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

Thursday, February 20, 2014

Random Apostasies and Heresies

It would be nice if I could go two or three weeks without apostasy, heresy, or just plain bizarre teachings needing to be warned about.  Unfortunately, false teachers never sleep; their web is daily spun and just gets larger and larger as it captures the gullible, easily deceived, and the spiritually immature.  So the warnings must be posted.

The Church of England has decided that a lack of male leadership justifies the idea of women bishops. I really don’t see why they are having such a problem making the decision, since they already have women in leadership roles - directly contrary to Paul’s teachings.  Perhaps if the Anglican Church concentrated on preaching the word and discipling members to maturity, they might just end up with a large reservoir of qualified male candidates.

Emergent, seeker-sensitive, and heretical Steven Furtick has been in the news too often.  First, I see he has made his debut on the Trinity Broadcasting Network - the station known for its abject heretical teachers.  Like them, he is getting wealthy off the gullible who attend his “church.”  Furtick is really a cult leader, with his followers acting very much like cult members.  His teachings are bizarre. and yet apparently none of his followers read the Bible for confronting him.  And if those outside his goat-pen challenge him, they are attacked as “haters.”  He is very reminiscent of those preaching the “Toronto Revival” with his man-caused, “spontaneous” baptisms and his focus on numbers of people joining his cult.  

Meanwhile, in one of the original seeker-sensitive/market-driven assemblies, Willow Creek, they are teaching the Alpha Course!!!  This course has too many false teachings to explain here, but it is a course which should never show up in any church claiming to be evangelical.

Excuses given for “pastors” using foul language are really getting old.  Now we have James MacDonald [link gone by 9/26/20] joining with the likes of Mark Driscoll and his ilk by using crude language.  I even had a commenter this week defending Tony Campolo’s foul language!  Since these men are seen as leaders in the church, should they not behave as leaders and follow the teachings of Ephesians 5: 4 and Colossians 3:8, where Paul says to NOT use such language?

Yes, there is more to be learned about Michael Brown’s association with Benny Hinn.  All I can say is, “Sorry Mr. Brown, but you have NO excuse for associating with such a rank heretic!”  Anyone in Brown’s position who supports the likes of Hinn in ANY way is not worthy of being a Christian leader.

Now that the subject of “Strange Fire” vs “Authentic Fire” has been broached, the Cripplegate had an excellent article about what “tongues” in the Bible really were - which is nothing like what the charismatic churches have today.  In fact, what goes on in these charismatic churches, and the people who claim to speak in tongues, is nothing but the same phenomena found in the early days of the Mormon Church.

Christian colleges are more and more becoming just like the world, or bringing in false teachings.  Wheaton College students protested the visit of a former lesbian to their campus.  It seems they didn’t like the idea of her message being that one can leave such sin behind by turning one’s life over to Christ.  It seems they think another side of the story should be presented that people can be Christians while being unrepentant of homosexual behavior. Then we have Faith Baptist Bible College in Ames, IA, which has always been very fundamental, now promoting and selling books by contemplative authors.  Sigh.

Last week I posted information about Bill Gothard’s sexual abuse and harassment of young ladies working for him.  Another young lady’s story was posted this week, which should raise the hackles of any parent.  With all the recent exposure of Gothard’s lust for his workers, and the refusal of Gothard to deal with it, a new project is being developed to bring lots of public exposure to what has taken place in Gothard’s organization.  I would really like to see the total collapse of the organization.

Andy Stanley disappoints me more and more.  Now he thinks it is “offensive that Christians would leverage faith to support the Kansas law. Serving people we don’t see eye to eye with is the essence of Christianity. Jesus died for a world with which he didn’t see eye to eye. If a bakery doesn’t want to sell its products to a gay couple, it’s their business. Literally. But leave Jesus out of it.”  The new Kansas law which failed to pass was about protecting Christians from being forced to provide services for same-sex fake weddings, etc, which SHOULD BE morally repugnant to every Christian.  And, there is plenty of biblical support for refusing to assist people in their sin.  It isn’t about refusing to sell products or services just because people are sinners, it is about specific kinds of goods and services which make the provider a participant in said sin.  For example, I don’t care what a person does with their sex lives (homosexuality, bestiality, adultery, fornication, etc) if I’m asked to play music at a birthday party for them; it’s helping people celebrate another year of life and is not in any way giving even tacit approval to whatever sexual immorality they may indulge in.  But if I am asked to play for a fake wedding I would be helping to celebrate what is an abomination to God.  For Stanley to suggest otherwise is an affront to God.


Anonymous said...

Hi Glenn,

I plan to write more later, but I had to shout an amen to this statement:

[Regarding BG] "I would really like to see the total collapse of the organization."



Steve Bricker said...

I read some accounts at Recovering Grace and was shocked and saddened by what those young ladies endured. Obviously, repentance is needed from Bill Gothard.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Gothardism was so heavy in the "Chapel" that I didn't need to now about the problems with the girls - I could already tell it was trouble. Actually, it was while I was there the first two weeks and how I was approached by a couple Gothardites trying to coerce me to join that I began my investigations. Their behavior was cultic and I wanted to get to the bottom of it.

Even the with the research I did over the next few months I kept coming across hints of impropriety with Bill and the young women, but no one seemed to want to put a face on it. The book by Midwest Christian Outreach was a real eye opener.

ali said...

Thanks Glenn. Once again you knock the ball out of the park. Great information the body needs to hear and heed.

Anonymous said...

Glenn, I just read about the 1980 scandal at BGs institute, which is posted on Recovering Grace's website. WOW, how disgusting, and infuriating to see that the "ministry" has continued on, and heartbreaking (and frustrating) that people STILL go there and support it. That place should have been forced shut in 1980.

The word of God is so apt here:

2 Peter 2:1-3, 13-14, 17-19

1... just as there will also be false teachers among you ...2 Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3 and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.
...14 having eyes full of adultery that never cease from sin, enticing unstable souls, having a heart trained in greed...
18 For speaking out arrogant words of vanity they entice by fleshly desires, by sensuality, those who barely escape from the ones who live in error, 19 promising them freedom while they themselves are slaves of corruption...

That about sums it up.

Those poor young women, though, who have been abused by BG and his brother for all these years, may the Lord bring deliverance and true healing to them.

As for the other RA&H:
Furtick - creeeeeeeeeeepy
Willow Creek - no shock there.
James MacD - again, no shock there.
Brown's association with Hinn - I agree 100% with your assessment, Glenn!
Andy Stanley - no shock there.

Apologetics and discernment ministries are very necessary today. Though pastors truly ought to be warning of these things from the pulpit.


Glenn E. Chatfield said...


I first learned about the Recovering Grace site soon after they started, having been notified by Midwest Christian Outreach (I subscribe to their journal, and they were the ones I contacted about Gothard back in 1999 when I first began researching him; and I've also been in numerous classes taught by Don Vienot, the founder).

So I've read all their articles as they've posted them. The case against Gothard and IBLP is so strong I don't see how anyone can even suggest there is good in that organization. It just goes to show how strong grips cult-teachings have on their followers.

Anonymous said...

Mr.Chatfield, you say you don't care what people do sexually. So you don't care about adulterers betraying faithful, innocent spouses and you don't care about homosexuals engaging in sodomy, and you don't care about other sexual sinners engaging in other horrors? You say you have no problem playing the bagpipes for such, as they "celebrate" another year of life?!! It is disgraceful for a professing Christian to be a part of any celebration organised by those whose sins were death penalty offences under the law of Moses.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...


Did you understand the context in which I said that? The context is IF I AM ASKED TO PLAY MUSIC FOR AN EVENT. Does it really matter what people do in private for me to decide if I should play for the event? Am I supposed to interrogate every person who asks me to play for a birthday party to find out if they are fornicators, or indulge in pornography, etc? If I am selling a product, am I supposed to grill them about their sex lives before I sell them the product?

Of course I care about what people do in their lives, when it comes to sin and teaching them a way for it to be forgiven. It certainly saddens me to know about the sexual immorality which is rife in this world.

As a performer, it is not my place to grill people as to their sexual behavior before I accept the job of playing for them. And even if I know that they are immoral people, playing at a birthday party does not celebrate their immorality.

So, should I elect to NOT play for a birthday party if I learn the honoree had an unbiblical divorce? What about if I discover they are a shoplifter, or a gossip, etc? If I decide I can't play for a birthday party because the person is a sinner, then I would never be able to play for anyone's birthday party - NOT EVEN YOURS!

Anonymous said...

You are most ungracious,aggressive and impolite, Sir, and arrogant. Do you allow anyone to disagree with you?
You said that you don't care if people engage in homosexuality, bestiality etc. I do care, and, to give an example of avoiding such, some years ago, I was looking for a driving instructor who could teach me to drive. I knew that one on the list was an adulterer, so I chose another instructor. The adulterer's faithful, honourable wife was glad when I told her, that, as a matter of principle, I would not book driving lessons with her wicked husband, who had left her and her children in financial and emotional distress. I was not going to contribute to his income which was enabling him to support him and his adulterous co-accused. Sometimes we know who the adulterers and homosexuals are and where possible, we should avoid "normalising" their conduct.

Glenn E. Chatfield said...

Mr cowardly anonymous,

You first comment attacked my integrity and was nothing but pharisaical self-righteous legalism because you seem to think one should not provide services to those whose sins fall into a particular category, whether or not one’s service provides support for such sin, and that apparently no one can celebrate another year of their life so long as it is a lifestyle of sin.

So I explained to you the context of my statement of not carrying what people‘s sex lives are about, very politely, I might add, and asked if I - or any other Christian - are required to interrogate someone seeking services to insure they are not committing some specific sin. I also made the point that I do indeed - contrary to your charges - care about such people living such lifestyles and their eternal destiny.

Finally, responding you your charge of “disgraceful” actions if I chose to play for any celebration in which such sinners might be present, I pointed out that by your logic I would be unable to play for any celebration!

Now you charge me with being “ungracious” (could you perhaps give a single example in my comment where I was ungracious?), “aggressive” (please give an example of what I said that was aggressive?), and “impolite” (in what way was I impolite - what did I write that was impolite?)

You accuse me of being arrogant because I pointed out the end of your logic - did I step on you toes?

I don’t care if people disagree with me, but if you want to make claims and charges, you’d better have biblical backing, and you comment had no biblical backing - just YOUR phariseeism

Again your new comment makes the same charge against me (You said that you don't care if people engage in homosexuality, bestiality etc.) without including the context. You doing so is dishonest and misrepresents my statement.

Providing a service, which has no bearing on the event at which the services are desired, is not unbiblical, nor does it “normalize” the sinful conduct people may be living under.

Your example is not YOU providing a service, and you already knew the circumstances and chose to take your business elsewhere - I do that all the time when it is a business which I feel it would be unethical to provide money to.

Your scenario is NOT relevant to the discussion. The discussion is whether or not one should provide services to anyone based on their lifestyle. The point is that IF the lifestyle is being sanctioned by said service, then it should not be given. BUT if said service has nothing to do with the individual’s lifestyle, then there is no justification for not providing said service.

The ungracious one here is YOU who, according to your logic, would refuse to sell groceries to someone if you found out they were a fornicator. According to your logic, you wouldn’t sell gasoline to a “homosexual.” But every person you provide service to (if you ever provide a service) has some sin - a sin which God has said requires the death penalty - but in your pharisaical legalistic mindset, it is okay to provide services for sinners so long as they do not fall into your category of the forbidden.

There is a vast difference between playing for a birthday party for someone you know is an adulterer, and refusing to participate in any activity which assists the adulterer in his sin.