Perhaps the most difficult word in Christendom to define is Evangelical. Just what is an Evangelical? Dr. Kevin Bauder of Central Theological Seminary, right here in the Twin Cities, recently contributed his view on the subject in a book entitled Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism. Dr. Bauder brings the Fundamentalist perspective on what constitutes Evangelicalism. In this episode, Dr. Bauder joins me to discuss both the book (in general), and the view that he presented in the book (specifically).

Other views expressed in the book are: Confessional Evangelicalism (Al Mohler), Generic Evangelicalism (John Stackhouse), and Post-Conservative Evangelicalism (Roger Olson). We briefly describe the other views before moving into the view expressed by Kevin Bauder.

Kevin is a research professor of systematic and historical theology at Central Baptist Theological Seminary. He served as President of Central Seminary from 2003-2011, and is general editor of One Bible Only? Examining Exclusive Claims for the King James Bible.

Show Notes

• The discussion is framed around the book ”Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism,“ which features essays from Kevin Bauder, representing “Fundamentalism”; Al Mohler, representing “Confessional Evangelicalism”; John Stackhouse, representing “Generic Evangelicalism”; and Roger Olson, representing “Post-Conservative Evangelicalism.”
• The book almost breaks down to two major views of Evangelicalism, with two distinct sub-views within each major view. Kevin Bauder’s view shares many similarities to Al Mohler’s view, and John Stackhouse’s view shares many similarities to Roger Olson’s view.
• John and Roger’s views represent different versions of “Big Tent” Evangelicalism, in that they have more vague boundaries of what they would consider to be inclusive in Evangelicalism.
• Roger Olson sees Evangelicalism more as a social phenomenon or a movement, whereas Kevin Bauder – at the opposite side of the spectrum, sees it more as a theological phenomenon.
• While Al Mohler introduced the idea of defining Evangelicalism in the mathematical terms  of centered, bound, or center-bound, Olson states clearly that he sees it as centered. Stackhouse shares that view. (Mohler sees it as center-bound – defined by both the center and the boundaries.)
• John Stackhouse states that he doesn’t see Evangelicalism as merely a doctrinal phenomena. He introduces the idea that it needs to be right not only in orthodoxy (right doctrine, but also in orthopraxy (right practice), and orthopathy (right affections).
• Al Mohler’s view is that Evangelicalsim needs boundaries. The Gospel sets boundaries, and that Christians should not have common-cause with those who place themselves outside of those boundaries.



• Al Mohler signed the Manhattan Declaration, which a Fundamentalist would not have done. However, he has since expressed a change of mind on the matter and publicly called it a mistake.
• Bauder’s view was titled “Fundamentalism”, rather than “Fundamentalist Evangelicalism” as one would expect, seeing the pattern of the other titles. Bauder would include Fundamentalism in Evangelicalism, considering it a subset. He says that some Fundamentalists would disagree, and consider Fundamentalism separate from Evangelicalism.
• Bauder describes Fundamentalism, from the point of view of a self-professed Fundamentalist. It’s primarily an attitude toward the Gospel. Fundamentalists have a strong fidelity toward the Gospel, and wish not to associate with people who deny the Gospel. The have an attitude of “Ecclesiastical non-cooperation with people who deny the Gospel.”
• Kevin makes the case for what he calls “Minimal Christian Fellowship.” It amounts to the minimum amount of orthodox doctrine that a person professing faith in Christ should have before we should consider them a believer and extend fellowship to them.
• Kevin describes that a minimum orthodoxy for fellowship entails both what you should affirm, as well as what you should or should not deny,
• From “Minimal Christian Fellowship”, we move on to discuss “Maximal Christian Fellowship.” The idea being that the more we have in common, the better our fellowship will be. Disagreeing over eschatology or whom should we should baptize or how we should baptism doesn’t preclude fellowship between believers, but it does introduce friction or frustration between believers that effectively reduces the amount of fellowship between believers.
• The divisions we have often result in denominational differences and splits. Kevin sees denominationalism as a good thing because it allows believers to seek out other believers that share their views on issues that tend to be considered non-essential (as far as salvation is concerned) and worship and practice within the confines of their own consciences. For example, Baptists and Presbyterians can worship within their own denominations without being concerned over each other’s views on baptism.
• Though Kevin and Al Mohler share many common views on Evangelicalism, we also discussed their differences. The two disagree about how to handle fellowship with Christians who in-turn extend fellowship to others outside of the boundaries of Christianity. The example Kevin gives is that Fundamentalists view Billy Graham to be a genuine believer, but have serious concerns over the people with whom Graham has cooperated in his crusades. Al Mohler, on the other hand, was willing to work with Graham, despite their differences over including Liberals and Catholics in Graham’s crusades (though Mohler did succeed in limiting co-sponsorship of Graham’s Louisville crusade to Conservatives only.)
• “Evangelicalism” is presented as synonymous with “Christian”.
• Kevin shares some of the history of American Evangelicalism. He talks about the “Fundamentalist Controversy” of the 1920s, as well as the birth of “Neo-Evangelicalism” in 1947, as well as other major developments in the 20th century that define American Evangelicalism.

Scriptures Referenced

• I Corinthians 5
• I Corinthians 12
• John 10
• I Corinthians 15

Additional Resources

• Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism (Amazon Affiliate Link)
• Phil Johnson: What is an Evangelical? – Grace Life Pulpit (2009 Shepherds’ Conference)
• John Gerstner: Primer on Justification – Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6
• Scott Oakland: Reformedcast, Episode 73 – Though Scott’s interview of Dr. Bauder had the same basis, the discussion was quite different.

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and/or Google+!

This month I spoke with Eric Barger of “Take a Sand Ministries” on the subject of Freemasonry. Eric has been a Christian apologist for nearly three decades, and addresses the Cults, World Religions, the Occult, Spiritual Warfare, and troubling unbiblical trends and doctrinal issues facing the church today. He’s authored several books, travels the country speaking to churches and Christian groups, and hosts his own radio show called “Take a Stand! with Eric Barger.”

Many of us know Christians who are involved in Freemasonry, and wonder what the organization is all about. Eric sheds light on this secretive organization and explains the occultic and anti-Christian practices that go on, as well as the dangers that Freemasonry poses to Christians.

Discussion Outline

• Freemasonry is viewed by many (if not most people) as a benevolent fraternal organization that seeks to do charitable work within their community, but there is much more to the organization, and it has a lot of religious aspects to it, which are not in line with orthodox Christianity.
• Many Freemasons consider their lodge to be their church.
• The only religious requirement to become a Freemason is that a candidate for membership hold to a belief in a god.
• Freemasonry contends that it got its start in ancient Egypt, but the earliest records that can be found trace it back to 18th century France.
• Freemasonry has two tracks that members follow: the York Rite and (more popularly) the Scottish Rite. Each has several degrees that members progress through.
• The first three degrees, regardless of Rite, are called the “Blue Lodge”.
• Many Bible-believing organizations and church denominations have forbidden their members and clergy from participating in secret societies, including Freemasonry. Some examples include: The Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), The Assemblies of God, The Reformed Presbyterian Church of America, The Church of God – Cleveland Tennessee, the Four Square Church, and others.
• Eric read some of the covenants that initiates must swear to enter into the first three degrees of Masonry. The rituals they go through are often downplayed as mere formality for initiation into the organization, but don’t look so good when held up to the light of Scripture.
• Among the reasons Eric argues that Freemasonry is incompatible with Christianity, he explains that the first thing new members must do is swear a secret oath. The Bible speaks against the swearing of oaths; Jesus said to let your “yes” be “yes” and let your “no” be “no”, that anything that goes beyond this comes from the Evil One. These oaths involve death curses, and are quite grotesque in nature.
• The Shriners (the guys with the red fez hats) are the top level of Freemasonry.
• In Christian countries, members that complete the third degree are given a Masonic King James Bible.
• The maroon fez that Shriners wear can be traced back to a battle waged by Muslims on a Christian town in medieval Turkey in which a Muslim soldier dipped his hat in the blood of Christians that he had killed. That hat also has a crescent moon and a sword on it, both symbols of Islam.
• The god of Freemasonry is a composite of Jehovah, Baal, and Osiris, and is referred to as Jahbulon.
• Eric listed several of the names of various Masonic temples in the US to illustrate that they often have names that are tied to Islam.
• Influential authors within Freemasonry freely admit their connection to the Occult, and occultic leaders leaders such as Anton Lavey (author of the Satanic bible) recognize the Occultic practices within Freemasonry.
• Membership is drawn by invitation, and members tend to be those who are civic and business-minded.
• Eric defends American Founding Fathers accused of being involved in Freemasonry, including Washington, John & Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and others. Washington was involved in his youth, but never attended a Masonic Lodge in the last 30 years of his life, and spoke out many times against the Masons.
• Several reasons Eric views Freemasonry as a religious institution:
• • The leaders is called a “worshipful master”.
  • The meeting place is called the Temple.
  • Initiates must believe there is a god.
  • Masonry instructs about its god as members progress to higher degrees.
  • Masons sing worship songs.
  • Each meeting begins with prayer.
  • The use religious books.
  • Mansonry is Universalistic.
• Eric advises to approach each Freemason differently, based on where they are, to share the dangers of their organization and compare it to Christianity. He offers some points though: share Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:37, and encourage them to investigate the claims he (Eric) and others make about Freemasonry.
• Freemasonry and Mormonism have many similarities. Joseph Smith was a Freemason, and many of the temple rituals for Mormonism were lifted directly out of Freemasonry.

Scriptures Referenced

• Matthew 5:37
• 1 Peter 3:15

Additional Resources

• Eric’s website – Take a Stand Ministries.
• Eric’s links to articles on cults (scroll down for Freemasonry articles)
• Ed Decker’s resources on Freemasonry
• Jack Harris, former Mason, on the John Ankerberg show discussing Freemasonry (Google Video)

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and/or Google+!

[Note: The February episode of Echo Zoe Radio, featuring guest Bob DeWaay, was based on this article.]

Bill Johnson of Redding, California has become a popular teacher in one of the latest iterations of the Signs and Wonders movement. His book, When Heaven Invades Earth, reveals his underlying theology.

Johnson believes that there will be a great end-time revival that will be initiated by an “Elijah generation”[1] (a concept from the heretical Latter Rain movement) that shall transcend all other generations of Christians in regard to their ability to do great works of power. Johnson claims the following about himself and associates: “We will carry the Elijah anointing in preparing for the return of the Lord in the same way that John the Baptist carried the Elijah anointing and prepared the people for the coming of the Lord” (Johnson: 184)[2].

Supposedly these elitists will set off a great revival of signs and wonders greater than those of Jesus. This miracle explosion, they expect, will cause a great revival before the return of Christ. Johnson states, “I live for the revival that is unfolding and believe it will surpass all previous moves combined, bringing more than one billion souls into the Kingdom” (Johnson: 23).

The basic premise is that God always wants to do abundant and remarkable miracles but is kept from doing so by the fear and unbelief of the church. God awaits the arrival of specially anointed and enlightened Christians who will make it possible for Him to bring at long last an invasion of heaven to earth before the return of Christ. That is the point of Johnson’s title. His subtitle is A Practical Guide to a Life of Miracles. Accordingly, with the right information, zeal, desire, piety, faith and anointing, any Christian can “make the supernatural natural” (Johnson: 133).

In this article I will show from Johnson’s book that he has departed from orthodox Christian teaching in many serious ways. He teaches the heretical kenosis doctrine about Christ. He denies the Reformation principle of sola scriptura. He embraces pietism, elitism, subjectivism, fideism, dominion theology, and many other errors. I will claim that his supposed end-time revival is actually end-time apostasy.

How to Introduce Heresy

As I read Johnson’s book, I noted the various errors in it by category. At the end of the process the largest number of entries was under “anti-scholastic bias.” Johnson is firmly against careful scholarship based on sound exegesis of Scripture. To him, such study is likely to bring one into bondage and spiritual death. Sadly, this bias is widespread in current evangelicalism, but Johnson is quite blatant in his rejection of scholarship.

Johnson claims, “For decades the Church has been guilty of creating doctrine to justify their lack of power. . .” (Johnson: 116). It is hard to imagine what “problem” he is reacting to when most of our evangelical educational institutions are committed to postmodern mysticism, with their heroes being mystics like Dallas Willard and Richard Foster. It is hard to find a Bible college or seminary that does not promote “spiritual formation,” which is merely a fancy term for Roman Catholic mysticism. Yet Johnson decries the presence of doctrine. We will see later just how willing he is to depart from orthodox doctrine.

He resorts to an often misused passage that promotes his anti-scholastic bias: “A powerless Word is the letter not the Spirit. And we all know, ‘The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life’” (Johnson: 116). This twisting of Paul’s meaning in 2Corinthians 3:6 has a long history of use to promote subjectivism and mysticism. The false implication is that studying the Bible will kill you spiritually. The context shows that Paul was speaking of the letters written on stone (verse 3), meaning the Decalogue. Paul explains how the law “kills” in Romans 7:5, 6. It kills because of our sinful passions that it exposes, not because it is studied for what it means.[3]

For example, does “you shall not steal” have some secret, mystical meaning that can only be assessed by certain elite persons with subjective spiritual impressions, or does it mean what it says? It means what it says. But to truly live as a person who is free from the sin of stealing we need the grace of God that comes through the gospel. In 2Corinthians 3, Paul is speaking of those who have the Law but reject Christ. Bill Johnson is warning Christians that studying the Bible will kill them. In so doing he abuses the passage and lowers the value of Scripture in the minds of his readers.

Johnson warns against “a powerless Word.” The only way God’s Word lacks power is if we refuse to believe and obey it. The suggestion is false and abusive to the Lord’s flock that people like Johnson, who refuse to be taught the truth but relish signs and wonders, have “power” while those who love and believe God’s Word are powerless.

It is easy to see where Johnson is taking his attack against Christian scholarship:

Those who feel safe because of their intellectual grasp of Scriptures enjoy a false sense of security. None of us has a full grasp of Scripture, but we all have the Holy Spirit. He is our common denominator who will always lead us into truth. But to follow Him, we must be willing to follow off the map—to go beyond what we know. (Johnson: 76)

We will see in the next section just exactly where Johnson has gone “off the map” and where he wants to take us. The claim that we cannot know the Scripture but can know what the Holy Spirit is saying by other means is absurd. The Bible claims that Scripture is the Holy Spirit speaking to the church. The Holy Spirit inspired the Scriptures. We understand the Bible using our intellect.

Johnson’s approach is to use the person of the Holy Spirit as an excuse to reject scholarly Bible study in favor of undefined, subjective religious experiences. He further denigrates the Bible:

But in reality, the Bible is a closed book. Anything I get from the Word without God will not change my life. It is closed to insure that I remain dependent on the Holy Spirit. (Johnson: 93)

His categories are false. The Bible is the Holy Spirit speaking to us and its power is not dependant on us using religious experience to escape its boundaries. Any lack of life-changing power is due to unbelief, not the meaning of Scripture as correctly understood. But Johnson claims that the Holy Spirit leads us off the map. Thus he denigrates sola scriptura.

The absurdity of Johnson’s claim is such that it amazes me how many are deceived by it. For example, the claim that the Holy Spirit leads us into truth (which He does through Scripture) by some subjective means that go “off the map” and beyond an “intellectual approach” is disingenuous. Those who go off the map are going somewhere. If they have gotten information directly from the Spirit about where they think they should go and then follow it, they are using their intellect as well. The subjective information from the spirit realm must register in someone’s mind in order for them to act on it. So if the intellect is as bad thing when contemplating the Scriptures, why is it a good thing when determining which subjective impressions to follow? But Johnson warns, “The Church has all too often lived according to an intellectual approach to the Scriptures, void of the Holy Spirit’s influence.” This false dilemma (i.e., either intellect or Spirit) fools his readers into thinking that if they attend hyped up meetings such as Johnson promotes, the Spirit is at work; whereas if they were to carefully study God’s once-for-all revealed Word they would be stuck in a “powerless” situation (Johnson: 76).

By discounting careful Bible study, scholarship, and using one’s mind Johnson disarms his readers to the point that they are susceptible to heresies such as those he teaches. For example, “Reaction to error usually produces error” (Johnson: 51). If this is true, why did Paul write Galatians, Colossians, and other of his epistles to correct error? Johnson brags that he doesn’t read any books of people who disagree with his version of revivalism. He consistently downplays or rejects the value of scholarly study. He says: “It’s in the environment of worship that we learn things that go way beyond what our intellect can grasp” (Johnson: 44). That statement reminds me of one I read from a New Ager who suggested we contemplate “the sound of one hand clapping.” How do we learn things but they never register on our minds? Probably by subjective, religious feelings that remain undefined. By such feelings people like the Dalai Lama feel close to God. But are they?

Johnson Goes “Off the Map” by Teaching a False Christology

Bill Johnson embraces a doctrine that teaches that during His earthly ministry Jesus operated only as a man and not God. Johnson claims that Christ laid aside His divinity. Johnson says, “He performed miracles, wonders, and signs, as a man in right relationship to God . . . . not as God. If He performed miracles because He was God, then they would be unattainable for us” (Johnson: 29; emphasis and ellipses in original). Johnson’s theology requires that Christians do greater miracles than Jesus. If Jesus’ divinity had any influence on His mighty works, then we might think we could not do the same (and rightly so). So Johnson embraces what is often called the kenosis heresy—that Jesus laid aside His divine nature. He writes elsewhere: “He laid his divinity aside as He sought to fulfill the assignment given to Him by the Father . . .” (Johnson: 79).

Johnson’s priority that believers must be able to do signs and wonders causes him to make many statements that blur the distinction between us and Christ and thereby diminish the uniqueness of Christ: “For us to become all that God intended, we must remember that Jesus’ life was a model of what mankind could become if it were in right relationship with the Father.” (Johnson: 138). On the contrary, the Biblical writers claimed that Christ was the Creator (see John 1:3; Hebrews 1:2). Jesus was affirmed to be the unique divine son (Mark 9:7) by a voice from heaven. Jesus’ deity was affirmed many places in the gospels. The gospel writers used Jesus’ mighty works to prove His deity. If Johnson is right and Jesus had laid aside His deity, then the mighty works prove only that Jesus learned what anyone could learn if he had the right faith and relationship to God. The claims of the gospels thereby become moot. Jesus is no longer unique, but only a special enlightened one who could lead the way to many such enlightened ones in the future. Thus we have a New Age Christ rather than the Biblical one.

If Johnson is correct and we can do greater works than Jesus (based on his misinterpretation of John 14:12; Johnson: 136), then whoever did greater works would have even greater reason to make himself the object of someone’s faith and worship.[4] The apologetic that points to Jesus’ life and miracles as proof of His deity would become worthless because others could do the same.

The kenosis doctrine is based on a misuse of Philippians 2:7 where Paul says that Jesus emptied Himself. False teachers claim that Jesus “emptied” Himself of deity and became only a man during the Incarnation. This claim is tantamount to the outright denial of Christ’s deity. This important issue is missed on people like Johnson, who attack the validity of Christian scholarship. Johnson’s denial of Christ’s deity during His earthly ministry is the same as the Word of Faith heresy’s denial of Jesus’ deity when He died on the cross. They claim he lost His divinity and suffered in hell as a man. Both denials are blatant heresy. Let me explain why.

A truly theistic understanding of deity has certain necessary definitions. The most basic definition is “eternal, non-contingent existence.” The reason such a definition is essential to Christian theology is to distinguish God as He has revealed Himself in Scripture from other deities. The God of the Bible is unique: “To you it was shown that you might know that the Lord, He is God; there is no other besides Him” (Deuteronomy 4:35). The true God is eternal, and He created the world out of nothing. All false gods are created (if they have any status of existence), and thus are not eternal. The prophet wrote: “Thus you shall say to them, ‘The gods that did not make the heavens and the earth shall perish from the earth and from under the heavens’” (Jeremiah 10:11). The New Testament claimed that Jesus was the Creator to establish His true deity.

Non-contingence is a corollary to God’s eternal existence. If God existed from all eternity before anything else existed, there is nothing outside of God that could have caused His existence. This means that God as God is not contingent on anything outside of Himself. This is important because in Bill Johnson’s Christology, Christ’s deity is contingent. It goes away during the Incarnation only to return later. That which comes and goes is not eternal and non-contingent. This is the same fatal error of the Word of Faith heresy and similar to other such errors that were condemned in church history. The heretic Arius was famous for saying about Christ, “There was a time when He was not.” Various Christological heresies were rejected by early church councils and the definition of Chalcedon (451) stands as a valid definition based on the true teaching of Scripture.[5]

What does this have to do with Bill Johnson and kenosis? If Jesus’ divinity can be laid aside then it was never true divinity. Deity is not an attribute that comes and goes. It is or it is not. If lost and then regained it is contingent, and if contingent, then not true divinity. Anything less leads to every form of heresy, cult, and New Age teaching. If divinity can be gained, then created man can possibly attain it. The Bible denies this. Furthermore, if divinity can be laid aside it is not divinity. R C Sproul explains:

If God laid aside one of his attributes, the immutable undergoes a mutation, the infinite suddenly stops being infinite; it would be the end of the universe. God cannot stop being God and still be God. So we can’t talk properly of God laying aside his deity to take humanity upon himself.[6]

If Jesus laid aside divinity, that would be proof that He never had true divinity. Thus Johnson’s doctrine is a de facto denial of the deity of Christ. Christological heresy is heresy. Period. So what does Philippians 2:7 imply that Jesus did empty Himself of? The answer is not divinity, which is eternal and cannot be compromised, but divine prerogatives. Paul’s point was about Christ’s humility that we should emulate, not His ontological status as God. Sproul explains:

I think the context of Philippians 2 makes it very clear that what he emptied himself of was not his deity, not his divine attributes, but his prerogatives — his glory and his privileges. He willingly cloaked his glory under the veil of this human nature that he took upon himself. It’s not that the divine nature stops being divine in order to become human. In the Transfiguration, for example (Matthew 17:1-13), we see the invisible divine nature break through and become visible, and Jesus is transfigured before the eyes of his disciples.[7]

The true doctrine of Christ is that in the Incarnation He took upon Himself humanity, not that he laid aside deity. The Incarnate Christ is fully human and fully God. In theology this is called the hypostatic union. Johnson claims that the Holy Spirit has led him “off the map.” I agree that Johnson is indeed “off the map.” The “map” for Christians is Holy Spirit-inspired Scripture. Our doctrine is to come from the Bible (2Timothy 3:16). The “map” draws out boundaries and when we cross those boundaries we are not merely lost, we are in ungodly error. The Holy Spirit does not lead God’s people off the map that He has given us, once for all.

So Johnson gives us a double whammy. First, he warns against scholarship and scholarly Bible study under pains of becoming spiritually dead. Then he introduces heresy that his followers have no means to discern because they have been scared away from the necessary tools for discernment. This is how entire movements depart from Christian orthodoxy and are plunged into theological ruin. The kenosis heresy is a damnable heresy and is as egregious as the Arian heresy, which still has life in modern times through the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Christological heresy is not an aid to the working of the Holy Spirit as Johnson claims, but it grieves the Holy Spirit.

Likely Johnson’s thousands of followers have no idea they are being led into rank heresy. They come for the signs and wonders in the hope that they will do greater miracles than Jesus. They are mesmerized by the claims that they shall be part of an Elijah generation that will defeat evil on the earth before the return of Christ. Very few will ever realize that the doctrine of Christ they are taught departs from the teaching of the church that has been embraced by nearly every Christian group for centuries.

It could be argued that the definition of Chalcedon is unbiblical (which it is not). But the burden of proof lies with those who would deny it. One cannot lightly reject the doctrine of Christ that has held sway for centuries. To do so would require extensive theological work and Biblical argument designed to persuade conservative Christian scholars. One cannot go into such an undertaking lightly. But Johnson does, glibly denying the deity of Christ for no better reason than he thinks that doing so will likely make it easier for Christians to think they can do greater miracles than Jesus. He doesn’t offer any scholarly proof that his kenosis doctrine is Biblical. Why should anyone take him seriously? Sadly, thousands do.

Signs and Wonders Theory

More important than anything else, for Johnson and followers, is the presence of signs and wonders—the more the better. The reason for this is that they are a necessary prerequisite for the hoped for end-time revival that will be initiated by an “Elijah generation” of elite Christians. Says Johnson, “Our mandate is simple: raise up a generation that can openly display the raw power of God” (Johnson 27, 28). Having such power is what he calls an “authentic gospel” because “powerlessness is inexcusable” (Johnson: 27). We are the problem, he claims, because God wants to do miracles but He cannot because of our bad thinking. Miracles await the coming of a generation of enlightened ones who will know the secret. Thus we have a New Age definition of miracles.[8]

To show that in Johnson’s theology the supernatural is something that can be learned and mastered by man (thus robbing it of valid supernatural status), we see that he has a school of the supernatural. It is called the Bethel School of Supernatural Ministry.[9] Once the supernatural can be mastered by learnable and reproducible processes, it is no longer supernatural, but natural. Thus in the New Age we have “A Course in Miracles.” In such thinking, there is nothing truly supernatural because all of nature is infused with God (panentheism). Given his distaste for scholarship, Johnson likely does not see the implications of his “school of the supernatural.”

If there is a process to be learned or a religious state to be achieved whereby miracles can be produced by humans at will, such miracles become natural events. Johnson claims, “The purpose of the anointing is to make the supernatural natural” (Johnson 133). This sounds like the opening of a whole new world, but it involves bringing the concept of “supernatural” into a panentheistic world view rather than a Biblical one. The Biblical concept of supernatural requires a theistic view of the universe in which the transcendent God of the Bible created the world out of nothing, but stays involved in His creation providentially. God can and does intervene in human affairs. The work of Christ is truly supernatural. Christ was not some enlightened One who learned and shared secrets that would work for anyone else with the same level of enlightenment. That view of Christ is that of the New Age. Christ’s works were truly supernatural because the Creator of the universe was on the scene of history and proved His true identity.

If the supernatural becomes “natural,” as Johnson claims, through those who have a superior anointing, then the uniqueness of Christ is compromised. The supernatural was always there to be accessed by those with special experiences and insights, thus it is not truly supernatural, but part of nature. Miracles, in such a worldview, are not miracles from a Biblical perspective.

When Paul spoke of power in relationship to the gospel, he spoke of the power of God to save Jew and gentile through the cross: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16). Paul uses the term “power” the same way in 1Corinthians: “For the word of the cross is to those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Corinthians 1:18). God’s power through the cross saves us from God’s wrath against sin. False teachers can perform signs and wonders but they have no true power as Paul speaks of it. The arrogant teachers who came to Corinth had words of knowledge (gnosis) and wisdom (sophia) but lacked the power of God that saves lost sinners (1 Corinthians 4:19, 20).

What is truly lost on Johnson and his followers is that the Bible predicts false signs and wonders at the end of the age. There is no prediction in Scripture that an invasion of true miracles from God will happen at the very end. For example Jesus warns: “For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect” (Matthew 24:24). “Christs” are literal “anointed ones.” There will be those who claim to be anointed in some special way that will do great signs and wonders. They are false. Antichrist (whose name and role is based on the concept of “anointed”) will do great signs and wonders (2 Thessalonians 2:9). Paul also predicts end time deception in 2 Timothy chapter 3.

Johnson brushes the possibility of such deception aside by calling these signs “counterfeits” (Johnson 110). False signs and wonders as warned against in the Bible are not sleight-of-hand magic tricks, but real signs that point to a false message. Thus the discerning of spirits concerns objectively evaluating teaching (1 John 4:1-5) not subjectively evaluating apparent miracles. A psychic healing might be a real healing, but it is not from God. It is known to be false by the false teaching of the healer. If such a false teacher produced a real, verified healing, the teaching and teacher would still be false.

By combining signs and wonders with a false Christology that denies the deity of Christ, Johnson has placed his followers in the center of end time deception. Now rather than the one “Anointed One” (Jesus Christ who is unique), there are many “anointed ones” who supposedly can do greater miracles than Jesus. This situation is described in the Bible: “Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have arisen; from this we know that it is the last hour” (1 John 2:18). “Antichrists” as understood from the Greek, are substitute “anointed ones.” In the Bible, all Christians are equally “anointed” by God, and only Jesus specially anointed, i.e., the Messiah.[10] An elite group of specially anointed ones who comprise the “Elijah generation” as taught in Bill Johnson’s Latter Rain theology would qualify as antichrists.

A related question is whether or not Johnson and company are actually doing greater miracles than Jesus. In Luke 8, Jesus is shown to have calmed the sea, delivered the most demonized man imaginable, healed the sick, and raised the dead. Luke’s point is that Jesus has power over nature, Satan, sickness and even death. Thus Jesus is Lord of the universe, and His claims are true. Do any of Johnson’s Elijah generation elite display greater power and authority than Jesus did in Luke 8? He lists a number of typical manifestations in a section he entitles, “When God Colors Outside the Lines.” They include laughter, gold dust appearing from nowhere, oil appearing from nowhere, wind in a closed room, a cloud appearing, fragrance smelled, gems appearing, and feathers falling in meetings (Johnson: 141). Most of these have no precedence in Scripture, and none of them is as profound as the Messianic signs of Luke 8.

There is a certain naiveté that accompanies those who follow signs and wonders theory. We once had a regular pastors meeting. At one of these a pastor attended who had just come from witnessing the so-called “Toronto Blessing” (the laughing revival as it was called). He recounted how he was standing in a food line and one of the attendees began gobbling like a turkey, strutting around, and using his elbows as turkey wings. The pastor concluded that God was at work. There is nothing bizarre enough to the point that true signs and wonders believers will question it. Signs and wonders that accompany a false Christology such as that of Bill Johnson do not thereby prove the existence of a great end-time revival. Rather, they prove the existence of end-time deception as predicted in the Bible.

Dominion Theology

Johnson’s theology contains a blend of many problematic movements of our day. One of them is the dominion teaching, popular in the Word of Faith movement. The idea is that Satan was able to wrest the earth, and authority over it, from Adam and Eve, leaving God on the outside having to figure out a way to get it back. His plan was for Jesus to come and take it back from Satan (which is what Word of Faith teachers say happened in hell during Jesus’ supposed stay there—to wrestle with Satan as a man, and not God). Jesus then, according to theory, delegated to the church the job of taking control of the earth back from Satan and putting it under the church.

Johnson teaches “All that Adam owned, including the title deed to the planet with its corresponding position of rule, became part of the devil’s spoil” (Johnson: 31). Like others of his ilk, Johnson uses Satan’s offer of the kingdoms during Jesus’ temptation as proof that Satan, not God, had the “keys of authority” to the earth (Johnson: 32). Jesus got them back and gave them to the church (Johnson 32). Proof that we have regained the dominion that Adam supposedly lost is to be found in achieving the attributes promoted by Word of Faith teachers: “In Adam and Eve’s commission to subdue the earth, they were without sickness, poverty, and sin. Now that we are restored to His original purpose, should we expect anything less?” (Johnson: 33).

Johnson interprets the Lord’s Prayer, which is primarily a prayer for the return on Christ, in terms of his “kingdom now” theology: “This is the primary purpose for all prayer—if it exists in heaven, it is to be loosed on earth” (Johnson: 59). This means that if we do not have problem free lives, we are lacking faith, praying wrongly, or failing to understand our role as having dominion. Johnson explains: “Such an invasion causes the circumstances here to line up with heaven” (Johnson: 59). This invasion is in the title of his book.

Johnson’s over-realized eschatology sees the sensibilities of many Christians, informed as they are from the Bible, to be a problem that will stop revival: “The second greatest reason for revival’s end [behind quenching the spirit interpreted as any questioning of bizarre manifestations] is when the Church begins to look for the return of the Lord instead of pursuing a greater breakthrough in the Great Commission (Johnson: 161). Earlier Johnson had interpreted the Great Commission in terms of his dominion theology (Johnson: 32). Those who correctly understand the Lord’s Prayer become the problem people who stop revival. Longing for the Lord’s return is discouraged. Eschatology of the soon return of Christ is replaced with eschatology of dominion, kingdom now, that sees the concept “maranatha” as a threat to revival.

A Deluge of Error

The rejection of scholarship and careful exegesis, in Johnson’s case, leads where it always does: to diverse theological errors. There are many that would take too long to cover in detail but need to be addressed. I shall do so briefly in this section.

Gnosticism

Gnosticism was an ancient heresy that claimed that the material realm was evil and the spiritual realm good. Johnson states, “Faith is the key to discovering the superior nature of the invisible realm” (Johnson: 43). The truth is that both realms, visible and invisible contain both good and evil. Both are created by God, and neither is innately superior. When the Bible speaks of things not seen, it includes things like the fulfillment of future promises and is not limited to ontological “realms,” such as material and spiritual. Johnson claims that there is an unlocked potential for seeing into the supposedly superior spirit realm: “Many of us have thought that the ability to see into the spiritual realm is more the result of a special gift than an unused potential of everyone” (Johnson 43). He misuses Hebrews 11:1 to teach his Gnostic understanding of realms: “The invisible is superior to the natural . . . Because the invisible is superior to the natural, faith is anchored in the unseen” (Johnson 45). But in Hebrews 11, what was unseen to the patriarchs was the future fulfillment of the promises of God, not just the heavenly realities (though those are included). There is much evil in the unseen world, so Johnson’s Gnostic categories are not what the Biblical authors had in mind.

Elitism

The Bible promotes the necessity that every member of the body of Christ is seen as important and essential, whatever their gifts may be (1Corinthians 12:14 – 25). But Johnson repeatedly speaks of an elite group of Christians that shall be greater than all other groups in church history. Of course those will be the ones associated with his movement and others who embrace the Latter Rain heresy. (International House Of Prayer in Kansas City is another example). For example: “Much of the opposition to revival comes from soul-driven Christians. The apostle Paul calls them carnal” (Johnson: 47). He goes on to claim that the spirit (not capitalized in translation, signifying the human spirit) influencing the mind produces true learning. His categories are reminiscent of Watchman Nee, whose false teachings harmed me early in my Christian life. Paul does not teach that the soul is problematic and the human spirit good. The revivalists that have true enlightenment by following their spirits rather than souls, are of course those who listen to Johnson and other such teachers. They are the elite ones, and the rest of us are left trying to understand the Bible. It is the few who have the real glory: “He lives in all believers, but the glory of His presence comes to rest on only a few” (Johnson: 149). The enlightened ones are part of the “Elijah generation” (New Order of the Latter Rain terminology) “But there will be no contest when such counterfeits go up against this Elijah generation that becomes clothed with heaven’s power on the Mount Carmel of human reasoning” (Johnson: 150). His attack on reason is unabated.

Fideism

Many of these errors are closely related. Fideism is the belief that faith operates independent of reason and needs no rational proof for its validity. Fideism is shown in this statement: “When we learn to learn that way [by faith], we open ourselves up to grow in true faith because faith does not require understanding to function” (Johnson: 47). Again, he is misusing concepts from Hebrews 11. For example, Abraham had to understand Gods promises to have faith in them. Faith is not disconnected from rational content in the Scripture as it is in Johnson’s fideistic theology.

Pietism

Johnson shows the same pietistic tendencies as many in today’s evangelical world of mysticism. He warns about the lack of “power encounters” and fear of experiences that might lead us away from scripture. He then states: “But it is illegitimate to allow fear to keep us from pursuing a deeper experience with God!” (Johnson: 92). He warns: “God is bigger than His book” (Johnson: 92). The obvious implication is that we must have extra-biblical experiences unless we live as lesser Christians ruled by fear. Pietists always look to higher order experiences to validate their Christian experience.[11]

Conclusion

The invasion of heaven promoted by When Heaven Invades Earth is in reality an invasion of theological error. Johnson says there is no sickness or poverty in heaven, which is true. However, there is also no falsehood or error in heaven. Johnson’s potpourri of error is astounding in is breadth. His is a classic case of zeal for a cause divorced from theological truth. In his thinking, zeal for signs and wonders (and the resultant end-time revival) baptize any theological errors, including his heretical Christology.

My conclusion is not overly harsh: that this movement is not really from heaven, as it is claimed to be. Many young people are targeted and deceived by it. Powerful experiences in a Christian context form a potent elixir that dulls ones theological senses. I know because when I was young, I was drawn into a similar movement based on experiences that I allowed to trump sound Biblical exegesis. Thankfully God saved me out of that and led me, through Scripture, to the true gospel. May many who are in the clutches of this false revivalism be spared as I was.

End Notes:

[1] Bill Johnson, When Heaven Invades Earth – A Practical Guide to a Life of Miracles, (Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image, 2003) 150. All subsequent citations from this book will be bracketed within my text.

[2] See Critical Issues Commentary issue 103 for a discussion of latter day apostles, the Latter Rain movement and their false understanding of an “Elijah Company” that will appear to defeat God’s enemies.

[3] See Critical Issues Commentary issue 16 for a full discussion of 2 Corinthians 3:6 and its common misuse in the church.

[4] See Critical Issues Commentary issue 65 for contextual and exegetical analysis that disproves this misinterpretation of John 14:12.

[5] This definition can be read here [pdf].

[6] R C Sproul: How Could Jesus be Both Divine and Human.

[7] Ibid.

[8] See Critical Issues Commentary issue 23, “New Age Miracles.”

[9] See http://www.ibethel.org/site/school-of-ministry.

[10] See Critical Issues Commentary issue 63, “Antichrists and The Antichrist.”

[11] See Critical Issues Commentary Issue 101, “How Pietism Deceives Christians.”

The occult is becoming increasingly commonplace in our society today, and Marcia Montenegro took some time to talk about it. Before Marcia became a Christian, she was a professional astrologer, and engaged in many other occult practices as well. She is currently a full-time missionary with Fellowship International Mission, and has her own ministry called Christian Answers for the New Age.

NOTE: Marcia and I are discussing a follow-up discussion on this topic. There is much she would have liked to cover, but couldn’t get to for lack of time. We will likely revisit this in late 2012. If you have any questions you’d like to ask for the follow-up, please feel free to ask them in the comments, via email, or via social media.

Discussion Outline

• Marcia begins with her experience in the New Age and the Occult
  • Involved in: Zen Buddhism, the New Age, and the Occult
  • She was a professional astrologer for over eight years, and taught astrology for five. She was also the chair of the board of astrology examiners in Atlanta, Georgia, and president of the astrological society in Atlanta.
  • She used Tarot Cards, took a course in numerology, and learned palm reading; with friends who were into many of the same things, as well as psychics and other occult practices.
  • Many of her friends and clients were also into Wicca, Witchcraft, and Neo-Paganism.
  • She now runs Christian Answers for the New Age and is a full time missionary with Fellowship International Missions, based in Allentown, PA
• While the New Age and the Occult have a lot of similarities, and overlap in many ways, I asked Marcia to describe some of the differences between them.
  • The New Age is more transcendent, and looks ahead to the future. It is based on the idea of evolving through reincarnation.
  • The Occult is much more focused on the here-and-now.
  • The New Age is more of a worldview, whereas the Occult is more of a set of practices.
• Marcia divides the Occult into three main categories: Divination, Spirit contact, and Sorcery/Magic (a.k.a. Magick).
• Divination:
  • Many different words used in Bible translations to try to describe the Hebrew terms, including: sorcery, sooth-saying, divination, witchcraft, augury, and others.
  • Divination is described as reading hidden meaning into patterns, things in nature, or the supernatural.
    • Numerology – meaning in numbers
    • Meaning from images – Tarot cards
    • Meaning from the lines on your hand – Palmistry or Palm reading.
    • Meaning from the positions of the planets – Astrology
    • More subtle forms, such as swinging a pendulum to derive answers to questions or problems.
  • Marcia sees the magic 8-ball as not quite divination, but dangerous because it can be a tool to open people up to divination.
  • She does not see tossing a coin as a form of divination. Her example was deciding to go to an Italian or Mexican restaurant, and flipping a coin to determine which to eat at.
  • Casting lots was not an occultic form of divination because it was done at the direction of the Lord. Marcia observes that lots where never used after the giving of the Holy Spirit in Acts.
  • Psychic get information via a supernatural means, so Marcia puts them in the category of divination, though there is some overlap with Spirit Contact.
  • Words ending in mancy are typically forms of divination: necromancy (consulting the dead), tasseomancy (tea-leaf reading), arithmancy (numerology), geomancy (divining geological forms, used in Feng Shui)
• Spirit Contact:
  • Some occult practices overlap between divination and spirit contact, such as necromancy, psychics, etc.
  • Spirit guides.
  • Channeling, Mediating (mediums), Ouija boards, and simply talking to spirits are all methods of engaging in spirit contact.
  • There are many spiritualist “churches” that engage in occult practices.
  • The Ouija board was designed as a means to spirit contact, not as a game.
• Sorcery/Magic (Magick)
  • The attempt to alter reality, be it present or future.
  • Incantations, rituals, magical tools, and casting spells are forms of sorcery.
  • Healing is very common in sorcery. Using sorcery to heal is not a good thing.
    • A Shaman is a Witchdoctor.
• There are many aspects of the occult that are manifested and glamorized in popular culture.
  • Astrology/horoscopes.
  • TV/Movies:
    • Contact with the dead
      • Medium
      • Ghost Whisperer
      • Hereafter
      • Silvia Brown on Montel Williams
      • Jonathan Edwards in Crossover
      • Harry Potter books & movies
  • Feng Shui
    • A form of geomancy that is popular in construction and real estate.
    • Comes from Daoism (Chinese mysticism)
    • It’s not just about eliminating clutter.
• Understanding the occult is important for Christians.
  • It’s a form of deception.
  • It’s a way to draw people from Christ.
  • It desensitizes people to evil.
• Marcia also discusses the difference between fantasy and occult in entertainment.
  • Fantasy does not glamorize the occult.
    • Lord of the Rings
    • Awake (NBC) (as of the first few episodes)

Scriptures Referenced

• Deuteronomy 18:10-12
• 1 Samuel 15:23
• Ezekiel 21:21
• Acts 1:26

Additional Resources

• Christian Answers for the New Age – Marcia’s website
• SpellBound: The Paranormal Seduction of Today’s Kids – Marcia’s book (Amazon)
• On Global Wizardry: Techniques of Pagan Spirituality and a Christian Response – Peter Jones ed. (Amazon)
• The Kingdom of the Occult – Walter Martin (Amazon)
• New Age and Occult articles – Ankerberg Theological Research Institute

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and/or Google+!

[Update April 2, 2012: The article that this episode is based on is now available]

An Outline of the Discussion

• Much of what we discussed revolves around a book by Bill Johnson, a pastor in Redding, California, called “When Heaven Invades Earth.” The book details formulas for performing miracles. Bob contends that once a miracle becomes the outcome of a prescribed formula, it is no longer a miracle, but a natural phenomenon.
• Jesus as portrayed as a person that could only do miracles in His Earthly ministry because He learned all of the proper formulas.
• A heretical view of Jesus is taught that says that He laid aside His divinity while on Earth. This is heretical because divinity, by definition, is not a quality that can be laid aside. If ever there was a time that Jesus was not divine, He never was divine to begin with, nor ever will be.
• Bill Johnson professes a teaching that is shared with IHOP (International House of Prayer) of an “Elijah Generation”, or an elite group of Christians that shows up at the end of the age, is greater than any other group of Christians in history, and do greater miracles than Jesus. Such teaching has its roots in the long-discredited Latter Rain movement that began in the 1940s.
• The ancient heresy of Kenosis is taught. Kenosis doctrine is based on a misinterpretation of Philippians 2, and teaches that Jesus “emptied Himself of diety”, and was merely a man during His Earthly ministry.
  • Deity cannot be gained, lost, laid down, or set aside. It either is or it isn’t.
  • Deity is defined as: non-contingent eternal existence.
• Johnson, et. al. operate under an anti-scholastic bias that downplays the importance of scripture in favor of spiritual experience. He states “The letter kills, but the spirit gives life”.
• The promotion of spiritual experience and special knowledge not found in scripture is a form of gnosticism, a heresy that dates back to the days of the Apostle Paul.
• The letter kills in that the letter is the law, and the law kills in that it points to Christ, but it is Christ that saves, not the law. The law is a schoolmaster as Paul says in Galatians 3:24
• Paul warned about gnosticism in his Corinthian letters, Colossians, and elsewhere.
• Gnosis is the Greek word for knowledge, and gnosticism refers to a special knowledge, not found in scriptures, nor available to all Christians.
• Gnosticism leads to a strange form of panentheistic worldview.
• Bob likes to say that “There are no extraordinary Christians, but being an ordinary Christian is an extraordinary thing.”
• The teaching that there are “elite” Christians parallels the Catholic teaching of super-irrigation, or works that go above an beyond that which is required by ordinary Christians.



• “Those who feel safe because of their intellectual grasp of Scriptures enjoy a false sense of security. None of us has a full grasp of Scripture, but we all have the Holy Spirit. He is our common denominator who will always lead us into truth. But to follow Him, we must be willing to follow off the map—to go beyond what we know.” (Johnson: 76)
• Docetism is a heresy that says that Christ only seemed to have a body.
• People who follow false teaching, especially of the sort that Bill Johnson teaches, often decry the “cognitive” as antithetical to “walking in the spirit”. However, they don’t realize that they make their own decisions and form their own beliefs based on a “cognitive” understanding of the world that they like. They merely use a different “cognitive” standard than that of Bible-believing Christians. Gnosticism uses a subjective cognitive standard, as opposed to the objective standard of the Scriptures.
• Johnson claims that reaction to error often leads to more error. This stands in contrast to much of the New Testament in which Paul, and other New Testament writers, wrote epistles meant to correct error (Galatians, Colossians, Hebrews, etc.)
• We don’t question a false teacher’s motives or sincerity, we question their doctrine in light of Scripture.
• Elitism is a heretical view that some Christians are more spiritual than others, and somehow better Christians.
• Pietism is a reaction to “dead orthodoxy,” and has a heavy emphasis on experience.
• Fideism teaches faith for the sake of faith. It de-emphasizes the object of faith and replaces it with faith itself.
• Panentheism is often mistakenly adopted by Christians who misunderstand omnipresence. It teaches that God is in everything (as opposed to Pantheism that teaches that God is everything and everything is God.)
• The Emergent Church movement is largely panentheistic, and they don’t necessarily deny it.
• Bill Johnson’s similarities to IHOP (International House of Prayer) in Kansas City include:
  • Common roots in Latter Rain theology
  • Both target young people
  • Elitism – The “Elijah Generation”
  • Manifested Sons of God
  • Bridal paradigm. A sensual relationship between Christ and believers.
  • “Deeper Life.” A gnostic idea that there is a secret that will lead you to a deeper life with Christ.
• Bill Johnson’s connection to IHOP appears to be informal, though he has spoken at many conferences held by IHOP.

Scripture References

• Hebrews 10:7
• John 5:39
• 2 Corinthians 3:6
• John 5:46
• Galatians 3:24
• Acts 17:11
• 1 John 4:1-5

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and/or Google+!

For this month’s episode, I interviewed Alan Shlemon of Stand to Reason on the subject of Islam. Alan trains Christians to persuasively share their convictions on various cultural issues, as well as share the Gospel with Muslims in a gracious, yet persuasive manner, as Stand to Reason is known for.

Our conversation was broken into two main parts. In the first part, Alan gives an overview of what Islam is, what Muslims believe, and compares and contrasts Islam and Christianity. In the second part, Alan explains how he goes about engaging Muslims in a thoughtful discussion on spiritual issues, and answers their most common objection: that the Bible cannot be trusted because it has been corrupted.

An Outline of the Discussion

Alan’s Background

• Alan is ethnically Assyrian. his family is originally from Baghdad, and he still has family there. His family is, like most Assyrians, historically Christian, but being from the Middle-East his family has a lot of experience and understanding of Islam and Muslim culture.
• Alan’s understanding of Islam comes mostly through research and study that he has done on his own as a staff member at Stand to Reason.

Explaining Islam

• Islam has Five Pillars (required behaviors) and Five Articles of Faith (required beliefs.)
• The Five Articles of Faith are as follows:
  • The unity of God. God/Allah is Unitarian, as opposed to Trinitarian. This is the most fundamental of the beliefs of Islam, and to reject it is to commit the most grievous of sins, which they call the sin of shirk.
  • Belief in God’s Angels. Similar to Christianity’s views, that there are angels. However, Islam teaches that angels do not have free will. They also believe in angel-like beings called Jinn, which are similar to the Christian understanding of demons. Jinn are mischievous beings that do have free will. Satan is a Jinn.
  • Belief in God’s prophets. The belief that God has sent prophets to mankind. Examples of prophets include: Adam, Noah, Moses, David, Jesus, and Mohammad.
  • Belief in God’s Books. Islam teaches that there are four holy books written by God/Allah. These include: The Torah, the Psalms, the Gospel, and the Quran.
  • Belief in the Final Judgment. At the end of time, all people will be resurrected and judged based on good deeds and bad. All of our good deeds and bad deeds will be put on a scale and if the good outweighs the bad, we will enter Heaven/Paradise. If the bad outweigh the good, we enter Hell. This eliminates the possibility of assurance of salvation, since we can’t possibly know how the scales will tip. The only exception is that death in jihad (holy war) dying for the cause of Allah guarantees salvation.
• The five Pillars are as follows:
  • Reciting the Creed. The creed says “There is no god but Allah, and Mohammad is his messenger.” Saying this creed, and believing it sincerely makes one a Muslim.
  • Daily Prayer. Muslims pray five times every day.
  • The Fast of Ramadan. A month-long fast in which Muslims abstain from food, drink, smoking, sex, etc. during the daylight hours, and is done to commemorate that Mohammad receive the Quran from Allah via the angel Gabriel over a 22 year period.
  • The Giving of Alms. Similar to the Judeo=Christian concept of tithing, though it is 2.5% rather than 10%, and the money goes toward serving the poor and needy.
  • Pilgrimage to Mecca. Muslims are required to travel to Mecca, Saudi Arabia and perform various rituals at least once in their life (more is better), though there are exceptions for those who cannot do so for physical or financial reasons.
• There are several sects of Islam, the two main ones being the Shia and the Sunni. The division arose after the death of Mohammad over who would be his successor. Sunnis believed that the successor should be elected, whereas the Shiites believed that the successor should be divinely appointed, as was Mohammad, and wished for the succession to follow the blood lines of Mohammad. Each of these two main sects sees the other as apostate.
• The succession determined the source of authority for theology.
• Muslims often name their children after successors to Mohammad, so often it’s easy to determine if they are Shia or Sunni based on their name.
• Alan sees two common misconception that Christians have of Islam, which he describes as two sides of the same coin. The first is that Christians often assume that, given Islam’s often violent nature, that all Muslims are violent people. This isn’t the case, most Muslims are peaceful people. The second misconception, which comes about from the observation that most Muslims are peaceful is that they then think that Islam is peaceful. As Alan says, Islam is not a peaceful religion hijacked by violent Muslims, for the most part it is a violent religion that is practiced by mostly peaceful people often unaware of what their religion really teaches.
• Many people believe that the God of Christianity and the god of Islam (Allah) are the same. They have many similarities, but significant differences as well.
  • Similarities include:
    • Both claim they are the one true god.
    • Both are transcendent, which is to say that they created the universe, but are separate from it.
    • Both are omnipotent and omniscient.
  • Differences include:
    • Yahweh is Trinitarian, whereas Allah is Unitarian.
    • Yahweh is immanent, which is to say that He enters into creation; Allah is not immanent.
    • Allah is unknown and it is not man’s job to know god, but only to obey him. Yahweh is both known and obeyed.
• Another way to answer the question is “do Christians and Muslims worship the same god?” Alan says no. Christians worship Jesus as God, but that is considered blasphemy by Muslims.
• Christianity teaches that we must not only worship the right God, but we must do so in the right manner, that is to say as He wishes to be worshiped.
• All false religions, be they psuedo-Christian cults or different religions entirely, teach a false view of the person and works of Jesus Christ. Islam teaches the following about Jesus:
  • He is a created being (not God the Creator).
  • He was appointed as a prophet.
  • He is not the son of God.
  • He is not the second person of the Trinity.
  • He did not die on the cross. It would be offensive for a prophet of Allah to die like a criminal.
  • He was not resurrected.
  • He could not and did not atone for our sins.
• Islam teaches things about Jesus that are surprising to many Christians. In fact, it says things that it doesn’t say of Muhammad, including:
  • That his birth was announced by angels.
  • He was born to the virgin Mary.
  • He was sinless.
  • He had the power to heal and raise the dead.
  • He was called the Messiah.
  • He was taken up by God to Heaven to be in His presence at the end of his life.
  • Shiites teach that Jesus will return at the end of the age to judge humanity.

Answering Muslim objections and Sharing the Gospel with them:

• Alan describes Stand to Reason’s approach to engaging with unbelievers in general by using questions to advance a conversation and make a point rather than making statements.
• Alan’s straightforward approach to engaging with Muslims is to share the Gospel with them just as he would with any other non-believer.
• The most common objection Muslims give is that the Bible has been corrupted, and so they cannot accept what it teaches about Jesus.
• Alan leverages the Muslim’s respect for the Quran by showing that it teaches the following:
  • God’s word cannot be changed or corrupted.
  • The Bible is the word of God.
  • Therefore: The Bible is trustworthy, and it is not true that it has been corrupted.
• Answering this objection typically leads to a healthier respect for Christians by Muslims.
• Muslims love to talk about religion, and tend to be people who are very easy to share your faith with.

Scripture References

Biblical:

• John 4:24
• James 2:19

Islamic:

• Surah 2:136
• Surah 4:136
• Surah 29:46
• Surah 10:94
• Surah 5:43 & 5:47-48

Additional Resources

• The Ambassador’s Guide to Islam – Alan Shlemon
• Answering Islam: The Crescent in Light of the Cross – Norm Geisler & Abdul Saleeb
• Engaging Islam – George Houssney

Video via tweet by Dr. James White, January 31, 2012:

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and/or Google+!

An Outline of the Discussion

• Ryan begins by giving his own theological background on the issue of tongues, being raised in an Evangelical Lutheran (ELCA) church that didn’t teach on the topic. As he began his Biblical studies, he didn’t have an opinion either way.
• The decision to study tongues came out of preparations for teaching a class at the church he pastors.
• Ryan sought to understand the passages regarding Tongues as they would have been understood by first century Christians, rather than from a 21st century America understanding.
• To understand the phenomena of tongues, Ryan begins at the beginning in Genesis with the creation of human languages at the Tower of Babel. (Genesis 11:6-9)
• When God called Abram/Abraham and established the Hebrew nation, the Hebrew language was established as the Holy Tongue, with which most of the Old Testament was written, and was the language that was used in ecclesiastical teaching.
• Isaiah predicted that God’s Word would one day go out in foreign languages (besides Hebrew): “Indeed, He will speak to this people Through stammering lips and a foreign tongue, He who said to them, “Here is rest, give rest to the weary,” And, “Here is repose,” but they would not listen.” – Isaiah 28:11-12
• Peter quotes Joel in regards to what happened in Acts at the time of Pentecost: “It will come about after this that I will pour out My Spirit on all mankind; And your sons and daughters will prophesy,Your old men will dream dreams,Your young men will see visions. Even on the male and female servants I will pour out My Spirit in those days.” – Joel 2:28-29
• Tongues are always accompanied by prophecy in scripture.
• The Jews began to lose Hebrew as their native tongue beginning with the Babylonian captivity.
• In the eastern portions of the Roman empire, including ancient Israel, the predominant languages were Greek and Aramaic. Latin was used in official, governmental capacity, and Hebrew was primarily used in ecclesiastical settings in a liturgical capacity, much like the Catholics used Latin up until Vatican II.
• The book of Acts begins with Christ telling His disciples that they will receive power from the Holy Spirit and will take the Gospel to all of Jerusalem, Judea and Sumaria, and to the uttermost parts of the Earth (Acts 1:8). This is the primary focus of the entire book of Acts.
• The first incidence of “tongue speaking” takes place at Pentecost, a feast in which all able-bodied Jews are in Jerusalem to celebrate. These Jews primarily spoke either Aramaic (eastern Jews) or Greek (Hellenized/western Jews).
• Greek words used in Acts are: laleo (speak), apothengomai (utterance), glossa (tongues), and dialoectos (native languages).
• The miraculous gift seems to be in the boldness of their speech.
• When we read the list of various nationalities present at Pentecost in Acts 2:8-11, it’s natural to assume that each nationality has its own lanquage, but in the Roman empire everyone spoke one of just a few languages.
• Mockers suggested that those who were speaking were drunk (in the morning). This is often used to suggest that they were babbling, at least from the point of view of those listening, and that they must have been speaking some heavenly language, since Peter responded that they were not drunk. Drunkenness doesn’t necessarily lead to babbling, especially mild drunkenness, but rather lowers inhibitions. Those speaking were thought to be drunk because they were speaking of the things of God in common languages, and were common men themselves, not priests, scribes, or Pharisees. It was thought that one would have to be drunk to be so bold.
• Over and over, the speeches given are with boldness.
• If what Ryan is saying is right: that the supernatural gifting is in the boldness, but not necessarily in the language spoken, it is hard to engage in an argument about cessationism.
• The focus of Acts is in the proclamation of the Gospel.

Please feel free to direct questions and feedback our way. We’ll be following up on this subject sometime in mid 2012, and would like to incorporate feedback in that discussion. You can do so via the comments sections (here, on Facebook, or Google+), via the feedback form, or even by old-fashioned snail-mail (see feedback form for address).

Scripture References

• Genesis 11:6-9
• Genesis 12
• Isaiah 28:11-12
• Joel 2:28-29
• Numbers 11:27-29
• John 19:19-20
• Acts 1:8
• Acts 2:3
• Acts 2:8-11
• Acts 2:12-21
• Acts 4:8-10, 13
• Acts 4:31
• Acts 10:44-46
• Acts 19:1-10

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and/or Google+!

For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. – 2 Corinthians 11:13

Sandy Simpson, of the Apologetics Coordination Team, joins me to discuss the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). Sandy runs Deception in the Church, an extensive library of resources on the NAR and related movements and organizations.

I would appreciate feedback, along with questions about this subject. Sandy has graciously agreed to the possibility of a follow-up interview, possibly late in 2012, and I would love to have listener questions to use in such an interview.

An Outline of the Discussion

• Sandy begins by describing his initial encounter with the New Apostolic Reformation while working as a missionary in Guam, which led him to investigate their movement.
• The NAR teaches that there are foundational Apostles today that are equal to, if not greater than, the original twelve Apostles of the first century.
• They teach that there is a transferrable impartation. The Holy Spirit can be imparted upon individuals by NAR “apostles”.
• Sandy sees links between NAR, Emergent, and “Church Growth”; all coming out of Fuller Theological Seminary.
• NAR puts together large-scale prayer meetings to lure in orthodox Christians to their methods and teachings.
• NAR and Word-of-Faith come from the same roots, and have many similarities.
• NAR seeks to take over the government, and Sandy asks what the difference is between “Christian Fascism” and “Islamic Fascism”?
• Sandy asserts that NAR denies some of the fundamental, core doctrines of Christianity. This places them within the definition of a cult movement. Core doctrines that they deny include: the Trinity; the divinity and personhood of Christ (hypostatic union); salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone; the supremacy of Scripture in all matters of faith and practice; the fact that Christ is going to return bodily to judge and rule the Earth (dominionism requires us to conquer the Earth before He returns).
• We discuss the prophetic element of NAR. The movement rarely references scripture, favoring instead “new revelation”. When they give prophesy over someone, they often just puff up the person they are supposedly prophesying over.
• “Slain in the Spirit” is a practice that is common in the NAR. It was picked up by William Branham on a trip to India, and is just a repackaged version of the Hindu practice of shakti-pat.
• Sandy explains the practice of diaprax, which is in use by various groups and forces hostile to Christianity. It pits a thesis against an anti-thesis. The two battle, eventually merging into a synthesis.
• Scandals and immoral behavior often follow false teachers.
• I ask Sandy to give his thoughts on a few of the players. Specifically I asked about Dutch Sheets, Rick Joyner, and Mike Bickel.
• NAR has a practice called “Prayer Walking” by which they supposedly cast out territorial demons.
• The NAR has many similarities to the ancient gnostics. Namely, they place heavy emphasis on special knowledge (new revelation), and attempts to create a “higher order” of Christianity/Spirituality.

Scripture References

• 1 Corinthians 15:8
• 2 Corinthians 11:12-15
• 1 Corinthians 3:10-11
• 2 Corinthians 13:5
• 1 Corinthians 15:2
• Matthew 7:1,15 – See my “Misapplied Scripture” article on this verse.

Additional Resources

• Sandy’s Website: Deception in the Church
• Sandy’s main page on NAR
• Sandy’s DVD series on NAR
• The “New Apostolic” church movement – Mike Oppenheimer
• The Roots and Fruits of the New Apostolic Reformation – Bob DeWaay
• What Is The New Apostolic Reformation? (And Why Should We Be Concerned About It?) – Christine Pack
• C. Peter Wagner – Herescope
• Slain in the Spirit – Let Us Reason

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, and/or Facebook!

“The sacred and inspired scriptures are sufficient to declare truth” – Athanasius

I am joined for the October episode of Echo Zoe Radio by Pastor Mike Abendroth of Bethlehem Bible Church in West Boylston, Massachusetts. Mike also hosts a radio show and Podcast called No Compromise Radio.

This episode marks the third installment in the series on the Five Solas of the Reformation, this one on Sola Scriptura. (For the first two, see Dr. James White: Sola Gratia & Sovereign Grace, and Phil Johnson: Sola Fide.)

An outline of our discussion is as follows:

• The history of Sola Scriptura. The doctrine arises from the debate over authority that took place early in the Reformation. The Reformers argued that the Scriptures alone carry the authority of God in all things relating to the Christian Faith.
  • Sola Scriptura is the formal principle of the Reformation. (Sola Fide being the material principle.)
  • Without Sola Scriptura, everything else falls.
  • In fact, if you listen carefully, you will notice that the real authority for Rome is neither Scripture nor tradition, but the church. What is Scripture and what does it teach? Only the church can tell you. What is tradition and does it teach? Only the church can tell you. As the Roman theologian John Eck said “The Scriptures are not authentic, except by the authority of the church.” As Pope Pius IX said at the time of the First Vatican Council in 1870, “I am tradition.” The overwhelming arrogance of such statement is staggering. But it confirms our claim that, for Rome, the only real authority is the church: sola ecclesia. – W. Robert Godfrey, Sola Scriptura, page 43
• The role of tradition in the Protestant Church.
  • The creeds and confessions (the London Baptist Confession of 1689, the Westminster Confession, The 39 Articles of the Anglical Faith, etc.) carry much weight in the Protestant Church, and summarize what we believe, but they are subordinate to Scripture.
• How do we define the Scripture?
  • The Roman Catholic Church will say that they selected the Canon of scripture, so they know what it contains, and what it lacks.
  • Jesus affirmed the Old Testament Canon by quoting from it, and taking it as it at face value. He never quoted from the Apocrypha, and neither do the New Testament writers.
  • The Apocrypha was added to the Catholic Bible approximately 30 years into the Reformation.
  • Mike recommends that people read the Apocrypha.
• How do we rightly interpret scriptures?
  • “You have Scripture for a master instead of me; from there you can learn whatever you would know” – John Chrysostom
  • Mike goes by what he calls the “blue-collar hermeneutic”, which is to say that blue-collar workers, then as well as now, were the primary audience, and the Bible was written such that they could understand it.
  • Scripture is illuminated to the believer by the Holy Spirit.
  • Men are gifted supernaturally with the gift of teaching to better understand the Scriptures.
  • Scriptures must be interpreted in light of authorial intent.
• We discussed the contemporary Protestant application of Sola Scriptura, and where Evangelicals diverge from the application of Sola Scriptura in the Church today.
  • When people begin to add internal machinations such as “God told me,” “God revealed to me,” “God gave me an impression,” “God gave me some intuition,” “God told me something and His Spirit testified to my spirit,” etc. they do the same thing Catholics do by putting their tradition at an equal standing, or above the Scriptures.
  • The idea that God talks to people today is a functional denial of Sola Scriptura.
  • Blackaby’s “Experiencing God,” Beth Moore’s Contemplative Prayer, etc. are other contemporary examples of a functional denial of Sola Scriptura
• How do the cults abuse Sola Scriptura?
  • They approach scriptures in one of two ways:
    • They use their own book, outside the Bible.
    • They use the Bible, but add to it with their own writings and/or teachings.

Scriptures Referenced

• 2 Timothy 3:16
• Acts 17:10-12
• 1 Thessalonians 5

Additional Resources

• Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible – R.C. Sproul, Joel Beeke, et. al. [Aff.]
• What Do We Mean by Sola Scriptura? – by Dr. W. Robert Godfrey
• Scripture Alone (Video)
  From R.C. Sproul’s teaching series What is Reformed Theology?
• The Sufficiency of Scripture – John MacArthur (two audio sermons)
• Why Evangelicals are Returning to Rome: The Abandonment of Sola Scriptura as a Formal Principle – Bob DeWaay
• Thoughts on the Sufficiency of Scripture: What It Does and Doesn’t Mean – John Piper
• Sola Scriptura – A.A. Hodge

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, and/or Facebook! Note that if you’ve followed Echo Zoe on Twitter in the past, you are probably now actually following my personal Twitter account, and will need to re-follow @EchoZoe for the blog and podcast.

An outline of this month’s episode is as follows*:

• How the topic came to be:
  • It’s totally a guy thing – From the Minneapolis Star Tribune, July 26, 2011
  • Dick’s Ad Agency experience
  • Dads in ads today
  • Husbands need help
• Our ideal in Christ – the perfect husband
  • Ephesians 5:18b-33
• Back to the beginning: The vows
  • Remember how this started? This thing called marriage?
    “to have and to hold,
    from this day forward,
    for better for worse,
    for richer for poorer,
    in sickness and in health,
    to love and to cherish, till death do us part.”
  • There are no “if” statements in there!
• She is a treasure, and she has to know it – Every Day!
  • Alistair Begg — “there is no more precious gift entrusted to a man than the treasure of his wife. She is to be admired and prized above all others. She is to have first place in his heart, mind, and affections. She is to be given special care and attention that leaves no doubt of her husband’s esteem”.
• Begg breaks it into four topics:
  • Ears for her alone
    • Communication
    • Face-to-face
    • Eye-to-eye
    • Listening and engaged – because you care
    • It’s an act of love
    • Helen Keller would have chosen hearing if given the opportunity to be able to hear or to see. Lack of sight kept her from things, whereas lack of hearing kept her from people.
  • Eyes for her alone
    • If she is a treasure—she must know that you have only ‘eyes for her alone’; Not the magazines, Not victoria’s secret, Not compared to other women, and Watch out for website porn!
    • James Dobson interviewed Ted Bundy, who stated that his psychotic behavior began with pornography.
  • Lips for her alone
    • Limit compliments about others
    • Never compare
    • Do not comment on appearances
    • Avoid flirting
  • Hands for her alone
    • Men often see casual touching as friendly, but women may see it differently
• Husbands are responsible to lead
  • Poor leadership causes conflicts
  • The husband’d authority to lead is God given, limited, and active
  • There are purposes to the husband’s leadership role:
    • To show how God leads His people
    • To develop humility and obedience in all concerned
    • To guide the family in righteousness
    • To give a sense of order and stability in the home
    • To provide what is needed for the family
    • To protect the family
    • To accomplish ministry for God more effectively
    • To help family be a good witness to the world
• Our idols often get in the way, that which is in our hearts: our thoughts, intentions, beliefs, desires, and attitudes
  • Security
  • Material things
  • Knowledge
  • Control
  • Wealth/job/work/success
  • Ourselves
  • Good health
  • Other gods, gods of the cults
  • Another person
• Share the household workload
• Protect your wife
  • Physically:
    • Provide a safe home
    • Be chivalrous
    • Take care of her car
    • Care for her personal health
  • Emotionally:
    • Protect her from the stress of overworking
    • Protect her from unnecessary worries regarding finances and your family’s well being
    • Protect her from the emotional strain of harmful people
  • Spiritually:
    • Make time to nourish her spiritually
    • Pray with her
    • Read the Bible and solid Christian books with her
    • Block out devotional time with her
    • Talk to her in everyday conversations about Christ & His promises of grace
    • Enjoy Christian music together
    • Get involved with a local church
  • To do this, you must know her!
• Guard your finances
  • Follow key financial principles:
    • Give to God first
    • Spend less than you earn
    • Develop a budget
    • Have emergency cash reserves
    • Don’t finance pleasure items
    • Protect your family’s finances with adequate life insurance
  • Be aware that most family debt comes from the husband
    • Women generally fear debt
    • Women take on debt in small, incremental amounts
    • Men take on large sums of debt at once
  • Develop a budget and keep it

*Note: This outline is adopted from Dick’s presentation notes, much of which was taken directly from his source materials: the books by Begg, McCall, and Scott that are listed below under “Additional Resources”.

Scriptures Referenced

• Ephesians 5:18b-33
• Psalm 119:2
• James 4:1-3

Additional Resources

• Dick’s Adult Sunday School class on the subject.
  • Loving Your Wife – Part 1 (mp3)
  • Loving Your Wife – Part 2 (mp3)
• Why Honoring My Wife Matters So Much – Brandon A. Cox
  (This came to me in the form of a tweet from another believer, which he sent out at roughly the same time we were interviewing. While I endorse this particular article, I don’t necessarily endorse other works by the author.)
• Lasting Love: How to Avoid Marital Failure – Alistair Begg
• Loving Your Wife as Christ Loves the Church – Larry E. McCall
• The Exemplary Husband: A Biblical Perspective – Stuart Scott
• The Fulfilled Family: God’s Design for Your Home – John MacArthur

Disclosure: links to book on Amazon are affiliate links. Echo Zoe Ministries receives a commission on sales generated via these links. Your purchase provides financial support for Echo Zoe.

Get Connected

Sign up for email notifications of new episodes of Echo Zoe Radio, and follow me on Twitter, and/or Facebook! Note that if you’ve followed Echo Zoe on Twitter in the past, you are probably now actually following my personal Twitter account, and will need to re-follow @EchoZoe for the blog and podcast.