Manifested Bentley, Part 2.

In Part 1 of this series, we discussed some attributes of the Manifested Sons of God (MSoG) teaching, and then presented one of Todd Bentley's sermons from the so-called Lakeland Outpouring. One of the distinguishing characteristics of MSoG is that idea that somehow the church will morph into Christ, or into a Christ-type. This relieves Christ from having to literally return, and in many strains of MSoG, He doesn't. You will hear phrases such as corporate anointing or corporate atmosphere referring to the transformed body of the elite. Yes, we are the body of Christ, but not The Body of Christ. You will also see Christ's divinity downplayed - as if He could only do what He did because some anointing cloud of glory fell down upon Him. As with all abberent teaching, MSoG teaching includes much truth, which makes the error that much harder to spot.

To be generous, you could say that they just have the timing of Romans 8 off. But the end result of MSoG is to ascribe divinity to ourselves, which will never happen. Of course there are many other problems; let's see how many you can spot without coaching.

Kingdom Theology (combined) with the Manifest Sons of God doctrine (believes in) the ongoing incarnation of God and (that) believers are "little gods" exercising autonomous sovereignty within their spheres of dominion.
-Robert M. Bowman, Jr.

In part 2 we will look at another of Bentley's sermons, this one given at about the time of the meltdown of Lakeland, due to Bentley's affair with an intern (now his wife) Bentley is speaking at Rick Joyner's church near Charlotte, North Carolina on August 8, 2008. The date 08.08.08 was celebrated by some as having some sort of prophetic meaning, even thought it has no meaning in God's calendar. Morningstar was calling it a "historic night of new beginnings," which in a way was sadly funny because Bentley was abandoning his wife at that time.



That Morningstar also embraces this theology is evidenced by the fact that the DVD as of this writing is still promoted on the Morningstar website. The cover of the DVD which I have calls it a "DVD teaching set."


Todd Bentley, August 8, 2008, at Morningstar

You know I saw a progression, (in) this anointing. In the first two weeks that God broke out in Florida, I had an open vision. Four stages of this revival. In fact there were twelve steps. Twelve stairs on a staircase. Four floors; every floor was one stage of the progression of revival.

Bentley goes on to tell us that each step is a progression (increase) of God's Glory . Regarding the four floors or stages. The first stage is healing. He says this where most of the church lives. "Let's worship until the presence of God comes and we get this."

The second floor is called "notable, remarkable miracles." He calls this the "creative miracle realm." "This was the legs, the arms and the eyeballs.."

The third floor was raising the dead. Ironically, Bentley stated (his affair was known by Joyner at this time) "And there were some other things on the (third) floor. The Spirit of Holiness, Romans 1:4. There was character..."

Back to Bentley:

And I was surprised that there was a fourth stage coming that we've still not hit. We've only begin to hit the third floor. Some of us aren't even in the notable-remarkable realm yet. We're just satisfied, we think the healing realm is revival. We're splashing around in the pool of Bethesda and God's trying to move us to the (Peter's) shadow. Then we get to the shadow, we finally start seeing the dead being raised, resurrection. And the fourth floor, I'll tell you what it is.

I got up to the fourth floor, the door opened, it was Romans 8, the Manifestation of the Sons of God, power, dominion, and it was called resurrection life. And I said, wait a minute God, what's the difference between raising the dead and resurrection life? He said, "Raising the dead is something that you do, but there's a place where there'll be such a maturity and glory in my church, that will be resurrection life, power, dominion and authority over every sin, sickness, disease, death, a realm of conquering. Listen, when Jesus came up out of the tomb, when Jesus was risen from the dead, when he came up, just because of the anointing on him, the glory on him, other dead people were raised by accident.

He said Todd, you can pray for one person today to be raised from the dead but there's coming a realm of corporate anointing that when it drops on a city, or drops on a life, or drops on a ministry, and the power become so great, it affects the area hospitals, it affects - people get raised from the dead, wherever they're watching. Because of the anointing in the atmosphere. There's been people raised from the dead for 2000 years.

You can be an apostle, have great faith and pray, and somebody gets raised from the dead, but when you walk in the realm of resurrection life and glory Manifestation of the Sons of God, and there's such a corporate atmosphere, and such an anointing around you. You step into a city and all that's death and decay, and all that's terminal and cancer get affected, and every devil begins to shake.

And that's when I said "God, I'm not focused on raising the dead anymore, I want resurrection life." Do you know, raising the dead isn't something that happens, raising the dead is a person. Resurrection isn't something that happens, resurrection is a person. Jesus said, "I am the resurrection, I am the life." Raising the dead is Jesus. When the dead are raised it's Jesus.

The person. Resurrection is the person. "I am the resurrection, I am the life." Resurrection is Jesus, not something that happens.

God's going to move the church into such a realm, yes Peter's shadow, yes unusual miracles by the hands of Paul, aprons, handkerchiefs, yes healing, yes creative miracles but we're moving into a realm of, yes a revival of raising the dead. But we're moving into a realm of Romans 8: resurrection life, power, dominion over every sin, sickness, disease, death, and it's an atmosphere. Because everything is the person of Jesus. And we are pressing in for that Romans 1:4 anointing. (divinity -ed.)

Do you know how Jesus was raised from the dead? By the spirit of holiness and declared to be the Son of God by the resurrection of the dead. And I just believe there's an impartation to call forth "Christ in you the hope of glory" "the same Spirit that raised Christ from the dead."

And I want to take one moment church and I want to press in, I want you to press in with me, to go from one floor, to two floors to three floors, to four, and let's progress and let's say God beyond raising the dead, beyond notable-remarkable miracles, beyond healing, let there be a release in the church of the realm of glory and power and dominion and authority that affects everything that's death and decay around us and it's true victory, it's true resurrection life, true resurrection power, and true resurrection glory. And I want you to press into that for a moment 'cause there's coming a day, where when that resurrection power comes, its going to be so great, that hundreds of those that are terminally ill will be healed, area hospitals will be emptied, dead will be raised five block down the street.

People will be made alive. Born again. Thirty-mile radius of glory- shaking city. That's the cloud that's coming down. That's the overshadowing.

So Lord, I pray tonight, for release of that glory realm, the glory realm that shakes, signs in the heaven above, wonders in the earth beneath. The glory realm that abides. The thirty-mile radius glory. Shaking glory. resurrection life. Resurrection power. Resurrection glory. I want you to press in to it right now and I'm going to pray.

Manifested Sons of God. No longer in the closet but boldly in the open. Coming to an apostolic/prophetic church near you!

Note to the gullible: The same spirit that raised Christ from the dead NOW dwells in us. Not when we reach "the fourth stage" whatever that is.

The Inerrancy Of Scripture

I believe the Bible is the Word of God written; it is the revelation of the truths of God conveyed by inspiration through His servants to us. As such, it is infallible and without error.

Implications Of Statement

1. I refer to original autographs. While the science of textual criticism assures us of a trustworthy text, inerrancy can be claimed only for the original writings (Jeremiah 36:2 [KJV/NIV]).

2. I conceive the Bible to be in actuality the very Word of God. The divine Author prompted the original thought in the mind of the writers (Amos 3:8 [KJV/NIV]); He then guided their choice of words to express such thoughts (Exodus 4:12,15 [KJV/NIV]); and, lastly, He illumines the mind of the reader of such words in a way that the reader potentially may comprehend the same truth as was originally in the mind of the writer (1 Corinthians 2:12; Ephesians 1:17,18 [KJV/NIV]). Thus, both thought and language are revelatory and inspired.

3. I understand inspiration to mean that special act of the Holy Spirit by which He guided the writers of the Scriptures. Such superintendency made full allowance for the divergent backgrounds, abilities, and personalities of the writers, and applies to all they wrote as it is found in the canon of Scripture.

4. I define inerrancy as meaning "exempt from error" and infallibility as a near synonym meaning "incapable of error, certain". If there is any difference in the shade of meaning between the two terms, inerrancy emphasizes the truthfulness of Scripture, while infallibility emphasizes the trustworthiness of Scripture. Such inerrancy and infallibility apply to all of Scripture and include both revelational inerrancy and factual inerrancy. It is truth (2 Samuel 7:28; Psalm 119:43,160; John 17:17,19; Colossians 1:5 [KJV/NIV]).

From the Assemblies of God Inerrancy of Scripture position paper.

Manifested Bentley, Part 1.

Of all the teachings of the Latter Rain sect, the most alarming are the teachings concerning the Manifest Sons of God (MSoG). The Let Us Reason apologetics website has perhaps the most concise summary of MSoG teaching, which in itself is not very concise.

Manifest Sons teachings are Kingdom Dominionist: they believe in restoration of the Church, restoration of the 5 fold ministry with the offices of apostles and prophets, having authority through its leaders by strong shepherding and discipleship. A perfection of the saints, immortalization, and the attainment of being Christ as we become just like Christ in nature and ability. The Manifest Sons of God doctrine has an eschatology of Dominionism through the perfecting of the saints under the leadership guidance of the latter-day prophets and apostles. They mostly deny a (pre-trib or post-trib) rapture in the classic sense. Some replace it with individual raptures, a collective transformation to immortality on earth, or none at all.

Jewel Grewe in her treatise on Joel's Army has this to say:

The theology behind Manifest Sons of God is rather like jello. It just changes its shape depending on the mold you put it into. Yet it is still jello. It comes as “Dominion Theology” or “Kingdom Now” teaching. It even can be called “The Bride.” Next time you hear it, it may not be called Joel's Army, but the “Phineas Priesthood” (those who executed judgment in the name of the Lord in Numbers 25).

She goes on to state that many who are would deny that they are teaching MSoG doctrine. Well, she wrote that in 1991. How things have changed.

In the last few years it has become not uncommon for MSoG proponents to explicitly state that they are teaching MSoG. What was once heresy is now a boast. They have, as it were, come out of the closet. One of the leaders of this thrust is the darling of the so-called "signs and wonders" movement, Todd Bentley. The temporarily disgraced but-now-restored Bentley promotes MSoG. As bad as the circus at Lakeland was, his theology is even worse.

Todd Bentley, May 28, 2008 - at the Lakeland Outpouring (tm)

Tonight is a crossing over and that we have an opportunity, even in this moment, says the Lord, that we can labor and travail until Christ is formed in you. We need a maturity. There's things that are going to mature tonight. Say "maturity." Things are going to mature tonight. Whereas before maybe it was a little embryo. Maybe before it was 3 months in the womb. Maybe before it was 6 months in the womb. Maybe your city, maybe your region, maybe your nation, maybe your destiny has been in the pains, in the labor pains and you've been in a place of contraction.

But I'm telling you I feel if we gave it a big push that we can literally form Christ, Christ in you. I'm talking about a maturing, a maturing of what God has placed on the inside of your spirit. It's gonna come out of the birth canal, it's gonna come out of the womb, because there's a labor and there is a travailing that's going on in the spirit.

And even as we begin to lift our voices, what we're actually doing is pushing, calling forth those things that be not, calling them out of the invisible realm. And we are saying LET THERE BE LIFE. And there was life, we're speaking things into existence. I'm talking about a creative realm.

Decree a thing an it'll be established. There's a realm of opportunity to decree a realm. To decree, to make a... under the anointing you make a declaration and it comes, it forms tonight. It's no longer a hope, and a vision, and a dream, and a promise; we have an opportunity to form. We have an opportunity to form, to bring a maturity to what God has spoken, to bring it out of the womb of expectancy. Because there are bowls coming down.

When you began to talk about the bowls, David (David Tomberlin?), I saw the bowls. The bowls are answered prayer. There's times when your prayers go up to Heaven like incense. But, there are times that the bowls of incense get full in Heaven. And when the bowls get full in Heaven, God throws the bowls back down to earth.

And when the bowls of incense come back to the earth, mingled with fire from the altar in Heaven, that's your answer coming back into the earth. And it comes back with lightning, it comes back with thundering, and it comes back with great earthquake. It comes back with great signs and wonders! And I believe tonight is not a night, tonight is not a night where the incense goes into the bowls, tonight's the night where God takes the fire from the altar, mixes it with the bowls that are full and throws the bowls back down to the earth. And tonight is a night of releasing. Tonight is a night of commissioning. Tonight is a night of activation. You can step right in; you can step right into that gift of healing, step right in to that word of knowledge, step right in to the impartation, step right in to the spirit of revival, step right in to the promise of God, step right into the healing… step right in to the breakthrough tonight.

And so we're going to go back into travail right now until Christ is formed. How many of you know that God's promised a day, God's promised a day where Heaven and earth must retain Him until the restoration of all things. I'm telling you, heaven will hold back the coming of Jesus Christ until sons and daughters come into maturity.

It's called the Manifestation of the Sons of God. Heaven will hold back the second coming. Until the- and listen, you want to know what a mature church looks like? A mature church manifests the glory of God. A mature church manifests the word of God in truth and power. A mature church walks in holiness and character. A mature church walks in miracles, signs, and wonders. I'm talking about a maturity tonight, and it's being formed in you. And that's my prayer tonight. As we begin to lift up our voice. Is let Christ be formed in maturity. Let the full man, let the full man, let the fullness of God come forth, and let the womb open tonight, and let there be a great birthing, says the Lord.

Original Audio

Next up, Bentley preaches MSoG at Rick Joyner's church.

Why is Lou Engle a Lightning Rod?

Well for starters, he's a prayer-and-fasting-animal. That alone is enough to stir up demonic forces. Add to that his outspoken stands against abortion and homosexuality and you've got yourself quite a target.

I like the guy, even if he can't sit still for one minute.

A few things trouble me. Perhaps they shouldn't.

Engle has espoused a thesis or prophetic insight regarding the War Between the States(1) . In this thesis he states, with the implied endorsement of God, that "The Civil War was the day for reckoning for America for the bloodshed of slavery – 600,000 men died in the God’s day of reckoning in America for slavery." In other words, he states that 600,000 were killed for a "blood atonement."

He goes on to make an analogy between the issue of slavery and the issue of abortion. Ironic in that the gays want to claim this analogy as their own. It's a very popular analogy, don't you know?

Lou seems to be stuck on this thesis. He mentioned the war again at his address given at a recent GBW meeting in Charlotte (2). And in his "current" blog article at LouEngle.com(3). If it is a thesis it needs to be challenged. If it is prophetic revelation it needs to be tested. Has anyone questioned it?

In essence, he suggests that today, as then, there is now a national blood-guilt that must be atoned for.

The issue is this: can there be any further atonement - or was the sacrificial death of our Lord on the cross all-sufficient for all-time? Engle implies that is was NOT, and I'm having a hard time with this. Quoting Engle "It is not enough that Jesus died. Someone must apply the blood of Jesus to the national sin of (the) USA." To accomplish this, Engle calls for a priestly ministry "to bring forth the blood of the Lamb on behalf of shed blood."

In practice and in teaching, Engle suggests some sort of new priestly order that devotes itself full-time to prayer and intercession. While I believe it is true that the burden to intercede falls very strongly on certain individuals, I can find no suggestion in the scriptures that a new priestly order is prescribed, and I can more likely make a stronger case for the "priesthood of all believers."

While some might accept the suggestion that some sort of priestly ministry could somehow function in an atoning manner, Engle goes on to suggest the slaughter of multitudes to appease a blood-thirsty God if we do not repent. And again, he uses the example of the War Between the States as proof.

Skirting the issue of cause of the war, as Dr. J. William Jones wisely did in his seminal work on revival in the Confederate camps (4) , and the fact that slavery was not peculiar to the USA (a point aptly made by the not-so-pro-south book, "The Hemingses of Monticello" by Annette Gordon-Reed) , Engle could be accused of crossing a theological line when he states "People must die (as an atonement) if innocent blood is shed." And he speaks of this not in the sense of Armageddon, which we all understand, but as a soon-coming pre-eschatological event (5).

As a response to an article by gay activist Matt Comer (6) , Dr. Michael Brown has suggested that militant Christain terminology is speaking of spiritual things, not of actual violent warfare (7) . In general, I ageee. But a plain and simple reading of Engle's widely circulated teaching "Shedding Innocent Blood" does NOT refer to spiritual things. Clearly the vision of youth in military uniforms that Engle refers to is not speaking of the "Salvation Army."

God’s justice may be slow in the way it is meted out. However, suddenly in one generation the sins are required for the sins of past generations. Lincoln cried out that God’s judgments would come to USA because of slavery. Lincoln understood the civil war was God’s judgment on USA.

The Civil War was the day for reckoning for America for the bloodshed of slavery – 600,000 men died in the God’s day of reckoning in America for slavery. If we do not deal with this blood in the courts of man, then it will be dealt with in the court of God.

What will it mean for God to deal with us for the shed blood of 50 million babies? Allen Hood had a dream of his sons in military fatigues. IHOP’s youth will not be at IHOP, but will be in military uniforms in foreign nations. We must stop abortion in America to stop this.

-Lou Engle

Engle uses an interesting literary device in stating "Lincoln understood the civil war was God’s judgment on USA." This implies that if you don't understand, then you are somehow deficient in discernment. Lincoln’s thesis, which Engle has adapted as his own, is not universally accepted as truth. Do we trust now that Engle is speaking for God, or do we hold his pronouncements to biblical scrutiny in the Berean manner?

When some speak of God’s bloody wrath and suggest, in classic Joel’s Army terminology, that we are God’s instruments of righteousness, it is any wonder that groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center (8) and the “Interstate Queers” are alarmed? Or at least are feigning alarm to further their cause?

The point that they may be missing with Engle is that he states: “If we do not find a ‘before the Lord intercessors’ our children will be hung ‘before the Lord’ in death.” Here he suggests that the blood atonement (if that has any theological basis today) will not be directed at the abortionists or homosexuals but rather at “our children.” Again he states with certainty that this has happened before, stating: “This is what happened in the Civil War retribution.”

It is worth noting that in the same teaching, given before the last presidential election, Engle states with the same certainty that “God will drive abortion like a wedge into the coming elections.” I’m not sure that history would affirm that; sadly abortion was not a pivotal issue in the presidential elections of 2008.

I join Engle in his concern for the global epidemics of abortion and homosexuality. And I admire his passion for prayer, fasting, and his willingness to step into the fray. Engle, repeatedly in his IHOP teaching on the Shedding of Innocent Blood states: “We need a clear doctrine on the issue of shedding innocent blood.” I agree. I just don’t think he has it.



1 Engle, Lou.”The Doctrine of the Shedding of Innocent Blood.” The Call Kansas City, December 3, 2007.http://www.thecall.com/Publisher/File.aspx?ID=1000005763

2 Engle, Lou. “A Call to Prayer and Fasting.” God Has a Better Way meeting, Concord, N.C. July 5, 2009.http://www.fire-church.org/sermonplayer.aspx?id=209

3 Engle, Lou. "Sebelius, Tiller, The Senate on Trial." Blogsite, March 11, 2009.
http://www.louengle.com/2009/03/11/sebelius-tiller-the-senate-on-trial/

4 Dr. J. William Jones “Christ in the Camp” 1887, The Martin and Hoyt. Co, 1904.
http://books.google.com/books?id=UkT0xLxpfaQC&dq=CHrist%20in%20the%20Camp&pg=PA7#v=onepage&q=&f=false

5 Engle in “The Doctrine of the Shedding of Innocent Blood” states: “There are times when God comes to deal with nations. He waits to judge some individuals but nations are not eternal so they are judge(d) now.”

6 Matt Comer, “On the edge: Religious militancy in the Queen City” internet article July 17, 2009
http://www.interstateq.com/archives/3708/

7 Dr. Michael L. Brown, Why Do You Sometimes Use “Violent” Language In Your Writing and Speaking? Internet article July 19, 2009
http://voiceofrevolution.askdrbrown.org/2009/07/19/why-do-you-sometimes-use-violent- language-in-your-writing-and-speaking/

8 Casey Sanchez “Arming for Armageddon” SPLC “Intelligence Report” Fall 2008
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=964

This author was interviewed by Sanchez when he was researching this story. Sanchez did not get it right and the shoddy article has been embraced by the gay community.

For my friends in Redcliffe

"Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies." (Exodus 32:25)

A simple study of Exodus 32 (the golden calf rave party) reveals that we have learned little from our past.

"As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool returns to its folly." (Proverbs 26:11)


Jesus said, "Be careful, or your heads will be weighed down with dissipation, drunkenness and the anxieties of life, and THAT DAY WILL CLOSE ON YOU UNEXPECTEDLY LIKE A TRAP." (Luke 21:34)


I don't know about the "anxieties of life" but much of the church today, like those "in the camp" are weighed down with "dissipation and drunkenness."

Watch out.

"So then let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be alert and self-controlled." (1 Thes 5:6)


Dr. Michael Brown wrote in 1994:

"This is not party time for the Church. This is the time for holy watchfulness. This is the hour to be alert. While the world gets caught up with the lusts of the flesh and deceptions of the devil, dazed by drugs, bound by immorality, enslaved by greed, hypnotized by entertainment, stupefied by alcohol, paralyzed by fear, WE WHO DRINK THE SPIRIT'S NEW WINE WILL BE SOBER. We will not be deceived."

True revival involves the preaching of the Word. We mock God when WE bring in the excitement, the fleshly manifestations, the faux-drunkenness and dissipation. We chase after "the glory" when we should be chasing after the Saviour. Jesus himself gave himself to "preaching and teaching."


Dr. Brown again:

We must never forget: Revival is a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit (not the Happy Spirit - although he brings great joy...He is the Holy Spirit) I have heard Him described as "wild," "exciting," and "creative." But have we forgotten
that He is holy?"

But holiness will not be attained by spiritual excitement alone. It is not an abstract, nebulous "something" existing "somewhere," no more than God Himself is just an abstract "something" existing "somewhere." Holiness does not float in and skip out. Holiness means definite, concrete, radical change. It means a whole new way of living. And it is grounded in the word of God.

Don't be taken in by things that claim to be of God but are hollow when it comes to real change within. Real change within can (and must) happen, but it will NEVER happen by "tokin' on the Ghost" or suckling on the so-called multiple breasts of whatever god man invents.

No. Real change comes with the preaching of the Word. That will never change. Allow the Word to penetrate your heart. Allow God to bring conviction and change. These are serious times. You snooze - you lose.

The Year of the Woman

At a recent "Glory, Signs and Wonders conference" Prophet(1) James Goll declared that this is "The Year of the Woman." This “word” was featured in a Charisma Magazine column on June 4 and was presented as a "timely and relevant" message for the body of Christ from a "recognized prophetic voice." In actuality, Goll has been proclaiming this "prophetic word" for several months, and as to its timeliness, the year is about half over. The ever-popular "Elijah List" published such a proclamation on February 29. 2009:

It is the Year of the Woman

Women in ministry and leadership will be released globally across the Body of Christ. The two righteous seeds of Michal Ann Goll and Jill Austin have been sown into the ground and there will be a harvest of women in both spiritual and secular leadership arising to be champions of the poor, in justice, prayer and creativity flowing freely as the prophetic anointing increases in Jesus' name.

Lest there be any confusion - some would say that these are just word-faith style proclamations and not presented as propehcies - Goll, in his preface to his Elijah List article states:

The Holy Spirit has been speaking to me about some Declarations for 2009 and beyond, so I have composed a portion of what He has been saying to me.

OK, so we have established that Prophet Goll has declared a "thus saith the Lord." What do we do with it?

* * * *

I've not seen such a knee-jerk reaction to the "prophetic church" since the Lakeland fiasco last year. To be fair with some who have reacted with outrage or bitterness in the blogosphere, Goll did appear at Lakeland, an event which sadly included "prophetic" proclamations of his now-deceased wife's healing. But that should not make Brother Goll a target for anyone’s animosity. We should take pity.

I for one am emphatic about not speaking on behalf of the Lord when He has not spoken. But I also think that we too-quickly attribute "False Prophet" status to our brothers in the Lord when a better way of stating that would be to say that one has falsely prophesied. If we are to judge prophetic words in the congregation, does everyone who falls short of the mark instantly become destined for eternal damnation? Can we add preachers who mess up on a sermon to that group? If so, the safe thing would be to get saved and never open your mouth again.

Actually, I think the intent of the scriptural injunctions to 1) judge all prophecies and to 2) not despise prophecies is that we thoughtfully consider the so-called "prophetic word" and make a judgment as to if it is indeed from the Lord. Note that the goal here is to judge the word, not the word-giver. And so I say to James Goll, bless you brother, but I think you are wrong to attribute your exhortation to the Lord (2).



Background

Much of the visceral reaction to this word is attributed to the silly prophetic church practice of "year of" proclamations(3). Perhaps some think that if it is good enough for the Chinese (this is the "Year of the Ox") then it is good enough for the rest of the world. But seriously, I think much of this stems from the Word/Faith movement practice of declaration. You know, speaking things into being, a.k.a. a "creative word."

Here's one such reaction to Goll's word that reflects this: "While we have the choice to receive a word spoken over us, it holds no power unless it comes from our mouth. So you women out there that so desire, take that word and speak it into your life...A prophets words have no power until we speak them over our life!"

Here we see two things that I find interesting. First, the writer seems to think that this is not necessarily a word from God, but she call's it "a prophet's word." I don't want to try to find something in this that isn’t there, but this seems to reflect the general understanding in the Word/Faith movement that we can speak things into being with our declarations (apart from God’s instigation).

Second, the theologically bankrupt concept that a prophetic word "holds no power unless it comes from our mouth." I call this concept theologically bankrupt because it directly contradicts God's Word which states in Isaiah 55 "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it."

I will be the first to bring up the importance of what we speak, and what comes out of our mouth. But, PLEASE, let's move past the Word/Faith voodoo concept that God can do nothing unless we speak it. Quite frankly, we just are not that important in the overall scheme of things. God is sovereign, and by golly, He will accomplish that which He pleases.


Mammon

We can never know that real motives of those prophesying. And we need to be careful. The NAR obsession with "Wealth Building" and the “Great Transfer of Wealth" does not make it easy to resist the temptation to attribute base motives to everything they do.

One commenter on Goll's word states "Now I get it: After going to Goll's website I saw why he proclaimed this special year: he's having a women's conference with nice hefty registration fees and needs to promote it." In Goll's defense, I would have to mention that this is his 12th annual Women's Conference. And that if this indeed is a word from the Lord, that hosting a themed conference (and the fee's are not that “hefty”) would be a natural thing to do.

On the flip side, It must be noted that Goll's extended prophetic word regarding 2009 also states:

It is Time for Property Procurement

For some, it is time to purchase property, land and gold. It is a time when wise investments now will pay off later. Whole strip malls and department stores will go up for sale and the discerning and wise will purchase property (in certain situations) for a dime on the dollar.

So here we have God giving us investment advice. And its kind of a duh! type advice, except I'd like to know which strip malls. As long as the NAR remains fixated on wealth, the criticism from many about perceived greed will continue. That's not a "thus saith the Lord," but rather a "you can bank on it."


The Word

I wanted to place up-front some of the visceral reactions to Goll's word just to get them out of the way, and now I would like to suggest some more valid ways of judging prophecy in general, and specifically this word. Because in the overall scheme of things, the objections outlined so far really don't matter.

Most importantly, a prophetic word must stand in light of the scriptures. It must not contradict the scriptures. For many years the charismatic church has promoted "new revelation" as a license to stray from scripture. The lastest twist on that scheme is to redefine it as "hidden truth." Apostle Bill Johnson will tell you that the Canon is complete - no new relevation - but will condition that by stating that God is now "unveiling" what is already there.
Friends, God will not contradict his Word.

In evaluating Goll's word two scriptures come to mind- both from Galatians. In many respects the term "Foolish Galatians" could be applied to much of the "prophetic church" today. In Galatians 3 we learn that "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." What would our reaction be to a so-called prophetic word that stated "(The Lord Says) This is the year of the Gentile"? In like manner, would we expect God, who has already stated "There is neither..male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" to now state emphatically "This is the Year of the Woman"?

I think this is a legitimate question.

Galatians 4 gives us even more fodder for thought.

“Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.”

This if course, is the scripture behind the knee-jerk reactions to the "year of" propehcy genre. We see many prophetic words which seems comparable to the Chinese "Year of the Ox" in all of the assorted Elijah List declarations that come down every year. As a biblical principle, I think one should be very cautious about declaring special years. God seems to be.

I have noted elsewhere that I have been unable to come up with any "year of" declarations attributed to God in the scriptures aside from the recurrent "year of jubilee." Of course, there is the "acceptable year of the Lord" mentioned in Isaiah 61 but this does not quite seem to be the same. But as a rule, we do not find God declaring this is the year of the woman, gentile, man, jew, gecko, or any such thing. This, of course, is consistent with God's position stated in Galatians 4.


Women Rising Up

This is not to say that women rising up is an unbiblical principle. At the risk of sounding sexist, I jokingly note that the Proverbs 31 woman rises up "while it is still dark." We read in Judges 5 of Deborah arising. And we read of Esther, who arose to leadership for "such a time as this." Which is probably as close to the concept of "The Year of the Women" as you can get without really going there.


Disney Prophecies

My friend Amanda (a "woman of the year") has observed that faux-prophecy very often involves Disney-esque Characters. I'm not sure why this is, but I have heard of numerous such "words" involving characters such as "Sleeping Beauty," "Snow White" and even the "Wizard of Oz." Goll, in his "prophetic word" says to the women "You're like Tigger, and you have been wound up, and you're going to jump all around." I'm not quite ready to add the Disney disqualification to my criteria, but I'd say to Amanda, as John Wayne said to his Chinese servant in Rooster Cogburn, "You might be right."


Itching Ears

Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that God cannot speak a prophetic word that we would not get excited about. However, too much of what passes for prophetic today is the ear-tickling stuff referred to in 2 Timothy 4:3.

I found the reaction of Goll's audience at the "Glory, Signs and Wonder's conference quite telling. First, for a movement in which women have been held back, it sure was disproportionally attended by women. It looked like about 70%, or more, of the people in attendance were of the distaff side of the church. Second, note the standing applause by those women. It causes one to ask, if this was indeed a word from God, why were so many men sitting down?

I have often noted that the most profound words given by God through his prophets are seldom received with enthusiasm. Leonard Ravenhill, in his seminal work "Picture of a Prophet" makes this point when he states "The prophet in his day is fully accepted of God and totally rejected by men."

One other aspect of judging a prophecy is to try to determine if indeed it is something God has spoken, is it just a much needed exhortation, or is simply something that is stirring within the "prophet." This is really a question the prophet should be asking him/herself before giving the word. One must seriously consider if there are externals - life experiences as it were- that are clouding your own hearing of what God may be saying.

Goll himself stated: "this is the year of the Woman. Now one of the reasons I say that is because of a hard deal in my life." He goes on to speak of his wife's passing. Goll is wrong - he should not be saying "(thus saith the Lord) this is the year of the woman" because his wife died, he should be saying this ONLY (if) God spoke it. I would suggest that a proclamation from the Lord should not be tainted by one's own feelings, ideas and perceptions. The ideal should be God speaks it - we pass it on.

Goll seems to imply that after 2000 years of the church that finally it was the year of the woman because his wife and Jill Austin passed. I'm not trying to be unkind, but as much as Michal Ann Goll and Jill Austin were "righteous seeds sown into the ground" so also were the millions of Godly women who preceded them in death. Not a few, or dozens, but millions. Surely at least a few of them were of such spiritual status as to warrant a "Year of the Woman" proclamation.

Which brings me to my last point - be very wary of any so-called prophetic word that implies that somehow THIS generation is in some manner far more spiritually significant than any of the previous generations that followed hard after the Lord. It is demeaning to their faith - bought with the same precious blood as ours. This great end-times army concept of course ties in with the Latter Rain foundations of the NAR.


Does the Word Apply?

An Exhortation may not be a prophetic word from the Lord but still have application. What this means is that the truth of the "prophecy" does not necessarily validate the prophecy. Perhaps, as I am now old-school Pentecostal, I have been too long removed from the Charismatic Church. Or what today is called the Prophetic or Apostolic church (NAR). Are women so oppressed in that movement? Judging by the reaction at the conference, I'd say they must be. Goll states:

We (men in leadership) can no longer hold you down....This is now the appointed hour of the release of women in leadership.

And so this sounds almost a like a Word/Faith "binding and loosing" thing. I find it unfortunate that women have been so repressed in the NAR churches. Since the rest of Christendom has never even heard of James Goll, nor will they ever hear his word, I have to assume the target demographic was the prophetic/apostolic church. He certainly got a reaction from that audience.

So I would have to concur with Goll that it is a time for women in the NAR churches to rise up and take a place of leadership. Alternatively, they should seek out places where they are not repressed. That's just plain good advice. I would not go so far as to say "(Thus saith the Lord) This is the Year of the Woman." The proclamation of freedom from repression, and the fact that each of us (regardless of gender) should be striving to move in our gifts and talents is never limited to a year, to a generation, or even to a dispensation. It is, it has, and it will always be part of the timeless gospel message.

"For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands."




Footnotes:

1 Matt Sorger's "Power for Life" televison program June 1, 2009. Sorger introduced his guest as "Prophet James Goll."

2 Jim, you are still welcome to stop by for a tomato sandwich the next time you come through the Shenandoah Valley on I-81. I should have some good ones in late August.

3 A useful discernment exercise is to search the Elijah List prophetic word index for the phrase "year of," and evaluate those words, especially in restrospect.

Spiritual Dishonesty

I suppose we've all heard of "Intellectual Dishonesty." I would like to propose a new term: "Spiritual Dishonesty." Although the term sounds a lot like "deception" (it may be), I would like to coin this phrase to refer to a special type of prophetic utterance.

Don't suppress the Spirit, and don't stifle those who have a word from the Master. On the other hand, don't be gullible. Check out everything, and keep only what's good. Throw out anything tainted with evil.

2 Thes 5:19-22 The Message

We are instructed in 1 Corinthians 14 to let the prophets speak (one at a time) and to let the others judge. The NIV puts it this way: "Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said."

And to, without belaboring the point, the expectation in the New Testament church is that 1) Prophecies be given and 2) Prophecies be judged.

I've heard it said that "If you are a prophet you don't need to say so." Indeed, it should be evident. However some must have slept through that class in Prophecy 101.

As an exercise, go to the Elijah List prophecy search box and type the phrase "my prophet" (no quotes) and see who comes up 80% of the time. Funny, I could have prophesied the result. Is it style or does that person have some serious issues?


How to Craft a Non-judgeable Word

The Lord Says - Hear the words of My Prophet. If you do not heed his words, I will not bring it to pass.

Ok, I just made that up. Its not funny- it happens all the time. Popular embellishments include "if you do not hear the word of my servant than I will strike you dead" and the all-time favorite "plague of boils."

This, of course, puts the recipient of the word in a peculiar position. In effect the prophetic word contradicts the Word of God- which tells us to judge all words. For those of you who don't get this yet, it is as if God is saying "The Lord says, I know I said in my Word to judge all words, but I am telling you to not judge this word." Seriously.

And it happens all the time. Here's a gem delivered at the Albany Vineyard on January 17, 2009:

"This night the Lord says, If you receive My word, if you receive My prophetic word, if you receive the prophet and you say 'yes,'... then it shall happen."

To further the deception, there was a set-up teaching earlier in the "prophetic" word:

"And so the promise remained for some other person, some other generation. Maybe He has said to us before He would bring great restoration, and maybe because of the hardness of our heart it didn't happen, not because of the inaccuracy of the prophet or prophetic word."

In other words- "my prophets are not inaccurate, the word did not come to pass because of the hardness of your hearts." One would have to ask if an omniscient God wouldn't have known that before the word was given. Ohhh, that hurts my head. We'll save that one for another day.



A Practical Application

I bring all of this up as background to comment on a current situation. Yesterday I received an e-mail promotion about a "prophetic dream" given to the president of a Bible School and leader of a world-wide youth prayer movement. He stated "Over the weekend I had a long, vivid prophetic dream about the victorious Church during a very specific biblical event in the coming end-time trouble. I woke up with a deep sense of reality and urgency, and I feel it is important to share this dream..."

As an aside, there was a link that would allow you to purchase the MP3 recording of this word freely given by God to this person (Mt 10:8). But I digress. Fortunately, the print version was free so that one could judge the word without an admission price.

The gist of the word was eschatological and revolved around Revelation 12. Now, understand that the time frame of Revelation 12 has been in dispute even amongst mainstream protestants. Fortunately, that issue has now been resolved by this prophetic dream.

But to focus on my thesis of "spiritual dishonesty" I would like to examine a certain portion of this "prophetic" dream.

I felt strongly that IHOP and other streams in the Body of Christ have “empty” arguments about power and their insight into the end-time drama. Most arguments, in either direction, do not actually prepare people to go deeper in Jesus, His Word and Spirit. They are not helpful—rather, they are empty.

In this dream, the Lord was warning me to set my face toward Him and His Word and to refuse the temptation to invest time in seeking to look wise to others. What is coming is so much more intense than we imagine. Even those with the most insight do not understand the intensity of the events in Revelation 12:7-12.

The point of the dream: neither the IHOP leadership nor I are mature enough in our understanding to entertain debates and casual arguments that will arise much more in the Church in the future.

Here we have a Bible School president, the author of at least 10 books, a man who has in the past generated more controversial commentary on the "Song of Songs" then perhaps any man ever, a man who has turned his teaching attention to the exposition of the "Book of the Revelation", and the leader of a worldwide youth prayer movement telling us that his ideas are no longer up for debate.

Well since God said it, I guess that settles it.

If the truth be told, I'd have to agree, to a point, with the first paragraph quoted above. But Mike, if you are serious about the "point of the dream" then (to paraphrase President Reagan) "Mr. Bickle, tear down those teachings."

I'd love to see IHOP focus in on prayer and move away from questionable teachings, which now, at the Lord's behest, can no longer be discussed. But you can't have it both ways. Teaching, at least in the past, seems to be one of their core missions.

"There is a dire need to call forth and train a generation of forerunners who have clarity as to what the Holy Spirit is saying, but also the boldness to confront and expose the lies that many leaders in the Body of Christ, even those with a 5-fold ministry calling, are attributing to the Holy Spirit."

Those were Bickle's words just 2 months ago. How does one confront (pre-trib)"liars" without entertaining debate? Is the new mode of training to simply state your own personal revelation (2 Peter 1:20-21) and refuse to entertain debate - because God told you so? Or will they move from training (which involves discussion) and simply spend more time in dark rooms praying in preparation for the end-times. We'll see.





"Cult members are usually very fearful of disobeying or disagreeing in any way with their leadership. Healthy organizations however are not threatened by openly debating issues." Cultwatch Website

A Profane Bride?

Is the Church the bride of Christ? Emphatically, Yes.

Is an individual believer the bride of Christ? Emphatically, No.

There is much confusion in the Bride, uh, the Body of Christ, concerning this issue. A significant "stream" of the Charismatic church has adopted a system of beliefs (doctrine) that suggests that we, individually as well as corporately, are the Bride of Christ, and in fact that we can or are somehow, symbolically, be married to Christ. This teaching is generally referred to as the "Bridal Paradigm," and as the title suggests, everything is seen through the lens of this belief.

Webster's 1828 dictionary defines Bride as a "woman new married" but notes that the "name is applied to a woman at the marriage festival, before she is married, as well as after the ceremony." The secondary definition tells us that a bride is "a woman espoused, or contracted to be married." This is plainly the sense in which the Holy Scriptures uses the word Bride when referring to the Church (or Israel).

In the Book of the Revelation, Chapter 19 and Verse 7 we read "Let us rejoice and be glad and give him the glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come and his bride has made herself ready." Regardless of your eschatological leanings, no reasonable person would suggest that this has already taken place. More precisely, the Church is the bride, betrothed to Jesus.

"The story has a happy ending! The Bridegroom and the Bride are married and live happily in a beautiful city forever." Introduction to the Book of the Revelation in The Visualized Bible.

Background

The concept of being married, symbolically or figuratively, to Christ predates the heterodox Bridal Paradigm viewpoint. The concept of a "mystical marriage" was promoted by Roman Catholic Teresa of Avila who through this experienced "spiritual ecstasy" which was defined as "divine intimacy." Not coincidently, many elements of Catholic Mysticism have been incorporated into the beliefs of those espousing the Bridal Paradigm today(1). The rejection of these aberrant Roman Catholic beliefs has been, until today, one of the distinctives of Protestantism.

Pope John Paul II, in an "Apostolic Letter" (Vita Consecrate no. 34)(2) noted that some aspects of this thought is "taking root or reemerging in the Churches and Ecclesial Communities which originated in the Reformation and is the sign of a grace shared by all of Christ's disciples. This fact is an incentive to ecumenism, which fosters the desire for an ever fuller communion between Christians 'that the world may believe'." John Paul goes on to say "In the consecrated life particular importance attaches to the spousal meaning, which recalls the Church's duty to be completely and exclusively devoted to her Spouse, from whom she receives every good thing. This spousal dimension, which is part of all consecrated life, has a particular meaning for women, who find therein their feminine identity and as it were discover the special genius of their relationship with the Lord."

I mention this to illustrate the point that the Roman Catholic viewpoint is that BOTH the corporate Church and the individual believer are the Bride of Christ. To their credit, the Roman belief outlined in John Paul's letter, suggests that they do adopt the understanding of Webster's second definition, which is that the Bride is betrothed, not married to Christ.


The Current Emphasis

In 2007, an acquaintance of mine, Rev. Keith Gibson, of the Apologetics Resource Center, wrote an excellent article on the Bridal Paradigm as it is emerging in the Charismatic church today (3). His thesis is that "Truth, taken to an extreme, becomes heresy." I'm going to quote his article in depth, because I really can't improve on it.

The bridal paradigm is a teaching that the image of the Bride is the primary identity for the church, especially the church of this unique end-time generation. This teaching has strong dominion theology undertones as there is a strong emphasis on the Bride co-reigning with Christ. Esther is seen as a type of the end-time Church. The bridal paradigm becomes the grid through which all Scripture is interpreted and through which all spiritual activity is engaged. Thus we have teachings like Bridal intercession, the Global Bridegroom fast, the cross in the bridal paradigm etc. All of the scripture is seen as the relentless pursuit of the heavenly lovesick groom for the bride of His hearts desire. This message truly stands the gospel on its ear. No longer is the emphasis on a God who is working for His own glory and displaying His majesty in redeeming a lost and unworthy humanity. Now the story of redemption is on God seeking a suitable mate for His Son with the cross being the dowry.

God is described as ”in-love”, lovesick, the passionate Bridegroom, or having a ravished heart. He is the Lover with fire in His eyes for His bride. The church is to respond in similar manner as we pray for our love to be awakened, to be ravished by the love of the Bridegroom etc. etc. Images and language from Song of Solomon abound.

This teaching, while drawing upon a legitimate metaphor and the language of Scripture, pushes the metaphor beyond the boundaries of its proper understanding leading to an improper and unbiblical picture of God and His relationship to the Church.

The first problem is the emphasis on the metaphor of the Bride to the exclusion of all other images used to describe the Church. Yes, the church is the Bride of Christ, but that is not all that is said of the Church. The Church is also called the Body (1 Cor. 12), the children of God (Eph 3:14, 1 Jn 3 and others), an olive tree (Rom. 11), a field (1 Cor. 3:6-9), a temple (1 Pet. 2:5), a royal priesthood (1 Pet. 2:9), a holy nation (1 Pet. 2:9), God’s house (Heb. 3:6), the flock of God (1 Pet. 5:2), and an inheritance (Eph. 1:18). And this is just for starters!! Consulting any good systematic theology book will yield a veritable host of metaphors, titles and images of the church. Therefore right from the beginning we should understand that any teaching that focuses almost exclusively upon one metaphor is necessarily out of balance. Each of these titles is meant to teach us some important truth concerning the people of God. We simply do not have the right to fixate upon one to the neglect of the others. We do not have the right to elevate one to the place of primary position and evaluate all of Scripture through this lense. In like manner, Jesus is the Bridegroom but that is not all that is said about Jesus. This teaching is out of balance.

The second issue is that, while it is true that the metaphor of the Bride is used for the church as a whole, this same metaphor is never used for the individual believer. This may seem minor at first but it is actually very significant. It is the entire church that is the Bride of Christ. Each believer is a part but is not the Bride. It would appear that many of the prophetic teachers either misunderstand this or choose to ignore it. Due to this confusion, many of the statements of the prophetic teachers cause Jesus to sound like our personal boyfriend instead of our Lord. I have shared before of the man who claimed that he held Jesus for the first 30 minutes of his quiet time and then had Jesus hold him for the last 30 minutes. Jesus is not your boyfriend or lover. It is inappropriate to consider Him in this way.

A third issue is that the statement is a metaphor. It is not a literal statement. The metaphor is meant to teach us the truth about God’s love and commitment to us and our need for holiness and submission and yes, love for Him and a number of other things. But it is not meant to be literalized and physicalized (If that’s not a word, it should be.) This third issue brings a host of problems into play. It should be noted that, as with teachings on Contemplative Prayer, the source of much of this teaching is Roman Catholic mysticism. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross and Madam Guyon, along with many others, have provided the foundation for this thought. This, in and of itself, should be a problem. Why would we go to those whose overall understanding of God is so poor expecting to find truth? Why would we draw from the polluted well of Roman Catholic mysticism hoping to find pure water? I have been told that it is because of their passion and certainly these authors can write passionately about God, but they can and did write just as passionately about the virgin Mary! This indicates to me, that the emphasis of the leaders of this movement is not at all grounded in a desire for truth but merely a desire to feel. And many of the “passionate” statements written by these mystics are squarely unbiblical. Consider the words of Catherine of Sienna who used to pray:

”O divine madman, you are crazed with love and drunk with love for me.”

Surely a less Biblical picture of God could not be painted than that of a crazed madman drunk with love.

This literalizing of the metaphor can be seen in the abundance of overly romantic phrases used to describe God’s love for us and ours for God. We read that God is “lovesick” or ravished for us. These phrases portray a God who simply cannot find true joy apart from us, who will never be satisfied without us. These statements are more appropriate for an adolescent than Almighty God. These phrases portray God looking longingly at the individual Christian and saying, “You…..complete me.” Jesus is finally sent to earth “When He couldn’t take it any longer.” This is a far cry from the God of the Bible who is completely sufficient within Himself and needs nothing. (Ps. 50, Isa 40) The triune God is complete within Himself, lacking nothing including relationship.

Certainly Christ does love us. He loves us with a love that is beyond comprehension in its height, depth, width and breadth (Eph 3:18-19). But He is not romantic about us. He is not attracted to us. He does not get sweaty palms, or stomach flutters. He is not “in-love” with us as we commonly mean that term today. There is a difference. (end extended quote)

Marriage is a picture of Christ’s relationship to the church. The Bridal Paradigm turns the biblical view on its head. The Bridal Paradigm teaches that we look at marriage to get a view of what Christ’s relationship to the church is. The biblical view is that we look at Christ’s relationship to the church and let that color our marriages with God-honoring truth. -Drew Blom (4)

Contemporary Illustrations

In 2002 CBN news reported "Some 20,000 mostly young people packed the Kansas City Convention Center on New Year's Eve for a wedding ceremony unlike any other... as each person who came embarked on a marriage covenant with the Bridegroom of Heaven... From noon until midnight they danced and sang, fasted and prayed, and got ready to get married to Jesus. One by one, thousands of men and women, young and old, made their vows and walked under the prayer shawl symbolizing their commitment to Jesus." (5)

Walking under a marriage canopy, known in Hebrew as a huppah, is part of the covenantal Jewish wedding ceremony. (6)

This ceremony took place at a meeting known as "The Call" which has strong ties to Lou Engle and the International House of Prayer (IHOP). The CBN report goes on a quote Steward Greaves (who is currently a lead teacher at IHOP) who said "I really feel like the Lord is calling young people to fall madly in love with Him. I've always felt that the difference between religion and relationship is intimacy with Jesus". (7)

While no one would argue against (righteous) intimacy with Christ, I can't help but contrast that statement with one made by evangelist Steve Hill which illustrates true intimacy.

Religion is hanging around the cross, Christianity is hanging on the cross.

CBN went on to note that at IHOP "there has already been a tremendous focus on the bridal love of Jesus... where for three and a half years, a team of prophetic singers, intercessors and others have held 24-hour-a-day praise and worship focusing on Jesus as the bridegroom." This practice has continued on to this day.

Mike Bickle, the leader of IHOP, is well known for his over-allegorization of the Song of Songs, by applying it literally to the individual believer and Jesus. While few would be willing to criticize anyone with a passion for prayer, the words of Gibson resound loudly: "Truth, taken to an extreme, becomes heresy."

Here is an illustration of the teaching coming out of IHOP. "He [God] has given Himself to both the exhilarations and the woundings of a lovesick heart. When He gazes upon me, He sees through the eyes of love and desire. He comes before me and says, 'I am a Man in love. I am a God that burns with desire, and I have set My affections on you. I am an all-consuming fire of love, and you are the inheritance that My Father has promised me. Will you receive My love?'" (8)


Passion in the Arts

Although it would be nice, no one expects musicians in the church to be theologians. So on one hand, I am hesitant to criticize the musicians in the church who are simply reflecting what they are hearing from the pulpit. However, we are aware that music has a very strong influence on people and much theology is gained through music.

John Mark Mcmillan, who has been featured at "The Call" meetings, wrote a song "How He Loves" which had gained some popularity. He writes:

We are His portion and He is our prize,
Drawn to redemption by the grace in His eyes,
If grace is an ocean, we’re all sinking.
So Heaven meets earth like a sloppy wet kiss,
And the heart turns violently inside of my chest,
I don’t have time to maintain this regrets,
When I think about, the way He loves us,
Oh how He loves us... (9)

Or consider some verse from Kansas City:

"O Gaze Eternal,
How penetrating are Your Fires
Rushing through my darkest places
With the burning streams of Desire
Leaving me naked, purged and bare
... Yet embraced...
You take hold of my weakest places
And kiss them with Your mercy
Lifting up my low grounds
With your mighty love so holy..." (10)

And this is a Misty Edwards favorite, the worship leader at IHOP-KC

I am lovesick, for my Beloved
My Beloved and my Friend
Only YOU can satisfy

Try as I may to chase another Lover,
I find there is, there is no other
For only YOU can satisfy (11)

Let me emphasize again that "Truth, taken to an extreme, becomes heresy."

It is not uncommon for those at IHOP to speak of being ravished by Jesus. This goes on much further than what could be deemed appropriate. Here's another quote from some required reading for students at IHOP: "She lifted her arms wide to the Lord and said with all of her strength and her love, 'Enjoy me. Right here, right now, in my absolute weakness, enjoy me.'" (12)


Spiritual Ecstasy

Sensuality, common in society, has indeed invaded the church. As noted previously, Teresa of Avila experienced "spiritual ecstasy" which was defined as "divine intimacy." Many in the charismatic church, in a practice known as "soaking prayer" where one is directed to empty ones mind completely and trance-like states are not uncommon, have reported such experiences. According to Paul Gowdy, Carol Arnott, a leader at the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship, reports that "she had her bride experience where she was taken into the very presence of Jesus and said that the love that she experienced was even better than sex" (13). Gowdy, an acquaintance of mine, was formerly pastor of a Vineyard church in Toronto which was a sister church to TACF, then known as the Toronto Vineyard.

Others involved in this practice have equated the experience to orgasm. My wife has heard women in mainstream Charismatic churches talk about these experiences in these terms. An anecdotal story, posted in response to the aforementioned CBN report, states : "A woman whom I see to be very Spirit filled, was talking to us at the dinner table about being taken into the "upper chambers" where Jesus laid her down on a bed of roses (because He is the Rose of Sharon He can do that, she said), and that He made love to her. She described to me this whole scene as if it were out of a romance novel. The thought of Jesus actually making love to me made me sick... I was actually disheartened, grieved and shocked that she was talking about this. What gets me is that her friends who were with her all agreed as if this was sound biblical doctrine."

I've heard reports from Kansas City of men being speaking of being "ravished in their hinder parts" by Jesus. While this may not be the viewpoint of leadership there, it reflects the sordid depravity behind the doctrine, and the logical end of such thinking.

Lee Grady, in a recent Charisma Magazine article, writes of the charismatic craze of Spiritual Ecstasy (14) which often involves drug imagery such as "tokin' the Holy Ghost" (15). He states "it won't be long before we see some Christians having sexual experiences at the altar. "It's already happening," my friend said. He described a recent "worship concert" in which one of the musicians simulated sex while stroking a microphone and whispering sensual phrases to Jesus. What is next-orgasmic worship? God help us." (16)


Profanity

Years ago I constructed a teaching on profanity. Many people are under the mistaken idea that profanity has to do with cuss words. A biblical definition of "profane" would be to make ordinary that which God has called Holy. Esau, by virtue of selling his birthright, was deemed profane (Hebrews 12:16). Psalm 89:39 speaks of one who has "profaned his crown by casting it to the ground." The leaven of the Bridal Paradigm, which starts with the innocuous premise that we, individually, are the bride of Christ, has blossomed into full blown profanity. Their over-allergorized Song of Songs even warn us of the little foxes that spoil the vines.

We are admonished by the Lord to touch no unclean thing. The Lord says "Therefore come out from them and be separate" (2 Cor 6:17). The call to walk in holiness and to not deviate from the counsel of the scriptures has never been easy. It is perhaps harder but even more important in these last days when the time has come that people will "not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." (2 Timothy 4:2-4)

“Lord I ask that you would create in us a pure heart and renew a right spirit in us and in the church.”



Endnotes

(1) http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09703a.htm

(2) http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2VITA.HTM

(3) http://signofjonah.wordpress.com/2007/08/12/bridal-mysticism/

(4) http://signofjonah.wordpress.com/2007/09/12/bsv-4-the-bridal-paradigm/

(5) http://www.hishousemedia.com/docs/BreakingNews.htm

(6) http://www.myjewishlearning.com/lifecycle/Marriage/LiturgyRitualCustom/Chuppah.htm

(7) http://www.hishousemedia.com/docs/BreakingNews.htm

(8) ibid

(9) http://www.seekalyric.com/song/John_Mark_Mcmillan/How_He_Loves

(10) http://www.hishousemedia.com/docs/BreakingNews.htm

(11) http://www.ihop.org/Shop/Sections/Items/Item.aspx?item_id=1000002501

(12) http://www.hishousemedia.com/docs/BreakingNews.htm

(13) http://www.discernment-ministries.org/NLMarchApril_2007.htm

(14) http://www.deceptionbytes.com/PatriciaKing-Ekstasis

(15) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGfjcER2WyA see also
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/the-new-mystics-drunken-glory-tours/1670643694 Note Jim Goll “toking the ghost” at 04:03 time stamp.

(16) http://www.charismamag.com/index.php/newsletters/fire-in-my-bones/18454-strange-fire-in-the-house-of-the-lord

"I will ascend above the heights of the clouds"

In a previous post, I spoke about the "anointing" and blatant sin. Lest any should think that perhaps I stepped over the line in illustrating this with a contemporary example, I would like to comment further.

The topic at hand certainly is someting to think about. The question not only brings up the anointing issue, but also questions about church discipline. Situations involving what some would call "wandering stars" are not easy because of the constant shopping for those he/she will be acountable to (Haggard, Cain, Traut, et al).

I wonder if Todd Bentley will eventually make it to Fort Mills for his "restoration" process with Rick Joyner. As an aside, Joyner has recently proclaimed that 2008 was the beginning if the "last-days church" era, an event that was kicked off by Todd Bentley on 08/08/08 (ohhh- spooky numbers!) at Heritage, with Joyner having at least partial knowledge that something was seriously wrong.

On 8/8/08, we had a gathering (with Todd Bentley) to celebrate this new beginning. It was an outdoor event on the grounds at Heritage and it drew thousands.
-Rick Joyner

Based on the reopening of the Bentley facebook/myspace pages, along with the ramping up of an online store featuring his book published in December I'd guess he is no more serious about setting the ministry aside than he is about leaving his current girfriend. At what point is he considered unrepentant? And if he continues in his public ministry should people be warned?

From an academic standpoint these issues are worth consideration- because they will happen again. Although Jimmy Swaggart or more recently Ted Haggard are good case studies, the Lakeland "revival" with Todd Bentley is certainly the most documented - thousands of hours of video and over 300 published "teachings."

Of particular interest is the question "can you be in blatant sin and function in the anointing?" My purpose of citing those Lakeland videos featuring Todd and Jessa is to illustrate that problem in a very real way. To my way of thinking, the root problem was arrogance. Having your girlfriend at your side while ministering seems to rate pretty high in that category.

Again, contrast the baptismal service seen in those videos with those hour-long videos of baptisims in the early days of Brownsville. Much of what you will see is to be expected- Brownsville was a revival of repentance, Lakeland was a "revival" of "kingly anointing."

Both had interesting physical manifestations. Those are not the issue. Without judging the motives of any who were baptised at Lakeland, I think we can safely say that generally most who "testified" at Lakeland stated that they were getting baptised to launch THEIR ministry, or to receive more power or something like that.

At Brownsville, there was a real humble attitude of repentance. And the general explanation of "why?" typically had something to do with obediance to the Word.

Based on this simple observation, I would have to say that there was an anointing at the Lakeland service, but it was an anti-anointing. What else could one expect?

As a side note, July 4 was about the time that things really started to fall apart at Lakeland. Cause and effect.

Another thing relating to arrogance is the alcohol use. I understand there are different takes on the alcohol issue. Although a tee-totaller by choice, I certainly believe that Jesus turned the water into alcoholic wine at Cana, not just really good grape juice, based on the "save the best for last" observation.

While at Lakeland, Bentley was ministering under the leadership of an A/G pastor. With the well-known tee-totalling stance of the A/G, I would guess that it might be somewhat disrespectful to indulge excessively - in public - while in that situation - ministering under an A/G "covering." I also have real trouble understanding those with Bentley who knew of his excessive drinking and "inappropriate relationships" with staff members of the "opposite sex" while at Lakeland, and I wonder how much Steven Strader knew or sensed. Somebody should have confronted or spoken out earlier.

As with the girfriend issue, the alcohol issue seems to be overshadowed by the arrogance problem. This was illustrated by the false prophecies given while taking up the offerings, and in so many other ways. Theologically, I think the Manifested Sons of God doctrine is the most arrogant heresy ever, well at least equal to Lucifer and his "I will" proclaimations (Isaiah 14) - and significantly enough that (MSoG doctrine) is what Todd Bentley preached on 08/08/08 at Fort Mills.

In light of this new information and in consultation with his leaders and advisors, Todd Bentley has agreed to step down from his position on the Board of Directors and to refrain from all public ministry for a season to receive counsel in his personal life.
Freshfire website, August 15, 2008

And it is this arrogance that seems to continue today- while saying he will receive counsel, continuing in sin (Freshfire website finally calls it adultery) and blatantly refusing to step down from "all public ministry" at least for a season.

Is there room for a voice that will speak out against such, or do we continue in silence, hoping things will sort themselves out? Both are legitimate arguments- what do you think?

Gross Sin and the "anointing"

A while back (August) a friend of mine did a radio show entitled "God's Anointing and Blatant Sin" where he asked the question if you could function in "the anointing" while involved in blatent sin.

This is a video of Todd Bentley and his girlfriend Jessa (holding the microphone) at the July 4 Lakeland “baptisim” festival.



The video evidence suggests, as I see it, that NO, you cannot function in the anointing while living in blatent sin such as John Arnott described in Bentley's case.. It also suggests that the manifestations / anointing shown in these videos was a false anointing or an "anti-anointing." If one believes in defilement (by the laying of hands on suddenly) that it might be reasonable to suggest that those folks get rebaptised.

One of the evidences of "the anointing" in the charismatic realm is demonstrated through "manifesting" (in the bible it was often a sign of demon possession). You can see Jessa “manifest” in Part 2 of the baptism video at about 4:20.



Bentley, in defiance of his so-called restoration process, has opened up shop once again, hanging out the myspace shingle in mid December 2008.

Well, I’m sort of sorry to bring this all up. It reflects the sorry state of the so-called apostolic/prophetic church, and in spite of Peter Wagner’s promises, its inability to deal with arrogance.

Be certain of this - the affair was simply a "manifestation" of a far bigger problem. A problem which extends to the many leaders and co-workers who helped to cover the whole thing up.

Now, watch this video by David Wilkerson and I’m sure you will feel much better.



That, my friend, is the anointing.