John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference - Religion (16) - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference (30982 Views)
2013 Fire Conference By Nnewi Diocese / John MacArthur On Islam And The Anti-christ / Wind & Fire Conference 2012 (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) ... (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (Reply) (Go Down)
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 7:07pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
nlMediator: Your conclusion here is not what Sammied was pointing my attention to. I had made a comment that not even prayer could avert God's position on a matter and he suggests the Hezekiah prayer and I in turn made it clear that as good as that prayer sounded, it was God's word again that reversed the initial pronouncement that is the issue and not prayers. A lot of people pray about things and still don't change God's position on a matter: case in point, David's child with Bathsheba. David mourned like Hezekiah but God was not moved. For you to use this to justify your faulty position of a mistaken or wrong prophet can still be a true prophet is criminal to say the least. Obviously the text shows that the same God who spoke of Hezekiah death, spoke again to reverse it. Maybe you should have accused God of being the false one here and not Isaiah seeing he is the one speaking, while Isaiah was a mere spokeman. You would require a lot more effort to debunk the Cessationists position that true prophets are always 100% accurate and to show that your wrong prophets are not false prophets after all. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 7:15pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
sammied: And why didn't God's mercy come on David who also mourned and pleaded with God in prayer for Bathsheba's child? The point remains that it is God who speaks a word and that word comes to pass and not how much we pray or we do not pray. The two scenarios, Hezekiah and David, shows God operating in his sovereignty and it is his sovereignty I speak of when I said if God says he will do a thing he will do and not even prayers can avert it. I hope you understand the concept the sovereignty of God because I know many do not and they despise it to their own detriment. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by sammied(m): 7:16pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
WinsomeX: Please Sir, can you kindly give me examples of three people who prayed and repented in the bible and God didn't change his mind? Thank you... |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by nlMediator: 7:23pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
WinsomeX: No. What s criminal is your attempt to change the WOrd of God. Revelations warned against that. You said 2 things: 1. Prayer does not avert prophecy. 2. Whatever a prophet says must come to pass; otherwise the person is a false prophet. Hezekiah's case clearly debunked #2. Hezekiah's case also debunked #1 because we know it's his prayers that God answered and changed His mind. If it was not Hezekiah's payer that moved God, what did? His sovereignty and Word were present all along before the prophet went there, during the visit and after the visit. The only new variable was Hezekiah's prayer. Yet, you want to throw that out of the way and attribute everything to God's sovereignty. Even if it's God's sovereignty that changed it, fact remains that the prophecy did not come to pass. Which should make Isaiah a false prophet by your criteria. Simple as ABC. That people pray and some things do not change is not a reason to reject the cases where prayers changed things. There are many barren women that stay without children, even after prayers. But it was Hannah's prayer that gave herSamuel. To discount it and claim it' all about God's sovereignty is to lie against God's Word. Saying that God changed His mind and so the prophet is not to blame is infantile. The whole idea of prophecy means that it is God speaking. The prophet is simply an agent. God can always change what He asked a prophet to prophesy. That's the bone of contention. And you have no coherent answer. Now, I agree with you that it does not mean that a prophet's message may not be false. That God changed His words in one prophecy does not mean that He's the One that spoke in another instance where He never spoke. But to use one to cancel the other will not wash. I used the bombed building example as one of the points against your criteria. I never claimed it addressed everything. Your attempt to debunk it failed woefully. And you're working too hard to get yourself out of a trap of your own making. Next time, stick with the Word. As I always do! |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by nlMediator: 7:27pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
Candour: Correct that Isaiah did not deliver an inaccurate message. But isn't that the bone of contention? I said that a prophet can make a true prophecy, people would pray and the prophecy is averted. Our brothers here challenged it, prompting the Hezekiah example. Let's not lose sight of the real point here. The claim that one of the criteria for determining a true prophet is that the prophecy must always come to pass is NOT true according to Scripture. Any other thing na jara. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 7:32pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
sammied: And where in that quote of mine did I say anything about people praying and repenting? What exactly is your point? You cannot comprehend a fact that God is sovereign enough to say a thing that even prayer cannot change? And I gave you a case of David and you do as if you did not see that? At the mouth of two or more witnesses a matter is confirmed: Judas and Esau repented but their case was sealed by God. Do these examples help you? |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by nlMediator: 7:32pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
WinsomeX: Youre dancing palongo, my friend! Nobody is fooled by your antics. When Jonah was mentioned, you said it was conditional. You didn't mention God's sovereignty. When Hezekiah was mentioned and you couldn't find a condition, you run to sovereignty. No matter how you slice it, the fact remains that an accurate prophecy did not come to pass. Which makes mincemeat of your claim that every true prophecy must come to pass. Why didn't you qualify your unequivocal assertion from the start: E.g., every true prophecy must come to pass unless God in His sovereignty intervenes. We would not have had this long argument. And you would not have disagreed with me about the bombed building, because all you wuld have said would be that the prayers would only work if it's in the sovereignty of God. Then, I'd have left it, knowing that no prayer gets answered outside the sovereign will of God. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by nlMediator: 7:53pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
WinsomeX: Neither Judas nor Esau is an example of repentance to God. Besides, both occupied unique positions that do not apply to the regular person. There could only be one betrayer of Jesus. Try again. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 8:05pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
[size=16pt]THE DEVILISH PUPPET MASTERS OF THE WORD OF FAITH MOVEMENT by Justin Peters[/size] It is a…it is a joy to be with you, it truly is. Anytime I have an opportunity to present God’s Word, it’s a great joy, it’s a great privilege, it’s also a terrifying responsibility. But I’m very grateful for this opportunity. Let’s go to the Lord in a word of prayer and then we’ll begin. Our Father, we do thank You for this time that You have graciously given to us. I thank You for each and every one who is here, Lord, who has come to this conference. Lord, the fact that they are here, it’s a reflection of their concern for the truth, a desire to be faithful to Your Word. And we pray that Your Holy Spirit would enrich our time together today throughout the rest of the conference. We pray that He would be honored, that He would glorify Christ in the preaching and teaching of Your Word and that He would illuminate the truth of Your Word to our hearts and that these truths will be implanted on our hearts and that we would live lives of faithful obedience to You. Amen. Well it is a joy to be with You and what we will be doing in this session and tomorrow’s session is that we will be looking at the Word of Faith Movement, more commonly known as the Health and Wealth Gospel, the Prosperity Gospel, Name it and Claim it gospel. Basically the doctrine that says it is always God’s will to be wealthy and it is always God’s will for a Christian to be physically healed. We should never be sick. If some of you may be familiar with my previous seminar entitled “A Call For Discernment,” and this is an updated version. I’ve added a lot of new material, a lot of new false teachers out now entitled it Clouds Without Water…Clouds Without Water. And this is a reference in Jude verse 12, and Jude refers to false teachers in a number of different ways and one of the ways that he refers to them is as clouds without water. They have the appearance of having some sustenance, some nourishment, but nothing falls from them. There is no nourishment, the ground below these false teachers, these clouds without water is dry and parched. And so that’s what we will be looking at. Now I have about seven hours of material that I’ve got to try to condense into just a little bit over two hours, so we’ll just be hitting some of the high points in this session and tomorrow’s session. Tomorrow’s session is different, by the way. I’ve had a few people ask me, “Are you doing the same thing on each day?” No, tomorrow’s session will be completely different, just different aspects of what we’ll be looking at today, but completely different focus and different direction, different issues. But clouds without water…now I understand that the bookstore does sell these DVDs, there are some of the Clouds Without Water DVDs in the bookstore over by the sanctuary, so if you’d like kind of the full-meal deal, if you will, they have those available for you. And so, let’s begin. Clouds without water…before we get to the meat of the matter here, I want us to just answer a few of the criticisms that will come our way when we call people to discernment, when we warn people about false doctrines and false teachers. A lot of people will not like this and they’ll criticize us for it, and so I want to look just briefly at a couple of the criticisms that will come our way when we do exercise discernment. One of them, you hear this a lot, “Judge not, judge not lest ye be judged.” Undoubtedly the most often misquoted, taken out of context passages in all of God’s Word. Jesus does indeed warn us not to judge, but the kind of judging against which our Savior warns is hypocritical judging. Judging somebody for doing something that maybe we’re really doing ourselves, that is what he warns against. But the answer to this criticism is that, in fact, we are to judge safely within biblical parameters. When it comes to matters of doctrine, when it comes to matters of theology, we absolutely are to judge on these things safely within biblical parameters. Another criticism is this, you shouldn’t name names. And some people say, “Well it’s okay if you warn people in a general sense about false teaching, but don’t ever call somebody out by their name publicly, don’t ever do that.” Well, the answer to this is that in fact there is a biblical precedent for calling out false teachers by name. The Apostle Paul did this himself on several occasions. He did it quite publicly. And so there is a biblical precedent for calling out false teachers by name. Jesus Himself called Herod that fox, so there is a biblical precedent for calling out false teachers by name. It should not be done lightly. Okay? And we don’t call somebody out as a false teacher if they differ with us on some relatively minor theological point. You know, maybe we’re premillennial, pretrib in our eschatology and we know somebody over here that’s pretty millennial, mid-triable, heretic. No…no. But when it comes to the fundamental doctrines of historical Christianity, the preexistence of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, the sinless life, the atonement on the cross, bodily resurrection of our Lord, salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, on these issues we do draw a deep line in the sand and we must warn people about wolves in sheep’s clothing. Is not an option, it is a duty. And dear ones, it’s not…it’s not an option to exercise discernment as a Christian, that’s not an option, it’s a mandate. It is a duty. And some people say, “Well, that’s just not my gift. You know, I just don’t have the gift of discernment.” That’s a cop out…that’s a cop out. What did Paul say, 1 Thessalonians 5:21, “Test all things…test all things.” And that’s not written there just to take up the white spaces, it’s incumbent on us to exercise discernment. It’s not an option and say, “Well discernment, that’s just not my gift, I’ll leave that for somebody else.” That’s a cop out. You may not have the gift of mercy either as your primary spiritual gift, but guess what? We can all do…what?...we can all exercise mercy, we can all show mercy. So it’s an excuse to say, “Oh, well that’s not my gift, I’ll leave that for someone else.” |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 8:06pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
continue 1 Another one of their criticisms, and you hear this a lot from within Charismatic circles, Word of Faith circles, when one of their false teachers comes under criticism, this is almost always how they respond. “Touch not my anointed,” heard this before? “Touch not my anointed.” Well, when you hear this criticism, this is how you can respond. “Okay, that’s fine, take not Scripture out of context,” because that’s what they’re doing. Now touch not my anointed can be found in a couple of places in the Old Testament, one of them is Psalm chapter 105, “He permitted no man to oppress them,” referring to Israel. And He reproved kings for their sakes, “Touch not my anointed ones and do my prophets no harm.” And so, is this biblical? Yeah, it’s biblical in the sense that it is in the Bible, but what does it mean? What does it say? Well, the context of this, the anointed ones refers to Israel’s patriarchs and their descendants not to today’s modern preachers, or self-acclaimed Apostles, first to Israel’s patriarchs and their descendants. And the word “touch,” this is the real kicker, the word “touch” actually refers to doing physical harm, not to speaking the truth. You might remember that when David had an opportunity to kill Saul, but he didn’t do it. Remember that? What did he do instead? He cut off a piece of Saul’s garment and held it up and he said, “I will not touch God’s anointed.” In other words, what David was saying is I would not kill him. So we may be calling out false teachers and their false doctrines, but nobody here is chasing Benny Hinn down the street with a baseball bat. You know, we’re not doing anybody any physical harm. Good thing, by the way, for the false teachers that we’re not living on the other side of the cross, you know, the Old Testament calls Benny Hinn and Pat Robertson and all these would have been dead a long time ago. And, by the way, there are three New Testament passages, at least three, which refer to all Christians as anointed. If you are here today and you know Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, you’ve been born again, guess what? You’re anointed and you have the same anointing as does every other Christian. There are no super-Christians with a super-special anointing that the rest of us common schmucks just don’t have. If you’re in Christ, you’re anointed and you have the same anointing as does every other believer. There are no super-Christians. That’s…that’s a Gnostic idea, the division of Christians into classes, that’s Gnosticism, it’s not biblical. Okay now, let’s get in to the Word of Faith Movement and in order to understand any Movement, I think it really helps and it’s really imperative to have an understanding of the origins of the Movement in order to have a fully orbed understanding of any Movement, we need to look at the origins. And we don’t have time to go into this and that, but I want to just briefly tell you that he Word of Faith Movement, the prosperity gospel is actually rooted in the meta-physical cults, like Christian Science, New Age, New Thought, Gnosticism. Most of what you see on Christian television, on TBN and Daystar and Inspiration at Work, and the Word Network, and the Sea of Broadcasting, it’s not Christian, okay? It’s cultic, cultic doctrine that has been wrapped in some Christian terminology. And so briefly, let’s look at this, where did the Word of Faith Movement begin? Well, it began with a guy named Phineas Parkhurst(?) Quimby. Quimby you could call the Great Grandfather of the Word of Faith Movement. Quimby was the father of New Thought, a metaphysical cult. Now when I say metaphysical, that’s a big word, all it means is beyond the physical realm, beyond what we can see and touch here. And when I say cult, I mean any group or sect that calls itself Christian yet compromises or denies some of the fundamentals of the faith. Mormonism is a cult. Jehovah’s Witnesses belong to a cult. Roman Catholicism is a theological cult…okay, not a sociological cult, not drink-the-Kool-Aid Jim Jones kind of a cult. But it is a theological cult because it compromises and denies some of the fundamental tenants of historical Christianity. Quimby was the father of the metaphysical cult known as New Thought. New Thought essentially held that whatever you think about and whatever you speak, you will attract those things to you. If that sounds familiar, that’s because it is, that heresy is still around today, it’s been repackaged called The Secret, that Oprah Winfrey is very fond of promoting, The Secret. And Rick Warren is dabbling in it as well. But Quimby was the father of the metaphysical cult known as New Thought, he was a student of a cultism, hypnosis, parapsychology and Quimby’s theoretical formulation started as the basis for the mind science called Christian Science. Now what happened, you’ve probably heard of Christian Science, but Mary Baker Eddy claimed that she was physically healed by Phineas Quimby, she really wasn’t, she was a sickly woman most all of her life. But she thought she was physically healed by Quimby and she was so impressed by his teachings that she took his doctrines and developed them a bit further and from that formed what is today known as Christian Science. And Christian Science is very poorly named, by the way. Because it’s not Christian and it’s not scientific, kind of like Grape Nuts, you know, they’re not grape and they’re not nuts. Christian Science is neither Christian, nor is it scientific, but there are a lot of Christian Science overtones in the Word of Faith Movement. One of which is the denial of physical symptoms when it comes to sickness and disease. If you have a friend or a family member who is in this Movement, you might notice that when they get sick, they deny that they’re sick. You know, maybe they’ve got a cold, their eyes are watering, their nose is running, they’re sneezing, they’re congested, the whole nine yards, but you say something to them about it, “Oh no, no, no, I’m not sick. I won’t confess that.” Well that’s Christian Science that has just been wrapped in some Christian terminology. The father of Word of faith…not the father, the grandfather, you could say, of the modern Word of Faith Movement is a guy named Essek Kenyon. Essek Kenyon I had very clear ties to the metaphysical cult, particularly the New Age, New Thought Movement. He attended college at the Emerson School of Oratory in Boston where the Metaphysical cults flourished and he was heavenly influenced by them. We don’t have time to get all into all of his doctrinal distinctives. Kenyon was not wrong on everything, on a lot of things he was spot on. But he did have some serious errant theology. He believed that we could speak things into existence, that Jesus died a spiritual death in hell where He atoned for our sins. We’ll talk about that, time permitting, a little bit later. So…but what has happened in the modern prosperity movement is that your people like Benny Hinn, and Kenneth Copeland. By the way, I’ve been in Kenneth Copeland’s bookstore and he’s got Essek Kenyon’s books for sale in the bookstore. But what these modern false preachers have done is they have taken Kenyon’s mistakes and made them much worse. So compared to the modern Word Faith preachers, Essek W. Kenyon was actually fairly orthodox by comparison…by comparison. Kenneth Hagen, father of the modern Word of Faith Movement, despite Kenneth Hagen’s teaching that no believer should die until he’s at least 120 years old. You see Kenneth Hagen didn’t quite make it. He was around 86. But Kenneth Hagen claims like all of the Modern Faith preachers that much of what they teach you, they received directly from Jesus Himself. God spoke to me…Jesus spoke to me and gave me these teachings…and that is their way of insulating themselves against biblical criticisms. And so, they’ll say, “Well, if you can’t find what I’m teaching you in the Bible, don’t worry about it, it’s okay because I have it from the highest authority, Jesus Himself came and gave me these teachings. So if you can’t find it in the Word, don’t worry about it, it’s okay, I got it from Jesus.” |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 8:06pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
continued 2 Well, Hagen claimed that Jesus physically appeared to him on at least eight different occasions throughout the course of his life. On one of these occasions, Jesus appeared to Hagen and gave him these exact word, according to Hagen, Jesus dictated these exact specific words. It’s interesting, however, that Jesus apparently bears a striking resemblance to Essek W. Kenyon. You can see that it’s practically word for word identical. Hagen did not get this from Jesus. Hagen plagiarized Essek W. Kenyon extensively among other authors as well, by the way. He was a plagiarist. So the faith teachers are very fond of claiming divine origin for what they teach. But as you can see, the origins are not nearly so supernatural. They steal from other people, plagiarize other people, just repackage old heresies, you know, repackage for a different modern audience. Okay, I want us to look at some of the doctrines now of the Word/Faith Movement. We’ll begin by the doctrine of positive confession. The prosperity preachers teach that we can actually speak things into existence. Watch these clips. Clip: Look at me and say, all of you, say there’s power in me (repeats) to speak life and death(repeats). Lady speaks: “You call what you have, you say what you want.” Male speaks,(Sounds like Benny Hinn “And I’m here to tell you I know that I know that I know. That as these programs are airing, I’m speaking something into existence.” “Amen.” If that sound eerily like God’s act of creation in Genesis 1 and 2, that’s because it is. Dear ones, only God can speak things into existence. That is not something that you and I can do. The Hebrew word for create is bar(?) and only God baras, only God does that. And in case you may be thinking, “Oh, well, they don’t really mean by that what it seemed like they meant. You know, you just took them out of context. They don’t actually teach that we can speak things into existence like God did, do they?” Well, yeah. This is a tweet from Creflo Dollar, “As spiritual beings who possess the nature of God, we have the ability to speak things into existence just like God did.” Yes they do teach this…absolutely. And people accuse me all the time of taking these folks out of context. No I’m not, I wouldn’t want to take…I wouldn’t want anybody to take me out of context, and I’m not doing it with him. They do teach these things. This is not an aberration, this is mainstream Word of Faith. Most of the Charismatic Movement, all of the Word of Faith Movement, all of it. As was pointed out earlier, there are some people in the Charismatic Movement who would not go into Word of Faith land but unfortunately once you take that Charismatic position, and we’ll talk more about those issues tomorrow, the apostolic gifts and things like that, how God does and does not speak, but once you take that Charismatic position, it is a very slippery slope right in the Word of faith. Few people put on the brakes, the vast majority do not. Watch this video clip from Gloria Copeland, dealing with the doctrine of positive confession. GLORIA COPELAND: You know, you’re supposed to control the weather. I mean, Ken’s the primary weatherman at our house, but when he’s not there, I do it. You can even see what’s happening out there. It shows just like they have at the…like the news, I mean, he’s got the computers, got the current weather on it and all that for flying. So sometimes I’ll hear something, I’ll hear the thunder start and maybe he’ll still be asleep and I say, “Ken, you need to do something about this.” And knowing that…but you are the one that has authority over the weather. One day Ken and Pat Boone, we were in Hawaii at their house and they were sitting outside and there was a weather spout out over the ocean. And that’s like a tornado except it hits the water. And so they were sitting there and they just watched it, rebuked it, it never did anything. One day I was in the airplane in the back and my little brother was in the back with me and Ken was up front flying. And we were not in the weather cause we don’t fly bad weather. But we could see the weather over here. And I looked out the window and that tornado came down just like this —- down toward the ground and Ken said, “I rebuke you in the name of Jesus, you get back up there.” So this is how I learned how to talk to tornados, I saw this. And that tornado went whoop-whoop-whoop-whoop, even while I was watching them. My little brother was not a devout Christian at that time and that was really good for him to see. So you’re the weather man. You get out there or the weather woman, whichever it is, and you talk to that thing and you tell it you’re not coming here, I command you to dissipate and you get back up there in Jesus’ name. Glory to God. I won’t charge you extra for.…” (END) JUSTIN: That…that really does not deserve a comment but I’ll offer a couple real briefly. If…well, let’s back up. Did you notice how she said we can control the weather but we don’t fly in bad weather? Why not? I mean, if you can control it, fly through whatever what to fly through. Honestly, just a little common sense goes a long way in clearing a lot of this stuff up. I mean, aside from the theology, just some common sense. But if it is true…if it is true that Gloria Copeland…and by the way, it’s not just Gloria Copeland, Benny Hinn says he can do it, Jesse Duplantis(?) says he can do it, Rod Parsley says he can do it. They all claim to be able to control the weather. If it is true that the faith teachers can control the weather by the words that they speak, then I would submit to you that these prosperity preachers are the most wretched, callous, heartless, selfish, narcissistic, uncaring, wretched people alive on the face if the earth. Where were they when Hurricane Katrina rolled into town? Where were they with Hurricane Sandy? Where were they when the wild fires were raging out of control in Australia? Every year thousands and thousands of people are killed in weather-related disasters all around the world. If it is true that they can control the weather, but choose not to do anything about it, then they should be charged with thousands and thousands of cases of negligent homicide, each and every year. But, you know, I’m not really that hard-nosed, I really don’t think they should be charged with thousands of cases of negligent homicide because they can’t do what they claim they can do. They’re liars. They’re liars. Does it remind you, by the way, of someone else who was able to control the weather? Yeah, they try to elevate themselves to the same authoritative level as Christ. In fact, direct quote, Kenneth Hagen, the Christian is just as much an incarnation as was Jesus of Nazareth. This from Joel Osteen, still dealing with positive confession. You recall the account in Luke’s gospel of the angel giving the announcement of…to Elizabeth of the up-coming birth, then up-coming birth of John the Baptist? You recall this? And when her husband Zechariah heard about this, he kind of, you know, scoffed at it a little bit. Remember? Cause they were advanced in years. And what did God do in response to this? What did He do to Zechariah? Closed his mouth for six months. For a very interesting take on why God closed Zechariah’s mouth? This from Joel Osteen. Joel Osteen says, “Why did God take away his speech? It’s because God knew that Zacharias negative words would cancel out His plan. See, God knows the power of our words, He knows that we prophesy our future and He knew Zachariah’s own negative words would stop His plan.” Unbelievable! |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 8:07pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
continued 3 So, according to Joel Osteen, God was up in heaven looking down and He saw Zachariah making negative confessions and God just went into a panic. “O my goodness, what am I ever going to do? I wasn’t counting on this?” And so in a last-ditch effort to save His plan of redemption, God reached down and closed his mouth and made him a mute. Whoo! Boy! That was a close one. No concept of the sovereignty of God…none. The prosperity gospel has no concept of the sovereignty of God. And this is not an aberration, this is mainstream. This is mainstream. The god, little G, of the prosperity gospel is a very weak, very effeminate God. It’s not the God of the Bible. The Word of Faith Movement is just as much a theological cult as is Mormonism, or Jehovah’s Witnesses. This is interesting. This is a New Age book, got nothing to do with the Word/Faith Movement in and of itself. Supreme influence, title, Supreme Influence. Change your life with the power of the language you use. Totally New Age, this was in Barnes and Noble New Age section, nothing Christian about this. Let me show you Joyce Meyer’s book, one of her recent books. Now this is a Christian. “Change your words, change your life, understanding the power of every word you speak.” You see how similar this is? It’s the same thing. Cultic doctrine cloaked in a little bit of Christianese. That’s all it is. At the heart of the prosperity gospel Word of Faith Movement is what is called the little gods doctrine. All of the faith preachers teach that if you are a Christian, you are in fact a little god. Watch this, quote/unquote exposition of Genesis 1:26 and 27 from Creflo Dollar, undoubtedly the most aptly named of the prosperity preachers. But watch this….watch this from Creflo Dollar. CREFLO DOLLAR: In verse 26 and verse 27, God now submits Hisself to this principle of everything producing after its own kind. And in verse 26 and 27, let’s read it out loud. Ready, read: “And God said, ‘Let us make man in our image after our likeness and let them have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth so God created man in His own image, in the image of God, created He Him, male and female, created He them.” Now that’s interesting because if everything produces after its own kind, we now see God producing man. And if God now produces man and everything produces after its own kind, if horses get together, they produce what? Horses. And if dogs get together they produce what? Dogs. If cats get together, they produce what? Cats. But if the Godhead gets together and say, “Let us make man,” then what are they producing? They’re producing gods. Now I’ve got to hit this thing real hard in the very beginning because I ain’t got time to go through all this. But I’m going to say it to you right now, you are gods, little G. You are gods because you came from God and you are gods. You’re not just human, the only human part about you is this physical body that you live in. The real me is just like god.” (END) JUSTIN: The real me is just like God. Blasphemy…blasphemy. Dear friends, when the Bible says that God created man in His image, that means that as human beings you and I are the pinnacle of God’s creation. We are the pinnacle of this creation and we have the potential and the capacity through a saving relationship with Jesus Christ to know God. None of the other created order has that privilege and ability . I love dogs. I do, I like dogs. I really do. I grew up with black labs, love dogs. But the greatest, smartest dog in the world will never know God cause he’s not created in God’s image. Cats for sure aren’t. (Laughter) Just kidding. But…but just kidding cat lovers, sort of. But we are…but we are. And I don’t care what PETA says, you and I are of infinite more value than a chicken or an aardvark or platypus. We are the pinnacle of God’s creation. But the Bible is very clear. There is only one God and He is a jealous God who will not share His glory with another, is a jealous God. And if I remember my Bible correctly, wasn’t the desire to be just like God kind of what led to the whole Fall thing in the first place? How ironic, the very thing, the very first temptation that led to the very first sin led to this whole fallen depraved state, in the first place is at the core of the Word of Faith Movement? They teach it as truth and they want you to believe it. How ironic, how dreadfully ironic. Who else in the Bible wanted to be just like God? Satan. He wanted the worship that God was getting. And he rose up in rebellion against God and it got him and a third of the angels along with him kicked out of heaven. The little god’s doctrine is quite literally a doctrine of demons and the prosperity preachers teach it as truth. I want us briefly to look at what the faith teachers teach about the doctrine of the Fall. We’re going to breeze through these real quickly. Number one, the faith preachers teach that Adam was an exact duplicate of God, not a little like God, not a lot like God, he was God, that God literally reproduced himself in Adam. Adam was a carbon copy Yahweh. Well we all know what happened, right? Adam sinned. Which, of course, brings up a very interesting question. If Adam was Yahweh and he sinned, was it Yahweh who sinned? Carried thee doctrines out to their logical conclusions, see how heretical they really are? Well when Adam sinned, he lost his supposed deity, transferred it to Satan. When this happened, the real Yahweh God lost His legal right to planet earth and was kicked out. And so according to classic Word/Faith theology, even as we sit here this afternoon, the real Yahweh God is up there somewhere but He’s got no access to planet earth. He’s been kicked out. Well, somebody has to fill that void, right? So Satan is all too eager to step up to the plate and Satan becomes a legal God of planet earth. Dear ones, Satan is not the legal God of planet earth. God is the legal God of planet earth. “Earth is the Lord’s the fullness there of, the world and they that dwell therein.” Satan is referred to as the God of this age. Second Corinthians 4:4, some translations say God of this world, that word in the Greek, aion or accurately rendered as age, it’s not referring to this dirt and rock and water sphere on which you and I are now sitting. It’s not talking about that. Paul was making a theological point, not a legal point. God is the legal God of planet earth. Well, guess what happens when a person gets saved? Guess what he gets back? He gets his godhood back. He regains his deity. He becomes God again just like Adam was before he fell. And this is why the prosperity preachers hold so tenaciously to prosperity, to health and wealth because we’re gods. And a god cannot be poor and a god certainly cannot be sick. A lot of people think that this stuff that you see on Christian television, and by the way, it’s not just Christian television, there are thousands and thousands, and thousands of churches all around the world that teach this stuff. It’s not just health and wealth. Those are just offshoots of a much more serious core theological problem with the Movement. It’s a different gospel. But this is why they hold so tenaciously to health and wealth, we’re gods. What other theological cult, by the way, does that kind of remind you of? Mormonism. A lot of different overlaps between Word of Faith, Mormonism, Roman Catholicism, and even, believe it or not, Islam and even Hinduism. Same basic heresies, they’re just packaged differently for different audiences. But the allure of health and wealth is one of the things that makes this Movement so appealing and yet so profoundly dangerous at the same time, because the prosperity gospel essentially says this, “Come to Jesus because He’ll make you wealthy, and He’ll heal your body.” They appeal to two of the most basic and universal of all human desires. Most people want to be wealthy. And very few people enjoy being sick. And there’s a few who just like the attention, but most people don’t like to be sick. And they’ll say, “Well, if you’ll just come to Jesus, then you can have it.” Well sign me up. That’s a pretty good deal. You’re telling me if I come to Jesus, if I ask Jesus into my heart, He’ll make me wealthy? He’ll heal my body. I don’t have to be sick anymore, I can have my best life now? Yeah. Yeah, I’ll try Jesus. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 8:07pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
continued 4 But is that the real gospel? Or is the real gospel something a little bit more like this, “Come to Jesus because you’re a sinner and because of your sin, the wrath of God abides on you. And the only way to have that wrath removed is to repent of sins, turn from sins, and place your trust in the risen Lord Jesus Christ. And then, you will be saved. But on this earth? You’re not promised money, you’re not promised healing. What are we promised? Persecution. Some of those who live godly in Christ Jesus may be persecuted. All who live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.” That’s not as popular. Saying come to Jesus cause you can be rich…God will heal you. Friends, if you come to Jesus for those reasons or any other reason other than to escape the righteous wrath of God, you’ve come for the wrong reasons. False decision, false conversion, there is no prosperity gospel. There is no social gospel, thank you very much Tony Compollo(?) there are no adjectives to the gospel. If you add an adjective to the gospel, you’ve got a different gospel. There is just the gospel. That’s it. Related to their emphasis on health and wealth is their softening of sin…their softening of sin. They may mention it from time to time, but they don’t go deeply into it. They don’t talk about sin very much. If they do, it’s just kind of in a casual surfacy sort of way. Watch this video clip from Joseph Prince. Joseph Prince is an up and coming, probably the fastest rising star right now in Word of Faith theology, watch this from Joseph Prince as he’s being interview of TBN. Listen carefully cause not everything he says here is wrong. TBN: To do this…but you’re getting the same kind of response aren’t you? People need and want… JOSEPH PRINCE: You know the word repentance like Joel said is from the Greek metanoia which literally means change your mind. And every time like Joel, I mean, preaching the Word without using the word repentance sometimes, well people’s minds are being changed all the time, from thinking this way negatively to thinking positively. JUSTIN: Well, Joel…I mean, Joseph Prince says that the Greek word for repentance is metanoia. You know what? He’s right. And then he says that the word metanoia means to change your mind. You know what? Right again. But then did you notice how he fleshed it out? He said, “We may not be using the word repentance, you know, let’s not confuse anybody with theological terms that the Bible uses, so we may not be using that term but we’re teaching people to repent all of the time. When people go from thinking negatively to thinking positively.” Friends, that’s not repentance. By his definition of repentance, we could all repent simply by joining the optimist club, having a sunnier outlook on life. That’s not repentance. Genuine repentance is a change in mind, but it comes when God’s Holy Spirit grants repentance, He gives us a godly sorrow over our sin and when He grants us repentance, there is evidence of that. There is fruit of that. And that will be evident to other people around us. There will be deeds. Paul says, “So, King Agrippa, I kept declaring that all people should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance.” John the Baptist, “Therefore bear fruit in keeping with repentance.” Does this mean we do good deeds in order to repent? No. But when God grants repentance, deeds, fruit, will be a natural outflow of that. It is a change in mind but it’s a change in mind that results in a changed life. Live to the glory of God. Watch this video clip from Myles Munroe. VIDEO MODERATOR: We get the mind of God about His will, we pray it. When we pray it, we give Him legal right... MYLES MUNROE: ...to perform it. Yes. Let me define prayer for you in this show. Prayer is man giving God permission or license to interfere in earth’s affairs. In other words, prayer is earthly license for heavenly interference. VIDEO MODERATOR: That’s incredible. (Applause) That is incredible. MYLES MUNROE: God could do nothing on earth…nothing has God ever done on earth without a human giving Him access. VIDEO MODERATOR: So He’s always looking for that somebody. MYLES MUNROE: Always looking for a human to give Him power permission. In other words, God has the power, but you get the permission. God got the authority and the power, but you’ve got the license. So even though God can do anything, He can only do what you permit Him to do. JUSTIN: God can only do what we permit Him to do. Dear friends, I would submit to you this afternoon that God can do whatever He jolly well wants to do and isn’t losing a great deal of anthropomorphic sleep over whether or not He’s got our permission to do it. God can do whatever He wants to do. Don’t take my word for it. Psalm 115 verse 3, “Our God is in the heavens, He does whatever He pleases.” Prosperity preachers, Word of Faith preachers will say, “Oh yeah, but that just means that God can do whatever He wants to do in heaven, not one earth.” Whatever the Lord pleases He does in heaven and in earth, in the seas and in all the deeps. Oops! God can do whatever He wants to do. He does not need our permission to do it. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 8:07pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
continued 5 You see, they have no concept of the power of God. They accuse us as cessationists of not believing the power of the Holy Spirit, limiting Him. No, they’re the ones who limit God, or at least think they do cause God needs our permission. Watch this from Jesse Duplantis: This will bless you, watch it. JESSE DUPLANTIS: Friends have frank and open conversations with each other. I’ve done that with the Lord. I’ve had the Lord say, “Jesse.” I’ve had a God come tell me, “This is what I’m going to do.” I’ve had the Lord and He’ll say, “What do you think about this?” God has asked me for my opinion. JUSTIN: God asks Jesse Duplantis for his opinion? Pray tell continue, let’s not take him out of context, so continue Jesse. JESSE DUPLANTIS: I said, “Well, Lord, since you asked, maybe I’m doing...” He said, “No, we can talk frankly. What do you think?” I said, “I don’t think you ought to do that.” He said, “Why you don’t think I ought to do that?” I said, “Well, you know, I know you know people more than I do, but you know, Lord, if you just let me…let me do a little bit more work on this individual, I think we can get him to you.” He says, “Okay, go ahead. Do what you have to do.” And I tell you what, the Bible said he who wins souls is wise. JUSTIN: And he who thinks he can counsel God is a fool. Who is this…who is this that darkens My counsel by words without knowledge? Who does this man think he is? These people are not Christians. Oh Justin, are you saying that they’re not saved? That’s exactly what I’m saying. That’s…you can mark my word, know they’re not saved. You cannot be indwelt by God’s Holy Spirit who leads us into truth, who sanctifies us in the truth, who illumines the meaning of God’s Word to us, you cannot be indwelt by the Holy Spirit of God and teach these kinds of blasphemies, these kinds of heresies. (Applause) The Holy Spirit would be screaming at them. Or the people in this Movement, the lay people, are they Christians? Most are not, the vast majority are not. There will be a smattering of real believers, but hear me, hear me, dear ones, when God saves somebody, He changes them and He leads them into truth. Can a genuine Christian be in serious theological error? Yes, for a season, not indefinitely…not indefinitely. If the Holy Spirit is strong enough to save you, He is also strong enough to move you out of a theological cult. We should be very, very concerned for our friends and family members who follow these false teachers. If the Holy Spirit is not screaming at them, is not convicting them, you know, something here is wrong. I can’t tell you how many e-mails I have gotten from people all around the world who are in this Movement and God saved them. Some people didn’t even know what was happening at the time. That happens to a lot of us, don’t even realize at the moment of what’s happening. But when God saves them, He moves them out…He moves them out of these heretical Movements and it usually doesn’t take very long. Are Roman Catholics saved? Not if you agree and embrace all that the Roman Catholic Church teaches, no. My wife was saved out of the Roman Catholic Church. And after her conversion, she remained in the Catholic Church for about four weeks. She was gone. She couldn’t put all together, you know, all the theological terms and all that, you know, couldn’t give you a dissertation on the difference between imputed and infused righteousness, but she knew it was wrong. The Holy Spirit was inside of her, growing her, leading her out of error. If you have a friend or a family member in this Movement, plead with them, show them the truth. They’re in a cult. Watch this, chasing a little rabbit there, but it’s so serious, watch this from Jesse Duplantis. JESSE DUPLANTIS: I’m going to say something that’s going to knock your lights off. God has the power to take life, but He can’t. He’s got the power to do it, but He won’t. He’s bound. He can’t. He says death and life is in the power of whose tongue? Yours. Are you ready for this? Do you want something to knock your lights off? You choose when you live. You choose when you die. Death and life is in the power of your tongue. JUSTIN: So, God has the power to take life, but He can’t. I think that might come as a bit of a surprise to a number of people in the Bible. Remember King Herod when God killed him and he was eaten by worms? Remember Uzzah, reached up to steady the ark and God struck him dead. You think God doesn’t take obedience seriously? I think He would probably disagree with Mr. Duplantis. Who else? I don’t know, everybody alive on the face of the earth, except for eight people in that little flood thing. I bet they would beg to differ with Jesse Duplantis. I want us briefly to look at what the faith preachers teach about the person of Jesus Christ. We can establish they preach a different Jesus, and establish they do indeed preach a different gospel. It was referenced this morning, but just to show you this quote again, I believe it was Dr. MacArthur that read this quote. This is from Creflo Dollar…Creflo Dollar: “And somebody said, Well Jesus came as God. Well how many of you know the Bible says God never sleeps or slumbers? And yet in the book of Mark we see Jesus asleep in the back of the boat. Jesus came as a man at age 30. God is now getting ready to demonstrate to us and give us an example of what a man with the anointing can do. You all listen to me, please listen to me. This ain’t no heresy, I’m not some false prophet.” Dear ones, as a general rule of thumb, if a preacher actually has to tell you that he’s not a false prophet, chances are… But Creflo Dollar says it just because Jesus was asleep in the back of the boat and God never sleeps or slumbers, then He could not have been God. That is ridiculous. When Jesus came to this earth, He was fully God and fully man, the God/Man. And as the God/Man, Jesus experienced many of the same things that you and I experience. He got hungry. He got thirsty. And guess what? He got sleepy. It does not mean He was not God. So why do they attack the deity of Christ like this? Because they…again as I said earlier…they want to elevate the Christian to the same status as Christ—all the rights, all the privileges, all the powers. We are just as much an incarnation as was Jesus of Nazareth. Again, direct quote. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 8:10pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
continued 6 This from Kenneth Copeland. Now Kenneth Copeland, and this is a prophecy, according to Kenneth Copeland Jesus said this to him. “Don’t be disturbed when people accuse you of thinking you’re a God, they crucified me for claiming that I was God, but I didn’t claim I was God. I just claimed that I walked with Him and He was in me, hallelujah, that’s what you’re doing.” Unbelievable. Jesus most certainly did claim to be God. “Before Abraham was, I am. If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father. I and the Father are one.” Jesus most certainly did claim to be God. And any Jesus he’s preaching who did not claim to be God, is not the Jesus of the Bible. If they preach a different Jesus, they preach a different gospel. This from Copeland. “And I say this with all respect so it don’t upset you too bad, but I say it anyway: When I read in the Bible where He says, ‘I am,’ I just smile and I say, ‘I am, too.’” Watch this video clip from Larry Huch and Paula White. And, gentlemen, if you’re in the sound booth, this video has a little bit lower level of audio, if you could just turn this up just a little for this one clip. PAULA: We really begin to understand that, that when Jesus Christ paid the price, the first thing that happened after He said it is finished is the veil was rent from top to bottom, signifying that no man could do that, but the price that was paid was there’s now no separation, so that we have direct access in the Holy of Holies. We understand according to Hebrews that Jesus is our High Priest and He’s the first of many brethren, which means I now come into a priestly anointing. So I now can walk… LARRY: Say that again, because they don’t get it. PAULA: I now come into a priestly anointing… LARRY: Jesus is not the only begotten Son of God, he is not. I’m a son of God. PAULA: He’s the firstfruit. LARRY: He’s the firstfruit, He’s the firstborn of many. But Jesus is not the only begotten Son of God. JUSTIN: Can you believe that? Flat out denying that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God. Have they read John 3:16? Friends, those of us who are saved, who have been regenerated by God’s Holy Spirit, we are children of God by adoption. There’s only one who is begotten and His name is Jesus. Watch this video clip from Victoria Osteen. This is Joel Osteen’s wife and she is leading a communion service at their quote/unquote church which is problematic in and of itself, but that’s another issue. And she actually starts off pretty good, but it goes downhill real quickly. Watch this from Victoria Osteen. VICTORIA OSTEEN: You see, Jesus walked this earth in a human body. He was man, He was God made flesh. The Bible says He was tempted and tried in every way, just like we are, but He overcame. See, Jesus was man until God touched him and put the Spirit of the living God on the inside of him. And that’s encouraging today. JUSTIN: No, that’s heretical today. Jesus was just a man, just a man until God touched Him, put a Spirit on the inside of him, just a man. We are just men, just women and so when we get saved supposedly, we are just as much an incarnation as was Jesus of Nazareth. Wealth, health, speak things into existence, it’s a different gospel. They’ve got a different God, they’ve got a different Jesus, they’ve got a different gospel. Dear friends, it’s not enough, okay this is going to sound heretical in and of itself, but bear with me…it’s not enough to believe in Jesus, it’s not enough to believe in Jesus…you’ve got to believe in the right Jesus. Mormons believe in Jesus. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe in Jesus. Muslims believe in Jesus. You’ve got to believe in the right Jesus. You’ve got to believe in the Jesus of the Bible. I want us briefly to look at the spiritual death of Jesus. This is a fundamental teaching that all of the faith preachers teach. They teach that Jesus’ death on the cross was not enough to pay for sins, not enough. That when Jesus died on the cross, the work of the atonement had just begun. And for time’s sake, I’ve got multiple, multiple videos of this, but time’s sake I’m not going to get into them. But this is something that they all teach. They teach that when Jesus died on the cross, He then went to hell, suffered, was tormented in hell, died spiritually, and ceased to be God. And then Jesus had to be reborn. Jesus had to get saved. And they say that that is where the real atonement for our sins took place, not on the cross but down in hell. And they all teach this. Even Joel Osteen has taught this. Joyce Meyer teaches this. Benny Hinn, Creflo Dollar, all of them, Kenneth Copeland…I mean, run the gamut, they all teach it. Bill Johnson, Bill Johnson in Redding, California, he’s one of the leaders, movers and shakers of the New Apostolic Reformation Movement. This is kind of an offshoot of the Word/Faith Movement, it’s everything that Word of Faith is, even worse, they even have more emphasis on miracles and signs and wonders and prophetic utterances, and modern day Apostles and things like this. Bill Johnson is a wolf. He is a false teacher. Bill Johnson also teaches this. This is…they all do, they all do. And they use the support Jesus’ words from the cross. “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” Probably even shouldn’t get into this because it’s too much to unpack in ten or fifteen minutes. But this is where this comes from. It’s not just Word of Faith and the NAR(?), it’s also…this is commonly held by many evangelicals, that Jesus died spiritually and when He was on the cross He was separated from God the Father. Be very careful with that. Well Jesus is quoting Psalm chapter 22 verse 1, okay? So if He’s quoting Scripture, He’s applying not only that verse to Himself but the context of the passage to Himself. Okay? We don’t take verses of Scripture out of their proper context. Leave them in the context. And of all people who would know this, it would be of course Christ. So let’s look down a little bit further at the fuller context, Psalm 22, the Psalmist David continues, “But be Thou not far from Me, O Lord, for He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, neither has He hid His face from Him. But when He cried unto Him, He heard. Dear friends, when it comes to the atonement, it’s important that we not say too little, it’s important also that we not say too much. There’s a certain mystery there that we’ll never fully understand this side of heaven. Was the agony of the cross the flagellation? Yes. The thirst? Yes. The nails? Yes. All of those things. It was more than that. It was the righteous wrath of God being poured out on the Son. In Jesus, God the Son fully drank in all of God’s wrath. Absolutely. But it was not a spiritual death. Dear Friends, if Jesus died spiritually, then that means He ceased to be God because what is God? God is Spirit and He must be worshiped in Spirit and in truth. So if Jesus died spiritually, then He ceased to be God. And if Jesus ceased to be God even for an instant, He never was God to begin with because God cannot cease to being God. Are there things that God cannot do? Yes, there are. God cannot sin. He cannot lie. God cannot deny Himself. God cannot cease being God. So if there’s ever a time when Jesus was not God, then He never was God to begin with. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 8:10pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
concluded There was anguish, to be sure, spiritual anguish, but not a spiritual death. The Psalmist very clear, “Be Thou not far from Me, O Lord, He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, neither has He hid His face from Him.” What else did Jesus say on the cross? “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do. Father, into Thy hands I commit My spirit.” Jesus was praying to the Father on the cross. He was praying to Him. So we know that those lines of communication, if you will, within the triune Godhead were still very much intact. I can’t wrap my mind around that, none of us can, but it was not a spiritual death. It’s not a spiritual death. I mean, we could look at many, many texts, many texts, just a couple real briefly. “For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him where the things on earth, or in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. For Christ also died for sins.” How many times? “Once for all, the just for the unjust.” Not two deaths, one spiritual, once for all the just for the unjust that He might bring us to God having been put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit of God. Much more than, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. In whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace. It was the physical death of Jesus that atoned for our sins. Jesus did not cease to be God. Something that you’ll notice about every cult, every theological cult disparages the cross of Jesus Christ, that it somehow wasn’t enough to pay for sins. Mormons disparage it. Jehovah’s Witnesses disparage it. Roman Catholicism disparages it because Roman Catholicism does not believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. They believe you’ve got to add works to your faith. Friends, if you add anything to faith alone, you’ve got a different gospel. Roman Catholics, you may not be aware of this, but according to official Roman Catholic doctrine, when they have communion, they call it the sacrifice of the Mass, you know why they call it the sacrifice of the Mass? Because according to official Roman Catholic doctrine, when priests takes that little wafer, what they call the Host, and he lifts it up, he refers to it as the victim…the victim, Prince(?) Jesus was never a victim. His life was not taken, He gave it. But they lift up the quote/unquote victim and the priest is actually given power not to ask Jesus to come into the little cracker, but to pull Him out of heaven and put Him in the little cracker and that becomes the literal flesh of Jesus Christ. And then they sacrifice Him, sacrifice of the Mass. They sacrifice Him over and over and over and over and over, thousands and thousands of times each and every day. To put it real bluntly, they’re killing Him. That is official Roman Catholic doctrine. It’s kind of ironic that the Catholic Church may be changed a little bit now, but the Catholic Church has been pretty strong on abortion, you know, that’s good. We should all be, you don’t even have to be a Christian to know it’s wrong to abort a baby. But it’s kind of ironic that they take such a strong stand on abortion and yet the one person who actually truly does not deserve death, they’ve got no problem killing Him. It’s a different gospel. Do I hate Roman Catholics? Absolutely not. Love Roman Catholics, hate Roman Catholicism. Like we should hate any aberrant doctrinal system, any theological cult. And if we love our Roman Catholic friends and family members, we should love them enough to tell them the truth. Every cult disparages the cross of Jesus Christ. What else did Jesus say on the cross? “It is finished.” His work was completed on the cross. This has been just a jet tour over the Word of Faith Movement and I think now maybe we can see that it is indeed a different gospel. I hope this has been helpful to you. Tomorrow we’ll be looking at other aspects of the Word of Faith Movement. We’ll be looking at tongues some, we’ll be looking at people who claim they’ve been to heaven. Looking at that, how does God speak to us today? We’ll be looking at that. Healing, physical healing, is it always God’s will to be healed? If I’m not healed is it because I don’t have enough faith? Is healing in the atonement? Isaiah 53:4 and 5, by His stripes we are healed. We’ll be looking at all those in tomorrow’s session. So thank you very much for coming. http://m.gty.org/resources/sermons/TM13-10/the-devilish-puppet-master-of-the-wordfaith-movement-justin-peters |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by nlMediator: 8:58pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
WinsomeX: Let me respond to a few of the things discussed. 1. Jesus is not the only begotten of the Father. The speaker quotes from John 3:16. But the Word of God di not end there. After Jesus rose from the dead, He made us also begotten of the Father. From the time of resurrection of Jesus, you never hear the Bible refer to Him as the only begotten of the Father. Instead, He's called the FIRST begotten of the Father or the first born among many brethren - US. The change in terminology must mean something, doesn't it? 2. Jesus as God on Earth. I agree with Victoria Osteen there that Jesus lived on earth as a human being. He said it Himself that the Spirit of God has anointed Him to preach, etc. Peter said 'how God anointed Jesus . . . .' God does not need anointing. Jesus needed it. Because he operated as man empowered by the Holy Ghost. He lives as an example that as human beings, we have no excuse for not living a godly and impactful life. Because He accomplished the same. If He had lived as God, it would be impossible for us to try to follow His standards and footsteps. 3. Spiritual death. I commend the speaker for noting that it's not only WOF that teaches that Jesus died spiritually. Evangleicals do too. Billy Graham is a prominent evangelical that does, although he may not go as far as adding the element of fighting the devil in hell. The confusion seems to be centered around the meaning of spiritual death. Spiritual death simply means to be separated from God. That's what happened to Adam when he sinned and God kicked him out of Eden. He died as God told him, but not physically immediately. The immediate death was spiritual. Jesus hinted, if not stated, that God had forsaken Him at the cross. God forsook Him because, as Habakkuk tells us, God is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity. At the cross, Jesus bore our sins. God could not behold the sin. That's the separation that people call spritual death. I don't know what people quarrel with, regarding that. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by sammied(m): 9:03pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
WinsomeX: Judas and Esau do not apply here...if it does please explain. Esua simply sold his birthright....God didn't make him do so.....and Judas hung himself...given no way for God's mercy... The only valid one is David case....that's the one that relate to what we are saying... My point? God's mercy triumph his sovereignty most times when it has to do with man...plenty of such are in the bible...the quote you made about the bombing is what I am debunking...Prayers do Change the mind of God....especially prayer for mercy. Look at the case of Ahab I pointed out too....that verse 29...read what God said... God's sovereignty? YES...God's mercy? GREATER...when it has to do with man...that's my point.. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by nlMediator: 11:55pm On Dec 16, 2014 |
WinsomeX: How do people with this high level of ignorance get selected to speak at high profile conferences? So this guy is telling us he does not know the difference between refusing to confess what you feel and denying that such feeling exists in the first place? Lord, have mercy! And some people sat down for hours listening to this crap? |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 4:44am On Dec 17, 2014 |
nlMediator: The bolded is called Christian science. More appropriately it is occultism and it has no basis in the holy scriptures. You are the one that needs some enlightening man. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by vooks: 5:07am On Dec 17, 2014 |
nlMediator:OT is ONLY applicable to a Christian to the extent the same principles are emphasized in the NT. Firstfruits in NT has zero to do with offerings but it points to Jesus Christ How can one who actively and accurately prophesies, is of good standing and has never on any record contradicted the Word of God be FALSE? False apostles? Anybody clinging to that title and was not an eyewitness of the resurrected Christ is as false as they come. False teachers? Their teachings of course False evangelists? Their doctrine 4. Flashing the Jonah card. As a brother already pointed out to us, I guess God was lying when he sent a prophet to Hezekiah. By your stand, God sent his prophet on a foolish errand He never intended to execute. In fact, He never added any years to Hezekiah because there was no decree that he was going to die. Right?My brother, How many instances in the entire scriptures do you find men averting prophetic decrees? Using these exceptions to excuse EVERY epic fail ever so often is fraudulent. I will leave you defending your own but I know too well beyond NL you are hardly convinced https://www.nairaland.com/2002872/here-prophet-claiming-malachi-4s#28310356of your own words. look at this charlatan I agree with you that one may prophesy,preach and teach,evangelize . In the OT, prophets were not stoned for sinning so the example is out of place. What has never been excused is ACCURACY and DOCTRINE. FRUIT is not a sin or two but the essential you |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by nlMediator: 5:39am On Dec 17, 2014 |
WinsomeX: I'm not surprised you do not know any better. A disciple is not above his teacher. Since your teachers are this ignorant, one cannot expect anything dramatically different. What you bolded contains 2 different concepts. One is Christian Science and the other is Word of Faith. That you cannot make the distinction is part of the reason I tell you you're not realy qualified to discuss WOF. What surprised me is that a supposedly knowledgeable minister would conflate the two and as a result misinform and mislead the hearers. Either he is ignorant or he knows the truth but chose the path of deceit. It's hard to debate with those who cannot come to the discussion table with an honest heart. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by vooks: 6:02am On Dec 17, 2014 |
nlMediator:Good to clarify that. But there is no inconsistency The idea that there is a 'principle' behind every Mosaic Law that must be decoded is faulty. It takes PhD in theology to get past 100 out of the 614 laws. Still, some principles may be readily identified. When paul in Corinthians appealed to Moses to justify supporting ministers, he mentioned the entire sacrificial system (including tithing). This means the only principle in tithing is supporting ministers not imposed a fixed fraction. Those giving 10% in the name of living up to 'tithing principle' may as well bring animal sacrifices to pastors for them to feast  There is nothing wrong with borrowing principles, but there is everything wrong with borrowing principles over similar circumstances as first century when those principles were not borrowed. paul could have easily borrowed on tithing or first fruits to collect offerings. He didn't yet you are here flashing new revelations in the name of borrowing from OT. Ridiculous These ministries are one area where you employ active imagination to craft their exact role. The distinction pursued by Pentecostals is not more valid than random guesswork 5. I know some of you would want to create an image of a masculine God that never ‘apologizes’ instead of an effeminate God, as you say. There is one man in the Bible who understood God more than any other person. It was David. When Prophet Nathan came and told him what was wrong and prophesied that the baby would die, David was obviously familiar with your standards for judging prophets and your non-effeminate God. But what did he do? He still went ahead to pray to God. Because he knows the God he serves is a merciful God. That the prayer was not answered does not change the understanding he had of God. Nowhere in the Bible is David condemned for seeking to change prophetic outcome, disqualify a prophet, or make God effeminate because of that prayer. You’re free to have any image of God that suits you, but I’d rather serve the God of David.There are two excuses for failed prophecies; 1. Delayed judgement, and 2. Repentance. Note the magniotude of Nineveh repentance before responding. Which of these caused a prophecy of Eiffel Tower falling to shift to Asia Japan? https://www.nairaland.com/2002872/here-prophet-claiming-malachi-4s#28310356 What was the point of sending Jonah there? Jesus said they repented at Jonah's preaching. This man was a preacher Very true but you can't blurt out garbage and still ascribe it to the gift. False prophecies are not abuses of the gift of prophecy but absence of the gift 8. Funny enough, you see that scripture as referring to charismatic chaos. Yet, you believe prophets do not exist today. Which means that particular scripture has ceased and thus cannot be referring to Charismatics who exist today. See the inconsistency?.Told you once, the point is even if the gifts were operational today, they should follow biblical standards. Cessationists are simply pointing this out With what else can you judge a chef if not their cooking? Jerry curls? A prophet is a Christian and they should be judged on this basis first. When they go beyond this and prophesy, then prophecy is the other criteria we utilize. How do you judge a prophesying Christian minus their prophecies? 10. You keep on latching on to Peter and the sure word of prophecy. For the umpteenth time, Pater said the Word is a MORE sure Word. Not a sure word as you claim. Peter understood there are other sure words. In fact, the transfiguration experience he was describing was a sure word. Peter knew it was true. He just didn’t want us to depend on other sure words at the expense or in competition with the MORE sure word. Your’re simply adding to or subtracting from scriptures.You have the WITNESS of the apostles and a MORE sure Word. That's very different from saying we have revelations of 2014 and then a more sure Word 11. You and the cessationists have one thing in common. They claim that gifts have ceased without citing ONE scripture that says so. You reject some of their positions, based on made-up positions, without citing one scripture that supports you EXACTLY. It’s just your interpretation and conjecture.No comments Where is mbaemeka? You argue like him  |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 9:05am On Dec 17, 2014 |
nlMediator: I didn't ask for a debate. I asked for scriptures. Provide scriptures that justify the Christian Science and WoF aspects of the statements or remain content with the fact that you peddle occultic doctrines and practices. Here is your statement: nlMediator: Which of the statement above is WoF and which is Christian Science? And by applying basic English and possibly logic, what is the difference BTW the two statements? |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by sammied(m): 9:09am On Dec 17, 2014 |
WinsomeX: One of the major errors of all this divisions (Charismatic, cessationanist, pentecostal, Catholic...)etc is what I call: the STRETCHING OF TRUTH...truth stretched is no longer truth...it is truth plus something else. Sometimes it is called exaggeration Now the principle of focusing and saying what God says instead of saying what you see or feel runs throughout the bible. But word of faith has stretched it...infact over stretched it...and that's the error... This principle certainly has root in the bible...contrary to the cessationanist claim that it originates from christian science. that's a big error... First, how about Joel 3v10? Is that christian science? Second, Numbers 13v 16-33... the bible says that the Ten spies saying what they SAW that it was an evil report...but what they said was 'true' because that's what they saw...they gave account of the land flowing with milk but also the giants...and how they cannot take the land...in v33...look what they said...they were certainly saying what was 'true'...what they saw...but the bible called that evil report But look at what Caleb said in v30...look at what Joshua said in chapter 14 v 6-9...they didn't even mention the GAINTS...why? Is that christian science too? They SAW the giants but refused to say it they didnt confess it unlike the other Ten spies did....Caleb and Joshua only spoke God's word...they only declare the ability of Jehovah...inspite of what they SAW...to them what they SAW was irrelevant! You can read the whole story there.... Look at v28 of that chapter 14...how do you explain that? Is that christian science too? Third...Ist Samuel 17...look at David before Golaith...everyone CONFESSED what they SAW....did David confessed that? Infact...according to the cessationanist...David would have been charged with practicing christian science...He ignored what everyone else felt or saw...he Only spoke what God could do through him... In v28....Eliab...Davids elder brother got angry with David and charged him with pride...sounds familiar? Other examples of such are in the bible.... The rest of the story is there for pondering. My point.? Whatever God says or has declared in his word is far superior to what we feel, see or hear...we are to say and declare what God has said in his word inspite of what we feel or see....if that is Christian science, then I think they borrowed it from the bible.... Every one of this divisions, in accusing one another...automatically they are accusing themselves...in finding faults in one another automatically tells me there's faults in all of them.... Better to keep the focus of being like Jesus in character, words and deeds...than taking position with any of this groups..no word of faith, cessationanist, pentecostal, Catholic, charismatic etc..in the bible |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 10:27am On Dec 17, 2014 |
You appear clearly as one who has been wrongly taught the word of God and your type is the reason for this thread. Instead of jumping the gun and spewing what your pastors, most of them WoF inspired, taught you, you could take the time to listen to what the thread is saying. That you can bungle a basic doctrine on God's sovereignty is a proof of that. sammied: Have you heard of exegesis before? Do you understand topical teaching? Do you recognize the title of the thread? If you do, you will understand the reason for the emphasis. I do not see anything like stretching truth here. And if that's what it is may these truth be stretched even further than this. sammied: Please note your words: "focusing and saying what God says..." Where in the bible is anyone taught to focus and then say, except in New Age books. Let's consider your scriptures: sammied: Joel 3:10 Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong. ... and let the poor say I'm rich, abi? Where in that scripture did you see "focus and say", and I will add "so as to get". Joel 3:10 is part of a prophetic statement by God to Israel. It has nothing to do with focusing, saying and getting. Using that scripture to justify name it and claim it practices is part if the error of removing scriptures out of context to make it say what we want. That leads me to a major error of WoF: making scripture say what your greedy and depraved mind want and not submitting to the voice of scriptures. This is done mainly by quoting scriptures out of context. sammied: Classical Word of Faith! If you have not been taught this scripture as a WoFist, you have not learnt anything. There is a reason God showed all his wonders to Pharaoh, which these Israelites witnessed. There is a reason why that generation saw the red sea part and Pharaoh men consumed. There is a reason God appeared to that generation in bellows of cloud. It was to tell them he is God and this should impart faith in the heart of anyone except the extremely unbelieving. Abraham slept with Hagar when he didn't know God much in Gen 16. When he had known God, God appeared to him and commanded him to walk before him and be perfect in Gen 17. By Gen 22, when God asked him to kill his child, he understood that God could raise from the dead. He moved out in faith and today he is called the father of faith. Faith is not name it and claim it. Faith is knowing God. This is all that grieved God with that generation that perished in the wilderness. Caleb and Joshua however knew God, and it was shown in the confession and that is what saved them. There is nowhere in that story these men were said to focus and then say some pre programmed statement to win Gods approval. Name it and claim it is a cultic doctrine that has no basis in scriptures. sammied: Same thing applies to David here too. There was no focusing and saying anything. David statements came from a God he knew who had delivered him in the past. That's all. sammied: Sorry to bust your bubble but this is not bible doctrine, this is Christian Science. The bible is the Christian weapon of war. We don't read the bible so as to say things from so that we can get things in life. We read the bible, again, simply to know God. The knowledge of God you know will show not in your words alone but more importantly in your actions, your character. sammied: There is truth in what you have said to the extent that God's intention is not for division in the body of Christ. I however understand why sometimes certain designations are assumed for groups like cessarionists, Reformed, WOF, etc. It is to bring out their biblical emphasis and in other cases to show their errors to the world. There are thibgs to learn from each group but I am afraid there are more to unlearn in WoF than to learn there. There is one verse you left out of the name and claim it scriptures: Romans 4:17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. 4:18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. 4:19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's womb: 4:20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 4:21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. How about that?! |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by sammied(m): 11:48am On Dec 17, 2014 |
WinsomeX: Well...I will ignore the things you have added...the things I didn't say.....and your almost confrontational and personal attacks.... Clearly, you don't even understand my point....why are you fighting on 'focusing and saying' as though that's the main point? I could have as well used any other word.... Thank God you have quoted my examples above...the point is clear...several people were confronted with things in the bible...but they refused to look at those things rather...they spoke God's word ....wether they say things from a God they knew in the past or what God had promise them..... Most important thing is that...they ignored what they SAW and held on to what God had said or what they knew about God(as you say)....it's clear in those examples....chikenna |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 12:06pm On Dec 17, 2014 |
Summary of Justin Peter's Devilish Puppet Masters of the Word of Faith Movement 1. " The Word of Faith Movement, the prosperity gospel is actually rooted in the meta- physical cults, like Christian Science, New Age, New Thought, Gnosticism. Most of what you see on Christian television, on TBN and Daystar and Inspiration at Work, and the Word Network, and the Sea of Broadcasting, it’s not Christian, okay? It’s cultic, cultic doctrine that has been wrapped in some Christian terminology." 2. The whole concept started out with a man in the 19th century called Phinehas Quimby. Quimby theories are still practiced in New Thoughts today. Quimby influenced Mary Eddy Bakker, the founder of Christian Science. Christian Science and Word of Faith share a great deal in doctrine and practices. 3. The Grandfather of Word of Faith (WoF) is E W Kenyon. Kenyon's teachings greatly influenced Kenneth Hagin who is the legitimate founder of WoF. Hagin is known to have plagiarized a lot of Kenyon's work while claiming divine origin for his teachings. 4. The following are leading doctrines in the WOF: a. Positive Confessions: This doctrine teach essentially that we can create things like God does through our words. WoF teaches you can control nature with your words and create the sort of future you want through your words. It is clear from the bible that only God can create through his words. Much of this positive confession teaching find root in New Age and New Thoughts literatures. And it is no coincidence that many Books share similar titles with WoFist literatures. b. The concept of the born again man being a god. Scripture no such thing. Only Satan is said to have sought to be like God in scriptures and that is what WoF teaches essentially through this doctrine. c. They teach the allure of health and wealth. A doctrine that is foreign to the bible. d. They preach message that is low on the essential ingredient of sanctification and are very soft on sin. e. They have no concept of the sovereignty of God and seek to substitute God's power with human effort. f. They teach a low view of Christ. They divest Christ of his deity and instead confer it on man. They reduce Jesus to their own status. g. They teach a concept of Spiritual Death of Christ. That God was separated from Christ on the cross. That Jesus went to hell to suffer for three days and in the process secured our salvation. This way they disparage the cross of Christ, something that all cults, including Mormons and Muslims do. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 12:21pm On Dec 17, 2014 |
sammied: I apologize for what might have sounded like an attack on you. I understand that you didn't use "name it, claim it" phraseologies. It best depicts the doctrine of confession that we hear around and that's why I used it. I had tried to make the thread as devoid of attacks as possible but I must have succumbed to the latest comments on the thread. sammied: I agree that I overly amplified the "focusing and saying" thing but the truth is that that is essentially what word of faith is. You may not have meant it that way but the bid to use mind power to bring about health and wealth is "focusing and saying". You only accidentally used the right words and I thought I could draw your attention to it. And everyone of us can be guilty of this in a debate that's why you must be careful with your words on nl. Even you took out a phrase I used to depict God's sovereignty and ignored all else I said. But even at that my point was still not dented. so welcome to Nairaland.com. sammied: I agree. But understand that those people made their confessions not bc their was a formulae to it but bc they had a relationship with God and it showed in their words. WoF teaches name it, claim it. They don't teach people to know God. They despise suffering, one of the clearest ways God has designed us to know him; they turned it all to formula. If you still follow these teachings, you need to review them in the light of God's word. Cheers. |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by paulGrundy(m): 1:20pm On Dec 17, 2014 |
I will comment on this topic when it gets to page 100.  |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 9:54pm On Dec 18, 2014 |
At this juncture a Q and A session was carried out. For those interested in it, you may see it here: http://www.gty.org/resources/sermon-series/325/strange-fire-conference?Term=strange%20fire The next presentation is by Steve Lawson: THE PURITANS COMMITMENT TO SOLA SCRIPTURA |
| Re: John Macarthur's 2013 Strange Fire Conference by WinsomeX: 10:08pm On Dec 18, 2014 |
[size=16pt]THE PURITAN COMMITMENT TO SOLA SCRIPTURA by Steve Lawson[/size] Well, I can say if I only had one worship service to be a part of before I would go to heaven, I’ve just had it. I wouldn’t change anything. And I just thank the Lord for the beauty of the music that we have heard played by the orchestra, by the beauty of the voices from John Martin to Philip Webb to Kory Welch, and to hear all your voices and my voice for us to all lift our voices together in singing to the Lord these hymns that we have sung and what has been selected in the way that Clayton has led us, for the Scripture that was read by Dr. MacArthur for his heart-searching and beautiful pastoral prayer…every piece of this evening has had God’s blessing, I believe, upon it and we are singularly blessed of the Lord tonight to find ourselves here at Grace Community Church and to be a part of this conference. I do want to say thank you to Kory Welch who just sang this beautiful solo of Psalm 23, I’m very humbly grateful to say that all four of my children have attended and graduated from the Master’s College, three boys and one daughter. My three boys, Andrew, James and John. We are in to discipleship at the Lawson house. And then my daughter Peter (laughter) who left her net and came to the Master’s College. And when she graduated, the very first job that she had and the very first job she had ever had in her entire life was to work for Kory Welch. And what a wonderful experience that was for her and she has never had a better boss to work for then Kory Welch. And I can safely say that because she now works for me. Well tonight, the focus of our study tonight will be another historical theology overview of a critical issue that ties in wonderfully with this entire conference. And the subject that I have been asked to address and I am happy to do so and embrace it is the Puritan Commitment to Sola Scriptura. Arising out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century, there was sounded a trumpet blast that rallied the hearts of God’s people. That trumpet blast was a clarion call known as Sola Scriptura, which is Latin for Scripture alone. It really served as the foundation for four other solas: sola gratia, sola fide, sola Christos and sola de la Gloria. And these five all fit together really as one statement of truth, one declaration of the true saving gospel of Jesus Christ. Now think of it this way. Think of a magnificent ancient temple and a foundation upon which everything rest is sola scriptura, everything that we believe, everything that we obey, everything that we embrace and hold dear in the convictions of our soul is based upon this sturdy foundation of sola scriptura. Rome said we accept Scripture but it is Scripture and… Scripture and church traditions, Scripture and ecclesiastical hierarchies, Scripture and the church councils, Scripture and Papal authority, and the Reformers said, coming back to the Bible, “No, it is sola scriptura. It is Scripture alone. And if anything else is added to the foundation of the church, it will be like…it will be cracks in the foundation and it will not hold up the teaching and the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ. At the same time they said no to the Anabaptists and to the Libertines who wanted to add their dreams and their visions and their new revelations and their prophetic revelations. And the Reformers said no, it is Scripture alone. Upon this foundation are three massive pillars which really frame the gospel and uphold the gospel in its most basic and elementary proposition. Sola gratia, sola fide, solas Christos, salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Rome wanted to add good works and church membership and church attendance and baptism and marriage and last rites and indulgences and Mary and the treasury of merit and etc., etc., etc. And they just backed up their dump truck and kept adding and adding and adding all kinds of rubbish. And the Reformers, because they came back to the Word of God, Scripture alone, they said no, salvation the one true saving gospel is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. And when that is in place, when this foundation is in place, and these three immovable sturdy pillars are in place, then the roof and the pinnacle over the hole that points upward is sola de gloria, for the glory of God alone. That is the entire Reformation in a nutshell. That is the entire forest in a small acorn. That is the entire matter reduced to its most minimal parts but everything resting upon sola Scriptura. Now the Reformers, if you will, built a wall around this foundation. There could be no intrusion. There could be no additives, there could be nothing augmenting this pure foundation of sola Scriptura. After they passed off the scene, the next giants to step into a long-line of godly men were those known as the Puritans. That Puritan age really began in the middle of that same century, the sixteenth century with the ascendency of Queen Elizabeth to the throne of England and the removal of Bloody Mary from her reign of terror as she had brought back her Catholic beliefs and put to death some 288 of the greatest, finest, preachers men and women this world has ever known, and the first to be burned at the stake by Bloody Mary is the man whose picture is always in the front of my preaching Bible, John Rogers who was burned at the stake in 1555 by Bloody Mary. After Mary’s reign, it became a new day with Elizabeth on the throne and there came now the new movement known as the Puritan Movement which sought to purify within the Church of England and bring the church back to the purity of sola Scriptura, sola gratia, sola fide, sola Christos, sola de la gloria. It was these Puritans who were so mightily used by God, few movements in church history have ever been more Bible-centered, Bible-oriented, than was the Puritan Movement. And tonight, I want us to consider their commitment to sola Scriptura. And I want to do so under three headings. I want to make this simple and I want you to see where we’re headed. These three headings regarding sola scriptura, it was defined by the Westminster Divines. Number two, it was deluded by the Quakers. And number three, it was defended by John Owen, England’s Calvin. That’s where we’re headed. I want to begin first now with sola scriptura defined by the Westminster Divines. And before we begin to look at perhaps the most remarkable statement, doctrinal statement of fidelity to the written Word of God, especially its place in history, I want to set before you some distinguishing marks just out of the Scripture itself of sola Scriptura. In other words, before we get to church history under this heading, I want you to think with me what are those distinguishing marks out of the Bible itself, regarding sola Scriptura, Scripture alone. It would have to begin, first of all, with the inspiration of Scripture. The Bible says of itself in 2 Timothy 3 verse 16, “All Scripture is inspired by God.” Every jot, every tittle, every chapter, every verse, every book within the canon of Scripture is God-breathed, it has come out of the mouth of God. It was not the authors who were inspired, it was the Scripture that was inspired. The authors were merely the instruments in the hand of God who would record what He intended them to write, using their own temperaments, and their own personalities, and their own vocabulary, and drawing upon their own background and experience, they nevertheless wrote precisely what God desired them to write. Jesus said in Matthew 4 and verse 4, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every Word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.” Every word of Scripture comes out of the mouth of God. It is as though divine revelation in the Bible has come down from God above. In Hebrews verse 12 we read, “For the Word of God is living and active.” This book is alive. This book has the life of God within it because it is the very breath of God, it is inspired by God. Jesus said in John 6:63, “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.” Now second, not only the inspiration of Scripture but the inerrancy of Scripture is involved and included in sola Scriptura. And because the Bible is God-breathed, it is therefore the Word of God. And because God is holy, God cannot lie. God is truth and every word of God is true. Titus 1 verse 2 says, “God cannot lie.” Are there some things that God cannot do? Yes there are. God cannot sin. God cannot deny Himself. God cannot lie. Hebrews 6 verse 18, “It is impossible for God to lie. Jesus prayed in John 17:17, “Your Word is truth.” Proverbs 30, verse 5, “Every Word of God is tested.” And so we uphold with the Puritans as we will see in just a moment, the very inerrancy of the Word of God. Let God be found true, let every man be found a liar. Third, the infallibility of Scripture, that all is recorded in Scripture must come to pass. The words of the Lord cannot fail. Isaiah 40 verse 8, “The grass withers, the flower fades away, but the Word of the Lord endures forever.” Jesus said in Matthew 5 verse 18, “Until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” Jesus would say, “The Scripture cannot be broken,” John 10 verse 35. And then fourth, the authority of Scripture, that because the Word of God is inspired, it is infallible, it is inerrant, it comes with the authority of God Himself. When the Bible speaks, God speaks. And when God speaks, He speaks with sovereign authority in His Word. Psalm 19 verse 7, it has already been read tonight. “The Law of the Lord is perfect.” They’re not the suggestions of the Lord. They’re not the options of the Lord. They are not the considerations of the Lord. It is the Law of the Lord and it is binding upon every man’s conscience and life. In Psalm 19 verse 8, “The commandment of the Lord is pure.” It is the very commandment of God to every man and to every woman, that is why Paul would say in 1 Thessalonians 4 verse 15, “For this we say to you, by the Word of the Lord. Continued in the next page. |
(1) (2) (3) ... (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (Reply)
DEBATE: Pls Present All The Biblical Contradictions And Lies Here. / Coronavirus: Oyedepo Cancels Services At Winners Chapel In Maryland, USA / Primate Ayodele And His Failed 2015 Prophecies
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 386 |