Apprising Ministries has been tracking the influx of corrupt Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM), which arrived inside the wall of the mainstream of evangelicalism within the Trojan Horse of the Emerging Church.

In our 6+ years along the Internet Front I’ve observed CSM a la neo-Gnostics like Living Spiritual Teacher and Quaker mystic Richard Foster and his spiritual twin Dallas Willard slithering deeply into the church.

Here’s a case in point. In a March 1, 2012 post at ostensibly Protestant evangelical Dallas Theological Seminary we read:

(source)

That would be Roman Catholic mystic priest Henri Nouwen (1932-1996) whom DTS faculty member Michael Lawson apparently considers “essential” for DTS grads going into Christian service for God’s people.

And if you like, you can purchase Nouwen’s book right at the DTS bookstore:

(source)

As you can see, the subtitle is: Reflections On Christian Leadership. The trouble is, there’s no evidence that Henri Nouwen was a Christian. Wouldn’t it be better to turn to actual Christian sources to learn about leadership?

I would offer, yes. What we do know about Nouwen is his lifelong practice of CSM turned him into a universalist:

Today I personally believe that while Jesus came to open the door to God’s house, all human beings can walk through that door, whether they know about Jesus or not. Today I see it as my call to help every person claim his or her own way to God.[1]

This is the rotten fruit of Henri Nouwen’s so-called “Christian” leadership. In fact, it’s in direct contradiction with what Jesus Himself said:

“I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
(John 14:6)

1) To enter God’s house one must know Jesus, and 2) there is only this one way, period:

“let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by him this man is standing before you well. This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:10-12)

Another thing we know about Henri Nouwen is—even today—from his books, he remains a leading teacher of spurious CSM; in particular the practice of “Christian” meditation in an altered state of consciousness.

It’s called, interchangably, Contemplative/Centering Prayer (CCP); and is truly transcendental meditation lightly sprayed with Christian terminology. This CCP was at the very heart of the teachings of the mystic Henri Nouwen.

So we’re not surprised in his In The Name Of Jesus when we come to the chapter “The Discipline: Contemplative Prayer.” Nouwen muses:

To live a life that is not dominated by the desire to be relevant but is instead safely anchored in the knowledge of God’s first love, we have to be mystics. A mystic is a person whose identity is deeply rooted in God’s first love.[2]

In the previous chapter Nouwen tells us this “first love” of God is “unconditional and unlimited love” because “God is love and only love.”[3] Like all mystics Nouwen distorts the nature of God until he/she/it becomes a mush god.

Space doesn’t allow a full discussion so I’ll just tell you that mystics receive a delusion where they feel they’re “bathed in love” and one with all creation. As panentheists they believe all things are in God and He in all things.

What they’re actually experiencing is a fulfillment of 2 Timothy 3:2 — people will be lovers of self. While this encompasses the arrogant in love with themselves, I believe the primary meaning is as lovers of mankind itself.

As you’ve already seen, in Nouwen’s CSM we lose the justice of God and replace it with a form of universalism. It is hostile to the Gospel. So, why would at least one faculty member of DTS want to expose graduates to this?

Nouwen continues:

If there is any focus that the Christian leader of the future will need, it is the discipline of dwelling in the presence of [God]… This is the discipline of contemplative prayer… Contemplative prayer keeps us home, rooted, and safe,… Contemplative prayer deepens in us the knowledge that we…already belong to God,…[4]

You need to know that “dwelling in the presence” of God is CSM-speak for the practice of CCP; aka “wordless prayer.” CSM advocates like Henri Nouwen and Richard Foster will tell you that “silence” is God’s language.

That Nouwen means all people “already belong to God” is clear from the earlier quote re. everyone finding “his or her own way to God.” It wasn’t an isolated idea. Consider also the following from Nouwen:

One of the discoveries we make in [meditative] prayer is that the closer we come to God, the closer we come to all our brothers and sisters in the human family. God is not a private God. The God who dwells in our inner sanctuary is also the God who dwells in the inner sanctuary of each human being.[5]

However, the proper Christian spirituality of sola Scriptura where we experience God in His Word and in prayer recognizes the Lord has spoken to us in Holy Scripture. If you want to hear from God, then read  your Bible.

In closing this, for now, what Nouwen says next is a recipe for spiritual disaster:

Through the discipline of contemplative prayer, Christian leaders have to learn to listen again and again to the voice of [God]… For Christian leadership to be truly fruitful in the future, a movement from the moral to the mystical is required.[6]

Can you see this is antithetical to sola Scriptura, which is why Roman Catholic mysticism was rejected by God’s Reformers. The key question is: If CCP is so important, why didn’t Christ Jesus or His Apostles teach it?

I encourage you to make the time to examine this: The Origin Of Contemplative/Centering Prayer. There you’ll see contemplatives themselves tell you that CSM and its CCP actually originated with the schismatic “desert fathers.”

We should be concerned that DTS would be recommending this book by apostate (at best) mystic Henri Nouwen.

___________________________________________________________________________
End notes:

[1] Henri Nouwen, Sabbatical Journey [New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1998], 51, emphasis mine.

[2] Henri Nouwen, In The Name Of Jesus: Reflections On Christian Leadership [New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1989], 42.

[3] Ibid., 38, emphasis mine.

[4] Ibid., 42, 43.

[5]  Henri Nouwen, Here and Now: Living In The Spirit [New York: Crossroad Publishing, 2006], 25, emphasis mine.

[6] In The Name, op. cit., 47.

See also:

HENRI NOUWEN HELPED BY “MEDITATION”

WHEN YOU PRAY, SAY: BIBLICAL PRAYER VS CONTEMPLATIVE PRAYER

THE TERMINOLOGY TRAP OF “SPIRITUAL FORMATION”

By Christian Research Network Associate Editor Erin Benziger of Do Not Be Surprised…
This is a repost of an original article on Do Not Be Surprised…

America’s largest and fastest growing “church,” Lakewood Church in Houston, Texas, often finds itself with guest speakers in the pulpit. With pastors Joel and Victoria Osteen traveling often for their own “Night of Hope” events, or for other special speaking engagements, it must be helpful to know so many prominent pastors and speakers who would willingly substitute on any given weekend.

On the weekend of 26–27 May, Lakewood Church will welcome Louie Giglio to the stage. In fact, Victoria Osteen excitedly invited all of her Houston-based Twitter followers to visit the Lakewood venue for the occasion:

Source

A quick visit to the website of Lakewood Church confirms this speaking schedule:

Source

Louie Giglio is the pastor of Passion City Church in Atlanta. He is also the founder of the Passion Conference. Back in January, a strange thing occurred at Session 5 of the 2012 Passion Conference event. As was reportedon this blog at that time, speakers Louie Giglio, Beth Moore, John Piper and others engaged in a Scripture reading exercise followed by a time of silence and meditation while the audience of young people was instructed to “be still” as they waited to “hear” from Jesus.

Here is Beth Moore leading her portion:

And John Piper:

Finally, to close the session, Passion founder Louie Giglio stood and declared the following:

How many of you heard the voice of God speak specifically, clearly, directly, and personally, to you? Can you just put a hand up? I’d like you to share it. Can you put a hand up for a minute?

Just want you to look around; that’s people saying, “God Almighty (pause) the Maker of heaven (pause) the one Who’s sitting on the only throne (pause) that’s not under threat (long pause, audience cheers)—He spoke to me. He spoke to me.”

“God spoke to me.” (long pause) Don’t let the voice of the darkness, tell you that you are not (pause) worth (pause) that God would not speak to you. (pause) Don’t let him tell you, you don’t matter. (pause) God spoke to you.

This exercise can perhaps best be described as “Lectio Divina lite.” When did Protestant leaders begin to teach that we have the Bible “plus” anything? God has spoken perfectly in His Word. We have no need to be still and wait for His voice.

It is curious, then, that Giglio, the founder and leader of the Passion event, would also be preaching at the one of the largest Word Faith churches in the country. But then, mysticism and the false, heretical prosperity gospel are both fruits plucked from the same bad tree.

SEE ALSO:

Biblical Silence vs. Mystical Silence and What Really Went on at Passion 2012?

Beth Moore and John Piper Lead Lectio-Divina Lite at Passion 2012

The original appears complete with a comments section for you to join the discussion right here.

See also:

EMERGING ECUMENICAL EVANGELEPHANTS AND THE WORD FAITH MOVEMENT

STEVEN FURTICK, JAMES MACDONALD, AND JOEL OSTEEN

SOUTHERN BAPTIST DAVID JEREMIAH PRAISES “VISION GOD” GAVE TO TBN’S PAUL CROUCH

“Continue in the faith.” (Acts 14:22)

Perseverance is the badge of true saints. The Christian life is not a beginning only in the ways of God, but also a continuance in the same as long as life lasts.

It is with a Christian as it was with the great Napoleon: he said, “Conquest has made me what I am, and conquest must maintain me.” So, under God, dear brother in the Lord, conquest has made you what you are, and conquest must sustain you.

Your motto must be, “Excelsior.” He only is a true conqueror, and shall be crowned at the last, who continueth till war’s trumpet is blown no more. Perseverance is, therefore, the target of all our spiritual enemies.

The world does not object to your being a Christian for a time, if she can but tempt you to cease your pilgrimage, and settle down to buy and sell with her in Vanity Fair. The flesh will seek to ensnare you, and to prevent your pressing on to glory.

“It is weary work being a pilgrim; come, give it up. Am I always to be mortified? Am I never to be indulged? Give me at least a furlough from this constant warfare.” Satan will make many a fierce attack on your perseverance; it will be the mark for all his arrows.

He will strive to hinder you in service: he will insinuate that you are doing no good; and that you want rest. He will endeavour to make you weary of suffering, he will whisper, ”Curse God, and die.” Or he will attack your steadfastness: “What is the good of being so zealous?

Be quiet like the rest; sleep as do others, and let your lamp go out as the other virgins do.” Or he will assail your doctrinal sentiments: “Why do you hold to these denominational creeds? Sensible men are getting more liberal; they are removing the old landmarks: fall in with the times.”

Wear your shield, Christian, therefore, close upon your armour, and cry mightily unto God, that by his Spirit you may endure to the end.

Charles Spurgeon

See also:

T.D. JAKES’ WORD FAITH PASTORS AND LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE 2012

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH HASN’T CHANGED ITS CONDEMNATION OF THE GOSPEL

KAY WARREN PREACHES SUNDAY SERVICES AT SADDLEBACK CHURCH

This was brought to my attention today at Apprising Ministries by Christian Research Network Contributor Christine Pack of Sola Sisters. I find this may 28, 2008 post to be a rather odd one by the New Calvinist mentor.

In How A Roman Catholic Anti-Calvinist Can Serve Today’s Poet-Calvinists Dr. Piper writes:

May 29 is G. K. Chesterton’s 134th birthday. He was a British journalist and brilliant writer. Nobody exploits the power of paradox like Chesterton. I celebrate his birthday by recommending his book Orthodoxy…

[H]is celebration of poetry and paradox undermines his own abomination of the greatest truth-and-mystery-lovers around today, the happy Calvinists… One of the reasons that Calvinism is stirring today is that it takes both truth and mystery seriously. (source)

Dr. Piper’s pretty postmodern there; I respectfully offer that if you were to substitute Emergents for Calvinists that could have been written by Living Spiritual Teacher and Emerging Church guru Brian McLaren,

Emergents will admit they take truth seriously, but you just can’t know it completely because it is mysteriously always evolving. John Piper then continues:

Read Orthodoxy. A few of you may be swept away into the folly of Roman Catholic sacramentalism… Here is a flavor of what to expect in Orthodoxy¹:

• “The poet only desires exaltation and expansion, a world to stretch himself in. The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens in to his head. And it is his head that splits.” (17)…
• “Mysticism keeps men sane. As long as you have mystery you have health. When you destroy mystery you create morbidity.” (28)…

¹ Page numbers from Orthodoxy (Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, 1959). (source)

So, is Dr. Piper recommending mysticism as a way to embrace mystery? It would appear so, and may also shed more light upon John Piper, Rick Waren & Foster-Willardism. Mysticism is spiritual suicide; best run from it.

See also:

DON’T CONFORM TO THE WORLD OR TO FOSTER-WILLARDISM

MARK DRISCOLL AND NEO-REFORMED NEW CALVINIST CONTEMPLATIVE SPIRITUALITY

TIM KELLER AND CONTEMPLATIVE SPIRITUALITY

Christian Research Network is a sister work of Apprising Ministries. Today CRN Associate Editor Erin Benziger of Do Not Be Surprised… brings to our attention her recent interview with Dr. John MacArthur:

If you were granted ten minutes to speak with and interview John MacArthur, what would you ask? Would you inquire about the state of the church, or would you focus on doctrinal questions? Would you seize the opportunity to ask a question pertaining to your own personal situation, or would you ask his opinion on the latest antics of the Seeker-Driven crowd?

Recently, I was graciously afforded ten minutes with John MacArthur, and I found myself asking questions about a little bit of everything.

John MacArthur is the pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California, president of The Master’s College and Seminary, author of numerous books and featured teacher with the Grace to You media ministry. He is a husband, father and grandfather who has faithfully been preaching the truths of God’s Word for over 43 years, and who has been following the Lord for even longer. On 19 May 2012, Dr. MacArthur was speaking at the 6:4 Fellowship National Conference, and he generously agreed to a brief interview following his session.

Within the first few moments of speaking with him, I knew that I did not want to spend this brief time simply lobbing questions at him in the style of a typical interview. Rather, I wanted to have a conversation with this man who has dedicated his life and ministry to the proclamation of God’s Word. So, as we stood outside on an unusually warm May afternoon, John MacArthur sipped a soft drink, and I grabbed my digital recorder, ready to catch every word.

In the following transcription, for the sake of readability, I have edited my questions to be more concise than they actually were, and have refrained from including the few tangents that were embarked upon. The pertinent answers given by Dr. MacArthur, however, are unedited.

You spoke this morning about prayer. You clearly spoke against the prosperity “name it and claim it” model, and alluded to some of the mystical elements within that. Can you speak a bit more to the contemplative spirituality and mysticism that is invading the church today?

It’s very dangerous, the spiritual formation. It’s a pagan approach. It’s more like Hinduism than Christianity. It’s content-less, the mantra prayers, it’s a form of Hindu expression. It’s the kind of mysticism that makes people think they can create reality by thinking it, by meditating on it, by focusing on it, claiming it, declaring it to be so.

So how would you respond to the idea that is taught by those who promote spiritual formation and contemplative prayer that “prayer is really a conversation with God”? The idea that we must remain still and quiet, waiting to hear back from Him?

Here’s the problem with that: God can’t answer. He’s spoken only in His Word, so it’s not a conversation.

Last Fall, you began a sermon series at your church, teaching about the Holy Spirit. What prompted you to preach that series?

The abuse of the Holy Spirit that’s rampant in the church. One of the points I made was when God the Father’s honor is under attack, everybody rises to defend Him. When Open Theology came along…there was a massive response: people writing books and articles and blogging to shut down the attack on the nature of God and the attributes of God.

When Christ is attacked as to His deity or as to the nature of the cross, we get a movement like Confessing Evangelicals, we get documents responding to ECT [Evangelicals and Catholics Together] on the Gospel. We get T4G, The Gospel Coalition. We get everybody mounting a massive effort to protect the integtrity of the Gospel, Christ, the cross and His vicarious substitutionary atonement.

But the Holy Spirit is just being slaughtered everywhere and where is the outrage? That was the issue.

Jesus accused the Pharisees of attributing to Satan the works of the Spirit and I accuse these people of attributing to the Holy Spirit the works of Satan.

The issue of Lordship Salvation is one that I seem to come up against frequently—a resistance to it. Can you share some thoughts on this issue and why it is so opposed by certain groups?

When all the denominations went liberal (early 1900s), liberalism was running rampant. It was all works salvation, it was a social gospel, works salvation. There was a reaction, and reactions don’t always stop where they should, so it swings all the way to grace. And people were talking about, “It’s all grace, it’s all grace, it’s not works.” And they began to identify certain things that might intrude on grace: confessing Jesus as Lord, obedience, those kinds of things were articulated as works in this overreaction…

What we have today is still the residual of that in that area, but an even worse thing would be the sort of “rockstar” pastors’ disinterest in the Lordship of Christ without theology.

In other words, they don’t want to ask anything of anybody. Just superficial, name Jesus and rock and roll with us and you’re going to Heaven.

Like Steven Furtick?

Steven Furtick, Perry Noble. There’s nothing of theology to say nothing of the massive egotism. It’s epic.

And it’s so visible. I’ve found myself reporting on the mess of the Elephant Room 2 conference and the fallout of that…

…Either you respond righteously [and] humbly to valid criticism, or you become totally self-defensive, ramp up your hostility and start attacking, and you always hate to see that happen.

Some may consider CRN to be a “discernment ministry,” and while we do seek to expose false teaching with much of our content, we strive to bring everything back to Scripture. How can legitimate websites and ministries avoid being stereotyped alongside those that really are little more than a gossip rag?

The Apostle Paul named names all through the New Testament: good, bad and indifferent. There are times when the Church has to be warned when something is dangerous, that’s part of spiritual responsibility.

But more importantly, we need to lay down principles, because you can’t keep up with the names. You can’t catch them all. So what you want to always be doing is teaching people the Word of God so that they have this sub-structure of theology and sound doctrine to be able to do the discernment. I think there are times to name names. I have a rule about that and that is, I will respond to anyone who has published something, but nothing that is private. And that’s fair.

Dr. MacArthur, it’s been a pleasure. Thank you so much for your time today.

Well, there you have it. Of course, I could have spoken to John MacArthur all day, and I told him as much. He was incredibly gracious, humble and kind. He clearly is as committed to his calling and to the Word of God outside the pulpit as he is when he stands behind it.

Perhaps that is the most refreshing observation of all. In a culture where “celebrity pastors” are more concerned with their wardrobe than they are with God’s Word, pastors like John MacArthur are a blessing. Whether a man has been given a church of 3,000 or 30, if he is faithfully opening the Scriptures each week, and is humbly caring for the sheep of his flock, then he is an increasing rarity. Christians ought to pray for, and thank the Lord for those pastors who seek to exalt and magnify Him rather than themselves.

For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. (2 Cor. 4:5–7, ESV)

See also:

T.D. JAKES’ WORD FAITH PASTORS AND LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE 2012

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH HASN’T CHANGED ITS CONDEMNATION OF THE GOSPEL

KAY WARREN PREACHES SUNDAY SERVICES AT SADDLEBACK CHURCH

Since we came online at the end of August 2005 as a pioneer in the field of Internet apologetics and discernment works Apprising Ministries has, sadly, been documenting The Falling Away Of The Evangelical Church.

Among other things, I also monitor trends in the visible church from this outpost where the Net is moving ahead of the rest of the Christian community. Oftentimes anywhere from 2 years to 6 months before they see the results.

Sometimes even more than that. You might recall back in December of 2008 I told you that Rob Bell, former icon of the neo-liberal cult operating within the Emerging Church, was teaching a form of Christian Universalism.

This news was finally discovered by the mainstream of the church visible when he released his book of Love Wins mythology in March of 2011. My point being, many times the things of which I warn won’t even seem possible.

Along this line, months before the ill-fated ecumenical Elephant Room 2, both myself and Chris Rosebrough of Pirate Christian Radio told you that James MacDonald and Mark Driscoll would use it to mainstream T.D. Jakes.

Well, that’s what happened as Jakes was allowed to tell us in essence: “I’m a trintarian-modalist.” Shortly thereafter, not naming any names (James MacDonald), we were told of private discussions with T.D. Jakes.

It seems that Jakes is saying he wouldn’t accept the label of prosperity preacher; not hard to believe because, after 26 years in fields of apologetics, non-Christian cults and Comparative Religion, I don’t know one who would.

However, it seemed pretty clear that Elephant Room curator James MacDonald was implying there’s been some repentance by T.D. Jakes in that area. But Jakes’ record since ER2 actually gives us the opposite indication.

For example, Elephant Room 2′S T.D. Jakes Says TBN’s Paul Crouch Led By God To Launch Jakes’ Ministry on TBN’s Spring 2012 Fleece-A-Thon. Then there’s his performing for his spiritual daughter pastirx Paula White.

See for yourself in T.D. Jakes Speaker This Month (March 2012) For Paula White’s A God Encounter. Jakes is also fresh off his Pastor’s & Leadership 2012 Conference. Notice at :25 in this clip Paula White shows up:

As you can see below in the advertisement for the DVD set P&L 2012 also featured Joel Osteen. Yes, we know prophet-pastor Steven Furtick says Joel Osteen Is A Great Man Of God, but Osteen’s a WF heretic same as Jakes:

(source)

This next clip is called a recap of P&L 2012 but it sounds more like the typical self-help stylings of Jakes’ usual WF prosperity show to me. Taking God’s name in vain is certainly not Biblical preaching:

Odd how much “touching” goes on within WF shows. Next we have “Bishop” Tudor Bismark whose bio tells us he:

resides in Harare, Zimbabwe,… Bishop Bismark serves as an Apostolic overseer to over 900 churches in 12 African nations, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, South America, the West Indies and the United States of America…

Bishop Bismark travels extensively functioning in the role of an Apostle and is sounding a clear voice in this season that it is time for God’s people to establish His kingdom in the earth. (source)

“Apostle-Bishop” Bismark also ministers with his wife pastrix ChiChi. I have to tell you, Bismark’s WF mythology below from P&L 2012 strikes me more like simply rambling. His shtick here is “keep the structure intact.”

Bismark shouts, “If a ship is blown in pieces; keep the structure intact.” How is one to do that if it’s been blown apart? Be that as it may, I’m also not sure where he gets Satan squeezing Jesus like a boa constrictor in Genesis.

However, as a former football coach, Tudor Bizmark is really quite light on his feet, I’ll give him that:

Then there’s pastrix Sheryl Brady, whom I told you of in Elephant Room, T.D. Jakes, And Pastrix Sheryl Brady, Jakes is really quite enamored with her having installed her as pastrix of The Potter’s House Of North Dallas.

Actually, Brady was also a featured speaker for T.D. Jakes’ Woman Thou Art Loosed 2011 hosted by the Lakewood Church of Joel Osteen, which even boasted his WF protégé, pastrix Paula White, as well as Cindy Trimm:

Keep in mind, the closer T.D. Jakes gets to the mainstream, the closer such as these also get. Having been in a WF church for a time as a young Christian I have much experience with this type of self-centered mythology.

I know the WF players well. In closing this, for now, we come to “Bishop” Noel Jones. I can tell you that Jones is no lightweight in the world of urban prosperity preachers; he’s royalty. Born in Jamaica Jones’ bio informs us:

Some may know him as “Bishop,” others as an astute intellectual, a columnist, prolific orator, theatrical producer,… Bishop Jones is also a frequent guest on Trinity Broadcasting Network…

Bishop Jones continues to make an indelible mark on the world, violently reclaiming territory for the Kingdom through his philanthropy, service and social justice efforts. (source)

Yikes, that sounds a bit malevolent. Following, Jones makes up one of most bizarre WF fables I have ever heard. Let me warn you, you do not want to be eating anything as you hear Jones’ wild speculations about Lazarus.

Notice that Noel Jones even claims that what he’s saying is actually “a Word” from God; but to me it sounds a little like Gil Grissom from a nightmare episode of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation:

I leave you now with some more bad news. seems T.D. Jakes is already gearing up for P&L 2013. But hey, who knows, maybe we’ll even see Steven Furtick and James MacDonald next time around:

(source)

See also:

ELEPHANT ROOM 2′S T.D. JAKES’ SPIRITUAL DAUGHTER PAULA WHITE IN THE NEWS

LEADING EMERGING ECUMENICAL EVANGELEPHANT JAMES MACDONALD ON CRITICISM

STEVEN FURTICK, JAMES MACDONALD, AND JOEL OSTEEN

Apprising Ministries will show you in this piece that the subtitle would be: Nor can she; not without admitting her popes are but fallible men, not vicars of Christ, and that her dogma asseverated at the Council of Trent was wrong.

I have already covered this further in Has The Roman Catholic Church Really Changed? Here I’m going to point out a rather huge fallacy that’s being perptrated by Roman Catholics and spiritually obtuse evangelicals right now.

Take for example this lunacy in the Lord’s name, Southern Baptists Assist The Roman Catholic Church To Infiltrate Evangelicalism. The fallacy is that the Church of Rome has somehow actually become orthodox.

However, it can’t; not without destroying itself as an institution. Let’s take a moment to consider the following from the Second Vatican Council, which was held by the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) in the early 1960’s.

Please look very carefully at the following quote from Lumen Gentium – “Solemnly Promulgated By Holiness Pope Paul VI On November 21, 1964.” I have added emphasis:

just as the office granted individually to Peter, the first among the apostles is permanent and is to be transmitted to his successors, so also the apostles’ office of nurturing the Church is permanent, and is to be exercised without interruption by the sacred order of bishops. (14*)

Therefore, the Sacred Council teaches that bishops by divine institution have succeeded to the place of the apostles, (15*) as shepherds of the Church, and he who hears them, hears Christ, and he who rejects them, rejects Christ and Him who sent Christ. (149)(16*) (source).

Click the source and you’ll see I quote this right from the online Vatican Library itself. Note: “the office granted individually to Peter, the first among the apostles is permanent and is to be transmitted to his successors.”

We must ask ourselves an important question here: In all its ecumenical dialogues, do we really think that the RCC ever had any actual intention of changing that dogma, which is the very reason the Church of Rome exists?

No, it can’t and still remain the RCC. It doesn’t matter what individual Roman Catholics or RCC theologians believe; it matters what the RCC itself set in stone. Here is her official position concerning herself and her pope.

From the Code of Canon Law, again my emphasis:

Art. 1. THE ROMAN PONTIFF Can. 331 The bishop of the Roman Church, in whom continues the office given by the Lord uniquely to Peter, the first of the Apostles, and to be transmitted to his successors, is the head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ, and the pastor of the universal Church on earth. (source)

Again, individual Romans Catholics might disagree; but it doesn’t change the fact that the RCC sees its pope as the head of the Body of Christ on earth. Next let me show you a critical part of the document Unam Sanctum.

This was “a Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302.” And it’s never been rescinded even to this day; nor can it ever be. Pope Boniface the VIII said:

Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins,… she represents one sole mystical body whose Head is Christ and the head of Christ is God [1 Cor 11:3]. In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5].

We venerate this Church [of Rome] as one,… Therefore, of the one and only Church there is one body and one head, not two heads like a monster; that is, Christ and the Vicar of Christ, Peter and the successor of Peter, [the Pope]… For since the Apostle said: “There is no power except from God and the things that are, are ordained of God” [Rom 13:1-2],…

Hence we must recognize the more clearly that spiritual power surpasses in dignity and in nobility any temporal power whatever, as spiritual things surpass the temporal…This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine,granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, ‘Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven’ etc., [Mt 16:19].

Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God [Rom 13:2],…Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff. (source)

Certainly, this is a Roman Catholic pope speaking concerning faith and morals. The late Dr. Walter Martin, who founded the Christian Research Institute, was a recognized authority in the field of Comparative Religion.

He informs us that this papal decree Unam Sanctam was declared by Cardinal Henry Edward Manning—himself “an authority on papal bulls and decrees”—to be “infallible and beyond all doubt an act ex cathedra.”[1]

Ex cathedra is an RCC term which refers to when the Roman Pontiff—the pope—speaks “from the Chair of Peter,” with his alleged supreme apostolic authority as the supposed Vicar of Christ—Head of the universal Church.

It’s important at this point to consider the following from the First Vatican Council of the RCC:

we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that

• when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA,
  • that is, when,
  • 1. in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians,
  • 2. in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,
  • 3. he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church,
• he possesses,
  • by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter,
• that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals.
• Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable. (source)

The meaning is crystal clear: When the pope makes a decree on faith and morals, this statement would therefore be considered an infallible decree. And as such then, Unam Sanctum also has to be considered as irreformable.

So also the Canons from the Council of Trent; they cannot be changed[2], so leading RCC apologist Jimmy Akin of Catholic Answers is correct when he tells us:

An infallible definition, by its very nature, can never be “undone.” The [Roman Catholic] Church still believes and teaches all the definitions Trent issued…

Many of Trent’s definitions concern articles of faith, and for a Catholic to doubt them culpably or to deny them constitutes heresy (CIC 751), which in turn incurs excommunication (CIC 1364 §1) (source)

This now properly positions you upon the battlefield to better understand what’s being discussed by John Ankerberg, R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, and the late D. James Kennedy in the video to follow below.

You’re about to see the second of six programs by The John Ankerberg Show entitled Protestants and Catholics: Do They Now Agree? on Evangelicals & Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium.

Even though that ecumenical document came out in 1994, what they talk about on this edition of Ankerberg’s show is crucial for people to understand as the spread of Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism continues.

With it has come a romanticizing of apostate Roman Catholic mystics and a sappy sentimentality that somehow the RCC is now to be considered part of the Body of Christ. However, our difference involves the very Gospel itself.

And as you’ll hear Dr. R.C. Sproul say below:

The Roman Catholic Church condemns “sola fide! (L.)” Now if, please understand this, if “sola fide (L.)” is the gospel, then the Roman Catholic Church has condemned the gospel of Jesus Christ. Now, nobody who went to the Council of Trent, as a delegate, went there with the intention of condemning the gospel. The theologians of Rome really believed that they were defending the gospel and that the Protestants had in fact committed apostasy.

And I admire the Church, the Roman communion of the 16th century for at least understanding what apparently people don’t understand today, and that is what is at stake here. That they understood that somebody is under the anathema of God! And we can be as nice, and as pleasant, and as gentle, and as loving, and as charitable, and tolerant as we can possibly be, but it’s not going to change that folks.

Somebody is preaching a different gospel! And when Rome condemned the Protestant declaration of “Justification by faith alone” I believe, Rome, when placing the anathema on “sola fide (L.),” placed the anathema of God upon themselves. I agree with his [John MacArthur] assessment, that the institution [Roman Catholic Church] is apostate!

Part 2

JOHN ANKERBERG: Welcome. We’re here in Fort Lauderdale, Florida at the beautiful Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church with this wonderful audience tonight. And my guests are Dr. D. James Kennedy, who is the pastor of this beautiful church. The well known and popular Dr. John MacArthur and Dr. R.C. Sproul. Now our program is about a document called Evangelicals & Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium. We’re also going to be talking about a new clarifying statement that was just written by the evangelical signees of this document. You may not know, but the Evangelicals & Catholics Together document was written by evangelicals and Protestants and signed by twenty well known leaders in the evangelical world and twenty well known Roman Catholic leaders. Now Chuck Colson, who helped to draft this document, has acknowledged that it has caused a lot of controversy.

And he has admitted that it raised genuine concerns over whether this document clearly represents what evangelical Christians believe. So just a few weeks ago we met with Chuck, at his request; we had ten evangelical leaders there—the for of us were there. And Chuck expressed his concern over the confusion the document has caused—the lack of clarity concerning what evangelicals believe. And he wanted to resolve and remove any contentious issues, so that there would no longer be any doubt as to where he and the other Protestant signees stood. To this end—together—we all composed a statement that clarifies, and clearly defines, our evangelical distinctives. Not all of them, but some of the primary ones.

Now, Dr. John MacArthur, when we met together, we agreed that the ECT document, the “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” document was attempting to join Roman Catholics and Evangelical Protestants together as “cobelligerents,” the word the Francis Schaeffer coined “working at the grass-roots level” in terms of social issues. And we were going to work together against the many social evils, including secular humanism, the riding tide of Islam, pornography, abortion, and things like that. But we also agreed that this work [ECT] has been perceived as going too far in proclaiming the kind of unity that exists. I would like you to define the kind of unity that can exist between Evangelicals and Roman Catholics, and the kind of unity that cannot exist until the doctrine of “Justification by faith alone” has been dealt with clearly.

JOHN MACARTHUR: Well, I might be a little bit radical on this, but I will go ahead. I think the way we can work together on it is for the Catholics to work against those things, like they want to work against them, and we will work against those things, like we want to work against them, but we can’t really throw our arms around each other in a common effort because that confounds the issue of spiritual truth.

Look, if the Catholic Church is already a cobelligerent, if they are already anti-abortion, and pornography, and homosexuality; they are going to use all of their energies within the framework of their system to go after that. We are committed to that, and we are going after that. There is already a collective movement. Once you then sort of try to define that as “common spiritual mission” built on “common spiritual unity” you just take doctrine and throw it out the window, and perception is violated, particularly because the Catholic Church claims to be true Christianity, and when we reverse 450 years of history, and just throw our arms around the Roman system, which I think we have to say, John, in all honesty, is not a group of wayward brothers but is an apostate form of Christianity.

It is a false religion, it is another religion. When you throw your arms around that you literally have to undo any doctrinal distinction. In fact, ECT doesn’t just do that implicitly, they do that explicitly. In the document, in effect, they say, “we have to accept all baptized Roman Catholics as brothers and sisters in Christ. In an article that followed that up in Christianity Today, J. I. Packer said, “We should acknowledge as brothers and sisters in Christ, anyone who lives to the highest ideals of their communion.” My response to that is the opposite. I maybe could fellowship with a bad Roman Catholic, that is, one who has rejected the system, but was still in the church and came to know Christ. But one who holds the highest ideals of Roman Catholicism—on what grounds do I have spiritual unity? And when you get spiritual leaders from both churches, coming together to sign a common effort—you may say that it is to fight a cultural war, but people are going to see it as confusion over doctrine.

R. C. SPROUL: John, can I say something?

JOHN ANKERBERG: Yes, let me just throw in here, that is why we put in here, paragraph one in this new doctrinal statement, which, let me read it:

“Our parachurch cooperation with evangelically committed Roman Catholics, for the pursuit of agreed objectives, does not imply acceptance of Roman Catholic doctrinal distinctives, or endorsement of the Roman Catholic Church system.”

R. C. SPROUL: That is important, John, that Chuck and Dr. Packer, and Bill Bright wanted to make that point clear. I just wanted to comment on John’s statement that he prefaced by saying he was “a little bit radical,” you know, like being a “little bit pregnant” I think. Because when somebody, representing evangelicalism makes the comment, “that in their opinion or their judgment, the Roman Catholic Church is apostate—it is not a true Christian community.” In this day and age of tolerance and pluralism and relativism, and the milieu or irenic peaceful, gentle coexistence. . . .we live in a world that is fed up with theological controversy and disputes, and divisions and all of that. You see we don’t live back in the 16th century where people burned each other at the stake over that.

For John MacArthur to make a statement like that, about the Roman Catholic Church, which is the largest professing body in the world, that claims a Christian position—it’s just flame inflammatory, incinderary (sp.), and will provoke a howling outcry of people—you’re going to get an enormous amount of mail for saying that John, you know that! [Great Applause].

The one thing that the spirit of tolerance of our day cannot tolerate is intolerance, because relationships have become more important than truth. Now what’s at stake here, if I understand the New Testament where the Apostle Paul writes the Galatians and says, “If anybody, anybody, if it’s Peter, if it’s Barnabus, if it’s an angel from heaven teaches any other gospel—let him be anathema.” That’s not Sproul, that’s not MacArthur, that’s not Kennedy, that’s not Ankerberg—that is the Apostolic position, and Paul wanted to make sure that he made himself clear so he repeated that.

And then he goes on to say that he had to resist Peter himself, as Peter started to crack and compromise and negotiate the gospel. Now think about the people in the first century who got that letter—they were horrified. They said the last thing we can have happen is a break-up of fellowship and unity between Peter and Paul! All I have listened to for ten months is “Oh, my goodness, what would happen if we saw a split among people like Colson, Packer, and Sproul, and MacArthur—we cannot have that happen! Well, I am the last person in the world to want to have that happen—I can’t stand that either, these people are my friends, my comrades and everything. But John, what he [John MacArthur] is saying here, the Catholic Church understood in the 16th century, and Trent and Rome placed its unambiguous anathema on the Protestant doctrine of “Justification by faith alone” and has never, in any magisterial sense removed that anathema.

The Roman Catholic Church condemns “sola fide! (L.)” Now if, please understand this, if “sola fide (L.)” is the gospel, then the Roman Catholic Church has condemned the gospel of Jesus Christ. Now, nobody who went to the Council of Trent, as a delegate, went there with the intention of condemning the gospel. The theologians of Rome really believed that they were defending the gospel and that the Protestants had in fact committed apostasy. And I admire the Church, the Roman communion of the 16th century for at least understanding what apparently people don’t understand today, and that is what is at stake here. That they understood that somebody is under the anathema of God! And we can be as nice, and as pleasant, and as gentle, and as loving, and as charitable, and tolerant as we can possibly be, but it’s not going to change that folks. Somebody is preaching a different gospel! And when Rome condemned the Protestant declaration of “Justification by faith alone” I believe, Rome, when placing the anathema on “sola fide (L.),” placed the anathema of God upon themselves. I agree with his [John MacArthur] assessment, that the institution [Roman Catholic Church] is apostate!

JOHN MACARTHUR: I don’t want to leave Jim [James Kennedy] out of this, but I think that it is so important to know this. In a time like this of tolerance, listen, false teaching will always cry intolerance. It will always say you are being divisive, you are being unloving, you are being ungracious, because it can only survive when it doesn’t get scrutinized. So it cries against any intolerance. It cries against any examination, any scrutiny—just let’s embrace each other; let’s love each other; let’s put all that behind us. False doctrine cries the loudest about unity. Listen carefully when you hear the cry for unity, because it may be the cover of false doctrine encroaching. If ever we should follow 1 Thessalonians 5, and examine everything carefully, it’s when somebody is crying unity, love, and acceptance.

JOHN ANKERBERG: Dr. Kennedy, not Chuck, and not J. I. Packer, and some of our Evangelical buddies that came out with the ECT document, but others have gone one step further, and have said, “You know, Evangelicals and Catholics should overlook doctrinal differences and distinctives and unite to survive today here in America. If we don’t stand together; if we don’t fight together; we are all going down. How does that come into your theology of the sovereignty of God? Should we give up doctrinal distinctives just to survive? What do you think about that?

JAMES KENNEDY: John, first of all, let me if I could just add one little thing to this discussion that went on here, and then I will get back to that. For those lay people here that are not familiar—the Council of Trent, eighteen years that they spent examining the doctrines of the Protestant Reformation, and at the end of that time they came out with many Canons of the Council of Trent, and this is the particular one that R. C. was referring to, and I just like to have you hear the words. This has never been altered or denied by the Catholic Church, “If anyone says that the faith which justifies is nothing else but trust in the Divine mercy, which pardons sins because of Christ, or that it is trust alone by which we are justified” Which is what every Evangelical Christian would say. And they end with, “let him be anathema,” which means “let him be accursed.”

Every Evangelical Christian in the world stands under the official, never changed curse of the Roman Church, and we need to be aware of that fact. Now, the Bible says that we are to hold to the truth—in love. Now, that is difficult to do. Only Christ did that perfectly. We always tend either to slip into a rigidity or a legalism or to slide on the other side into some sort of “wishy-washy” compromise of the gospel.

But, getting to your question, and that was one of the reasons for ECT, that we live (as Chuck told me on the phone when he called me). We live in a time when the concept of truth is under attack. When the values and morals that Christians hold in common are under enormous assault, that we must stand together, or we are going to fall together. But, the problem with this document is that it gives the appearance of compromising the basic doctrine of the gospel of the Bible, which is the gospel, and this is the heart of all Christianity. This is why we had this meeting, right here in my office, to try to work these things out so there would not be a schism among Evangelicals, and happily got all of these gentlemen to sign a statement that they do affirm the basic Reformational truths. I still would have difficulty having my name on that document [ECT], which it is not, because I think of the ambiguity of it; the lack of clarity, and the way it opens a door for people to think that there is no difference of any significance, pertaining to the Gospel of Salvation between Protestants and Catholics.

JOHN ANKERBERG: It is very important right now, that we, for the people who are tuning in, because they want to know, “Where do we stand right now?” “What does this doctrinal statement mean in terms of where we are at?”

R. C. SPROUL: That’s what I was going to address, John, so that we have an understanding of this. The purpose of this meeting for the clarification, was as Chuck Colson had a compassionate concern to communicate. He said, can’t we come together and agree to disagree as brothers in Christ, because the controversy had escalated to such a point that the issue became now: not what is the relationship between Catholics and Evangelicals, but what will the relationship now be between evangelicals who endorse this position and those who didn’t. Are we facing a serious and permanent breach within Evangelical ranks? I mean, are we going to break fellowship over our disagreement over ECT, and that is what provoked this. At that meeting everybody expressed their concerns in a candid way, and Chuck, of course, said, “The whole thing was provoked in the first place because of their deep concern of what was happening in Latin America, and they didn’t want to see another Belfast erupt, and trying to come to a united front to an increasing hostile secularism.” And we all said, “Hey, we share that concern. We don’t want to see Latin America become a Belfast, and we recognize the hostility of secularism.”

Our concern was, as I stated it in that meeting, as clearly as I knew how, “that as far as I could see ECT, in my judgment, betrayed the gospel of Jesus Christ.” I also went on to say, and I have said this as loudly as I can every time that I discuss this, “I don’t for one minute think that Bill Bright, Jim Packer, Charles Colson, et all, ever in their wildest dreams, ever intended any such thing. But by the same token, neither did the signers of the Council of Trent.” This is not a personal thing with me. I was saying the document, in what it says and proclaims because it goes beyond this standing together as cobelligerents—it declares a unity of faith, John, where there is not a unity of faith. That’s what deeply, deeply, concerns me. So what the concern of the men was, at this meeting was to say, “Hey, look, let’s say to the world, `We do believe in `sola fide (L.)’ and Chuck Colson says, `I believe in Justification by faith alone’ and he wanted to put his print on paper his statement that this is central to the gospel of Jesus Christ, because he realized that people were interpreting the document the way that I was interpreting it, and he believed that that was a misinterpretation. Packer thinks that it is a misinterpretation. I think that it is the one that the document screams, but we still disagree on that, and Chuck is still committed to ECT—my fondest hope was that these men would remove their names from it—”A.” And if they couldn’t do that, if they couldn’t formally recant of it, “B” that they would at least revise the document itself, and if we couldn’t get them to do that—at least, please give a clarification that we can print separately of what you meant.

JOHN ANKERBERG: Next week we’re gonna continue our conversation. And we’re going to look at: Are there any people that are off limits in terms of evangelism? Sheep-stealing, prostelization between Catholics and Protestants. And we’re going to look at this very controversial area newt week. And I hope that you’ll join us. (source)

___________________________________________________________________________
End notes:

[1] Walter Martin, Roman Catholicism, CD Rom, available at Walter Martin’s Religious InfoNet.

[2] http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct25.html, accessed 5/24/12.

See also:

RICK WARREN AND TEACHINGS OF DEMONS

DID GOD GIVE BETH MOORE THIS VISION?

THE DECEIVERS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM

Your kingdom come. Your will be done, On earth as it is in heaven. (Matthew 6:10)

God’s will reveals three aspects of His will. First, His will of purpose—His sovereign, ultimate plan for the universe. “Surely, just as I have intended so it has happened, and just as I have planned so it will stand” (Isaiah 14:24; cf. Ephesians 1:9-11).

It has been within God’s purpose to allow sin to affect the world for a time. But that situation will end precisely according to His plan and foreknowledge. Within God’s will of purpose is His will of desire.

This will is more specific but not always fulfilled in this present age. For example, Jessu desired His people, the Jews, to be saved. However, only a relative few believed in His message.

Jesus prayed,  ”O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together … and you would not have it!” (Luke 13:34) Like the Jews, most Gentiles are also unwilling to come to Christ for salvation (John 5:40; cf. 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9).

Third is God’s will of command, which is His desire that believers obey Him fully, as only they of all people can, with the help of the Spirit (see Romans 6:16-18). Pride is the great enemy set against all of God’s will.

But for us to obey His will, we must forsake self-will and “prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptab;e and perfect” (Romans 12:2; see also v.1).[1]

John MacArthur

___________________________________________________________________________
End notes:

[1] John MacArthur, Daily Readings From the Life of Christ [Chicago: Moody, 2008], May 24.

See also:

DON’T BE FOOLED BY DELUDED DECEIVERS

KAY WARREN PREACHES SUNDAY SERVICES AT SADDLEBACK CHURCH

DON’T CONFORM TO THE WORLD OR TO FOSTER-WILLARDISM

Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.

For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. (Jude 3-4)

Spiritual Judgment And The End Of God’s Patience

Years ago Charles Spurgeon said: “We can learn nothing of the Gospel except by feeling its truths. There are some sciences that may be learned by the head, but the science of Christ crucified can only be learned by the heart.” A few years back I wrote an article entitled Emerging With The Spiritual Side Of Christianity, which is a reminder that no matter how intellectual any of us are, in the end the Christian faith is still a spiritual relationship with God Himself.

The Bible clearly tells us that God is Spirit, and not a spirit as the King James Version reads; therefore those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). My point being that, although this is a bit mysterious—it’s been referred to correctly as the mystical union of the believer in Christ—there is no escape from the fact that to be a Christian is to become involved in another world, this one spiritual. The neo-liberal cult operating within the Emerging Church aka the Emergent Church has erected a straw man to pretend that those of us who hold to sola Scriptura aren’t aware of this; but no one credible is saying anything otherwise.

Apprising Ministries has been alerting you that we are seeing an increase of deceptions entering the Christian community; and the reason for that is actually tied to 1 Peter 4:17 — For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? Now, I’m not pulling a Harold Camping and saying that this is the final judgment; nor am I saying that the Lord is necessarily coming in our lifetime. What I am attempting to do is draw attention to a secondary principle that’s found in this verse, which is when God tires of mankind’s foolishness in a given generation, He will first begin to deal with His own remnant—or specifically to this verse—His Church.

As you come to understand this you’ll see what’s happening in the visible Christian church. The Lord is allowing the rapid acceleration of spiritual blindness and such spiritual deceptions as the Purpose Driven/Seeker Drivenism a la Rick Warren , the judgment-less Love Wins mythology of former Emerging Church icon Rob Bell, and the growing acceptance of the Word Faith heresy of smiling Joel Osteen; by doing so, He is challenging us to actually live up to our most cherished beliefs through these combined forces of The Ecumenical Church Of Deceit (ECoD).

By allowing this ECoD and its own critical thinking skills-numbing Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism to gain strength the Lord is forcing an evangelicalism steeped in the humanism she never really renounced to come to grips with the spiritual side of the Christian faith. I’m not going to hash out dispensationalism, cessationism, Calvinism, Arminianism etc. at this point; what I am trying to do here is to let you know that we had best come to grips with a good working knowledge of these kinds of issues because Satan’s forces are doing their best right now to try and drive his wedge of division and confusion into the very remnant of God itself.

I must tell you that at the present time he is winning the battle spiritually and his ECoD has been doing a fantastic job of undoing the Reformation within evangelicalism. Can we really not see that this ECoD is a dutiful daughter who’s been very busy tying to draw spiritually obtuse Christians right back to apostate Roman Catholicism and the Church of Rome, her man-pleasing mother? These are the new Pharisees of Roman Catholic self-righteous religion who have simply recreated their own form of Judaism all over again. Do you possibly think all of this interest in Contemplative/Centering Prayer, which originated within the monastic system of the Rome—has come about by accident?

And A Sad Pattern Again Comes Emerging

Maybe we might look at it this way. Consider the sad pattern of mankind’s relationship with his Creator from Adam, who actually walked with Him in the garden, to God’s own chosen people Israel not even recognizing Him when Jesus Christ—the LORD God Almighty in human flesh—stepped upon His planet. Man is given the privilege of knowing His loving and merciful Creator, but then through his own sin and rebellion, he always ends up abusing that relationship until he no longer even recognizes Him anymore. Now let’s move ahead into the Age of Grace; our Great God and Savior Himself establishes His Church and then graciously comes to actually dwell within us.

However, by 1517 His visible Christian church is so corrupt, and has turned so far away from Him, that God has to send His Reformers to return the Body of Christ back to the things the Lord has already taught us in His Word the Bible. William Webster is dead-on-target when he says:

The Reformation was responsible for restoring to the Church the principle of sola Scriptura, a principle which had been operative within the Church from the very beginning of the post apostolic age. Initially the apostles taught orally but with the close of the apostolic age all special revelation that God wanted preserved for man was codified in the written Scriptures.

Sola Scriptura is the teaching and belief that there is only one special revelation from God that man possesses today, the written Scriptures or the Bible, and that consequently the Scriptures are materially sufficient and are by their very nature as being inspired by God the ultimate authority for the Church. (Online source)

How far the mainstream of the largely pretending to be Protestant evangelical community has drifted. If you will honestly take a look at what God has revealed to us prophetically concerning what is going to happen to this world before Christ returns, you will see that once again mankind will push Him right out of his life; and even now Purpose Driven/Seeker Driven and Emergent pseudo-Christians are engaged in shoving the Lord right out of His own church visible. We need only turn to Revelation 3:20 to shed some prophetic light upon this. Although it’s often quoted in its secondary meaning to unbelievers, this truth is that the passage from which it is taken is actually speaking to a church, or at least people who would profess to be Christians:

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”

So we see an interesting pattern come emerging from Genesis to Malachi; even among those who considered themselves God’s chosen people because of their birth, they end up completely forgetting Who their Creator is by the time Christ comes into the world He created. And then as we move into the Age of Grace, from the Matthew to Revelation, could it be that we are seeing this same pattern come emerging once again by the time we reach chapter 3 of Revelation? I would say this is good cause for one to take heed of the Biblical admonition of 2 Corinthians 13:5 — Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!

If John the Baptist were here, in a style that would no doubt be frowned upon by today’s focused on the self Christianity, I believe he’d be saying to these leaders in the ECoD of new and postevangelicalism, as well as to their apostate brethren in the Church of Rome:

“You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruits in keeping with repentance. And do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham. Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.” (Luke 3:7-9)

Since God cannot change, the spiritually mature should see that the point is still the same: It’s one thing to say you belong to God, but it’s quite another to have the life to back it up. You don’t think that the Pharisees had any good works; of course they did, but they loved the approval of men, just the same as Rick Warren and Rob Bell and Joel Osteen and Pope Benedict XVI seem to today. I exhort you, don’t be fooled by deluded deceivers any longer because this is what the Lord says to those who are:

“‘But I have a few things against you: you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, so that they might eat food sacrificed to idols and practice sexual immorality. So also you have some who hold the teaching of the Nicolaitans.

Therefore repent. If not, I will come to you soon and war against them with the sword of my mouth. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who conquers I will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, with a new name written on the stone that no one knows except the one who receives it.’”
(Revelation 2:14-17)

See also:

MAN-CENTERED METHODS OF RICK WARREN A LA ROBERT SCHULLER

POSTMODERN MYTH AND SOME HOMEBREWED ROB BELL

JOEL OSTEEN: SMILE WHEN YOU LIE

By Christian Research Network Associate Editor Erin Benziger of Do Not Be Surprised…
This is a repost of an original article on Do Not Be Surprised…

If you live in or near Seattle, Mark Driscoll thinks you should visit The City Church, pastored by Judah Smith and his wife, Chelsea. Why [did Driscoll want us to] visit [that] weekend? It seems that Smith [had] invited renowned prosperity preacher Brian Houston ofHillsong Church to preach.

Source

It is certainly interesting that the “Reformed” Mark Driscoll would encourage anyone to attend a church that appears to have little regard for the biblical mandate against women in positions of authority within the church. Of course, the presence of a pastrix at The City Church should not surprise us when we consider that this church was founded by Judah’s parents, pastor Wendell and pastrix Gini Smith:

Source

The reader will note that, in the screenshot above, it states that Wendell and Gini Smith originally served under Dick Iverson at Bible Temple in Portland. According to C. Peter Wagner’s book Apostles Today: Biblical Government for Biblical Power, Iverson was the “founder of one of America’s foremost apostolic networks, Ministers Fellowship International, out of Portland, Oregon.” So it sounds as though The City Church has some rather colorful roots.

 Returning again to the issue at hand: apparently Mark Driscoll and Judah Smith share more than just an endorsement by Rick Warren. These two men also possess a shared affinity for prosperity preacher Brian Houston of Hillsong Church. In his post, Charismatic Quasi-Prosperity Preacher Judah Smith, Pastor Ken Silva informs us of Smith’s apparent longstanding relationship with Houston and Hillsong, as Smith has previously appeared at the famed Hillsong Conference. In fact, Silva informs us that

Judah Smith shared the platform this year [2010], again, supposedly with “the world’s finest teachers” such as Word Faith prosperity preachers Joel Osteen and Jentezen Franklin. (Source)

Of course, we know from posts like ONE Conference brings together Calvary Chapel and Hillsong Church that Brian Houston also shares his pastoral duties with his wife, pastrix Bobbie Houston. We also know that Hillsong has launched the career of speaker Christine Caine, who not only spoke earlier this year at Steven Furtick’s Code Orange Revival, but who also preached the Sunday service for Furtick that same weekend. It seems that the crew from Hillsong has no qualms about disobeying such biblical texts as 1 Timothy 2:12. Yet, why would Mark Driscoll seemingly condone this by his endorsement? Further, why would he encourage his 235,000+ followers on Twitter to visit Judah Smith’s church to hear Brian Houston preach? Why this enthusiasm for two known prosperity preachers? Perhaps this is an example of the extended fall-out of the Elephant Room 2, when famed Modalist and Word Faith heretic T.D. Jakes was ushered into the evangelical community by none other than Mark Driscoll and his ER2 co-host, James MacDonald.

It seems as though the doctrines of the Word Faith movement are becoming more and more acceptable among professing evangelical Christians. Perhaps this leaves us with two options: we can either choose to pray or choose to “sow a seed.” With this growing apostasy, let us hope that the true Church would earnestly seek to do the former.

SEE ALSO:
Cleaning Up After the Elephants? MacDonald Takes to the Airwaves
Mark Driscoll Resigns from The Gospel Coalition Council
ONE Conference Brings Together Calvary Chapel and Hillsong Church

The original appears complete with a comments section for you to join the discussion right here.

See also:

MARK DRISCOLL, ACTS 29 NETWORK, AND RICK WARREN

MARK DRISCOLL HAS PERSONAL REVELATIONS FROM JESUS

EMERGING ECUMENICAL EVANGELEPHANTS AND THE WORD FAITH MOVEMENT