When studying false ministries or New Age religion I always seem to end up at Genesis 3:5, and there is a reason for this. It is so applicable in today’s world. We always hear that God is the same yesterday, today and forever. Unfortunately Satan’s lies fall under the first two categories. We can look forward to the day when Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire and destroyed but until that day we will have to stand up to him using God’s word as our armor.
Let’s take a closer look:
Genesis 3:5 “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (NIV)
Consider these statements from Word of Faith promoters….
Kenneth Copeland “You’re all God. You don’t have a God living in you; you are one.”
Paul Crouch “I am a little God!…I have his name. I’m one with Him. I’m in covenant relation. I am a little god!. Critics, be gone!”
Benny Hinn “When you say I am a Christian, you are saying, I am mashiach in the Hebrew. I am a little messiah walking on earth, in other words, that is a shocking revelation ..May I say it like this? You are a little god on earth running around.”
It seems as though those who stray too far from the Word of God become unscriptural or twist its meaning. The phrase “and you will be like God” is spoken by the serpent in the garden of Eden. Oh, what power the serpent can have over us. Look at Adam and Eve. Here they were living in a virtual paradise, all their needs were met, they communed directly with God, and yet……they were tempted by the desire to know more…to be like God.
There are three temptations Satan used on Eve to entice her to disobey the commandment of God in Genesis 3:3 which is:
But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
TEMPTATION 1
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Hath God Indeed Said?
Notice how the serpent took a commandment from God and changed it into a question. He asked Eve: “Yea, hath God said..?”or…. Did God really say? Satan created a seed of doubt in Eve’s mind. Now she may have asked herself in response to this question: Why is God withholding this beautiful fruit from me? Surely, God would not hold back His blessings from me. Did I misunderstand?
TEMPTATION 2
Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Surely you will not die.
Now that the seed of doubt was planted, Satan contradicted God’s word outright, with “surely you will not die”. Eve’s fear of death was removed by this lie. God said that even if she touched the fruit she would die. When the consequence of disobedience is removed, sin is meaningless.
TEMPTATION 3
Genesis 3:5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.
You shall be like God.
After Satan first questioned the Word of God then openly defied it, he then tempted with a new thought. You will be as God. Doesn’t this speak to our pride. That somehow we are in control of our own life and our destiny without Jesus Christ as our Lord. That God’s plan for our lives is not good enough for us. Our way is better than His way.
Can you see the sequence of these three temptations? Satan first used a suggestion to create doubt, then he defied scripture and then baited the trap with deity of self.
Of course this has been happening since the fall of man but you can see it easily in today’s world. The questioning of the Bible. It is authentic? Then the rejection of His word or the twisting of it by man’s sorry translations of today. Then the practices of meditation coming into the churches. Meditation invites oneself to go within. To look within for the answers.
THE ANSWERS ARE NOT WITHIN. THE ANSWERS ARE IN THE HOLY BIBLE. ALL OF THEM. ALL THE ANSWERS FOR HOW TO LIVE OUR LIFE. THE BIBLE IS OUR OWNER’S MANUAL. CHERISH IT. READ IT. PRAY WITH IT. (whew! sorry for yelling)
The New Age/Emergent Church is coming on strong and this will be the trend till the end of time. Theosophy teaching reveals that their goal is to introduce mystism, especially Buddhism and Hinduism into the West and into the churches. OUR churches. Yours and mine!!!! And I can assure you it is happening. The blending of Eastern religion into the West is rampant. Consider how President Bush just warmly received the Dalai Lama. I have read of goddess worship, labryinths, celtic worship, Taize, Yoga, meditation by contemplative prayer in the evangelican churches all across the country. These activities have been advertised in my local newspaper in the religion section. So, when is the New Age? It is NOW. It is here. It is in our churches as I speak…er…write!
There is tremendous power for the Christian who is trying to stay from deception by remembering Genesis. The three lies of Satan can help us detect deception in the false ministries, false teachings, and new age philosophy of today’s ever increasing sinful ways.
1. Did God really say? (Here read my book instead * The Bible is irrevelant)
2. You will not die. (Sin doesn’t exist * there is no hell * reincarnation)
3. You shall be like God. (God is already within all of us * man is divine * we are one with the universe)
Let’s turn this around so we can find the truth!
We are not like God. We are fallen and sinful. But when we confess our sin, repent by turning away from sin, and call on Jesus Christ and follow Him as Savior, we can have eternal life. God’s Word is true, inerrant, and available for all who believe in Him. There is only one way to resist the sin that is presented to us on a silver platter day in and day out. It is through the power of the Holy Spirit.
When confronted with their sin, Adam blamed Eve, and then Eve blamed the serpent. Who are you blaming for your sin or disbelief? Are you puffed-up, full of pride, relying on yourself instead of God? Are you trying to do things your way instead of God’s way? Will you rely on God’s strength instead of your own?
kim
serpent poster from:
http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/posters.htm
Motivational Posters for the Emerging Church.
DiscernIt 
155 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 15, 2007 at 10:19 am
Mary
Peg,
There are many pentecostals and charismatics that I have met on these blogs who take issue with IHOP and John’s kind of interpretaton on scripture. This is not an issue of cessationism verses the gifts. Whether you choose to listen to those who have behind the scenes experience of IHOP and have studied the teachings of Mike Bickle, and IHOP is your choice.
November 15, 2007 at 11:11 am
IBIJ
Peg,
I have refrained from getting too involved in this conversation but I want to tell you that I recieved the “Infilling of the Holy Spirit”/”Baptism of the Holy Spirit” as an Episcopalian. After reading “None O’Clock in the Morning” and studying the “Holy Spirit and You” written by Dennis and Rita Bennett.
It was a tremendous time in my life but after a time I realized that the “charismatic movement”, which I believe is now in the “prophetic movement”, began to bring things into the teachings that were extra biblical. Many of those things are now a part of the teachings of groups such as ihop, and many other groups that are rooted in Latter Rain/Dominion theology.
I remember when the seminary, that you spoke about either on your web site or here was opened. I was at the very first Episcopal Charismatic Fellowship meeting held at Biola/Marymount College in Los Angeles and was involved in the “Life in the Spirit” seminars.
But to my dismay and disapointment the church has moved away from it’s “sound doctrine” and good biblical teaching (except for a few) and look where it has led to. Division, gay priests, and all around disunity. Now I see from your web site that there is an acceptence of the “Emergent Church” theology and direction. I am genuinly concerned that once again this direction will lead to another division in the church.
Have you really, REALLY, researched the teachings and foundational doctrine of Emergent Churches?
Concerned
IBIJ
November 15, 2007 at 1:34 pm
www.educationadvice4u.info » Comment on The Revelation in Genesis - Satan’s Lies. by Kim
[…] Kim placed an interesting blog post on Comment on The Revelation in Genesis – Satanâs Lies. by Kim.Here’s a brief overview:Every Saturday morning i attend my leaders meeting for womens bible study. There are about 40 of us. If we were to be asked this same thing, i would venture a show of NO hands. Of course the focus would be on the divine instruction from … […]
November 15, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Peg
Hi all,
No time for a full answer right now — have to dash off to work — but will write more later. Just wanted to address this:
IBIJ wrote: “Have you really, REALLY, researched the teachings and foundational doctrine of Emergent Churches?”
Not fully. I think they’re a force to be reckoned with. Some of the stuff I’ve read is totally off the wall, other stuff is not bad, depends on who is writing. So far I like Scot McKnight and definitely do not like Brian McLaren. At school (Trinity — cool that you’ve heard of it!) most of my fellow students consider the Emerging movement to be simplistic and a bit annoying. Of course I’m old enough to remember when Keith Green and Second Chapter of Acts were considered simplistic and a bit annoying! 😉
I think one thing the Emerging bunch is right about is the need to shake off the old paradigms and reconsider Biblically what church is called to be. What I mean by that is, throughout the past century the church has been divided into denominational vs nondenominational, traditional vs contemporary, King James vs RSV vs NIV, etc. I believe we need to step back from that and realize Jesus was none of those things and yet the faith is broad enough to accomodate all those things. They don’t need to divide us.
As an example I believe the excesses of the Charismatic movement (“Charismaniacs”) would not have happened if the “traditional” church had been broad-minded enough to recognize the gifts and bring loving discipline to bear. So many of the charismatics have gone non-denominational because they feel unwelcome in the mainstream churches… and once they’re out and on their own, they keep wandering further and further from the truth of the scriptures. Just one example of why “the hand cannot say to the foot ‘I don’t need you’ ” & etc.
That’s a start… more to come when I have a few more minutes…!
Peg
November 15, 2007 at 8:06 pm
IBIJ
Keith Green and Second Chapter of Acts
Great musicians…miss them. Heard Matthew Ward not to long ago. he has gone through some very serious health issues and has returned to the traditional church because he wanted to get back to the “sound doctrine” that was not being taught by many groups. ministries, etc. of today.
Interesting how many seem to be returning to their roots, seeking a more foundational “meat”, “sound doctrine” of the word than what is being taught today.
November 15, 2007 at 9:23 pm
Mary
Interesting,
I became saved in a PCUSA church that had a fair amount of charismatics -mostly singles,college age. That church had a truly great spirit of love there and some of the best worship and preaching I have ever experienced. You just couldn’t go to church and not be stretched convicted and forced to change and be confronted with Christ. I have never found a church like it since. But the charismatics left after a time. Unfortunately so did the spiritual power IMHO. Part of that was due to a change in leadership that was unrelated.
But I agree with you Peg. Had the reformed church really tried harder to work with those practicing the spiritual gifts and not be so skeptical I don’t think we would be in the mess we are in. However I do think the great falling away will come as a failure to love the truth to the end. And that is where I see many churches today.
November 16, 2007 at 12:00 am
www.christmasforallofus.info » Comment on The Revelation in Genesis - Satan’s Lies. by Kim
[…] Kim put an intriguing blog post on Comment on The Revelation in Genesis – Satanâs Lies. by Kim.Here’s a quick excerpt:The spiritual gifts can be a difficult subject. I believe that the gifts exist today but that many have grieved the Holy Spirit and snuffed out their gifts. Some believe that the gifts have totally ceased. All believers are promised a … […]
November 16, 2007 at 12:33 am
www.giveamazinggifts.info » Comment on The Revelation in Genesis - Satan’s Lies. by Kim
[…] Kim added an interesting post on Comment on The Revelation in Genesis – Satanâs Lies. by Kim.Here’s a small excerpt:The spiritual gifts can be a difficult subject. I believe that the gifts exist today but that many have grieved the Holy Spirit and snuffed out their gifts. Some believe that the gifts have totally ceased. All believers are promised a … […]
November 16, 2007 at 6:08 am
jarrod
i just read through this post. took a while to do it too. i found johns comments to be interesting. but i have a question. the ihop affirmations and denials page is super vauge.they say stuff like we deny certain heretical teachings of the latter rain but they dont go in to to much detail as to which teachings they deny. unless the page has been updated. so hears my question what part of the latter rain dominion theology does i hop deny? what part do they endorse? also why is it that folks are always saying people have a notorious problem hearing the voice of God. can anybody give me one single scriptural reference for a real prophet having a hard time hearing God speak? i would think that the almighty God of the universe would not have a hard time getting some ones attention when He wanted it. doesnt seem like He has in the past. so why now all the sudden are Gods prophets no more accurate then the phsycic hotline? why do they now have to go to schools to learn how to hear Gods voice? and heres some food for thought. what did edwards say the downfall of the evangelical awakening was? i beleive in revivals. but the simple truth is from the welsh to the americas in history the doctrine of the gospel was preached or it werent no revival at all. and truly things did not look so different in the orthopraxi of the church it was the lives that changed. i think the reason for folks having a hard time hearing God speak is because they arent real prophets. and dont value His word enough to look at it as God speaking to them. just for the record i am a reformed continuationist. we are out there. we do exist. i believe God speaks but man we have the words of Christ and the apostles if people count them secondary and keep askin for sings then they are askin to be decieved. anyway its been real.peace
November 16, 2007 at 8:28 am
Peg
Good evening all!
IBIJ wrote: “Interesting how many seem to be returning to their roots, seeking a more foundational “meat”, “sound doctrine” of the word than what is being taught today.”
Yeah I’ve noticed that too. There’s a real resurgence, particularly in the Lutheran and Episcopal churches around here, and a few Methodist and Presby as well. (In fact the two biggest Bible-teaching PCUSA churches in our area just a few months ago pulled out of the PCUSA and went to… I think it was the Evangelical Presby…?) Anyway neither of those churches is hurting for members. Give people the Real Thing and they will come!
November 16, 2007 at 8:46 am
Peg
Mary wrote: “That church had a truly great spirit of love there and some of the best worship and preaching I have ever experienced. ”
THAT in my opinion is what makes a great church! Spirit, love, worship, and solid Bible preaching… that’s all it takes. Sounds so simple… just wish it wasn’t so hard to find!
“I do think the great falling away will come as a failure to love the truth to the end.”
I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to but let me toss out a couple ideas and see if they make sense. I think what we are seeing in the decline of the churches is (as CS Lewis observed) the end of “cultural Christianity”. He suspected, and I agree, that at any given time in history only about 10-15% of the population is ever really Christian. The rest are nominal Christians, people who go to church because they’re expected to, or required to, or because it’s the cultural norm. As we enter the so-called “post-Christian” society the nominal Christians are feeling free to call it quits, and they are. What we’re left with are (mostly) the people who are still interested in spiritual things. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
As for loving truth — absolutely! Same thing as loving Jesus, isn’t it? He is the Truth. I think the challenge is this:
“And now I will show you the most excellent way. If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.”
Christian love… that is the hard part!!!
November 16, 2007 at 9:08 am
Peg
Hi Kim,
“Bereans just want to stay as biblical as possible. I belong to a Lutheran church although denominations mean little to me.. So i am a Lutheran who has experienced many of the so-called charismatic gifts. ”
Cool! I like the Lutheran church a lot — my first music director’s job was in a Lutheran church. Beautiful worship and very friendly people. So where do the Bereans come in? (btw that’s one church I know next-to-nothing about. Never been in one, and the one we have locally reeeeallly keeps to itself, they never attend community services or anything.)
“the spirits needed to be tested” Absolutely!!!
“i had been taken to Southern Baptist church in Seattle and as the service commenced people starting shaking, rolling in the aisles and they had to be carried away with stretchers. The ushers were dressed as nurses so this was nothing new to them. That very day the Lord told me this was not of Him and i knew it was demonic. ”
I’ll say. Sounds like they never read the bit where Paul talks about order in worship…
“As i continue my study in the Word of God, i am growing in the Word and receive much more from reading the Bible. Scripture has come alive for me and even reading the smallest passages can give me many insights that only the Lord can give.”
Amen! I tell ya what… try it in Greek!! I haven’t taken Greek or Hebrew yet but I have learned a few Greek words. Here’s an example of where just three Greek words gives a whole new insight on a familiar passage:
http://getstarted.wordpress.com/2007/11/14/how-to-spot-a-fake/
(BTW -offtopic question- what are all the sites linking in to this thread? It looks like someone out there in cyberspace is trying to get us to Christmas-shop or something…)
November 16, 2007 at 9:19 am
Peg
PS to y’all —
If there is any lingering concern that I’m being tempted to join IHOP, not to worry. IHOP doesn’t fit either my personality or my understanding of theology. I’m not ready yet to say they’re outside the scope of Christianity… didn’t see anything terribly objectionable in what John had to say here (maybe I missed something, if so feel free to point it out)… but I did notice when browsing the IHOP website there is a LOT of verbiage about this guy Bickle, and about the end times and a few other things, but I don’t recall seeing Jesus’ name on any of the pages! Oversight?? “Things that make you go “hmmmmm”… ”
And one other question: IBIJ wrote: “after a time I realized that the “charismatic movement”, which I believe is now in the “prophetic movement”, began to bring things into the teachings that were extra biblical. Many of those things are now a part of the teachings of groups such as ihop, and many other groups that are rooted in Latter Rain/Dominion theology”
Where exactly did you see/ do you see the charismatic movement going off track? That is, what is it that makes the difference between a true Charistmatic and a “Charis-maniac”? Where is the turning point when the Truth takes a left turn and ends up lightyears away from orthodoxy?
TIA
November 16, 2007 at 9:36 am
Lee
BTW: I’m still reading but not commenting right now. Nothing new to say.
November 16, 2007 at 10:59 am
Kim
Hi Peg,
I really appreciate you….
“Where is the turning poing when the Truth takes a left turn and ends up lightyears away from orthodoxy”?
What a great question. I suppose there are many ways to answer this but i just want to quote one sentence from Ray Yungens book “For Many Shall Come In My Name”.
“To occultists, the significance of the Alice Bailey writings was that they foretold that in the coming Aquarian Age, ‘the teachings of the East and the West must be fused and blended before the true and universal religion–for which the world waits–could appear on earth”‘.
So the New Age movement is the downloading of teachings from the Ascended Masters (fallen angels) to mankind. These mystical teachings promote unity, peace and love, and that God is within. These teachings are being relayed metaphysically by meditation and/or contemplation in the churches. Also these evil spirits can be passed onto a willing empty vessel.
Meditation that creates an altered state is pleasant, so i read, and so people, even Christians, assume the light, the visions, the inner voices are from God.
These “ascended masters” (satan) have also said that they are going to “use” the church to accomplish this.
So there you have all my articles condensed into one comment.
November 16, 2007 at 12:13 pm
IBIJ
And one other question: IBIJ wrote: ………
Peg,
Let me think about that statement I made because I have to think back at when did I accept the deception, and my days in the Episcopal Church were in the early to late 70’s.
I personally believe that as time has gone by, that these movements have evolved into other more deceptive movements. I know that at some point in my life I began to accept the false teaching or at least parts of the false teaching that became a whole bunch of leaven that tainted my thinking. In fact I would say that it really probably began somwhere about 1985.
I’ll think some more about this and answer your question above….
Good night – time for bed….
November 16, 2007 at 12:18 pm
IBIJ
Oops…I posted before I was ready, example of evolving movements…Plegiasm, (a theological belief) if I am correct, came around 400 to 450 A.D. In 450 AD it was considered a heresy by the church leaders of the time. It later became semi-plegiasm and eventually after many, many, many, many, and on and on years we find this same theology as the basis of the Purpose Driven Life Church which is evolving (at least I believe after much research) into the Emergent Church foundation. Current name that is a mentor and teacher of Rick Warren – Robert Schuller. Check him out in your research.
More to come in order to answer your question..
November 16, 2007 at 1:13 pm
Mary
“I do think the great falling away will come as a failure to love the truth to the end.” I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to..”
Peg I guess I meant the contempt for the word of God that is found in the prophetic movement. I believe some in the prohetic movement refer to the God’s word as “moldy”, the emphasis of experience replacing rightly dividing the word and seeking after signs and wonders (what I consider is happening in 5 fold ministries, charismania.)over following Christ. Hope that makes sense.
Yes I agree authentic christian love is the rarest and hardest thing to find these days. I believe satan and pressures of the world work overtime to detroy spirit filled churches who also stand for truth.
“And now I will show you the most excellent way. If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.”
“As for loving truth — absolutely! Same thing as loving Jesus, isn’t it? He is the Truth.” Exactly!
November 16, 2007 at 8:42 pm
Kim
IBIJ –
I was just reading about Schuller in Reinvening Jesus Christ for my next article. Chapter 10 Update.
Peg, this update verifies what IBIJ is saying about Warren and Schuller.
This update has these names, Rick Warren, Schuller, Brian McLaren, Ken Blanchard, among the many. Warren weaves all these names together.
http://reinventingjesuschrist.com/
Warren Smith was involved with the New Age so his book is filled with his experiences and research. IT IS FREE..
Click on the link. Click Enter to access the book. Please read the short forward and intro. Click on updates and the info that IBIJ is referring to is chapter 10 update. The Silent Church.
I cannot stress how important this book is. It was one the first i read on discernment and deception.
November 17, 2007 at 6:36 am
Peg
Kim wrote:
“So the New Age movement is the downloading of teachings from the Ascended Masters (fallen angels) to mankind. These mystical teachings promote unity, peace and love, and that God is within. These teachings are being relayed metaphsycially by meditation and/or contemplation in the churches. Also these evil spirits can be passed onto a willing empty vessel. ”
I understand what you’re saying here. I’ve seen some of that kind of thing, usually in what’s left of the liberal left-wing denominational churches. Excellent example of why our diocese is where it is, about to pull out of the mainline Episcopal church. I’m not sure where the connection is between this and the charismatic movement… they’re generally conservative, Bible-believing folks. (Unless you’re talking about the Schuller gang, that’s another thing entirely…)
“Meditation that creates an altered state is pleasant, so i read, and so people, even Christians, assume the light, the visions, the inner voices are from God.”
Again we need to make a distinction between Eastern meditation and Christian meditation. The two are different as night and day. The first is a human attempt to reach out to a ‘universal spirit’ that doesn’ t really exist and therefore needs to be conjured with psychological tricks. The second is God breaking into your everyday prayer life totally unexpectedly and startling the carp out of you. “Pleasant” is not the word. 😉 “Worth it” is more like it.
I took a glance at the Warren Smith book. Not meaning to criticize it in any way… but I only consider original sources. If I want to critique Schuller I will use Schuller’s own words. (Schuller is an incredibly easy target!) If I want to critique “Purpose Driven Life” I will do it from the book’s own pages. I think it’s only fair to let people speak for themselves, even famous people (and don’t even get me started on the whole Christian ‘cult of celebrity’ thing….!)
More in next post…
November 17, 2007 at 6:47 am
Peg
“what is it that makes the difference between a true Charistmatic and a “Charis-maniac”? Where is the turning point when the Truth takes a left turn and ends up lightyears away from orthodoxy?”
What I was looking for with these questions is the thought process or the experiential process of passing from orthodoxy to heresy. Where is the turning point? Is there just one, or are there more? We agree that the spiritual gifts do still exist and are still working, but we also agree that there is a point at which what appear to be gifts are actually forgeries. Having witnessed both I can tell the difference just by the “feel” of the spirit… God’s Spirit or some other spirit. Jesus said “my sheep know my voice” and that’s really true.
November 17, 2007 at 8:16 am
Peg
IBIJ wrote: “my days in the Episcopal Church were in the early to late 70’s.”
Ah yes! My high school days! {grin} Back in those days the guy who is now my pastor was already an Episcopal priest and was fronting one of the first Christian rock bands. He used to play for and witness to the hippies hanging out at the Jersey Shore and then baptize the new converts in the ocean. Man did he get a lot of flack from the mainline churches for that! But I digress…
“I personally believe that as time has gone by, that these movements have evolved into other more deceptive movements.”
I tend to agree with you where the outside edge of the charismatic movement is. The thing is, just recently I have been meeting more charismatics who are level-headed about the gifts and returning to the mainline churches… it’s almost like the charismatic movement itself has had some kind of a split…
re: “Plegiasm, (a theological belief) if I am correct, came around 400 to 450 A.D. In 450 AD it was considered a heresy by the church leaders of the time. It later became semi-plegiasm”
Talk about coincidence, we just finished studying Pelagianism in Church History! You have the years just about right. It was started by a British guy named Pelagius who traveled to the city of Hippo in Africa (what is now Libya) to talk to the famous theologian Augustine about his ideas. He and Aug. never met but they debated with each other by mail. The ideas of both men spread throughout the Roman Empire. What they debated over… I’m going to go look this up to be sure I get it right, this is the kind of stuff theologians split hairs over…
The debate between Augustine (a Catholic bishop and former Platonist) and Pelagius (a monk) centered around the nature of salvation and a person’s part in it. Augustine said when he became a Christian he had been unable to do anything at all by his own efforts to move towards salvation and was rescued only by God’s grace. (Calvin got a lot of his ideas from Augustine… his writings provide the foundation for the doctrines of predestination and salvation by unmerited grace.)
Pelagius on the other hand denied that people are so corrupt they are powerless to obey God’s commands. He said we have the freedom to sin or not to sin, there is no such thing as original sin, and that we are innocent until we of our own free will decide to sin. While he agreed salvation requires God’s grace, he divided the salvation process into three parts: “capacity” (the ability to be righteous); “volition” (the will to be righteous) and “action” (the doing of righteousness). Pelagius said God provides grace for the first of the three (capacity) but the other two are our responsibility.
According to the historians, Augustine and Pelagius were actually cordial in their writings at first, and were in the process of working toward common ground until third parties got involved and fanned the flames of dispute. When the dust finally settled the Pope decided in favor of Augustine and excommunicated Pelagius.
The “semi-Pelagian” viewpoint — which has cropped up again and again through church history — is generally described as salvation by grace, and that God wants to save everyone but is prevented by those who reject grace. Some but not all of the above teachings will be present in semi-Pelagianism.
Interesting footnote to this un-asked-for history monologue… Arminius (the guy “Arminianism” is named after) has been accused of being semi-Pelagian but he was actually one of Calvin’s brightest students and agreed with Calvin on most points of his doctrine. His main point of disagreement with Calvin was that grace is not irresistable: “for it is written that many resisted the Holy Spirit”.
OK… so having said all that (*phew*) where in the book Purpose Driven Life does Rick Warren teach Pelagian theology? Original source only, please.
November 17, 2007 at 8:26 pm
IBIJ
Click to access issue56.pdf
November 18, 2007 at 12:53 am
Kim
Great article. I like Bob Dewaay and CIC
November 18, 2007 at 4:29 pm
Peg
??
November 18, 2007 at 10:37 pm
Kim
Rick Warren to my knowledge does not outwardly express his theological views. So one has to search through his comments and writing and try to sort out what he believes.
Here are some transcripts from the Larry King show.
“There is truth in every religion. I, I, Christians believe there is truth in every religion. But we just believe in one savior. We believe we can learn truth from, I believe I have learned a lot of truth from different religions. Because they all have a portion of the truth. I just believe there’s one savior Jesus Christ.”
“I happen to know many people who are followers of Christ in other religions.”
“I have known many people who believe in the Messiah of Jesus, regardless of what religion they are, because they believe in him. It’s about a relationship not a religion.”
These comments parallel the Theosophic universal beliefs of New Ager Alice Bailey who said,
“I would point out that when I use the phrase “followers of the Christ”, I refer to all those who love their fellowmen, regardless of creed or religion”
Let’s go one step further…
The mystic, Thomas Merton, who promotes a universal church, the religions as one:
“I see no contradiction between Buddhism and Christianity…I intend to become as good a Buddist as I can.”
I know you are asking for original sources. I guess you mean quotes from authors. The above are the orginal quotes.
I want to say that there are some out there who have done extensive research, and i trust some of these sources but not all. If you are asked to look at an article at least look at the quotes. You can read the quotes and make your own determination using the Word of God.
I trust the http://www.lighthouseresearch. com site. Here is an article about Rick Warren.
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/questions/RickWarren_growth.html
Gotta go!
November 19, 2007 at 9:01 am
IBIJ
November 17, 2007 at 8:16 am
Peg you posted and this is my response to your post….
I would sum up the discussion like this. In the history of Christianity there have been 3 systems of theology when it comes to understanding salvation; Pelagian, semi-Pelagian, and Augustinian. As your friend noted Pelegius was marked as a heretic and excommunicated. His understanding of salvation was divorced from the initiative and grace of God. In fact he denied that the grace of God was even necessary for salvation and the fallen sinners would make themselves righteous before a holy God by works. The philosophical underpinnings of Pelagian thought have continued over the last 1900 years in what could be called “liberal theology” which is rooted in humanism and often infected with universaliam. I would agree with the Church over the last 1900 years (Catholic and Protestant) in affirming that Palegianism is not Christian, but antithetical to Scripture and the Gospel.
Semi-pelagianism is modified Palagianism. The “semi’ position affirms that the grace of God is necessary for salvation and that apart from God’s initiative by His Spirit no one can be saved. The “semi” position also affirms the biblical doctrines of election and predestination. The difference with semi-pelagianism and augustinianism lies in this question: On what BASIS does God elect and predestine some to salvation and not others? The semi-pelagian camp would argue that God elects and predestines sinners by looking down the time-line of history from eternity past. In doing this he is able to foresee those who will choose to believe in Christ. Based on that human action of faith he elects them for salvation. In essence, according to semi-pelagian theology, God chooses us because we first choose Him. In this scheme God has provided the potential for all to be saved, while guaranteeing the salvation of none. The semi-pelagian would tinker with the TULIP denying that t
he “U” (unconditional election) is in fact conditional. Again, God elects and predestines us because we first choose Him. It follows then also that the “L” is also denied–the atonement is not “Limited” as Augustine believed because humanity, while fallen, retains the capacity to choose Christ and believe. Again, God has provided the opportunity for the entire race to be saved. The semi-pelagian view simmered below the surface in the middle ages and arose again during the Reformation by Arminius who, was reacting to what he perceived to by a stern form of Augustinian doctrine in the Church. An interesting footnote in history is the Council of Orange. That council officially declared semi-pelagianism was also heretical, condemning its teachers and proponents.
Now having said that Christians remain divided on the augustianian and semi-pelagian views to the present day. It is my contention that that the augustianian view is the Pauline view, hence the biblical view; and I humbly admit I could be wrong (yet I don’t think so!). The semi-pelagian view has, in my estimation, fatal flaws.
1. It shifts the ultimate glory in salvation from God to sinners.
2. It overestimates the human capacity to will to choose Christ.
3. It has God electing and predestining sinners in response to their decision–making the sinner sovereign in salvation.
4. It stretches beyond credibility grammer and syntax of the biblical text, not to mention the etymology of the words “elect” and “predestine.”
5. It provides the “potential” for all to be saved, but also has the the Father in eternity past potentially sacrificing His Son in vain, in that there is a very real possibility with this scheme that none would choose Christ.
6. It warps the definition of grace (unmerited favor) if God chooses us for election based on what He knows we will do at some future time.
7. It assumes that grace is obligatory–God owes it to all to extend the possibility of salvation. That mindset destroys grace. For grace to be grace it must be bestowed freely without obligation. Justice on the other hand is obligatory–it demands action.
8. The semi-pelagian view simply will not hold up to scripture (in my estimation), especially with the writing in the NT such as Romans 9:10-24below:
“And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, “THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER.” Just as it is written, “JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.”
What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.” So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power kno
wn, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.”
Paul understood that the fallen nature of humanity would object to grace and cry out “That’s not fair!” Thus the apostle responds, “You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” Some argue that the augustinian position is not gracious enough, when the truth is it is much MORE gracious. The Bible makes it clear that apart from God’s initiative none would be saved and all would perish. So rather than permit the entire race to take its own sinful path to destruction God by His love and mercy decided to save for Himself a remnant or the fallen race. These he elected and predestined to come to faith, hence salvation. As the scripture says, “We love Him because He first loved us.” Jesus also said to His disciples, “You did not choose Me, but I choose you….”, etc., etc., etc.
The power of God that saves also preserves, which is why we cannot loose our salvation–we did not gain it to begin with. As the scripture says, “He who began a good work in you will be faithful to complete it….” and “it it God who works in you both to will and to do according to His good pleasure”, etc., etc., etc.
Now then, I believe Rick Warren, Robert Schuller, Purpose Driven Life and the Emergent Church falls within the Pelagian, semi-Pelagian theology.
Blessings
IBIJ
November 19, 2007 at 10:32 am
Peg
Kim,
Excellent! Thanks! Yes, that’s exactly what I mean by “original sources”. This is something we can dig scriptural teeth into. From Rick Warren’s quotes:
“There is truth in every religion. I, I, Christians believe there is truth in every religion. But we just believe in one savior. We believe we can learn truth from, I believe I have learned a lot of truth from different religions. Because they all have a portion of the truth. I just believe there’s one savior Jesus Christ.”
There is a point at which the above quote could be acceptable. Paul’s teaching in Acts 17:22-23 is an excellent example of how to take a partial truth in another religion and use it to God’s glory. To add that only Jesus saves (“there’s one savior, Jesus Christ”) is the important caveat that keeps the quotation within the realm of orthodox Christianity.
“I happen to know many people who are followers of Christ in other religions.”
That’s obviously not possible and must be unscriptural, taken at face value. However one-sentence quotes tend to be suspect because context is missing. Paragraphs (better yet pages) are much better for doing critical analysis.
“I have known many people who believe in the Messiah of Jesus, regardless of what religion they are, because they believe in him. It’s about a relationship not a religion.”
That quote doesn’t make a whole lot of sense at all. What is a “Messiah of Jesus”? Is he trying to say that there have been converts to Christianity from every religion? Or that there are people in other religions who believe in Jesus (why would they do that and stay in another religion?) I agree with Christianity being “a relationship not a religion” but that statement makes no sense in the rest of the paragraph.
OK so there’s three different quotations, and three different reactions:
1. Yes, with reservations
2. No
3. Huh???
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“If you are asked to look at an article at least look at the quotes. You can read the quotes and make your own determination using the Word of God.”
That’s true to some extent but the writers of articles all have their own points of view they want to get across and will use quotes out of context to defend positions they were already planning on taking. Biassed writing is not good scholarship, to say nothing of being unfair to the person being critiqued. That’s why I generally only trust original sources. I use the Word of God on what I hear from original sources.
On the rare occasion that I read opinions from article-writers I use the Word of God not on the quotations in the article, but on what the article-writer tells me about himself. If he makes sarcastic comments about someone who is not there to defend themselves (such as in the CIC article above) I discount anything the article-writer says on the scriptural grounds of lack of charity.
There are also theological presuppositions to deal with, which is mostly what IBIJ is tackling in the next post. Onwards…!
November 19, 2007 at 10:47 am
Peg
IBIJ,
Being past midnight it’s way too late for me to take on the age-old Calvinist vs Armeinian debate at the moment! Let’s just suffice it to say my position is that both Calvin and Arminius were right, and I can defend my position (to my satisfaction at least) from scripture.
Keep in mind too that all these guys — Calvin, Augustine, Luther, Arminius, etc — were mere mortals like you and me. They were imperfect, grouchy sometimes, proud of their intellectual achievements, etc. and they all made some very tragic mistakes in their lifetimes. Their words are no more (or less) true than yours or mine. Watch out for that cult of celebrity, it has nasty teeth…!
If you’re interested I’ll look up the verses supporting Arminianism (no need to look up Calvinism, you covered that pretty well) in a few days… I have much work to do Mon & Tues and must get some Z’s…
Blessings,
Peg
November 19, 2007 at 8:36 pm
IBIJ
Peg,
Thank you for the response. I actually thought I was answering a question you had above, I guess I may have mis understood your post. If you are settled in your mind about both Calvinism and Arminianism then that is fine.
I really do not want to debate the two theologies. After 12 years in the Rick Warren Camp and about 35 years in the Charismatic Movement I have come to a place in my mind as to why I believe as I do.
I went back to my old church (a PDL church) this past Sunday and listened to the sermon. It was again confirmed to me why I felt the Lord had me leave. I heard nothing more than the usual motivational speech, no mention of Jesus and three verses, taken out of context, to prove a point, before the pastor asked everyone to fill out the commitment card for more money.
The point that I believe we are trying to reason here is that the foundation of this method is built on an age old theology that was and still is considered a heresy. If the theology was heretical in 450AD when did it become really acceptable and all of a sudden a “sound theology”? Why do we become so acceptable of any “unsound-doctrine”? Do we as a people have no fear of the day we stand before the Lord and become “accountable” for what we, as individuals teach? I don’t believe Christ taught us any lessons about pragmatic acceptance!
These are the questions I have and really have to do with what is going on inside of me and I believe the Holy Spirit is redirecting my thinking because I was one that got caught up in the “deception of the word”, Satan’s best battle attack since the garden.
Blessings
IBIJ
November 20, 2007 at 2:15 am
Kim
“Paul’s teaching in Acts 17:22-23 is an excellent example of how to take a partial truth in another religion and use it to God’s glory.”
Yes, Paul did this with the Stoics and Epicureans. He was deeply oppressed by the pagan idolatry in Athens. He found common ground to start his foundational beliefs but he flaty contradicted the Epicureans’ (pleasure is the chief end of life, things are left to chance) and the Stoics, who believed in pantheism, God is in all things, instead God the Creator.
Acts 17:24 “The God who made the world and and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live is temples built by hands.”
Acts 17:26 “From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.”
Paul did not tell these men that there was truth in their religion, or that a portion of their religion had truth.
Rick Warren is not setting anyone straight. Instead of declaring the true God among false gods, he is saying that their Gods have truth. How can you tell someone that their religion has truth and then turn around and tell them that Jesus is the only way? What a cop-out to say …well, i believe there’s one savior Jesus Christ. Isn’t Rick Warren calling himself a pastor? What a cop-out to say…I believe my way and you can believe your way. He is saying that both ways have merit and this is not true!!!
People need to hear the truth. Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father.
Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
November 20, 2007 at 7:58 am
Peg
Hi Kim and IBIJ,
IBIJ wrote: “I went back to my old church (a PDL church) this past Sunday and listened to the sermon. It was again confirmed to me why I felt the Lord had me leave. I heard nothing more than the usual motivational speech, no mention of Jesus and three verses, taken out of context, to prove a point, before the pastor asked everyone to fill out the commitment card for more money. ”
Imo IBIJ’s quote summarizes beautifully the whole problem with the Rick Warren / Joel Osteen / Joyce Meyer / etc way of “doing theology”. It’s not so much the odd things they say now and then. It’s not even about their ignoring (and repeating) the mistakes of church history. It’s about ignoring the call to teach and preach scripture (both Old and New Testament) on a week-in, week-out basis. To teach the “whole counsel of scripture” (as my Baptist friends like to say). To make disciples and not just converts, to teach people how to read His word and pray and live for Him.
Churchgoers don’t need motivational sermons that would fit right in on the Oprah show. They need to know who Jesus is and what the kingdom of God is all about. And they need pastors who aren’t in it to fleece the flock (constantly hassle them for money).
And IBIJ… I think your post also answers the question I was asking, thanks! The slippery slope into heresy is partly an inner thing and partly a matter of being fed the wrong spiritual food by people in positions of trust. The Lord looks after His own. But those who want money, popularity, good looks etc more than they want to obey Him, He’ll leave them to their own devices and to follow after false teachers.
Make sense?
March 9, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Bibles and Airports » The Revelation in Genesis - Satan’s Lies. DiscernIt
[…] Dig deeper into the topic here […]
March 25, 2012 at 12:01 am
Gerardus Gieskens
There is BUT one EXPLANATION for Genesis.! And That is that TIME as we know it, DID NOT EXIST, Because TIME and CONDEMNATION are SYNONIMOUS! Life is ETERNAL., JUST LIKE every day is the same day: TODAY But while OUR spirit is LIFE(if born again) our flesh is YET TERMINAL. and MUST DIE! HENCE: the FIRST day of genesis and the 7th day are the same “TODAY. (timeless) BUT The first actual day as we count days, happened when” Adam started to die ” ” For in the DAY thou eatest there off , thou shallt surely DIE ! MORTALITY! THE FIRST DAY IN TIME!
March 25, 2012 at 11:00 am
Gerardus Gieskens
There will be a great UNIFICATION of “CHURCHES” world wide.! But I for one won’t be part of it. It will be “THE CHURCH” of the “THIEF in the night”
The one who sews the false teachings, in the “KINGDOM OF GOD”
The false messiah. THE ANTI- CHRIST! BASED IN JERUSALEM.!
Jesus of NAZARETH, will return, The “TWO EDGED SWORD of the TRUTH” proceeding FROM HIS MOUTH. and with the “sword of THE TRUTH” he will slay the ANTI-CHRIST. Then and in that day, shall be the end of “TIME” The end of death. The end of the CURSE!
AND CHRIST SHALL REIGN FOR A THOUSAND YEARS. ( THIS IS NOT A PROPHESY) It is just the way I for one see it!