Yesterday in church we sang a song that was popular in the 1960s and 1970s among the “Jesus People,” and one I learned when I was studying with the Navigators during my Army days. It is titled, We Are One In the Spirit.
Over the years as I have matured in my faith, I get more and more annoyed by this little ditty. It’s a “feel-good” song, for sure, but the apologetic eye sees a serious biblical error in this song. Let me show you the third verse and see if you can spot the problem:
We will work with each other,
We will work side by side.
We will work with each other,
We will work side by side.
And we'll guard each man's dignity
And save each man's pride.
Do you see it? How many times do Christians sing this song without thinking about all the lyrics? Where is the discernment?
“And we’ll guard each man’s dignity and save each man’s pride.” Where is this taught in the Bible? Isn’t pride something that we have to guard against? Do we find anything in Scripture at all about saving each other’s pride? Some may argue that showing respect for someone is “guarding” their dignity; perhaps we can even say the dignity of man is the image of God. So I won’t quibble on this part because it can really get nuanced. But “saving” each other’s pride is something I just can’t validate at all.
Isn’t it time we threw this old “feel-good” song out?
Monday, May 31, 2010
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Are Christians Required to Keep the Sabbath?
I thought about this post because I have fairly recently been engaged in this discussion with a Seventh-day Adventist, then later with my brother, and then this past week I saw a comment posted on another blog charging Christians with not keeping the Sabbath. So this is my analysis of the issue.
Before the Law of Moses there was no Sabbath. When God made the seventh day holy in Genesis, that's all we know about it - He made it holy. God doesn't say what the day was going to be for, just that it was made holy, meaning "set apart." Set apart for what? We aren't told. The very first time the word Sabbath is mentioned is Exodus 16:23-30 when God gives it to Israel as a day of rest - not as a day of worship since they were to worship God daily.
Okay, now with that prelude, let me digress to the connection between the Ten Commandments and the Sabbath.
Let me first point out that the Law of Moses (hereafter referred to as the “Law”) was only for Israel and no other nation. The Gentiles did not have the Law, nor were they ever to be given it or mandated to follow it. (For biblical references see: Deut. 4:7-8; Lev. 27:34; Ps.147:19-20; Neh. 9:14; Mal. 4:4; Acts 15: 5, 24; Rom. 2:14; 2 Cor. 3:7-8, 11, 14; Gal. 3:25; Heb. 7:12, 18.)
So then, does that mean the Gentiles had no moral law? Of course not. Romans 2:14-15 says the moral law is written on the hearts of all people.
Now, as to the Ten Commandments - which are part of the Law and not given to anyone but Israel - notice how they do indeed sum up the moral law which is on everyone's heart, with the exception of the command about the Sabbath because there is no moral issue there. Using the Ten Commandment list, here is what the moral law sums up as and why:
1. No other God: Implicit because God is the only true God and He is the creator. To worship any other is fraudulent worship. Adam & Eve would have known this.
2. Do not misuse the name of God. Again, implicit - if He is your creator, you don't abuse Him in any way. Again, Adam & Eve would have known this.
3. Sabbath day. Did not come into play until God gave it to Israel under Moses as a sign of a covenant between God and Israel. It is not a moral law.
4. Honor your father & mother: This is implied because they are the ones who brought you into the world, who nourished you until you were able to function on your own and provided you with training to go into the world. You are also the result of God's command to the parents to be fruitful and multiply.
5. Do not murder. Originally implicit because Cain knew he did wrong by killing Abel. When Noah stepped off the Ark he was told capital punishment would be the consequences for murder (Genesis 9:6). Noah was the federal head of all civilization to follow.
6. Do not commit adultery. Implicit in the institution of marriage where God said the TWO shall be one, which means anyone coming between them violates that oneness.
7. Do not steal. This is certainly a moral code that God would plant in everyone. In no other way could there be peace and love between people.
8. Do not bear false witness against your neighbor. If Adam and Eve didn't have this one planted in them, they quickly learned the consequences when the serpent (Satan) was punished for bearing false witness against God.
9 and 10 are disputed as to how they split but they both deal with coveting something that is not yours to have. Again, if this was not implanted in Adam's and Eve's hearts then they immediately recognized the penalty for coveting when they coveted and ate of the fruit which was not theirs to have.
Notice how all but one of these commands were either implicit, or given before Abraham, meaning they were given to the entire world, which is why these are the ones continually mentioned in the New Testament as being in force for all mankind. But the Sabbath wasn't before Moses and was not for anyone but Israel, which is why Paul, in Col. 2:16-17, said to let no one judge you in regards to a Sabbath. It may also tell us why Jesus made a point to say that man was not made for the Sabbath but the Sabbath was made for man (Mark. 2:27). Notice also how commands 1 & 2 are about our relationship with God, while 4-10 are about our relationship with each other. Number 3, the Sabbath, is not about either one; it is about a sign of a covenant between Israel and God.
Now, let’s take a closer look at the Sabbath. As pointed out above, the very first time the word Sabbath is mentioned is Exodus 16:23-30 when God gives it to Israel as a day of rest. The next time Sabbath is mentioned is in the Ten Commandments; it is here that God explains why He chose the 7th day as a Sabbath for Israel; because God rested from His creative work on the 7th day. (This use of the 7th day of creation is given as the reason for the choice of that day, not to say that a Sabbath day existed prior to the Mosaic Law.)
So then, just what is the Sabbath? It is called a sign of the covenant between God and Israel in Exod. 31:12-17 You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the LORD, who makes you holy....The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come as a lasting covenant. It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever. In Deut. 5:15 we are given the reason for this covenant: Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day. No one else was brought out of Egypt so this cannot refer to anyone but Israel. Nehemiah 9:14 says, You made known to them [Israel] your holy Sabbath and gave them commands, decrees and laws through your servant Moses. Who did Nehemiah say God gave the Sabbath and laws to? ISRAEL! Ezekiel 20:12 says, Also I gave them [Israel] my Sabbaths as a sign between us, so they would know that I the LORD made them holy. Go 8 verses farther and He says, Keep my Sabbaths holy, that they may be a sign between us.
Scripture makes it very clear that the Sabbath is a sign of a covenant between God and Israel. No one else has that covenant that God has with Israel, His chosen people whose job it was to tell the world about the one true God (Exod. 15; Is.42:6; Acts 13:47; Rom. 2:17-20, 3:2).
What about the Sabbath for the Christian? Since it was not known before the Law, and since it is part of the Law, and since the Law was given only to Israel, this would mean the Christian, or any Gentile, was never under command to keep the Sabbath. And since it is a sign between God and the nation of Israel, and Christians are not Israel, Christians are not part of the covenant which the Sabbath signifies. (An analogy would be my wedding ring being a sign of a covenant between me and my wife - no other woman could wear my wife’s ring because another woman would not be a part of our covenant.)
Is Sunday the Christian “Sabbath”? Absolutely not. The Christian has no Sabbath except the Sabbath rest in Jesus (Heb. 4). Sunday was set aside by the first Church as a day of worship and remembering Jesus’ resurrection on the first day of the week (which began sundown Saturday, and which is most likely when Jesus rose - Saturday evening, not Sunday morning - since He was already gone when the disciples arrived at the tomb that morning). The Bible never said this day of fellowship, breaking the bread and worship, was a Christian “Sabbath.”
The meeting on the 1st day of the week was also Saturday evening originally as shown by Acts 20:7-12. Tradition led to meetings on Sunday morning (most likely during the early 4th century under Constantine), but Scripture does not designate any specific day to meet. Heb. 10:24-25 just says not to forsake the meeting, it never says how often to meet or what days to meet. Although tradition has set Sunday for the most part, any day of the week is fine by Scripture. It is a Romans 14 issue.
Jesus came to perfectly fulfill the requirements of the Mosaic Law and, by doing so, He made them inoperative/not in effect (Rom. 7:1-6). In fact, Romans and Galatians both go into discussions about the Mosaic Law being null and void. Being part of the Law, this voids the Ten Commandments, per se, which would include the command to remember the Sabbath. This does not render the law written on our hearts (what could be called a moral law) ineffective because all the moral laws - not the Sabbath law - outlined in the Decalogue are reiterated in the New Testament teachings. (And remember, Paul specifically states that no one is to be judged in regards to a Sabbath Day.)
The Sabbath was to be kept as a day of remembrance by doing no work on it. It was not a day of worship, which is where so many Sabbath-followers make their biggest mistake. There has never been any command by God to choose any day for worship because we are to worship him every day. God said to ISRAEL to remember the Sabbath because it was a sign of the covenant which showed they were set apart for His service - made holy - because He brought them out of Egypt.
One final note for those who claim we must keep the Sabbath: if you demand this, then keep it from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday and obey all the laws laid down for the Jew in relation to the Sabbath. If you claim Sunday is the new Sabbath, then you still need to obey the laws of the Sabbath. Since there are no denominations who do all the requirements of the Sabbath, then anyone demanding Sabbath-keeping who doesn’t keep the letter of the Law, is being hypocritical from the “git-go.”
Christians have their Sabbath in Christ (as do the Jews, but they don’t know it).
Before the Law of Moses there was no Sabbath. When God made the seventh day holy in Genesis, that's all we know about it - He made it holy. God doesn't say what the day was going to be for, just that it was made holy, meaning "set apart." Set apart for what? We aren't told. The very first time the word Sabbath is mentioned is Exodus 16:23-30 when God gives it to Israel as a day of rest - not as a day of worship since they were to worship God daily.
Okay, now with that prelude, let me digress to the connection between the Ten Commandments and the Sabbath.
Let me first point out that the Law of Moses (hereafter referred to as the “Law”) was only for Israel and no other nation. The Gentiles did not have the Law, nor were they ever to be given it or mandated to follow it. (For biblical references see: Deut. 4:7-8; Lev. 27:34; Ps.147:19-20; Neh. 9:14; Mal. 4:4; Acts 15: 5, 24; Rom. 2:14; 2 Cor. 3:7-8, 11, 14; Gal. 3:25; Heb. 7:12, 18.)
So then, does that mean the Gentiles had no moral law? Of course not. Romans 2:14-15 says the moral law is written on the hearts of all people.
Now, as to the Ten Commandments - which are part of the Law and not given to anyone but Israel - notice how they do indeed sum up the moral law which is on everyone's heart, with the exception of the command about the Sabbath because there is no moral issue there. Using the Ten Commandment list, here is what the moral law sums up as and why:
1. No other God: Implicit because God is the only true God and He is the creator. To worship any other is fraudulent worship. Adam & Eve would have known this.
2. Do not misuse the name of God. Again, implicit - if He is your creator, you don't abuse Him in any way. Again, Adam & Eve would have known this.
3. Sabbath day. Did not come into play until God gave it to Israel under Moses as a sign of a covenant between God and Israel. It is not a moral law.
4. Honor your father & mother: This is implied because they are the ones who brought you into the world, who nourished you until you were able to function on your own and provided you with training to go into the world. You are also the result of God's command to the parents to be fruitful and multiply.
5. Do not murder. Originally implicit because Cain knew he did wrong by killing Abel. When Noah stepped off the Ark he was told capital punishment would be the consequences for murder (Genesis 9:6). Noah was the federal head of all civilization to follow.
6. Do not commit adultery. Implicit in the institution of marriage where God said the TWO shall be one, which means anyone coming between them violates that oneness.
7. Do not steal. This is certainly a moral code that God would plant in everyone. In no other way could there be peace and love between people.
8. Do not bear false witness against your neighbor. If Adam and Eve didn't have this one planted in them, they quickly learned the consequences when the serpent (Satan) was punished for bearing false witness against God.
9 and 10 are disputed as to how they split but they both deal with coveting something that is not yours to have. Again, if this was not implanted in Adam's and Eve's hearts then they immediately recognized the penalty for coveting when they coveted and ate of the fruit which was not theirs to have.
Notice how all but one of these commands were either implicit, or given before Abraham, meaning they were given to the entire world, which is why these are the ones continually mentioned in the New Testament as being in force for all mankind. But the Sabbath wasn't before Moses and was not for anyone but Israel, which is why Paul, in Col. 2:16-17, said to let no one judge you in regards to a Sabbath. It may also tell us why Jesus made a point to say that man was not made for the Sabbath but the Sabbath was made for man (Mark. 2:27). Notice also how commands 1 & 2 are about our relationship with God, while 4-10 are about our relationship with each other. Number 3, the Sabbath, is not about either one; it is about a sign of a covenant between Israel and God.
Now, let’s take a closer look at the Sabbath. As pointed out above, the very first time the word Sabbath is mentioned is Exodus 16:23-30 when God gives it to Israel as a day of rest. The next time Sabbath is mentioned is in the Ten Commandments; it is here that God explains why He chose the 7th day as a Sabbath for Israel; because God rested from His creative work on the 7th day. (This use of the 7th day of creation is given as the reason for the choice of that day, not to say that a Sabbath day existed prior to the Mosaic Law.)
So then, just what is the Sabbath? It is called a sign of the covenant between God and Israel in Exod. 31:12-17 You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the LORD, who makes you holy....The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come as a lasting covenant. It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever. In Deut. 5:15 we are given the reason for this covenant: Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day. No one else was brought out of Egypt so this cannot refer to anyone but Israel. Nehemiah 9:14 says, You made known to them [Israel] your holy Sabbath and gave them commands, decrees and laws through your servant Moses. Who did Nehemiah say God gave the Sabbath and laws to? ISRAEL! Ezekiel 20:12 says, Also I gave them [Israel] my Sabbaths as a sign between us, so they would know that I the LORD made them holy. Go 8 verses farther and He says, Keep my Sabbaths holy, that they may be a sign between us.
Scripture makes it very clear that the Sabbath is a sign of a covenant between God and Israel. No one else has that covenant that God has with Israel, His chosen people whose job it was to tell the world about the one true God (Exod. 15; Is.42:6; Acts 13:47; Rom. 2:17-20, 3:2).
What about the Sabbath for the Christian? Since it was not known before the Law, and since it is part of the Law, and since the Law was given only to Israel, this would mean the Christian, or any Gentile, was never under command to keep the Sabbath. And since it is a sign between God and the nation of Israel, and Christians are not Israel, Christians are not part of the covenant which the Sabbath signifies. (An analogy would be my wedding ring being a sign of a covenant between me and my wife - no other woman could wear my wife’s ring because another woman would not be a part of our covenant.)
Is Sunday the Christian “Sabbath”? Absolutely not. The Christian has no Sabbath except the Sabbath rest in Jesus (Heb. 4). Sunday was set aside by the first Church as a day of worship and remembering Jesus’ resurrection on the first day of the week (which began sundown Saturday, and which is most likely when Jesus rose - Saturday evening, not Sunday morning - since He was already gone when the disciples arrived at the tomb that morning). The Bible never said this day of fellowship, breaking the bread and worship, was a Christian “Sabbath.”
The meeting on the 1st day of the week was also Saturday evening originally as shown by Acts 20:7-12. Tradition led to meetings on Sunday morning (most likely during the early 4th century under Constantine), but Scripture does not designate any specific day to meet. Heb. 10:24-25 just says not to forsake the meeting, it never says how often to meet or what days to meet. Although tradition has set Sunday for the most part, any day of the week is fine by Scripture. It is a Romans 14 issue.
Jesus came to perfectly fulfill the requirements of the Mosaic Law and, by doing so, He made them inoperative/not in effect (Rom. 7:1-6). In fact, Romans and Galatians both go into discussions about the Mosaic Law being null and void. Being part of the Law, this voids the Ten Commandments, per se, which would include the command to remember the Sabbath. This does not render the law written on our hearts (what could be called a moral law) ineffective because all the moral laws - not the Sabbath law - outlined in the Decalogue are reiterated in the New Testament teachings. (And remember, Paul specifically states that no one is to be judged in regards to a Sabbath Day.)
The Sabbath was to be kept as a day of remembrance by doing no work on it. It was not a day of worship, which is where so many Sabbath-followers make their biggest mistake. There has never been any command by God to choose any day for worship because we are to worship him every day. God said to ISRAEL to remember the Sabbath because it was a sign of the covenant which showed they were set apart for His service - made holy - because He brought them out of Egypt.
One final note for those who claim we must keep the Sabbath: if you demand this, then keep it from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday and obey all the laws laid down for the Jew in relation to the Sabbath. If you claim Sunday is the new Sabbath, then you still need to obey the laws of the Sabbath. Since there are no denominations who do all the requirements of the Sabbath, then anyone demanding Sabbath-keeping who doesn’t keep the letter of the Law, is being hypocritical from the “git-go.”
Christians have their Sabbath in Christ (as do the Jews, but they don’t know it).
UPDATE 9/2/21: A friend pointed me to an excellent article regarding this topic: Is the Sabbath Still Required For Christians? by Justin Taylor, written a few months after my article.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Let Her Be Veiled?
This is a subject I decided to tackle because Thursday night I again saw a family in which the females all wore what they considered to be a “head covering” (a small piece of fabric pinned just in front of a bun of hair). We were involved with a family several years ago who wore head coverings a bit larger on flowing hair, and we live in an area teaming with Amish and Mennonites who wear anything from a doily to a stiff bun-cover to a huge bonnet. From my experience, those who practice the wearing of head coverings for the women are always involved in some sort of legalistic group, and many legalistic home-schoolers have taken to this practice. For these reasons I did a thorough study of the issue several years ago, and it is that study I have modified and shortened for this post.
Before I go farther, let me state that I reviewed 26 English translations of the Bible and 20 commentaries from many viewpoints, including the small book, “…let her be veiled,” which was given to me as a proof of the correctness of women wearing a head covering all the time.
Women wearing head coverings is mentioned only once in Scripture. The context begins at 1 Corinthians 7:1, where Paul begins addressing questions that were written to him. He does not address their worship meetings until 1 Cor. 11:17 - the verse which follows this section, which immediately refutes the idea that a woman should wear a head covering for worship.
My commentary will attempt to answer the following questions from my layman‘s understanding:
1. Is the head covering the woman's hair?
2. Is the head covering cultural or for all time?
3. Is the head covering for all women or just those who are married?
4. When should the head covering be worn?
5. Why should the head covering be worn?
6. What form should the head covering take?
Let’s first look at the text, and I’ll use the NIV. 1 Cor. 11:3-16:
(3) Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. (4) Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. (5) And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head - it is just as though her head were shaved. (6) If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. (7) A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. (8) For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; (9) neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. (10) For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head. (11) In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. (12) For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. (13) Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? (14) Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, (15) but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. (16) If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice - nor do the churches of God.
Verses 4-7 and 10 are the actual instructions, while the remainder of the text gives the reasons.
Is the head covering the woman's hair?
Because v. 15 says the woman's long hair was given to her for a covering, does this mean that the hair is the covering discussed as some claim? If that is the case, then, in context of the man having no covering, the man would have to be shaved! Logic dictates that this is wrong, so hair could not be the context of vv.4-10. V.6 says if her head isn't covered, she should be shorn; this implies that she has hair already and that the covering is something separate. Even v.5 seems to imply that she has hair. So, what is the purpose of vv.14-15? I think it is to demonstrate that as in the natural realm God has given the woman long hair for a covering, so in the realm of relationships between men and women there should also be a separate covering - it is an analogy. So, the answer to this question is that the hair is not the covering spoken of.
Was the head covering just cultural as most claim today?
Paul's argument is about the relationships established between God and Christ, Christ and man, and man and woman. This argument transcends culture, so that would make this argument for all time and all cultures. Additionally, chapter 1:2 says, "To the church at Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ - their Lord and ours..." This says the instructions in this letter are for "all those everywhere" who are Christians, and that it was not confined to any culture.
Is the head covering for all women or just those who are married?
Most Bible translations have the context of husbands and wives. Since the argument appears to be in relation to a woman and her husband, single women are not included, let alone young girls. Even the requirement of verse 10 is in light of the husband/wife relationship in most of the translations I read. But then, what about single women - should they not be covered? If we translate all verses to just "man" and "woman," which I understand the Greek permits, the text looks just like that of NIV. In this case, ALL women are included, and this actually makes sense in light of Paul's overall argument of the relation of men to women. Verse 10 just says it is a sign of authority; it doesn't say whose authority. In the passage, the reason given (that woman is the glory of man, that she came from man, and was created for man) is not relegated to married women. But then, whose authority are single women then under? I would say their father or an elder maybe? It doesn’t say, so we can only speculate.
An interesting consideration is Paul's appeal to nature in relation to hair length. He says the long hair is given a woman for her covering. This would be a covering for all women, including those unmarried. I think a possible understanding of this passage is this: Woman was given long hair as a natural covering. As long as she is a single woman this is all she needs before God but, once she is married, her husband is her head and so she should cover her own glory to show she is now under his authority.
For the sake of being conservative, let's assume all women, married or single, should be covered. Then the question becomes, at what age would it be appropriate for a girl to begin wearing a head covering, if it is desired as a sign of being under her father's (or other man's) authority? I would suggest it would necessarily be when she is old enough to have a scriptural foundation and understand the purpose. This may very well be around the time of puberty, as Tertullian and other early church leaders suggested, or at least when of marriageable age.
When should the woman have her head covered?
Here is the sticky point. The context is NOT just at worship. As previously pointed out, instructions in relation to worship meetings begin after this discussion - at v.17. Paul’s instructions are for "praying" or "prophesying." Alexander Strauch points out that, by the Greek construction, this must be audible and public, so that the symbolism is meaningful; if a woman is praying silently, how would anyone know she is doing so, and how would a symbol then mean anything? So then, I think that the covering should be worn whenever the woman is participating in a prayer meeting where she would join in audible prayer. As for prophesying, I believe direct revelation from God has ceased, so this would not be a consideration.
Some feel that it should be worn at all times because one may be at prayer at any given moment; this seems to be the teachings of the Amish and others who have adopted the tradition. As Strauch points out, the logic would then need to be applied to men, that they could never wear anything on their heads. And yet every one I have seen practice the head covering tradition have no problem with men wearing hats, and Amish and Mennonite men wear hats often! So they pick part of the passage to force women to be covered, yet ignore the other part that says they are NOT to be covered.
Interesting considerations here would be to look at 1 Tim. 2:9 and 1 Pet. 3:3. To Timothy, Paul talks about dressing modestly, describing the hair but not saying that modest dress should include covering that hair or even just the head; if the head was to be covered always, would he not have so stated here? Peter also address a woman's hair by saying not to let the braided hair be her beauty; if her head was to be covered always, no one would see her hair to begin with!
What if a woman is somewhere without her head covering, or has never been taught the practice - does God honor her prayer? As with other signs, I believe the whole thing boils down to a heart attitude. If the woman forgets her covering and wants to participate in a prayer meeting, I believe God honors her because of her attitude; she has a submissive attitude that correlates with the sign.
Another argument for continuous wear is that it would be a constant reminder to the wife (single woman) that she is under her husband's (father's) authority. This is adding to the text something not there.
I think the only thing we can determine from the text is that the woman should wear a covering if she is praying or prophesying, regardless of location or setting. And since prophecy is no longer being revealed, current practice would only be for prayer.
Why is it worn? What about the angels; what do they have to do with it?
Commentaries making modesty a reason for the veiling are eisegesis; modesty is not mentioned in our subject text. Paul says the reason the covering is worn is that woman is the glory of man, that she came from man, and was created for man AND, because of the angels she should have a sign of authority on her head. The head covering is obviously considered a sign of authority to those who see it, including angels. But why do the angels need to see a sign of authority on a woman's head? A review of the commentaries gave me some insight:
I learned that the good angels watch over us, minister to us, and are interested in the gospel message. They should see proper attitudes towards God when observing us. Since the angels are veiled as a sign of their subordination to God, their head, they would expect a woman to be veiled as a sign of her subordination to her husband (or father?), who is her head.
But the bad angels have a different problem. They see the beautiful hair, and are enticed by the woman. However, if she has a sign of being under someone's authority, this says to the bad angels that she is protected from them.
Could not single women also wear the covering as a sign here? There is no proscription as I see it, and if the angels are indeed attracted to the beauty of the hair, then it wouldn't matter if the woman was married or single.
What form should the head-covering take?
Since the Greek word for veil means "something that covers completely and hangs down," I would say the covering should be something the woman can drape over her head at the time of prayer, such as a scarf or shawl. The idea is obviously to drape over the head an item that covers it. I do think it is enlightening that the art from early Christian times shows various forms. The attitude of the heart has to be in line with the sign. If the attitude is to just wear a tiny doily so no one would even notice the sign, or to fulfill a legal requirement, then the purpose is defeated. And a small doily certainly doesn’t cover completely and hang down!
Okay, so what is the ultimate lesson to learn here?
Firstly, I think the idea of a woman wearing a head covering was intended to be a forever sort of thing, but it is not a salvation issue, and I think for that main reason our culture has left the teaching behind. (It would be interesting to see what would happen if the Church began teaching the wearing of a covering for audible prayer.)
Secondly, those who claim a woman should wear a covering at all times are adding to Scripture, and ignore the fact that a man could then never wear a hat. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander; if you are going to make your women wear a head covering all the time, then you’d better not ever have a hat on your head! You can’t just take part of the verse as being applicable and throw the other part out.
Thirdly, those who wear little fabric patches or doilies are not in compliance with the teaching of the text. Those things do not “cover completely” or “hang down.”
So, to sum the whole thing up, IF you choose in your tradition to wear a head covering, then do it when and how the Bible says: just during audible, public prayer - and have a real covering. Otherwise all you are doing is forcing on the women your own legalistic ideas. Let’s free Christian women from this legalistic bondage!
4/5/19 Addendum: Here is an interesting take on this issue--I don't agree with it, but found it interesting:
James B. Hurley [in Man and Woman in Biblical Perspective ,pp.45-47, 66-68, 162-171, 178-9, and 254-72 ] gives us a thorough treatment of “veils.” He points out that the Old Testament contains no law about wearing a veil, and that the Hebrew and Graeco-Roman custom was for women to be normally unveiled. In both cultures too it was usual for women to put their hair up: loosed or hanging hair was a sign either of mourning or of separation from the community (e.g. because of leprosy, Nazirite vows or being suspected of adultery). Dr. Hurley argues , therefore, that the “covering” and “uncovering” Paul mentions refers to the putting up or letting down of the hair. The NIV margin also adopts this interpretation.
John Stott, Decisive Issues Facing Christians Today, pg.283, note 43
Before I go farther, let me state that I reviewed 26 English translations of the Bible and 20 commentaries from many viewpoints, including the small book, “…let her be veiled,” which was given to me as a proof of the correctness of women wearing a head covering all the time.
Women wearing head coverings is mentioned only once in Scripture. The context begins at 1 Corinthians 7:1, where Paul begins addressing questions that were written to him. He does not address their worship meetings until 1 Cor. 11:17 - the verse which follows this section, which immediately refutes the idea that a woman should wear a head covering for worship.
My commentary will attempt to answer the following questions from my layman‘s understanding:
1. Is the head covering the woman's hair?
2. Is the head covering cultural or for all time?
3. Is the head covering for all women or just those who are married?
4. When should the head covering be worn?
5. Why should the head covering be worn?
6. What form should the head covering take?
Let’s first look at the text, and I’ll use the NIV. 1 Cor. 11:3-16:
(3) Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. (4) Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. (5) And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head - it is just as though her head were shaved. (6) If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. (7) A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. (8) For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; (9) neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. (10) For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head. (11) In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. (12) For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. (13) Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? (14) Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, (15) but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. (16) If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice - nor do the churches of God.
Verses 4-7 and 10 are the actual instructions, while the remainder of the text gives the reasons.
Is the head covering the woman's hair?
Because v. 15 says the woman's long hair was given to her for a covering, does this mean that the hair is the covering discussed as some claim? If that is the case, then, in context of the man having no covering, the man would have to be shaved! Logic dictates that this is wrong, so hair could not be the context of vv.4-10. V.6 says if her head isn't covered, she should be shorn; this implies that she has hair already and that the covering is something separate. Even v.5 seems to imply that she has hair. So, what is the purpose of vv.14-15? I think it is to demonstrate that as in the natural realm God has given the woman long hair for a covering, so in the realm of relationships between men and women there should also be a separate covering - it is an analogy. So, the answer to this question is that the hair is not the covering spoken of.
Was the head covering just cultural as most claim today?
Paul's argument is about the relationships established between God and Christ, Christ and man, and man and woman. This argument transcends culture, so that would make this argument for all time and all cultures. Additionally, chapter 1:2 says, "To the church at Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ - their Lord and ours..." This says the instructions in this letter are for "all those everywhere" who are Christians, and that it was not confined to any culture.
Is the head covering for all women or just those who are married?
Most Bible translations have the context of husbands and wives. Since the argument appears to be in relation to a woman and her husband, single women are not included, let alone young girls. Even the requirement of verse 10 is in light of the husband/wife relationship in most of the translations I read. But then, what about single women - should they not be covered? If we translate all verses to just "man" and "woman," which I understand the Greek permits, the text looks just like that of NIV. In this case, ALL women are included, and this actually makes sense in light of Paul's overall argument of the relation of men to women. Verse 10 just says it is a sign of authority; it doesn't say whose authority. In the passage, the reason given (that woman is the glory of man, that she came from man, and was created for man) is not relegated to married women. But then, whose authority are single women then under? I would say their father or an elder maybe? It doesn’t say, so we can only speculate.
An interesting consideration is Paul's appeal to nature in relation to hair length. He says the long hair is given a woman for her covering. This would be a covering for all women, including those unmarried. I think a possible understanding of this passage is this: Woman was given long hair as a natural covering. As long as she is a single woman this is all she needs before God but, once she is married, her husband is her head and so she should cover her own glory to show she is now under his authority.
For the sake of being conservative, let's assume all women, married or single, should be covered. Then the question becomes, at what age would it be appropriate for a girl to begin wearing a head covering, if it is desired as a sign of being under her father's (or other man's) authority? I would suggest it would necessarily be when she is old enough to have a scriptural foundation and understand the purpose. This may very well be around the time of puberty, as Tertullian and other early church leaders suggested, or at least when of marriageable age.
When should the woman have her head covered?
Here is the sticky point. The context is NOT just at worship. As previously pointed out, instructions in relation to worship meetings begin after this discussion - at v.17. Paul’s instructions are for "praying" or "prophesying." Alexander Strauch points out that, by the Greek construction, this must be audible and public, so that the symbolism is meaningful; if a woman is praying silently, how would anyone know she is doing so, and how would a symbol then mean anything? So then, I think that the covering should be worn whenever the woman is participating in a prayer meeting where she would join in audible prayer. As for prophesying, I believe direct revelation from God has ceased, so this would not be a consideration.
Some feel that it should be worn at all times because one may be at prayer at any given moment; this seems to be the teachings of the Amish and others who have adopted the tradition. As Strauch points out, the logic would then need to be applied to men, that they could never wear anything on their heads. And yet every one I have seen practice the head covering tradition have no problem with men wearing hats, and Amish and Mennonite men wear hats often! So they pick part of the passage to force women to be covered, yet ignore the other part that says they are NOT to be covered.
Interesting considerations here would be to look at 1 Tim. 2:9 and 1 Pet. 3:3. To Timothy, Paul talks about dressing modestly, describing the hair but not saying that modest dress should include covering that hair or even just the head; if the head was to be covered always, would he not have so stated here? Peter also address a woman's hair by saying not to let the braided hair be her beauty; if her head was to be covered always, no one would see her hair to begin with!
What if a woman is somewhere without her head covering, or has never been taught the practice - does God honor her prayer? As with other signs, I believe the whole thing boils down to a heart attitude. If the woman forgets her covering and wants to participate in a prayer meeting, I believe God honors her because of her attitude; she has a submissive attitude that correlates with the sign.
Another argument for continuous wear is that it would be a constant reminder to the wife (single woman) that she is under her husband's (father's) authority. This is adding to the text something not there.
I think the only thing we can determine from the text is that the woman should wear a covering if she is praying or prophesying, regardless of location or setting. And since prophecy is no longer being revealed, current practice would only be for prayer.
Why is it worn? What about the angels; what do they have to do with it?
Commentaries making modesty a reason for the veiling are eisegesis; modesty is not mentioned in our subject text. Paul says the reason the covering is worn is that woman is the glory of man, that she came from man, and was created for man AND, because of the angels she should have a sign of authority on her head. The head covering is obviously considered a sign of authority to those who see it, including angels. But why do the angels need to see a sign of authority on a woman's head? A review of the commentaries gave me some insight:
I learned that the good angels watch over us, minister to us, and are interested in the gospel message. They should see proper attitudes towards God when observing us. Since the angels are veiled as a sign of their subordination to God, their head, they would expect a woman to be veiled as a sign of her subordination to her husband (or father?), who is her head.
But the bad angels have a different problem. They see the beautiful hair, and are enticed by the woman. However, if she has a sign of being under someone's authority, this says to the bad angels that she is protected from them.
Could not single women also wear the covering as a sign here? There is no proscription as I see it, and if the angels are indeed attracted to the beauty of the hair, then it wouldn't matter if the woman was married or single.
What form should the head-covering take?
Since the Greek word for veil means "something that covers completely and hangs down," I would say the covering should be something the woman can drape over her head at the time of prayer, such as a scarf or shawl. The idea is obviously to drape over the head an item that covers it. I do think it is enlightening that the art from early Christian times shows various forms. The attitude of the heart has to be in line with the sign. If the attitude is to just wear a tiny doily so no one would even notice the sign, or to fulfill a legal requirement, then the purpose is defeated. And a small doily certainly doesn’t cover completely and hang down!
Okay, so what is the ultimate lesson to learn here?
Firstly, I think the idea of a woman wearing a head covering was intended to be a forever sort of thing, but it is not a salvation issue, and I think for that main reason our culture has left the teaching behind. (It would be interesting to see what would happen if the Church began teaching the wearing of a covering for audible prayer.)
Secondly, those who claim a woman should wear a covering at all times are adding to Scripture, and ignore the fact that a man could then never wear a hat. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander; if you are going to make your women wear a head covering all the time, then you’d better not ever have a hat on your head! You can’t just take part of the verse as being applicable and throw the other part out.
Thirdly, those who wear little fabric patches or doilies are not in compliance with the teaching of the text. Those things do not “cover completely” or “hang down.”
So, to sum the whole thing up, IF you choose in your tradition to wear a head covering, then do it when and how the Bible says: just during audible, public prayer - and have a real covering. Otherwise all you are doing is forcing on the women your own legalistic ideas. Let’s free Christian women from this legalistic bondage!
4/5/19 Addendum: Here is an interesting take on this issue--I don't agree with it, but found it interesting:
James B. Hurley [in Man and Woman in Biblical Perspective ,pp.45-47, 66-68, 162-171, 178-9, and 254-72 ] gives us a thorough treatment of “veils.” He points out that the Old Testament contains no law about wearing a veil, and that the Hebrew and Graeco-Roman custom was for women to be normally unveiled. In both cultures too it was usual for women to put their hair up: loosed or hanging hair was a sign either of mourning or of separation from the community (e.g. because of leprosy, Nazirite vows or being suspected of adultery). Dr. Hurley argues , therefore, that the “covering” and “uncovering” Paul mentions refers to the putting up or letting down of the hair. The NIV margin also adopts this interpretation.
John Stott, Decisive Issues Facing Christians Today, pg.283, note 43
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Unification Church (Moonies)
The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever. Isaiah 40:8
So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” John 19:30
But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God. Hebrews 10:12
For many will come in My name, saying, “I am the Christ,” and will deceive many. Matthew 24:5
(Most of the history in this article comes from Kingdom of the Cults, by Walter Martin; Revised, Updated and Expanded Edition, October 2003, with General Editor Ravi Zacharias.)
The founder and leader of the Unification Church is North Korean-born Sun Myung Moon, whose parents were Confucian farmers. Moon was born January 6, 1920 as Yong Myung Moon (Shining Dragon Moon). When his family converted to the Presbyterian Church in 1930, Yong retained his Confucian veneration of his ancestors, and in his early teen years he attempted to contact then in the spirit world.
Moon reportedly had a vision of Jesus when he was 16-years-old on Easter morning, April 17, 1936. This “first vision” story has some discrepancies like the LDS “first vision” story of Joseph Smith. While 16 is the generally accepted age, some Unification authorities place the vision anywhere from 15 to 18 years of age. A major problem with the claim is that April 17, 1936 was a Friday and not a Sunday, so it could not have been on Easter. Additionally, depending on which calendar one uses, in 1936 Easter was either on March 30th or April 12th. Apparently, the Unification Church has not addressed this problem.
Moon was first married in 1945 in North Korea to Choi Sun Kil and had a son. After World War II, Moon was involved with various “Pentecostal” groups where he participated in “séances, spiritism, ancestral spirit guidance, and a host of occult practices.” (KofC, p.374)
Moon was excommunicated from the Presbyterian church in 1948, the year in which Moon was also first arrested for “irresponsible sexual activity.” In February 1949 Moon married Kim X while still married to Choi, which resulted in the pair being sentenced to prison for bigamy. (There is some possibility that Moon had four marriages by this time.)
In October 1950, during the Korean War, Moon’s prison was bombed by United Nations forces, freeing the prisoners, and Moon traveled south to Pusan, South Korea. It was in Pusan where he wrote his Divine Principle during 1951-1952. On May 1, 1954, Moon established the Unification Church in Seoul, the official title being The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity. (“The phrase "Holy Spirit Association" has the sense in the original Korean of "Heavenly Spirits" and not the "Holy Spirit" of Christianity.” Wikipedia) By the end of 1955 there were 30 churches in South Korea.
“Again, he was arrested on July 4, 1955, for irresponsible sexual activity that caused a scandal at Ewha Women’s (Methodist) University in Seoul. … Moon was released October 4, 1955, because the eighty women involved in the incident exercised their right of silence in court. It was also reported by the Church of the Nazarene Korea Mission that Moon’s church was involved in an unusual sexual ‘blood cleansing’ rite where a woman was to have sexual intercourse with Sun Myung Moon to cleanse her blood from Satan’s lineage. The ‘cleansed’ woman could then cleanse her husband through sexual union with him. This ritual was based upon the Unification doctrine that Eve fell by having intercourse with Satan; therefore, a woman having intercourse with Moon, who is the Lord of the Second Advent, would be cleansed. Just as Eve passed Satan’s tainted blood lineage on to Adam, likewise the cleansed Unification member passes purification of blood on to her spouse.” (KofC, p.374-375) The church ceased this practice after a period, most likely as a result of the increasing membership.
In 1958 Moon sent missionaries to Japan, and the following year he sent them to the United States.
In March 1960, at the age of 40, Moon, known by his followers as “Father,” married his current wife, Hak Ja Han, who was 17-years-old; she is referred to as “Mother” by members of the Church. She and Moon had thirteen children, all who are supposedly “sinless,” and the two are called “True Parents.” Additionally, their wedding was considered to be the “marriage of the Lamb” of Revelation 21:9. “To Unification members, this monumental event ushers in the ‘New Age, the Cosmic era.’ Moon and his wife are the first True Parents and have the power to bless other marriages with pureness and ‘sinless’ offspring. Incidentally, this is why the Unification Church conducts massive weddings, with up to three hundred thousand couples at a time. These blessed couples supposedly are sinless families on earth.” (KofC, p.375) Since his marriage, it has been reported that Moon has had numerous affairs.
In 1964 Moon sought out spiritist-medium Arthur Ford and discussed his mission with a disincarnate spirit. The Unification Church published the events of the séance until they realized Christians considered such things as abhorrent to God, and they have since suppressed all references to Moon’s entire history of occultic practices.
Moon moved to the United States in 1971. He said, “I came to America primarily to declare the New Age and new truth…. This is why God appeared to me and told me to got to America to speak the truth.” (KofC, p.375)
In 1976 Moon held a rally in Washington, DC, at the Washington Monument, attended by 200 to 300 thousand people. Moon told the audience “that his work had broken down all the walls of the spirit world, and spirits were descending rapidly upon the earth.” (KofC, p.376)
During the mid-1980s Moon was convicted of income tax evasion and spent thirteen months in federal prison. As with so many other cult leaders, Moon’s private wealth has reached millions of dollars.
In 1994, Moon changed the official name of the church to the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification.
In April 2008, Sun Myung Moon appointed his youngest son, Hyung Jin Moon, to be the new leader of the Unification Church. However, Moon was still active at 90 years old when, in February 2010, he blessed about 7000 couples in a mass wedding is Seoul.
Currently, the Unification Church is making an emphasis to appear more mainstream, and has instituted a new outreach called, Lovin’ Life Ministries, which is intended to become the new church in America. Membership in the church is accomplished through a 21-day course.
Although Moon goes by the title of “Reverend,” there is no history of him being ordained in any denomination, and the Unification Church does not ordain, so it is apparently a title he took for himself. He also claims the title, “Lord of the Second Advent,” and is referred to as the “Messiah.”
Besides the mass wedding, another distinguishing feature of the Moonies is their fund-raising tactics. They sell flowers at many public venues, including street intersections. Tactics for fund-raising include what Moon calls “heavenly deception” - lying. Moon has stated, “Even God tells lies very often.” (KofC, p.377). This “heavenly deception” includes pretending to be wheel-chair-bound to gain sympathy while selling flowers, and giving names of false charities.
The Unification Church owns many large corporations, as well as the Washington Times newspaper.
Doctrine: “The Unification Church is one of the best cults at disguising its unusual, nontraditional beliefs from the unsuspecting secular world.” (KoC p.371) Most of their doctrine is based on Taoist philosophy, and, in fact, Moon claims the Taoist Book of Changes (I Ching) is a key God provided for Moon to interpret the Bible. Since the Unification Church is so far removed from any semblance of Biblical teachings, rather than spend a lot of time on their many doctrines we will look at highlights from just a few.
1. God: “God is viewed as the creator, whose nature combines both masculinity and femininity, and is the source of all truth, beauty, and goodness. Human beings and the universe reflect God's personality, nature, and purpose. ‘Give-and-take action’ (reciprocal interaction) and ‘subject and object position’ (initiator and responder) are ‘key interpretive concepts,’ and the self is designed to be God's object. The purpose of human existence is to return joy to God.” (Wikipedia) God’s characteristics in Moon’s theology are based on Yin and Yang dualism. Unification theology denies the Trinity.
2. The fall of Adam: Prior to writing Divine Principle, Moon supposedly personally faced Satan and questioned him about the Fall until Satan told him the truth about it. “When man was created, Lucifer became extremely envious of God’s love for man. He also saw Eve’s great beauty and lusted after her. At this time Lucifer had not fallen himself, but because of jealousy and lust he entered into an unlawful relationship with Eve. Their sexual intercourse constitutes the spiritual fall of man as well as the fall of Lucifer. When Eve participated in an illicit relationship with Lucifer, she received spiritual insight and realized that she had violated the purpose of creation. She knew then that her intended spouse was not Lucifer but Adam. Subsequently she had intercourse with Adam in an attempt to restore her position with God. Adam, however, was still spiritually immature. Consequently they entered into a relationship which constituted they physical fall of man. So there is a dual aspect to the fall: a spiritual fall and a physical fall. Both of them have to do with sexuality.” (A Guide to Cults & New Religions, by Ronald Enroth & Others, p.157)
3. Jesus: Unification teaching deny the virgin birth, and say that Zachariah, John the Baptist’s father, was Jesus’ father. They also deny that Jesus is God, and that he is an ordinary man but without original sin. Moon claims it was Christians who claimed that Jesus is God. Jesus was supposed to marry and raise sinless children.
4. The atonement: According to Moon, when he met Jesus as a teen, Jesus told him that his crucifixion and death were not supposed to have happened, and that they caused him to not complete his mission of marrying and raising a family. This was because his disciples failed to find him a bride. Because of this, Jesus could not save man physically, but only spiritually. Therefore, Moon was to complete mission by raising a perfect family as a model for the world. (Apologia Report, Vol. 15:8, 3/3/10, p.2) As an aside, in addition to meeting Jesus, Moon also claims to have met Moses and Buddha.
5. The Bible and revelation: “It is stated in their history that Moon struggled for nine years (the original Divine Principle says seven) to discover the truth of Divine Principle. The Divine Principle is authoritative scripture in the Unification Church and is considered superior to the Bible. ~ Through Divine Principle, in its latest version, Moon’s followers understand and interpret the Bible. … It must be explained by the organization and God’s prophet for today: Rev. Sun Myung Moon.” (Kingdom of the Cults, p.373)
There is a debate as to the origin of Moon’s Divine Principle. Unification writers are divided as to whether it was “discovered” or came as revelation. Most likely, the origin of this work came from Moon’s former teacher, Klder Baik Moon Kim, who taught similar “principles” to Moon in 1946. It was under Kim’s tutelage that Moon changed his name to Sun Myung Moon (Shining Sun and Moon). Moon’s Divine Principle was published six years later.
Moon said, “The Bible, however, is not the truth itself, but contains the truth.” Moon then claims that new truth comes from God through Moon. The introduction to Divine Principle says, “This truth must appear as a revelation from God himself. This new truth has already appeared! God has sent his messenger …. His name is Sun Myung Moon.” (KofC, p.380)
Moon says his Divine Principle is the “Complete Testament,” becoming the third testament of the Scripture after the Old and New Testaments.
6. Marriage: Those couples married in the Unification Church become part of the sinless mankind which will bring physical salvation to the earth. Moon’s blessing on these mass weddings guarantees their children will be sinless. After the wedding, the couples remain celibate for 40 days, after which they consummate the marriage for three days and then remain celibate for three years.
How to Witness: The best way to witness to Moonies would be to start with the reliability of Scripture and then undermine the prophet by comparing his teachings with the Bible.
I think it’s fair to say that there is nothing resembling biblical Christianity in the Unification Church. The Moonies are deceived by the same evil behind all the other cults - Satan.
So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” John 19:30
But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God. Hebrews 10:12
For many will come in My name, saying, “I am the Christ,” and will deceive many. Matthew 24:5
(Most of the history in this article comes from Kingdom of the Cults, by Walter Martin; Revised, Updated and Expanded Edition, October 2003, with General Editor Ravi Zacharias.)
The founder and leader of the Unification Church is North Korean-born Sun Myung Moon, whose parents were Confucian farmers. Moon was born January 6, 1920 as Yong Myung Moon (Shining Dragon Moon). When his family converted to the Presbyterian Church in 1930, Yong retained his Confucian veneration of his ancestors, and in his early teen years he attempted to contact then in the spirit world.
Moon reportedly had a vision of Jesus when he was 16-years-old on Easter morning, April 17, 1936. This “first vision” story has some discrepancies like the LDS “first vision” story of Joseph Smith. While 16 is the generally accepted age, some Unification authorities place the vision anywhere from 15 to 18 years of age. A major problem with the claim is that April 17, 1936 was a Friday and not a Sunday, so it could not have been on Easter. Additionally, depending on which calendar one uses, in 1936 Easter was either on March 30th or April 12th. Apparently, the Unification Church has not addressed this problem.
Moon was first married in 1945 in North Korea to Choi Sun Kil and had a son. After World War II, Moon was involved with various “Pentecostal” groups where he participated in “séances, spiritism, ancestral spirit guidance, and a host of occult practices.” (KofC, p.374)
Moon was excommunicated from the Presbyterian church in 1948, the year in which Moon was also first arrested for “irresponsible sexual activity.” In February 1949 Moon married Kim X while still married to Choi, which resulted in the pair being sentenced to prison for bigamy. (There is some possibility that Moon had four marriages by this time.)
In October 1950, during the Korean War, Moon’s prison was bombed by United Nations forces, freeing the prisoners, and Moon traveled south to Pusan, South Korea. It was in Pusan where he wrote his Divine Principle during 1951-1952. On May 1, 1954, Moon established the Unification Church in Seoul, the official title being The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity. (“The phrase "Holy Spirit Association" has the sense in the original Korean of "Heavenly Spirits" and not the "Holy Spirit" of Christianity.” Wikipedia) By the end of 1955 there were 30 churches in South Korea.
“Again, he was arrested on July 4, 1955, for irresponsible sexual activity that caused a scandal at Ewha Women’s (Methodist) University in Seoul. … Moon was released October 4, 1955, because the eighty women involved in the incident exercised their right of silence in court. It was also reported by the Church of the Nazarene Korea Mission that Moon’s church was involved in an unusual sexual ‘blood cleansing’ rite where a woman was to have sexual intercourse with Sun Myung Moon to cleanse her blood from Satan’s lineage. The ‘cleansed’ woman could then cleanse her husband through sexual union with him. This ritual was based upon the Unification doctrine that Eve fell by having intercourse with Satan; therefore, a woman having intercourse with Moon, who is the Lord of the Second Advent, would be cleansed. Just as Eve passed Satan’s tainted blood lineage on to Adam, likewise the cleansed Unification member passes purification of blood on to her spouse.” (KofC, p.374-375) The church ceased this practice after a period, most likely as a result of the increasing membership.
In 1958 Moon sent missionaries to Japan, and the following year he sent them to the United States.
In March 1960, at the age of 40, Moon, known by his followers as “Father,” married his current wife, Hak Ja Han, who was 17-years-old; she is referred to as “Mother” by members of the Church. She and Moon had thirteen children, all who are supposedly “sinless,” and the two are called “True Parents.” Additionally, their wedding was considered to be the “marriage of the Lamb” of Revelation 21:9. “To Unification members, this monumental event ushers in the ‘New Age, the Cosmic era.’ Moon and his wife are the first True Parents and have the power to bless other marriages with pureness and ‘sinless’ offspring. Incidentally, this is why the Unification Church conducts massive weddings, with up to three hundred thousand couples at a time. These blessed couples supposedly are sinless families on earth.” (KofC, p.375) Since his marriage, it has been reported that Moon has had numerous affairs.
In 1964 Moon sought out spiritist-medium Arthur Ford and discussed his mission with a disincarnate spirit. The Unification Church published the events of the séance until they realized Christians considered such things as abhorrent to God, and they have since suppressed all references to Moon’s entire history of occultic practices.
Moon moved to the United States in 1971. He said, “I came to America primarily to declare the New Age and new truth…. This is why God appeared to me and told me to got to America to speak the truth.” (KofC, p.375)
In 1976 Moon held a rally in Washington, DC, at the Washington Monument, attended by 200 to 300 thousand people. Moon told the audience “that his work had broken down all the walls of the spirit world, and spirits were descending rapidly upon the earth.” (KofC, p.376)
During the mid-1980s Moon was convicted of income tax evasion and spent thirteen months in federal prison. As with so many other cult leaders, Moon’s private wealth has reached millions of dollars.
In 1994, Moon changed the official name of the church to the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification.
In April 2008, Sun Myung Moon appointed his youngest son, Hyung Jin Moon, to be the new leader of the Unification Church. However, Moon was still active at 90 years old when, in February 2010, he blessed about 7000 couples in a mass wedding is Seoul.
Currently, the Unification Church is making an emphasis to appear more mainstream, and has instituted a new outreach called, Lovin’ Life Ministries, which is intended to become the new church in America. Membership in the church is accomplished through a 21-day course.
Although Moon goes by the title of “Reverend,” there is no history of him being ordained in any denomination, and the Unification Church does not ordain, so it is apparently a title he took for himself. He also claims the title, “Lord of the Second Advent,” and is referred to as the “Messiah.”
Besides the mass wedding, another distinguishing feature of the Moonies is their fund-raising tactics. They sell flowers at many public venues, including street intersections. Tactics for fund-raising include what Moon calls “heavenly deception” - lying. Moon has stated, “Even God tells lies very often.” (KofC, p.377). This “heavenly deception” includes pretending to be wheel-chair-bound to gain sympathy while selling flowers, and giving names of false charities.
The Unification Church owns many large corporations, as well as the Washington Times newspaper.
Doctrine: “The Unification Church is one of the best cults at disguising its unusual, nontraditional beliefs from the unsuspecting secular world.” (KoC p.371) Most of their doctrine is based on Taoist philosophy, and, in fact, Moon claims the Taoist Book of Changes (I Ching) is a key God provided for Moon to interpret the Bible. Since the Unification Church is so far removed from any semblance of Biblical teachings, rather than spend a lot of time on their many doctrines we will look at highlights from just a few.
1. God: “God is viewed as the creator, whose nature combines both masculinity and femininity, and is the source of all truth, beauty, and goodness. Human beings and the universe reflect God's personality, nature, and purpose. ‘Give-and-take action’ (reciprocal interaction) and ‘subject and object position’ (initiator and responder) are ‘key interpretive concepts,’ and the self is designed to be God's object. The purpose of human existence is to return joy to God.” (Wikipedia) God’s characteristics in Moon’s theology are based on Yin and Yang dualism. Unification theology denies the Trinity.
2. The fall of Adam: Prior to writing Divine Principle, Moon supposedly personally faced Satan and questioned him about the Fall until Satan told him the truth about it. “When man was created, Lucifer became extremely envious of God’s love for man. He also saw Eve’s great beauty and lusted after her. At this time Lucifer had not fallen himself, but because of jealousy and lust he entered into an unlawful relationship with Eve. Their sexual intercourse constitutes the spiritual fall of man as well as the fall of Lucifer. When Eve participated in an illicit relationship with Lucifer, she received spiritual insight and realized that she had violated the purpose of creation. She knew then that her intended spouse was not Lucifer but Adam. Subsequently she had intercourse with Adam in an attempt to restore her position with God. Adam, however, was still spiritually immature. Consequently they entered into a relationship which constituted they physical fall of man. So there is a dual aspect to the fall: a spiritual fall and a physical fall. Both of them have to do with sexuality.” (A Guide to Cults & New Religions, by Ronald Enroth & Others, p.157)
3. Jesus: Unification teaching deny the virgin birth, and say that Zachariah, John the Baptist’s father, was Jesus’ father. They also deny that Jesus is God, and that he is an ordinary man but without original sin. Moon claims it was Christians who claimed that Jesus is God. Jesus was supposed to marry and raise sinless children.
4. The atonement: According to Moon, when he met Jesus as a teen, Jesus told him that his crucifixion and death were not supposed to have happened, and that they caused him to not complete his mission of marrying and raising a family. This was because his disciples failed to find him a bride. Because of this, Jesus could not save man physically, but only spiritually. Therefore, Moon was to complete mission by raising a perfect family as a model for the world. (Apologia Report, Vol. 15:8, 3/3/10, p.2) As an aside, in addition to meeting Jesus, Moon also claims to have met Moses and Buddha.
5. The Bible and revelation: “It is stated in their history that Moon struggled for nine years (the original Divine Principle says seven) to discover the truth of Divine Principle. The Divine Principle is authoritative scripture in the Unification Church and is considered superior to the Bible. ~ Through Divine Principle, in its latest version, Moon’s followers understand and interpret the Bible. … It must be explained by the organization and God’s prophet for today: Rev. Sun Myung Moon.” (Kingdom of the Cults, p.373)
There is a debate as to the origin of Moon’s Divine Principle. Unification writers are divided as to whether it was “discovered” or came as revelation. Most likely, the origin of this work came from Moon’s former teacher, Klder Baik Moon Kim, who taught similar “principles” to Moon in 1946. It was under Kim’s tutelage that Moon changed his name to Sun Myung Moon (Shining Sun and Moon). Moon’s Divine Principle was published six years later.
Moon said, “The Bible, however, is not the truth itself, but contains the truth.” Moon then claims that new truth comes from God through Moon. The introduction to Divine Principle says, “This truth must appear as a revelation from God himself. This new truth has already appeared! God has sent his messenger …. His name is Sun Myung Moon.” (KofC, p.380)
Moon says his Divine Principle is the “Complete Testament,” becoming the third testament of the Scripture after the Old and New Testaments.
6. Marriage: Those couples married in the Unification Church become part of the sinless mankind which will bring physical salvation to the earth. Moon’s blessing on these mass weddings guarantees their children will be sinless. After the wedding, the couples remain celibate for 40 days, after which they consummate the marriage for three days and then remain celibate for three years.
How to Witness: The best way to witness to Moonies would be to start with the reliability of Scripture and then undermine the prophet by comparing his teachings with the Bible.
I think it’s fair to say that there is nothing resembling biblical Christianity in the Unification Church. The Moonies are deceived by the same evil behind all the other cults - Satan.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Unity School of Christianity
Founded by Charles and Myrtle Fillmore in 1889, Unity is one of the fastest-growing New Age church systems. They do not claim to be a church, rather they claim to be a school which “seeks to help anyone, regardless of church affiliation, ‘to find health, peace, joy and plenty through his day-by-day practice of Christian Principles.’” (Confronting the Cults, by Gordon R. Lewis, p.131)
Charles Fillmore was born near St. Cloud, MN, in 1854, and married Mary Caroline Page (“Myrtle”) in 1881. The couple ended up moving to Kansas City, MO, where Charles set up a real estate office.
The origin of Unity began in 1886 when the Fillmores went to see a lecture given by “mental healer” Dr. E.B. Weeks. Myrtle, who had suffered for years with tuberculosis and malaria, was immediately taken by Weeks’ talk. “One of his statements transformed her life: ‘I am a child of God and therefore I do not inherit sickness.’ Since life is intelligent, she began to reason, it can be directed by thinking and talking. ‘Then it flashed upon me,’ Mrs. Fillmore wrote, ‘that I might talk to the life in every part of my body and have it do just what I wanted. I began to teach my body and got marvelous results.’ Mrs. Fillmore spoke words of truth to each life center silently and aloud until the organs responded. After asking for divine forgiveness for misusing her body she determined to entertain no anxious or negative thoughts. In two years Myrtle Fillmore was no longer an invalid.” (Confronting the Cults, p.132)
Charles, supposedly crippled from infancy, wasn’t ready to accept his wife’s new healing technique and began studying “mind science” and Eastern religions, including Hinduism and Buddhism. After several months he decided to apply his wife’s healing principle to himself. “My chronic pains ceased. My hip healed and grew stronger, and my leg lengthened until in a few years I dispensed with the steel extension that I had worn since I was a child.” (Confronting the Cults, p.132).
The Fillmores then began counseling and praying with others to heal them. This required more and more time, so Charles then left his real estate business and published his first paper in 1889. The Fillmores borrowed ideas from Christian Science and New Thought (a healing movement developed from P.P. Quimby’s system), and added in ideas from the Eastern religions Charles had studied, including the teachings on reincarnation. Pressure from Mary Baker Eddy forced them to stop using terms common to Christian Science, although they had a long relationship with New Thought.
Originally named “Modern Thought” in 1889, the Fillmores’ teachings became known as “Christian Science Thought” in 1890, then “Thought” in 1891, and finally “Unity” in 1895.
Myrtle died in 1931 and Charles then married his private secretary. Charles died in 1948 and the leadership of Unity passed to his two sons, Lowell and Rickert. Unity is headquartered in Lees Summit, MO.
Weekly publications of Unity are Daily Word and Weekly Unity. Monthly publications include Good Business (for working people), Progress for young people, Wee Wisdom for children, and Unity for sick people. Unity also operates “Dial-A-Prayer.”
Doctrines: Similar to Christian Science, with Hinduism mixed in. The Fillmores’ attitude toward doctrine can be summed up in a statement Charles wrote in an early edition of Modern Thought: “He who writes a creed or puts a limit to revelation, is the enemy of humanity…. Creeds have ever been the vampires that sucked the blood of spiritual progress in the past, and life can only be kept in the present movement by latitude of thought tempered always by the power that moves the world, love.” (Confronting the Cults, p.133).
Much of Unity’s teachings, like Christian Science, are also in line with gnosticism. “According to gnosticism, God is impersonal and one’s eventual goal is to reach oneness with this impersonal God. Gnostics view Jesus Christ as a human being who possessed, in some great way, the expression or presence of God. To them, Jesus refers to the man and Christ refers to the divine influence. Rather than agreeing with the Bible by declaring that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 5:1), gnostics, including Unity, separate Jesus from the Christ. Unity is not as interested in theology as it is in prosperity and happiness. A survey of the literature of Unity will clearly show that the stress is on material and worldly happiness, not spiritual happiness.” (Handbook of Today’s Religions, by Josh McDowell and John Stewart, p.132)
Below are some samplings of Unity doctrines. Reference citations below are from Handbook of Today’s Religions or Confronting the Cults.
God: Like Christian Science, Unity’s God is a force or energy which permeates the universe.
a. “Though personal to each one of us, God is it, neither male nor female, but principle.” (Myrtle Fillmore, How to Let God Help You, 1956, p.25).
b. “The Father is Principle, the Son is that Principle revealed in creative plan, the Holy Spirit is the executive power of both Father and Son carrying out the creative plan.” (Charles Fillmore, Metaphysical Bible Dictionary, p.629)
c. “God is all and all is God.” (Unity, August 1974, p.40)
d. “God is not loving…God does not love anybody or anything. God is the love in everybody and everything. God is love…God exercises none of His attributes except though the inner consciousness of the universe and man.” (Jesus Christ Heals, Unity School of Christianity, 1944, pp.31,32)
The Bible: “We believe that the Word of God is the thought of God expressed in creative ideas and that these ideas are the primal attributes of all enduring entities in the universe, visible and invisible. The Logos of the first chapter of the Gospel of John is the God idea of Christ that produced Jesus, the perfect man. We believe the Scriptures are the testimonials of who have in a measure apprehended the diving Logos but that their writings should not be taken as final.” (Unity’s Statement of Faith, part 27.)
Jesus: “Christ consciousness” that is within all of us.
a. “The Bible says that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, but the Bible does not here refer to Jesus of Nazareth, the outer man; it refers to the Christ, the spiritual identity of Jesus, whom he acknowledged in all his ways, and brought forth into his outer self, until even the flesh of his body was lifted up, purified, spiritualized, and redeemed, thus he became Jesus Christ, the word made flesh. We are to follow into this perfect state and become like Him, for in each of us is the Christ, the only begotten Son. We can, through Jesus Christ, our redeemer and example, bring forth the Christ within us, the true self of all is perfect, as Jesus Christ commanded his followers to be.” (Unity, Vol. 57, no.5, p.464, and Vol. 72, no.2, p.8)
Salvation: There is no necessity for salvation because sin and evil are illusions. “To eradicate physical ills and mental sickness and to attract happiness, all a person needs to do is to tap into, or become attuned, aligned, or united with the ‘Divine Mind.’” (New Age Cults & Religions, by Texe Marrs, p.329)
a. “There is no sin, sickness or death.” (Unity, Vo. 47, No. 5, p.403)
b. “The atonement is the union of man with God the Father, in Christ. Stating it in terms of mind, we should say that the Atonement is the At-one-ment or agreement of reconciliation of man’s mind with Divine Mind through superconsciousness of Christ’s mind.” (What Practical Christianity Stands For, p.5)
The Gospel: “The gospel of Jesus is that every man can become God incarnate. It is not alone a gospel of right living, but also shows the way into dominion and power equal to and surpassing that of Jesus of Nazareth.” (Charles Fillmore, The Revealing Word, p.88) Compare this to 1 Cor. 15:1-3.
Reincarnation: This belief is borrowed from Hinduism. “We believe that the dissolution of the spirit, soul, and body caused by death, is annulled by rebirth of the same spirit and soul in another body here on earth. We believe the repeated incarnations of man to be a merciful provision of our loving Father to the end that all may have opportunity to attain immortality through regeneration, as did Jesus. This corruptible must put on incorruption.” (Unity’s Statement of Faith, Article 22)
As anyone can see by comparing Unity doctrines to true Christian doctrines, Unity has nothing in common with the Christian faith as defined by the Holy Bible.
Charles Fillmore was born near St. Cloud, MN, in 1854, and married Mary Caroline Page (“Myrtle”) in 1881. The couple ended up moving to Kansas City, MO, where Charles set up a real estate office.
The origin of Unity began in 1886 when the Fillmores went to see a lecture given by “mental healer” Dr. E.B. Weeks. Myrtle, who had suffered for years with tuberculosis and malaria, was immediately taken by Weeks’ talk. “One of his statements transformed her life: ‘I am a child of God and therefore I do not inherit sickness.’ Since life is intelligent, she began to reason, it can be directed by thinking and talking. ‘Then it flashed upon me,’ Mrs. Fillmore wrote, ‘that I might talk to the life in every part of my body and have it do just what I wanted. I began to teach my body and got marvelous results.’ Mrs. Fillmore spoke words of truth to each life center silently and aloud until the organs responded. After asking for divine forgiveness for misusing her body she determined to entertain no anxious or negative thoughts. In two years Myrtle Fillmore was no longer an invalid.” (Confronting the Cults, p.132)
Charles, supposedly crippled from infancy, wasn’t ready to accept his wife’s new healing technique and began studying “mind science” and Eastern religions, including Hinduism and Buddhism. After several months he decided to apply his wife’s healing principle to himself. “My chronic pains ceased. My hip healed and grew stronger, and my leg lengthened until in a few years I dispensed with the steel extension that I had worn since I was a child.” (Confronting the Cults, p.132).
The Fillmores then began counseling and praying with others to heal them. This required more and more time, so Charles then left his real estate business and published his first paper in 1889. The Fillmores borrowed ideas from Christian Science and New Thought (a healing movement developed from P.P. Quimby’s system), and added in ideas from the Eastern religions Charles had studied, including the teachings on reincarnation. Pressure from Mary Baker Eddy forced them to stop using terms common to Christian Science, although they had a long relationship with New Thought.
Originally named “Modern Thought” in 1889, the Fillmores’ teachings became known as “Christian Science Thought” in 1890, then “Thought” in 1891, and finally “Unity” in 1895.
Myrtle died in 1931 and Charles then married his private secretary. Charles died in 1948 and the leadership of Unity passed to his two sons, Lowell and Rickert. Unity is headquartered in Lees Summit, MO.
Weekly publications of Unity are Daily Word and Weekly Unity. Monthly publications include Good Business (for working people), Progress for young people, Wee Wisdom for children, and Unity for sick people. Unity also operates “Dial-A-Prayer.”
Doctrines: Similar to Christian Science, with Hinduism mixed in. The Fillmores’ attitude toward doctrine can be summed up in a statement Charles wrote in an early edition of Modern Thought: “He who writes a creed or puts a limit to revelation, is the enemy of humanity…. Creeds have ever been the vampires that sucked the blood of spiritual progress in the past, and life can only be kept in the present movement by latitude of thought tempered always by the power that moves the world, love.” (Confronting the Cults, p.133).
Much of Unity’s teachings, like Christian Science, are also in line with gnosticism. “According to gnosticism, God is impersonal and one’s eventual goal is to reach oneness with this impersonal God. Gnostics view Jesus Christ as a human being who possessed, in some great way, the expression or presence of God. To them, Jesus refers to the man and Christ refers to the divine influence. Rather than agreeing with the Bible by declaring that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 5:1), gnostics, including Unity, separate Jesus from the Christ. Unity is not as interested in theology as it is in prosperity and happiness. A survey of the literature of Unity will clearly show that the stress is on material and worldly happiness, not spiritual happiness.” (Handbook of Today’s Religions, by Josh McDowell and John Stewart, p.132)
Below are some samplings of Unity doctrines. Reference citations below are from Handbook of Today’s Religions or Confronting the Cults.
God: Like Christian Science, Unity’s God is a force or energy which permeates the universe.
a. “Though personal to each one of us, God is it, neither male nor female, but principle.” (Myrtle Fillmore, How to Let God Help You, 1956, p.25).
b. “The Father is Principle, the Son is that Principle revealed in creative plan, the Holy Spirit is the executive power of both Father and Son carrying out the creative plan.” (Charles Fillmore, Metaphysical Bible Dictionary, p.629)
c. “God is all and all is God.” (Unity, August 1974, p.40)
d. “God is not loving…God does not love anybody or anything. God is the love in everybody and everything. God is love…God exercises none of His attributes except though the inner consciousness of the universe and man.” (Jesus Christ Heals, Unity School of Christianity, 1944, pp.31,32)
The Bible: “We believe that the Word of God is the thought of God expressed in creative ideas and that these ideas are the primal attributes of all enduring entities in the universe, visible and invisible. The Logos of the first chapter of the Gospel of John is the God idea of Christ that produced Jesus, the perfect man. We believe the Scriptures are the testimonials of who have in a measure apprehended the diving Logos but that their writings should not be taken as final.” (Unity’s Statement of Faith, part 27.)
Jesus: “Christ consciousness” that is within all of us.
a. “The Bible says that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, but the Bible does not here refer to Jesus of Nazareth, the outer man; it refers to the Christ, the spiritual identity of Jesus, whom he acknowledged in all his ways, and brought forth into his outer self, until even the flesh of his body was lifted up, purified, spiritualized, and redeemed, thus he became Jesus Christ, the word made flesh. We are to follow into this perfect state and become like Him, for in each of us is the Christ, the only begotten Son. We can, through Jesus Christ, our redeemer and example, bring forth the Christ within us, the true self of all is perfect, as Jesus Christ commanded his followers to be.” (Unity, Vol. 57, no.5, p.464, and Vol. 72, no.2, p.8)
Salvation: There is no necessity for salvation because sin and evil are illusions. “To eradicate physical ills and mental sickness and to attract happiness, all a person needs to do is to tap into, or become attuned, aligned, or united with the ‘Divine Mind.’” (New Age Cults & Religions, by Texe Marrs, p.329)
a. “There is no sin, sickness or death.” (Unity, Vo. 47, No. 5, p.403)
b. “The atonement is the union of man with God the Father, in Christ. Stating it in terms of mind, we should say that the Atonement is the At-one-ment or agreement of reconciliation of man’s mind with Divine Mind through superconsciousness of Christ’s mind.” (What Practical Christianity Stands For, p.5)
The Gospel: “The gospel of Jesus is that every man can become God incarnate. It is not alone a gospel of right living, but also shows the way into dominion and power equal to and surpassing that of Jesus of Nazareth.” (Charles Fillmore, The Revealing Word, p.88) Compare this to 1 Cor. 15:1-3.
Reincarnation: This belief is borrowed from Hinduism. “We believe that the dissolution of the spirit, soul, and body caused by death, is annulled by rebirth of the same spirit and soul in another body here on earth. We believe the repeated incarnations of man to be a merciful provision of our loving Father to the end that all may have opportunity to attain immortality through regeneration, as did Jesus. This corruptible must put on incorruption.” (Unity’s Statement of Faith, Article 22)
As anyone can see by comparing Unity doctrines to true Christian doctrines, Unity has nothing in common with the Christian faith as defined by the Holy Bible.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Unitarian Universalist Association
Unitarian Universalism is actually the merging of two movements, the Universalists and the Unitarians, in 1959. Universalism teaches that all people are saved and that there is no such thing as eternal punishment because no one is lost. Unitarianism teaches that God is only a unity and not a triune God.
Both these belief systems are contradictory to Christian non-negotiable doctrines.
Unitarianism has long been a belief, virtually from the first century, but as a movement it can be traced to anti-Trinitarians in 16th century Europe. From there it moved into England in the 17th century, and then to the American colonies in the 18th century. Apparently, except for the anti-Trinitarian belief (including the lack of divinity in Christ), the rest of their theology was fairly orthodox and they considered the Bible as authoritative. But once the doctrine of the Trinity was left behind, it didn’t take long to leave all other doctrines in the dust.
American Unitarianism developed from New England Congregationalism when a liberal wing of the Congregational Church in Massachusetts requested to never subscribe to a creed. However, while the movement was primarily a split of the Congregationalist churches, the first body of Unitarianism was the Episcopal King’s Chapel in Boston in 1785.
When Unitarian philosophy met with early 19th century Transcendentalism, “Unitarianism passed from the status of a heresy to that of a clearly non-Christian philosophy.” (Lloyd F. Dean, The Withering of Unitarianism, p.16-17, as cited in Kingdom of the Cults, p.340)
The “apostle of American Unitarianism” was William E. Channing, who preached a famous sermon in 1819 outlining the Unitarian view. In 1825 the American Unitarian Association was formed and a national conference was established 40 years later. Unitarians have no creed, rather their constitution of the general conference stated that, “these churches accept the religion of Jesus, holding in accordance with his teaching that practical religion is summed up in the love to God and love to man.” (Handbook of Denominations, by Frank S. Mead, p.240)
Universalism has its base in many cultural streams and is found in many religious systems throughout the world. Christian Universalists claim their heritage in the early Christian Gnostics and down through numerous teachers over the centuries. Its formation as a religious denomination seems to have started in 1759 by James Relly of England, when he wrote Union, opposing Calvinism’s doctrine of the election of few. His teachings of universal salvation influenced Wesleyan evangelist John Murray, who came to New Jersey in 1770.
Murray discovered numerous groups of like-minded people in New England and then became the minister of one in Gloucester, Massachusetts. In 1779, the Independent Christian Church of Gloucester became the first organized Universalist church in America. Eleven years later the Universalists met in Philadelphia and drafted their first declaration of faith and established their church government.
“Government was established as strictly congregational; doctrinally, they proclaimed their belief in the Scriptures as containing a revelation of the perfections and will of God and the rule of faith and practice, faith in God, faith in Christ as a mediator who had redeemed all people by his blood, in the Holy Ghost, and in the obligation of the moral law as the rule of life.” (Handbook of Denominations, p.242).
According to Handbook of Denominations, this Philadelphia declaration was adopted by New England Universalists in 1793, about the time Hosea Ballou was ordained in the Universalist ministry. Ballou broke with the teaching of the New England group and, in 1805, published his Treatise on Atonement, which gave the movement “its first consistent philosophy.” “Ballou rejected the theories of total depravity, endless punishment in hell, the Trinity, and the miracles. Humankind, said Ballou, was potentially good and capable of perfectibility; God, being a God of infinite love, recognized humanity’s heavenly nature and extraction and love the human race as his own offspring. The meaning of the Atonement was found not in the bloody sacrifice to appease diving wrath, but in the heroic sacrifice of Jesus, who was not God but a Son of the eternal and universal God, revealing the love of God and anxious to win all persons to that love.” (p.242)
As the belief systems of the Unitarians and Universalists came to become more and more similar, the two organizations merged to form the Unitarian Universalist Association. As an organization, they have abandoned all historic Christian doctrines and continue to become more and more radical in their liberal views.
Unitarian Universalists have no creed and permit all followers to believe in God as their own consciences dictate. Secular humanism is the primary philosophy, and half the signers of the 1933 Humanist Manifesto were Unitarian Universalist ministers, as were the first four presidents of the American Humanist Association and many AHA leaders.
Unitarian Universalists are known for supporting homosexual unions, abortion, redistribution of wealth, the feminist movement, sexual immorality, and virtually every politically-liberal philosophy. Additionally, as the 20th century progressed, the UUA accepted many New Age/Eastern religious practices such as yoga and Eastern forms of meditation.
Doctrines: Members of UUA hold to many beliefs within each doctrine.
1. No religious belief is exclusive; all religions have truth. Claiming one above any other is intolerant.
2. The Bible is not absolute or infallible; it is a human book with moral, scientific and historical errors. “Reason, conscience, and experience are the final test of all religious truth claims.” (KofC, p. 349)
3. God. One may or may not believe in God, but He will never be triune. God may be a “higher power” or a divine part of the individual. God may also just be a name for the ordering principle in nature.
4. Jesus. Strictly human, a good moral teacher (some may dispute whether he was a good moral teacher). His miracles, virgin birth, and resurrection are all denied.
5. Man originated through evolution. Man has the natural ability to do good and has no original sin nature.
6. There is no sin to be saved from. Salvation is by making this world a better place to live. We save ourselves through developing our moral character.
7. Heaven is not a place, rather it is a state. Hell and eternal punishment are inconsistent with a loving God and therefore do not exist. People experience “hell” as a consequence of bad deeds.
8. Bodily resurrection is unscientific and impossible.
I hope this introductory information on UUA was helpful in understanding them. I have actually posted some other sections from my course, which you can read in the entries on RLDS/Community of Christ, Word of Faith and Christian Science.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Church of Christ, Scientist (Christian Scientists)
Mary Ann Morse Baker was born in Bow, NH in July 1821 to strict Congregationalist parents. Mary was frequently ill with both physical and emotional ailments until she was 22-years-old. At that time she married businessman George W. Glover, whose sister was married to Mary’s oldest brother. According to Walter Martin, in his book Kingdom of the Cults, Glover’s “untimely death of yellow fever in Wilmington, South Carolina, some seven months later, reduced his pregnant wife to an emotional and highly unstable invalid, who, throughout the remaining years of her life, relied from time to time upon the drug morphine as a medication.” (p.150)
Mary moved back to her father’s home and had a son not long thereafter, naming him George after his father. When Mary’s mother died in 1849, George’s custody became an issue. Her father remarried and did not want the boy staying with them, so he lived with a series of relatives.
In June of 1853, Mary became the wife of a dentist, Daniel M. Patterson, who was a relative of her father’s second wife. He did not want Mary’s son, so the son lived with friends in Minnesota.
The history of the religion of Christian Science actually starts with a fellow named Phineas Parkhurst Quimby of Portland, Maine. P.P. Quimby developed a system of “mental healing” in the 1850s which he called “The Science of Man,” and used the terms “The Science of Christ” and “Christian Science” to refer to his system. Another term he used for his system was “Science of Health.” He was essentially a hypnotist and faith healer.
Mary met Dr. Quimby in 1862 when she and her husband moved to Portland, and Mary sought Quimby’s care for “spinal inflammation.” Most of Mary’s writings and ideas are stolen from Quimby’s writings and teachings, with much of her work being direct plagiarism from him. More of her writings have been proven to be plagiarized from other authors’ works.
As with other false prophets, Mary Baker Eddy’s claims of how her religion originated were put down in writing long after the fact, and mostly after Quimby was dead and unable to expose her. She claims to have discovered her system in February 1866 (the month after Quimby died) after a fall on a slippery sidewalk when her attending doctor said she was “incurable,” with only three days to live. On her third day, she called for a Bible and read Matthew 9:2 and was suddenly healed. Supposedly, convinced that God had healed her, she then spent the next several years studying the Scriptures and “rediscovered” the faith-healing secrets the church lost when it supposedly apostatized.
The doctor who supposedly diagnosed Mary, Alvin Cushing, stated under oath in a 1000-word statement that he never gave such a diagnoses, and that Mary was in good health and that he treated her later in August of 1866 for other ailments. It was during this period in 1866 that Mary’s husband, Daniel, left her. Seven years later she divorced him on the grounds of adultery.
Mary had been teaching from the Quimby manuscripts in Stoughton, MA and then moved to Lynn, MA where she finished her book, Science and Heath, in 1875. This is the Christian Science religion’s primary “scripture.” In 1877, when she was 56, Mary entered her last marriage to Asa G. Eddy, who had come to her for treatment. He would died after only five years of marriage, in 1882.
In 1879 Mary chartered her new church in Charlestown, MA, “The Church of Christ, Scientist.” This church was established "to commemorate the word and works of our Master, which should reinstate primitive Christianity and its lost element of healing." Mary claimed she found hundreds of errors in the Bible, and that her teachings were the “final revelation of God for mankind.” Of course, Mary was the pastor of this new church.
After a revolt among her students, Mary moved to Boston where she started what became known as “The Massachusetts Metaphysical College, where she taught beginning in 1881. After Asa died, Mary continued teaching in her college until 1889 when she closed it to revise her book, which now was called Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. Mary claimed it came by revelation from God: "I should blush to write a Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures as I have, were it of human origin, and I, apart from God, its author; but as I was only a scribe echoing the harmonies of heaven in divine metaphysics, I cannot be super-modest in my estimate of the Christian Science textbook."
Boston became the headquarters for her new church. There, in 1888, she opened a reading room for her writings. Mary completed her church manual in 1895, establishing procedures for governing the organization. Mary reopened her college in 1899.
As with other cults, Mary’s real purpose seems to have been to make money off of her religion. As Mark Wheeler on “Catholic Answers” website (http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9202prof.asp) notes [Link gone by 7/26/15], “Mary Baker Eddy wished to acquire wealth. The original edition of Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures was advertised as ‘a book that affords an opportunity to acquire a profession by which you can accumulate a fortune.’ Her followers were commanded to buy and sell copies under pain of excommunication. They were forced to buy each new edition, even though only a few words might have been changed. Eddy, who started her religion without a penny, died a millionairess.”
Mary Baker Eddy died in December 1910.
Mary’s book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, is divided into two sections. The first section is Science and Health where-in she gives her theological teachings in regards to her health teachings. The second section, Key to the Scriptures, is her explanation of Genesis, Revelation and Psalm 23.
A very good way to start looking at Eddy’s teachings are to look at what she called “erroneous postulates.” In these postulates she makes it clear that matter only exists as illusion. Let’s take a look at these, as cited in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures chapter 4:
"The first erroneous postulate of belief is, that substance, life, and intelligence are something apart from God.
“The second erroneous postulate is, that man is both mental and material.
“The third erroneous postulate is, that mind is both evil and good; whereas the real Mind cannot be evil nor the medium of evil, for Mind is God.
“The fourth erroneous postulate is, that matter is intelligent, and that man has a material body which is part of himself.
“The fifth erroneous postulate is, that matter hold in itself the issues of life and death, - that matter is not only capable of experiencing pleasure and pain, but also capable of imparting these sensations. From the illusion implied in this last postulate arises the decomposition of mortal bodies in what is termed death.”
Doctrines: References to Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures will be abbreviated as “S&H” with the page numbers from the soft-cover. I’m going to cite several passages under each section, but these are only a portion of the many that could be cited.
1. A primary foundational belief is that nothing is real - everything is illusion and nothing material exists. Sin, disease and sickness are all illusions with may be overcome by the mind. “Temporal life is a false sense of existence.” (S&H, p.122)
a. “Now is the time for so-called material pains and material pleasures to pass away, for both are unreal, because impossible in Science.” (S&H, p.39)
b. “Death will be found at length to be a mortal dream, which comes in darkness and disappears with the light.” (S&H, p.42)
c. “He presented the same body that he had before his crucifixion, and so glorified the supremacy of Mind over matter.” (S&H, p.45)
d. “The ‘man of sorrows’ best understood the nothingness of material life and intelligence and the mighty actuality of all-inclusive God, good. These were the two cardinal points of Mind-healing, or Christian Science, which armed him with Love.” (S&H, p.52)
e. “The entire education of children should be such as to form habits of obedience to the moral and spiritual law, with which the child can meet and master the belief in so-called physical laws, a belief which breeds disease.” (S&H, p.62)
f. “The scientific fact that man and the universe are evolved from Spirit, and so are spiritual, is as fixed in divine Science as is the proof that mortals gain the sense of health only as they lose the sense of sin and disease.” (S&H, p.69)
g. “Close your eyes, and you may dream that you see a flower, - that you touch and smell it. Thus you learn that the flower is a product of the so-called mind, a formation of thought rather than of matter. Close your eyes again, and you may see landscapes, men, and women. Thus you learn that these also are images, which mortal mind holds and evolves and which stimulate mind, life, and intelligence.” (S&H, p.71)
h. “Suffering, sinning, dying beliefs are unreal. When divine Science is universally understood, they will have no power over man, for man is immortal and lives by divine authority.” (S&H, p.76)
i. “Science shows that what is termed matter is but the subjective state of what is termed by the author mortal mind. (S&H, p114)
j. “Thus matter will finally be proved nothing more than a belief, wholly inadequate to affect a man through its supposed organic action or supposed existence.” (S&H, p.125-126)
2. God: Is called “Father-Mother God.” Other titles for God are: “Truth,” “Life,” “Love,” “Mind.”
a. “[God] is a power, something we feel and know in our hearts…God, Mind, tells us what we need to know, when we need to know it.” (Tract titled, “Our Father-Mother, God”)
b. “The Jewish tribal Jehovah was a man-projected God, liable to wrath, repentance, and human changeableness.” (S&H, p.140)
3. Sin.
a. “To cause suffering as the result of sin, is the means of destroying sin. Every supposed pleasure in sin will furnish will furnish more than its equivalence of pain, until belief in material life and sin is destroyed.” (S & H, p.6)
b. “Evil has no reality. It is neither person, place, nor thing, but is simply a belief, an illusion or material sense.” (S&H, p.71)
c. “Evil is a suppositional lie.” (S&H, p.103)
4. Virgin Birth: “The Virgin-mother conceived this idea of God, and gave to her ideal the name of Jesus - that is, Joshua, our Saviour. The illumination of Mary’s spiritual sense put to silence material law and its order of generation, and brought forth her child by the revelation of Truth, demonstrating God as the Father of men. The Holy Ghost, or divine Spirit, overshadowed the pure sense of he Virgin-mother with the full recognition that being is Spirit. The Christ dwelt forever an idea in the bosom of God, the divine Principle of the man Jesus, and woman perceived this spiritual idea, though at first faintly developed. … Jesus was the offspring of Mary’s self-conscious communion with God.” (S&H, p.29-30)
5. Jesus: The Christian Science Jesus was not Christ, nor did He really die.
a. “Born of a woman, Jesus’ advent in the flesh partook partly of Mary’s earthly condition, although he was endowed with the Christ, the divine Spirit, without measure.” (S&H, p.30)
b. “Jesus mapped out the path for others. He unveiled the Christ, the spiritual idea of divine Love.” (S&H, p.38)
c. “The lonely precincts of the tomb gave Jesus a refuge from his foes, a place in which to solve the great problem of being. His three days’ work in the sepulchre set the seal of eternity on time. He proved Life to be deathless and Love to be the master of hate. He met and mastered on the basis of Christian Science, the power of Mind over matter, all the claims of medicine, surgery, and hygiene.” (S&H, p.44)
d. “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.” (S&H, p.44)
e. “Jesus’ students, not sufficiently advanced fully to understand their Master’s triumph, did not perform many wonderful works, until they saw him after his crucifixion and learned that he had not died.” (S&H, p.45-46)
f. “The spiritual Christ was infallible; Jesus, as material manhood, was not Christ.” (Miscellaneous Writings, p.84)
6. The Atonement: Eddy’s teachings here have nothing in common with orthodox teaching. Here are samples of Eddy’s teachings:
a. “Atonement is the exemplification of man’s unity with God, whereby man reflects divine Truth, Life, and Love.” (S&H, p.18)
b. “Every pang of repentance and suffering, every effort for reform, every good thought and deed, will help us to understand Jesus’ atonement for sin and aid its efficacy.” (S&H, p.19)
c. “The atonement requires constant self-immolation on the sinner’s part. That God’s wrath should be vented upon His beloved Son, is divinely unnatural. Such a theory is man-made. The atonement is a hard problem in theology, but its scientific explanation is, that suffering is an error of sinful sense which Truth destroys, and that eventually both sin and suffering will fall at the feet of everlasting Love.” (S&H, p.23)
d. “The material blood of Jesus was no more efficacious to cleanse from sin when it was shed upon ‘the accursed tree,’ than when it was flowing in his veins as he went daily about his Father’s business.” (S&H, p.25)
e. “Divine Science reveals the necessity of sufficient suffering, either before or after death, to quench the love of sin. To remit the penalty due for sin, would be for Truth to pardon error. Escape from punishment is not in accordance with God’s government, since justice is the handmaid of mercy.” (S&H, p36)
7. The Holy Spirit: “In the words of St. John: ‘He shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever.’ This Comforter I understand to be Divine Science.” (S&H, p.55)
8. Other aberrations:
a. Audible prayer is sinful and useless - God only listens to mental prayer. (S&H, Chapter 1)
b. “The act of describing disease - its symptoms, locality and fatality - is not scientific. Warning people against death is an error that tends to frighten into death those who are ignorant of Life as God. … A scientific mental method is more sanitary than the use of drugs, and such a mental method produces permanent health.” (S&H, p.79)
Christian Science is like Hinduism in its teachings of the afterlife, in that they teach a continuance of a circle of life while reaching higher planes. “Death will occur on the next plane of existence as on this, until the spiritual understanding of Life is reached.” (S&H, p.77)
Christian Science --- Neither Christian nor science!
Mary moved back to her father’s home and had a son not long thereafter, naming him George after his father. When Mary’s mother died in 1849, George’s custody became an issue. Her father remarried and did not want the boy staying with them, so he lived with a series of relatives.
In June of 1853, Mary became the wife of a dentist, Daniel M. Patterson, who was a relative of her father’s second wife. He did not want Mary’s son, so the son lived with friends in Minnesota.
The history of the religion of Christian Science actually starts with a fellow named Phineas Parkhurst Quimby of Portland, Maine. P.P. Quimby developed a system of “mental healing” in the 1850s which he called “The Science of Man,” and used the terms “The Science of Christ” and “Christian Science” to refer to his system. Another term he used for his system was “Science of Health.” He was essentially a hypnotist and faith healer.
Mary met Dr. Quimby in 1862 when she and her husband moved to Portland, and Mary sought Quimby’s care for “spinal inflammation.” Most of Mary’s writings and ideas are stolen from Quimby’s writings and teachings, with much of her work being direct plagiarism from him. More of her writings have been proven to be plagiarized from other authors’ works.
As with other false prophets, Mary Baker Eddy’s claims of how her religion originated were put down in writing long after the fact, and mostly after Quimby was dead and unable to expose her. She claims to have discovered her system in February 1866 (the month after Quimby died) after a fall on a slippery sidewalk when her attending doctor said she was “incurable,” with only three days to live. On her third day, she called for a Bible and read Matthew 9:2 and was suddenly healed. Supposedly, convinced that God had healed her, she then spent the next several years studying the Scriptures and “rediscovered” the faith-healing secrets the church lost when it supposedly apostatized.
The doctor who supposedly diagnosed Mary, Alvin Cushing, stated under oath in a 1000-word statement that he never gave such a diagnoses, and that Mary was in good health and that he treated her later in August of 1866 for other ailments. It was during this period in 1866 that Mary’s husband, Daniel, left her. Seven years later she divorced him on the grounds of adultery.
Mary had been teaching from the Quimby manuscripts in Stoughton, MA and then moved to Lynn, MA where she finished her book, Science and Heath, in 1875. This is the Christian Science religion’s primary “scripture.” In 1877, when she was 56, Mary entered her last marriage to Asa G. Eddy, who had come to her for treatment. He would died after only five years of marriage, in 1882.
In 1879 Mary chartered her new church in Charlestown, MA, “The Church of Christ, Scientist.” This church was established "to commemorate the word and works of our Master, which should reinstate primitive Christianity and its lost element of healing." Mary claimed she found hundreds of errors in the Bible, and that her teachings were the “final revelation of God for mankind.” Of course, Mary was the pastor of this new church.
After a revolt among her students, Mary moved to Boston where she started what became known as “The Massachusetts Metaphysical College, where she taught beginning in 1881. After Asa died, Mary continued teaching in her college until 1889 when she closed it to revise her book, which now was called Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. Mary claimed it came by revelation from God: "I should blush to write a Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures as I have, were it of human origin, and I, apart from God, its author; but as I was only a scribe echoing the harmonies of heaven in divine metaphysics, I cannot be super-modest in my estimate of the Christian Science textbook."
Boston became the headquarters for her new church. There, in 1888, she opened a reading room for her writings. Mary completed her church manual in 1895, establishing procedures for governing the organization. Mary reopened her college in 1899.
As with other cults, Mary’s real purpose seems to have been to make money off of her religion. As Mark Wheeler on “Catholic Answers” website (http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9202prof.asp) notes [Link gone by 7/26/15], “Mary Baker Eddy wished to acquire wealth. The original edition of Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures was advertised as ‘a book that affords an opportunity to acquire a profession by which you can accumulate a fortune.’ Her followers were commanded to buy and sell copies under pain of excommunication. They were forced to buy each new edition, even though only a few words might have been changed. Eddy, who started her religion without a penny, died a millionairess.”
Mary Baker Eddy died in December 1910.
Mary’s book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, is divided into two sections. The first section is Science and Health where-in she gives her theological teachings in regards to her health teachings. The second section, Key to the Scriptures, is her explanation of Genesis, Revelation and Psalm 23.
A very good way to start looking at Eddy’s teachings are to look at what she called “erroneous postulates.” In these postulates she makes it clear that matter only exists as illusion. Let’s take a look at these, as cited in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures chapter 4:
"The first erroneous postulate of belief is, that substance, life, and intelligence are something apart from God.
“The second erroneous postulate is, that man is both mental and material.
“The third erroneous postulate is, that mind is both evil and good; whereas the real Mind cannot be evil nor the medium of evil, for Mind is God.
“The fourth erroneous postulate is, that matter is intelligent, and that man has a material body which is part of himself.
“The fifth erroneous postulate is, that matter hold in itself the issues of life and death, - that matter is not only capable of experiencing pleasure and pain, but also capable of imparting these sensations. From the illusion implied in this last postulate arises the decomposition of mortal bodies in what is termed death.”
Doctrines: References to Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures will be abbreviated as “S&H” with the page numbers from the soft-cover. I’m going to cite several passages under each section, but these are only a portion of the many that could be cited.
1. A primary foundational belief is that nothing is real - everything is illusion and nothing material exists. Sin, disease and sickness are all illusions with may be overcome by the mind. “Temporal life is a false sense of existence.” (S&H, p.122)
a. “Now is the time for so-called material pains and material pleasures to pass away, for both are unreal, because impossible in Science.” (S&H, p.39)
b. “Death will be found at length to be a mortal dream, which comes in darkness and disappears with the light.” (S&H, p.42)
c. “He presented the same body that he had before his crucifixion, and so glorified the supremacy of Mind over matter.” (S&H, p.45)
d. “The ‘man of sorrows’ best understood the nothingness of material life and intelligence and the mighty actuality of all-inclusive God, good. These were the two cardinal points of Mind-healing, or Christian Science, which armed him with Love.” (S&H, p.52)
e. “The entire education of children should be such as to form habits of obedience to the moral and spiritual law, with which the child can meet and master the belief in so-called physical laws, a belief which breeds disease.” (S&H, p.62)
f. “The scientific fact that man and the universe are evolved from Spirit, and so are spiritual, is as fixed in divine Science as is the proof that mortals gain the sense of health only as they lose the sense of sin and disease.” (S&H, p.69)
g. “Close your eyes, and you may dream that you see a flower, - that you touch and smell it. Thus you learn that the flower is a product of the so-called mind, a formation of thought rather than of matter. Close your eyes again, and you may see landscapes, men, and women. Thus you learn that these also are images, which mortal mind holds and evolves and which stimulate mind, life, and intelligence.” (S&H, p.71)
h. “Suffering, sinning, dying beliefs are unreal. When divine Science is universally understood, they will have no power over man, for man is immortal and lives by divine authority.” (S&H, p.76)
i. “Science shows that what is termed matter is but the subjective state of what is termed by the author mortal mind. (S&H, p114)
j. “Thus matter will finally be proved nothing more than a belief, wholly inadequate to affect a man through its supposed organic action or supposed existence.” (S&H, p.125-126)
2. God: Is called “Father-Mother God.” Other titles for God are: “Truth,” “Life,” “Love,” “Mind.”
a. “[God] is a power, something we feel and know in our hearts…God, Mind, tells us what we need to know, when we need to know it.” (Tract titled, “Our Father-Mother, God”)
b. “The Jewish tribal Jehovah was a man-projected God, liable to wrath, repentance, and human changeableness.” (S&H, p.140)
3. Sin.
a. “To cause suffering as the result of sin, is the means of destroying sin. Every supposed pleasure in sin will furnish will furnish more than its equivalence of pain, until belief in material life and sin is destroyed.” (S & H, p.6)
b. “Evil has no reality. It is neither person, place, nor thing, but is simply a belief, an illusion or material sense.” (S&H, p.71)
c. “Evil is a suppositional lie.” (S&H, p.103)
4. Virgin Birth: “The Virgin-mother conceived this idea of God, and gave to her ideal the name of Jesus - that is, Joshua, our Saviour. The illumination of Mary’s spiritual sense put to silence material law and its order of generation, and brought forth her child by the revelation of Truth, demonstrating God as the Father of men. The Holy Ghost, or divine Spirit, overshadowed the pure sense of he Virgin-mother with the full recognition that being is Spirit. The Christ dwelt forever an idea in the bosom of God, the divine Principle of the man Jesus, and woman perceived this spiritual idea, though at first faintly developed. … Jesus was the offspring of Mary’s self-conscious communion with God.” (S&H, p.29-30)
5. Jesus: The Christian Science Jesus was not Christ, nor did He really die.
a. “Born of a woman, Jesus’ advent in the flesh partook partly of Mary’s earthly condition, although he was endowed with the Christ, the divine Spirit, without measure.” (S&H, p.30)
b. “Jesus mapped out the path for others. He unveiled the Christ, the spiritual idea of divine Love.” (S&H, p.38)
c. “The lonely precincts of the tomb gave Jesus a refuge from his foes, a place in which to solve the great problem of being. His three days’ work in the sepulchre set the seal of eternity on time. He proved Life to be deathless and Love to be the master of hate. He met and mastered on the basis of Christian Science, the power of Mind over matter, all the claims of medicine, surgery, and hygiene.” (S&H, p.44)
d. “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.” (S&H, p.44)
e. “Jesus’ students, not sufficiently advanced fully to understand their Master’s triumph, did not perform many wonderful works, until they saw him after his crucifixion and learned that he had not died.” (S&H, p.45-46)
f. “The spiritual Christ was infallible; Jesus, as material manhood, was not Christ.” (Miscellaneous Writings, p.84)
6. The Atonement: Eddy’s teachings here have nothing in common with orthodox teaching. Here are samples of Eddy’s teachings:
a. “Atonement is the exemplification of man’s unity with God, whereby man reflects divine Truth, Life, and Love.” (S&H, p.18)
b. “Every pang of repentance and suffering, every effort for reform, every good thought and deed, will help us to understand Jesus’ atonement for sin and aid its efficacy.” (S&H, p.19)
c. “The atonement requires constant self-immolation on the sinner’s part. That God’s wrath should be vented upon His beloved Son, is divinely unnatural. Such a theory is man-made. The atonement is a hard problem in theology, but its scientific explanation is, that suffering is an error of sinful sense which Truth destroys, and that eventually both sin and suffering will fall at the feet of everlasting Love.” (S&H, p.23)
d. “The material blood of Jesus was no more efficacious to cleanse from sin when it was shed upon ‘the accursed tree,’ than when it was flowing in his veins as he went daily about his Father’s business.” (S&H, p.25)
e. “Divine Science reveals the necessity of sufficient suffering, either before or after death, to quench the love of sin. To remit the penalty due for sin, would be for Truth to pardon error. Escape from punishment is not in accordance with God’s government, since justice is the handmaid of mercy.” (S&H, p36)
7. The Holy Spirit: “In the words of St. John: ‘He shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever.’ This Comforter I understand to be Divine Science.” (S&H, p.55)
8. Other aberrations:
a. Audible prayer is sinful and useless - God only listens to mental prayer. (S&H, Chapter 1)
b. “The act of describing disease - its symptoms, locality and fatality - is not scientific. Warning people against death is an error that tends to frighten into death those who are ignorant of Life as God. … A scientific mental method is more sanitary than the use of drugs, and such a mental method produces permanent health.” (S&H, p.79)
Christian Science is like Hinduism in its teachings of the afterlife, in that they teach a continuance of a circle of life while reaching higher planes. “Death will occur on the next plane of existence as on this, until the spiritual understanding of Life is reached.” (S&H, p.77)
Christian Science --- Neither Christian nor science!
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Hermeneutics
But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not…handling the word of God deceitfully… 2 Corinthians 4:2
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15
What is “hermeneutics”? It is the principles, laws and methods of interpretation. This is how we determine exactly what any document says, including the Bible. With the Bible we use the literal, historical-grammatical method of interpretation.
What exactly does “historical-grammatical” interpretation mean? It doesn’t mean everything is interpreted literally. It means that the text is to be understood in all the context the original writer meant for it to be understood, whether poetic, typology, figurative, hyperbolic, etc. “Scripture interprets Scripture” is a common phrase explaining how the Bible itself can be used to understand difficult passages by use of those which aren’t as difficult. “Literal” interpretation means “the understanding of a text that any person of normal intelligence would understand without the help of any special keys or codes…. Words are given the meaning they normally have in common communication.” (Norman Geisler & Ron Rhodes, Conviction Without Compromise, p.196) “Grammatical” interpretation means the understanding from normal grammatical usage of all the words in the text. When discussing the “historical” interpretation of a passage, we must take into consideration the historical and cultural context in which it was written, rather than putting one’s current history and culture into the passage.
Pastor Gary E. Gilley’s book, I Just Wanted More Land, has a very good primer on the subject, from which I will draw most of the following. There are several key principles necessary for good hermeneutics:
1. Practice exegesis instead of eisegesis. Exegesis means to objectively read out of the text what is actually there. Eisegesis means to read into the text a meaning from personal bias or beliefs. All false teachings practice eisegesis. When one drags in current culture to explain a text, that is also eisegesis.
2. Assume the Bible is the authoritative word of God.
3. Let the Bible interpret itself. Remember what we saw above: “Scripture interprets Scripture.”
4. Scripture never contradicts Scripture, so if there is an apparent contradiction, we must search for the correct interpretation.
5. Do not let personal experience interpret what you read (eisegesis), rather interpret your personal experience by what the Bible teaches. Many in the charismatic movement make this mistake.
6. Biblical examples aren’t authoritative unless God commands them. For example, polygamy is mentioned many times in Scripture, but that doesn’t mean we can practice polygamy because God has set the qualification for marriage as one man and one woman. The Bible often describes things that happen without condoning them. Also, God’s promise to an individual or nation in the Bible is not to be understood as a promise to all people and all nations unless the context specifically states as much.
7. Any given passage has only one meaning, unless the Bible specifically states otherwise.
8. Always interpret a passage in its context. Pulling passages our of their context is the most common way cults and false teachings begin.
9. Do not look for allegories in concealed, secret or symbolic meanings.
10. Do not seek to change plain meanings of texts just because they might offend.
By practicing these basic principles of hermeneutics, you will be more able to quickly identify false teaching, whether from a single teacher, a cult or worldviews in general.
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15
What is “hermeneutics”? It is the principles, laws and methods of interpretation. This is how we determine exactly what any document says, including the Bible. With the Bible we use the literal, historical-grammatical method of interpretation.
What exactly does “historical-grammatical” interpretation mean? It doesn’t mean everything is interpreted literally. It means that the text is to be understood in all the context the original writer meant for it to be understood, whether poetic, typology, figurative, hyperbolic, etc. “Scripture interprets Scripture” is a common phrase explaining how the Bible itself can be used to understand difficult passages by use of those which aren’t as difficult. “Literal” interpretation means “the understanding of a text that any person of normal intelligence would understand without the help of any special keys or codes…. Words are given the meaning they normally have in common communication.” (Norman Geisler & Ron Rhodes, Conviction Without Compromise, p.196) “Grammatical” interpretation means the understanding from normal grammatical usage of all the words in the text. When discussing the “historical” interpretation of a passage, we must take into consideration the historical and cultural context in which it was written, rather than putting one’s current history and culture into the passage.
Pastor Gary E. Gilley’s book, I Just Wanted More Land, has a very good primer on the subject, from which I will draw most of the following. There are several key principles necessary for good hermeneutics:
1. Practice exegesis instead of eisegesis. Exegesis means to objectively read out of the text what is actually there. Eisegesis means to read into the text a meaning from personal bias or beliefs. All false teachings practice eisegesis. When one drags in current culture to explain a text, that is also eisegesis.
2. Assume the Bible is the authoritative word of God.
3. Let the Bible interpret itself. Remember what we saw above: “Scripture interprets Scripture.”
4. Scripture never contradicts Scripture, so if there is an apparent contradiction, we must search for the correct interpretation.
5. Do not let personal experience interpret what you read (eisegesis), rather interpret your personal experience by what the Bible teaches. Many in the charismatic movement make this mistake.
6. Biblical examples aren’t authoritative unless God commands them. For example, polygamy is mentioned many times in Scripture, but that doesn’t mean we can practice polygamy because God has set the qualification for marriage as one man and one woman. The Bible often describes things that happen without condoning them. Also, God’s promise to an individual or nation in the Bible is not to be understood as a promise to all people and all nations unless the context specifically states as much.
7. Any given passage has only one meaning, unless the Bible specifically states otherwise.
8. Always interpret a passage in its context. Pulling passages our of their context is the most common way cults and false teachings begin.
9. Do not look for allegories in concealed, secret or symbolic meanings.
10. Do not seek to change plain meanings of texts just because they might offend.
By practicing these basic principles of hermeneutics, you will be more able to quickly identify false teaching, whether from a single teacher, a cult or worldviews in general.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Word of Faith - Heretical Belief System
His divine power has given us everything required for life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and goodness. 2 Peter 3:1 (HCSB)
God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son. Hebrews 1:1-2a (NKJV)
When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, and if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken.; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. Deuteronomy 18:22 (NKJV)
There is disagreement among Christian apologists as to whether the Word of Faith movement is a cult or just a heretical movement. In many respects the movement has some organization, but many of the practitioners of the faith do not align themselves with anyone else. For this article I will treat it as an unorganized cult.
The WOF movement (also known as “name it and claim it,” “health and wealth,” or “prosperity gospel”) has its historic origins in the charismatic movement of the early 20th century. From out of this movement arose many so-called “faith healers” who traveled around the country with their “crusades.”
The “grandfather” of the WOF movement was Essek William Kenyon (1867-1948). It was through him that the majority of the doctrine, terminology and expressions were developed. Kenyon was from New England and was exposed to various Christian and “mind science” movements of the l890s. In 1893 he became a Baptist pastor and five years later started a Bible school.
Kenyon rejected most of the distinctive Pentecostal doctrines of the early 20th century, but the Pentecostals liked his teachings. In the 1920s he was a popular speaker in Pentecostal meetings, including those of Foursquare Church founder Aimee Semple McPherson. He became one of the first radio evangelists.
There is currently a scholarly debate as to whether Kenyon’s theology is based more on Pentecostalism or on the mysticism of the “mind-science” cults because his teachings reflected both streams of thought. According to Robert Bowman, in his book, The Word-Faith Controversy (p.37), “The following doctrines of the Word-Faith teaching either originated from Kenyon or received their distinctive formulation from him:
+ Human nature is spirit, soul, and body, but is most fundamentally spirit.
+ God created the world by speaking words of faith and does everything else by faith, and we are intended to exercise the same kind of faith.
+ In the fall human beings took on Satan’s nature and forfeited to Satan their divine dominion, making him the legal god of this world.
+ Jesus died spiritually as well as physically, taking on Satan’s nature and suffering in hell to redeem us, and then was born again.
+ By our positive confession with the God kind of faith we may overcome sickness and poverty.”
Also contributing to the development of the Word of Faith teachings were the Latter-Rain movement under William Branham in the late 1940s and Pentecostal televangelism under Oral Roberts. But the recognized “father” of WOF is Kenneth E. Hagin (1917-2003), who developed Kenyon’s teachings “in light of the healing revivals of Branham and Roberts.” (Bowman, p.92)
As we have seen with other false teachers, Hagin has varying stories as to how he discovered the WOF teachings. He claimed since the time he discovered the teachings in 1933, he had never had a headache, and any illness encountered lasted less than a day. From 1939 to 1949 Hagin pastored several Assemblies of God churches, and then became an itinerant faith-healer. By 1950 Hagin began applying the same methods for preaching prosperity as he had used in faith-healing.
Again like many other false teachers, much of Hagin’s writings were direct plagiarisms from E.W. Kenyon’s works. “In 1966 Hagin moved his ministry to Tulsa, and in 1974 he founded the Rhema Bible Training Center. In 1979 Hagin and several other televangelists founded the International Convention of Faith Churches and Ministries (headquartered in Tulsa), which functions as a virtual denomination for the Word-Faith movement.” (Bowman, p.93)
Hagin was not unlike other false prophets and false teachers in that he claimed visitations by Jesus. He has been nicknamed “Dad Hagin” by those of the WOF movement.
Foundational Doctrine: While some teachers have even more bizarre ideas, these are the teachings that all seem to agree on.
1. We can not know God by reason. Kenneth Hagin, said: "We cannot know God through our human knowledge, through our mind. God is only revealed to man through his spirit. It is the spirit of man that contacts God, for God is a Spirit.... We don't understand the Bible with our mind, it is spiritually understood. We understand with our spirit, or out heart.... As we meditate in the Word, our assurance becomes deeper. This assurance in our spirit is independent of our human reasoning or physical evidence."
Essentially, they have a very gnostic view of God and the gospel, and spiritualize much of the Bible. The most basic doctrine in WOF is that man is composed of body, soul and spirit, and that of these parts, it is the spirit that is the real human being, not the body or soul. Therefore, man is in the same class of being as God; the same kind of being. Many other Christians believe a trichotomous view of man but don't have the WOF doctrinal beliefs in relation to it. WOF must have the trichotomy to get to the "God class" of person. According to Bowman's book, WOF claims "that the reasoning of the intellect (which is located in the soul, on this theory) and the feelings of the body are unreliable guides to what is really true. Only if the spirit is the real person would it make any sense to say that health and wealth come from the spirit realm into material existence through faith, as indeed the Word-Faith teachers all say." (p.98) So, because God and humans are both spirits, they are in the same class of beings. This is a very important foundation.
2. God has faith. To cite Charles Capps, "God is a faith God. God released His faith in Words....God created the universe by the methods which you have just put into motion by the words of your mouth. God released His faith in words. Man is created in the image of God, therefore man releases his faith in words." (cited in Bowman, p.105) What this boils down to is that faith is a power invoked by your words. You speak what you want. If you want wealth or health, just speak it and it happens because of your faith power. God had faith power and that's how He created, and you, being in his "God class," have the same power of faith to speak things into existence. Faith is the creative force, and God used His faith to create and do everything. God cannot do anything without his own faith. If God doesn't speak, nothing gets done. Interestingly, wealth is the primary focus of the televangelists' teaching, telling you how God will provide you with much wealth depending on how much you send to them! That's why there is no such thing as a poor WOF teacher - every single one of them are very wealthy from the many offerings the gullible send to them.
3. God has a body. In this, they are very similar to Mormons in that they consider anthropomorphisms to be literal descriptions of God. For the most part, this God is described as being just over six feet and weighs "in the neighborhood of a couple hundred pounds, little better." (Kenneth Copeland, as cited by Bowman, p.115)
4. Being in the same class as God in being, we are actually little gods. Benny Hinn has pointed out that Christ means "anointed" and we are all anointed of God as Christians, and therefore are all "little Christs." This is how we have the power of faith in our words and how we can remain healthy without seeing doctors. Earl Paulk said, "Adam and Eve were placed in the world as the seed and expression of God. Just as dogs have puppies and cats have kittens, so God has little gods. Seed remains true to its nature, bearing its own kind. ... He created us as little gods, but we have trouble comprehending this truth. We see ourselves as 'little people' with very little power and dominion. Until we comprehend that we are little gods and we begin to act like little gods, we cannot manifest the Kingdom of God." (as cited by Bowman, p.123)
5. Dominion/Kingdom now theology. WOF adherents are strong believers in the Dominion theology; that is, we must Christianize the world and retake dominion of it from Satan before Christ can return. Supposedly, Adam gave dominion of the world over to Satan and there was nothing God could do about it.
6. The "born-again Jesus." Jesus went to Hell when he died and was tortured and beat up by Satan as punishment for our sin, and he had to be "born again" in order to defeat Satan. Jesus became actual sin, submitted to the lordship of Satan and took on Satan's nature. Kenneth Copeland explains it well: "The spirit of Jesus accepting that sin, and making it to be sin, he separated from his God, and in that moment, he's a mortal man - capable of failure, capable of death. Not only that, he's fixing to be ushered into the jaws of hell. And if Satan is capable of overpowering him there, he'll win the universe, and mankind is doomed. Don't get the idea that Jesus was incapable of failure, because if he had been, it would have been illegal." (cited by Bowman, P.161-162)
Teachers: All these well-known names are WOF to some degree, some being more heretical than others: Kenneth Hagin, jr, Charles Capps, Benny Hinn, Joyce Meyer, Morris Cerullo, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, Paul and Jan Crouch, Oral Roberts, Earl Paulk, Creflo Dollar, Kim Clement, Joel Osteen, Rod Parsley, John Avanzini, Jesse DuPlantis, Marilyn Hickey, Frederick Price, Jerry Savelle, Robert Tilton, Paul Cain, Jack Coe, Rick Joyner, Carlton Pearson, Peter Popoff, R.W. Schambach, T.D. Jakes, Phil Aguilar, Bob Larson.
These teachers, as well as the TBN network, all teach falsely regarding the Christian faith, and all should be avoided like the plague!
For further reading on the Word of Faith movement:
The Facts on the Faith Movement, by John Anker burg & John Weldon
Charismatic Chaos, by John MacArthur
The Word-Faith Controversy, by Robert M. Bowman
Will the Real Pharisee Please Stand Up? by Robert Liichow
Christianity in Crisis, but Hank Hanegraaff
The Confusing World of Benny Hinn, by G. Richard Fisher and M. Kurt Goedelman
Everything You Always Wanted to Know: Trinity Broadcasting Network, by Robert Liichow
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Kenneth Copeland, by Robert Liichow
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Robert Tilton, by Robert Liichow
God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son. Hebrews 1:1-2a (NKJV)
When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, and if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken.; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. Deuteronomy 18:22 (NKJV)
There is disagreement among Christian apologists as to whether the Word of Faith movement is a cult or just a heretical movement. In many respects the movement has some organization, but many of the practitioners of the faith do not align themselves with anyone else. For this article I will treat it as an unorganized cult.
The WOF movement (also known as “name it and claim it,” “health and wealth,” or “prosperity gospel”) has its historic origins in the charismatic movement of the early 20th century. From out of this movement arose many so-called “faith healers” who traveled around the country with their “crusades.”
The “grandfather” of the WOF movement was Essek William Kenyon (1867-1948). It was through him that the majority of the doctrine, terminology and expressions were developed. Kenyon was from New England and was exposed to various Christian and “mind science” movements of the l890s. In 1893 he became a Baptist pastor and five years later started a Bible school.
Kenyon rejected most of the distinctive Pentecostal doctrines of the early 20th century, but the Pentecostals liked his teachings. In the 1920s he was a popular speaker in Pentecostal meetings, including those of Foursquare Church founder Aimee Semple McPherson. He became one of the first radio evangelists.
There is currently a scholarly debate as to whether Kenyon’s theology is based more on Pentecostalism or on the mysticism of the “mind-science” cults because his teachings reflected both streams of thought. According to Robert Bowman, in his book, The Word-Faith Controversy (p.37), “The following doctrines of the Word-Faith teaching either originated from Kenyon or received their distinctive formulation from him:
+ Human nature is spirit, soul, and body, but is most fundamentally spirit.
+ God created the world by speaking words of faith and does everything else by faith, and we are intended to exercise the same kind of faith.
+ In the fall human beings took on Satan’s nature and forfeited to Satan their divine dominion, making him the legal god of this world.
+ Jesus died spiritually as well as physically, taking on Satan’s nature and suffering in hell to redeem us, and then was born again.
+ By our positive confession with the God kind of faith we may overcome sickness and poverty.”
Also contributing to the development of the Word of Faith teachings were the Latter-Rain movement under William Branham in the late 1940s and Pentecostal televangelism under Oral Roberts. But the recognized “father” of WOF is Kenneth E. Hagin (1917-2003), who developed Kenyon’s teachings “in light of the healing revivals of Branham and Roberts.” (Bowman, p.92)
As we have seen with other false teachers, Hagin has varying stories as to how he discovered the WOF teachings. He claimed since the time he discovered the teachings in 1933, he had never had a headache, and any illness encountered lasted less than a day. From 1939 to 1949 Hagin pastored several Assemblies of God churches, and then became an itinerant faith-healer. By 1950 Hagin began applying the same methods for preaching prosperity as he had used in faith-healing.
Again like many other false teachers, much of Hagin’s writings were direct plagiarisms from E.W. Kenyon’s works. “In 1966 Hagin moved his ministry to Tulsa, and in 1974 he founded the Rhema Bible Training Center. In 1979 Hagin and several other televangelists founded the International Convention of Faith Churches and Ministries (headquartered in Tulsa), which functions as a virtual denomination for the Word-Faith movement.” (Bowman, p.93)
Hagin was not unlike other false prophets and false teachers in that he claimed visitations by Jesus. He has been nicknamed “Dad Hagin” by those of the WOF movement.
Foundational Doctrine: While some teachers have even more bizarre ideas, these are the teachings that all seem to agree on.
1. We can not know God by reason. Kenneth Hagin, said: "We cannot know God through our human knowledge, through our mind. God is only revealed to man through his spirit. It is the spirit of man that contacts God, for God is a Spirit.... We don't understand the Bible with our mind, it is spiritually understood. We understand with our spirit, or out heart.... As we meditate in the Word, our assurance becomes deeper. This assurance in our spirit is independent of our human reasoning or physical evidence."
Essentially, they have a very gnostic view of God and the gospel, and spiritualize much of the Bible. The most basic doctrine in WOF is that man is composed of body, soul and spirit, and that of these parts, it is the spirit that is the real human being, not the body or soul. Therefore, man is in the same class of being as God; the same kind of being. Many other Christians believe a trichotomous view of man but don't have the WOF doctrinal beliefs in relation to it. WOF must have the trichotomy to get to the "God class" of person. According to Bowman's book, WOF claims "that the reasoning of the intellect (which is located in the soul, on this theory) and the feelings of the body are unreliable guides to what is really true. Only if the spirit is the real person would it make any sense to say that health and wealth come from the spirit realm into material existence through faith, as indeed the Word-Faith teachers all say." (p.98) So, because God and humans are both spirits, they are in the same class of beings. This is a very important foundation.
2. God has faith. To cite Charles Capps, "God is a faith God. God released His faith in Words....God created the universe by the methods which you have just put into motion by the words of your mouth. God released His faith in words. Man is created in the image of God, therefore man releases his faith in words." (cited in Bowman, p.105) What this boils down to is that faith is a power invoked by your words. You speak what you want. If you want wealth or health, just speak it and it happens because of your faith power. God had faith power and that's how He created, and you, being in his "God class," have the same power of faith to speak things into existence. Faith is the creative force, and God used His faith to create and do everything. God cannot do anything without his own faith. If God doesn't speak, nothing gets done. Interestingly, wealth is the primary focus of the televangelists' teaching, telling you how God will provide you with much wealth depending on how much you send to them! That's why there is no such thing as a poor WOF teacher - every single one of them are very wealthy from the many offerings the gullible send to them.
3. God has a body. In this, they are very similar to Mormons in that they consider anthropomorphisms to be literal descriptions of God. For the most part, this God is described as being just over six feet and weighs "in the neighborhood of a couple hundred pounds, little better." (Kenneth Copeland, as cited by Bowman, p.115)
4. Being in the same class as God in being, we are actually little gods. Benny Hinn has pointed out that Christ means "anointed" and we are all anointed of God as Christians, and therefore are all "little Christs." This is how we have the power of faith in our words and how we can remain healthy without seeing doctors. Earl Paulk said, "Adam and Eve were placed in the world as the seed and expression of God. Just as dogs have puppies and cats have kittens, so God has little gods. Seed remains true to its nature, bearing its own kind. ... He created us as little gods, but we have trouble comprehending this truth. We see ourselves as 'little people' with very little power and dominion. Until we comprehend that we are little gods and we begin to act like little gods, we cannot manifest the Kingdom of God." (as cited by Bowman, p.123)
5. Dominion/Kingdom now theology. WOF adherents are strong believers in the Dominion theology; that is, we must Christianize the world and retake dominion of it from Satan before Christ can return. Supposedly, Adam gave dominion of the world over to Satan and there was nothing God could do about it.
6. The "born-again Jesus." Jesus went to Hell when he died and was tortured and beat up by Satan as punishment for our sin, and he had to be "born again" in order to defeat Satan. Jesus became actual sin, submitted to the lordship of Satan and took on Satan's nature. Kenneth Copeland explains it well: "The spirit of Jesus accepting that sin, and making it to be sin, he separated from his God, and in that moment, he's a mortal man - capable of failure, capable of death. Not only that, he's fixing to be ushered into the jaws of hell. And if Satan is capable of overpowering him there, he'll win the universe, and mankind is doomed. Don't get the idea that Jesus was incapable of failure, because if he had been, it would have been illegal." (cited by Bowman, P.161-162)
Teachers: All these well-known names are WOF to some degree, some being more heretical than others: Kenneth Hagin, jr, Charles Capps, Benny Hinn, Joyce Meyer, Morris Cerullo, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, Paul and Jan Crouch, Oral Roberts, Earl Paulk, Creflo Dollar, Kim Clement, Joel Osteen, Rod Parsley, John Avanzini, Jesse DuPlantis, Marilyn Hickey, Frederick Price, Jerry Savelle, Robert Tilton, Paul Cain, Jack Coe, Rick Joyner, Carlton Pearson, Peter Popoff, R.W. Schambach, T.D. Jakes, Phil Aguilar, Bob Larson.
These teachers, as well as the TBN network, all teach falsely regarding the Christian faith, and all should be avoided like the plague!
For further reading on the Word of Faith movement:
The Facts on the Faith Movement, by John Anker burg & John Weldon
Charismatic Chaos, by John MacArthur
The Word-Faith Controversy, by Robert M. Bowman
Will the Real Pharisee Please Stand Up? by Robert Liichow
Christianity in Crisis, but Hank Hanegraaff
The Confusing World of Benny Hinn, by G. Richard Fisher and M. Kurt Goedelman
Everything You Always Wanted to Know: Trinity Broadcasting Network, by Robert Liichow
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Kenneth Copeland, by Robert Liichow
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Robert Tilton, by Robert Liichow
Monday, March 8, 2010
The Episcopal Church and Satan
The article points out that Chane is joining Episcopal bishops in the states of Iowa, Vermont and Massachusetts “in permitting clergy to wed homosexual couples.” This is the result of the Episcopal Church national leadership approving “a resolution last summer allowing ‘bishops, particularly those in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same-gender marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships are legal’ to ‘provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this church.’”
“Chane has cited the familiar Scripture passage on loving your neighbor as yourself as one of the reasons he felt ‘compelled’ to offer the sacraments of the church to gay and lesbian couples.”
I wonder if he will feel the same compulsion to sanction adultery and fornication, and even prostitution? I would think that loving one’s neighbor would not include aiding them in their rebellion against God.
Chane also claimed, "[I]f one is fully initiated into the Body of Christ, the Church, then one has full access to all the sacraments of the Church, including marriage, ordination and consecration.”
But if a person is truly in the Body of Christ, wouldn’t they give up sexual immorality, especially that of homosexuality - which God calls an abomination?
Those so-called Christians, such as Bishop Chane, will be among those who will hear Christ say, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
