You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘False Teachers’ tag.

Now Slice of Laodicea and Apprising Ministries are reporting that not only will Ravi Zacharias not apologize or even back away from his endorsement of Henri Nouwen, but his ministry is defending his position. You can read the following letter from Ravi Zacharias Ministries in defense of Ravi’s endorsement of Nouwen by clicking here (PDF).
One of the most shocking parts of this letter written by Margaret Manning was her justification of Ravi’s compromise via the following statement:
“ . . . if it weren’t for the Catholic church you and I would not be here–nor would Christianity.”
Ravi Zacharias has become one of a long line of “public figure” Christians to compromise a little here and a little there until full blown apostasy is reached. What next Ravi, what next?
“Today I personally believe that while Jesus came to open the door to God’s house, all human beings can walk through that door, whether they know about Jesus or not. Today I see it as my call to help every person claim his or her own way to God.”
Roman Catholic mystic Henri Nouwen
Sabbatical Journey
Page 51, 1998 Hardcover Edition
Horn has some VERY convincing arguments in many instances, and he has some rarely exposed research information. Horn is correct that Freemasonry and other secret orders want a new order of the ages using America as a springboard to do it and they are in deep alliance with the occult. This is highly seductive to the Bible believer who is interested in prophecy. His errors are that he accepts the Apocrypha (when even the Reformers didn’t view the Apocrypha as inspired of God) as equivalent to the Bible and refuses to expose the Vatican as a heretical church system explicitly. Horn supports the Apocrypha and the Book of Enoch as a means to promote his view on the Nephilim.
The Palestinian Jews or Jewish people in Israel never accepted the Apocrypha as inspired. Nor did the Samaritans. The Jews in Alexandria never officially accepted the LXX as canonical. The leading fathers of the Greek Church did not accept the Apocrypha as inspired writings. Principle lights among the Early Church Fathers rejected the idea of the inspiration of the Apocrypha. The book of Enoch and the Book of Jasher have tons of contradictions and aren’t divinely inspired of God. Jasher 18:9 states that one of the angels tells Abraham that Sarah will have a son, but Gen. 17:16 says that God told Abraham. In Jasher 42:30-41, Rachel talks to Joseph from the grave. This is of course necromancy and is an abomination unto the Lord (Deuteronomy 18:11-12). Tertullian admits that the Jews never accepted the Book of Enoch as authentic and that Christians of his time also rejected it. So, it isn‘t wonder that New Agers like the late Elizabeth Claire Prophet supports the Book of Enoch. In Chapter 40:9-10 of the Book of Enoch, it falsely says that the angel Phanuel can give eternally life to over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life: “…9 seen and whose words I have heard and written down?’ And he said to me: ‘This first is Michael, the merciful and long-suffering: and the second, who is set over all the diseases and all the wounds of the children of men, is Raphael: and the third, who is set over all the powers, is Gabriel: and the fourth, who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life, is named Phanuel.’ 10 And these are the four angels of the Lord of Spirits and the four voices I heard in those….”
The Bible is clear that Phanuel does not exist in the Scriptures. It’s blasphemy to say that an angel is set over the repentance of those who inherit eternal life. That statement in itself contradicts everything the Word of God teaches. We read in 1st Timothy 2:5 that Jesus Christ is the ONLY Mediator between God and men, not some angel named Phanuel… “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” Salvation is found ONLY in Christ Jesus, “Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” King David said in Psalm 62:6, “He (Jesus) only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved.” Repentance is strictly between a man and Jesus Christ alone. Only Jesus died for our sins, and shed His blood to pay for them (1st Peter 1:18-19); therefore, we must be diligent to guard and defend against LIARS and imposters who would lead people to believe otherwise. 1st John 2:22 clearly indicts all Christ-deniers as LIARS, guilty before God. The Book of Enoch, on chapter 69:8-12 says that a being named Penemue told man to write in ink and paper, etc. which doesn’t exist in the Bible at all. The Book of Enoch teaches that 450 tall feet giants exist in the world via relations of angels plus women. There is no biblical or scientifically evidence of this reality.
*Tom Horn is promoting his new book on Prophecy in the News, called “The Researchers Library of Ancient Texts Volume 1. He and Gary Stearman say that these books are not on a par with the Bible….yet then go on to say that “these studies are on the front burner,” the “predictions are astonishing”, it is for “serious Bible researchers..”
I have come to believe that these studies are meant to distract from the simple truths we find in the books of the Canon. Satan’s plan is to distort truth of the Word of God and make people believe it has no power in itself. Seduction lies in wait as a promise of hidden knowledge only for those who are enlightened enough to find it. I reject all teachers or pastors who promote these books, hidden codes, esoteric knowledge or long lost texts. I accept only those teachers who are faithful to God’s Word in the canon and who guard and shepherd the small flock by teaching the Bible and its truth and applications so that we can find salvation and learn to live lives holy unto the Lord.
In this video Deluca compares the Holy Spirit to an epiderul injection.
Mike Bickle of International House of Prayer has admitted that most of these
“manifestations are 80% false” and come from a pretense. But he allows them.
What of the other 20%? The real manifestations are even more dangerous because they flow from a false spirit and and false anointing.
There are three kinds of false prophets, I see in the Bible, three kinds, and this is a definitive statement that might help you in understanding it. Three kinds, number one, is a heretic, this is somebody who comes along and says, that’s not true, that’s a lie, I don’t believe the Bible and teaches heresy. Or even says I believe the Bible but teaches a heretical doctrine by twisting it, somebody whose doctrine is obviously, openly heretical.
Secondly is an apostate who denies the faith, who denies Christianity, who apostatizes, departs from it. The first two aren’t tough to spot, it’s easy to spot false doctrine, isn’t it? Just take your Bible and check it, it’s easy to spot apostasy because they’re denying it. And beloved may I hasten to add to you that both of these are dealt with in verse 6 of chapter 7, they are the hogs and the dogs. It says, “Don’t cast your pearls before swine or before dogs, giving that which is holy.” It’s easy to see the hogs and the dogs, they’re in the vomit and the mire. You see the first two kinds of prophets, false prophets the heretics and the apostates are made manifest. …………………….
It is the third kind of false prophet, I call the deceiver, that is the one Jesus is referring to here, this is the one you don’t see, this is the one who comes with the cloak of the shepherd. This is not the cultist, this is not the Mormon or the Jehovah’s Witness or, or somebody who belongs to Christian Science who, who openly and flagrantly teaches false doctrine, those are apostates or heretics. This is the one who talks about Jesus and he talks about the cross and he talks about God and he talks about the Bible and he talks about the church and the Holy Spirit and he hangs around with people that are true Christians and he mingles within the framework of evangelicalism, and he’s on the radio and he’s on television and he’s in the pulpit and he’s on the platform and he writes the books, and he always looks like a Christian. That’s the one Jesus refers to. Not heretics, heretics are obvious. Apostates are obvious too because they’ve denied the faith. But these are subtle. The Lord is not warning us against heretics, He’s not warning us against apostates, He’s warning us against people who sound like they teach the Gospel, who sound like Christians, who use the speech of the Bible, the speech of the Gospel, but it’s only a guise. They express orthodox terminology.
{Red Clover} from a facebook comment
TAKING SPIRITUAL DOMINION OVER
DARK ANGELS
By Gaylene Goodroad
and The Discernment Research Group*
Only the most naïve would imagine that an aggressive assault on the kingdom of satan would be met with anything but a desperate fight. That is why satan and any of his principalities or powers attempting to stop the spread of the Gospel must be bound…Binding and loosing, therefore are extremely important weapons which must be found in the arsenal of all those who desire to win the lost for Jesus Christ.[1]
~ C. Peter Wagner, NAR
To partner with Jesus in fulfilling the Great Commission,… the church must renounce fear and fatalism and recover the prevailing faith behind Paul’s frontal attack against the forces of darkness… [Christ’s] church must learn to contend, to wrestle with and throw down its spiritual adversaries…. The church, functioning as the house of prayer, the governmental ekklesia, is the correct context for Jesus’ teaching on binding and loosing…[it] is a council of war at the highest level. With Christ as our Head, we are bringing heaven down to earth and barring hell’s invasion.[2]
~ Lou Engle, TheCall/IHOP
The Bible subsequently reveals that it is the believer’s responsibility to “ask” before God will respond, to bind and release on earth for heaven to do the same, and that part and parcel of the Great Commission is the duty of the church to cast out demons and to tread over the power of the enemy. Apparently when we do, we send shock waves through the heavenlies![3]
~ Tom (and Nita) Horn, Christian author/publisher/speaker
THE GODS WHO WALK AMONG US
Prayer Warfare methodologies conceived and borne out of the Latter Rain Movement and nurtured under the New Apostolic Reformation are going mainstream. Twenty years ago, Chief NAR apostle, C. Peter Wagner, applied his Church Growth teachings to the spirit realm in what he termed Strategic Level Spiritual Warfare (SLSW). The plan calls for identifying “territorial spirits” (demons) of a geographic locality, then devising practices (such as militant intercession and fasting)[4] and techniques to defeat these unseen foes so that cities, nations, and beyond will respond to the Gospel.[5]
Sadly, this heresy is creeping into conservative Christian forums unawares through various prophetic ministries concerned about the eschatological implications of transhumanism and loosely related subjects.
Full Article HERE
Only Scripture
by Pastor Anton Bosch
One of the non-negotiable essentials of orthodox Christianity has always been the completeness of Scripture. By completeness we mean that the Bible (66 books) is the complete and final revelation of God to man. Nothing is to be added to the Scriptures, nothing is to be taken away from it, and nothing is to be placed above, or next to it (in authority or priority). The Bible stands on its own, is complete, and is the final measure by which every other doctrine, statement, creed or revelation is to be judged.
Over the centuries various groups have strayed from the principle of the completeness of Scripture. Most notably the Roman Church places the Apocrypha, the Magisterium, Canon Law, the Ex Cathedra statements of the Pope and a bunch of other stuff at the same level, or higher than Scripture.
One of the things that most cults have in common is that they all have their books, prophecies, and teachings that are equal to, or that supersede, the Bible.
Some historic churches hold their traditions, creeds and council decisions as equal to Scripture. Many also believe the teachings of deceased teachers above God’s Word. Most (not all) Charismatic and Pentecostal churches place prophecy, visions, revelations, experiences, and the teaching of special gifted leaders (often called apostles or prophets), above the Bible.
This is an old problem, but it has recently been escalating to new levels. Many evangelicals who previously held to the completeness, inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture are abandoning those truths…..
Tom Horn is one of the writers and teachers that has taken the church world by storm with his wild speculations about mutant life forms in the Old Testament, alien visits and abductions, as well as all sorts of fantastical science fiction sold as new Christian revelation (sounds very similar to Scientology – and it is). In addition to his own wild imagination and twisted use of Scripture, Horn has based many of his doctrines on apocryphal books as well as astrology. He strongly defends his use of extra-biblical sources and many evangelical Christians agree with him. He is endorsed by many Evangelical pastors and leaders.
These are but two of dozens, if not hundreds, of examples of “Christian” leaders rejecting the truth that the Bible is complete and closed.
Full Article HERE
Answer: Throughout his ministry Dr. Schuller has been outspoken in warning his listeners about the dangers of negative thinking.
The Faulty Gospel of Robert Schuller
by Joseph P. Gudel
‘Why would any Christian write an article criticizing Dr. Schuller? Isn’t this being negative? Isn’t this being unloving?’ These and similar questions are raised automatically by many people whenever one Christian criticizes another Christian; especially when the one criticized is as notable and well-liked as Dr. Robert Schuller.
I believe the first question raised above will be answered as we examine the content of Dr. Schuller’s theology. To test or criticize someone whose teachings are aberrational is not being negative; in fact the Bible commands us to do this. When the Apostle Paul wrote to the Christians in Thessalonica, he told them to “test all things; hold fast to that which is good” (1 Thess. 5:21).
The question still remains: “Is this unloving?” The most unloving thing that we could do would be to close our eyes and turn our backs as untold numbers of people are being led astray by false teaching. To critique a Christian who has erred from the truth is the most loving thing we could do for him. The Apostle James wrote: “My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth, and one turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins” (James 5:19-20).
DR. SCHULLER’S THEOLOGY
Dr. Schuller has stated many times throughout his many years of ministry that his one goal, his main desire, is to reach the masses of unchurched people. When he and his wife first arrived in California, they wondered how they could build a church from scratch.
Who would come to our church?… Looking at some statistics, it was very plain that half the people in the U.S. had no religious affiliation. Our answer then came quickly and clearly. The unchurched thousands– this was our opportunity. We would have to impress and win the people who, for one reason or another, had never before been interested in organized religion 1.
So Dr. Schuller believes that his calling is that of a missionary. “My ministry has, for over thirty years, been a mission to the unbelievers.” 2 And as we are about to see, he does not believe that the way to reach them is by proclaiming the gospel.
How does Dr. Schuller believe we can reach the nonbelievers most effectively? The most important thing is to find out what they want! He did this for several years at the beginning of his California ministry. And what did he discover? He found out that nonbelievers wanted to have their emotional needs met: they did not want to hear about the Bible or about their need for forgiveness of sins and salvation.
As a missionary, I find the hope of respectful contact is based on a “human-need” approach rather than a theological attack …. The non-churched who have no vital belief in a relationship with God will spurn, reject, or simply ignore the theologian, church spokesperson, preacher, or missionary who approaches with Bible in hand, theology on the brain and the lips, and expects nonreligious persons to suspend their doubts and swallow the theocentric assertions as fact. 3
POSSIBILITY THINKING VS. NEGATIVE THINKING
Since Dr. Schuller will not preach the gospel from the pulpit, nor teach from the Bible, what then is the message he propagates? Los Angeles Times staff writer Bella Stumbo, after an extended interview with Dr. Schuller, wrote: “In short, Robert Schuller believes that God placed him on this Earth to preach possibility thinking.” 4
Anyone who is familiar with Dr. Schuller’s writings or who has listened to him speak will realize that this is not an exaggeration.
Throughout his ministry Dr. Schuller has been outspoken in warning his listeners about the dangers of negative thinking. He asks his audience to consider “that dirty ten-letter-word ‘impossible.’ When uttered aloud, this word is devastating in its effect. Thinking stops. Progress is halted.” 5 Elsewhere he states: “Whatever you do, never verbalize a negative emotion.” 6
The gospel that he wants to share with his unchurched audience is that they can do anything that they want to, that everything is possible for a “possibility thinker.”
There is no problem or situation that cannot be solved. 7
… success awaits the man who will “never say never.” 8
… this is what I think our ministry is all about. Helping people realize they can become more than they ever thought they could be! 9
To underscore just how vitally important this message is, Dr. Schuller once wrote: “I believe in positive thinking. It is almost as important as the resurrection of Jesus Christ” 10 In addition, the titles to some of his books are revealing: Move Ahead With Possibility Thinking, You Can Become the Person You Want to Be, It’s Possible, and Become a Possibility Thinker Now…
The Gospel of Success
Closely connected with his emphasis on “possibility thinking” is his teaching concerning success. Dr. Schuller believes that God wants us to succeed in whatever we do.
God’s will for you is clear…. God wants you to succeed. He has promised to “crown your efforts with success… (Prov. 3:6) 11
Who owns the cattle on a thousand hills, mines of ore that have never been discovered and is waiting to make millionaires out of simple farm boy? Take Christ as your Partner and give Him a chance to work the miracle He promised: “I am come that you might have life — and have it more abundantly.”12
If you fail, you do so because you choose to fail! 13
Although in recent years Dr. Schuller has somewhat tempered this teaching, it is still one of his major tenets.
Self-Esteem: A New Reformation
The prime focus of Dr. Schuller’s ministry today concerns the self-esteem of the individual. This was reflected in most of his earlier books, but was never specifically formulated until 1982, when he wrote Self-Esteem: The New Reformation. Dr. Schuller believes that virtually every problem a person has, every ill that plagues society, all sin and evil in the world, is a result of people having low self-esteem. Therefore, our greatest need is to have our self-esteem increased.
Self-esteem then, or “pride in being a human being,” is the single greatest need facing the human race today. 14
I strongly suggest that self-love is the ultimate will of man that what you really want more than anything else in the world is the awareness that you are a worthy person. 15
Do not fear pride: the easiest job God has is to humble us. God’s almost impossible task is to keep us believing every hour of every day how great we are as his sons and daughters on planet earth. 16
According to Schuller, in order to reach the multitudes of nonbelievers today, a new reformation is needed, a reformation based on building up their self-esteem. This reformation must be anthropocentric, that is, man-centered, not theocentric, or God-centered. Indeed, Dr. Schuller believes that classical theology seriously errs in insisting that all theology be centered around God instead of around man. 17
The Bible
One might legitimately ask why Dr. Schuller believes classical theology errs so gravely. His answer: Luther and Calvin were listening to the wrong person! He asks the following rhetorical question: Luther and Calvin, we know, looked to the Book of Romans in the Bible for their primary inspiration. Were they, unknowingly, possessed more by the spirit of St. Paul than by the Spirit of Jesus Christ? Are we not on safer grounds if we look to our Lord’s words to launch our reformation? 18
The implication is that what Jesus said in the gospels overrides everything else in the in Bible. For Schuller then, some parts of the Bible (i.e., what Jesus said as recorded in the gospels) have more authority than other areas of the Bible. In other parts of Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, Dr. Schuller is more explicit.
But can anything be above the Scriptures? Yet, the Eternal Word transcends the written Word. Christ is the Word made flesh. Christ is the Lord over the Scriptures; the Scriptures are not Lord over Christ . . . The Bible must not compete with the Lord for the seat of glory. We are “saved by the blood,” not “by the Book.” We believe in the holy Trinity, not a holy Quadrangle. 19
Christ must be, at all times, Lord over the Scriptures. 20
Sin and Man’s Nature
For Dr. Schuller sin, a subject he does not like to discuss, has a definition very different from the one most Christians give.
I am convinced that the deepest of all human needs is salvation from sin and hell …. We come now to the problem of semantics. What do I mean by sin? Answer: Any human condition or act that robs God of glory by stripping one of his children of their right to divine dignity. I could offer another complementing answer, “Sin is that deep lack of trust that separates me from God and leaves me with a sense of shame and unworthiness.” I can offer still another answer: “Sin is any act or thought that robs myself or another human being of his or her self-esteem. ” 21
Any analysis of “sin” or “evil”… that fails to seethe lack of self-dignity as the core of the problem will prove to be too shallow. 22 Classical Reformed Theology declares that we are conceived and born rebellious sinners. But that answer is too shallow.It ignores the tough question: Why should love-needing persons resist, rebel against, and reject beautiful love? The answer? We are born nontrusting. Deep down we feel we are not good enough to approach a holy God. 23
By implication then, man is basically good according to Dr. Schuller. His only problem is that he was born with a disability: this disability, or original sin, is a low self-esteem or lack of trust. 24
If only we could love ourselves enough to dare approach God …. But we feel too unworthy. So one layer of negative behavior is laid upon another until we emerge as rebellious sinners. But our rebellion is a reaction, not our nature. By nature we are fearful, not bad. Original sin is not a mean streak; it is a nontrusting inclination …. do not say that the central core of the human soul is wickedness. If this wereso, then truly, the human being is totally depraved. But positive Christianity does not hold to human depravity, but to human inability. 25
Dr. Schuller does not believe or teach that we are ultimately responsible for our sins. He attempts to distinguish between what he calls “Adam’s Sin” and “Original Sin.” Adam, created sinless, knew better. Only he deserved a sermon on sin, because he alone had a choice. Adam “… made a choice, he chose. He knew better. His children, however, were born with a disadvantage. They didn’t have that choice.” 26
Because we are basically fearful, but not bad, and because we need to have our self. esteem lifted, Jesus never criticized people or called them sinners, according to Dr. Schuller. Instead, he always tried to uplift them.
He never did call them “sinners.” He saw great possibilities in each of these men. How He tried to give them the sense of self-worth and dignity that they deserved! After all, they were human beings, descendants of God. 27
Christ always tried to give man’s self-image a boost. When he met immoral people He never called them sinners. Never! 28
He believed in the dignity of the individual. So He never called a person a sinner. He always saw the individual as a saint. 29
So Dr. Schuller believes that if Jesus never called people sinners, then he won’t either.
Man and Glory
The end result that Dr. Schuller hopes to accomplish is to show everyone that they are all children of God because they are all made in His image. “The Fatherhood of God is built into our subconscious,” 30 all we really need is enough self-esteem to accept this fact. But it does not stop there. Because “we were created to be princes and princesses,” 31 we have an innate “thirst for glory.” 32 Dr. Schuller believes that “what we need is a theology of salvation that begins and ends with a recognition of every person’s hunger for glory.”33 “The Christian faith and life is a gospel designed to glorify human beings for the greater glory of God.” 34 The final goal is that “we can pray, ‘Our Father in heaven, honorable is our name.'” 35
Salvation and the Gospel
In concluding our examination of Dr. Schuller’s theology we must see what he has to say about salvation and the gospel. First of all, he stresses that people will not respond to the gospel until they recognize that they are worthy of God. “The unsaved person cannot perceive himself as worthy of ‘divine grace’ and hence rejects it.” 36 In fact, Dr. Schuller believes that the ultimate sin is in feeling unworthy about yourself: “the most serious sin is the one that causes me to say, ‘I am unworthy. I may have no claim to divine sonship if you examine me at my worst.”‘ 37
Dr. Schuller believes, then, that God wants to build up man’s self-esteem and restore the lost glory that is our inherent right as children of God, as people “Created to be princes and princesses.” 38 “God’s ultimate objective is to turn you and me into self-confident persons.” 39
In accord with this, Dr. Schuller believes that any proclamation of the gospel that puts “a person down before it attempts to lift him up” is dangerous. 40 He goes on to state that “you are not preaching the Gospel unless you make people happy, because the Gospel is good news.” 41
Finally, what is salvation in Schuller’s opinion? What does it mean to be “born again”?
What does it mean to be saved? It means to be permanently lifted from sin (psychological self-abuse with all of its consequences as seen above) and shame to self-esteem and its God glorifying human need-meeting, constructive, and creative consequences. 42
Salvation is defined as rescue from shame to glory. 43
To be born again means that we must be changed from a negative to a positive self-image — from inferiority to self-esteem, from fear to love. from doubt to trust. 44
And what is the real effect of being saved? “Glory restored is the real fruit of salvation.” 45
A BIBLICAL CRITIQUE
A Faulty Foundation
A building is only as strong as its foundation, and every argument stands or falls on its premise’s). In Dr. Schuller’s case we can readily see that his entire ministry is based upon a defective premise. What is it? He has knowingly based and structured his theology on what people wanted to hear! It began with him going from door to door, asking people what type of church they would like to attend. 46 It has continued to this day, albeit more sophisticatedly, with Dr. Schuller hiring firms like the Gallup Poll to conduct surveys on such pertinent topics as self-esteem of the American people. 47 Instead of asking himself what the people needed, he asked what they wanted. Sometimes these two are in agreement, but more often they are not. Instead of listening to the people, or even to himself, he should have asked God what the people needed and how he could help them obtain it!
Imagine someone like the prophet Jonah going to Nineveh and telling the people only the good things that they wanted to hear. After all, he could have reasoned, they would never listen to some foreigner preaching negative sermons. Why, none of the Ninevites even believed in the Jewish Scriptures. The result of this type of approach would have meant the destruction of Nineveh and all of its inhabitants.
A theology based upon opinion polls rather upon God’s Word is a direct fulfillment of what the Apostle Paul warned against: “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires.” (2 Tim. 4:3).
Possibility Thinking
The teaching advanced by Dr. Schuller is clear. You can be whatever you want to be, all you have to do is believe in yourself. Any and every problem you encounter can be overcome, just never quit. “Set your goal, define your role, and pay your toll.” 48 “What you can conceive, you can achieve.” 49 And above all, never verbalize a negative thought or admit that something is impossible.
As we have seen, the teaching of “possibility thinking” is a cornerstone of Dr. Schuller’s theology. And in and of itself, there is nothing wrong with this. After all, there are many biblical verses which affirm this. For example:
For nothing will be impossible with God (Luke 1:37).
And Jesus said to him, “‘If you can.’ All things are possible to him who believes” (Mark 9:23).
There are several problems, however, with how Dr. Schuller presents this. First of all, his emphasis is virtually indistinguishable from the same type of teachings given in secular circles (e.g., Dale Carnegie’s Hot to Win Friends and Influence People). The only difference is that Dr. Schuller builds his message within a theistic framework. The problem lies in the fact that the biblical promises of God’s help apply only to those people who have a living relationship with God; that is, people who have accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. But Dr. Schuller admits that the main group of people he is trying to reach are non-Christians! Therefore, his “possibility thinking” teachings from the Bible really would not apply to them.
Second, in teaching that we can do anything that we can dream of, Dr. Schuller totally ignores the fact that we do have limitations. All of us are limited by our own natural abilities and by outside influences over which we have no control.
A final flaw in this type of teaching is that there are times when we must say unpleasant things or “verbalize negative emotions.” According to Dr. Schuller. the Apostle Peter would probably be one of the world’s greatest possibility thinkers. Why? Remember when Jesus began to tell his disciples that He had to go to Jerusalem and suffer many things and be killed (cf. Matt. 16:21f)? What was Peter’s reaction? He took Jesus aside and lectured Him on the dangers of negative thinking.
And Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “God forbid it, Lord! This shall never happen to You” (Matt. 16:22).
We all know the rest of the story, Jesus rebuked Peter for not setting his “mind on God’s interests, but man’s.” Elsewhere, Jesus actually commands us, under certain conditions, to verbalize negative emotions. “Be on your guard. If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him” (Luke 17:3).
The danger of Dr. Schuller’s teaching on “possibility thinking” is that he only shows one side of the coin and thus distorts God’s message.
The Gospel of Success
In attempting to marshal together biblical evidence to back his claims that God wants us to succeed in whatever we do, Dr. Schuller has taken one verse after another out of context. For example: “God’s will for you is clear …. God wants you to succeed. He has promised to ‘crown your efforts with success!”‘ (Prov. 3:6). 50
It is no accident that Dr. Schuller quotes Proverbs 3:6 from The Living Bible, which is a paraphrase, not a translation. Proverbs 3:6, according to the Hebrew Masoretic text, reads: “In all thy ways acknowledge Him. And he will direct thy paths.” 51 The Hebrew word for “direct” is “yashar,” meaning “To go straight or direct in the way” or “to make (a way) straight” 52 Thus God is promising to guide us as we walk with Him, not to make us succeed in everything we do.
Many examples could be cited to show Dr. Schuller’s frequent distortion of scriptural passages in order to justify his theological positions. For instance. what does Dr. Schuller say Jesus really meant when He taught His disciples to pray for their “daily bread” (Matt. 6:11)?
“Give us our daily bread.” What does the word bread mean? Bread refers to life’s basic needs. God doesn’t promise that we will get the dessert, but he does promise that we will have the crust…. What is the crust that God offers? We call it possibility thinking. 53
“Give us this day our daily bread.” God will give us what we need. And what is that? It is creative, inspiring, possibility-pregnant ideas. 54
Dr. Schuller is guilty of even more blatant distortion when he equates the “rivers of living water” Jesus referred to in John 7:38 with self-esteem.
And I can feel the self-esteem rising all around me and within me. “Rivers of living water shall flow from the inmost being of anyone who believes in me” (John 7:38, TLB). I’ll really feel good about myself. 55
Did Jesus really equate “rivers of living water” with “self-esteem”? The Apostle John (who I think was in a better position to tell us what Jesus meant than Dr. Schuller is) tells us exactly what Jesus was saying: “But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive: for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (John 7:39).
More examples could be cited showing how Dr. Schuller takes verses out of context and distorts their meaning, but these will suffice.
One of the most lamentable aspects of Dr. Schuller’s “Gospel of Success” is in the effect it can have on people who genuinely try but fail. For people like this I cannot think of anything more pernicious than to tell them that “if you fail, you do so because you choose to fail.” 56 William Kirk Kilpatrick, associate professor of educational psychology at Boston College, makes the following observation:
If you lead people to believe that by the power of their mind they can become rich and change their life, and if in fact that doesn’t happen, not only are they going to feel frustration but also more guilt for not having enough faith. 57
Christians may oftentimes be successful in their earthly endeavors, but God has not promised this to us. In fact, many of the greatest men and women of faith were total failures in the world’s eyes (cf. Heb. 11:35-40). Worldly success may be a byproduct of obedience to God, but it should never be our primary goal.
Self-Esteem: A New Reformation?
We must first address the question, is it wrong to have high self-esteem? The biblical answer is no! In the book of Genesis we are told that man was created in God’s own image (Gen. 1:26-27). In other places the Scriptures state that “we are the temple of the living God” (2 Cor. 6:16), and that we are “sons and daughters” of God (2 Cor. 6:18). In Eph. 2:10, we are told that “we are His workmanship.” The word “workmanship” comes from the Greek word “poiema” from which we get our English word “poem”. Just as a poem is an artistic expression of the poet, so we are artistic expressions of God. How unique and special is each person? When a baby is conceived,
it will be a combination of the genetic content of one of the mother’s 400 ova with those of one of, say, 360 million spermatozoa released at the same time. The child you conceived might have been any one of about 144 billion distinct human beings, assuming that all of the spermatozoa really had an equal chance to fertilize that ovum. The slightest difference in the timing of the sex act would have tipped the odds in favor of a different spermatozoa — and resulted in a different child. No other couple could produce a child identical to yours. 58
Truly King David was right when he proclaimed: “I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made” (Ps. 139:14).
There must be a proper balance in our evaluation of man. We need to see ourselves as God sees us. How does God view man?
He sees us as beings of tremendous value and worth. In John 3:16 the word “so” is often overlooked: God loved us so much that He sent Jesus to die for our sins, that we could be reconciled with him.
Once again, however, there is a flip-side to the coin. God sees us as His creation (not as His peers) who have willingly rebelled against Him. Dr. Schuller rejects this fact in his evaluation. He believes that the greatest need of man is having his self-esteem built up, 59 therefore we should never say anything derogatory about man. Man’s main goal, he believes, should be seeking to have his self-esteem built up high enough that he can respond to God’s love. The only reason people do not accept God is because they have a low self-esteem and thus fear Him. 60
The main question is, “Is Dr. Schuller’s analysis of man’s problem correct?” We will consider the scriptural answer to this in the following sections dealing with “Man’s Nature” and “Jesus and Sinners.” Right now, though, I believe that simply by looking at the evidence before us we can see that Dr. Schuller’s logic is faulty.
Lewis Smedes, a professor at Fuller Seminary and the author of Love Within Limits, makes the following cogent observation:
I have seen a hit man of the Mafia who says “I feel very good about myself.” I have talked to prostitutes who have felt very good about themselves, and I’m not judging them, but I have talked to saints who felt very badly about themselves. The crux in this whole business is not whether we feel good about ourselves, though that is important, but what is the truth about ourselves? 61
If Dr. Schuller is correct, if the only reason we run from God is because we have a low self-esteem and fear Him, then people who have a high self-esteem should all become Christians and also should not sin anymore! But we know from practical experience that this is not the case.
William Kirk Kilpatrick states that a high self-esteem often inhibits people from coming to God:
Like the rich man who will have such a hard time getting into heaven, his riches protect him from the knowledge of how utterly dependent on God he is. In the same way the man who is brimful of self-esteem is unable to see how utterly broken he is, how we all are. 62
It is both interesting and significant that recent psychological studies have confirmed what the Bible has always taught: man’s problem is not low self-esteem but rather pride. While at times this is expressed in low self-esteem it is also very often manifested as an inflated self-image. Dr. David Myers, a professor of psychology at Dr. Schuller’s alma mater, Hope College, comments on this in his article, “The Inflated Self .”
[What an intriguing irony it is that so many Christian writers are now echoing the old prophets of humanistic psychology at the very time that research psychologists are amassing new data concerning the pervasiveness of pride. Indeed it is the orthodox theologians, not the humanistic psychologists, who seem closest to the truth that is glimpsed by social psychology. 63
Church history also refutes Dr. Schuller’s teaching on self-esteem. He believes that we are entering a “new age of church growth” and that the only way the Church can succeed is to build up people’s allegedly low self-esteem. 64 Dr. Schuller must answer a significant question: why didn’t the early Church preach a theology of self-esteem? They were virtually surrounded by nonbelievers, people whose greatest need, according to Dr. Schuller, was to have their self-esteem lifted. However, the early Church followed the example of Paul, and preached “Christ and Him crucified” not any gospel of self-esteem (e.g., 1 Cor. 2:2; 1:18,23; Rom. 3:10-18). We find no examples in the preaching of the apostles that man’s basic problem was a low self-esteem. Instead we find that it is a need for forgiveness of his sins.
An Anthropocentric Theology?
As we have seen, Dr. Schuller believes that the Reformers seriously erred in centering their theology around God instead of around man. The verse people like Dr. Schuller usually cite to support that teaching is Mark 12:31, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Their argument is that we must first learn to love ourselves, to have our own self-esteem built up, and only then can we love others.
But what is the context of this verse? A scribe came up to Jesus and asked Him what was the greatest commandment.
Jesus answered, “The foremost is, ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’
‘The second is this, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these” (Mark 12:29-31).
Two things stand out from Jesus’ words. The first is that, according to Jesus, our theology must be primarily God-centered, not man-centered, because the first commandment was to love God with everything we have. The second thing that stands out is that we were not commanded to love ourselves. We are commanded to love our neighbor just as we love ourselves. This agrees with what the Apostle Paul wrote: “For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it” (Eph. 5:29).
In truth, a theology that is centered around man inseparably becomes a not-so-subtle attempt at self-worship. A theology that is based on self-esteem is really only a new narcissism. In Beyond Personality which was first published at the same time Dr. Schuller was an undergraduate at Hope College, C.S. Lewis succinctly critiqued and destroyed any attempt at a theology based on man’s self-esteem.
Christ will indeed give you a real personally: but you must not go to Him for the sake of that. As long as your own personality is what you are bothering about you are not going to Him at all. The very first step is to try to forget about the self altogether. Your real, new self (which is Christ’s and also yours, and yours just because it is His) will not come as long as you are looking for it. It will come when you are looking for Him …. Look for yourself. and you will find in the long run only hatred, loneliness, despair, rage, and decay. But look for Christ and you will find Him, and with Him everything else thrown in. 65
Pride
A long with telling us that our greatest need is a high self-esteem and that our theology must be man-centered, Dr. Schuller has also said that we do not have to worry about pride.
Do not fear pride: the easiest job God has is to humble us. 66
But the Bible warns believers against pride and exhorts Christians to practice humility as a safeguard against pride:
Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before stumbling (Prov. 16:18).
… and all of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, for God is opposed to the proud, but gives grace to the humble (1 Pet. 5:5).
In the book of Isaiah we find that Lucifer, the “star of the morning,” was cast down from his eminent position because of the great pride that he possessed (Isa. 14:10-14). His end result was to be “thrust down to Sheol, to the recesses of the pit” (v. 15).
The Bible
One of the reasons Dr. Schuller has drawn so much criticism is that his theology and teachings are not based on the Bible. In fact, as we have just seen, they are oftentimes diametrically opposed to what the Bible says in context. He believes that Jesus’ words are the only safe basis within which we can build any theological framework. 67 In one place in Self-Esteem: The New Reformation he writes:
A simple and very wise man once said: “If you really want to know a person’s deepest desire and most conscientious concern, study, if you can, his unvarnished prayers. Stealthily approach him in his intimate closet and try to overhear what he is really praying about passionately.” 68
I think that this is excellent advice. To find out what our view of the Bible should be, we will look at what Jesus said about Scripture, and we will begin by looking at one of the most passionate prayers Jesus ever uttered, His prayer to His Father, just before His passion and death.
In John 17 Jesus is praying for His disciples, whom He will soon be leaving, He asks His Father to: “Sanctify them in the truth; Thy word is truth” (John 17:7).
Jesus evidently believed that all of God’s word is truth, not just part of it! Just before this. Jesus stated that he had guarded His disciples and that none of them had perished except Judas, “the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled” (verse 12). Again, Jesus plainly, believed that whatever the Scriptures said would take place, would.
In John 10:35 Jesus stated that “the Scripture cannot be broken.” In Matt. 5:18 He said “until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished.”
Dr. Schuller’s grave error is that he attempts to make a dichotomy between Jesus’ words and the rest of the Bible. He claims to base his teachings and his hope for “new reformation” on what Jesus said. In reality, he simply accepts the sayings of Jesus that he agrees with and ignores the rest!
Sin
Perhaps the most insidious aspect of Dr. Schuller’s teaching method is the way he redefines biblical terms at will. A prime example of this is how he redefines sin. According to Dr. Schuller, sin is anything that robs us of our “divine dignity” or, sin is a “deep lack of trust.” 69 According to the Bible, though, sin is rebellion and lawlessness on man’s part.
… sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4).
All unrighteousness is sin (1 John 5:17).
Jesus gave another definition of sin. He said that when the Holy Spirit came, He would convict the world “concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me” (John 16:9). Thus sin is defined as any refusal to believe in Jesus.
Dr. Schuller believes that we should never discuss people’s sins, because to do so would be an insult to their dignity. R.C. Sproul addresses this type of attitude in his book In Search of Dignity:
There is a road to redemption where every human being has dignity. Many reject this road because they think Christianity destroys self-esteem, disparaging human value with woeful denunciations of the evil of man. Preachers rail against corruption, calling man a wretched sinner. Did not David cry out, “I am a worm and not a man” and Job grovel in the dust moaning, “I hate myself”?
These grim statements make it seem that Christianity has a low view of human dignity. But the point often overlooked is that the character of sinfulness in no way diminishes the worth of persons. It is because God takes sin seriously . . . .
By taking sin seriously we take man seriously. Evil may mar the divine image and cloud its brilliance, but it cannot destroy it. The image can be defaced, but it can never be erased. The most obscene symbol in human history is the cross: yet in its ugliness it remains the most eloquent testimony to human dignity. 70
If we Christians, especially the leaders who are shepherds in the Church, are ever going to help anyone, we must start by being honest. This means that we do not close our eyes to mankind’s true condition. We need to have the courage to speak “the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15).
Man’s Nature
What is man’s true condition? Dr. Schuller believes that man is basically good. “By nature we are fearful, not bad.” 71 What does the Bible say?
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? (Jer.17:9).
There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless: there is none who does good, there is not even one (Rom. 3:10-12).
For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh (Rom.7:18).
Jesus and Sinners
Perhaps one of the most incredible statements Dr. Schuller has ever made is that Jesus never called anyone a sinner. He reasons that if Jesus never called people sinners, then neither should he. This is a perfect example of how Dr. Schuller picks and chooses from among the words of Jesus, accepting only what he likes and leaving the rest. Did Jesus ever call people sinners? Yes, many times.
I said therefore to you, that you shall die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you shall die in your sins (John 8:24).
He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her (John 8:7).
And hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mark 2:17).
Jesus knew what type of a heart each person had (cf. John 2:24-25). If they were genuinely repentant for their sins, He would forgive them and then lift them up. But if they were hardhearted and antagonistic, Jesus would speak very harshly to them. Dr. Schuller does not believe this: “Jesus, when he confronted secular unbelievers as well as conspicuous sinners, still refrained from insulting or embarrassing them. He left their dignity intact.” 72
Once again Dr. Schuller purposely ignores the parts of the Bible that he finds distasteful.
You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. . . (John 8:44)
Woe to you, blind guides . . . Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites. For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness (Matt. 23:16, 27)
Dr. Karl Menninger, a renowned psychiatrist and the head of the Menninger Clinic, wrote a book over ten years ago entitled Whatever Became of Sin? His thesis was that the reason so many people are confused and lost is because people no longer think of themselves as sinners. He concluded that if we really want to help people, then we should “tell it like it is,” we should point out their sin to them so they can turn from it and be healed.
Some clergymen prefer pastoral counseling of individuals to the pulpit function. But the latter is a greater opportunity to both heal and prevent. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, indeed. and there is much prevention to be done for large numbers of people who hunger and thirst after direction toward righteousness. Clergymen have a golden opportunity to prevent some of the accumulated misapprehensions, guilt, aggressive action, and other roots of later mental suffering and mental disease.
How? Preach! Tell it like it is. Say it from the pulpit. Cry it from the housetops. 73
Man’s greatest need is not to have his self-esteem built up or to have his “lost glory” restored. His greatest need is to have his sins forgiven and thus be reconciled to God! The joy of forgiveness and of restored fellowship with our Creator is the greatest joy man can experience. The person whose has been forgiven can then sing out with King David:
Happy is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is pardoned. Happy is the man unto whom the Lord counteth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile (Ps. 32:1-2).
To avoid mentioning sin is to preach a distorted Gospel. R.C. Sproul eloquently summarizes this as follows:
The preacher who smiles benignly from his pulpit, assuring us that “God accepts you just the way you are” tells a monstrous lie. He sugarcoats the gospel of love with saccharine grace. God does not accept the arrogant; He turns His back to the impenitent. He maintains love toward His fallen creatures, inviting them back to restored fellowship, but strings are securely attached as we must come on bended knee. 74
Man and Glory
Many times throughout his writings Dr. Schuller asserts that we are all children of God. Is that what the Bible teaches? No, the Bible teaches that we are God’s creation, it does not state that we are His children by nature. Because we have rebelled willingly against God, we are “by nature children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3). Only by asking Jesus into our lives do we become adopted children of God: “But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name” (John 1:12; also cf. Romans 8:15,23; Galatians 4:5).
There are some Scriptures referring to the glory believers will possess (e.g., Col. 3:4; Rom. 9:23; John 17:22). However, any “glory” ascribed to believers is glory derived from Jesus Christ and is a reflection of the divine glory.
Because of his misunderstanding of man’s nature and man’s greatest need, Dr. Schuller has developed a doctrine that teaches the glorification of the human being.
Christianity with its doctrine of salvation is a faith designed by God for the glory of the human being for the greater glory of God. 75 Because of this we can pray, “O God, I am great.” 76
It is no coincidence that Dr. Schuller rarely cites Scripture passages to buttress his teachings. The reason is twofold: he does not believe in the total authority of the Bible, and (as this article demonstrates) the Bible often contradicts what he teaches! What do the Scriptures tell us about glory? Is it something we deserve because “we were created to be princes and princesses?” 77 Or is it something that only God deserves? The Bible is explicit on this.
For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To him be the glory forever. Amen (Rom. 11:36).
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased (Luke 2:14).
I am the Lord, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another (Isa. 42:8).
What can we boast of, then? What can we glory in? The Bible tells us to “glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh” (Phil. 3:3). Elsewhere the Bible states “But he who boasts, let him boast in the Lord” (2 Cor. 10:17; also cf. Gal. 6:14; Acts 12:23; Jer. 9:23-24).
It is at this point that Dr. Schuller crosses the line from harmful teaching to blasphemy. He states: “And we can pray, ‘Our Father in heaven, honorable is our name.'” 78 He has gone to the extreme. He has attempted to lift man up to the level of God!
The highest pinnacle of pride and deception is to attempt to deify oneself. This is what Lucifer did; he said “I will make myself like the Most High” (Isa. 14:14). We cannot place ourselves on the same level as the Creator of the universe. We can never place our name on the same level as God’s name!
This is not the only time Dr. Schuller has done this. At other times he has attempted to lower God to man’s level. He writes: “God’s need for glory compels him to redeem his children from shame to glory.” 79
God does not “need” glory; as the Creator of the universe He already possesses all glory! And God is not “compelled” to do anything. Whatever He does it is because He has chosen to do it, not because He is compelled to do it. As the God-man, Jesus Christ is intrinsically worthy of all honor and glory (Rev. 5:12). However, on the Phil Donahue show Dr. Schuller attempted to portray Jesus as being an egotist.
But the cross sanctifies the ego trip. That’s very significant. In other words, Jesus had an ego. He said, “I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto me.” Wow, what an ego trip He was on. 80
This type of teaching is indefensible blasphemy. Jesus “humbled Himself” by His Incarnation (Phil. 2:8). We are told that “though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor, that you through His poverty might become rich” (2 Cor. 8:9). To talk of Jesus, the eternal God made flesh, as being on an ego trip is heresy!
Is Man Worthy?
Dr. Schuller teaches that nonbelievers do not respond to God because they do not feel worthy of Him. His goal is to tell people that they are worthy of God: “The most serious sin is the one that causes me to say, “I am unworthy. I may have no claim to divine sonship if you examine me at my worst.'” 81
The truth of the matter is that even at our very best we are still unworthy of God. Jesus said: “So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say, ‘We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done”‘ (Luke 17:10).
A story from Jesus’ life also illustrates this. A Roman centurion came to Jesus and asked Him to heal his servant. Jesus agreed to go with him and heal his servant, but the centurion replied: “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed” (Matt. 8:8).
What was Jesus’ reaction? Did He say “Don’t you know it’s a sin to feel unworthy? Why of course you’re worthy of Me, after all you were born to be a prince! Don’t have such low self-esteem.” No. Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith” (Matt. 8:10).
God accepts us only because of one thing: what Jesus did on the cross of Calvary (Rom. 5:9; 1 John 1:7). He does not accept us because of our self-worth, or because of any works that we do (Eph. 2:8-9; Isa. 64:6).
The Gospel
In proclaiming the Gospel, Dr. Schuller believes you must never put another person down. “In fact, you are not preaching the Gospel unless you make people happy, because the Gospel is good news.” 82
The mistake Dr. Schuller makes is assuming that everyone who hears the Gospel has an open and receptive heart. If they do, then they will likely respond to it happily. But many people have no desire at all to change their lives.
What was the reaction when Peter and John preached the Gospel before the Sanhedrin? The Jewish leaders were “cut to the heart” (Acts 5:33). How did the Jewish leaders respond when Stephen proclaimed the Gospel? Likewise, they were “cut to the heart” and began “gnashing their teeth at him” (Acts 7:54). When Paul preached the Gospel in Jerusalem, a riot broke out (Acts 22).
These responses were not because Peter and John and Stephen and Paul were preaching “possibility thinking.” The people were not “cut to the heart” because they were told that they were children of God and deserved to have their lost glory restored. Why were all of these people offended? Because of the “offense of the cross” (Gal. 5:11).
The Apostle Paul proclaimed: “For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). To the Jews this was “a stumbling block.” To the Gentiles it was “foolishness” (1 Cor. 1:23), and to Dr. Schuller it would be insulting (if he is consistent with his own teachings) because it reminds people of their sins!
There are many times when we have to point out something negative to people before we can help them. Alcoholics Anonymous has had tremendous success in helping alcoholics quit drinking because they have used a biblical principle: before they can help an individual quit drinking, he must first admit that he has a problem. Only after he admits that he is an alcoholic can he be helped.
It is much the same with the Gospel: there are many negative aspects to it. First of all, you are a sinner. Second, there is nothing that you can do to help yourself. And finally, if you are not helped, you are going to hell. If these things are not pointed out to the nonbeliever, then the Gospel has not been presented.
But someone might ask, “What about the testimonies of people who have been converted through Dr. Schuller’s ministry?” It is true that there are testimonies of people who have come to the Lord by reading his books or hearing him on television. But it is also true that there are many nonChristians who have felt better about themselves after listening to Dr. Schuller, but were totally unaware of the fact that they are lost sinners who are destined for hell unless they accept Jesus Christ! Michael Nason, in his biography on Dr. Schuller, records several such “testimonies”:
Although I am of the Jewish faith, you have helped me to realize that through God and love all things are possible. 83
“We’re Jewish,” the gentleman said. “In fact, our son is a rabbi, but we love to watch you, Dr. Schuller . . . 84
The terrible tragedy is that there are untold thousands of nonbelievers who think they know what Christianity is all about because they watch the “Hour of Power” or have read one or more of Dr. Schuller’s books, yet who have never heard the true gospel.
Salvation
As we have seen, Dr. Schuller believes that salvation is being rescued “from shame to glory.” 85 For him being “born again” means to “be changed from a negative to a positive self-image — from inferiority to self-esteem, from fear to love, from doubt to trust.” 86 Dr. Schuller’s problem is that he has (as he often does) confused an effect with its cause. Salvation, or being “born again,” gives us a basis for a high self-esteem and to have a greater love and trust. However, salvation is not a synonym for self-esteem. According to the Bible the new birth is a spiritual phenomenon, not a psychological one John 3:5; 1 Peter 1:3-5).
What is the “real fruit” of salvation? It is not a restoration of our pride and glory. Rather, it is a restoration of our fellowship with God. It means that we now have a living relationship with our Maker and have been saved from the punishment that we justly deserved.
A PARABLE
A modern-day, adapted version of Jesus’ parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (Luke 18:10-14) will aptly conclude our study of Robert Schuller’s “New Reformation.”
Two men went up into the church to pray, one a possibility thinker, the other a negative thinker. The possibility thinker stood and was praying thus to himself, “God, I thank Thee that I am not like other people: people with low self-esteem, people who think they are unworthy of You, or even like this negative thinker. I think only positive thoughts for I was created to be a prince, I am worthy of glory, honorable is our name!”
But the negative thinker, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, “God, be merciful to me, the sinner.” I tell you, the negative thinker went down to his house justified rather than the other, for everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled but he who humbles himself shall be exalted.
NOTES
1. Robert H. Schuller, Move Ahead With Possibility Thinking (Old Tappan, NJ: Spire Books, 1967), p. 20.
2. Robert H. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1982), p. 12.
3. Ibid.
4. Bella Stumbo, “Schuller: The Gospel of Success” Los Angeles Times, 29 May 1983, part 1, p.24.
5. Robert H. Schuller, You Can Become the Person You Want to Be (New York: Pillar Books, 1973), p. 65.
6. Ibid., p. 39.
7. Robert H. Schuller, It’s Possible (New York: Fawcett Gold Medal, 1978), p. 28.
8. Schuller, Move Ahead With Possibility Thinking, p. 189.
9. Stumbo, “Schuller: The Gospel of Success”, loc. cit.
10. Michael Nason and Donna Nason, Robert Schuller: The Inside Story (Waco: Word Books,, 1983), p. 152.
11. Robert H. Schuller, Daily Power Thoughts (Irvine, CA: Harvest House Publishers, n.d.), p. May 29.
12. Schuller. Move Ahead With Possibility Thinking, p. 112.
13. Schuller, It’s Possible. p. 29.
14. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 19.
15. Robert H. Schuller, Self-Love: The Dynamic Force of Success (New York: Hawthorn Books, Inc., 1969). p. 21.
16. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 57.
17. Ibid., p. 64.
18. Ibid., p. 39.
19. Ibid., p. 45.
20. Ibid., p. 136.
21. Ibid., p. 14.
22. Ibid., p. 15.
23. Ibid., pp. 63, 64.
24. Ibid., p. 67.
25. Ibid., pp. 66, 67.
26. “Self-Love: How Far? How Biblical How Healthy?” Eternity, February 1979, p. 23. Also cf. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 127.
27. Schuller, Move Ahead With Possibility Thinking, p. 209.
28. Schuller, Self-Love: The Dynamic Force of Success, pp. 87, 88.
29. Schuller, Daily Power Thoughts, p. March 23.
30. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 54.
31. Ibid., p. 52.
32. Ibid., p. 39.
33. Ibid., pp. 26, 27.
34. Ibid., p. 140.
35. Ibid., p. 69.
36. Ibid., p. 16.
37. Ibid., p. 98.
38. Ibid., p. 52.
39. Ibid., p. 80.
40. Ibid., p. 127.
41. Robert H. Schuller, Your Future is Your Friend, (New Canaan, NJ: Keats Publishing, Inc., 1964), p. 18.
42. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 99.
43. Ibid., p. 151.
44. Ibid., p. 68.
45. Ibid.. p. 161.
46. Nason and Nason, Robert Schuller: The Inside Story, p. 59.
47. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 17.
48. Nason and Nason, Robert Schuller: The lnside Story, p. 171.
49. Stumbo, “Schuller: The Gospel of Success”, loc. cit.
50. Schuller, Daily Power Thoughts, p. May 29.
51. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1955), p. 987.
52. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Workbook of the Old Testament, Vol. I (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980, p. 417.
53. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 80.
54. Ibid., p. 82.
55. Ibid., p. 80.
56. Schuller, It’s Possible, loc. cit.
57. Jon Trott, and William Kirk Kilpatrick, “The Psychological Connection”, Cornerstone, Vol. 12., Issue 68, p. 18.
58. Roberts Rugh and Landrum B. Shettles, From Conception to Birth: The Drama of Life’s Beginnings, (New York: Harper and Row, 1971), p. 18.
59. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 19.
60. Ibid.. pp. 15, 16.
61. “Self-Love: How Far? How Biblical? How Healthy?”, loc. cit.
62. Trott and Kilpatrick, “The Psychological Connection”, loc. cit.
63. David G. Myers “The Inflated Self,” The Christian Century, 1 December 1982, p. 1226.
64. “Self-Love: How Far? How Biblical? How Healthy?”, p. 24.
65. C.S., Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: MacMillan Publishing Co., 1943), p. 190.
66. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 57.
67. Ibid., p. 39.
68. Ibid., p. 46.
69. Ibid., p. 14.
70. R.C. Sproul, In Search of Dignity (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1983), p. 95.
71. Schuller. Self-Esteem The New Reformation, p. 67.
72. Ibid, p. 72.
73. Karl Menninger, Whatever Became Of Sin, (New York: Hawthorn Books, Inc., 1973), p. 228.
74. Sproul, In Search of Dignity, pp. 56, 57.
75. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 80.
76. Schuller, Daily Power Thoughts, p. January 24.
77. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 52.
78. Ibid., p. 69.
79. Ibid., p. 140.
80. Donahue Transcript #08120,12 August 1980, p. 10.
81. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 98.
82. Schuller, Your Future is Your Friend, loc. cit.
83. Nason and Nason, Robert Schuller: The Inside Story, p. 147.
84. Ibid., p. 187.
85. Schuller, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 151.
86. Ibid., p. 68.
Mr. Gudel is a contributing editor to the Christian Research Journal
This article was first read by Mr. Gudel by invitation of the Evangelical Theological Society at their West Coast Conference in April of 1982.
A PROFILE
ROBERT SCHULLER
by Joseph P. Gudel
Born in 1926 to an Iowan family of Dutch descent, Robert Schuller was reared in the Reformed Church in America. He decided to become a minister at the age of five, and after graduating from high school he received the necessary training at Hope College and Western Theological Seminary. The newly ordained Rev. Schuller entered the pastorate in 1951 at Hope Church in Chicago, which over the next four years grew from 38 to 400 members. In 1955 his denomination sent him to Orange County, California to establish a new church there. After trying unsuccessfully to rent numerous facilities, the 28-year-old Schuller finally rented the Orange County Drive-In Theater for Sunday mornings. A congregation in cars slowly grew, until by the second year they could afford to build a small chapel. Rev. Schuller (he did not receive his honorary doctorate until many years later) also continued to preach at the drive-in theater, because many people preferred to worship in their cars. During these first two years, Rev. Schuller went from door to door inviting people to come to his church, and asking them what type of church they would like to attend. According to his intimate friend Michael Nason,
To his surprise he found that most people didn’t even know the difference between the Old and New Testaments and couldn’t care less …. That’s when he realized that giving Bible studies on Sunday morning during a worship service would turn off most of the unchurched people entirely… Then he asked the people what sort of a church they would want to attend. They wanted light, beauty, tranquility, beautiful music, friendly people, programs that suited their needs, sermons that weren’t boring — better yet, sermons that weren’t even sermons! They wanted a place where they could feel comfortable..:. He decided at that point that he would never again use his pulpit as a teaching platform. (Michael Nason and Donna Nason, Robert Schuller: The Inside Story (Waco: Word Books, 1983, p. 21)
It was at this time that he began to see his church as a mission, a place where non-Christians would feel comfortable enough to come in and then later accept Jesus. How would he do this? By preaching only positive things! Dr. Schuller credits close friend and fellow Reformed Church in America minister Dr. Norman Vincent Peale “with fine tuning his own positive faith and laying the foundation for his own Possibility Thinking that was to come.” (Ibid., p. 61) In September of 1959 groundbreaking ceremonies were held at the location of the present church property in Garden Grove, California. The next fall the congregation, with a membership of 700 people, moved into its new church budding. Rev. Schuller’s two churches were now combined into one. In July of 1966 construction began, on a 14-story “tower of hope” which was completed the following year. A 90-foot high cross that would light up at night was placed at the top of the 162-foot tower. In 1970 Dr. Schuller began what has become the most widely watched televised church service in the nation, Hour of Power. In 1975 construction began on a new sanctuary, and on September 14, 1980 the world famous Crystal Cathedral was officially opened for worship. All in all, Dr. Schuller’s many accomplishments are remarkable. From preaching to 50 cars from the roof of a drive-in snack bar, he has built up a congregation of over ten thousand members in a church that cost over 20 million dollars. Hour of Power is seen in over 175 cities with an audience of two to four million people. He receives between thirty and forty thousand letters a week and has a mailing list of over one million people. He has authored 19 books, several of them national best sellers. Since 1970 more than twenty thousand church leaders have attended Dr. Schuller’s “Institute for Successful Church Leadership.” Indeed, few people in the church today have had an impact comparable to that of Dr. Schuller.
Permission is granted for reproduction by the publisher of the Christian Research Journal (Spring 1985, pages 16-25).
Source http://issuesetcarchive.org/issues_site/resource/archives/gudel2.htm
Bill Johnson’s ‘Born Again’ Jesus, Part I
CrossWise Blog LINK HERE
[This article could not have been completed without the work of others who came before me, the assistance of those who pointed me to certain texts and documents, the expertise of those whom I consulted for advice and clarification on theological matters, and the help of the individuals who assisted me on readability before finalizing this document. To all of these I say, “Thank you!”]
On a recently uploaded YouTube video[1] there are two clips put together exposing some faulty teaching of “Apostle” Bill Johnson of Bethel Church in Redding, CA.[2] In the second part, which begins at 3:40, Johnson states that Jesus was ‘born again.’ Here[3] is the uncut sermon from December 20, 2009 with the ‘born again’ Jesus portion beginning at 33:48. Following is the transcription:
“…Did you know that Jesus was born again? I asked… the first service and they said, “No.” But I will show it. It’s in the Bible. He had to be. He became sin.
In Hebrews 1 it says this, “For to which of the angels did he ever say, ‘You are my son. Today I have begotten you’?” And Acts 13 explains that: “God has fulfilled this for us, their children, in that he has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: ‘You are my Son, Today I have begotten You.’ And that He raised Him from the dead, no more to return to corruption.” He was born through Mary the first time and through the Resurrection the second time. He was ‘born again.’” [4]
Did Jesus become sin? If so, when? Was it at His incarnation? Was it on the cross? Was it some time in between?
As we examine Scripture we find, of course, that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life.[5] However, Scripture does say He ‘became sin’ as substitution for ours:
21God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God. [II Corinthians 5:21 NIV]
Please note that Jesus Christ did not ‘become sin’ in that He did not become a sinful being with corruptible flesh but, rather, our sins were imputed to Him by the Father to atone for the sins of all who believe on Him. The following explains this:
“God used the principle of imputation to benefit mankind when He imputed the sin of believers to the account of Jesus Christ, who paid the penalty for that sin – death – on the cross. Imputing our sin to Jesus, God treated Him as if He were a sinner, though He was not, and had Him die for the sins of the entire world (1 John 2:2). It is important to understand that sin was imputed to Him, but He did not inherit it from Adam. He bore the penalty for sin, but He never became a sinner…” [6]
We’ve established the correct interpretation regarding how Jesus Christ ‘became sin;’ but, what is Johnson’s belief? Apparently, he does not ascribe to the orthodox view because, if so, he would not state that Jesus had to be born again. Regarding this apparent view of Johnson: who would be worthy to atone for Jesus’ supposed sin in order for Him to be born again?
Going back to the second paragraph of the transcript, Johnson quotes the question from Hebrews 1:5a, then attempts to answer this question over in Acts 13. The trouble with this is that these are two completely different contexts. Why did he do that? It just leads to potential confusion.
Logic would lead us to think that Johnson was making a thesis statement in the first paragraph while explaining it in the next. So, to paraphrase Johnson: Jesus ‘became sin’ and thus had to be ‘born again’ which can be proven using Scripture.
Therefore, if we take Johnson’s words in the second paragraph as a strict chronology in the context he provides by isolating the verses in Hebrews and Acts, we should find the answer to his thesis statement. In addition, we may be able to determine his underlying theology. First, he quotes the first part of Hebrews 1:5:
For to which of the angels did God ever say,
“You are my Son; today I have begotten You?”
Next he states:
And Acts 13 explains that…
Explains what? Explains ‘to which of the angels did God ever say…’? No, that’s not what Johnson answers (it was a rhetorical question in the context of Hebrews and, hence, did not require an answer) as he has shifted to a completely different context over in Acts as pointed out above. So, which question IS Johnson attempting to answer?
…God has fulfilled this [“You are my Son; today I have begotten You” from above] for us, their children, in that he has raised up Jesus [at the Resurrection]. As it is also written in the second Psalm:
‘You are my Son, Today I have begotten You.’ [Jesus is the Father’s begotten Son, today at the Resurrection.] [Bracketed comments mine for explanation.]
If we take his words at face value here he seems to be inferring that Jesus became God’s Son at the resurrection. Johnson appears to solidify this thought by continuing with the following:
…And that he ‘raised him from the dead, no more to return to corruption.’
Johnson now states that Jesus was ‘born again’ “through the Resurrection:”
He was born through Mary the first time and through the Resurrection the second time. He was ‘born again.’
So, can we conclude that Johnson believes Jesus was ‘born again’ through the Resurrection, and subsequently, or simultaneously, became God’s Son only then? The view of Jesus being God’s Son at or through the Resurrection is only unorthodox if the belief is that Jesus was not the Son of God before this event. We’ll return to this at a later point.
Now that we understand when and how Jesus was ‘born again’ according to Johnson, it may seem plausible to assume he is also explaining with the words in the second paragraph of the transcript when and how Jesus ‘became sin.’ Is it possible then, that he is saying it is through Mary that Jesus ‘became sin?’ This would make sense if he equated “corruption” with “sin” and that Jesus’ birth through Mary made Him ‘corruptible flesh,’ i.e., human.[7] We’ll attempt to answer this later.
In his book When Heaven Invades Earth from 2003, Johnson further defines his theology:
“Jesus lived His earthly life with human limitations. He laid his [sic] divinity aside as He sought to fulfill the assignment given to Him by the Father: to live life as a man without sin, and then die in the place of mankind for sin. This would be essential in His plan to redeem mankind. The sacrifice that could atone for sin had to be a lamb, (powerless), and had to be spotless, (without sin).” [8] [all as per original]
This is bad Christology[9] (the view of Christ’s nature, person and deeds) which we’ll explain more a bit later. When did Jesus lay aside His deity? And, when, if ever, did He pick it back up? Did Jesus have to strive to be sinless? This is just faulty theology. [This issue of Johnson’s faulty Christology is also spoken of here. ] Is it that Johnson just does not understand orthodox Christian doctrine? This seems doubtful as he is a fifth generation[10] pastor by his own admission.
This also contradicts Johnson’s words in the transcript. How could Jesus have been spotless and without sin yet ‘became sin’ thus making it a requirement that He be born again? How can that be reconciled?
Perhaps the words from Johnson’s books can be harmonized with the words in the video/audio in order to understand his theology.
Returning to Johnson’s When Heaven Invades Earth we find Jesus as a boy at the Temple[11]:
“He was simply a 12-year-old boy with priorities that were different from everyone else.” [12]
With this he may be inferring that Jesus was not yet divine; but, this is inconclusive.
The “Anointing”
However, with his words below, Johnson claims outright that Jesus did not become The Christ until His baptism[13] which, by extension, means He was not divine at the Incarnation:
“Christ is not Jesus’ last name. The word Christ means ‘Anointed One’ or ‘Messiah.’ It is a title that points to an experience… …He had to receive the anointing in an experience to accomplish what the Father desired.” [emphasis mine]
“The anointing is what linked Jesus, the man, to the divine enabling Him…”. [14]
Scripture makes it clear that Jesus was divine at His Incarnation[15] by identifying him as “Immanuel” (God with us)[16] and the “Anointed One” – The Christ[17] – at the virgin birth, contrary to Johnson. Given his view that Jesus was not The Christ at His birth, then, by extension, does this mean he believes Jesus was born into the same fallen, Adamic sin nature as the rest of us?
This points, once again, to faulty Christology known as the Kenosis heresy.[18] Adding Johnson’s words from a few paragraphs earlier: “The sacrifice that could atone for sin had to be a lamb, (powerless)…” drives it home. Louis Berkhof in The History of Christian Doctrine quoting Everard Digges La Touche: “In the most absolute and consistent form it [the Kenosis doctrine] teaches what La Touche calls ‘incarnation by divine suicide.’”[19]
Adding to this, Johnson, in his book The Supernatural Power of a Transformed Mind: Access to a Life of Miracles states:
“…Jesus had no ability to heal the sick. He couldn’t cast out devils, and He had no ability to raise the dead. He said of Himself in John 5:19, ‘the Son can do nothing of Himself.’ He had set aside His divinity… …Jesus so emptied Himself that He was incapable of doing what was required of Him by the Father – without the Father’s help…”[20]
Johnson lifts this Scripture out of its proper context. So, was Jesus Christ really “powerless” with the ability to do “nothing of Himself?” He makes clear His words:
17”The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life – only to take it up again. 18No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.” [John 10:17-18]
Johnson explains his belief that Jesus received the “title” of Christ at His baptism:
“The word anointing means to “smear.” The Holy Spirit is the oil of God that was smeared all over Jesus at His water baptism. The name Jesus Christ implies that Jesus is the One smeared with the Holy Spirit.” [21]
With the above, Johnson misconstrues the meaning of the word “anointing” in this context. First of all, in the Gospel accounts the Greek word from which we get the word “anoint” is not used at all in regard to Jesus’ baptism. The Holy Spirit ‘descended upon’ Jesus.[22]
In Acts 10:38, in which Jesus is described as having been ‘anointed’ with the ‘Holy Spirit’ (also see Acts 4:27, Luke 4:18 and Hebrews 1:9), the Greek word used is chrio which is defined:
To anoint (physically with oil; spiritually, with the Holy Spirit), to assign a person to a special task, implying a giving of power by God to accomplish the task. [23]
Johnson is over-literalizing a metaphor. The spiritual application should be used rather than the physical. Referring to the Holy Spirit as a ‘smearing’ smacks of sacrilege. This error begun in the first two sentences has compounded itself in the third with its implications. He’s equating ‘Christ,’ The “Anointed One,” with the Holy Spirit “anointing.”
Here’s the Strong’s definition of “Christ” from the Greek Christos:
“Christ, Anointed One, Messiah, the Greek translation of the Hebrew 4899 (cf. Greek 3323). The Messiah is the Son of David, an anointed leader expected to bring in an age of peace and liberty from all oppression. In the NT, the Messiah is Jesus, who came first to bring liberty from sin and peace with God and who will come again to bring all things under His control.[24]
The orthodox view of the significance of Jesus’ baptism is stated here:
Jesus’ baptism…symbolized the sinners’ baptism into righteousness of Christ, dying with Him and rising free from sin and able to walk in the newness of life. His perfect righteousness would fulfill all the requirements of the Law for sinners who could never hope to do so on their own…
Perhaps most importantly, the occasion of the public baptism recorded for all generations to come the perfect embodiment of the triune God revealed in glory from heaven. The testimony directly from heaven of the Father’s pleasure with the Son and the descending Holy Spirit upon Jesus [Matthew 3:16-17] is a beautiful picture of the Trinitarian nature of God. It also depicts the work of the Father, Son and Spirit in the salvation of those Jesus came to save…[25]
Note that Jesus “publicly announced Himself” as the Son of God; however, He already was the Son of God at His incarnation (and before this, of course). Jesus Christ being ‘fully God and fully man’ at the virgin birth did not need the Holy Spirit. He was already the “Anointed One.”
This same “anointing” is available to others according to Johnson.[26] With his belief, then, by implication, when individuals receive the Holy Spirit – thus receiving the same ‘Christ’ “anointing” as Jesus – they will, in essence, be just like Jesus. Taken to its logical conclusion, this leads to the view that once an individual receives this ‘Christ anointing’ he/she will be Joe/Jane Christ. Quoting Johnson:
Through the shedding of His blood, it would be possible for everyone who believed on His name to do as He did and become as He was. [27]
This seems to state outright that we can become just like Jesus Christ. While we are to strive to be ‘like Christ’ by the leading of the Holy Spirit, we are never going to be equal to Christ. Jesus Christ is the one and only Son by nature.[28] We, however, are adopted as sons (and daughters) by grace.[29] There is only one Christ and He is Jesus Christ!
According to Johnson, after receiving the “anointing,” we are to pass ‘it’ to others. Not necessarily others who are or wish to become Christians exclusively, but to anyone:
“For the most part, the anointing has been hoarded by the Church for the Church. …thinking it is for our enjoyment only. …This wonderful presence of God is to be taken to the world.” [30]
“…When we are smeared with God, it rubs off on all we come into contact with – and it’s that anointing that breaks the yokes of darkness.” [31]
“…The anointing is substance. It is the actual presence of the Holy Spirit, and He can be released into our surroundings” [32] [all emphasis mine]
Johnson is claiming the “anointing” is a transferable, tangible substance; however, the “anointing” is also described as the “smearing” on of the Holy Spirit at baptism. Are these one and the same? Presumably not since Johnson refers to the “anointing” above as an impersonal ‘it.’ The Holy Spirit, as the third person of the Trinity and part of the Godhead, is most certainly not an ‘it!’
This seems as though Johnson is implying the Holy Spirit may be manipulated almost at will. If that’s the case, could we just ‘pass Him on,’ so to speak, to unbelievers – those in “the world” – in order to bring salvation?
The Apostle John makes it clear there is a counterfeit anointing. Is it possible Johnson is passing a counterfeit?
20But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth. I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth…
26I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. 27As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit – just as it has taught you, remain in him. [1 John 2:20, 26-27 NIV; emphasis mine. Underlined portion is rendered in other translations as “is true, and is not a lie”]
Johnson also speaks quite a bit about the antichrist spirit:
“The nature of the antichrist spirit is found in its name: anti, “against”; Christ, “Anointed One.’” [33]
“…The spirits of hell are at war against the anointing, for without the anointing mankind is no threat to their dominion.” [34]
“The antichrist spirit has a goal for the Church – embrace Jesus apart from the anointing.”[35]
The first sentence is nearly correct; however, it’s not a complete definition (see below). However, in the second and third passages, once again we find Johnson confusing “anointing” with “Anointed One.” Johnson’s view here then may be better stated as ‘anti-anointing,’ ‘anti-Holy Spirit,’ or, perhaps, anti-hagiopneuma [or anti-pneumahagios].[36]
Johnson defines further his version of the antichrist spirit calling it a ‘religious spirit:’
“The spirit of antichrist is at work today, attempting to influence believers to reject everything that has to do with the Holy Spirit’s anointing. …That spirit has worked to reduce the gospel to a mere intellectual message, rather than a supernatural God encounter. …But, never does this spirit expect the anointing of God’s power to be available in the here and now…”
“It is the antichrist spirit that has given rise to religious spirits. A religious spirit is a demonic presence that works to get us to substitute being led by our intellect instead of the Spirit of God.” [37]
Since Johnson’s definition of antichrist would be more accurately termed ‘anti-anointing,’ or ‘anti-Holy Spirit,’ then this “demonic presence,” – the term he uses to describe those with ‘religious spirits’ (those who hold to doctrine over personal experience) – are actually those who are against Johnson’s “anointing” rather than against Christ.
The prefix ‘anti’ from which the term ‘antichrist’ is derived is defined as:
“in exchange for (often as a sign of benefaction), in place of (often as a sign of contrast), instead of (often as a sign of an exchange of a relationship), one after another (often as a sign of purpose or result). Note that this preposition used in absolute does not mean to be ‘against’ or ‘in opposition to’ something.” [38]
Therefore ‘antichrist’ is not just ‘against Christ’ it can be ‘instead of Christ,’ ‘in place of Christ,’ et cetera.
Johnson’s Christology Defined
If we take Bill Johnson’s words in total so far, we have Jesus devoid of divinity at birth, but receiving His divinity at baptism by the “anointing” of the Holy Spirit and thereby becoming the “Anointed One” and consequently obtaining the ‘title’ of Christ. Immediately following this “anointing,” The Father declared, “This is My much loved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”[39] In laying His divinity aside he was “powerless,” completely dependant upon the “anointing” in seeking to live a sinless life. He was successful in living out a sinless life; however, because He had ‘laid His divinity aside,’ he died as the man Jesus – a “powerless” lamb – on the Cross. Further, since He ‘became sin’ He had to be ‘born again.’ He was ‘born again’ through the Resurrection and was consequently reaffirmed as God’s Son. Presumably, He reacquired His divinity which He previously laid aside.
The remaining question to attempt to answer: When was it that Jesus ‘became sin’ according to Johnson? Logically, it was either at birth or at the Cross. Let’s explore these two options.
First, if He ‘became sin’ at the Cross as per the orthodox meaning as described near the beginning of this article – i.e., our sin was imputed to Him by the Father– then it would not have been necessary for Him to be ‘born again.’ So, it is fair to say he either does not hold to this doctrine or he does not fully understand it.
Second, If Johnson’s view is that Jesus ‘became sin’ on the Cross like that of Word of Faith, then, it is considered heretical.[40] We can’t know for sure since, of course, Johnson is not clear on how he supports this particular view.
The next possibility then is that Johnson believes Jesus ‘became sin’ at His incarnation. Since Jesus apparently did not have a divine nature until His baptism, according to Johnson, then it is logical to assume that He had only a human nature and, by extension, He inherited an Adamic, sin nature. Going back to the second paragraph of the transcription: if we consider, as noted above, the possibility that Johnson was actually explaining his viewpoint on when and why Jesus ‘became sin,’ it is plausible that his interpretation of “corruption” in Acts 13 is “sin,” and thereby “corruption” could mean “corruptible flesh.”
It seems the most plausible conclusion is that Johnson believes Jesus ‘became sin’ at the Incarnation since Jesus was not divine until baptism; however, this is not made certain in the texts.
It appears Johnson has adopted a Christological view close to that of Cerinthianism, derived from its main spokesman Cerinthus. A form of 1st century Gnosticism, this is one of the heresies the Apostle John was specifically refuting in his first epistle.[41] He did this by proclaiming that Jesus Christ came in the flesh, was the Son of God, and had preexisted as part of the Triune God [vv 1:1-4]. Further, he identifies that which is antichrist [vv 2:22-23; 4:2-3].
1Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus [Christ] is not from God. This is the spirit of antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. [I John 4:1-3 NIV. Emphasis mine.] [42]
The study note of 4:2 referencing ‘Every spirit that acknowledges that’ “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” ‘is from God’ states:
…Thus John excludes the Gnostics, especially the Cerinthians, who taught that the divine Christ came upon the human Jesus at His baptism and then left him at the cross, so that it was the man Jesus who died.” [43]
The Apostle John goes further in showing that Jesus was also divine at the Cross (blood):
6This is the one who came by water and blood – Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7For there are three that testify:[the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit and these three are one] 8[And there are three that testify on earth:] the Spirit, the water and the Blood; and the three are in agreement. 9We accept man’s testimony but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about His Son. 10Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. 11And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. [I John 5:6-11 NIV] [44]
The study note referencing verse 5:6 explains the importance of Jesus being divine at the Crucifixion:
“…He [John] now asserts that it was this God-man Jesus Christ who came into our world, was baptized and died. Jesus was the Son of God not only at His baptism but also at His death (v. 6b). This truth is extremely important, because, if Jesus died only as a man, his sacrificial atonement (2:2; 4:10) would not have been sufficient to take away the guilt of man’s sin…” [45] [emphasis mine]
Sad to say, but, Bill Johnson’s ‘Jesus’ is not the one of orthodox Biblical Christianity. In addition, his ‘Christ’ is inconsistent with Scripture; and, this ‘Christ’ does not offer true salvation.
The Good News!
However, there is good news! Salvation is available through the one True Savior: the Anointed One, The Messiah, the one and only Son of God – Jesus Christ.
Orthodox Christianity asserts that Jesus Christ is the one and only Son of God, [John 3:16] incarnated through the Virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit coming upon and overshadowing her [Luke 1:26-35; Matthew 1:18], fully God and fully man [John 5:18; Philippians 2:6-7] – the unique God-man – at all times during His earthly ministry. He was preexistent as part of the Triune Godhead (the Trinity) from ‘the beginning’ [Genesis 1:1; John 1:1] and He is ‘the alpha and the omega’ [Revelation 1:8, 21:6, 22:13], the beginning and the end.
Salvation into eternal life is only through Jesus Christ [John 14:6] as a result of His death, burial, and resurrection on the third day [Philippians 2:8; Matthew 28:1-7; Luke 24:1-10,46] which atoned for our sins [John 3:16; Romans 5:8, 10:9]. Christ has now ascended to be at the right hand of the Father [Acts 2:33] serving as our mediator [Galatians 3:19-20; 1 Timothy 2:3-6]. Salvation is a free gift of unmerited grace through faith in Jesus Christ [Ephesians 2:8-9]. Jesus’ death also fulfilled the Law of Moses [Matthew 5:17; Romans 8:1-2]; consequently, Christians are free from this bondage [Galatians 3:10-25].
If you believe the above and acknowledge the fact that you are a sinner in need of a Savior [Romans 3:23, 5:12, 6:23], repent of your sins [Luke 13:5; Matthew 3:2], and accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, you will gain eternal life [Romans 10:9,13]. At the point of salvation the Holy Spirit indwells each and every believer [Romans 5:1-2,5] identifying each one as a Christian who has become a new creature [2 Corinthians 5:17]. Christians are a Royal Priesthood [1 Peter 2:9] with the confidence to enter the Most Holy Place [Mark 15:37-38] to petition the Father by prayer [Hebrews 10:19-22] in the Name – i.e., in the character – of Jesus Christ, His Son as revealed through His Word.
The Holy Spirit empowers all believers [Romans 8:9-11] to live out the Christian life; and, His indwelling is a seal guaranteeing eternal life [2 Corinthians 1:21-22; Ephesians 1:13-14] if we stand firm to the end [Matthew 24:13]. The Holy Spirit brings conviction of sin and guides into all Truth [John 16:8-11,13]. He will testify and bring glory to Jesus Christ [John 15:26, 16:14]. The Holy Spirit gives believers spiritual gifts [1 Corinthians 12:7-11; Romans 12:4-8; I Peter 4:9-11] just as He determines [1 Corinthians 12:11] and, He intercedes on our behalf [Romans 8:26-27]. AMEN!
[This article is not copyrighted and may be reproduced with the stipulation that all endnotes be included as these provide additional explanation critical to the document.]
Endnotes:
[1] “raideragent” Bill Johnson False Teacher. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzAwFYKe3h0> 3:40 to 4:55
[2] Bethel Church, Redding, CA home page <http://www.ibethel.org/site/>
[3] “ewenhuffman” Jesus is our Model- Sermon of the week 20 Dec 09. <http://ewenhuffman.podbean.com/2009/12/23/jesus-is-our-model-sermon-of-the-week-20-dec-09/> 33:48 to 34:57
[4] Here Johnson quotes Hebrews 1:5a and Acts 13:33-34b from the NKJV
[5] Hebrews 4:15; I Peter 2:22/Isaiah 53:9; etc.
[6] Got Questions? What is the Definition of Sin?. <http://www.gotquestions.org/definition-sin.html> par 4
[7] When taking the larger context into account by adding vv 36 and 37 it is clear the best definition for “corruption” is ‘the decay of the body after death.’ See Studylight.org diaphthora <http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=1312>
[8] Johnson, Bill “The Anointing and the Antichrist Spirit.” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 79
[9] Got Questions? What Is Christology <http://www.gotquestions.org/Christology.html> The claim that Jesus Christ laid His divinity aside is known as the Kenosis heresy – the misunderstanding of the words “emptied himself” of Philippians 2:7. Jesus was never less than fully divine; however, some of his attributes were veiled. See http://www.theopedia.com/Kenosis. In the Gospel of John (17:5), Jesus Himself states, “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.” This shows it was His full glory rather than His divinity that was not present during His earthly ministry.
[10] Johnson, Bill “Introduction.” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 23
[11] Luke 2:41-52
[12] Johnson, Bill “The Works of the Father.” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 98
[13] Johnson, Bill “The Anointing and the Antichrist Spirit.” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 79
[14] ibid.
[15] Luke 2:11; I John 1:1-3; Matthew 1:18-23; Isaiah 7:14; Isaiah 9:6
[16] Strong, James, Dr. The Strongest Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. fully revised by John R. Kohlenberg III and James A. Swanson; 2001, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI; Strong’s # 1694; p 1495 “Immanuel,” ‘God with us.’
[17] Strong, Op.cit. Christos Strong’s # 5547; p 1542 “Christ, Anointed One, Messiah, the Greek translation of the Hebrew 4899 (cf. Greek 3323). The Messiah is the Son of David, an anointed leader expected to bring in an age of peace and liberty from all oppression. In the NT, the Messiah is Jesus, who came first to bring liberty from sin and peace with God and who will come again to bring all things under His control.”
[18] Theopedia Kenosis <http://www.theopedia.com/Kenosis>
[19] Berkhof, Louis The History of Christian Doctrine. 1975, Baker, Ann Arbor MI; p 121
[20] Johnson, Bill “Change Your Mind.” The Supernatural Power of a Transformed Mind: Access to a Life of Miracles. 2005; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 50
[21] Johnson, Bill “The Anointing and the Antichrist Spirit.” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 79
[22] Matthew 3:16, Mark 1:10, Luke 3:22
[23] Strong, Loc.cit. Chrio Strong’s # 5548; p 1542
[24] ibid. Christos Strong’s # 5547; p 1542
[25] Got Questions? Why was Jesus baptized? Why was Jesus’ baptism important?.
updated 11/26/11
<http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-baptized.html>
[26] Johnson, Op.cit. pp 79-80, 134-135
[27] Johnson, Bill “Our Debt to the World: An Encounter with God.” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 138
[28] John 3:16-18
[29] Romans 8:15, 8:23, 9:4; Ephesians 1:5 We are adopted as sons by Grace; whereas, Jesus is God’s Son by nature.
[30] Johnson, Op.cit. p 134
[31] ibid. Johnson p 135
[32] Johnson, Bill “The Kingdom and the Spirit” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 75
[33] Johnson, Bill “The Anointing and the Antichrist Spirit.” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 79
[34] ibid. p 80
[35] ibid. p 84
[36] Not an actual word, but made from the Greek, hagios which is ‘Holy,’ and pneuma which is ‘Spirit,’ for illustrative purposes. It is understood that these two terms are never used as a compound word.
[37] Johnson, Op.cit. p 81
[38] Strong, Op.cit. anti, Strong’s # 473; p 1480
[39] Johnson, Bill “The Works of the Father” When Heaven Invades Earth. 2003; Destiny Image, Shippensburg, PA; p 99 (Here Johnson quotes Matthew 3:17 from the NKJV)
[40] Gospel Outreach Ministries Online. “Atonement” What is the Word of Faith Movement?. <http://www.gospeloutreach.net/whatwordfaith.html>
[41] Barker, Kenneth; Burdick, Stek, et. al. “Introduction: I John; Gnosticism” NIV Study Bible. copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI; p 1905
[42] Strong, Op.cit. p 198 The word “Christ” put in brackets here is disappointingly omitted in the NIV; however, it is in the original Greek (Christos) and appears in the KJV and NKJV as well as other translations.
[43] Barker, Op.cit. p 1910
[44] ibid. p 1911 Bracketed portion is in “Late manuscripts of the Vulgate…” However, this text is “not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century.”
[45] ibid.

Years ago, I was standing in my dining room watching my cat walk down the hallway to the bedroom. When he entered through the doorway, he suddenly stopped, and the hair on his back came up and then he started slowly backing out of the room. Of course, I was alarmed. Standing there for a few minutes, it was decided I had to know what was going on in that room.
Slowly I approached the bedroom doorway and peeked around the frame. A man was entering through the bedroom window. I stood there shocked. Then the man noticed me just standing there. He was afraid, and put up his hand, saying, “sorry, sorry, I am leaving, I am leaving”. He backed out of the window and fled.
The image that stuck in my mind was the cat though, backing slowly out of room, sensing invasion. An intruder was entering through an unexpected entrance.
Have you ever invited an intruder into your life or mind?
There are many ways to gain entrance or break the veil of protection of our very minds. This is done easily by mind-altering drugs, eastern-style meditation, Reiki, trances induced by repetition of words or sounds, or anything that empties the mind of thought. Just by mentally opening yourself up by willing another spirit to enter is enough. This invasion of our mind is called a crossover into the paranormal spirit world.
A classic way to invite a spirit into your presence is by using a Ouija board. But the apparatus is not always necessary. By rite, and ceremony you can invite a visitation from the spirit world, who is by the way, very happy to oblige your divination.
The problem with invading this spirit world is that these spirits are experts at giving you false impressions of being from or of God. They can make you feel joy, elation, power, electricity, and often they make you feel divine. For this reason the Bible forbids any contact with this spirit world, because these spirits are deceiving spirits. They are experts at their craft, and someone who listens to them, will be deceived.
If you have ever scanned the prophetic word sites, you will find many predictions, advice, biblical interpretation, warnings, and so forth. Many are vague and rehashed over and over again.
Just in April 2009, I read that on April 1 disaster was coming. On April 9th, we were to expect something significant to happen because historically this was a dark day. These predictions proved false but I noted that the authors did not repent of their false warnings. In fact they just continued with further advice, as though nothing had been said, shrugging off the false predictions. What nonsense!
There has been a couple of instances of my having direct contact with diviners. Two sisters, moved away from the coast because they were warned by God to “MOVE NOW”, that there was a tsunami on the way. The other person also told me that there was a tsunami on the way and that moving inland would be wise at some point. But what I later learned is that the sisters were heavily involved in new age techniques, who would not give up their paranormal tendencies, and the other person was once married to a witch. Divination was involved in both cases.
How fascinating though. Two different sources warned of a tsunami, but both were comprised by new-age thought and techniques. A repeated message from the spirit world, enforced in my mind, that a deception was brewing. John Ankerberg’s New Age informative primer speaks of Uri Geller and of how multiple psychics can receive the same message. This eerie circumstance is something we also see in the prophetic world.
Those who know me, or have read my other articles know, that I too was once deceived. My mind had been pierced by anti-depressant drugs. Once I had a vivid “prophetic word” that a city was to be destroyed by a tornado in two weeks. It did not happen. I opened my Bible and this is what I discovered.
Deuteronomy 18:22 “If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.”
So according to this verse what I thought was from the Lord was NOT. The cause of my paranormal or occult messages were not revealed to me for awhile, but I knew something was wrong. I did not ask for these experiences, nevertheless, I repented, and they stopped. Why did this happen to me? I believe I went through this situation so that I could relate my experience to others and warn them. Also, I was being tested by God.
So how has divination entered the church? First let’s define divination. It is gaining spiritual knowledge that cannot be obtained through normal means, like reading or studying. Divination is a method one uses to gain secret information from the spirit world,which is not a true prophecy or an edification from scripture.
The means and methods are numerous. The easiest way one accesses the spirit world is through meditation by altering one’s consciousness. Eastern style would be like using Yoga with its repetitious words and breathing techniques. The church may introduce, stillness, or hypnotic music, to alter consciousness. Centering prayer is also advocated, but truly it is focusing inward and stilling the mind and it is deceptive in nature.
Christian Yoga? Hardly. All the positions in the Sun Salutation worship goddesses and push energy up the spine to the mind for enlightenment. Oh. Only for exercise you say? Doesn’t matter. Back to Deuteronomy again. This time 4:19
“And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon and the stars–all the heavenly array–do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshiping things the Lord your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven.”
This totally excludes being able to do the sun salutation.
Modern Day Prophets
I have heard people say, “I was seeking the Lord” before they received their visions. But they do not explain HOW they were seeking the Lord. Were they allowing themselves to fall into deep meditation? Were they silent till the Lord spoke? Did they use a method to contact God?
I seek the Lord through His Word, in the Bible. But I guess I am old-fashioned that way. The new methods tend to be wrong, deceptive, faulty, misleading, cause manifestations, cause depression, pull people away from the Bible, and create a lack in the prayer life.
I like this article “Prophecy Is For Today” by K. A. Jentoft
from:
http://cicministry.org under articles
http://cicministry.org/commentary/issue95b.htm
Here are some excerpts and quotes –
“Someone falsely speaking what is unknowable is in a unique position to damage God’s people.”
“God tests His people with false prophets to see if they obey the first commandment and love Him with all their heart and soul.”
“The first rule of discernment is simple; those who make predictions that do not come to pass are false prophets even if some of their predictions are accurate.”
“While God may raise up prophets to predict the future, there can be no more “new revelations” of God until the second coming because Jesus “in the flesh” appointed no new apostles after John and Jesus now abides in heaven sitting at the right hand of God the Father.”
“This does not mean that prophecy ceased nor even that prophets can no longer exist. It simply means that the revelation of God regarding Himself and how we are to experience Him has been completed.”
“The gospel is under attack when men claiming to be “modern apostles or prophets” attempt to alter the revelation of God and our approach to Him.”
“Many now claim to be modern prophets and predict future events or reveal things hidden from a normal person, but to the best of my knowledge, not even one of them meets the criteria specifically given to judge this type of prophet. Oddly, none of them even claims to be 100 percent accurate in all of their predictions.”
“People who seek guidance from prophets who fail God’s tests are sinning and rejecting God’s authority.”
I had a difficult time selecting the most important points in this article so please read it when you have the chance.
So we are to use God’s word as a final authority in our life. An unusual passage from Luke can be used to verify this. In Luke 16:19-31 we have a section called “The Rich Man and Lazarus.”
In this passage a rich man who ignored a beggar named Lazarus, sees him in the afterlife. The rich man is in hell and Lazarus is standing by Abraham. He calls to Abraham, “Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.”
His request is rejected, so then he begs Abraham to send Lazarus to his five brothers to be warned of this place of torment. Abraham replied, “They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.”
“ ‘No father Abraham,’ he said ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’ ”
“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”
The rich man had no confidence in the Word of God, he wanted a miracle to convince his brothers. But Abraham was unyielding. The Word was enough, but it was ignored.
We can also apply this same scenerio to Moses and the Israelites. The people saw the Red Sea parted, they were led day and night by pillars of smoke and fire, they were fed for 40 years with Manna, water flowed from a rock, yet….these miracles did not produce faith and obedience. The first generation all died in the desert except Moses, Caleb and Joshua. They disobeyed the Word given to them by Moses and suffered the judgments and plagues.
No matter what miracles we may see, visions we might consider, secret knowledge we may think we need, it matters not, if we do not obey God’s word. Over and over again the Israelites were instructed on how to worship in the tabernacle, what the law was, and how they were to obey God. But instead they worshiped other gods, they built gold idols, they listened to false prophets and leaders and they were destroyed.
Lately I have been greatly concerned about some of the prophetic sites and their dire predictions. While I know that the whole world will deteriorate and that the Bible predicts a one-man rule of the anti-christ, and that we are to watch for wars, famines, earthquakes many have taken to hoarding food, water, guns and ammo. Precautions are prudent. I have extra water and a full pantry, a small box with clothes, extra shoes, blankets, batteries, etc, just as I would for any emergency situation.
Oddly though, once when I was buying extra canned goods for a food drive, I was tempted to keep some for my own pantry. But I had a check in my spirit and this is what I was told, “GIVE IT ALL AWAY.” Do you see the contrast? I was to have faith that God would supply all my needs. I was not to hoard.
But there are sites selling survival packs in line with their soulish prophecies. The rebellious leaders prophecy from their own minds, then desire for their foul predictions to come true. When I read “THIS IS IT!!!!” about the flu pandemic, meaning this would instigate martial law, I became angry.
Ezekiel 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.”
Then, I decided to take a look at several mainstream sites. One prophetic ministry had the teachers’ name and picture plastered all over the main page. Not one mention of Jesus Christ. But there was a load of DVD’s, CD’s, and products to purchase for personal blessing. This is outright exploitation. Also, you could purchase the latest divinations if you signed on as a member. (You always need to purchase new divinations because the previous ones did not come to pass.) For the right price, you too, can be an “insider” and be privy to “special knowledge” other Christians do not know! Divined special knowledge not revealed in the Bible is occult and many other predictions are mere imaginations.
See “Epidemic of Fear” from:
http://www.thebereancall.org/node/7716
All this new revelation draws people away from God’s Word, which truly is sufficient for those who believe in the Bible. God would not make His Word hard to understand, or only available to an elite few.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
So are you going to allow intruders into your Christian walk? A thief can steal your faith in the Living Word of God if you pay heed to him. God gave us many guidelines to protect us from false prophets in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Read these verses and prayerfully ask God to help you understand them and use them in these deceptive times.

Recent Comments