Two Proofs About the Timing of the Rapture (Part 1 of 2)

 Let’s talk about End Times.  Despite many people’s wariness, the order of certain important future events can actually be determined. Not the date of rapture, for instance, but placing all Scripture in context, and using verses literally as much as possible, gives a way to figure out the order of some significant future events.  Each event then is a sign that tells you, “x” event comes next.  That helps you endure the trek toward the end. 

John, who wrote Revelation, has certified early in the first chapter that it is profitable to read it.  He wasn’t asserting it was a bag of frustrations, like most people do who avoid it:

Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near.

Didn’t he say to “keep those things within it?”  He must’ve expected that it makes sense to us to say,  “keep those things.”  True, the answers are not all in one place, meaning it takes a great acquaintance with Old and New Testaments to pull these things off, but Scripture sprinkled all around will hint and yield results. 

My initial portion of this study is based on these Scriptures:

1.     Daniel 9:27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation

2.    II Thessalonians 2:1-4 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him… for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, ⁴ who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

3.    Matthew 24:15-16, 22, 29-31 So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation… ¹⁶ then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountain …“If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive…“Immediately after the distress of those days ‘the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’ “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.  ³¹ And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

4.    Revelation 11:1-2 I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, “Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, with its worshipers. ² But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 month

What do we learn from these verses?  In Daniel, we learn that an unnamed man will make a Covenant with “many” for a time period of one ‘seven.’  In that same verse, we learn who the two parties are.  The receiving party for the Covenant were the Jews, because the terms ‘sacrifice and offering,’ and ‘temple’ are Jewish terms in the Bible. The grantor of the Covenant was the man of sin, since after a time he shows that he hates the Jews enough to stop their sacrifices.  Not only that; he also commits blasphemy against God, setting up an ‘abomination’ in the temple, which has to refer to an idol.  The idol is likely him, or a statue of his image, since we learn in II Thessalonians 2 above that he ‘sits as God in the temple of God.’ Truly sticking the middle finger at God. We can easily guess what that does for his future. 

We also can conclude that when he had the Jews agree to make a Covenant with him, he pretended to be their friend. Or else they would not have agreed to Covenant with him. The Covenant is agreed to for a term of time.  That length of time is a neutral word meaning ‘seven.’  It could never be for seven weeks; that would be meaningless.  It’s likely to be seven years, because Scripture makes a reference to a portion of it. In Revelation 11 above, the Gentiles have the run of the temple for 42 months, or 3-1/2 years. Consider further that ‘in the middle’ of the ‘seven,’ is the time that the man of sin breaks the Covenant and shows himself as their enemy by desecrating their treasured temple. He, being a Gentile, will be the guy that will lead the offense over the temple for the 42 months, from the middle of the ‘seven.’  So we see the Covenant has to be 7 years, but broken up into two halves; in the first half he pretends to be friends of Jews, but the second half starts with him desecrating the temple and blaspheming God—which goes on for 3-1/2 years.

Think about him starting out as a “friend” of the Jews. Then, all of a sudden, he desecrates their temple.  Would it not be fair to conclude that when he did that, he ‘revealed’ himself for what he really is, a hater of Jews?  I think so.  Then, looking at II Thessalonians 2 again, it definitely seems to be speaking of the Coming of the Lord for his saints, the one-time event called the rapture. Look again.  It CLEARLY says that that fabulous Day will not come until AFTER the man of sin is revealed. So II Thessalonians 2 says that Christians can’t get raptured until the man of sin is revealed, right?  But did we agree on the idea that that ‘revealing’ would be in the middle of the seven-year Covenant?  Therefore, if the seven years are ‘the Tribulation,’ such as most futurists affirm (look at the disasters Jesus prophesies in Matthew 24), the saints cannot leave the earth, or get raptured, until at least half of the tribulation is past. Thus there is no ‘pre’tribulation rapture, no rapture before the tribulation. 

Jesus helps out in Matthew 24 above. Verse 15 is right at the point where the abomination, or idol, being set up, halfway through the 7 years. He warned that the Jews hearing of that should get away as fast as they can—presumably the man of sin will begin killing them as fast as he can. He is no longer loyal to them.

Jesus broadens who the man of sin will want to kill by saying, “If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive.  Since that man is acting on behalf of Satan, and since Satan hates Jews and Christians (actually, he loves killing anybody), both Jews and Christians will be killed by the millions. Plus, there are wars (which given modern weapons will kill millions), as Matthew 24:6 says:

⁶ And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars

Truly, combining those elements would come close to “no one would survive.”

After all that martyring for the Lord, then Jesus mentions a cosmic disturbance, and THEN He details the rapture.  The Greek word ‘parousia,’ a rapture word, is used. As you can see in Matthew 24:31 above, He says angels will blow the trumpet and gather His children from the clouds, favorite rapture events. No one in his right mind can say that Matthew 24:29-31 is not the rapture.  It Is!

Let me further say that we cannot conclude that the rapture happens right after the man of sin is revealed, as you might argue a mid-tribulation rapture. No, if that were the case, Christians would rapture immediately after he’s revealed, and before the man of sin can kill more than a few of them.  No, the rapture is not immediately after the man of sin is revealed; it is after “the distress of those days,” as you read above.  Sadly, there has to be a period of time after the man of sin is revealed before the rapture, since the man of sin’s bloodletting goes on so long that it appears “no one would survive.” Further about the day of rapture is that the tribulation, designed as 7 years, is ‘cut short’ so as to have some Christians (and some saved Jews) still around lest he kills everyone.  So, probably short of 7 years a bit, comes a cosmic event (our rapture sign), and then the glorious Return of Our Lord.  This is His second coming, the rapture.

One more time, to summarize:  There are wars among nations. The man of sin makes a deceptive covenant to protect the Jews for 7 years. In the middle, or after 3-1/2 years of the 7, he reveals how he really feels by desecrating the temple and setting up an abomination to God. Some Jews flee.  But he kills Jews, and Christians, in massive numbers and in great violence, for over 3 years more.  When it seems loss of life among God’s beloved would be total, Christ comes to pick up His Bride, His real church, both dead and alive—the rapture. His Second Coming.

Those of you who argue in favor of pretribulation rapture, have to assume all sorts of weird things.  A big problem of yours: Jesus’ first coming (Advent) was at His birth, right?  You tell us that Jesus, in the future, comes from heaven to earth in a rapture before the tribulation, so I feel it’s safe to assume you’re saying that that would be His second coming.  Then, strangely, you have Him coming to earth yet again (you assert Matthew 24:15-31 is this event, which you call “Not a rapture,” despite how v. 31 looks). Supposedly He will take up just the Christians and Jews who got saved in the 7 years, and to perform Judgment.  I think it’s fair to assume you mean that’s His 3^rd coming?  What, you say?  No? He doesn’t come 3 times? Well, it sure looks like you’re doing 3 times.  So your biggest problem, to me at least, is to explain how that middle coming is not a coming.  Because we both know that the Bible clearly says He comes twice, not 3 times. It’s in the Apostles’ Creed as well:

…on the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty; from there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

That’s twice, right? 

Hopefully this introduction will help you to read next week, my summary of Joel Richardson’s sermon, the second goal of this blog. Please visit us to capture another proof, in the 10 virgins, of why the rapture is post-tribulation

The Thankfulness of Jesus

 

From John Henry Jowett

“And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened…” —Luke 24:30-31

I want to lead the meditation of my readers to one of the private habits of our Lord–His habit of thanksgiving. Everyone who knows the New Testament knows how the apostolic life abounded in praise. It runs like some singing river through all their changing days. And where did they learn the habit? They had got it from their Lord. The Master’s habit must have made a profound impression upon them. There must have been something very distinct and distinctive about it. We are told that the two disciples, journeying to Emmaus after the awful happenings in Jerusalem, recognized their risen Lord when He began to give thanks. “He was made known to them in the breaking of bread.” They knew Him by His gratitude and by the manner in which He expressed it. He was recognized by His praise. Let us recall two or three examples of this shining habit of our Lord.

“And Jesus took the loaves and gave thanks.” That is to say, He took commonplace, common bread, and associated it with God, and it was no longer a commonplace. He gave thanks, and in the recognition the common was revealed as the Divine. The ordinary meal became a sacrament with the Unseen Presence as real as we apprehend Him at the table of the Lord.

Now, a man who feels the divine relationships of bread will have a very transfigured road. The man whose praise is elicited by loaves will also be thankful for the cornfield, the sunshine, the dew, and the rain, for the reapers who gather the corn, for the touch of God in the labourer, and for the millstones which grind the corn that makes the bread. He who took the loaves and gave thanks would also give thanks for the common lily of the field, the daisy of His native land. Indeed, I think we may truly say that the Master’s habit of praise made every common thing radiant, and every wayside bush became aflame with God. He breathed His music of gratitude through the commonest reeds.

Now unless His disciples can do the same, unless we can touch and feel God in the commonplaces, He is going to be a very infrequent and unfamiliar Guest. For life is made up of very ordinary experiences. Now and again a novelty leaps into the way, but the customary tenor is rarely broken. It is the ordinary stars that shine upon us night after night; it is only occasionally that a comet comes our way. Look at some of the daily commonplaces–health, sleep, bread and butter, work, friendship, a few flowers by the wayside, the laughter of children, the ministry of song, the bright day, the cool night–if I do not perceive God in these things I have a very unhallowed and insignificant road. On the other hand, the man who discovers the Divine in a loaf of bread, and lifts his song of praise, has a wonderful world, for divinity will call to him on every side.

I do not know how we can better begin to cultivate the Master’s habit than by beginning with daily bread. Because if we begin with bread we cannot possibly end there. If we see one commonplace lit up with God, other commonplaces will begin to be illumined, until life will be like some city seen from a height by night, with all the common lamps in the common streets burning and shining with mystic flame. So let us begin with bread. But let us give thanks reverently, not with the sudden tap and the sharp, superficial sentence of a public dinner. Let us do it quietly, apprehendingly, with an effort to realize the presence of the awful, gracious, merciful God. And let us do it without formality, and seeking deliverance from the perilous opiate of words. Let us change our phraseology, let us sometimes bow in silence, and share the significant, worshipful stillness of the Friends.

Let us watch our Master again and listen to His praise. “I thank Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.” Our Master thanks the Father that spiritual secrets are not the perquisites of culture, that it is not by cleverness that we gain access into the Kingdom of Grace. He gives thanks that “these things” have not been made dependent upon academic knowledge, that they are not the prizes of the merely clever and acute, but that they are “revealed unto babes.”

Now, mark this: Out of six men only one may be clever, only one may have the advantage of knowledge, but all six may have the elementary simplicities of a child. All cannot be “knowing,” but all can be docile. All cannot be “cute,” but all can be humble. All cannot be “learned,” but all can be trustful. All cannot attain to mental sovereignty, but all may sit on thrones of sovereign love. And it is upon what all may have that our Lord fixes His eye; it is the common denominator for which He offers His praise. He takes bread, the commonplace of life, and gives thanks; He takes the child, the commonalty among men, and gives thanks. He offers praise for the commonplaces and the commonalties. He gives thanks for the things that are common to Erasmus and Billy Bray, to Spurgeon and John Jaspar, to Onesimus and St. Paul. To give thanks for commonplaces makes a transfigured world; to give thanks for commonalties makes a transfigured race. The one unveils the world as our Father’s house; the other unveils the race as our Father’s family.

Now, would it not be good to exercise ourselves in that form of praise? Would it not be wise to allow our minds to rove over the race of men irrespective of class and condition, and search out the commonalties and sing our song of praise? One thing such praise would do for us. It would preserve in our minds a vivid sense of the relative values of things. We should recognize that academic learning is not to be mentioned in comparison with loneliness, that carnal power has not the holy standing of meekness, and that mere eminence is not to be counted in the same world with love. What we may have in common with the poorest and most ignorant is our most precious possession.

Look at the Master once more. “Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up His eyes and said, Father, I thank Thee that Thou hast heard Me.” The Master gave thanks before the miracle was wrought, while the dead was still lying stiff and stark in the tomb. He offered praise not for the victory attained but for victory about to be won. His song was not for what He had received, but for what He was about to receive. He gave thanks before the dead marched forth, and before the mourners’ tears were dried. The doxology was sung at the beginning and not at the end.

“Father, I thank Thee . . .” “And when He had thus spoken He cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth, and he that was dead came forth.” The sound of praise thrilled through the call that awaked the dead.

Have we learned the habit? Is that the gracious order of our thought and labour? Sometimes we thank God for food we are about to receive. Do we thank God for power we are about to receive? Do we thank God for victory we are about to receive? Do I go forth in the morning to the warfare of the day with thanks for coming victory filling me with exhilaration and powerful hope? Did I rear my altar of praise before I took my sword? Is that how I go to the pulpit, thanking God for victories about to be won? Is that how I go to my class, quietly confident in the coming of my Lord? Is that how I take up the work of social reform? Is the song of victory in the air before I enter the field? Can I begin to sing the song of harvest home as I go forth to sow the seed? Am I sure of God, so sure that I can sing as soon as the struggle begins? That was the Master’s way. It was first the thanks and then the miracle.

And so Jesus assumed that His prayer was answered before He addressed the dead. And the significance of the act is this. To gratefully assume that prayers for power are answered opens the entire being to the full and gracious influence of the answer. Gratitude opens the channels of the whole life to the incoming of the Divine. There is no mood so receptive as praise; it fills the soul with the fulness of God, and the indwelling God works wonders, even to the raising of the dead.

I have given these three examples of the Master’s habit of thanksgiving. It is our great wisdom to follow in His train. All manner of things are promised to the grateful heart. Thanksgiving is to be a minister of vigilant sight; “watch in the same with thanksgiving.” Thanksgiving is to be a stimulant to a jaded and weary soul: “Be not drunken with wine, . . . but be ye thankful.” Thanksgiving is to be a beautifier of the regenerate soul. Ten lepers were purified, only one was beautified; “he returned to give thanks.” And, lastly, thanksgiving glorifies God. It is by the brightness of our praise that we offer the best witness to the goodness and power of our God.

 

Doctrines of Demons (Part 2)

 

Please read Part I to get our whole theme.  This is on Ron Matsen’s sermon “Doctrines of Demons.”  We are focusing on Satan’s desire to deceive us from seeing Jesus as God.  Now let’s look at specific antichrist cults, whose gospel was perfected by Satan.

Let’s look at the Gnostics first, since that deviation from orthodoxy happened first. Interestingly, the cult was birthed in a seminary In Alexandria, Egypt, during the days of the apostles. So Satan wasted no time introducing the first heresy.  They believed in another Jesus because their theology taught that material things must have been created by an inferior god, since they believed that no physical thing, no physical body, can be pure and holy.  Those two qualities belong to the spirit realm, which were created by a higher god. (They believed in multiple gods.) Therefore, Jesus, as a higher god, could not have physically visited the earth, because He was holy. So His “appearance” on earth had to be in a ghost form only. He was an aura. This took away the humanity of Jesus, which was important, as we saw in Hebrews in Part I. II John 7 also says:

For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

An antichrist, as the term “anti,” says, is one who believes a false Jesus—and also teaches it. Gnosticism was on Satan’s side, because it was against the real, physical Jesus in His incarnation.

Now let’s bring up the Muslim Jesus.  Keep in mind, if you will, that I am not writing arguments against every one of these “facts” they assert.  I assume that you know enough of the Scripture to know that there is no one named Issa in the Bible, that Jesus’s mother is Mary, etc.  The false stuff that these cults believe is usually because they have an alternative book to the Bible.  It might be the book of Mormon, the Quran, the Watchtower, etc.  Their books they consider higher than the Bible.  In the U.S., there was superb Bible training in the past.  How could anyone in this country believe these books were superior to the Bible?  Total disrespect for God’s Word will not do people well on Judgment Day.  We must read it to our kids, tell them that we love God’s Word, that He gave it to us, and it is the only Truth we can be sure of.  Sunday School doesn’t cut it.

Anyway, here are religious Muslim beliefs surrounding Jesus:  His true name, according to the Quran, is “Issa,” or “Isa.” They did not believe Jesus, or “Issa,” was God.  He was only a prophet, and his main two messages in coming to earth were: Surrender to Allah; and Muhammad is Coming.  His original disciples, they say, were Muslims.  Issa’s mother was Miriam, who was sister to Aaron and Moses. (They have a problem with time scale, since those Biblical characters lived over a thousand years earlier.)  Despite the clarity of Scripture and other writings and events as proof, Issa was not crucified and did not die. Those who say otherwise “lied.”  Instead of dying, he ascended to Allah. This bypasses His death on the cross; thus, it tries to wipe away His redemptive payment for our sin—but that was His main purpose in coming to earth. This idea was a serious heresy in doctrine.  At Resurrection, they say, Allah will be a witness against Jews and Christians, for believing that Issa died. Muhammad was God’s gift to Christians because he corrected their misunderstanding by writing the Quran.

This hyper-distortion guarantees that religious Muslims are unsaved, and almost all bound for hell if they die believing it.  But some Muslims are additionally a danger to Christians and Jews, because the Quran is extremely antisemitic, and their teaching on End Times is apocalyptic destruction.  We do not have the space to deal with it here; just be warned. These people have nothing to tell you.  Turn away from those who preach it.

Next, the Mormon Jesus.  Jesus was conceived, they say, through sexual intercourse between God the Father and Mary—yet they believe Mary was still a virgin at Jesus’ birth. They believe that Jesus was the literal brother of Lucifer (or Satan). How could anybody believe this?  Their leaders must never speak of this ‘brother of Satan’ openly in their weekly meetings, it is so audacious. Yet they have 6.5 million Mormons in the U.S., whose eternal destiny is on the edge of a cliff; if they accept it, and do not think of fighting against this..this chunder, their destiny is hell.  They have a mind; we all have a responsibility to know our church’s doctrine.  If God gives these people the light to see this as insolence against Him, and they are willing to walk away from it, they have a chance for heaven.  Ignorance doesn’t save you from hell’s grasp.  

Even worse, if possible, is their statement that Jesus earned His salvation while on earth—and offers His grace only to those who work hard enough. This is salvation through works, which is against Scripture. Also, it again takes away His sinless divinity (since He “had to earn His salvation”).  But the Bible clearly teaches that through His grace, our trust in Him and why He died on the cross is the key on the way to our salvation. 

They further claim that Jesus is finite, not infinite, saying He began His existence when He was born on earth. This denies an essential quality of God, that He is Eternal.  They have made Him immortal, as a higher angel. But Jesus is God; He is infinitely higher than the angels; He created them! And, they say, He had to submit to a moral law that “began before He did.” But Jesus gave a New Covenant, and was not under the Moses law, as they are implying.  He sets the laws; He is sovereign to it.  The purpose of that Law, for us, was to teach us that we, who have the nature of sin, can never be perfect enough to obtain heaven.  We were not created so we could brag that our obedience to law brought us to heaven. Note Hebrews 7:18—19:

For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, ¹⁹ for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.

The “better hope” is Jesus, through whom we have a shot at heaven, by true faith. We must admit that we are sinners; trusting that His redemption on the cross initially saves us.  After that, loving and obeying Him, our Savior, is possible with the Holy Spirit helping. If it doesn’t make us a radically different person, we missed what it is to be truly ‘saved.’

To continue Mormon dogma:  They say, beyond death, we will be just like Him. So we will be little gods?  Here is what the sources say: 

Mortals themselves may become gods and goddesses in the afterlife, be rulers of their own heavenly kingdoms, have spirit children, and increase in power and glory forever.

Jesus plainly taught that there will be no marriage in heaven. Matthew 22:30:

At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven

(Final note:  Mr. Matsen questions Christian acceptance of Mormons such as Glenn Beck and Mitt Romney, since they, as Mormons, believe in “another Jesus.” Do you want unsaved people, whose spiritual father (John 8:44) is still Satan (whether they know it or not), directing our thoughts, or our legislation? Take that time instead to read the Scripture. No lies, just the truth.

Next, the Jehovah Witness Jesus.  He was Michael the archangel before He came to earth. After resurrection, He was again Michael, leading angels in fighting with the dragon (Satan).  Again, we have the lack of faith of Jesus being an angel.  See prior paragraph.  They changed John 1:1; their Bible says “the Word (or Jesus) was a god.” The Bible actually reads “the Word was God.”)  By adding that little word, they are vague about Jesus being uniquely God.  That’s because they do not believe in the trinity.  Hard as that concept is to understand, there is no way we can understand everything about an infinite God. Scripture teaches it, so we believe it.  We trust God to tell the truth.  Here’s additional proof that they are lowering Jesus. From my source:   

They affirm that God—Jehovah—is the most high. Jesus Christ is God's agent, 

But an agent is not God. In explaining Jesus as “a god,” they say, “the Word was a powerful godlike one. Clearly Jesus is not Almighty God.” Unfortunately, this quote was another step backward—godlike isn’t God. The term Almighty God may suggest the Father’s unique trait to some people, but there is no question that Jesus has infinite power as well, so He deserves the title Almighty as well. 

Side note:  their fixation on a date for Christ’s return.  Charles Taze Russell, their founder, began this sect in the 1880’s.  He originally taught that Jesus would return to earth invisibly in 1914. They played this up, and got a huge boost in their membership. They shouldn’t have, since the Bible says that when He makes His Second Coming, we will all see Him. The sky will be dark, then suddenly a bright lightning, then He appears on a horse in the sky with His angels (Matthew 24:27ff).  As Judge of all the earth. What is “invisible” about that?  When the anticipated 1914 passed, they were forced to change that doctrine later.  They really, really wanted to set a date for Christ’s return to earth, so they kept setting dates, and when the date passed, they changed the doctrine yet again.  Here again, the Bible teaches that’s wrong. In Matthew 24:36, Jesus says:

But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only. 

BUT He tells us that there are signs so we will know that we are close, Matthew 24:32-33:

Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. ³³ So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors!

The point being, no matter how bad it gets in those last days, there is comfort for a believer if the signs in the world match up, and we can say the rapture is near.  But we cannot fix a date, and then just exist, making no plans for the future, thinking about that so much.  We should not be so enslaved by the future that we forget to live in the present so we, as Christians, can do some good for the Lord.

When a Mormon or a JW comes to your door, and says “I believe in Jesus, you shouldn’t fall for the deception and ignorantly say, “Well, I do too.” You have nothing in common, knowing their doctrine was fostered by Satan. They believe in another pseudo-Jesus.  Both cults deny some necessary attribute of divinity, so both cripple the story of His Redemption—because He was God and Human while on earth, and He was sinless and His death could redeem us if we have trusting faith.  Those who believe these  are anti-Christ, and are bound for hell until they see the Gospel. They have nothing to teach you.

 I don’t think most of us could successfully teach such visitors to our door the Truth—they almost always have a second person around to keep you from saying much.  Nothing wrong in you learning how to present the Gospel, but I wouldn’t suggest you engage them if you’re a young one in the Lord.

There are other denominations who have “another Jesus,” but I only had room for the main ones.  Millions of people have been deceived, not only in these groups, but Jesus has been distorted by groups even calling themselves “evangelical.”  Many of my other blogs can tell you about that.  I just hope you will study His Truth before looking for a church that betrays what a church is for. God go with you.

      

 

Doctrines of Demons

 

I’ve just heard an excellent speech by Ron Matsen called “Doctrines of Demons.”  He has been a pastor of Calvary Chapel Portsmouth for 30 years, and loves Expository (verse-by-verse) preaching.  This sermon, made three years ago, is very relevant today.

He begins by telling us Jesus’ opening remarks about the End Times. Our Lord is making us aware, in Matthew 24, that many of us will be deceived by false prophets, so we need to “take heed” to Satan’s cunning ways that he operates through his human servants:

And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you….Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many…

What does deception do? Deception is a powerful weapon in helping to defeat your enemy’s goals.  Think of the great efforts the Allies did pretending to land the D-Day troops at Calais in France.  Nazis were deceived, and put many troops there, so they were not available to hold off the Allies at the actual landing strip, Normandy.  Deception throws your sight off the real truth, and exchanges it for pseudo (partial) truth. 

Satan used deception to throw off Eve from truth in Genesis 3. God said not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil, or else they would die. Satan, who appeared to her as an attractive figure (God reduced him to a serpent on his stomach after this), blatantly accused God of lying. Satan told her “You will not surely die”, but then he focused her attention on a “lust of the flesh” deception (you will be like God, knowing good and evil).  That deception caused her to ignore the issue of whether it was possible for God to lie, or whether this creature was more credible than God—and transferred her attention to what could feel good (“knowing things like good and evil is desirable to me”). So he got her to sin based on pseudo-truth. He told her a truth—she did obtain knowledge of good and evil, by experiencing the evil guilt of disobedience; and he told her a lie, since her body immediately began to reproduce cells in accordance with mortality, and she experienced spiritual death—separation from God--with full death later (she and Adam were probably initially intended to be with God forever, as immortals). 

I have to take a rabbit trail and give you a current batch of deceptions. Wikipedia is not a believer in the inspiration of Scripture.  So in our question about Scripture, they divert us with “facts”—but those facts are chosen by “scholars’ theories” instead of Scripture. Those theories sound good, but they steer us away from considering God’s Word as final truth. Nor do they tell us where these “facts” come from.  Check out what they say about Eve’s sin:

Genesis 2 narrates that God places the man, Adam, in a garden with trees of whose fruits he may eat, but forbids him to eat from "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." God forms woman, Eve, after this command is given (underline is mine).

What are they saying?  They are implying that Eve was possibly not responsible for sin—since she did not receive the command from the lips of God as Adam did. She got it from her husband, who was not a perfectly reliable source for accuracy—since he was human.  Since we have opened the door for his possible mistake in relaying that information, perhaps she did not sin in her act. Well, I have a number of complaints about that—but let’s just go with the obvious:  God believed she sinned.  She was cursed (Genesis 3:16) right along with Adam, which effectively said that that was her punishment for her sin. 

Wikipedia, in giving their “alternative” explanation, wants women to feel oppressed by the masculine characters around her, who seem ever willing to blame her, when (they say), possibly she doesn’t deserve any of that blame.

Wikipedia is good at this cleverness.  From a previous blog I did, check out when they think the Book of Daniel was written:

The Book of Daniel is a 2nd-century BCE biblical apocalypse with a 6th century BCE setting. Ostensibly "an account of the activities and visions of Daniel.

(P.S: The abbreviation “BCE” (Before the Common Era) is a favorite term they like to use to substitute for BC, Before Christ. That way they can avoid glorifying the importance of Christ in human history.)

The problem for Wiki is that the Book of Daniel names an upcoming king, Cyrus, who will rule Israel in the future—which was a miraculous prophecy, since the Book was written even before Cyrus was an adult.  So Wiki has to discount this prophecy somehow, since prophecies being that specific are supernatural, and that means God inspired the Bible authors. So they cooked up the “alternative explanation” for events that eliminates the supernatural. They are saying, in their first sentence above, it was written in the 2^nd century BC, by an author who was pretending (“ostensibly”) that he was Daniel, writing 400 years previously.  So since the “prophesied” events had already happened when the imposter wrote, the “prophecy” wasn’t a prophecy at all. They’re also saying, by the way, that the writer of Daniel was a liar, and by today’s standards, a felon as well.

Well, archeology and the Book of II Chronicles agrees with Scripture—the Book of Daniel was written before Cyrus, and written by Daniel, and since it mentioned Cyrus as a future ruler, it was indeed a supernatural prophecy. What is also noteworthy is, Cyrus is also mentioned in Isaiah 44 and 45.  But the Book of Isaiah, written by Isaiah, had to be written before Isaiah’s death, estimated by archaeologists to be close to 686 BC. Thus, his mention of Cyrus was also a miraculous prophecy too—since Isaiah had to write it before he died, which was at least a full 146 years before Cyrus came along as ruler of Israel in 539 BC.  Of course, “scholars” covered their butts on this one by saying, conveniently, Isaiah wasn’t written by Isaiah; that we don’t know who wrote it, or when. Likewise the Book of Deuteronomy wasn’t written by Moses, they say (heck, let’s clear out the whole crew). Check this Wiki quote about what they call the author of Isaiah: 

The unknown second prophet (See Deutero-Isaiah) 

We conclude that Wikipedia allowed writers who were agnostic to challenge Biblical inerrancy without telling us; so Wiki is using deception, and is not to be trusted for research on fundamental (i.e., miraculous) Christianity. 

Well, that was enlightening; that’s our current lesson in deceptive pseudo-truths. Let’s get back to our main theme, the problem of deception pulling us away from God in the End Times. Paul said that some people will be deceived, like Eve was; then he calls the authors of deception “spirits;” and further, “Doctrines of Demons.” This is based on I Timothy 4:1:

Now the (Holy) Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons

What are “doctrines of demons?”  Dr. Matsen calls them very good at “deception through disinformation.”  That word is not the same as misinformation, which leaves an opening that it was accidental.  Disinformation is bad information that follows an agenda.  (Ed. Note: If you are familiar with the term as applied currently, the Deep State will tell us lies that sound good, but they are just “gaslighting” us as they await their chance for a crisis to make us fearful enough, by their disinformation, to abandon important portions of the Constitution in the name of “protecting our security.” That’s their agenda).

 Without a doubt, the agenda that Satan would like to fulfill most, of course, would be to spread deceptions on Jesus Himself, to tear down His Godhood. The truth part of his pseudo-truth is the hook, to lead weak Christians in. Then he spreads his lies.  

Let me first speak briefly to those who say that Jesus “never claimed to be God.”

In John 8:58, Jesus claims a name that is reserved for God:

 'I solemnly declare it: before Abraham came to be, I AM.”

This was the name God gave Himself when he first communicated with Moses.  In Exodus 3:14 “God replied, 'I am who am. ' 'This is what you shall tell the Israelites: I AM sent me to you.”

In John 14:9 Jesus says:

 “Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?

John 4:25-26:

The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.” ²⁶ Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”

These are but a few of many. Jesus also calls Himself Son of Man.  That title, in the Old Testament, means Deity.  The Pharisees and scribes knew what He was claiming. They accused Him of blasphemy.  But they couldn’t get around His healing, His raising people from the dead (including Himself).

Let’s get back to our main theme.  Satan’s followers, in tearing down Jesus, may dream up an “alternative creed” to “correct the errors of the past,” for instance.  Everybody likes modern things; they’re assumed to be improvements, right?  Here’s one such example:  Joseph Smith, the Mormon founder, declared that Christianity became corrupt and apostate over the centuries—it was, he said, an abomination to God. Smith was there to save us with his alternative version, the Book of Mormon. He wrote it around 1835, and since the Bible was finished nearly 2000  years ago, his book can be considered a modern arrival. They say it corrects the past.

The mixture of truth and deception will appear truthful to those who do not know their Scripture well, or have let their worldly feelings and lusts rule their decisions. With this tactic, unless we know our Bible, we become easier marks for Satan. 

I have an important sad fact to mention:  Our ignorance of Biblical doctrines may have a disastrous result when we die. Denying Jesus as God is a damnable event (I John 2:23).  Belonging to a false church which preaches that, and if we ignorantly or willfully don’t challenge it, that means we accept it and are thus guilty of it, and we find ourselves in hell after the Judgment at the resurrection. God says some have believed in “another gospel” (II Corinthians 11:4 and Galatians 1:7), and thus we could be on Satan’s side, not Christ’s side, when Judgment Day comes. Jesus did say that a lot of people would be totally shocked when Jesus rejects them from heaven. See Matthew 7:22-23:

Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ ²³ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

I cannot but stress it enough the importance of Bible reading to learn correct doctrine. Paul told Timothy, a young pastor, that he must preach  good doctrine; that’s an important reason for teaching, or studying, the Bible. II Timothy 3:16 says:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness

Here’s the truth:  Christian orthodox doctrine (formalized expressions of a foundational belief, from the context of Scripture) maintains that Jesus was both Man and God while on earth. He experienced pain and hunger, but He also knew exactly what people were thinking, knew exact things ahead of time; and could walk on water or through walls, could miraculously heal at will, and could appear and disappear at will. (I haven’t the space to list even a part of all the precise events—guess you’ll have to read the Gospels.)  

You may not be desirous of raising the banner to His human side, and declare that the only thing important is that He was God.  I disagree. First of all, God is a spirit, and is not visible with human flesh. Jesus could not have His influence as an invisible spirit. Further,  Hebrews tells us He was made “perfect through suffering,” and, as Hebrews 2:9 says:

But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone

Jesus had to be a Man, “a little lower than the angels,” for a time; He had to taste death and torture to pay for our sin. We are unable to pay for our sin. He had to be tempted through trials of hunger and pain, to show that we can also defeat sin and temptation no matter the circumstances.  All that made perfect His appearance on earth.   And we can identify with Him when we suffer persecution. So let us thank God for His Incarnation.  We cannot identify with a non-feeling spirit-ghost-person, or even worse as a mysterious, uninterpretable aura of Christ-likeness, whatever that is. 

Satan is satisfied with tearing down either side of that Human/God concept.  You’ll see details of what I mean next week, as we delve into the deceptions that might take us into perdition, if we are not aware of Satan’s craftiness. We will take a close look at various “doctrines of demons.”   

There are three deceptions Satan uses, outlined in II Corinthians 11:4:

For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted…

 

You’ll recognize “another Jesus” in the spurious doctrines below and next week. I John 2:22-23 tells us how important it is not to reinterpret Jesus:

 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ (ie, Anointed One)? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. ²³ Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

Reading that, you first of all see how the Son (Jesus) is equated to the Father.  Also, you get the idea that how people interpret Jesus is serious enough for God to consider it a litmus test, a line in the sand. Believe in Jesus as God, and act accordingly; then you’ve got an important doctrine on the path that leads to heaven. Don’t believe that; that path is on the way to hell.

More detail on the “Christian” cults next week.   

Church of Tares (Part 2 of 2)

 

Two weeks ago we began studying the flaws in the New Reformation and the many Megachurches that have adopted it.  We began our third objection, namely their message is not the Gospel as presented in Scripture. (It might be a good idea to read last week’s blog, Part I.) Let’s continue our study of that objection in Part II. 

A classic example of their feel-good doctrine, and the message it contains, came from Bill Hybels.  He did a survey of his vast church. But it found that a lamentably large percentage of his congregants were recently engaging in illicit sex (example:  41% of divorced people, 38% of single parents).  Did he call the congregation to repent for some of their rebellion against a holy God? No; he immediately exuded compassion, lest anyone feel guilty.  He said “We are a love-starved people, with broken hearts that need the kind of repair that only He can give.” Thus, he provided a great rationale for the fornicators to go on as before; now he can also think that he’s been victimized, not having an outlet for his love-starved need (ie, sex). Can you see a lack of exhortation there?  Any conviction?  God wants us to confess our sin (I John 1:9), not to find ways to continue in it. So these popular pastors treat gross sinners with a light touch, and condemn the Bible-reading devout by calling him a “jackass” or a “Pharisee” (Steven Furtick, another pastor among their movement leaders).

Yes, Jesus was kind to particular sinners.  Thinking of the adulteress, Jesus did not want her killed.  When He got the Pharisees to go away, He told her to “sin no more.” In His work of evangelism, He opened Himself up to anybody who had experienced lives of rejection and were hungry for meaning to life.  They knew they needed help.  The Pharisees’ problem was ignoring their sin. The “treatment” of immorality among these pastors needs to apply the Word; let it do its proper use as a sword, helping them to see their sin, exhorting people to stop, and pruning their lives (John 15:1-6).  Our depraved society calls us hypocrites for making this “tough love” part of our counseling, but Jesus’ mission is to save us for heaven and save us from sin.  He gives us the Holy Spirit for real help.  Sin is pleasurable; you have to reminded people of its consequences (yes, you can lose your salvation) before you want to let it go.  Also, imperfect people should exhort other imperfect people without being called a legalist, a judgmentalist, a  hypocrite, as if none of us has the truth or the right to coax our brothers to turn to the right way—because we love them. 

The proof of them being “vehemently anti-doctrinal” is on the surface; their movement’s church names are always non-denominational.  You could also dig into their introduction materials online, and generally fail to find much about their creed.  Those pastors I spoke to were unwilling to get beyond vagueness on important matters (at least, to me). But they know they generally don’t have to worry about it--people I talk to in intro groups don’t care about doctrine.  What does it say about today’s culture that doctrines that people died to maintain 500 years ago are irrelevant today?

These pastors steer away from any controversy, skipping verses, even books, to prevent argument.  Many of them never deal with prophecy, even though whole books of Scripture are devoted to it; many avoid discussing things like gay people, or the role of men or women. It would be nice to learn from our pastor something to say to witness to people what God’s Word says about a current cultural obsession.  People might even get the idea that the Bible is actually relevant, and isn’t just loving speeches on being kind, and humble, or giving them moralistic goals that are “impossible” to meet.  Many pastors would never preach on what Jesus said in John 6, or would call Paul a “sexist” (despite his words being God’s inspired Words), because of what he said about women’s role in church.  May I say, ignoring large portions of God’s Word is just deception.  As if Jesus were a kind soul all the time, and hated arguing.  That’s the view these pastors give us, but it is wrong; and they are, whether they know it or not, giving a distorted view of Our Lord.  Jesus expected radical, sometimes pushy behavior from His followers.  Look at what Jesus said in Matthew 10:34-37:

 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. ³⁵ For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; ³⁶ and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.’ ³⁷ He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me

Always remember, the Cross, and all that implies, is an offense to people.  Look at I Corinthians 1:18:

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

So the real Gospel, which really begins with our sin and guilt, is an offense to people.  You must be ready to dispense that extensively about our sin making us unworthy of heaven in speaking to a prospect.  Then you tell the good news—if they’re still around. Getting their agreement isn’t your goal; truth is.   Skip neither the bad nor the good.  Let the Holy Spirit shift their minds from feeling offended to feeling guilt, and then, if so moved, they grasp for relief in faith. ReaI salvation may then result.  In this country, ”bad-news-first” evangelism is getting to be a dead end, since America has had money for so long that people think they are self-sufficient. They have savings, and don’t need God.  But God will do us a favor and not let us live under that delusion. We will be put to the test, not because God desires evil for us, but to show us if we depend on Him for rescue.

Also on the subject of changing the message, Robert Schuller (the founder of the “New Reformation”) had this to say: “The new reformation will return our focus to the sacred right of every person to self-esteem. The church will never succeed until it satisfies the human being’s hunger for self-value.“ They assume we can think our way to it.  My response to this is, OK, you want to put a bubble of victimization on him, since working with people will, in most cases, knock around your self-esteem.  The sins of the world attack our soul.  It begins when we were children; wearing glasses gets your new name, “four eyes” or “Froggie.” Bullying is common, especially to the “nerds.”  Let’s not forget the words of Candace Owens:  “Life’s hard; get a helmet.”

Scripture has a way of dealing with our needs here. John 6 tells that the day after Jesus fed the five thousand, the people clamored to get more of Him.  But He exposed their motive, and also gave them a long, blunt doctrinal speech, which seemed designed to confuse and offend them away.  But His real purpose was, He wanted to be followed by real believers; only a person with faith in Him as God could accept that all the words He said were from a divine source, whether they could understand them or not—and they would still accept them in faith because  they knew that He was the Son of God..  His words were not pleasant for them.  See John 6:24-27 and verse 66, which showed that they were, indeed, followers of their bellies:

²⁴ when the people therefore saw that Jesus was not there, nor His disciples, they also got into boats and came to Capernaum, seeking Jesus. ²⁵ And when they found Him on the other side of the sea, they said to Him, “Rabbi, when did You come here?” ²⁶ Jesus answered them and said, “Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. ²⁷ Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life…⁶⁶ From that time many of His disciples (ie, in this definition, casual followers) went back and walked with Him no more.

Bill Hybels has his own twist on changing the message.  He likewise avoids things like the blood of Christ covering our depths of sin that we deserve hell. He also has a “sin-light” definition of sin—he calls sin a “flawed strategy to gain fulfillment.”  So his motivation for the Gospel is to make people experience fulfillment. The problem is, Jesus does not guarantee fulfillment from following Him.  In fact, He expressed the opposite; see John 15:19-20, 16:33):

 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. ²⁰ Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also….These things I have spoken to you, that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world.”

These new, sin-light definitions of Schuller and Hybels often lead to easy converts, then easy-believism, a death-knell for our real goal—which should be avoiding hell, and obtaining heaven.  Easy-believism means we don’t have to change our lives, just accept Christ.  But not changing our lives means we don’t put away the sins of the world.  No problem, they say; I was told that all my sins are forgiven.  Well, limit that too; all our sins up to the date of real conversion is true; confession, like washing the feet, is still a necessity.  God is not interested in our focus on self—self-esteem or self-fulfillment.  We already love ourselves too much as it is. See Romans 12;3 and Ephesians 5:29:

For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned…For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it

Writing articles like “Learn to Love Yourself” (Rick Warren, 2005) are unnecessary.  In fact, increasing self-love may bring problems like those outlined in II Timothy 3:1-5:

in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power.

When Jesus told us in Mark 12:31 to love your neighbor as yourself, he’s saying “try loving your neighbor as much as you already do for yourselves.” He wants us to practice self-denial, thinking of others first.  See I John 3:16-17:

By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers. But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?

Like the felt need for self, another “felt need” people feel is entertainment.  Music moves people like nothing else. Taylor Swift will herself make over $4 billion from this Era tour (I’m writing in 10/2023). Dance and drama performances in megachurches do a good job of copying methods used by popular entertainers today. The church music is high-decibel and fast—not exactly worshipful.  Older folks know especially well what I’m talking about. The Saddleback Church youth ministry were teaching their young people a dance the Harlem Shake, where the body jerks lasciviously or demonically, take your pick. 

Mark Driscoll had an answer for a felt need—discussing sexual matters in church.  His preaching through Song of Solomon was explained because “I assumed the students and singles were all pretty horny.”  In the Song, he discussed, as he quotes, “marriage, foreplay, oral sex, sacred stripping, and sex outdoors, just as the Book teaches.”  (I’m thinking, “wait a minute:  I’ve read it, and don’t recall those acts.”) I listened, in enraptured disgust, as he “preached” on masturbation. (Matthew 5:28 was not part of that discussion—so, masturbation is not sin, so we can do as much as we want--whee). He has also claimed to have the gift of discernment, which allows him to see the sexual sins of his congregation.  His book, Confessions of a Reformission Rev, is available on Amazon, in case you forget these quotes. Oh, and “reformission” means a call to reform a flawed view of missions.  Evidently a confession. But he probably made money on the royalties.

Just to give you further proof that despite all these worldly efforts, all is not well in megachurches, let me give you a few quotes from Wikipedia:

To continue on Mark Driscoll: He led the Mars Hill megachurch in Seattle until 2014, when he was forced out.  His teachings on masculinity were toxic for women. He would go into graphic detail about sexual submission, they said. He left the church after the viral effects of his plagiarism, and his using $250,000 of church funds to pay a source off who knew how to game the New York Times Best-seller list, so his book could hit the list and he’d make more money—and add it to his resume.

The global megachurch Hillsong (New York City) was known for its hipster trappings, celebrity congregants and wildly popular worship music in the 2010s, but in recent years it has been more closely tied to a series of scandals, including the firing of its charismatic celebrity pastor, Carl Lentz, for “moral failures.” May 19, 2023

This next one is from a school founded by Bethel Church in Redding CA and headed by pastor Bill Johnson (its schools have had over 13,000 students):

The school garnered criticism for a practice among some students termed "grave soaking" or "grave sucking", where they would lie on the graves of deceased revivalists in the belief that they would absorb the deceased's anointing from God.

You should know that this is not some prank among immature experimental students:  It is actually within the church’s beliefs. (They are Word of Faith, uh, Part 2).  I can’t avoid mentioning this one:

Bethel Redding has also become associated with certain phenomena that are interpreted by the leadership and the congregation as manifesting the presence and glory of God. The phenomena include the appearance of “glory clouds” and gold dust and “angel feathers” falling from the ceiling (or perhaps from the ventilation system)

With non-denominal churches, it is not easy for a prospect to find their real vision. The church’s “intro” to the public sounds glowing:

Bethel is a congregation rooted in the love of God and dedicated to worldwide transformation through revival. The Lord has given us a mandate to be a resource center to impact cities and nations. We believe we're on the edge of the greatest revival of all time.

But you have to dig hard on the internet to find these other, wild beliefs.  Let’s give one other item:

The bigger problem stems from the theology of the Bethel Church and Bill Johnson, who was influenced by the likes of John Wimber and the false teachers of the Toronto Blessing. Consistent with others in the New Apostolic Reformation, Johnson teaches that people today are receiving direct words from God and that the offices of apostle and prophet have been restored to the church. In this way, Johnson presents a low view of Scripture (ed: and a high view of himself): the Bible must be either incomplete or insufficient, if we must keep adding to it with the words of modern-day prophets.

Note how “direct words from God” (like vision casting) led him to wild beliefs. (Hearing from the wrong god?) What are his congregants’ reaction (especially to the angel dust routine)?  Are they aghast as the distortion of the Bible or their manipulation of people?  I mean, he has to assume people are really naïve, right? I assume they take offense at that.  Well, you won’t believe it:

The response of those in the Bethel movement is usually wonder mixed with excitement, dancing, and recording it with cell phone cameras. 

So, it was great entertainment.  We can’t believe these people will do much for God’s Church in the near future. He is another celebrity pastor who has ridden off the rails, for sure.

Ending this with Rick Warren, where we began, what is he doing lately?  He unveiled a P.E.A.C.E. plan in Los Angeles Angel stadium in 2005.  P=Promote reconciliation (he is speaking to Muslims, for instance); E=Equip Leaders; A=Assist the Poor; C=Care for the Sick; and E=Educate the Next Generation.  But he unfolded this, oddly, to the music of Purple Haze.  That song, by Jimi Hendrix, was surely about the effects of drugs like LSD.  As one source said, the song is so widely assumed to be about drugs that there is entire strain of marijuana named after it, and there are many head shops that have opened under the name Purple Haze all over the country.  Why would he launch a plan—if not religious, at least humanitarian—to a pagan song? 

That plan is his latest “hope for a New Reformation.”  His intent is to help wipe out the global problems and show that the church is again relevant to unbelievers. It grew slowly while he was still pastor at Saddleback for 17 more years.  When he retired, he nominated a woman as co-senior pastor.  The Southern Baptist Convention ex-communicated Saddleback in early 2023 for that, despite Warren’s appeal for them to not do that.

But he again introduces controversial ideas.  In speaking to international local workers, he is always willing to work with Muslims, or whoever has influence in the local area.  Since, he says, he’s trying to lower poverty, for instance, he will accept anyone who wants to work, Christian or not—gays, atheists, etc.  He has also told corporation leaders that they must be ready for “religious pluralism.”  But I disagree with his quoted assumption that “we’re building a bridge” thereby.  Neither humanitarian aid nor social justice done through a non-believer in any way puts anybody closer to Christ. His mention of Pluralism puts many gods on the table, not the truth of Jesus as God.  Many of these people are not grateful for the grace offered to them; they are simply glad the rich USA thought of them to throw some money at.  You can see how their money is misapplied. Best to spend money on a local on-fire preacher, let him convert a bunch in the village, then watch as the caste system and the genocide start to disappear.  Warren is offering a social ‘reformation,’ not a spiritual one. He quotes that “the first reformation (Luther) was about doctrine; this one is about deeds.”  Great—let’s spread a works-gospel. He flits about, visiting the World Economic Forum (a socialist group which disavows religion), and other world groups that would definitely like a world religion, a world monetary system.  But aren’t those bad news in Revelation?  Only if their pastors will ever preach on it. 

Well, I’ve given you, in this short script, the story of the “Church of Tares” video.  Let me say this in my summary:  Ephesians 2:20 says that the church, which could always need improvement, MUST be…

…built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,

But men can follow God’s Way, or man’s way.  I choose God, since He is the best organizer in all history. His way is revealed in Scripture, and was at one time highly successful (see Acts).  But, I hope you have been convinced that man’s way is where the next Reformation is going.  The consequences will be severe and fatal.  There will be a ton of people who will be denied heaven, and totally shocked, because their pastor told them they were locked in.  Just as in traffic citations, not knowing the rules doesn’t save you from the ticket.  You should have read the manual.  Well, we have a Manuel, but few people read it either.  This one is different—it is eternal in its grace or judgment.