The Watchman's Bagpipes

Entertainment in the Church

2012-01-26T12:34:00.000-06:00

I originally posted this a few months after starting the blog. I thought it was time to repost.

+++++++

So many churches nowadays are following methods promoted by “seeker sensitive,” “market driven,” “purpose driven,” and even the emergent churches, that we are encountering a lot of entertainment-oriented services which have often completely changed the gospel message. Although this entertainment-oriented ideology is pervasive in the church today, it really isn’t new. The following commentary is by A.W. Tozer:

For centuries the Church has stood solidly against every form of worldly entertainment, recognizing it for what it was - a device for wasting time, a refuge from the disturbing voice of conscience, a scheme to divert attention from moral accountability. For this she got herself abused roundly by the sons of the world. But of late she has become tired of the abuse and has given over the struggle. She appears to have decided that if she cannot conquer the great god Entertainment she may as well join forces with him and make what use she can of his powers. So today we have the astonishing spectacle of millions of dollars being poured into the unholy job of providing earthly entertainment for the so-called sons of heaven. Religious entertainment is in many places rapidly crowding out the serious things of God. Many churches these days have become little more than poor theatres where fifth-rate “producers” peddle their shoddy wares with the approval of evangelical leaders who can even quote a holy text in defense of their delinquency. And hardly a man dares raise his voice against it. … The great god Entertainment amuses his devotees mainly by telling them stories. The love of stories, which is characteristic of childhood, has taken fast hold of the minds of the retarded saints of our day, so much so that not a few persons manage to make a comfortable living by spinning yarns and serving them up in various disguises to church people. What is natural and beautiful in a child may be shocking when it persists into adulthood, and more so when it appears in the sanctuary and seeks to pass for true religion.

Did They Really Say That?

2012-01-25T10:51:00.004-06:00

?!?

The fall of Adam and Eve was no tragedy. It was a blessing in disguise, for without it non of us would have been born, since Adam and Eve, in their original state, were not able to have children, as the Book of Mormon explains.

Mark E. Petersen, Adam: Who Is He? p.4

So the Fall was not a tragedy? Scripture says it was a great tragedy, for by the sin of Adam sin came into the world and the world itself became corrupted. And if Adam and Eve were not able to have children before the Fall, why were they commanded to “be fruitful and multiplay” at their creation?

This is but another blatant example of how the teachings of Mormonism are not in line with the Bible.

Random Apologetics News

2012-01-24T13:10:00.001-06:00

The last time I posted a “random” collection a commenter asked if the post was meant as satire or if it was serious. I was at sort of a loss how anyone could see these posts as satire.

The purpose of my “random” posts is to highlight some of the many articles I have read over a particular period, for which I don’t have time to write my own articles about. I feel the issues are important, however, and that the body of Christ should be aware of the false teachings that are corrupting the Church. And there are also times when I find articles which are very thought-provoking in ways of edification. While there may be an occasional satirical article among them (such as the one showing Benny Hinn as a Dark Lord), the posts themselves are not intended to be humor. I got the idea from a fellow blogger who does a “Roundup,” but I got my idea for a title from Thomas Sowell (a brilliant commentator) who writes an occasional “Random Thoughts From the Passing Scene.”

That being said, it has been 10 days since my last “Random” post, and I have come across so many things which I think are important to be aware of, that this may be my longest “Random” collection. Let us proceed.

I have previously pointed out that John Hagee is a false teacher. Another example is that he allowed the MORMON Glenn Beck to preach at his church!! Mormons are NOT Christians!! To treat Beck as a Christian and let him teach in a Christian church is unconscionable!

I have had posts in the past about how Joel Osteen is a rank heretic. During the last election for President, I had to do an article on Osteen’s claim that the Mormon god was the same as the Christian God. Well, he’s done it again! Osteen just doesn’t have a clue!!! A CBS headline reads: “Osteen: Romney ‘believer in Christ, like me.’” As seen here, this makes apologetics ministries have to work harder for damage control to show the world - and other Christians - that Mormonism is NOT just another denomination.

While still on the subject of Mormonsim, Janis Hutchinson has a good article explaining the newer strategies of the LDS for gaining followers. Very deceitful, of course. Meanwhile, I came across an interesting video showing how the Mormon faith is all based on feelings. It’s a slick advertisement for the church.

Neil over at Eternity Matters has a good post explaining the further descent of the United Methodist Church into apostasy. I’ve exposed the UMC in the past, so this isn’t new to me. If you are in a UMC church, if you are not fighting this - why not?

Corporal punishment is one of those areas which should be a Romans 14 issue as to whether we should or should not use it. HOWEVER, it is certainly a biblical method of punishment. The problem is the abuse of such punishment by people such as Mike and Debi Pearl and the way they teach it. Christianity Today (or should I say Christianity Astray?) has decided to go on record as being against spanking due to twisted hermeneutics. If you don’t like spanking, don’t do it, but don’t say it is unbiblical!

Hippolytus has posted an excellent short article by Dorothy Sayers about the state of church.

There is an excellent site by those who have left Gothardism (IBLP/ATI) where they share their experiences while in that legalistic and cultic environment. Last week there was an article using the movie Tangled as an analogy. We loved that movie, and we also saw the analogy of a relationship in which our adult children are involved. I recommend this thought-provoking article.

Jerry Wragg over at The Cripplegate has an excellent 3-part series addressing the current fad of unsavory preaching and writing about all things sexual by certain “pastors.” Wragg’s series gives some good analysis of the problems with this ideology, as well as great responses to claims made about the importance of their unsavory teaching. Read parts one, two and three.

Jackie Alnor alerts us to a situation in Calvary Chapel, where pastor Don Stewart has continued his position in spite of a divorce (in which apparently he was the guilty party) and remarriage. This is the type of situation which brings shame to the church. Apparently, Calvary Chapel has no intention of removing Don from his position.

One thing I get tire of hearing from the liberals who claim the name of Christ, let alone the non-believers, is that “Jesus never said anything about homosexuality.” Stand to Reason blog gives a good response.

The aberrational man-made Code Orange Revival is the big talk on many apologetics sites. As with all the man-made revivals over the years, there is nothing of substance in any of them. One of the surprising things is that this so-called evangelical revival headlines the heretic modalist T.D. Jakes. James MacDonald, who used to be pretty solid as a teacher, is part of the COR and claims he learned “a ton” from T.D. - okaaaaayyyy. However, I think if anyone reads this story about T.D. Jake’s COR sermon, they’d be scratching their heads at just what it is they are supposed to learn! Erin has an excellent recap of the 12 days of COR, demonstrating how man-centered the event was. Goatherd Steve Furtick, who is behind COR, let a WOF woman, Christine Caine, preach a sermon in his “Elevation Church” last week.

Well, Phil Johnson speaks to the issue of these celebrity “pastors” in a 40-minute interview which would be well worth your time to view.

And, finally, if you want satire, Ken Silva has posted a photo to give you a chuckle. And he posted another that is scary - albeit true.

Two Dangers to the Church

2012-01-23T18:40:00.002-06:00

There are many dangers to the Church today, the main one of which is false teaching corrupting it from within and without. However, I think there are two other deadly dangers which severely damage the church and its message: legalism and syncretism.

Now there are four main understandings about legalism, some of which include false teachings:

1. Keeping the law as a means of salvation. (e.g. Rom. 3:28; Gal. 2:16)

2. Keeping the law’s letter without keeping its “spirit.” (e.g. Mk. 2:23-3:6)

3. Building a “fence” of unnecessary, extra-biblical laws around Biblical laws. (e.g. Matt. 15:3-9; 23:16-24).

4. Imposing obsolete, O.T. requirements on N.T. believers. (e.g. Rom. 14:1-23; Heb.8:13)

Now, it is easy to see how false teachings under these standards can be fairly easily seen. But what about what is sometimes called “judgmentalism”?

Chuck Swindoll had a good description in his book, Grace Awakening. He said, “Legalism is an attitude, a mentality based on pride. It is an obsessive conformity to an artificial standard for the purpose of exalting oneself… Legalism says, ‘I do this or I don’t do that, and therefore I am pleasing to God.’”

It is one thing for this attitude to be focussed on oneself, but it is another thing when directed at those in the church. I have known of “seekers” who have quit going to church for this reason; I know of many people who were new/immature believers who quit attending church for this reason. Both type have a bad taste left in their mouths.

Let me give some examples as to what I’m referring here:

A young man has tattoos or earrings and is condemned, or just snubbed.

A single mom is condemned for promiscuity.

People are condemned for how they are dressed.

People are condemned for unbiblical beliefs.

Women condemned for short hair, men condemned for long hair.

A person with yard gnomes is told they are idols and they shouldn’t have them.

I think you get the picture. Seekers may have a lot of unholy fashions, language, ideas, etc., which need to be dealt with in love and compassion as they are led to understanding their need of a Savior. New believers may have bodily reminders of a life before they were saved and need reassurance that the sins which led to those decisions are forgiven. New/immature believers need solid biblical instruction and discipleship to help them learn why some of the stuff they believe is incorrect. New/immature believers need counsel if their fashions are immodest. Other things are Romans 14 issues which need to be let alone rather than judging the person for their beliefs and practices.

Now let’s look at syncretism. This again can have many connotations, such as the Emergent movement’s bringing in contemplative prayer and other Catholic mysticism, or such as the new movement known as “Chrislam.” Others of this type try to meld with pagan belief systems such as various American Indian beliefs or even Hinduism. Movements which bring in this type of heresy as part of their syncretism are, again, easy to point out as the false teaching which they are.

The subtle syncretism is more serious because it weakens the message of the Gospel while not being as readily discernible, and can very well eventually lead the assembly into apostasy and even heresy. These types of ideas which are syncretized have more to do with the ideology of the world. Here are some examples:

1. The “social gospel” is one of the worst, and may not even be considered syncretism, rather it is really a separate system completely distorting the gospel message. However, often just aspects of this system are syncretized into an otherwise fundamental assembly, and while not distorting the Gospel, it weakens it.

2. Pop-psychology is an insidious movement easily syncretized with Christianity because we have all been brainwashed into accepting its precepts. So-called “Christian psychologists” such as James Dobson, Larry Crabb, et al are guilty of this type of syncretizing. Sometimes Bible teachers also bring in this type of teaching, as I have demonstrated in my articles on Beth Moore’s studies. Many of the programs for church youth groups are rife with pop-psychology, leading to the “dumbing down” of our youth. An excellent book on this subject is Spiritual Junk Food, by Cathy Mickels & Audrey McKeever.

3. Bringing in the world’s culture, including its entertainment methods is really nothing more than syncretizing Christianity with the culture around us. And the culture selected is often self-focused. When a worship service seems to be no different than a rock concert, then the culture has been syncretized into that service. “Seeker-sensitive” assemblies are guilty of this carnage.

Of these two dangers, it’s sometimes difficult to decide which is worse. Legalism can prevent people from coming to the Lord as well as chase immature believers into isolation so they can’t grow in their faith. Possibly syncretization is the worst because it waters down the Gospel message and dumbs down the members of the assembly, leaving solid meat in the dust.

Either way, I have known people spiritually harmed by both. Do you have observations of these two dangers and which you’d consider worse?

Error May Be Subtle

2012-01-18T11:18:00.000-06:00

Cleaning out my files this week I came across this drawing.

I have no idea when or where it came from. All I know is that I was somewhere listening to some teacher who had this drawing and I copied it because I thought it was a good visual aid.

The point is that false teachings are often very subtle because they cross back and forth over truth. All cults and false teachers have some truth in their teachings, which makes discernment of the utmost importance. Often it is the true parts of their teachings that draws people unwittingly into the false, not being able to discern where the line was crossed.

An example would be Mormonism when they speak of God, Jesus, salvation, atonement, etc. The words themselves can be true descriptions of Christian theology, but the Mormon definitions are not in accordance with Scripture and are false teachings, only picking up the truth of the words as they cross the line of truth.

Roman Catholicism has much more truth than the LDS, of course, because Rome is a true Christian faith which has added much aberration and heresy to burden the Catholic faithful. They actually have a truth line which makes the criss-crossing of it with their false teachings all the more difficult to discern.

It is important for every Christian to be continually in the Word of God so that the line we follow is the true path, and so that we will be able to recognize the false teachings whenever they cross our line.

Discernment Thoughts from Martin Luther

2012-01-17T11:58:00.003-06:00

This is our foundation: where the Holy Scripture establishes something that must be believed, there we must not deviate from the words, as they sound, neither from the order as it stands, unless an express article of faith (based on clear Scripture passages) compels us to interpret the words otherwise, or arrange them differently. Else what would become of the Bible?

Martin Luther (cited by Dick Fischer in The Origins Solution, p. 96)

In philosophy a small error in the beginning leads to a very large error at the end. So in theology a small error overturns the whole doctrine.

Martin Luther (cited by Jean S. Carton in Who Broke the Baby, p.45)

Investigate Religious Beliefs

2012-01-16T17:44:00.000-06:00

"The subject of eternity is of infinite moment to all; and each individual has sufficient capacity to embrace truth instead of error, provided the due exercises of the faculties are instituted. Then, when any subject is presented to us in the garb of religion, we ought carefully investigate it, and compare it with the standard which should be our rule of faith and practice.... If any doubts hang over the subject, it is reasonable that a scrupulous search, and a critical enquiry be instituted by us."

E.D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed, p. 37-38

Marketing God’s Word

2012-01-15T18:44:00.004-06:00

Just when you get to thinking that there is nothing else they can do to the Bible to provide more income for the publishers, out comes a new one.

There are Bibles out there in just about every design possible, and today I even saw a “clutch purse” version called - appropriately - the “Clutch.” Study Bibles, Charismatic Bibles, teen Bibles, children’s Bibles, etc, etc, etc.

Now we have “The Story.” The advertisement tells us, “The Story was created to turn everyday people into devoted Bible readers - pastors tell us it’s working!” Essentially a chronological Bible, it uses the NIV translation in a condensed version.

I looked at one at Barnes & Nobel today as I shopped for a particular book, and could see no benefit. The publishers are always looking for more ways to get rich off of God’s Word, and suckers oblige them by the minute.

I guess I want to know why we need another chronological version. Back in 1993 I purchased “The Gospels Interwoven,” which had been out since 1987, and it is a chronological version of the Gospels using the NIV. It was such an interesting way to read Scripture that in 1996 I picked up a copy of “The Narrated Bible in Chronological Order,” also using the NIV. It is copyright 1984 and I have still seen it in Christian book stores as late as last year! So if a person wants a chronological version, why not just get that one?

OH, that’s right; we must dumb down our translations to make them appealing as a book, which is why The Story is a condensed version - sort of like a “Reader’s Digest” condensed book. Of course it includes “a timeline, maps and charts, character sketches, discussion questions, and an epilogue.” Boy, am I glad it has an epilogue! But the text itself has been altered: “It’s almost entirely Scripture.”

And don’t think Zondervan stopped with just the book; marketing this sort of commodity takes imagination to garner the most gold from the world. Here are some products of “The Story” for your purchasing pleasure:

The Story Audio CD

The Story Curriculum DVD and Participant’s Guide (Adult small group curriculum).

The Story: Teen Edition “with features designed to resonate with teens,” including “fun flip animation on each page.”

Teen curriculum DVD (companion to the Teen Edition)

The Story for Kids, this time using the dumbed-down NIrV. This is so “kids can discover God’s great love story.”

“The Story for Kids: Later Elementary Curriculum with CD-ROM

“The Story Trading Cards: Elementary”

“The Story for Little Ones”

“The Story for Little Ones: Preschool curriculum with CD-ROM

“The Story Trading Cards: Preschool

Don’t forget that you can “Help your church grow and have a greater impact” if you purchase their “Church Campaign Kit” for a limited-time offer of $149.99 (normally $300). This kit includes:

The Story, NIV

The Heart of the Story, by Randy Frazee

The Story Curriculum DVD and Participant’s Guide

The Story for Teens and DVD Curriculum

The Story for Kids, Ages 9-12, and CD-ROM

The Story for Children, Ages 6-8, and CD-ROM

The Story for Little Ones, Ages 5 and under, and CD-ROM

Two packs of The Story Trading Cards: Elementary Age and Pre-school age.

Implementation Guide

Resource DVD

Online access to Resource Library

Did you notice the “Implementation Guide”? Looks like they want to implement The Story as the only version for use in your church! After all, you can’t just have people here and there using this version; we need curriculum for indoctrinating all ages into a dumbed-down version of the Bible.

Then we have also available:
Exploring the Story, by Adam T. Barr. This is “A Reference Companion”

The Heart of the Story, by Randy Frazee

The Story of Jesus, NIV

Finally, if you order $250 or more worth of The Story merchandise, they will send you free of charge Max Locado’s “God’s Story, Your Story,” billed as a “Six-session Church Campaign and Small Group Curriculum.” This set includes,

“God’s Story, Your Story” in hardcover

DVD with video teachings, sermon resources and promotional material

Participant’s Guide

Getting Started Guide

All this information is in a Zondervan catalog I received in the mail.

So why do we need this Bible version? Are our pastors and teachers that lacking in ability to teach from the Word of God without curriculums and programs? Isn’t the NIV readable enough as it is that it doesn’t need to be made into gimmicks to draw an audience? How in the world were we able to reach people, including the youth, in times past without all the new gimmicks? Cultures change, but people don’t, so what purpose does this version serve other than to bring more gold into Zondervan’s till?

Well, I guess I’d much rather see this one in public instead of “The Message.”

Random Apostasies and Heresies

2012-01-14T15:13:00.000-06:00

More information about the “Code Orange” so-called revival. Erin has an excellent article exposing James MacDonald’s downward drift into apostasy by who he associates with and the garbage he is promoting. I can no longer recommend him for anything.

Suze Blog has an interesting article about Roman Catholicism, and that it “no longer swears by the truth of the Bible.” With Rome, this isn’t necessarily something new!

Joel Osteen was interviewed by Oprah Winfrey and we could probably guess how that would turn out. And this is only part of the interview - I found other parts which weren’t any better. Osteen is a heretic and has no business being in the pulpit.

Herescope has done three more parts on their review of Have Heart, a book teaching communication with the dead. Some long articles, but worth the examination. See parts three, four and five.

Meanwhile, John Piper continues his slide into mysticism and New Age beliefs. Apprising Ministries has a good article on Piper’s association with Lectio Divina. Like Beth Moore, Piper is also hearing directly from God now.

Speaking of Beth Moore, Ken Silva has another excellent article exposing her visions from God for what they are. Poor Beth; she had no idea she would be labeled a mystic for claiming personal revelations from God. And yet she continues to associate with Word of Faith heretics!

Pastor - correction, Goatherd Ed Young is spending time in bed with his wife on the roof of their church - correction, goat barn so as to promote marital sex, as well as their

book, Sexperiment. Young has long been teaching about sex from the pulpit. This sort of thing will bring in people, but will it make them converts?

Another bizarre movement is about “purity,” and I’m talking about sex vs a life of purity. Now, I’ve seen some of this legalistic nonsense in person with a group we used to know, and I’ve read a lot about it on the internet. It is a bizarre movement where a girl is virtually wed to her father until she marries. The Reformed Traveler has a post with a 4-part video interview with women and girls in this movement. I found it to be a sad situation for the girls, let alone being bizarre for the fathers. I understand a lot of what they are after (having a daughter myself) but legalism and ceremonies such as noted in this article are just beyond the pale.

Will the “seeker-sensitive” movement ever die out?!? A Methodist Church in Minnesota now has a service for “unsure” Christians. Their services will now be “less preachy” so as to make them more inviting for the unbeliever. I have one old post I believe address this apostasy, titled “How to Destroy the Church.” I also have an article telling us what “Church” is really for, and it isn’t for making a place for sinners to be given succor! If your church is making its services appealing to man just to keep attendance up, you need to go elsewhere!

Just to show how bizarre Churches are getting so as to leave every semblance of New Testament teachings behind, now we have a church in Flint, MI which has a tattoo parlor! The church itself, “The Bridge,” founded in 2008 by Steve Bentley, said he founded the assembly for “people who have never felt comfortable at a traditional house of worship.” Yeah, I can see how talking about sin and the need for a savior could be uncomfortable! But aside the tattoo parlor, they’ve already had Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous office space (groups which violate Scripture with their psychobabble teachings of victimhood), “as well as wrestling and auto repair.” Rest easy though, tattoos “that glorify drugs, gangs or the Devil” aren’t allowed to be done there.

Our last look at apostasy in the church today is this bizarre “praise” song. Oh, and it’s Ed Young’s church - you know, the guy in bed with his wife on top of the building? Just another reason the leave that assembly.

Did They Really Say That?

2012-01-12T12:42:00.000-06:00

?!?

I was shown that ... the door was opened in the most holy place in the heavenly sanctuary, where the ark is, in which contained the ten commandments. This door was not opened until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the holy place of the sanctuary in 1844. Then Jesus rose up and shut the door of the holy place, and opened the door into the most holy, and passed within the second veil, where he now stands by the ark.

E.G. White, Early Writings, p.42, written 1849.

According to White, Jesus did not enter the most holy place of the heavenly temple until October 22, 1844. What does the Bible say?

Now the main point of what is being said is this: we have this kind of high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister of the sanctuary and the true tabernacle, which the Lord set up, and not man. Hebrews 8:1,2 (HCSB)

He entered the holy of holies once for all, not by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. Hebrews 9:12 (HCSB).

Since Scripture says Christ entered the holy of holies when he ascended to heaven, either E.G. White is wrong or the writer of Hebrews is wrong. I’ll take my stand with the Bible, which again proves Ellen G. White to be a false prophet, and in this case even a liar who blatantly contradicted Scriptural truth.

Care of Converts

2012-01-11T18:04:00.000-06:00

There are certain telltale signs of the neglect of new converts in evangelical churches. One of the most obvious is the large number of people that confess Christ but will not give allegiance to any church. They float on the sea of religious activity with no sense of direction. They hasten from sacred concert to sacred concert, from Bible conference to Bible conference, from seminar to seminar, from movement to movement, preoccupied with hero image leadership. These unattached Christians are easy prey to certain types of spectacular leadership. They are tasters of sermons more often than they are doers of the Word. If everything does not contribute to their self-centered view of the church, they move on to hear the latest religious star in the vain hope that they have at last found the answer. Well-discipled believers would not fall into that kind of hopeless syndrome.

Another sign that indicates a need for discipleship is the many believers that do not grow up: they remain babes in Christ and require constant care. They are problem-centered, wanting a church ministry that provides spiritual props. The pastoral staff counsels many Christians who, in the light of Scripture, should now be equipped to counsel others [but are unable to do so].

Keith M. Bailey, Care of Converts: Leadership Training Manual for Discipleship, p.13 (1979)

Our Call to Judge False Teachings

2012-01-10T13:17:00.000-06:00

While cleaning up my files I came across an article from a May-June 2006 Critical Issues Commentary, by Bob DeWaay. The subject is the duty of the Christian to judge false teachings.

DeWaay dismantles the various arguments which claim we are not to judge, as well as the argument which says if we have a problem with false teachings, we should to privately to the teacher. Then he addresses the claim that “you will know them by their fruits” means “character qualities, popularity, or the ability to do supernatural signs.” DeWaay demonstrates that in Matthew 7 the discussion is about false prophets.

DeWaay then discusses the following points:

“Personality traits are not fruits.”

“The number of one’s followers is not fruit.”

“Signs and wonders are not fruits.”

After the discussion about these points, DeWaay says, “People who call Jesus ‘Lord,’ come in His name, and do works of power are false prophets if they refused to abide within God-given boundaries. This is an important concept. This is lawlessness. ... Understood in this way, false prophets are those who teach and practice lawlessness. They do not abide within the once-for-all determined boundaries of New Testament teaching.”

As he continues in the article, DeWaay has some very pointed comments:

“Today many despise the very term doctrine and accuse those of being wrongly motivated who think it is important to correct false doctrine and espouse true doctrine. .... The duties of pastors and elders are very clear in Acts 20 and the Pastoral Epistles. They are to teach true doctrine, correct false doctrine, and protect the flock from wolves. Sadly, those who do so today are often accused of being divisive or sinning because they have ‘judged’ when Jesus told us not to judge. This is a category error. We are not to judge motives or relative degrees of righteousness, but we must judge public teaching.”

Well said, Pastor Bob!

I recommend the full article at:

http://cicministry.org/commentary/issue94.htm

Sufficiency of Scripture

2012-01-10T10:11:00.000-06:00

Christians go looking for truth and guidance in all the wrong places. They dig through the garbage cans of psychology, mysticism, spiritual gimmicks, and supernatural quick fixes. “As a result,” pastor and teacher John MacArthur says, “they wallow in a watered-down, pseudo-Christianity that has been drained of its vitality, effectiveness and security” (Our Sufficiency in Christ, back cover). It’s not like “frozen concentrated orange juice - its contents need not be supplemented, augmented to or diluted.

Scripture is clear as to its all sufficiency. Second Timothy 3:16-17 declares, “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” Do you hear what the Holy Spirit is saying through Paul? Scripture is sufficient for the man of God to be complete, thoroughly equipped. ...

When one looks beyond the pages of Scripture, they open themselves to confusion, chaos, subjectivism, mysticism, deception, and even demons. Today, the Church is bombarded with a fraternity of self-proclaimed prophets and self-anointed apostles. These “ascended masters” foist, in numerous ways and expressions, that Scripture is outdated and no longer applies. ...

It can be said, without doubt that which the Apostle Paul feared, that which moved him to tears, that which he admonished the church at Ephesus for a period of three years, is again confronting the Church (Acts 20:28-31). It is a problem which the Church continues to face.

Kurt Goedelman, For Life, For Goodness, Scripture is Sufficient, SBABC newsletter, October-December 2001.

The Lesson

2012-01-09T14:11:00.000-06:00

A little something I found in my files; I hope you get the point.

Then Jesus took his disciples up to the mountain, and gathering them around him, he taught them saying, “Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are the meek; blessed are they that mourn; blessed are the merciful; blessed are they who thirst for justice; blessed are you when you are persecuted; blessed are you when you suffer. Be glad and rejoice for your reward is great in heaven...”

Then Simon Peter asked, “Do we have to write this down?”

And Andrew asked, “Are we supposed to know this?”

And James asked, “Will we have a test on it?”

And Phillip asked, “What if we don’t know it?”

And Bartholomew asked, “Do we have to turn this in?”

And John said, “The other disciples didn’t have to learn this!”

And Matthew asked, “When do we get out of here?”

And Judas asked, “What does this have to do with real life?”

Then one of the Pharisees present asked to see Jesus’ lesson plans, and inquired of Jesus his terminal objectives in the cognitive domain.

And Jesus wept.

Random Things in the Christian Realm

2012-01-08T17:26:00.000-06:00

There seems to be no end of books from Christians who claim to have visited heaven, visited hell, or had communication with the dead. The latest book is Have Heart, in which the author claims communication with the dead. Now, we know necromancy is condemned in Scripture, so I would have to say that pretty well sums up the evidence that this didn’t take place. This week the blog Herescope had a two-part series, with a third part upcoming, reviewing this book and the ideology behind it. Go here and here for parts one and two. Additionally, Worldview Weekend published a report on the same book by The Berean Call.

While Beth Moore has been exposed as a false teacher time and again on this blog and others, John Piper has been slowly descending into apostasy himself, as many apologetics blogs/ministries have been reporting. Now we have Moore and Piper joining together teaching lectio divina at the Passion 2012 Conference. Apprising Ministries and the blog Do Not Be Surprised... both give good reports on this false teaching method. Sola Sisters has a good follow-up about John Piper’s involvement with this teaching. And finally, Erin has another report about what really went on at Passion 2012, and what the difference is between biblical silence and the mystical silence found there.

An interesting addition to this combination of Moore and Piper was a video posted by Apprising Ministries where Piper said, “I’m happy to learn from Beth Moore.” The post is still there but the video is missing for some reason. However, that statement alone tells me Piper is not acting as a shepherd when he is happy to learn from someone who is been exposed as a false teacher in many ways - where is his discernment? I guess it is dying, as his involvement in the lectio divina demonstrates.

Over at Worldview Weekend there was a good short article about “social justice” and its erroneous promotion by religious liberals.

Along the same lines, Gary Gilley has an excellent two-part article about the social gospel. His first part is about the history of the movement, including the morphing into things with the Emergent movement and Rick Warren’s PEACE plan, and the devastation it has caused in the Church. In part two Gilley discusses what the Bible really has to say about the issue. You should find this series to be very informative.

Finally, we have false prophet Pat Robertson claiming God has been giving him more revelations. He claims God even told him who the next president of the U.S. will be, but he won’t divulge that information. The “revelation from God” is typical false prophet nonsense based on things going on in the world which anyone could give similar speculations about. And “God” gave him a specific revelation about an economic collapse this year. It is sad that so many people give this man the time of day.

Love, Evil, & Free Will

2012-01-07T11:22:00.000-06:00

A very interesting article with my subject title was in the November-December issue of Worldviews, the newsletter of the Apologetics Resource Center, written by Jim Edwards. It was a good article in defense of the skeptics’ claim against a loving God allowing evil in the world. I think the summary would give you enough information to respond to anyone questioning this subject.

1. Being made in God’s image means we have real free will, real choices, and the deep desires to love and be loved and honor and be honored.

2. The alternative of evil (nonconformance with God’s will) is necessary for us to have free will with real choices.

3. Love and honor would have no meaning without free will.

4. The benefits of loving and being loved far out weighs the reality that we are allowed to choose evil and this arrangement is consistent with a God that is good and love us enough to make us in His image.

5. The consequence of mankind’s choices is that evil was brought into our world and is sustained here. All of mankind’s evil is a result of mankind’s real choices.

6. Although we come into this world as a slave to evil due to our earthly father Adam’s choice, God provides us each a real choice to deny evil and do good through faith in Jesus Christ.

Summary of summary: In order to have real free will, evil must exist as a real alternative, but real free will also allows us to love and be loved by God and others, if we choose to follow Jesus Christ instead of Adam.

Underground Church?

2012-01-05T15:21:00.003-06:00

This thought-provoking article was in yesterday’s The Berean Call e-mail, “TBC Today”:

WILL TRUE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES BE FORCED UNDERGROUND IN AMERICA? [Excerpts]

Will the real Christian churches please stand up? Or, rather, should they go underground?

In order to stay true to their belief and to God, one conservative Christian commentator is convinced that the "real" Christian church in America is going to be forced to do as the early Christians did -- go underground.

[J. D. Longstreet's commentary argues that] many of the mainline Christian churches have slipped away from the foundation of Scripture to adopt secular tenants and leftist, politically correct philosophies [and] have become only a shadow of the true followers of Christ.

Strong words, but words that Longstreet -- who left his own denomination a few years ago because he said it was forsaking the tenets of the Bible and the gospel -- is standing on.

"Unfortunately, many of our mainline denominations have become nothing more than social clubs with many franchises nationwide," Longstreet writes. "Their pastors 'preach' feel good 'sermonettes' about the environment, and things like 'social justice.' In my opinion, that is not the mission of a church that purports to follow Christ. In fact, Christ Himself spelled out the mission of the church in what we refer to as the Great Commission."

As Longstreet sees it, pastors in America are fearful of preaching scriptures and of pointing out man's failings. They are concerned that they will be accused of slander or sued for libel. Longstreet admits that's a real threat in America -- and that's why he is suggesting churches that hold true to the gospel will be forced underground.

(Leclaire, "Will True Christian Churches Be Forced Underground in America?", Charisma Online, 12/8/2011).

Random Things of Note

2012-01-03T11:29:00.001-06:00

I’ve been very busy with so many things lately that I haven’t had a whole lot of time to put into my blog. One of the good things I did so as to give me more time for my apologetics ministry was to dismantle and close down my social commentary blog, “Sanity in an Upside Down World.” That was getting too time consuming!

Over the past couple weeks I have been collecting various stories to report on, so sit back and enjoy!

Beth Moore is one of those in the spotlight who never seems to lack in false teachings. I’ve reported on many of her problems, but now it seems she also considers Roman Catholicism to be just another Christian denomination - which tells me a lot about her ignorance or Roman Catholicism! But even worse than that, Moore is now recommending the book, Jesus Calling, a book whose author claims she receives direct revelation from Jesus. If you are unfamiliar with this book, read the excellent review by Tim Challies.

The Church today is really, really getting entertainment-oriented as it slides farther and farther into apostasy. Steve Bricker, at What Accords With Sound Doctrine, has an excellent article about whether our worship services are about God or man. Now let’s look at a couple assemblies where the answer seems to be, “MAN.”

I don’t know what church this is in, but if this is what you see where you worship - run out the door and never come back. Steve Furtick’s “Elevation Church” is right up there at the top rung of the ladder of a self-worshipping assembly. An example of the nonsense going on there is this “Christmas Dance.” Elizabeth Prata at The End Time blog has a good commentary on Furtick, as well as providing more examples of such foolishness.

I think this short talk by Paul Washer also addresses these types of assemblies, but he also addresses a much bigger problem invading churches who don’t get as bizarre as the ones we just saw, but nevertheless are “catering to the carnal.”

Meanwhile, false teacher Rick Warren’s market-driven assembly says that “God is Mad About You.” Where do these goatherds come up with this stuff!?!?

One thing I have observed over the years in my Christian life is that those churches who place women in positions of pastor and elder always go liberal in their doctrine and practice. Think about the ELCA, the Episcopal Church, United Church of Christ, PCUSA, and even the Methodist church; these are the churches who promote the social gospel, support same-sex unions, support abortion, etc. There is a reason why Scripture said women are not to be in these positions. Matt Slick has a good, short article about Women Pastors and a lack of a biblical worldview.

The “Code Orange” so-called revival seems to me to be more of a place for false teachers to gather and promote their corrupt view of the Church. In the process of reading many articles about this upcoming event, I have learned more and more names and faces of the goatherds who participate in this event. The latest is Kevin Gerald, and Erin’s article covers a lot of ground exposing who he is.

Meanwhile, Mark Driscoll has released his new book, Real Marriage. Knowing that Driscoll is fascinated by all things sexual, it doesn’t surprise me that he has a really controversial chapter about sex. And he thinks deviant sexual behavior is okay as long as it is within the confines of marriage! Tim Challies’ review ends with him saying it isn’t a book he’d want his wife reading and that he can’t recommend it. An even more thorough review by Denny Burk should lead you to agree with Challies if you hadn’t already done so. Again I say, Driscoll has no business being a pastor.

Roman Catholics virtually Idolize Mother Teresa. Over the years I have come across a lot of information about her which led me to believe there is no way she was saved. This week I stumbled across an old article by Tim Challies which I think conclusively demonstrates that Teresa had no clue about the true Gospel.

Neil has a good post about a discussion with an atheist, showing how illogical their arguments are.

Finally, someone doctored a video of arch-heretic Benny Hinn to have him portrayed as a “Dark Lord of the Sith.” It’s posted at Slaughtering the Sheep. Prepare for a good laugh.

The Robe

2012-01-02T18:01:00.003-06:00

This week my wife and I took three nights to watch an old VHS movie of The Robe. I hadn’t seen this movie in many, many years, and it was almost like seeing it for the first time!

The Robe used to be a television staple during Easter time, but I don’t know if this is still the case because I haven’t watched regular TV in many, many years. I do know that the movie has been well-loved by Christians. And that is the reason for this commentary.

I was very disappointed in this movie because it was nothing more than preaching the social gospel and the brotherhood of man, with lots of talk about how just a look from Jesus changed their lives. Yet, how could they learn the gospel with just a look?

There was never any mention of why Christ was crucified, but there was much discussion by the characters about how horrible it was for Rome to have killed Christ. In reality we have from the New Testament letters that it wasn’t a travesty at all - if Christ hadn’t been put to death we would not have the punishment for our sins paid!

If it wasn’t for the very poor theology, I could have liked this movie. As it was, I was very irritated the whole time whenever some sappy social gospel idea was preached. I could never watch this movie again, nor would I ever, ever recommend it to anyone; not to Christians because I don’t like recommending false teachings, and not to unbelievers because I wouldn’t want them to get the wrong idea about why Christ died.

The Church - A Pillar of Truth

2011-12-27T17:09:00.000-06:00

One of the things that separate the church from all other organizations is that it is to be the pillar and support of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15). The congregation not functioning as the support and dispenser of truth falls short of the biblical criteria for a local church; therefore the assembly which does not major on truth does not fit the definition of a New Testament church. Its attendance may be “mega,” its programs prolific, its enthusiasm contagious, and its motives honorable, but if it is not the pillar and support of truth it fails in its job description as a church. Call it a club, a social gathering, a political awareness group, a socially concerned assembly, or an entertainment center, but don’t call it a church.

Gary Gilley, Think on These Things, November 2008

There are many mega-churches today which fit that description, and even many which aren’t “mega” yet, but are aspiring to be so. How about your church: is it a pillar of truth?

Religious Plays

2011-12-26T18:43:00.000-06:00

Religious shows leave a bad flavor. When they enter the holy place, they come perilously near to offering strange fire to the Lord. At their worst they are sacrilege; always they are unnecessary, and at their best they are a poor substitute for prayer and the Holy Ghost. Church plays are invariably cheap and amateurish, and in addition to grieving the Holy Ghost, those who attend them are cheated by getting wretchedly poor entertainment for their money.

A.W. Tozer (The Early Tozer: A Word in Season, p. 98)

Random Apostasies and Heresies

2011-12-21T14:06:00.000-06:00

A good article on Sola Sisters blog about Henry Blackaby and his “soft” mysticism. I came across his “Experiencing God” book a long time ago and learned it was typical aberrational teaching, leading me to say Blackaby’s teachings need to be avoided.

Can you imagine two heretics uniting for any purpose? Well, yeah - I can too. This time it is Joel Osteen and T.D. Jakes - two mega-church goatherds.

Another goat-herd in the news is Ed Young. The Museum of Idolatry had some of Young’s videos about his new book - “Sexperiment” - which I reported on with my last “Random Apostasies and Heresies” post. But Young has many more problems than his fixation on sex; he is heading well down the road to apostasy, as reported by Erin at “Do Not Be Surprised...”

Moody Bible Institute is going the way of other Christian colleges and universities, selling out the faith for what feels good. They have now published a book on contemplative/centering prayer. Oh those itching ears!

The Pearls are in the headlines again. I have to agree that the Pearls’ book is not to blame for parental abuse; people should make their own decisions and some go much farther in punishment that what Pearl teaches. “Under Much Grace” has a good article with video clips of Michael Pearls’ interview with Anderson Cooper. I have to agree with Anderson when Pearl said “It’s about training” - Anderson said Pearl’s method was like training animals. The sad part is in the last video clip one of Pearl’s followers claims that training children and animals is the same thing!!! Since Pearl has claimed his book is “God’s way” of training children, I’d like to see biblical support!

Tim Challies has a great review of Mark Driscoll’s new book, Real Marriage. There are some real problems with the book as far as what Driscoll considers proper sexual behavior within marriage - among other things. Driscoll seems to have a fascination with all things sexual, as I’ve noted before - he can’t seem to talk about it enough. The man needs to focus more on the Word!

A great collection of quotes from LDS President Ezra Taft Benson is over at Apprising Ministries. These citations demonstrate that the LDS has taught “divine incest” as the way Jesus was born.

Another name I’ve come across quite frequently lately is James Robison. He is another of those Christians selling out to the Romanist church. Suze Blog has a primer about Robison if you don’t know who he is.

C. Peter Wagner is the man most responsible for the aberrant “spiritual warfare” model propagated by so many in the charismatic churches. He is also very much part of the aberrant “New Apostolic Reformation.” Herescope has a good article about Wagner’s false teachings, which should be a good reason for every discerning Christian to abandon him.

Finally, I came across an article about multi-site churches this week at DefendingContending. Thabiti Anyabwile calls a spade a spade, noting that such abominations are of the devil.

Did They Really Say That?

2011-12-20T11:57:00.000-06:00

?!?

His disciples believed Jesus to be dead while he was hidden in the sepulchre, whereas he was alive, demonstrating within the narrow tomb the power of Spirit to overrule mortal, material sense. ... Paul writes: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the [seeming] death of His Son...”

Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, p.44,45

Let’s see; the Bible says Jesus was dead in the tomb and Eddy says he was alive. Then she added a word, in brackets, to Paul’s words to give credence to her teachings. Well, if Christ did not die, then our sins never paid for. What do you trust - the Word of God or the words of Mary Baker Eddy? I trust the Word of God, and I’d suggest you do the same.

What to do About Philip Yancey

2011-12-15T15:20:00.000-06:00

Philip Yancey is a well-known Christian author of books and magazine articles. He writes on various subjects, but often not with a lot of theological “meat.” But there have been things about Yancey which have disturbed me over the years to the point that I decided to do some research to see if what snippets I’ve read about him are actually indicative of his belief system. I have to report that the snippets were indeed indicative of Yancey’s often dangerous beliefs.

The first place I looked was Yancey’s web site, where I read his responses to various questions. Here are a few of these for your review:

In regards to a question about trends in the U.S. churches, Yancey had this to say:

“I take hope in the fact that the Spirit always finds a new way of breaking out in the church. Remember the Jesus movement, in which hippies, the least likely group, led the way to Christ. And the charismatic movement, which has spread worldwide. Now the emergent church has emerged, which brings new forms to an old institution. Jesus promised that the gates of hell will not prevail against the church, and that gives me hope. God will always find a way; all God needs is willing hearts.”

Notice Yancey speaks with approval of these movements, which I find problematic because I don’t think the Holy Spirit was behind all this, especially the emergent movement! But the follow-up question was also disheartening:

Where do you think the Church will go in the next 10 years?

Sorry, I’m a freelance writer and not a prophet. You should talk to someone like Leonard Sweet or Phillip Jenkins.

I don’t know who Phillip Jenkins is, but that Yancey would direct anyone to Sweet, who is known for his New Age and Emergent leanings, says a lot about Yancey’s lack of discernment.

One subject which I find very disconcerting is Yancey’s stance on homosexuality:

Do I agree with gay Christians’ interpretations of the six passages in the Bible that may or may not relate to their behavior? No. They may be right, but so far I’m unconvinced. I also disapprove of sexual promiscuity, whether of the hetero- or homo- variety. I agree that the temptation and the homosexual orientation are not sin. Beyond that, I stubbornly refuse to answer. I’ll let others debate the morality and the biblical exegesis, and plenty of people seem willing to do so.

Yancey says these passages “may or may not” relate to homosexual behavior! And he refuses to take a stance to say homosexual behavior is wrong, which is something I came across often in my research.

Here is another example from his site:

What do you think about gay churches?

I’ve attended a few gay and lesbian churches, and it saddens me that the evangelical church by and large finds no place for homosexuals. I’ve met wonderful, committed Christians who attend Metropolitan Community Churches, and I wish that the larger church had the benefit of their faith. At the same time, I think it’s unhealthy to have an entire denomination formed around this one particular issue—those people need exposure to and inclusion in the wider Body of Christ. When it gets to particular matters of policy, like ordaining gay and lesbian ministers, I’m confused, like a lot of people. There are a few—not many, but a few—passages of Scripture that bring me up short. Frankly, I don’t know the answer to those questions. I’m a freelancer, not an official church representative, and I have the luxury of saying simply, “Here’s what I think, but I really don’t know,” rather than trying to set church policy.

Should the Church “find a place” for homosexuals? Yes - the same place they find for all other sexual sinners; fornicators, adulterers, etc. The place is at the foot of the cross as they repent of their sexual sins. What sort of “faith” do Yancey’s “gay” friends have if they think God approves of their sexual behavior? And he approvingly cites the Metropolitan Community Churches, bastions of apostasy that they are! He finds the subject of ordaining “gays and lesbians” as ministers to be confusing; has he ever really studied what the Bible says on this matter? It isn’t confusing at all!

Yancey gives tacit approval to the homosexual community as long as they claim to be Christian. Apprising Ministries has a good article about Yancey’s involvement with “Gay Christian Network”. And "DefendingContending" discusses the problems with Yancey being a keynote speaker at the 2011 “Gay Christian Network’s” conference.

An interesting analysis of Yancey’s teachings in his books and other media comes from a site in Ireland, no less! The author of this site shows how Yancey fits the teacher described in Jude 4. I recommend this page for your perusal.

Leanne Payne has an excellent article about the problem of using grace to excuse homosexuality, as she reviews Yancey’s book What’s So Amazing About Grace? Here is an excerpt:

Far more subtle is the influence of White upon Philip Yancey. The prolific writer featured White in his book What’s So Amazing About Grace?, showcasing White and his friendship with him as a powerful example of God’s grace. Though the author does not embrace all of White’s choices, Yancey highlights a man who has become the most influential gay Christian of our day. Inadvertently, the author provides an ungodly bridge between a false prophet (White) and thousands of readers seeking clarity in the area of homosexuality. Perhaps Yancey’s inclusion of White in his book is an example of one who has “secretly slipped in among” us in order to “change the grace of our God into a license for immorality” (Jude 4).

Grace without truth is deadly. It plays upon our sentiments. “I want to be a nice guy. I do not want to give a hurting person any more trouble. Didn’t Jesus include the outcasts?” Our desire to be merciful is understandable but uninformed. Sentimentalism distorts the essence of the homosexual conflict; it promotes a dramatic view of the self, which only distances the struggler from his cure.

And it distances one from the real good news of the Gospel. To be sure, Jesus first called the religious hypocrites to repentance. But He then called His followers to deal forthrightly with their sin (Luke 7:36-50; John 8:1-12). To ignore the latter is to scramble the witness of Christ and to set up vulnerable ones for deception.

Men and women facing profound same-sex vulnerabilities require the fullness of grace and truth. Without that fullness, we can readily mislead God’s people into powerful deception. What if I had gone to a Manning or a White at the onset of my healing journey? Perhaps we as Christians are far too naïve in what and who we take in.

Another review of What’s So Amazing About Grace can be found here. Notice the author not only mentions the problem of Yancey’s beliefs about homosexuality, but he also discusses Yancey’s problems with ecumenicism as well as his problems of associating with false teachers (e.g. Tony Campolo) and psychology.

Speaking of Yancey’s ecumenical stance, here is another response to a question on his site, in reference to politics:

What hopes do you hold for inter-faith communication in a world of political and spiritual division?

The three faiths of Abraham (Islam, Judaism, Christianity) have so much in common, including the entire Old Testament, shared stories, and a similar morality. For one thing, I wish moderate Muslims would speak out more openly against the extremists who are giving their religion a bad name (we Christians have had our turn, of course). And I wish Christians would be more humble in letting God pick out the weeds from the crops, to borrow a metaphor from Jesus. I don’t see Jesus twisting arms and imposing beliefs on people. He won their hearts in a different way.

His favorable support of Islam is unconscionable, and his ignorance of the teachings of Islam is blatant in his belief that there is such thing as a “moderate” Muslim.

Another example of this ignorance comes from an article in Christianity Today, where he again is calling an ecumenical movement void of doctrine:

Perhaps our day calls for a new kind of ecumenical movement: not of doctrine, nor even of religious unity, but one that builds on what Jews, Christians, and Muslims hold in common, for the sake of mutual survival. ...

As Heschel pointed out, Jews and Christians (and I would add Muslims) share the belief that this world with its history belongs not to us but to God. We disagree over important doctrines, but are united "in our being accountable to God, our being objects of God's concern, precious in his eyes." Indeed, Jews, Christians, and Muslims have much in common: They honor the authority of Moses and the Hebrew prophets; they believe in the Creator, the God of Abraham; they want to fulfill God's commands of justice and mercy; they see life as sacred. All three acknowledge that we must oppose evil with a holiness that begins with a proper humility before a sovereign God.

Tim Challies reviewed Yancey’s book, Prayer: Does It Make Any Difference? Challies discusses Yancey’s propensity to respect false teachers and dubious mystics:

A further disturbing theme in the book is Yancey’s respect for all manner of perceived spiritual authorities. He affirms Mother Teresa and Martin Luther as equal authorities on prayer, even in the same sentence (and I don’t think he quotes anyone with greater respect or frequency than Mother Teresa). He often quotes Jewish rabbis as if their theology of prayer should be taken as equal to those who love Jesus Christ and who have submitted their lives and their beliefs to the New Testament. A vast quantity of the answers Yancey provides are based on the writing of people whose beliefs would not align with historic Protestantism and hence with Scripture. And, while this book is not a “how-to” guide, it does include an appendix that lists a wide variety of recommended resources. Among these are a great number of books that promote mysticism, contemplative prayer, lectio divina, Roman Catholic prayer guides and the like. There is a recommendation to a book that “gives guidance to different personalities, following the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator test” (something Jesus surely overlooked when teaching us to pray). In fact, the good resources are by far outweighed by the dubious or those that are just plain bad. For example, a section dealing with collections of prayers points readers to the Roman Catholic collection Christian Prayer: Liturgy of the Hours (which, as we might expect includes prayers to Mary) while overlooking classics like The Valley of Vision.

Further evidence of Yancey’s support for secular psychology and mysticism is the fact that he is friends with, and promotes, mystic Brennan Manning, as well as being part of the Recovery movement. Yancey is also part of the Renovare group, which promotes contemplative prayer. And finally, more from Yancey’s own words about his support of mystics comes from The Berean Call, from which I draw this excerpt:

Now, Religion in the News, a report and comment on religious trends and events being covered by the media. This week’s item is from Publisher’s Weekly, August 28, 2006, with a headline: PW talks with Philip Yancey. The following are excerpts: Publisher’s Weekly: Many of your books have been about how Christians feel the burden of spiritual practice. Which writers most influenced your thinking about prayer? Philip Yancey: No Protestants come to mind, to be honest, so, much I have learned about prayer is from the Catholics. One book I discovered was by Mark Phibido, called, Arm Chair Mystic. Of course, if you want to go deeper, there’s Thomas Merton.

When Yancey has had questions brought to him about his association with mysticism, he has been against correction, even denouncing those who would dare suggest that he is promoting false doctrine. Again, The Berean Call has a report about this:

Unfortunately, Christianity Today seems to defend error instead of expose it. In a recent editorial, Philip Yancey rejects all correction as "Christian McCarthyism," the title of his article. Numerous leaders are defended for their false doctrine and not by dealing with the serious issues their critics raise, but by a dishonest whitewash. For example, Yancey says, "Richard Foster dares to use words like meditation ...which puts him under suspicion as a New Ager." In fact, Foster gave detailed instructions on how to practice Eastern meditation to the extent that the visualized image of Jesus comes to life: "you can actually encounter the living Christ in the event, be addressed by His voice and be touched by His healing power....Jesus Christ will actually come to you.” Numerous Christian leaders around the world have joined Foster in his Renovaré movement for reviving Eastern mysticism in the church. There is a similar exoneration of Karen Mains, who Yancey says has merely "written about her dream life." He fails even to mention the occultic delusion she promotes in her book Lonely No More.

The last evidence against Philip Yancey as a Christian teacher is an article from Biblical Discernment Ministries. It is a quite thorough article about Yancey’s false teachings and beliefs, which goes much beyond the few things I’ve itemized in this article. I think a major problem is exposed in this paragraph discussing apologist Gary Gilley’s review of What’s So Amazing About Grace?

In a report written by Pastor Gary Gilley of Southern View Chapel, Gilley writes: "Yancey has a fundamental flaw that runs throughout all of his writings -- he doesn't always draw his thoughts and principles from Scripture … this serious flaw of not basing his concepts squarely upon the Scriptures eventually leads Yancey astray. Yancey does not know the difference between tolerance and arrogance; between grace and license; between boldness and harshness. By Yancey's definitions John the Baptist and Elijah would be men of "ungrace"; but God did not seem to think so … Certainly Jesus loved and spent time with prostitutes, but He did so to call them to repentance, not to accept their way of living. Yancey's method of dealing with a homosexual, who is also a church leader, may seem like "grace" to him, it may seem like what Jesus would do, but it is clearly out of sync with the teachings and examples of Scripture."

My case against Philip Yancey has demonstrated him to be a follower and promoter of New Age mysticism in its many permutations, a teacher of unbiblical secular psychological theories, a teacher of varieties of ecumenicism; that he often fails to base his beliefs and teachings on the clear Word of God, that he defends homosexuality, approves of the Emergent movement, and has demonstrated ignorance of the Islamic faith. To top it all off, he rejects correction, denigrating those who would dare point out error.

So what do we do about Philip Yancey? Avoid him like the plague!

The Allure of Cult Leaders

2011-12-14T11:26:00.000-06:00

Personal Freedom Outreach is an excellent apologetics ministry, which holds a biennial apologetics conference I heartily recommend (the next one is in April 2012). They also publish what I consider to be one of the best apologetics magazines, The Quarterly Journal.

In the January-March 2012 issue G. Richard Fisher has an excellent editorial about the allure of cult leaders. Here is the summation of this editorial:

Let’s get down to what false teachers offer and promise, which then ties in to what followers are looking for.

1. They offer a place that seems to promise unchanging structure and safety. In other words, they offer a haven of sameness. The troubled and restless latch on to this quickly.

2. They offer a sense of having the inside track with God through personal revelations an authoritative voices from heaven. Claims of trips to heaven or even angelic visitations really impress the naive.

3. They offer their boldness in chaotic and frightening world.

4. They offer a sense of determined direction.

5. The false teacher has honed the ability to twist the Scripture and reality to fit into the group’s purpose. Even dramatic shifts in theology by the false teacher are simply reinterpreted as an attack of the devil or a test from God or maybe even suffering for Jesus’ sake.

6. The false teacher is able to convince the devotees that doubt is just giving in to reason and the carnal mind. The deep level of the spirit must bypass logical thinking.

7. The false teacher is able to blur the lines between God’s approval and the false teacher’s own approval. God’s approval comes through him alone.

8. Lastly, add to the above that the phony leader is able to convince them there are things in the Bible that are not just because he says so. His interpretations and additions are then considered “Bible.” ...

So now we can understand more easily why there is such an allure and why such strong attachments are forged between cult leaders and cult followers. In actual fact, the cult leader is an antinomian, without law, structure, or guidelines, running only on his personal subjective feelings, visions, voices, hunches, and sometimes outright fabrications and lies. When we see through the manipulations and attempts at mind control, it makes us less vulnerable.

Is the Bible Sufficient?

2011-12-10T16:09:00.001-06:00

Do we need The Prayer of Jabez or the Secrets of the Vine or the prayer rituals of Neil Anderson and Mark Bubeck? Do we ultimately need all the subjective and sensational books of Beth Moore or the mystical reflections and ramblings of Henry Blackaby? Some will tell us that the answer is the prophecies of C. Peter Wagner and his coterie of prophets in the New Apostolic Revival despite their often off-the-mark prophecies. Perhaps another will argue the ultimate secret is a Benny Hinn Miracle Crusade or the insanity of a John Crowder or Todd Bentley meeting. Then again it just may be the spiritualist meanderings and automatic writing of the perennial classic God Calling book. Who has that “something more” and where to find it reminds one of the old carnival wheels - spin and win - maybe, but probably not. Disgraced Family Radio leader Harold Camping thought he had it and so do other modern false prophets and date setters. Christianity is becoming like a carnival sideshow complete with barkers and ringmasters. ...

Either the whole Bible is enough for life and godliness or it is not. It is God’s gift for our growth or it is not. We need to follow “the apostles’ doctrine” (Acts 2:42). If the Bible is not sufficient for life and godliness, we should simply throw up our hands in despair over the confusing deluge of claimed revelations, contradictory visions, extrabiblical books, and cult heresies and admit we have no definitive answers. No one would know where the truth really is. We would have to conclude that there is no road map or guidebook. There is no lamp for our feet or light for our path and that there is no fixed truth or guiding plumb line. We would be on our own - lost and sailing adrift upon a sea of subjectivism and mysticism. It is the Bible or nothing. Nothing else makes any sense. The Apostle Paul charged that we are “not to think beyond what is written” (1 Corinthians 4:6). Thus, we affirm that the Bible is enough. And enough is enough!

G.Richard Fisher, The Continuing Battle for the Bible, in Personal Freedom Outreach’s The Quarterly Journal, January-March 2012.

Pray For Conviction

2011-12-07T10:59:00.000-06:00

Let’s pray that God will bring conviction on the world. Let’s pray that He will send conviction back. Religion has become so popular now that it is shown in theaters, sung over radio and in barn dances. Just one more form of entertainment. We fundamentals and evangelicals just will not believe the truth about ourselves and the kind of people we are. So we have a popular religion but very little power because we have very little conviction, very little repentance and very little sorrow.

A.W. Tozer (sermon “Men Do Not Believe the Truth About Themselves,” John 8:38, General Council, as cited in Tozer on Worship and Entertainment, p.103)

John Hagee - Enemy of the Jews

2011-12-06T14:21:00.000-06:00

I have been cleaning out files and came across an old article about the Gospel from the April 2008 Jews For Jesus newsletter. There are a couple references to the false teaching of John Hagee which I decided to post for everyone else’s benefit.

The newsletter cites Hagee’s book, “In Defense of Israel,” in which Hagee claims that “The Jews Did Not Reject Jesus as the Messiah”: It seems Hagee claims Jesus didn’t come to be the Messiah, so therefore the Jews didn’t reject what he offered to them. Of course he also believes Jews do not need the Gospel (the newsletter cites Charisma magazine of April 2004 for this).

John Hagee preaches the need for the USA to be friends with the nation of Israel, all the while he is an enemy of the Jewish people by condemning them to eternal damnation by teaching they don’t need the salvation offered by Christ.

Random Apostasies and Heresies

2011-12-02T15:32:00.002-06:00

The most irritating apostasy I’ve come across this week is a Baptist Church in Kentucky which will not allow “inter-racial” couples to be members. Well, I’d like to know just where they find THAT in the Bible! According to God there is only ONE race, which is Adam’s race; i.e., the human race. Skin color has no bearing on whether or not one is a human (although evolutionism claims the blacks haven’t evolved as far as the lighter-skinned people). This church blasphemes the name of Christ by their treatment of these people! They are nothing but a bunch of racist bigots!

Many mega-church teachers are getting into the whole Word of Faith idea that those who don’t “tithe” are stealing from the Lord, have their money cursed (or are cursed themselves), or are experiencing financial difficulties. Of course it doesn’t matter that only the Nation of Israel was under the tithe, and that Christians are only obligated to give generously and not under compulsion for any particular percentage of their income (2 Cor. 9:6-7); what matters to these goat-herds is that you enrich their coffers! What’s really surprising are some of the names among these teachers, one of which is James MacDonald! Check out this report at “Do Not Be Surprised...”

Sex seems to be the big thing to sell in apostate assemblies nowadays, with goatherds outdoing each other with their shock value. “Defending. Contending.” exposes one example of a church in New York with a “kissing contest”, while the “The Museum of Idolatry” has been updating us on Ed and Lisa Young with their new book coming out in January - “Sexperiment: 7 Days to Lasting Intimacy with Your Spouse.” The Youngs claim the book is a “life changer” and that it will “change your life.” The advertisements are a bit crude at points. But hey, sex draws them in, doesn’t it? Just ask Mark Driscoll!

Vision Forum has received a slight mention by me in the past because I really haven’t had time to study them. However, they are indeed bad news with legalistic and aberrant theology. I found a good site for investigating Vision Forum, and I recommend your perusal here before getting involved with anything to do with this group.

Mega-zoo goatherd Joel Osteen has been proven to be a rank heretic who is more of an entertainer than anything else. Well, now he is looking to develop a prime-time “reality show.” Supposedly it will follow Osteen and several of his goats as they travel around the U.S. on “missions.”

It seems the charlatans who work all these false revivals always seem to come up with new ideas for the non-discerning. Charismaniacs now have a “cell phone” anointing available! Yes, sir, get those calls going to spread the “fire”!

How about I end this issue with “good stuff” article to refresh your brain from the apostasy we have been reviewing. Keith and Kristyn Getty tell us why hymns are so important to our worship.

Did They Really Say That?

2011-11-30T18:32:00.001-06:00

?!?

Today my wife and I went shopping at an antiques store in Mt. Vernon. As we came out of the store and headed up the sidewalk towards where our car was parked, we noticed two Mormon missionaries walking towards us. Before we got within 20 feet of them they began talking to us so we stopped and listened for a couple minutes as they began their presentation. I interrupted and told them I was an ex-Mormon, so they asked what led me to leave. Our conversation continued for several minutes, during which I pointed out that their Christ was not the Christ of the Bible, which was a main reason for my researching their faith leading to my departure. I mentioned the Adam-God doctrine of Brigham Young’s, and said it was one of the doctrines the LDS discounts. I stated that Brigham Young was a prophet of God and stated he received that doctrine from God and yet the LDS now denies it as true. For the first time ever, I heard a new defense for why this doctrine is wrong.

Wait for it...................

“Brigham Young misunderstood God!”

Yes, that’s what they said!!!!! Can you imagine a biblical prophet being excused that way?!

The one young man said he knows the Book of Mormon is true because God told him. Again, this was a new tact I’ve never heard. So I asked, “Did God actually speak to you?” “Yes,” he said. “You actually heard his audible voice?” I asked. “He spoke to my heart,” he said. “AH!,” I said, “Have you not read Jeremiah 17:9 where he says the heart is deceitful?” “But it was God who spoke to me,” he replied.

Well, I suggested there were many problems which he should investigate, such as at least 50 false prophecies by Joseph Smith, grave problems with the Book of Mormon (beginning with the Reformed Egyptian being translated in 1828-29 coming out exactly like KJV 1611 English translating Hebrew & Greek, including the italicized words), the differences in the LDS god and Jesus vs those of the Bible, no historical evidence, no archaeological evidence, etc. I even handed him a business card for my ministry and suggested he review my blog articles. He took the card, but then got close to me and said in a fairly loud, stern voice, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to be silent!” I simply stated, “You invoke the wrong Christ” and continued by stating that DNA has proven that Indians are not of Jewish origin. He looked sort of stunned when I did not become silent at his command. His partner then laughed at me and said they had to go.

So, is this the new thing? Claim Brigham Young misunderstood God, claim God spoke to them (rather than the burning in the bosom) and command you to be silent?

I did tell them that if they were wrong, they had no second chance. It was really very sad to see these young people so deceived.

Is Your Assembly Fed on Excitement?

2011-11-26T15:15:00.000-06:00

A Church fed on excitement is no New Testament church at all. The desire for surface stimulation is a sure mark of the fallen nature, the very thing Christ died to deliver us from. A curious crowd of baptized worldlings waiting each Sunday for the quasi-religious needle to give them a lift bears no relation whatsoever to a true assembly of Christian believers. And that its members protest their undying faith in the Bible does not change things any. A.W.Tozer, The Next Chapter After the Last, p.14.

When I read this I immediately thought of Willow Creek, Joel Osteen’s monstrosity, and lots of other entertainment-oriented “churches” I read about daily. Tozer was right - they bear no relation to a true assembly of Christian believers.

Mark Driscoll - Not Qualified as a Pastor

2011-11-23T14:47:00.001-06:00

I have said in a previous article that Mark Driscoll is a teacher to avoid. It isn’t that he’s a false teacher when it comes to proper doctrine (well, he’s a Calvinist and I disagree with that doctrine), it’s that he has a lot of other problems, including rank immaturity. Another blogger recently called Driscoll one of the “top five pastors in America,” and when I challenged him on that claim several others came to his defense. Well, here I’m going to lay out the problems with Mr. Driscoll, and if you think he’s still someone worthy of listening to, let alone one of the top five pastors, then I’d be interested in knowing how you can maintain that position.

First, as noted in my original post, Driscoll has a habit of using crude language, contrary to Paul’s injunction against such language in Ephesians 4:29 and 5:4. There is no excuse for a pastor to be using such language; it is not “cool” or “hip” to do so. If one lacks a command of the English language, then perhaps they should not be in the pulpit.

A paper I linked to in my original article, written by Cathy Mickels, discusses some grave problems with Driscoll’s immaturity in regards to teaching about human sexuality. In referring to a book by Driscoll, Confessions of a Reformission Rev, John MacArthur is cited as saying, “...there are statements in that book that are so sexually explicit and unnecessary and purely gratuitous humor at the basest level...” MacArthur is further cited as saying the same language and humor was on a video and later on Driscoll’s web site. MacArthur states that the attitude seems to be to identify with people at their sensual level: “And I think that baser approach - that’s something I’ve never heard of in my life - I’ve never, ever, in the name of ministry heard anyone who would speak at that level of explicit language with regard to things sexual...” The article also links to this excellent analysis of the type of behavior presented by Driscoll and why it is not proper for a pastor.

Describing an example of Driscoll’s treatment of sexuality, Mickels says, In Genesis 3, Satan's first line of attack against mankind was to undermine and call into question the authority of God's Word. Yet, it is this very book of the Bible that hits a funny bone for Mark Driscoll. According to Mark, this is where all "good comedy begins." First of all, in the story of Adam and Eve, Driscoll throws out a suggestive, sensual idea about Eve that I guess Mark thinks will amuse his male audience. He says "...God creates a perfect woman who is beautiful, sinless, and naked,- the same kind of woman every guy ever since has been looking for." (The Radical Reformission, pg.28.)

Later Mickels gives another example of Driscoll’s teaching on sex: Driscoll appears to have discovered early on that sex sells and that he could use it to draw a crowd. He writes, "I assumed the students and singles were all pretty horny, so I went out on a limb and preached through the Song of Songs. ....Each week I extolled the virtues of marriage, foreplay, oral sex, sacred stripping, and sex outdoors, just as the book teaches...This helped us a lot because apparently a pastor using words like 'penis' and 'oral sex' is unusual, and before you could say ‘aluminum pole in the bedroom,’ attendance began to climb steadily to more than two hundred people a week." ... It is also curious that in spite of Mark Driscoll's acknowledgement that many of the young men at Mars Hill struggle with pornography, Mark would intentionally and frequently plant himself in a barbershop filled with pornography. In his own words, Mark describes his barbershop as "providing the finest selection of waiting area pornography in our city." But, isn't the word "finest" a rather odd way of describing perverted material? Would Mark recommend this same barbershop to other young men at Mars Hill? Since Mark details in his book, The Radical Reformission, that he even takes his own young son with him to his barber, a flamboyant transsexual, I will assume the answer is possibly "Yes."

Mickel’s description of a telephone call Driscoll relates which was between him and a man who was into pornography is horrible! Driscoll has no business counseling anyone in any sexual matter. Driscoll’s fascination with all things sexual (he claims the Song of Solomon is his favorite Bible passage) is really comparable to what you find with a high-school locker-room jock. Driscoll’s blog even suggests anal sex with one’s wife is perfectly okay, and then he links to a site called “Christian Nymphos.” Additionally, he advocates the use of “sex toys” and links to an ostensibly “Christian” sex toy site.

A January 23, 2008 ABC News article by Neal Karlinsky claims Driscoll admits that his preaching can “be summed up with two words: sex and Jesus.”

A now extinct blog, Slice of Laodicea, posted a quote from John MacArthur on 5/8/09, in which MacArthur addressed Driscoll’s teaching in regards to human sexuality: “For stronger reasons than simple modesty, certain acts involving fornication, autoeroticism, and other things people commonly ‘do in secret’ are shameful to talk about in any public context (Ephesians 5:12), much less a church service. They may be suitable subjects for a private counseling session, or the doctor’s office, or a college biology lecture, but they are not fitting topics for a worship service where God should be glorified, Christ should be uplifted, women should be shown respect, children’s innocence should be guarded, and single people’s prurient curiosities should not unnecessarily be enflamed. When a speaker deliberately arouses lusts that cannot possibly be righteously fulfilled in unmarried college students, or when his personal illustrations fail to guard the privacy and honor of his own wife, that is far worse than merely inappropriate. When done repeatedly and with the demeanor of an immature bad-boy, such a practice reflects a major character defect that is spiritually disqualifying. Any man who makes such things the main trademark of his style is quite simply not above reproach.”

Driscoll is also very irreverent (and even blasphemous in my opinion) as he often makes jokes about theological matters. An example I heard while personally viewing a DVD put out by his church was him suggesting that Jesus had a large tattoo on his thigh.

Mickels gives further examples of Driscoll’s irreverent handling of Scripture in The Radical Reformission: Driscoll sets the stage for more mocking of Scripture by describing the Old Testament as "a redneck hillbilly comedy." He finds humor in Jacob, Aaron, Moses, Job, Jeremiah, and Noah. For example, he undermines the seriousness of the messages of Jeremiah, a prophet of God, by describing him as someone "who cries like a newly crowned beauty queen all the time." He laughs at Noah for getting drunk and ending up naked in his tent, and then compares him to "some redneck on vacation." Why would Driscoll find amusement or pleasure in seeing Noah's dignity reduced or undermined?

In his series on humor, the New Testament also gets a Driscoll face lift. Without shame, he turns the issue of circumcision found in Galatians 5 into a crude "cut off your pickle joke."

Also, unlike all the biblical scholars who have gone before Mark Driscoll, he comes up with another name than the one given in Scripture to describe the Holy Spirit. In his book Confessions of a Reformission Rev, he thanks "God the Ghost" for helping him write his book. In another part of the book, Driscoll just shortens it to "Ghost." For those who would be alarmed by this cavalier handling of God and His Word, Mark also has an arrogant, cocky response. He says, "...religious people are too serious.....judgmental.... they're such a joke." ....

Mocking and poking fun at Jesus and his family, Mark writes, ".....everytime they (the religious leaders) see Jesus, it agitates them that he is always surrounded by a crowd telling knock-knock jokes to miscreants who love his sense of humor because his perfection had to have included comedic timing." In other communications Mark refers to the King of Kings as "a dude" and uses word pictures depicting Him as "a prize-fighter with a tattoo down his leg..." In Driscoll's human attempt to make Jesus relevant, he turns the spotless lamb into a blemished lamb tarnished with the markings of the streets of Seattle. (The Radical Reformission, pg. 30.)

Discussing more irreverent teaching from Driscoll at Mars Hill, Mickels reports, One will hear things at this church never heard before about Christ. In a church video series regarding the humanity of Christ, Mark had fun with the question whether or not Jesus went "potty." In response, according to Driscoll, "...yes, Jesus went number one and number two," but he did it "perfectly....never got the toilet all wet."

I think you get the general idea of what Cathy Mickels reports on, but I really recommend you read the entire document. It paints a picture of a “pastor” with some serious problems, especially in the realm of teaching on sexuality, and totally irreverent handling of God’s Word. Much of it is relating things from Driscoll’s books, “The Radical Reformission” and Confessions of a Reformission Rev.” (Why anyone reading these books would still consider Driscoll worthy to be a pastor is beyond my comprehension.) Just that article alone should have droves leaving Driscoll’s church.

Mark Driscoll has preached at Robert Schuller’s “Crystal Cathedral” a couple times and yet has not preached a solid gospel message there - a “church” which needs the truth more than anything else. He has also associated with Schuller on several occasions, and has even congratulated Schuller for his ministry - congratulating a rank heretic for preaching heresy!

This year Driscoll has been claiming he receives direct revelations from Jesus. Interestingly enough, they usually have to do with sexual matters. This article gives the full text of some of Driscoll’s claims, which are nothing less than bizarre. In fact, as with his teaching on sexuality, some of these revelations are downright pornographic.

Lately Driscoll has been propagating a false spiritual warfare theology - including promoting false teachers in this subject - and claims he has even talked to demons. Not only that, he accepts what the demon says as the truth as to what the demon is doing. His description of his conversations with demons would be downright laughable if Driscoll wasn’t seriously teaching it as truth. His demonology includes ideas from the totally aberrational “deliverance ministries” and is totally unbiblical.

According to The New York Times 4-part article, “Who Would Jesus Smack Down?” Driscoll will allow no dissent. “In 2007 two elders protested a plan to reorganize the church that...consolidated power in the hands of Driscoll and his close aides.” Their protests led to their excommunication, and when a member complained, his membership was suspended. According to the article, Driscoll said, “They are sinning through questioning.” I’d be interested to know where Driscoll finds that in Scripture!

As his schtick, Driscoll displays a persona of a “cool dude,” and has even said one could call him “Pastor Dude.” The New York Times said Driscoll has the “coolest style and foulest mouth of any preacher you’ve ever seen” and said he is the “cutting edge of American pop culture.”

Would you really want your pastor to describe Christ as "a classic underachiever with no wife, kids, stable career or even much of a home." I’d say this is downright blasphemous! Yet Driscoll also says that Jesus began his ministry as a bartender. Mickels also cites his books where Driscoll makes jokes about soiling his trousers. Driscoll obviously sees himself as a stand-up comedian, but is this the character of a shepherd of God’s people?

Let me sum up the problem with Mark Driscoll as a pastor:

He behaves in a very immature and arrogant fashion reminiscent of a high-school locker-room jock.

He appeals to the basest level in his teaching on human sexuality, and even teaches sexual perversion as being okay.

He uses coarse, as well as sexually explicit language, which gives him an undignified reputation.

He abuses the Word of God while promoting levity and irreverence for it.

He speaks and teaches blasphemously about Jesus.

He gives tacit approval to the teachings of heretic Robert Schuller.

He teaches falsely about spiritual warfare.

He claims direct revelation from God.

He claims to have conversations with demons.

He claims those who question him are sinning.

Paul details the qualifications for elders (including pastors) in 1 Timothy 3:2-7 and Titus 1:6-9. Among these qualifications are (HCSB): “above reproach,” “self-controlled,” “sensible,” “respectable,” “a good reputation with outsiders,” “not arrogant,” “loving what is good” - none of which are demonstrated by Driscoll.

I maintain that Mark Driscoll has a huge following not because he teaches solid meat of Biblical doctrine, but because he appeals the the basest fleshly attitudes of the world, making his services and books into stand-up comedy routines with much sexual titillation.

Update 12/3/11:
I found an article in my files which I thought should be added to this post. The article can be found at http://defendingcontending.com/2009/06/24/i’ve-had-it-with-mark-driscoll-and-his-mouth-now-it’s-personal/

The Power of the Cross

2011-11-20T16:12:00.000-06:00

This morning in our assembly of saints we sang a contemporary worship song by Keith Getty and Stuart Townend. That team has some really doctrinally powerful songs. The lyrics are well worth contemplating.

The Power of the Cross

Oh, to see the dawn

Of the darkest day:

Christ on the road to Calvary.

Tried by sinful men,

Torn and beaten, then

Nailed to a cross of wood.

CHORUS:

This, the power of the cross:

Christ became sin for us;

Took the blame, bore the wrath—

We stand forgiven at the cross.

Oh, to see the pain

Written on Your face,

Bearing the awesome weight of sin.

Every bitter thought,

Every evil deed

Crowning Your bloodstained brow.

Now the daylight flees;

Now the ground beneath

Quakes as its Maker bows His head.

Curtain torn in two,

Dead are raised to life;

"Finished!" the victory cry.

Oh, to see my name

Written in the wounds,

For through Your suffering I am free.

Death is crushed to death;

Life is mine to live,

Won through Your selfless love.

FINAL CHORUS:

This, the pow'r of the cross:

Son of God—slain for us.

What a love! What a cost!

We stand forgiven at the cross.

Have You Created Your Own God?

2011-11-20T15:48:00.001-06:00

"Throughout history, the further people have strayed from the supremacy of Scripture, the more removed they have become from their Creator. In our corrupted human nature, we love to create our own god. A safe god; custom-designed to suit our tastes. Let’s face it, we all have our own desires and agendas. If we can just get ‘god’ (however we may conceive of him) to back us up...well, now that’s really a ‘higher power’ we can worship! The Jesus of the Gospels is not the non-confrontational, infinitely tolerant, impotent idol the liberal church has molded Him into. Such a ‘revised’ image of Jesus may not threaten willful sinners, and they may stay comfortable in whatever lifestyle they please. A selective reading of Scripture may yield a very different deity; not a true representation of the One True God.

"Jesus is not the harsh, ascetic taskmaster the Church of the Dark Ages portrayed Him to be. The Christ of the Bible is a gentle Shepherd, not a drill sergeant. Still, He takes sin very seriously. It cost Him greatly. A perfectly holy God cannot wink at sin and still be just. In order to fully grasp God’s unfathomable love for His people, His infinite mercy, and His hatred of sin (as well as His definition of what ‘sin’ is; not ours), you must go straight to the source. The Bible is the only direct revelation humanity has from the lips of God. As you pursue knowing Him, God will reveal His heart to you (Jeremiah 29:13; James 4:8)."

Marie Notcheva, Redeemed From the Pit, pp.128-129

Did They Really Say That?

2011-11-19T09:08:00.000-06:00

?!?

The world was peopled before the days of Adam, as much so as it was before the days of Noah. Orson Hyde, October 6, 1854, Journal of Discourses 2:79

Orson Hyde was not only an LDS apostle, he was the President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles from 1847 to 1875. And yet this man directly contradicts the Bible with his teaching: according to the Bible Adam was the very first man on earth. I’d say this is another proof that the LDS is not a Christian faith.

Random Apostasies and Heresies

2011-11-18T13:38:00.000-06:00

The Romanist church is doing more and more to form a one-world religion, proving again that they are not God’s church. The council for Synod of Bishops for America met in Rome to discuss the RCC relation to other religions. Their statement includes this: “the Catholic Church, while affirming the specific originality of Christianity, does not reject anything that is true and holy in non-Christian religions.” Another citation starts with, “The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems....” and goes downhill from there. They address Hinduism, Judaism and Buddhism also in positive terms. See Suze Blog for a good report.

Then we have a Catholic adoption agency capitulating to the state of Illinois so as to keep state money flowing. Rather than stand their ground with other Catholic agencies against providing adoptive children to same-sex couples, the Diocese of Belleville child welfare agency changed their name from “Catholic Social Services of South Illinois” to “Christian Social Services of South Illinois.” The Catholic Church in Illinois as a whole actually did the right thing and closed down their services rather than kow-tow to the homosexual agenda of Illinois, but not this group; they disassociated themselves from the Catholic Church. There is still a problem in that they call themselves Christian while supporting the unholy idea of giving children up for adoption to same-sex couples!

Seeker sensitive churches continue their spiral into total apostasy. The Museum of Idolatry posted another two prime examples of the nonsense taking place in these apostate assemblies. First we have Ed Young Jr.’s church with his false teachings of a “blessing zone.” Then we get to see North Point Church with their “worship” service including a production of “Thriller.” These assemblies are nothing but herds of goats led by goatherds. All they want is entertainment and to leave church feeling good.

Jan Markell’s Olive Tree Ministries posted a thought-provoking article this week by Jack Kinsella, telling us about the apostasy of the religious Left and its leader, heretic Jim Wallis. Wallis has long promoted the false “social gospel” - which sure fit’s the description of Paul’s “other gospel”!

Harold Camping is not sorry he taught all the false stuff about Christ coming back in May and then October (or even 1994). Nope, it wasn’t his fault; it was God’s fault for letting him believe and teach that stuff: “It seems embarrassing for Family Radio. But God was in charge of everything. We came to that conclusion after quite careful study of the Bible. He allowed everything to happen the way it did without correction. He could have stopped everything if He had wanted to.” That’s right - if you prophesy falsely, it is God’s fault. He’s lucky he didn’t live in O.T. Israel or he’d find himself stoned!

Brian McLaren, arch-heretic leader of the Emerging Church movement, has some really bizarre teachings. This week I came across an article from almost two years ago which tells of McLaren’s ideas about how we may need to have 12-step groups to help us escape from our biblical ideas! That Bible can really mess you up, you know. Why, it just might help you see through false teachers like McLaren!

Finally, this week I came across another blog to follow. I was directed to the blog because of this excellent article about “The cult of agreeableness.” Tune in to this blog - Joel has some good stuff to say.

The Psychological Method vs Christianity - Part 7

2011-11-15T09:51:00.001-06:00

WHAT ABOUT “CHRISTIAN PSYCHOLOGY”?

Dave Hunt quotes two Christian psychologists as saying, “there is no acceptable Christian psychology that is markedly different from non-Christian psychology. It is difficult to imply that we function in a manner that is fundamentally distinct from our non-Christian colleagues. . . . As yet there is not an acceptable theory, mode of research or treatment methodology [in psychology] that is distinctly Christian.” Hunt then asks, “Then what is meant by ‘Christian psychology?’ Most laypersons imagine that there is indeed a psychology which is distinctly Christian. The professionals know, however, that they are involved in an attempted integration of atheistic and anti-Christian theories into Christian theology. Psychology is part of that very ‘wisdom of this world’ taught by ‘the spirit of the world’ which Paul rejected (1 Corinthians 2:5-14). Rapha founder Robert McGee frankly confesses that he joins the Holy Spirit in partnership with atheist Albert Ellis, who considers Christianity a cause of mental illness:

‘Changing how we think, feel, and act is a process that involves the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. . . . As a starting point, however, we will use a model adapted from psychologist Albert Ellis’s Rational Emotive Therapy.’

“Psychology comes out of the occult, is not scientific, and many of its leading professionals admit that it is destructive. The same legitimate criticisms that can be leveled against secular psychology apply equally to so-called ‘Christian’ psychology. Yet it has invaded the best pulpits and is a large part of the curriculum in Christian universities and even seminaries.”

If the roots of a system are bad, and there is no science behind the system, and the fruits of the system are bad, why should Christians be dabbling in it? Why do we have “Christian Psychologists” such as James Dobson, Larry Crabb, Gary Collins, et al, trying to syncretize the psych system with Christianity? “What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?” (2 Cor. 6:14).

SUMMARY

The world view in which the roots of psych are firmly planted and fed is one of sexual perversion, humanism, evolutionism, atheism, the occult, hedonism and selfism. There is nothing scientific about the methods and theories, rather they are very much akin to witchcraft and shamanism, and we have seen that it is in fact a religious belief incompatible with Christianity. As would be - should be - expected of the roots feeding on this world view, the fruits produced are sexual perversion, sexual immorality, idolatry of self, eugenics, racism, lack of personal responsibility, spiritual anarchy, and the break up of the family unit. This fruit is harmful not only to the individual, but has brought much ruin on society in every aspect of it, even to the permeating of the church with so many programs based on the psych methods.

CONCLUSION

What about the Christian in need of counsel; what do we as the Church do with them and how do we go about getting the counseling help we might need? The obvious answer is that we go to the Bible. It claims to be sufficient for all our needs (2 Pet. 1:3) and the Holy Spirit is there to guide us into all wisdom.

According to Torrey there are four primary components of counseling no matter who is doing it, no matter what the qualifications or theory. These four components are: 1. a shared worldview 2. the personal qualities of the therapist 3. the expectations of the client 4. emerging sense of mastery in the client. Every one of these can be fulfilled with Biblical counseling.

Essentially, the worldview/culture is the most important feature. Torrey states that “all attempts at cross-cultural psychotherapy of which I am aware have been either difficult or unsuccessful.” Interestingly, he also states that, “Therapists in almost all cultures are closely allied with religious functions.” Since the Christian world view is based on the Bible, the Christian’s counselor should have the very same world view and be a Christian.

When it comes to item 2, the therapist must be someone who is moral and ethical, with worth and dignity and able to be respected. This may not even be the actual qualities, but may also be those projected on the counselor by the client. Torrey points out that the therapist-client relationship is a personal one in all cultures of the world. A church elder, pastor, or even a trusted friend who is seen as knowledgeable in the Scriptures should fulfill this role for the Christian.

The third component of client expectations is very important. As Torrey says, “Anything that raises client expectations aids this process.” He points out that, “The expectations of a client in psychotherapy are a composite of many factors. Hope is an essential element, and this in turn is related to trust in the healer or therapist. Trust is dependent on the personality characteristics of the therapist, and in this way the third component of psychotherapy (client expectations) interacts with the second (personal qualities of the therapist).” Can we not as Christian counselors give expectations of hope to our counselees?

Part of the process of client expectations is the important function of naming the problem, which Torrey calls “the principle of Rumpelstiltskin.” In relation to this Torrey says, “much of the naming process and the assignment of meaning can be looked at from the vantage point of increasing the client’s faith in the therapist and increasing the expectations of cure. It is the naming, in fact, that is the necessary first step; only when the malady is properly identified does the possibility of curing it become a real one.” With Christian counseling the identity of the problem is usually “sin.”

The fourth component is what Torrey calls “the Superman syndrome.” This is where the client is “convinced that their therapy has provided them with the knowledge, competence, insight, and understanding necessary to master life’s adversities. . . . ” The Christian counselor should provide the counselee with the proper biblical teaching and requirements of personal responsibility so that the counselee is certainly left with the ability to master the problem following the Lord’s instructions.

Biblical counseling is a valid field, and is sometimes known as “nouthetic” counseling. Leaders in this field include Jay Adams, whose books for Biblical Counselors are many and thorough. Let us as Christians seek the use of Biblical Counseling, and totally separate ourselves from the psych philosophies.

The following sources were were cited in this series:

Freudian Fraud, by E. Fuller Torrey, M.D.

Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists, by E. Fuller Torrey, M.D.

The End of “Christian Psychology,” by Martin & Deidre Bobgan

Occult Invasion, by Dave Hunt

Psychology as Religion: The Cult of Self-Worship, by Paul C. Vitz

Beyond Seduction: A Return to Biblical Christianity, by Dave Hunt

Why Christians Can’t Trust Psychology, by Ed Bulkley, Ph.D

Evolution in American Education and the Demise of its Public School System, by Lael Weinberger, located at http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2005/01/31/evolution-american-education

Additional recommended sources consulted:

Psychobabble: The Failure of Modern Psychology - and the Biblical Alternative, by Richard Ganz

Psychology and the Church, by Dave Hunt & T.A. McMahon

Psychoheresy: The Psychological Seduction of Christianity, by Martin & Deidre Bobgan

Deceptive Diagnosis: When Sin is Called Sickness, by Dr. David Tyler & Dr. Kurt Grady

Christian Psychology’s War on God’s Word, by Jim Owen

Psychologized Man: A Biblical Perspective, by Martha Peace

Manufacturing Victims: What the Psychology Industry is Doing to People, by Dr. Tana Dineen

James Dobson’s Gospel of Self-Esteem & Psychology, by Martin and Deidre Bobgan

TheoPhostic Counseling: Divine Revelation or Psycho Heresy? by Martin and Deidre Bobgan

Larry Crabb’s Gospel, by Martin and Deidre Bobgan

12 Steps to Destruction: Codependency Recovery Heresies, by Martin and Deidre Bobgan

ADHD: Deceptive Diagnosis, by Dr. David M. Tyler and Dr. Kurt P. Grady

Will Medicine Stop the Pain? by Elyse Fitzpatrick & Laura Hendrickson, M.D.

Self-Esteem: Are We Really Better Than We Think? by David M. Tyler, Ph.D

The Biblical View of Self-Esteem, Self-Love, Self-Image, by Jay E. Adams

Recommended resources for Christian Counseling

Mending the Soul: Understanding and Healing Abuse, by Steven R. Tracy, Ph.D.

Competent to Counsel: Introduction to Nouthetic Counseling, by Jay E. Adams

The Christian Counselor’s Manual, by Jay E. Adams

A Theology of Christian Counseling, by Jay E. Adams

The Christian Counselor’s Casebook, by Jay E. Adams

A Homework Manual for Biblical Living: Vol. 1 Personal and Interpersonal Problems, by Wayne A. Mack

Leaving Yesterday Behind: A Victim No More, by William Hines

Only God Can Heal the Wounded Heart, by Ed Bulkley, Ph.D

Curing the Heart: A Model for Biblical Counseling, by Howard Eyrich & William Hines

Counsel From Psalm 119, by Jay E. Adams

Helps for Counselors: A Mini-Manual for Christian Counselors, by Jay E. Adams

Hope & Help for Self-Injurers and Cutters, by Mark Shaw

The Biblical View of Self-Esteem, Self-Love, Self-Image, by Jay E. Adams

From Forgiven to Forgiving, by Jay E. Adams

The Psychological Method vs Christianity - Part 6

2011-11-14T12:47:00.001-06:00

FRUITS OF THE PHILOSOPHY
For purposes of our study, this can be the most important section, demonstrating what the fruits of the psych field are and will be. Some of the fruits of the philosophy behind the psych fields are harmful to individuals undergoing the counseling, while the entire civilization is harmed by the psych fields in general. These are the fruits of this world view which is based on such an anti-God philosophy. I will begin this section with harm caused to individuals.

The Bobgans quote Dr. Jeffrey Masson, former Projects Director of the Sigmund Freud Archives, as saying, “Everybody should know, then, that to step into the office of a psychotherapist, regardless of the latter’s persuasion, is to enter a world where great harm is possible.” Knowing this, why would anyone, let alone a Christian, put himself at the mercy of a psychotherapist?

Torrey cites a review of 12 studies which says that psychotherapy is harmful in one out of 20 people, and that some types of “therapy” have even higher harm rates. He says that, “Even individuals who do not have a brain disease may become agitated, anxious, and severely depressed by psychotherapy.” Torrey also points out that there are “other adverse effects of psychotherapy, which occur more commonly with insight-oriented therapies as found in the United States. One is a syndrome described. . . as the ‘utilization of a psychotherapeutic experience to rationalize feelings of smugness, superiority over others, or utilizing “insights” to aggressively comment on other people’s behavior.’” He says that a “variant of this is the fully ‘analyzed’ client or therapist whose insight becomes a rationalization for self-serving behavior.”

The Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change says, “. . . research suggests that some patients are worse as a result of psychotherapy. . . . Many more recent studies continue to document rates of deterioration in patients, even in those who participate in carefully controlled research protocols. . . . After reviewing the empirical literature and the critiques of the evidence accumulated, it is our view that psychotherapy can and does harm a portion of those it is intended to help.”

Hunt tells us of a disturbing case: “Indeed, in the famous Cambridge-Sommerville Youth Study, involving 650 underprivileged boys six to ten years of age (divided equally into two groups), follow-up 30 years later revealed that those who received therapy had more problems with ‘alcoholism, mental illness, job dissatisfaction and stress-related diseases’ and committed significantly more serious crimes than those who were not given the ‘benefit’ of psychological counseling. Any scientific evidence we have been able to compile proves that psychotherapy is at best ineffective and is even harmful in many cases.”

Hunt also cites the following from Bruce Wiseman’s Psychiatry, The Ultimate Betrayal: “For eons some children, like adults, have always been more active than others. Perhaps they play harder or wander mentally because of a short attention span. . .[and] parents simply dealt with this as a fact of life. . . . And the wise parent saw that children, like adults, learn to change their behavior for the better. . . . However, psychiatry has deemed there is something wrong. . . . The child and parents thought he was normal when they walked into the psychiatrist’s office. They think he is abnormal when they walk out. . . . As a normal child he would have been tolerated, endured, disciplined. . . whatever parents have done for thousands of years. And in all likelihood, he would have grown out of it with little significance made of the situation. As an abnormal child, however, he would have been treated much differently by his parents, his teachers, and possibly his classmates. He would have been ‘special’. . . on years of medication. . . . He himself would, of course, think he had something inherently wrong with him. . . . Most likely this sense of ‘abnormality’ would be with him the rest of his life.” (This is certainly what we see with the government schools diagnosing so many as ADD/ADHD and medicating them for their school career.)

Torrey tells us that studies have shown “that counseling and psychotherapy given to young juvenile delinquents do not decrease later criminal behavior. On the contrary, insofar as it has any effect at all, it appears to increase later criminal behavior.” This is certainly harmful to these individuals, and to their victims.

From this point we will be looking at the overall harm to society in general that has come by way of the psych fields. Although the problem is world-wide, it is more prevalent in the United States due to the full embracing of the psych fields in this country for the past century. Carl Rogers stated that, “Yes, it is true, psychotherapy is subversive. . . . Therapy, theories and techniques promote a new model of man contrary to that which has been traditionally acceptable.” This philosophy of being subversive to the point of promoting that which has never been traditionally acceptable is indeed bringing ruin to our society.

As previously noted, the overarching philosophy of the psych fields is that the self is most important, that we as individuals should be determining values without resorting to an outside source for guidance, and that our happiness is supreme over everything. This causes major problems since, as Paul Vitz reminds us, “individual relativism leads to social anarchy and. . . it flies in the face of simple common sense.”

Torrey tells us, “The core of Freud’s theory and therapy are both fundamentally narcissistic in assuming that one’s happiness is the greatest good. . . . Indeed, the focus of virtually all psychotherapy systems, many of which come and go in America like cerebral fall fashions, is not some higher ideal, not one’s fellow man, but merely oneself.” But has this self-focus been good at all? Absolutely not! Hunt tells us that, “Numerous studies by secular psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that the higher one’s self-esteem, the more likely one is to be immoral, violent, and prone to trample on the rights of others.”

Even Maslow recognized a major problem with his self-esteem theory. The Bobgans cite his book Motivation and Personality where Maslow says, “The high scorers in my test of dominance-feeling or self-esteem were more apt to come late to appointments with the experimenter, to be less respectful, more casual, more forward, more condescending, less tense, anxious, and worried, more apt to accept an offered cigarette, much more apt to make themselves comfortable without bidding or invitation. In still another research, their sexual reactions were found to be even more sharply different. The stronger [high self-esteem] woman is much more apt to be pagan, permissive, and accepting in all sexual realms. She is less apt to be a virgin, more apt to have masturbated, more apt to have had sexual relations with more than one man, much more apt to have tried such experiments as homosexuality [and other itemized behaviors]. In other words, here too she is apt to be more forward, less inhibited, tougher, harder, stronger.”

Vitz also has some good insights. He states that, “The growth of self-expression in our classrooms in the last two decades has not served to bring a glorious increase in student happiness and mental health. If anything, the great rise in student violence and the continued decline in student test scores are evidence that the opposite has occurred. In short, the assumption about the complete natural goodness of the self, which stands at the heart of the values clarification theory, is false.” Vitz avers that ". . . .modern psychology has created widespread 'social pollution' by its analytical (and also reductionist) emphasis on the isolated individual and its relentless hostility to social bonds as expressed in tradition, community structures, and the family."

As an example of the problems originating in this idolatry of the self, Vitz states, “The increase in the rates of divorce owes much to the values advanced by self-theory, at least if the comments of former partners can be taken at face value.” He also points out that, “Many self-theorists, especially Carl Rogers, give very little value to marriage - and indeed encourage divorce on theoretical grounds. . . . Rogers states that ‘a relationship between a man and a woman is significant, and worth trying to preserve, only when it is an enhancing, growing experience for each person.’”

Are there other teachings in the psych fields that aid in this breakdown of marriage and family? Most certainly. As previously noted, Freud, as well as many of his followers, were very misogynistic. This makes the theory inherently so, as well as being very patronizing of women. Karl Menniger, for example, claimed that mothers were the cause of just about every problem with individuals or civilizations! Torrey says that, “This theory has led logically to an epidemic of mother-blaming and women-bashing among mental health professionals. For example, a study of 125 articles in professional journals published between 1970 and 1982 reported that ‘mothers were held responsible for 72 different kinds of psychological disorders in their children . . . not a single mother was ever described as emotionally healthy, although some fathers were, and no mother-child relationship was said to be healthy.’ A social worker recalled that during her training, ‘We took it for granted that mothers caused much pathology. . . . If a patient is in trouble, the underlying assumption is that the mother must have done something wrong. . . . If [the problem] is not viral or bacterial, it must be maternal.’ The concept of pathogenic mothering has come to permeate almost all forms of psychotherapy and is used to explain most individual and family pathology. . . . …according to Freudian theory, women rather than men are said to be responsible for many of the world’s problems.”

With this view of women, is it any wonder that sexual relationships are not respectful of women; that sexual “freedom” becomes the norm so that women are nothing more than objects of satisfaction for men? If one denigrates marriage by idolatry of self, and believes that women are the cause of all the problems in the world, why not just use them for gratification of sexual desires by men? Just what other ideas in the realm of sexuality do we have projected by the psych fields; what philosophies are prevalent today that have led to such abuse of sexuality? Let’s look at some of these ideas.

Torrey cites Paul Goodman, a Freudian, as saying that “the repression of infantile and adolescent sexuality is the direct cause of submissiveness of the people to present rule of whatever kind.” So apparently even children should be sexually active to avoid such a “neurosis.” It is quite apparent to anyone reading the daily newspaper just where this has headed, with public school sex education becoming more of “how to” rather than limiting the instruction to biological information, while they hand out condoms to students, advocate homosexuality as an alternative, aid students in getting abortions, and leave the whole subject of morality up to the students themselves.

The sexual revolution which has led to all sorts of sexual immorality is indeed rooted in the psych fields. As a result of a vote, rather than any scientific or medical evidence, the American Psychiatric Association and American Psychological Association both removed homosexuality from their list of mental illnesses in 1973, which led to more and more societal acceptance to the point where it is propagated as a normal lifestyle in all arenas of public life. This is also what led to the acceptance of homosexuals adopting and “civil unions.” The decision to remove homosexuality from being a mental illness was done under pressure from homosexual lobbyists. In 1998 the American Psychiatric Association stated that therapy aimed at changing homosexuals should be rejected. In the summer of 2004 the American Psychological Association even came out with resolutions supporting homosexuals adopting and homosexuals “marrying.”

To demonstrate just how far the psych fields have gone in advancing sexual immorality, it was only a couple of years ago that at their conference in San Francisco members of these associations suggested that adult-child sex was not harmful.

Torrey tells us that “A second major liability of Freud’s theory has been its promotion of irresponsibility. This evolved logically from the belief that individuals are governed by powerful unconscious forces, arising from early childhood experiences, which thereby usurp their freedom of action. . . . It is the areas of child rearing and criminal behavior in which Freudian theory has had the most profound effect and in which traditional concepts of responsibility have been challenged. In the Freudian scheme, men and women are seen increasingly as puppets of their psyches governed primarily by the edicts of their egos. The corollary of ‘don’t blame me’ is ‘blame my parents,’ expressed clearly from the earliest days of the Freudian movement. . . . In the Freudian schema, mother, father, family, social circumstances, and culture become the causal agents for whatever is wrong. The ripple of personal irresponsibility spreads slowly outward to cover ever greater areas until the very terms ‘good’ and ‘bad’ seem to no longer have meaning.”

Most of today’s leaders in just about every part of society were products of child-rearing practices of the 1950s and 1960s, which were based on Freudian concepts that were promoted primarily by Dr. Benjamin Spock. These teachings can be directly linked to the permissiveness that became so prevalent from the 1960s on. Torrey cites Dr. Louise B. Ames, Co-director of the Gesell Institute of Child Development as saying, “Most of the damage we have seen in child rearing is the fault of the Freudian and neo-Freudians who have dominated the field. They have frightened parents and kept the truth from them. In child care I would say that Freudianism has been the psychological crime of the century.” Torrey also cites Norman Vincent Peale as characterizing Spock’s teaching as “Feed ‘em whatever they want, don’t let them cry, instant gratification of needs. And now Spock is out in the mobs leading the permissive babies raised on his undisciplined teaching.” Peale is also cited by Torrey as saying that his was “the most undisciplined age in history.” Interestingly, Spock is also cited as saying that parental problems with child rearing “occur mainly in families with college background or with a definite interest in child psychology.”

Dave Hunt makes the clear nexus between these child-rearing practices and irresponsibility in our young people. He says, “The explosion of youth’s rebellion, crime, and immorality has coincided with the exponential growth of psychology since the early 1950s. There was a 43-percent increase in the number of Americans in the 10-19 age bracket who were committed to psychiatric hospitals from 1980 to 1987, while the number of private psychiatric beds per 100,000 persons more than doubled in the five years from 1983 to 1988. What a growth industry! Psychology has been rightly called the only profession that ‘creates the diseases which it claims to cure.’” Hunt continues by pointing out, “What was once disciplined as laziness, disinterest, stubbornness, or rebellion is now excused as a mental ‘disorder.’ The number of children diagnosed as having ‘learning disabilities’ nearly tripled from 1977 to 1992!”

As I have demonstrated previously, it was the Freudian theory and its follow-ons which taught the idea that no one is really responsible for their actions, because they only behave the way they do due to some problem that took place during their childhood. “Mental illnesses” have multiplied exponentially over the years to the point that just about everyone in society has some sort of neurosis! This has led to pleas of “not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect” by many criminal lawyers. A U.S. Court of Appeals decision has even stated that a person “could be ruled not guilty of a crime by reason of irresistible impulse.” Personal responsibility is absolved! Again, daily references to the newspapers will show how many criminals are judged innocent because of various “mental diseases,” and how many lawsuits are won against corporations because the judicial system, following the psych fields’ teachings, refuse to assign personal responsibility to the so-called “victims” who smoke, over-eat, misuse products, etc.

One result of the psych field is our tradition of age-segregated public school systems. The following lengthy citation demonstrates the connection between the psych field and the belief in evolution which it propagates:

“While a public fight was going on over what would be taught in the public school science curriculum, evolution was being applied to the schools in a more subtle manner. In the late 1800s, Granville Stanley Hall was a prominent educator at Johns Hopkins University. He believed in evolution and was a leader in the developing field of psychology. In 1904, he published a book on adolescence, advocating a new theory of child development based on evolutionary recapitulation . This theory was soon to be applied to classrooms across America.

“Hall’s recapitulation belief was that child development reflected evolutionary ancestry; certain ages, he argued, represented stages of evolutionary development. Infancy and early childhood corresponded to early “pre-civilized” mankind just grown out of its animal stage. Ages 6–7 were “crisis” years, where children could enter school and leave the “pre-civilized” state behind. Ages 8–12 corresponded to “the world of early pigmies.” Ages 13–18 were what he declared to be the stage of adolescence. This period, Hall claimed, was critical, as the child entered a “stormy” ancient civilization stage, and finally grew into full civilization.

“Hall’s book was a major influence on the public schools as age segregation became more emphasized. Before Hall, the “stormy” period of adolescence was virtually unknown. John Quincy Adams, later to become US president, received a diplomatic appointment overseas for the federal government when he was only fourteen years old. For those who acquired a college education in the 1700s, thirteen-year-old freshmen were not uncommon. But Hall made little allowance for the fact that children mature differently. Now all six-year-olds, seven-year-olds and eight-year-olds get their own classes, learn to stick with their age group peers, and it is regarded as odd—if not suspicious—if a ten-year-old associates with a fifteen-year-old. Today it is often a terrible thing for a child to be ahead of his peers—public school children must fit into Hall’s evolutionary mold. (Perhaps this is why we don’t see children like John Quincy Adams any more.)

“Hall’s theory was widely accepted because it was in full character with the mood of academia at the start of the twentieth century. Freud’s humanistic psychology was growing in acceptance, and Hall was a leader in psychology. The theory of embryonic recapitulation was also popular, and Hall merely extended this belief (namely, that human embryos recapitulate—or retrace—their evolutionary history) to children after they were born. Thus, the days of the one-room schoolhouse were numbered, and age segregation became more and more emphasized. Age segregation, it should be noted, is certainly foreign to “real life,” where one must interact with people of all ages. (Incidentally, even Benjamin Rush, one of the “fathers” of American public schools, stated that public schools should imitate conditions of a “private family.”) So when creationists began fighting in the 1920s to keep evolution teaching itself out of the schools, the subtle application of evolution in the schools was already being made.”

Some other fruits of the psych fields are eugenics and racism. Psych was part and parcel of the eugenics movement of the 1920s and 1930s in America. Torrey tells us that, “As late as 1942 Foster Kennedy, a professor of neurology at Cornell University, writing in the American Journal of Psychiatry, urged a program of euthanasia ‘for those hopeless ones who should never have been born - Nature’s mistakes. . . . It is a merciful and kindly thing to relieve that defective - often tortured and convulsed, grotesque and absurd, useless and foolish, and entirely undesirable - of the agony of living.’” As for racism, this thinking is essentially based on evolutionism, that different races are on different levels of evolution. The Psychological Review of January 1930, for example, had an article discussing the superior intellect of the Nordic race. Of course eugenics and racism are bound up with one another; part of the reason for eugenics was for the destruction of so-called lesser races.

The problem of “repressed memories” leading to many false accusations among thousands of Americans also has it’s origin in Freud. Freud wrote, “We must not believe what they [patients] say [when they deny having memories], we must always assume, and tell them, too, that they have kept something back. . . . We must insist on this, we must repeat the pressure and represent ourselves as infallible, till at last we are really told something. . . the pressure technique, in fact, never fails.”

A particular fruit offensive to the Christian faith is in the area of spirituality. Aside from the fact that psych is seen as another religion and is antagonistic to God in general, Hunt’s book has an entire chapter discussing the occult connections with the psych field. The issue of multiple personalities has been raised into the claim that we all have them and that we need to get in touch with them. The connections to the mind sciences is established, the use of hypnosis in treatments opening up the client to the occult, the affiliation with shamans among members of the Association for Humanistic Psychology, and the connections between the psych field and the search for extra-terrestrials. In this same area of thought, the Bobgans cite Dr. Maureen O’Hara as saying, “It is significant to remember that the present New Age movement has its origins in the counterculture of the sixties and early seventies. Early inspiration came from the writings of Abraham Maslow, Eric Fromm, Rollo May, Carl Rogers, and others.”

Some last thoughts to give cause for concern about where the fruits of psych are heading will close this section. Torrey has demonstrated that the Freudian theory has influenced the majority of the liberal intellectual elite, and that the Democratic party as a whole has succumbed to this philosophy. He also cites Dr. G. Brock Chisholm, at the time president of the World Federation for Mental Health, as saying, “if the race is to be freed from its crippling burden of good and evil, it must be the psychiatrists who take the original responsibility.” And Hunt cites leading psychologists as suggesting that “parents be licensed to have children only upon demonstrating a sound understanding . . . of truth dispensed by psychologists.”

Will you be licensed?

Random Apostasies and Heresies

2011-11-13T17:25:00.000-06:00

A California ELCA church bills itself as “herchuch,” and is a bastion of feminist ideology. As if this wasn’t heretical enough, they just hosted the fifth annual “Faith and Feminism Conference,” which included a high priestess of Isis as one of the speakers. So why does the ELCA not excommunicate this heretical assembly? Oh, that’s right, because the ELCA is apostate itself!

Zondervan publishers has long printed many books with false teachings, but their latest endeavor is taking new roads to apostasy. Take a look at the book and small group curriculum they are publishing based on the Jewish Mishnah.

Joel Osteen never ceases to amaze me with just how much a false teacher he is. Now he has had Oprah Winfrey as a visitor and instead of rebuking her for her false teaching and leading so many people away from God, he praises her and gushes all over her, and all the goats in his assembly do the same! Osteen is 100% poison to the Christian faith. Apprising Ministries has a good article about this incident.

Michael and Debi Pearl are back in the news with their aberrational child-raising methods. It seems there have been more children killed by applying their principles. I have to admit that, as taught in their book, they do not advocate quite such severe punishment, but anyone taking the teaching to its logical conclusion will certainly end up with that.

The Snarky Apologist always has some good videos exposing the false teachings of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Usually they are fairly short, but this one is just over 14 minutes. It is some good information for anyone who wants to be able to counter the JWs at the door with some good questions.

Ralph Peterson has a short video which demonstrates Benny Hinn exercising his demonic power; but Ralph humorously calls it “Christian Whack-a-Mole.”

Finally, I came across an excellent article this week itemizing “95 Specious Lies of Rome” in honor of Luther’s 95 Thesis. Something to share with your Roman Catholic friends.

The Psychological Method vs. Christianity - Part 5

2011-11-12T11:03:00.001-06:00

Aside from the various previous citations in reference to individual religious beliefs and religious connotations of their teachings, here I will demonstrate the various ways in which the psych field is indeed seen as some type of religion. Vitz bluntly states, “contemporary psychology is a form of secular humanism based on the rejection of God and the worship of self.” He also states, "In many respects, all modern psychology of whatever theoretical persuasion, because of the emphasis on special, somewhat esoteric knowledge, can be interpreted as part of a vast gnostic heresy."

Torrey tells us that, “The similarities of Freudian theory and therapy to a religion have been noted and commented upon from its earliest inception in Vienna. . . . . Freud offered an understanding of the unknown, an explanation for evil, and in later years. . . even a myth of creation.” Meanwhile, Hunt quotes psychologists who have “described psychotherapy as a kind of national religion, with a gospel of self-fulfillment and with therapists as the new priests”. The Bobgans cite psychiatrist Thomas S. Szasz, Professor Emeritus of State University of New York, as saying, “. . . the human relations we now call ‘psychotherapy’ are, in fact, matters of religion - and that we mislabel them as ‘therapeutic’ at great risk to our spiritual well-being.”

Jung essentially felt that God was in everyone with a collective unconscious. His “goal for psychoanalysis was to be an all-encompassing religion superior to Christianity,” and the Bobgans cite a letter Jung wrote to Freud as follows: “I imagine a far finer and more comprehensive task for [psychoanalysis] than alliance with an ethical fraternity. I think we must give it time to infiltrate into people from many centers, to revivify among intellectuals a feeling for symbol and myth, ever so gently to transform Christ back into the soothsaying god of the vine, which he was, and in this way absorb those ecstatic instinctual forces of Christianity for the one purpose of making the cult and the sacred myth what they once were - a drunken feast of joy where man regained the ethos and holiness of an animal.”

The Bobgans also cite Maslow: “These psychologies give promise of developing into the life-philosophy, the religion-surrogate, the value-system, the life-program that these people have been missing. Without the transcendent and the transpersonal, we get sick, violent, and nihilistic, or else hopeless and apathetic. We need something ‘bigger than we are’ to be awed by and to commit ourselves to in a new, naturalistic, empirical, non-churchy sense, perhaps as Thoreau and Whitman, William James and John Dewey did.”

Dave Hunt cites an article from Psychology Today where Rollo May says, “We have bid goodbye to the theologians at the wake for our dead God.” He also cites a 1969 article from the same magazine that says we must “face our own inner experiences without the guidance of traditional. . . foundation stones of Judeo-Christian experience. . . . We are compelled to erect our own morality, arrive at our own faith and belief. . . .”

Hunt also tells of the Journal of Humanistic Psychology publishing an article declaring, “From Delphi’s ‘know thyself’ through scripture’s ‘you shall be as gods!’ we are left with the certitude that we are, indeed, multidimensional beings capable of works beyond our imagining and that our primary purpose in life is to discover who we are and who we can become.”

Another citation from the Bobgans is this one from Herbert Lazarus in his book, How to Get Your Money's Worth Out of Psychiatry: “Psychiatry has a quarrel with only those forms of religion which emphasize the doctrine of original sin. Any belief that tends to focus on the idea that man is inherently evil conflicts with the basically humanistic approach to problems that psychiatrists must follow."

G. Brock Chishom, onetime director of the U.N. World Health Organization and president of the World Federation for Mental Health, stated, “If the race is to be freed from its crippling burden of good and evil, it must be psychiatrists who take the original responsibility. . . . With the other human sciences, psychiatry must now decide what is to be the immediate future of the human race. No one else can. And this is the prime responsibility of psychiatry.”

To sum up this section I have to agree with William Kirk Kilpatrick, Associate Professor of Educational Psychology at Boston College, who is cited by Bulkley as saying, “Psychology and religion are competing faiths. If you seriously hold to one set of values, you will logically have to reject the other.”

The Psychological Method vs. Christianity - Part 4

2011-11-11T11:27:00.000-06:00

SCIENCE OR THEORY?

There is nothing scientific about the psych field; psychologists have developed hundreds of theories and several thousand therapies. A good place to start an examination to prove this is to look at some citations about Freud’s theories in particular, since, as already stated, all other theories have their ultimate origin in Freud.

Freud’s theories essentially state that “early childhood experiences, especially those that are sexual in nature, as being the crucial determinants of adult personality and behavior.” Hunt points out that Freud’s theories “were founded upon his warped view that all thought, feeling, and motivation have their roots in sexual cravings.” However, as Torrey succinctly puts it, “people who have invested hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars in therapies arising from Freudian theory are not pleased to learn that the theory is devoid of any scientific foundation.”

Torrey writes that, “Although he had been trained as a scientist and on occasion invoked scientific metaphors to support his position, after the turn of the century Freud’s interest in scientifically validating his theory appears to have waned. . . . Freud’s critics noted the scientific shortcomings of his theory from its earliest days.” Torrey also cites a 1916 article in the Nation which said that Freud’s theory was “well founded neither theoretically nor empirically. . . . it conveys the impression of unscientific method.”

In 1959 Dr. Benjamin Spock attempted to prove that Freud’s theory was accurate and he recruited 21 families to study. As Torrey tells us, “The results of the study provided no support whatsoever for Freud’s theory and, not surprisingly, little of the data was ever published.”

Torrey cites study after study demonstrating the lack of scientific evidence for Freud’s theories. The following lengthy citation from Torrey will shed some light on the subject:

The scientific validity of the oral, anal, and Oedipal stages of development has been reviewed by several researchers over the years. In 1937 Gardner Murphy and his colleagues noted:

Although we have now been exposed for some time to psychoanalytic and other psychiatric hypotheses regarding the effects of birth trauma, weaning trauma, extreme emphasis on early control of urination and defecation, excessive attention from adults, dethronement by a second child, we have almost no objective records of the development of children going through these experiences, or of experiments controlling certain aspects of the problem.

Ten years later Harold Orlansky reviewed the pertinent “empirical data bearing on the theory that various features of infant care determine adult personality” and reported that “our conclusion has been largely negative.” In 1952 Ernest Hilgard et al., although sympathetic to the Freudian point of view, acknowledged in a review that “anyone who tries to give an honest appraisal of psychoanalysis as a science must be ready to admit that as it is stated it is mostly very bad science, that the bulk of the articles in its journals cannot be defended as research publications at all.” . . . .

[Paul] Kline added: “Freudian theory, so far as it is dependent on data at all, rests on data which by the criteria of scientific methodology are totally inadequate. These data are, for the most part, the free associations of patients undergoing therapy and their dream reports, and both of these sources are unquantifiable and riddled with subjective interpretation.”. . . .

[Hans Eysenck in the 1985 edition of The Experimental Study of Freudian Theories] likened Freud’s ideas to a “medieval morality play” populated “by such mythological figures as the ego, the id and the superego . . . too absurd to deserve scientific status.” Freud was, Eysenck wrote, “without doubt a genius not of science but of propaganda, not of rigorous proof but of persuasion, not of the design of experiments but of literary art. His place is not, as he claimed, with Copernicus and Darwin but with Hans Christian Anderson and the Brothers Grimm, tellers of fairy tales.”

Torrey makes the clear statement that “learning and mastery are important components of effective psychotherapy not because the theories being taught have any scientific basis but because people believe in them.” So any theory is okay, as long as the client believes the theory being espoused by the particular therapist. The problem, of course, is that there are so many of these theories that we should be objective and not judge the theory by beliefs, but whether there is any supporting evidence behind them. Torrey cites a textbook by Redlich and Freedman as saying that if we used only the psych theories that were based on scientific evidence, then “not much would remain, because there are very few truly scientific therapies in our field.”

What is disturbing is that even though we should look for evidence over beliefs, this is not the norm in the psych field. Torrey points out that “. . . scientific validity of insights and truths is irrelevant in psychotherapy. Learning is a process, and the achievement of mastery is an end in itself. It matters little whether the truths have a small or a large t; if they are accepted by the client, then they have the same force as religious beliefs have on the devout Muslim, Buddhist, or Christian. As any mullah or priest can tell you, it is the strength of a person’s belief that is the important determinant of whether the person is able to translate belief into action.” In fact, as if to prove this point, Dave Hunt cites an article from American Journal of Psychiatry that says, “Patients given conventional mental-health treatment in Puerto Rico reported less improvement than those that often went to spiritist healers. . . . [In] spiritist healing. . . mediums receive spirit messages or become possessed by spirits in order to diagnose, counsel or prescribe herbal and ritual remedies.”

Now let’s take a look at the psych field in general.

Hunt tells us that “A lengthy study appointed by the American Psychological Association (subsidized by the National Science Foundation and involving 80 eminent scholars) concluded in 1979 that psychology is not and cannot be a science. Karl Popper, one of the greatest philosophers of science, declared that psychological theories have ‘more in common with primitive myths than with science.’” Hunt also cites Dr. Tana Dineen as saying that if psychologists “were to look honestly at what they are doing it would cause them to have doubts about their effectiveness, their worth, their self-image and their career.”

“Dr. Arthur Shapiro, clinical professor of psychiatry at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, says: ‘Just as bloodletting was perhaps the massive placebo technique of the past, so psychoanalysis - and its dozens of psychotherapy offshoots - is the most used placebo of our time.’"

The Bobgans cite Psychologist Roger Mills as saying, “The field of psychology today is literally a mess. There are as many techniques, methods and theories around as there are researchers and therapists. I have personally seen therapists convince their clients that all of their problems come from their mothers, the stars, their bio-chemical make-up, their diet, their life-style and even the ‘kharma’ from their past lives.”

The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM) was first published in 1952 with 112 “disorders” compared to six from 100 years earlier. In 1968 the total was 163 and by 1980 it was 224. In 1994 the list had grown to 374 “mental disorders.” Ironically, there has been no scientific validation for this exponential growth of “mental illnesses.”

Dave Hunt cites past president of the Association for Humanistic Psychology, Lawrence LeShan, as suggesting “that psychotherapy will be known as the hoax of the twentieth century.” Hunt also notes that one of psychology’s most respected leaders, R.D. Laing, gave an “opinion that not even one ‘fundamental insight into relations between human beings [had] resulted from a century of psychotherapy.’”

The psych field has no scientific support for any of their theories, and yet the field is promoted as authoritative when discussing human behavior.