples to lead the churches. In fact, race plays no part all in any of the things he lists.

When it comes to gender, well, Paul makes it rather clear that the leaders are to be men. Women are mentioned in I Timothy 3:11, but that likely refers to the wives of the deacons. Church leadership is limited to men, but God's own Word. It's certainly not because men are such grand creatures, but that is how God has set things up for the church to be run.

And concerning their ages, while nothing is explicitly said about that, there is a good bit said about thier spiritual maturity. They are not to be novices, I suppose that means recent converts, which may mean young or old, but should most definitely mean the young, since in almost all things the young are indeed novices. There is also the criterion that they be good husbands and fathers, who rule their homes well, have children who believe and have been taught to honor and obey them and not act like wild animals. They are to be sober-minded, even grave, along with many other signs of maturity.

In other words, the shallow postmodern goal of making sure that a certain, often unspecified, quota of all given races should be shoehorned into church leadership is absolutely foreign to anything in the Bible. Throw in as well the goal of making sure that women and youth be in these positions, and we can kind of get the idea that YWAM is going beyond anything taught in Scripture, and that this supposed "mandate" they claimed to receive from God was really not something from God.

I remember hearing or reading something a few years ago, along the lines of how YWAM had finally elected the first non-American or non-European to lead their mission, and where likely they would never again select anyone from the US again for that position, but rather would continue to find Presidents from among the non-western nations. Why is that so important? Isn't that rather a form or racism? A spiritually mature man who is from the US is passed over, simply because he's from the US, no other reason?

If we were to say that it would be unjust to say that a Chinese man who is Christian, spiritually mature, and meets the criteria Paul writes about to Timothy and Titus, is not fit for leadership because he is not American or European, why is it just to reverse that discriminatory practice?

Church leadership positions are not to be used for such shallow political maneuverings, nor should they filled based on race or skin color simply because it may "bring a broader diversity of gifts" (whatever that means), and may somehow better represent YWAM's racial make-up. It is spiritual maturity and how it is shown in things like family life that are the things that should be used in deciding who shall be church leaders, not other things.

I will say this here and now--these 71 YWAM leaders received no such mandate from God. It strikes me more as something with roots more in postmodern quota-making with a dash of charismanic nonsense thrown in.

he must have lost it, then

I was with Loren (Cunningham), I think in Switzerland, many years ago. And he was with...many youth(?), in a big conference. And they were asking him questions. And one of them asked a very bold question. They said "Loren, what is the worst sin you could commit? What are you afraid that you might do?" And I thought, whoa, I'm glad they didn't ask me that. And he did even pause, he didn't even stop, his answer came just like this, he said "To lose the active awareness of the active presense of the Holy Spirit in me, (maybe something indistinct here), moment by moment, day by day, in every situation, in any context, doing ministry or having fun."
Maureen Menard, Celebrate Asia U of N Workshop, beginning roughly 25 minutes in of the first part of her lecture on The Holy Spirit

Just to note, I've put in quotation marks here, because how she sounded made it seem like she was quoting. I wouldn't be surprised, though, if the exact words may have been different, it's likely just how she's speaking about this event.

Now, this answer of Cunningham's is...rather interesting. One might consider it a spiritual answer, or if you're like me, you may consider it a bit over-spiritual. I'm not going to deny that this may have been an fairly honest answer, so far as it goes, but another part of me if fairly skeptical. I have this temptation to ask something like, "Really, sir? You're not worried that you may do something the Bible considers a sin? Maybe you're not so worried about commiting adultery, but if you consider how Jesus spoke about lusting after a woman as being adultery in your heart, is that not something you must guard against? Or what about greed, covetousness, wrath, injustice? Or, more to the point, concerning what I know about you, Mr. Cunningham, should you not be more worried that you may be putting too much trust in false apostles and prophets, like the ones at the Kansas City IHOP, not to mention people like Rick Joyner? Should you not be more concerned that your attempts to institute dominionism may be against biblical teachings? Are those not more serious sins you could do, or even are doing, than you're supposed sin in your answer?"

Because there is one thing I'm sure of--it is not God's Spirit that is leading him to connect YWAM with those false prophets and apostles, nor is it God's Spirit that is telling him to work at a dominionist agenda.

undue blaming

Why the Impact World Tour

Language, gender, age and values are all elements of culture. To really reach people, we must minister cross-culturally. If our appearance or methods cause people to miss the message of the Gospel, the burden is on us to change!

Is it?

Ok, let me look at those four things they list. Language I could agree them on. If one is going to preach the Gospel to, let's say, the Chinese, it would be good to do so in the language they understand, or to have someone around who can translate the message for you.

Gender seems a bit trickier. I suppose one could consider that in light of a particular culture's views of gender and how the men and women should relate to each other. On the other hand, I get the impression that respect for those rules only goes so far; for example, it seems Jesus probably bent those rules a bit when he talked with the Samaritan woman and the Syrophoenician(sp) woman.

I suspect that age is the bit one IWT is concerned with, from things they say elsewhere on that page. Values is an interesting word, I'm nor sure what they mean by that.

Now, how important is it for the church to change to fit any particular culture? I remember hearing stories of people who would go to these remote tribes, among people who essentially went around with little or no clothing. The stories went that their ministering would be largely ineffective at first, until they got some kind of message from the God telling them to go around naked like those they were ministering to, at which point for whatever reason the people listened to them.

Now, considering how much the Bible makes about things like proper dress and modest clothing, I have to question this tactic by those missionaries. The question of what constitutes modest clothing may be debatable on some fronts, but public nakedness surely crosses that line. It is one thing for us to take the Gospel to others, it is another for us to descend to their level of morality. It would be wrong for a man to become a pimp in order to minister to prostitutes, or for a woman to become a prostitute in order to minister to other prostitutes. It would be wrong for a man to commit murder in order to get into prison to minister to prisoners. It would be wrong for a person to try to get a disease in order to minister to those in hospitals.

There are things we can do to make the message of the Gospel more understandable to others, such as presenting that message in the language the people understand. But there are lines that should not be crossed.

The Gospels present a good case for this. Consider this from Matthew 11.

11Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist. Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. 12(N) From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence,[d] and the violent take it by force. 13(O) For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John, 14and if you are willing to accept it, he is(P) Elijah who is to come. 15(Q) He who has ears to hear,[e] let him hear.

16"But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling to their playmates,
17"'We played the flute for you, and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge, and you did not mourn.'

18For John came(R) neither eating(S) nor drinking, and they say, 'He has a demon.' 19The Son of Man came(T) eating and drinking, and they say, 'Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard,(U) a friend of(V) tax collectors and sinners!' Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds."[f]

John and Jesus acted in two very different ways, and both were rejected. We have to remember that people are fallen, sinful, and that no matter what we do or how culturally sensitive we are, many will reject the Gospel. The Bible does not have a high view of mankind, and does not say that all we have to do is convey the message in just the right way and people will fall all over themselves believing. That's not how it goes.

So, up to a point, IWT may have a point in saying we may need to change some things, but eventually, we simply have to accept that if we change too far, we'll be changing the message of the Gospel, or acting in ways we should not.

Perhaps the greatest challenge for us believers is to do what Jesus did, leave “our worlds” to reach another. The methods Jesus used were relevant to the culture of the time, but very different than the culture of the “church” in its day. Most of today’s younger generation are not open to the methods that reached their parents.

I'm not so sure what that means. What methods reached their parents? Why will they not work nowadays? How were Jesus' methods relevant His culture? What methods have been used since then, and how have they worked?

Finally, is such pragmatism the best way to determine if a method is good or not? Many churches are drawing big crowds, but in listening to their sermons and messages, one can really wonder if the people are being taught God's Word or the ideas of men. Do numbers justify a method? If Jesus' methods were relevant for His time, then we have to conclude that they were failing methods, because He was rejected, and His Apostles and early followers suffered a lot of persecution. "He came unto His own, and His own did not receive Him".

The Gospel of Jesus Christ has never lost its power and relevance. Our greatest challenge now, as a Church, is to present this message in a relevant way...

Relevancy is a tricky thing. The pursuit of relevancy can lead to a lot of foolishness, not to mention bad teachings. And, finally, the message of the Gospel will simply cause offense and be rejected.