We who preach the gospel must not think of ourselves as public relations agents sent to establish good will between Christ and the world. We must not imagine ourselves commissioned to make Christ acceptable to big business, the press, the world of sports or modern education. We are not diplomats but prophets, and our message is not a compromise but an ultimatum. A.W. Tozer
Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of truth. --Basil of Caesarea
Once you learn to discern, there's no going back. You will begin to spot the lie everywhere it appears.

I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who has strengthened me, because He considered me faithful, putting me into service. 1 Timothy 1:12

Monday, January 7, 2013

“Christianizing” the World


Today my wife and I stopped at the grocery, and there were a couple of young women (early 20s) in front of the store at a table, spread with material, and promoting a particular Christian ministry.  Now, we were of course thrilled to see Christians reaching out with the gospel message, but one thing I noticed was the emphasis on patriotism.  After skimming over the materials, I asked if they knew the primary mission of Christians - and they gave the proper response of the primary mission being to preach the Word and make disciples.  I then said that it was important to not confuse the Christian faith with patriotism - that the two were not synonymous.  Bad move on my part.

This statement immediately rankled the one young lady, who vehemently stated they were indeed connected, and that to be a good Christian one must be patriotic because, after all, this is a Christian nation.  Well, you can imagine what I said next: “No, it is not a Christian nation; it was founded on Christian principles but we long ago left any semblance of a nation following Christ, let alone following God.”  The young lady then continued getting more angry, explaining to me the history of the U.S. and the founding fathers’ beliefs, etc.  I explained to her that I was well-versed in such history but the fact still remains that we are not a Christian nation.  The conversation continued in this vein for about 15 minutes as they were packing to leave, with them trying to tell me I didn’t know my history, that I didn’t understand the Bible, etc.

Their primary goal seemed to be to demonstrate the need for Christians to be involved in the political realm, which I didn’t disagree with.  My point was that patriotism and the Christian faith were separate, but that our worldviews should shape what patriotism we do have.  I even noted that I believe God gave this nation the president it deserves because we as a nation have turned our back on God, but that still doesn’t equate Christianity with patriotism.  When I pointed out that Muslims are patriotic in their nations, I was told that was not a good argument because theirs were not Christian nations!  I pointed out that when you say patriotism equals Christianity then you have a problem with other faiths being patriotic.  I also stated that even unbelievers can be patriotic.

There were several moments in the conversation which disturbed me.  First, no matter how many times I stated that I was very familiar with the history of the USA, etc, she kept telling me I didn’t know it.  Second, when I tried to explain that the Bible does not tell us we are to be patriotic, I was ignored as she continued to press her case for patriotism. When I stated that the USA was not God’s chosen people as was Israel, I was told that “Christ founded America!  I asked her if she had a revelation about that and she decided the “proof” was a story about how General Washington had all sorts of guns fired at him, and the bullets made holes all over his coat but never hit him because God protected him.  I explained that, even if that was true, it is not proof that Christ founded this nation.  The final, most disturbing, incident was during a discussion of the choices we had for electing a president; the angry young lady (the other, slightly older one for the most part kept her composure) made a statement about Romney and him not being a Christian, and she began to explain to me why he isn’t a Christian.  At that point I said that I was well aware of what Mormons teach, having been one myself before becoming a Christian almost 40 years ago.  She replied that she pitied me for having been a Mormon!  I stated there was nothing to pity, since I am a believer now and have been for decades, yet she still said she pitied me.  I didn’t say it at the time, but my wife and I later wondered if she pitied everyone who was a pagan before coming to Christ (i.e, every Christian).

The overall bearing of the one young lady was sad, because she was very rude, condescending, and even attacking me as part of the problem with our country because, in her view, I was obviously doing nothing to fight the destruction of our society.  Of course she wouldn’t listen to me tell her that she had no idea as to my political involvements, etc, nor would she accept it when I told her I was probably one of the most patriotic people she would every meet.  Her mind was made up simply because I said that Christianity did not equal patriotism!

I tried to explain to these ladies that the secular world attacks Christians because they (the world) believe Christians are trying to force a theocracy on us.  The one young lady spit out the “proof text” of 2 Chronicles 7:14, so I stated the context of that passage and asked if they were familiar with the dominion theology or the New Apostolic Reformation with their teachings about “christianizing” the world.  The one said she never heard of dominion theology and didn’t want to know anything about it.  I told her she should learn about it so as to not be giving it tacit support by claiming Christians have to be patriotic!

I have to confess that being on the receiving end of such rude behavior I did respond in a more stern than usual way, and even raised my voice. I have no excuse and should know better.  Sometimes my impatience with false teachings and rude behavior gets the best of me and I allow the flesh to respond, leading me to be quite curt.  If these young ladies happen to read this article (I gave them my card), then I ask their forgiveness for my curtness.

Because some of the stuff on their table appeared to be appealing to youth by worldly means, I decided to examine the web site posted on the banner in front of their table.
I was very disappointed by what I found.  Oh, they are doing good in the political aspect in that they want young people to learn what the U.S. Constitution says, but the guy running this organization, Bradlee Dean, implies the government is behind the recent mass shootings as a way to establish gun control - typical conspiracy theory.

Their music style (I consider it cacophony) is hard rock.  I have no way of judging the lyrics of the “songs” since I didn’t find them printed, but I will never be convinced that this worldly music is pleasing to God.  And when you use the world’s ways to win people, that is what you win them to.

Several of the articles on the blogs associated with the organization referred to the Old Testament for all their teaching about the U.S.A. and governments.  One of the articles on the “Junkyard Prophet’s blog” (and I only looked over a few on the whole site) was very disturbing in that it seems to be definitely teaching “reconstructionist” theology:

It’s those same people who preach that the "End Times" are coming, and have no desire to reform society to morality and the Ten Commandments.  They look for the easy way out and don't understand "For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men” (1 Peter 2:15).  Just food for thought.

Okay, tell me where it says in Scripture that we have the mission to “reform society to morality and the Ten Commandments”!  That certainly is not the meaning of the 1 Peter passage the writer abused.  Yet this was indeed the message we heard over and over again by these young ladies.

When looking to see their mission focus, I found this:
What We Do: You Can Run But You Cannot Hide Intl. is a non-profit organization that specializes in reaching America's next generation through principles of morality, true freedom, and personal responsibility. Our mission is to equip our next generation with the Christian values that made America great through a unique avenue of music and educational event forums in colleges, schools, churches, festivals, and arenas....

Bradlee Dean: Bradlee Dean is the founder and executive director of the non-profit ministry, You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International that has reached over 500,000 students in colleges and high schools across the country. His message is to reconcile this generation to Judeo/Christian principles found in the U.S. Constitution. 

Again, this ministry is about teaching values which will “Christianize” America.  While teaching values is right and proper, it should be done in the context of a Christian living the Christian worldview and not as a way to “reform society” or “reconcil[ing] this generation] to any perceived “Judeo/Christian principles found in the U.S. Constitution.”

The main thing I want to point out here is that these young women, sincere believers that they are, have been brainwashed into thinking that if one is not patriotic (and by THEIR definition), then one is not a good Christian.  And they have been falsely taught that we are to “reform society” and its morals.   There is a lot of this type of false teaching in the Church today but, ladies and gentlemen, this teaching is simply not true!

While this ministry may have some solid teachings in reference to the gospel and salvation, they left orthodoxy the moment they decided to teach reconstructionism.  Perhaps instead of promoting themselves as a Christian ministry, they should promote themselves as a Christian political activist group.

Sunday, January 6, 2013

Another Bad Hymn


Today another hymn was used from our hymnal, and apparently there was no discernment used in selecting it.  Here are the lyrics, followed by my comments:

Spirit of the living God, fall fresh on me.
Spirit of the living God, fall fresh on me.
Melt me, mold me, fill me, use me.
Spirit of the living God, fall fresh on me.

Soul of heaven, heart of God, wash over me.
Soul of heaven, heart of God, wash over me.
Cleanse me, teach me, hold me, reach me.
Soul of heaven, heart of God, wash over me.

Holy presence, love divine, cast out my fear.
Holy presence, love divine, cast out my fear.
Shield me, free me, call me, lead me.
Holy presence, love divine, cast out my fear.

Our song leader elected to sing the first verse twice rather than singing the other verses.  I’m at least thankful we did just the one verse, but I wish I’d never heard this one.

Okay, here are my questions:
1.  How does the Holy Spirit “fall fresh” on us?  Do not the Scriptures say that the Holy Spirit indwells the Christian?  And just how does the spirit “melt” us when it “falls”?

2.  What is the “Soul of heaven”?  Every place I read about a “soul” in the Bible, it is either about a human being or synonymous with the human’s spirit.

I’m sure if I study this song long enough, I could come up with more questions, but these were the ones that came immediately into my head when I looked at the lyrics in church today.  The song reeked of charismania.

Where is the discernment?

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Some Good Stuff


Another post to start the New Year, this time with some articles which I found last month, which were edifying or otherwise helpful.

First up is a great article about “10 Old Wives’ Tales About Church Growth.”  This article is good at demonstrating part of the error with the seeker-sensitive and market-driven churches.  Now, this is not a site I normally would have visit, so I have to give a hat-tip to my fellow blogger Steve Bricker.

Stan, over at Winging It, had an excellent article about marriage, based on what he calls the Genesis Principles.

Lighthouse Trails Research Ministry blog had a good list of books Christians should avoid.  All these books promote contemplative prayer in some way or another.  It’s a good list to be familiar with.

Are you interested in the truth about St. Nicholas and his connection to Christmas?  The Gospel Coalition had an informative article.  I enjoyed the article especially because my wife and I had just recently visited the National Czech and Slovak Museum while they had a huge display about Nicholas and the history and legends surrounding him.

A very interesting article examined God’s probable attitude towards the cult known as Westboro Baptist Church.  This is the “church” which likes to protest at funerals, claiming the person or people were killed by God because of the sanctioning of homosexuality in America.  I think God does indeed hate WBC.

And, finally, Elizabeth Prata has an excellent article about the “therapeutic gospel” being espoused by so much of today’s church leadership.  Although I have not previously heard of Trevin Wax, Prata’s review of his book explaining this false gospel leads me to seek to purchase a copy of Wax’s book.

Have a blessed New Year!

Monday, December 31, 2012

Spiritually Abusive Religion or Religious Leader


A few years ago, while doing research on the Seventh-day Adventist sect, I ended up being subscribed to “Proclamation” magazine, the publication of Life Assurance MinistriesLife Assurance Ministries has ex-SDA members and is an “anti-SDA” apologetics ministry.

The current issue, Winter 2012, has a good article (by Joan Yorba-Gray with Colleen Tinker) about spiritually abusive religions and religious leaders, including an excellent chart comparing spiritually abusive teaching to healthy teaching.  I think the chart is well-worth sharing, so below you will find the information from the chart, but not in the chart format (I am not geeky enough to do that, and scanning the chart would make it too small to read).  Also, the chart explains where the SDA falls into the Abusive category, but I am leaving that part out so these descriptions can stand alone, as well as  be compared to other churches or leaders.

Abusive:  Coerces obedience with power, manipulation, domination and fear.
Healthy:  Leads the flock in his care with a servant’s heart and seeks cooperation and fellowship (Mk.9:35)

Abusive:  Uses the Bible for his own purposes, i.e., to control and dominate the flock.
Healthy:  Uses biblical doctrines in teaching and encourages the flock to do their own personal Bible study and study in groups.

Abusive:  Has rigid or overly-enmeshed boundaries, and the members of the church are closed off from other groups.
Healthy:  Has appropriate boundaries with members of the church.  Doesn’t try to become enmeshed in their lives or cut them off from other Christians.

Abusive:  May be narcissistic and believe that he knows what God thinks and may even see himself as “God’s mouthpiece.”  Authority goes from the top down.
Healthy:  Knows that God works through the Holy Spirit in each believer to give us discernment; accountability goes both ways.

Abusive:  Sees itself as the only “true” church; has black and white thinking - us vs. wrong (the others are wrong).
Healthy:  All those who have accepted the finished work of Christ on the cross, without need for personal performance, are brothers and sisters in the Lord.  There are not “superior” believers; all believers are equally loved by God (Romans 8:1).

Abusive:  Promotes legalism and perfectionism.  This gives the leader ability to control people by their fears of not being saved and going to hell.
HealthyKnows that the Christian is saved by grace through faith and salvation cannot be earned by one’s behavior (Eph. 2:8-9).

Abusive:  Has obsession with discipline in which those who disagree are shunned, censured or expelled from the church.  Leader expects to be obeyed because he has “the mind of Christ.”...  Many sins are tolerated if a person is a loyal tithe-paying member.
Healthy:  If the individual has erred, he confesses the sin and receives forgiveness (1 Jn.1:9).  Believers are not shunned or expelled for disagreements on non essential matters of faith.

Abusive:  Encourages “group think” by using rules and regulations that are constantly repeated, taught and reinforced by church literature, classes and teaching from the pulpit.
Healthy:  Encourages the Bible as truth, does not obsess about rules and regulations, but focuses on helping individuals grow in their relationship with the Lord.

Abusive:  Believes the end justifies any means.  The denomination sponsors community events and public activities without saying who they are in order to gain proselytes.  Immoral or criminal conduct on the part of a leader may be covered up for the sake of “the mission”.... 
Healthy:  If the end that is desired is not consistent with God’s Word, then no means will be acceptable.

Abusive:  Uses end-time events to promote its own eschatology.  Eschatology itself isn’t wrong, but when the leaders use end time teaching to control the flock by promoting fear and anxiety, isolation from other Christians, perfectionistic behavior, uncertainty about salvation and “extra-biblical” teachings, they are in error.  There may be an obsession with calculating the dates, situations or events that predict Jesus’ return...
Healthy:  Teaches that no one knows the time of Jesus’ coming (Mk. 13:32).

Abusive:  Uses insider double-talk with a confusing doctrine.  The group encourages blind acceptance of its opposing teachings and rejection of logic through complex presentations on incomprehensible doctrines.
Healthy:  The Bible is the doctrine upon which teachings are based; other ancillary teaching texts must be consistent with biblical truth.


While some spiritually abusive religions or religious teachers will be guilty of every one of these, most will probably just be guilty of most, or at least several of these descriptions.

If you recognize any of these as applying to a group you are in or a teacher you follow, get out of that group and leave that teacher as quickly as possible.  If you know someone in a group described above as abusive, teach them why they need to leave such a group.  Be discerning with everyone you follow; some can be very subtle and slowly drag you in.

Friday, December 28, 2012

Ravi Zacharias


 Ravi Zacharias has long been one of my favorite apologists ever since I first heard him on radio broadcasts while I lived in the Chicago area.   He has always been a solid defender of the faith.

I don’t know what has gotten into Mr. Zacharias, but he is now compromising the faith by praising and otherwise sanctioning false teachers.  Ken Silva, over at Apprising Ministries, has been following a story about Zacharias giving praise to Joyce Meyer and her teachings.  Zacharias has called Meyer, who is a Word of Faith heretic, “a great Bible teacher.”  This is really a very sad situation.

The following links will take you to the various articles posted by Silva as the story was coming out:

Joyce Meyer as “a great teacher,” with Zacharias giving giving her credence on her show.

A reader’s exchange with Ravi Zacharias International Ministries and the further tacit support of Meyer.



Other problems with RZIM:

Ordained women ministers, and Ravi calling Henri Nouwen “one of the greatest Christian saints.”
This particular article links to this one excusing the praise of Nouwen.

Ravi praises The Alpha Course and claims God inspired Gumbel in his work with Alpha.

A question is raised as to whether Silva is too hard on Zacharias, and Silva responds.

Here is the crux of the matter: Teachers of the Word are held to be more accountable than the everyday Christian (James 3:1).  As Silva notes, Ravi is not untouchable, nor is any other popular Christian leader/speaker.  In fact, they are in a position to do more damage than anyone else, which is why it is important that they not be giving even tacit approval to false teachers and false teachings.

My hope and prayer is that Ravi will cease promoting these false teachers and expose their teaching instead.

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Another Attempt at Relevance


During Christmas Eve service at the Church assembly I attend, we had “special music” with a woman singing Faith Hill’s song, “A Baby Changes Everything.”  I never previously heard this song, and I wish I never had now.  It is just another attempt at relevance in today’s culture.  I was disappointed it was used in our service.

Due to the way the singer performed the song, I had difficulty understanding most of the lyrics.  (I don’t know what it is about our culture nowadays wherein no one seems to enunciate the words in song lyrics.)  But that which I did understand disturbed me.  So today I had a chance to seek the lyrics on the Internet, and what I post below is what I found.

Teenage girl, much too young
Unprepared for what's to come
A baby changes everything

Not a ring on her hand
All her dreams and all her plans
A baby changes everything
A baby changes everything

The man she loves she's never touched
How will she keep his trust?
A baby changes everything
A baby changes everything

And she cries!
Ooh, she cries
Ooh, oh

She has to leave, go far away
Heaven knows she can't stay
A baby changes everything

She can feel it's coming soon
There's no place, there's no room
A baby changes everything
A baby changes everything

And she cries!
And she cries!
Oh, she cries

Shepherds all gather 'round
Up above the star shines down
A baby changes everything

Choir of angels sing
Glory to the newborn King
A baby changes everything
A baby changes everything
Everything, everything, everything

Hallelujah
Hallelujah
Hallelujah
Hallelujah

My whole life has turned around
I was lost but now I'm found
A baby changes everything, yeah
A baby changes everything.

Now, except for the last two verses the song could be about any unwed mother.   But there is a problem with anachronistically placing modern ideas into the culture of the period of Jesus’ birth.

First, the fact that Mary was a “teenage girl” is irrelevant.  She was a young woman, as is every “teenage girl.”  It is only in modern culture where we keep our children as children well into their 20’s.  During Mary’s culture, marrying at 14 was common.  In fact, it was quite common up to a couple hundred years ago, and even after that it wasn’t unusual.  My own mother married at 15.  Mary was already engaged to be married.

Mary was told by an angel that she was going to conceive and have a baby.  Therefore, being a mature young woman, she was not “unprepared for what’s to come.”

“Not a ring on her hand” is anachronistic.  Rings weren’t used.  Of course the listener is meant to understand by this that she wasn’t married and having a baby would change “everything.”  We know nothing of any “dreams” or “plans” of Mary’s other than she was planning on marrying Joseph.  Of course being with child and unmarried was certainly a problem, but Joseph was also contacted by an angel when he thought about divorcing Mary.  We aren’t told in the Bible, but I would assume that both Mary’s and Joseph’s parents would have been filled in with the information about the miraculous conception.  After all, that isn’t something which would have been kept secret from family members who worshipped God.  But what I found especially amusing about this song and its attempt at relevance, is that in today’s culture being an unwed mother is readily accepted without any stigma!

“The man she loves” - do we know she loved him?  She was engaged to him, but in those days many marriages were arranged and romance was not necessarily part of the equation.  And we are never told Mary cried about anything!  She most likely was ecstatic about being chosen to bear the Son of God!

A baby changes every couple’s lives, and that is all this song is saying with its attempt at relevance.  However, it totally leaves out the reason why this particular baby was different from every other baby; if I knew nothing about the gospel, I would think this song was just about a new heir to a throne being born.

In all the efforts to be relevant to today’s society, song writers continue to be touchy-feely in their so-called “Christian” songs.  And everyone is led to feel so emotional about them, without ever once exercising discernment and trying to understand what the lyrics teach.

Sunday, December 23, 2012

We Are Christ’s Soldiers?


Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.
(2 Timothy 3:12-13)
Christian Soldiers Standing Up For Jesus?
In many of our local fellowships on a given Sunday we could hear a congregation singing songs like Stand Up Stand Up For Jesus and/or Onward Christian Soldiers. But let’s stop and think for a moment; isn’t part of the job of a soldier defending against attack?
Doesn’t this bring them into conflict; and wouldn’t it mean that they’d have no choice but to fight? So ask yourself: Have I seen much of that going on for the cause of Christ in my lifetime? Which is why I find myself wondering: “Where are the Elijahs of God?” Lord, about now I’d say Your church would be willing to settle for just one.
You know I can’t help but wonder, among our professing Christian brothers and sisters today, just where are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness (Matthew 5:6)? And among our so-called Christian “leaders,” with their compromised Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism, which always leads to a false and phony unity; just where are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake (Matthew 5:10)?
Do they seriously not know that Christ Jesus said of those who do hunger, and of those that are persecuted, theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven? Let’s take a moment to go over to 2 Corinthians chapter 11 and verse 4. At this point in this Age of Grace it’ll be a good idea to remind ourselves of something the Bible tells us about false teaching. And this is becoming especially evident in these times of growing apostasy and the so-called “Christian” mysticism that’s now infesting our Lord’s visible church through men like Living Spiritual Teacher and Quaker mystic Richard Foster.
Truly this is really but a form of gnostic mysticism all over again, which originally resurfaced in the antibiblical monastic traditions of apostate Roman Catholicism; and which, has already been condemned within the pages of Scripture itself! However, secular humanism and the theory of evolution—left virtually undefended by the church visible—gave birth to the relativism now so deeply imbedded in very definitely pagan America.
Continue reading at Apprising Ministries

Thursday, December 20, 2012

Dr. David Jeremiah


I began listening to David Jeremiah almost 30 years ago; I would listen to him on the radio while driving to or from work, depending on the time of day (I worked rotating schedules).

I always liked Jeremiah’s teaching, but as I matured in the faith I tended to find his continuous use of anecdotes to be rather dry.  Don’t get me wrong; I think anecdotes are excellent for making points, but I am not fond of sermons which seem to be 80-90% anecdotal.  I like to have more exegetical teachings - I want more meat!

Recently I have read that Dr. Jeremiah has been promoting the contemplative movement, and have been disappointed.   Too many good teachers are jumping on the mystical bandwagon to the detriment of the Church.  Jeremiah has also given credence to the Word of Faith movement by appearing on TBN and even praising heretic Paul Crouch!

I just finished reading a book by Dr. Jeremiah, Living With Confidence In A Chaotic World, which was given to me by a friend.  As usual, it was filled with anecdotes, as is his style.  There was a lot of very good teachings, but the people he cited throughout the book, and other things he promoted, prevents me from passing the book along.  Non-discerning and immature Christians would read this book, and assume if a teacher in it was cited, then he or she must be someone worthy of reading - or listening to.  This is not so!

So, just who are the teachers Jeremiah cites, without any caveats, which are problematic?

1)Philip Yancey.  My evidence against Yancey is an article I wrote a year ago.

2)  Watchman Nee.  Nee is another very mystical teacher, and sometimes his teaching borders on the bizarre (try reading his book series, The Spiritual Man, with its gnostic teachings).  Perhaps one day I’ll even do an article on him.  Meanwhile, read this article by G. Richard Fisher.

3) Henri Nouwen.  Nouwen was a Roman Catholic mystic who endorsed many Eastern practices as well as teaching a form of universalism.  A short article by Lighthouse Trails should be sufficient to demonstrate the problem of citing Nouwen.

4)  Beth Moore.  Moore has been examined many times on this site, and you can select her label to read the various articles I have posted.

5)  Eugene Peterson.  Peterson is also very much involved in mysticism and other New Age teachings.  He’s another one I need to get around to writing about.

Aside from citing these very, very questionable teachers, Jeremiah uses The Message paraphrase “Bible” throughout the book.  This “version” of the Bible is rife with New Age teachings, twisting of Scripture, and many other problems.  Many apologists call it “The Mess,” and rightfully so.  I could link to many articles examining the problems with The Message, but I’ll just link you to this one which also explains more about Eugene Peterson’s beliefs as well as a bit of examining The Message itself.

The last disturbing thing in Jeremiah’s book was his support for Mel Gibson’s Roman Catholic propaganda piece, “The Passion of Christ.”  

I will never again recommend David Jeremiah to anyone.  While he has some great teachings, when he promotes such teachers and teachings as noted above, he can lead weak Christians down the wrong path.