Print 
PDF.
.
The “Ask Rich” Page
.
Do you have a Bible question for me? Questions about the economy? Family? Something else? You can now post your questions on this new web page for that purpose using the commentary feature below.
A moderator will notify me (or I will retrieve the question myself) and the answer will be posted either within that same comment (if my answer is short) or as a new blog post teaching that elaborates on that topic more fully. In this latter case, the question will also appear here on this page with a link to the new article that answers it.
Note 1: Questions will not display immediately, and I have to have time to respond, so please be patient for the answers. Also, any inappropriate or profane questions will be disregarded and deleted without ever being displayed or acknowledged.
Note 2: I no longer answer any questions about Kenneth Copeland or his family, or his alleged “ministry,” on this webpage. This page was never intended for that purpose, so the few questions about them which I have answered below will be the ONLY ones that I will allow on this page from here on out. So don’t bother asking. We now ignore such queries and comments on this page.
(KCM/EMIC “whistle blowers” and ex-KCM cult members can use the Whistleblower Contact Form on KennethCopelandBlog.com if you are in need of personal ministry, or if you want to share your testimony with us. All contacts are kept confidential.)
Note 3: The geographically-identifying IP addresses of all people who submit comments on ANY page or post of RichVermillion.com are recorded for security purposes. Unfortunately, our public stance regarding the Copeland family, and other similar religious frauds, makes this necessary.
(The idolatrous mindset that is so common among the cult-like “groupies” that follow these wolves, tends to cause their followers to become unreasonable and irrational whenever their “sacred cows” are mentioned in an unflattering manner; but this is especially true when their idols are “kicked over” by documentable facts and sound theology.)
So any threatening or hostile submissions may be forwarded to law enforcement within that person’s location for further investigation.
Lastly, be aware that I base my answers first and foremost on the Bible (regardless of the topic) and then secondarily on sound data and science (such as archeology, economics, financials, case studies, etc.). Furthermore, if you have read any of my other articles here on RichVermillion.com, or on the “biblical rebuke” KennethCopelandBlog.com,you should know that I have a tendency to “tell it like it is.” So do not expect a “pat” answer to your queries, and be fully prepared to be surprised by what I write—because quite often biblical truth is shocking.
Now with these simple caveats in mind, ask away!
____________________________
so rich if these guys are shams whats in it for them do not blessings comes with giving rather it be them or someone else do you have a better means of giving some one hope the bible says the destruction of the poor is their poverty prov(10:15) is not poverty evil paul said we are to be delivered from this present evil world(gal1:4)is he talking about now or when we die is not the gospel the good news in which paul said he is not ashamed for it is the power of god and that it leads to salvation and in the greek and hebrew is not salvation more than the born again experience is not the power god’s word doesnot the bible states that all things are possible to those who believe(mk9:23)and that god is able to do exceeding and abundantly above all that we can ask or think according to the power that worketh in us(eph3:20)if the holy spirit in me bears witness with what these guys are saying according to the scriptures what then is the problem.please help a brother out not with beating and badgering the prosperity teachers but with scriptures that will deliver me from this present evil world give me hope how do a regular joe like meaccording to scripture live the abundant life that jesus died for.thank you very much sir wating for your reply.
Rich’s Answer: Tyrone, thanks for posting your question here on the Ask Rich page. I have answered you in a new post entitled, Prosperity vs. Theological Error here on this blog. Please go there for the details.
Mr.Vermillion,
Just wanted to send a note of thanks. I too have been ashamed of the tolerance in Faith and Charismatic groups of errant doctrines and twisted scriptures. However, for me, it has been very hard to minister to/share with these teachers and adherents due to obvious disagreements. Your page though [Rich note: I think Kevin is referring to Prosperity vs. Theological Error], has assisted me in remembering that these are our estranged brothers and sisters in Christ. This is excellent motivation to excercise the love of God and hope to restore our brothers and sisters.
KR
Rich’s Reply: Thank you, Kevin, for the encouraging feedback. We all surely have much work to do for the Kingdom if we are to see these people redeemed from error. Thankfully, we constantly find more and more true believers undertaking this task.
It always warms my heart whenever I have contact with my fellow co-laborers in Christ. It is a fact that the Lord is raising up many for this worthy endeavor… and it is surely a blessing to hear from another blessed co-laborer as you, my brother.
God bless you, as you continue to love Him, and labor with and for Him.
Always in Jesus,
- Rich
Have you listened to Jacob Prasch – an excellent Hebraic Christian teacher. He teaches on deception in the church, says a lot about Copeland, Hinn, Meyers etc.
Also can you explain more about the Kabbalah practices of Kenneth Copeland that you mentioned.
Excellent teaching on Theological error page. Keep up the good work.
Thank you for all you are doing. We have family members involved with KCM and are keen for them to know the Truth.
Paul and Rachael (Scotland)
_____
Rich’s Answer: It is so nice, Paul and Rachael, to have siblings from Scotland stop by and chat here on my blog.
I have not heard of Jacab Prasch or his teaching personally, but I will Google around and check him out now that you have brought him to my attention.
Regarding Copeland’s Kabbalah teaching (also spelled “Cabala” and other ways) Kenneth Copeland sat down for nearly eight hours one day with one Mr. Dan Stratton back in 2006 (who is an admitted and unrepentant member of the satanic cult known as the Skull and Bones). Copeland was personally taught blasphemous things by that practicing Kabbalah-ist regarding the Hebraic names of our Lord. Copeland subsequently began teaching this garbage himself publicly, and has since looked to this same perverted man at other times for additional “insights” (e.g. even during his public teaching as he consulted the man, who was sitting in the audience). I am sure there have been other times additionally beyond those of which I have direct knowledge.
Copeland has also publicly “endorsed” this same admitted member of a known satanic cult as an “apostle” when he proph-e-lied over him at the 2007 DC Victory Campaign in the Friday night service. Kenneth and Gloria Copeland (in conjunction with pastors George and Terri Pearsons) have repeatedly allowed him to “teach” at Eagle Mountain International Church (EMIC) as well.
Obviously, Copeland has strong connections with this false-apostle…but his connections are also with Stratton’s fellow cult members. These facts can be documented by video of several services and BVOV broadcasts, but also via Copeland’s own KCM website. Take special note thereon of all the search instances that reference Dan Stratton and Doug Wead (who is a surrogate of the Skull and Bones for many years through the Bush family).
Thus, the depravity of Kenneth Copeland and his family is quite extreme, but I am hopeful not beyond the reach of God’s grace if they will simply repent. Of course, that brings me to the very purpose of our own Copeland-redemption project, KennethCopelandBlog.com, wherein we are “calling on the man, his family, and his ministry…to simply repent.”
You can learn more about Mr. Stratton and how I know him from my post entitled, Comments About ‘Bonesman’ Stratton, here on this blog. There is extensive discussion on Stratton’s public teaching of Kabbalah in the commentary below that article. That will help you understand from whom Copeland was primarily influenced this blasphemous direction. My article The REAL Gospel also helps to give further clarity regarding what the Bible says about these matters.
Thanks again for commenting and posting your question here on the “Ask Rich” page. Blessings to you both there in Scotland, as you continue to follow the True Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ with all your hearts.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Why is your rebuke of kenneth copeland got so much information that is “COMING SOON”. If you felt the way about the information you have, you would be putting it on the web and letting people know NOW.
Otherwise, a more cynical person might be tempted to think that “COMING SOON” “COMING SOON” “COMING SOON” is just a way to make it look like you know more than you do and Kenneth is worse than you make him out to be.
Awaiting a swift reply,
Dave
Rich Answer: Excellent question, Dave. Fairly comprehensive answers to your query may be found on the new FAQ page of KennethCopelandBlog.com, especially under topics 1 & 2. Of course, there is additional clarifying information under the other topics as well, so please review that FAQ page in its entirety.
Thanks again for posting a question. I hope my reply was “swift” enough for you (chuckle); regardless, I always try to get to these questions at my earliest opportunity (as I noted above within the introductory text of this page).
Always in Jesus,
-Rich Vermillion
UPDATE: The KennethCopelandBlog.com project is now being more fully populated with information. Please review that website’s Table of Contents page for more information.
Hello everyone!
I guess it is to be expected, but our increased exposure regarding our KennethCopelandBlog.com project has greatly increased the number of questions coming in about the Copelands to this page. Questions about their house…their family…even one question about KCM’s similarities to Bernie Madoff’s ponzi scheme! (Oi ve.)
I know I have answered some questions previously (below), but frankly this page was not intended to be a bulletin board for Copeland discussions. Additionally, I clearly stated in the About page of that blog, and within some of the videos, that we do not want to field a bunch of questions about the Copelands and their personal habits. So respectfully, I am going to refrain from answering most Copeland questions from this point forward on the Ask Rich page. (I reserve the right to make an exception, of course.)
Any further questions posted here might be answered eventually on KennethCopelandBlog.com itself, however, especially in the FAQ page. So if you have a question, we are not forbidding you from asking. However, we are going to refrain from filling up this Ask Rich page with any more material that is better suited for that website. Thank you all for understanding.
Media persons can still contact me by our Contact page to discuss these issues. We have received media requests for comment/information before, and will continue to answer those to the best of our ability.
Now…if you have any questions on ANY topic non-specific to the Copelands, please feel free to post that question here. In accordance with the rules set out at the top of this page, we will do our best to answer you query.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich,
You might consider these questions dumb, but it would be much appreciated if you can answer these two questions from a Biblical perspective for the benefit of someone close to me from whom these questions came from. First question: as Adam and Eve were the first created beings by God on earth, and later Eve gave birth to Cain and Abel, who were the people Cain feared would kill him after God put him under a curse (Gen. 4:13), and who did Cain marry afterwards? The second question was: fossil remains have been discovered by scientists from the different parts of the world and they’ve always determined that these dinosaurs have existed on the earth millions of years ago, how can you explain from a Biblical perspective that this study is flawed as the earth has existed only for more than 6 years now (if my understanding is right), and that we’re now living in the last days; how is it possible for these dinosaurs to have even co-existed with people from the time of creation? I’ve always found these questions puzzling and would really appreciate it if you can shed light on these.
Thank you much:)
Connie
Connie, thanks for asking a question on my “Ask Rich” page. And no, your question is not “dumb,” because it touches on biblical issues of faith and the integrity of God’s Word.
However, I will merely serve here to point you to articles which will answer your queries. There are “experts” in these fields who can not only delineate the Scriptures nicely on these topics, but also cite specific scientific evidence that support the Bible’s account. So here are the links by topic:
Cain’s Wife:
Who Was Cain’s Wife?
Dinosaurs:
Dinosaurs and the Bible
From Ancient Dinosaurs to Biblical Truth
What Really Happened to the Dinosaurs?
Were Dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark?
Young Earth Evidence (Creation):
Six Evidences of A Young Earth
A Young Earth—It’s Extremely Relevant
All of the above articles are found on AnswersInGenesis.org, but another wonderful website to explore is the Creation Evidence Museum website at CreationEvidence.org.
Thank you for your great questions.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich,
Thank you for taking the time to provide Bible-based answers to my questions. I was surprised to learn that I’m not the only one who’ve asked these questions before. I’ve clicked on some of the links you’ve provided and have found the articles spiritually enlightening. I feel I can now defend the Bible regarding these issues. I will read the rest of the articles later to further my understanding of these topics.
My apologies for the typo error–I meant to say 6,000 years and not 6 years.
God bless!
Connie
After attending the 2010 SWBC and knowing that the Partner Service was actually Friday Morning (Friday Night was a typo, apparantly) could you please redact that from your page, KennethCopelandBlog.com.
Much appreciated.
Nope. Can’t do it. But I do appreciate the fact that you brought this to my attention.
Now to explain: First, the section of KennethCopelandBlog.com that you are referring to was a press release, which has already gone out all over the world. So in essence, there is not much I can do to redact that statement now.
Second, that information was based upon actual KCM scheduling information from the time the convention was occurring. Of course, their material on their website may have been a “typo” or they may have rescheduled. If I receive additional confirmation from others that the service occurred in the morning time slot, then I might add a clarifying statement to the page upon which I have that release (though I cannot do anything about the other copies in circulation on the Internet). Without that confirmation, however, I will leave things as they are at present. Besides, if they did change their “Partner Service” time back to the original slot (i.e. that it was not a typo on their schedule), it MAY have actually been because of our press release, which was distributed early that same morning.
Nevertheless, I am allowing your comment to display here (for disclosure sake) — though I normally do NOT allow KC-related posts on this page anymore, as I noted further above. However, at present, this will be the ONLY post on ANY of my sites regarding this issue for clarification purposes, unless I can confirm your testimony from other sources (especially sources that I know personally).
Let me note also that I am not questioning your integrity. I just need this information from “the mouth of two or three witnesses” to make any public change regarding something that I derived from KCM sources.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Update: I contacted one of my most knowledgeable KCM resources, and their statement in the matter was as follows:
In the attachment, they had provided me one KCM source that scheduled “Increase Day” for Friday morning, another that had it Friday evening (actually the same one I saw when I was composing the press release), and then a link to the video of the actual AM service which shows that they did indeed do “Increase Day” in the morning. So in short, it would appear that KCM had conflicting information published about their 2010 SWBC Friday schedule.
Like I said, I cannot do much about the press release other than to post an addendum under the version posted on my own site (which I just finished doing).
Thanks for the heads up on this topic, however. I do like my information to be as accurate as possible.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Rich
Definitely the Copelands should be held accountable for any present wrongdoing. However, a lot of these sins happened a long time ago. How do you know the Copelands didn’t already repent for them?
Mrs. Glozier,
Thank you for commenting and asking your question. I tend to ignore most questions about the Copelands on this particular thread, as I mentioned I would in a previous post hereon. However, your query has great merit, and is certainly a good topic to address.
Of course, the best source for the answer is the Bible itself. Consider these passages, and my elaborations, below:
Note that Jesus said that those who “live by the truth” come out into the light where the rest of us can see their deeds. Why? “So that it may be seen plainly” that what they are doing NOW (i.e. as a result of genuine repentance) is being “done through God.” Now let’s note what the apostle Paul explained to King Agrippa concerning the content of his Gospel message:
So Paul, by the Holy Spirit, said very plainly that it is NOT enough for a person to simply “say” they have repented. They must also DEMONSTRATE that repentance by their subsequent deeds. Certainly, this same passage (and the one cited before it) clearly indicate also that “secret repentance” is not sufficient either. The very public nature of the Copeland family’s sin (and let me add, their ongoing sin, as they continue even today to practice deceit and fraud) makes it absolutely necessary that any genuine repentance be demonstrated publicly. Now, here is an example of this very principle, as had occurred under Paul’s ministry in Ephesus:
So we see genuine repentance being demonstrated above. These people had no fear of admitting publicly what their former evil practices were, because genuine repentance had “cleansed their consciences from dead works to serve the living God” (Hebrews 9:14). Furthermore, note that most of these FORMER evil deeds were done in secret, yet now that these people had repented, they were openly proclaiming and renouncing those evil practices. In truth, that is the only way to get free from such heinous and demonic bondage, as such a bold public declaration tends to prove that the person has made a SOLID determination to never return to such behavior again.
Thus, in summary: If the Copeland family ever truly repents, they will come public with their confessions and demonstrate their repentance by an OBVIOUS change in their subsequent behavior. In their case, that would include public financial accountability and honest business practices. At present, MinistryWatch.com still grades KCM with an appalling “F” for a financial transparency grade. According to Jesus within the citation above, such a fact indicates clearly that the Copeland family’s deeds are still very evil.
Lastly, please keep in mind that we have NOT posted all that we know about the Copelands’ nefarious activity and sins. We only periodically add content to KennethCopelandBlog.com when we feel impressed of the Lord to expose another aspect of their behavior. It is our sincere hope that they will repent BEFORE we have to lay bare the bulk of their heinousness. Also, though we have already exposed multiple lies and multi-million dollar frauds on the website, be assured that we have not yet posted the most disgusting things that they are doing.
Nevertheless, we have provided enough therein for any honest observer to determine that the Copelands are “bad trees” by their very obvious—and highly documented—”bad fruit” (note Matthew chapters 7 and 12). Unless “good fruit” is similarly displayed publicly, we can ONLY conclude that they yet remain “bad trees” and should continue to be rebuked (and avoided).
Thanks for stopping by to post this excellent question. I trust my answer was helpful.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich Vermillion
Rich, What do you think about John Paul Jacksons teaching on warefare? Like in his book, “Needless Casualties of War” I read the book many years ago and felt something attached, (even came to me in a dream). Now years letter I find some people talking about it, believing its completely right. While others like my pastor says no, its wrong. I can say that I did learn some good points in it, but I do not agree with all of it. Could you show through sqripture the balance on warfare? Thank you for your time, and this website. (I just found.)May God bless you even more.
Lori,
Thanks for the question. It would take a book-length treatise in order to show you through Scripture a balanced teaching on spiritual warfare. Consequently, I will have to refrain from doing so here and merely comment briefly on the other points of your inquiry.
I read Needless Casualties of War some years ago myself, and from what I remember of it, it seems my impression was the same as yours. There was some useful information therein, but several points upon which I feel there was insufficient biblical substantiation. To be fair, I would have to re-read the entire text in order to do a point-by-point analysis. Thus, I will recommend simply that you reject anything you read, written by any author, that is not clearly supported by Scripture. The Berean approach is always the safest:
Regarding John Paul Jackson in general, I think he’s got some useful teaching mixed in with some rather “edgy” material; mixed also with some error. (I am not aware of any outright heresy that he has propagated, however.) In general, he fits into the periphery of the category that most of the prophets that I am aware of in the USA also tend to fit: Namely, they are too emphatic on “spiritual” revelations and manifestations, and insufficiently founded upon the Word of God (though at present, my impression is that he is less guilty of this than others of which I am aware). Peter addressed the fact that even his “Mountain of Transfiguration” experience was subordinate to the “more sure word of prophesy” found within the written Scriptures:
I wrote about this issue some within my Preachers of Righteousness post, naming a few who blatantly fall into such a category. These types of “prophets” have fallen into the error I call, “pressure to perform.” They build their “ministries” with an air of “spirituality” that then burdens them to always put on a good “show” for their audiences. They feel that they have to act “prophetic” and thus, eventually they merely act pathetic. They begin to “prophesy” out of their own imaginations instead of by the Spirit of God (note Jeremiah, especially chapters 5, 14, 23, and 27; and Ezekiel, especially chapters 13 and 22), or they start to propagate “deep” teachings that sound “spiritual” but are sheer nonsense biblically.
In contrast, genuine ministers—including true prophets—consider it their duty to unfold God’s Word to their hearers. They desire to feed God’s sheep first and foremost. They build their ministries on God’s eternal Truth, and not upon supernatural manifestations. When the latter occurs, they flow with it. But if a minister is lacking in the former (i.e. sound ministry of the Word), then I seriously question the “source” of the latter (i.e. there are demonic “lying signs and wonders” out there too). If the minister respects God’s Word properly, they will only feel “obligated” to teach/preach that Word, not to “perform” signs and wonders or to put on false airs of “spirituality” as the freaky persons do.
Another tendency for such errant “prophets” is to see things happening in society around them, and then “prophesy” that such a thing is going to happen. In other words, they “predict” something that is even unsaved people can see is coming. In my post Prophets Come Lately (And Their Inept Counsel) I address this shortcoming as well. (Let me note here for fairness sake that I am not aware of John Paul Jackson being guilty of this particular behavior at present, but several I mentioned within Preachers of Righteousness do fall into this category.)
So in general: Take everything you read by John Paul Jackson (or anybody else, for that matter) with a proverbial “grain of salt” until you can compare those things with the Word of God. As Isaiah said so well:
I do believe there are some righteous prophets in the world today, of course. That is a New Testament ministry and reality that should be embraced. However, as was the case in Jeremiah and Ezekiel’s days, there seems to be MORE errant, “Balaamic” (see 2 Peter 2:15-16), and false prophets, in the world than there are genuine ones. Thus, you need to know your Bible and to be cautious when evaluating ANY minister. Also, NEVER get caught up in admiring the “preachers” themselves too much. Too many Christians today are “respecter of persons” and become so easily led astray if their “favorite” ministers get into error.
I also recommend that you become very studious of this 1965 prophesy by one of the great Pentecostal Generals, Stanely Frodsham, which is certainly about THESE DAYS that we live in. He truly saw into the Spirit and identified the tactics of the “wolves in sheep’s clothing” that are too common at present. That TRUE prophetic word will also reinforce some of the points I have just made in this reply.
Thanks for your question, Lori. I do hope my answer is helpful. Feel free to reply if you want further clarification.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Lori,
I thought about another point or two that I would like to make in reference to all those who fall into the “quasi prophetic/apostolic” category: I am concerned about their overemphasis of NON-biblical supernatural occurrences, as well as their lack of sound biblical teaching/preaching.
For example, there is the “orbs” phenomena. When people snap flash photographs during their services, these semi-transparent “orbs” of light can be seen in the resulting photographs (whether digital or film). I do not have a problem with God or holy angels creating such phenomena if they so choose. However, my problem is that:
The above concerns not only apply to the “orbs” issue, but also the gold dust, gem dust, “anointing oil” flowing from the hands, and other such supernatural phenomena that occurs so frequently in some circles today.
I cannot see those phenomena being done within the Bible specifically (nor have I have seen any scientific chemical analysis of the “gold” and “gem” dust to prove they are anything more than simply pyrite or glass). While I cannot rule out that such occurrences might SOMETIMES be done by God, the fact that the biblical supernatural signs (e.g. conviction of sin that leads to genuine repentance and salvation, healing the sick, raising the dead, physical translations from one location to another, true prophetic ministry, etc.) are NOT more prevalent in those circles, leads me to conclude that MUCH such phenomena are likely demonic and are NOT being performed by God. Anything that distracts from the KEY issues of salvation and holiness are likely not performed by the HOLY Spirit.
Furthermore, the Bible says, “These signs shall follow them that believe…” (Mark 16:17, KJV). The problem I see in these so-called “prophetic” and “apostolic” circles is that so many people are running to these “services” chasing after the signs, and are not having the signs follow them as they proclaim God’s truth to a lost and dying world:
Signs and wonders (in particular, the conversion of sinners) are supposed to follow genuine Christians. When people chase “signs” (especially when most of then are not recorded by example in the Bible) then there is something manifestly WRONG with the focus of such “ministry.”
I am not saying that a single service—or even a few services—might not have special manifestations of God’s Spirit that seem to override the minister’s plan for teaching. However, if the entire “revival” is of a character that it has little to no genuine teaching from Scripture—and particularly if the “signs” are predominately of a nature that they cannot be substantiated directly from the Bible—then I would avoid such “revivals” and be VERY suspect of them. I am also very wary of any “ministers” that develop (intentionally or unintentionally) a cult-like following of people who are enamored with them and their “giftings,” instead of being solely enamored with Jesus Christ. Any revival so characterized could be either:
Obviously, a case of the former would lead eventually to the latter. So all “revivals/outpourings” should be examined closely. If there are serious concerns manifest (such as I have outlined herein) then they should be subsequently shunned and avoided.
Genuine revivals, if they are to continue and have God’s blessing upon them, MUST be Christ-centered and result in conviction of sin, and bona fide repentance that leads to salvation through Jesus Christ. They will also have sound doctrine/teaching, and not strange “super spiritual” messages that are not (or which are poorly) substantiated by the Bible. God may move in and “take over” a service here and there just to bless His people, but the general flow of the revival in aggregate will be toward convicting sinners, sanctifying the saints (i.e. Christians made more holy in thought, word, and deed), and will produce other such holy and good “fruit.”
Healings, true prophetic ministry, and other such good and biblical manifestations of the nine gifts of the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 12) could and should occur frequently if God is pouring out His Spirit. However, salvation and sanctification are the key focal points of Scripture, and thus, are the key focal points of God’s Spirit. Thus, the Word of God needs to be preeminently manifest in sound teaching/preaching, for it is only through His Word that God promises that such things will occur. Again:
Again, Lori: Thanks for asking your question and provoking me to write so much on these topics.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Thank you Rich for such a good answer, and I say Amen to it! It’s funny you would say all that, because I have been searching things out, and though I used to say I was charismatic, now I say non-denomenational. There is so much crazy stuff out there. several years ago I turned off Christain TV, my spirit was grieved by so much of it. Then when I heard about Todd B, I went on line to watch one night, Holy Spirit in me said NO! Then when many charismatic leaders endorsed and put their approvel on it I lost what faith I had in them.I thought, what spirit are they following? I know we can all be decieved, as I have been before, and I prayed for them, but I don’t follow them.
There’s so much out there that many unsaved don’t want anything to do with the church. I’ve heard people say, the preachers are just about money. Then the other thing is, people don’t want religion, but want something that is real,(God) not this new age strange fire stuff.
Anyway Thank you for standing on the Word, and not wavering…We need more ministers who don’t compromise.
God told me to write a book, He gave me the 25 chapter titles, I thought I was done almost a year ago.400 pages. Now I’m going through re-reading to see if I can find anything that is not scriptually sound, as there has been so much teaching that we learn, that we really need to unlearn. This book needs to be truth, and therefore there is a couple topics I thought I’d do searches on to see what I could find. That is how I found you.
God Bless you! Lori
God bless you back, Lori. And let me give you an hearty “Amen!” in response also.
I agree on the label issue. I just call myself a Christian, and a Biblicist in regards to my theological approach (based on the Bereans in Acts 17). I am Spirit-filled, and am well acquainted with biblical Charismatic and Pentecostal theologies (along with Reformed, Wesleyan, and other theologies). However, much of what is called “Charismatic” today is nothing more than demonic manifestations and carnality. Charismania would be a more accurate description. So I avoid the “Charismatic” label also, especially since it is not really biblical to use such “labels” (note how Paul called them “carnal” in 1 Corinthians chapters 1 & 3) and my biblical studies have ranged far broader than the Spirit-filled categories of doctrine alone.
Thanks for popping back to post a follow-up reply. May God give you amazing wisdom for your book project too.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Rich,
Now I am looking at more things on your website like this page. What you said to Lori, I so needed too. It is not just that you are coming against what is wrong, you are also shinning the light in such a way I feel like a person who has been fed imitation “food” for so long that now that I have tasted the real thing-I just can not stop saying thank you. I wish you were on TV. That would give some real “food” to God’s people. Two “friends” from my past who I thought were saved but were such snakes to me, I told them of your blogs in an Email and of the Creflo Dollar video “pay tithes or die”. I had to let them know just in case they actually cared, for I had been one telling them that those preachers were good (in the past I did). Then I got nervous, I know what they are like, and what if they get on your sites saying horrible things pretending to be me.
Can someone who is not really saved speak in tongues? One of these “friends” did. I know they never knew a foreign language, we grew up together. This person did bad things while being “saved”. I am the one who prayed with them to get baptized in the Holy Spirit. I am guessing she just backslid. Could she have backslid her way out of salvation?
I needed what you said to Lori about the orbs and such. Since I gave up listening to Copeland, I started listening to Sid Roth and ones who came on his show like Katie Souza. Not to say they are wrong, I don’t know everything at this point. But since your comment to Lori, I will be more aware. People on tv like Kirk Cameron are so dry and I feel beaten up with his bible by the time he is done. But an expose by GoodFight ministries on Rock and Roll and such opened my eyes! I just wish there was someone like you preaching on the tv. But I know that would be a large sum of $$ to do. I don’t know the ins and outs of all of that, but couldn’t you sell commercial space to christian advertisers or something like that, I mean IF the Lord called you to be on TV. Not to stroke an ego or to highlight any man except the Lord, but man I feel the time has come for someone like you! And I wish we could bring back Walter Martin and other great preachers from the past. I mean, while God is weaning us off of the wolves, we need to see real men of God rising up.
May you and your family be blessed!
Wow, Kathy. That is a very kind post, and one loaded with things to ponder. Let me quickly answer two your your questions therein here:
(1) Yes, someone can be unsaved (even never born again) and yet speak in tongues. It happens all the time within eastern religions through demonic influence (on the one hand), and through soul-based “mimicking” (on the other hand). The demonic side is obvious, so let me address the soul-based mimicking. My 3 year old child would hear his parents praying in the Spirit, and his older two siblings doing so also, and he would “mimic” it himself just to join in. Yet, he was not born again (because he was not quite where he needs to be to understand the gravity of the Gospel yet). So it is very possible for someone to be a false convert (tares among wheat, a “bad fish” caught in the net with the “good fish”, etc.) and when prayed for by well-meaning, but uninformed people…they either “mimic” the gift, or they can even demonstrate demonic manifestation that counterfeits it. Many of the people within “Charismania” today likely fall into one of these two categories of unsaved “tongue talkers,” in fact; because their manifest “fruit” is bad, which Jesus said in Matthew 7 indicates that they are a “bad tree” and were never saved.
(2) Can someone “backslide out of salvation”? Yes. Note the last two chapters of 2 Corinthians, and compare them with the first three chapters of Galatians, and Hebrews chapter 10. Note also 2 Peter and Jude, each in their entirety. The letters to the Churches found in Revelation chapters 1-3 are also quite applicable to this question in several instances. I addressed the Doctrine of Eternal Security somewhere else on this page in a response to Terence, so please also read that for additional points that you may find helpful too.
I have been personally acquainted with Sid Roth and believe his intentions were originally mostly evangelistic whenever he emphasized “signs and wonders.” However, I feel he has gone off the deep end VERY far now, because he has endorsed people who are clearly demonic. His ability to discern things is extremely questionable now, as he has demonstrated serious error in this regard numerous times in recent years. So I have distanced myself from him and one of his close friends (through whom I met Sid); because these guys will run after just about any “miracle” no matter who it manifests through or around. It is a sign of the End Times: People chasing counterfeit “miracles” and being led astray by the spirit of antichrist. True believers perform PRIMARILY the signs and wonders found within the Bible–and focus on the genuine conversion of souls through a correct presentation of the Gospel–rather than doing kooky “miracles” like oil coming out of their hands (which is often done by demons) or alleged “gold dust” falling in their services (which I just cannot find in the Bible, and thus, have reason to question the validity of such things when they are so “prominent” within a particular “ministry).
Regarding Kirk Cameron & Ray Comfort: I like those guys, actually. Your feeling like you have been “beat up” when listening to them may merely be the fact that you have just never heard such strong evangelistic preaching/teaching before. They are teaching some strong stuff regarding the proper presentation of the Gospel. Once you know how the Law is supposed to be used with the Gospel correctly, you will also know how the original apostles preached it in their day. I suggest you take the time to review the free videos available on WayoftheMaster.com and listen to Ray Comfort’s free MP3 audio recordings, “Hell’s Best Kept Secret,” “True and False Conversion,” and “What Did Jesus DO?” in that order–all of which are on that website.
I hope this reply helps too, Kathy! Keep up the studies.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Rich,
What is your view of the “Jesus Died Spiritually” teaching?
Thanks!
GaryM,
That is a very good question, but one that requires far more time to answer than I have at present. I have been considering writing a white paper on the topic, or one really long post (chuckle). But at this time, I do not have time for either because I am working very hard to launch a new financial website to help people in these troublesome economic times.
My short answer is I agree with most (if not all) of John Calvin’s take on the topic (as found in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2, chapter 16, in particular, section 8 thereof) and all of John Buynan’s theological explanation (as he wrote in his book, The Doctrines of Law and Grace Unfolded). Martin Luther seems to have been of the same mind as these men on most parts as well. He well-summarized the issue in his second point of the general creed of the Christian faith by writing that we believe:
But Luther himself elaborated that portion of the creed ONLY in brief when he later explained within his Catechism:
Note that Luther finished his brief explanation with a note to the fact that it takes quite a lot of time to properly address such subjects as these. Thus, again, I can only offer you this answer in brief for now because an appropriate treatment of the topic requires significant writing, as John Calvin’s and John Bunyan’s writings do attest also. Google around and download copies of Calvin’s and Bunyan’s texts and examine those for now. That will certainly cover the issue very well for your informative benefit.
Thanks for the question.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich, I like your blog, I have learned a lot from this website. However I am bit confused in one area. I am 20 and an aspiring politician. Does God chose leaders (political)? If yes, could you please explain the selection of Bush. A member of a satanic cult at Yale University before he came to power. I don’t Believe God choses leaders, but us people.
I remember before and when Bush was selected people like Benny Hinn and most Christians (Televangelists) in USA saying he was chosen by God and he was after God’s heart. Did you also believe this at the time? (I have a funny feeling that you did) I mean are you also one of those people who believe that the Democrat’s are of the Devil?
I hear that Sarah Palin might become president in the USA. Some Christians there think she has been chosen by God to deliver them from the “evil” Obama. I mean most people associate right- wing-ness with Christianity. I have got a lot to say about this.
In the bible God chose some leaders for example King Ahab, King Saul and King Solomon to be rulers of Israel. These people turned to be WICKED.What was God reasoning in this?
I hope you were not offended by my questions.
Thank you, Terence, for your kind comments and query. I have been slow to respond, however, as my schedule has been quite busy of late.
“Does God choose leaders (political)?” Yes, and no. As you pointed out in your closing comments, God has and does choose men and women to be leaders of nations. That does not mean that He chose every one of them, but only certain ones who He designated as being His selections. You could add pagan leaders to that list too, as both Nebuchadnezzar (see Daniel chapters 2 & 4) and Cyrus, King of Medo-Persia (see Isaiah 44:28 through 45:14) were specifically chosen by God for their reigns and His purposes.
That said, it is certainly clear from other passages that leaders were not necessarily chosen by God, but by people or appointment (the various Herods of the pre-NT and NT period are good examples). These were eventually judged for their extreme wickedness, of course; but the same thing happens to non-leaders who are extremely wicked too. In other words, judgment for sin is universal, not specific to leaders. However, for a good discourse of how God deals with the rebellious leaders, study Psalm 2.
“These people turned to be WICKED. What was God’s reasoning in this?” The Lord always foreknows what will happen, as He is both omniscient (all knowing) and omnipresent (filling both all space and all time, both of which were created by Him through His omnipotence). So Jesus was a “Lamb slain before the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). Why? Because the Lord knew what would happen in the Garden of Eden before the world was even created. And if Adam, created perfect and without sin, could choose to sin and fall from God’s grace, why do you think that is any less difficult for human beings to do today, despite their calling from God? From Genesis to Revelation, we see men and women called by God, sin and fall; and some are judged while others repent.
I believe every person born of a woman has God-given gifts and talents, which indicates that He also had designed them for specific purposes and roles within society. That would include political leaders as well. Chapter 2 of my Organic Economics™ online book is entitled The Biblical Genesis of Trade, and it addresses this topic more, if you want to check that out for more detail of what I teach on such points.
However, let me note here that because of sin, most people are unsaved and use their gifts/talents wrongly (sinfully). It is only the redeemed of the Lord who have the spiritual capacity to do what is right (see 1 John chapter 3), but temptation to sin or make mistakes still exist. In the OT, they were particularly prone to such because they could not be born again. In the NT, we “practice righteousness” (see 1 John chapter 3 in the Amplified Bible) which implies that we are not perfected in our ability to walk righteously all the time. We make mistakes, like anyone “practicing” any task or endeavor. But genuine Christians practice righteousness, so they get back up and start all over again as they seek to perfect their walk. Sinners, on the other hand, practice sin…which distinguishes true Christians from false believers.
I agree with you (in-part) that within democracies, the people “vote” in their leaders. That fact does not limit God’s omnipotent ability to change the course of an election, however. He is God, and if He chooses to change the course of things, who could stop Him? Most of the time He uses circumstances to discredit one candidate over another, or moves on the hearts of people when they enter the voting booth. So in short, even when He chooses to intervene in an election, He is usually doing so covertly, as most people will fail to recognize His hand at work.
Let me also point out, however, that democracies are never reflected in the Scriptures in a positive light. The only references to a social-democracy are, in fact, in reference to the coming kingdom of the Antichrist. True republics (which are rare these days) are a better form of “representative government” as they restrict the voting population to certainly classes whose vested interests promote the overall good of the nation (i.e. educated, land owners, etc.). The United States of America used to be a true Republic, but has degenerated into a quasi-social democracy throughout the 20th into the 21st Centuries. And unless that course is corrected (as the recent election indicated might actually occur) then it will follow the path of all democracies and degenerate into totalitarian rule, or fall apart completely and the Union will cease to exist (e.g. much like the Soviet empire collapsed). In fact, Constitutional Monarchies that found their constitutions upon the principles of God’s Word, are the only truly biblical form of government (e.g. ancient Israel, though that was not His original plan even for them). Even Jesus’ coming 1000-year reign over the earth will be as a divine monarchy, and nobody gets to vote.
So with the above said, let me draw toward this point to address your overall question: What is my position on “Dominion Theology”? This is a heresy that has become popular of late in various Evangelical and Charismatic circles within the USA. However, it was first made popular in the 20th Century in Germany as the “Christians” voted in their “Christian” leader, namely, Adolf Hitler. A very well-researched article about that era can be read here.
In short, biblical Christian theology teaches that we are to serve God within our own calling and role within society with a pure heart and clean conscience; but that the coming “rule” over the nations will only occur once Jesus returns to take the earth over physically. The way genuine Christian doctrine tells us to change a nation is to “go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature.” In other words, we change a nation when we do our JOB to win the lost for Christ.
By changing the hearts of the people as they are born again, then the “desires” of the people change toward righteousness, and they begin to “practice” such (as we discussed above) and the society changes–one heart at a time. This was seen during the revivals of Charles G. Finney during the mid-1800s when entire towns would come under conviction, turn toward the Gospel to the saving of their souls, and then become immersed in Bible reading, prayer, and other Christian activities. The bars would shut down, profanity would cease to be uttered in the streets, and the society of those villages and towns would be absolutely transformed by the power of God working within the hearts of the people.
“Dominion theology” tries to usurp such biblical principles by telling people that we are to “take over the politics” and “the nation” and enforce “Christian” laws upon an unsaved population. Few realize what the article I referenced above documents: That Hitler ran for election on a “morality” platform, and actually instituted “moral” reforms in society once he came into power. The movies were censored and became morally “cleaner.” Women were forbidden to smoke in public. However, 6-million Jews, and another 6-million Christian leaders, political dissidents, and other “undesirables” who failed unwavering devotion to the “Third Reich,” were put on trains and sent to concentration camps. So the superficial “morality” that the people “voted in” became a systemic evil that destroyed lives and the soul of the nation. That is the end-game for such “dominion theology” for it is patently antichrist in nature.
I did vote for G.W. Bush in 2000 and 2004, because I genuinely thought he was a Christian (and I did not know about the Skull and Bones thing). In essence, I was deceived along with most Christians by that man.
After the 2004 election, however, Bush stopped using the Name of Jesus in public and began supporting ungodly one-world-religion types of initiatives. That awoke me to the possibility that the guy may not be a genuine Christian after all. After discovering in 2006 that from 2004-2006 I had been doing business with an active member of the Skull and Bones myself, I began to study about that satanic cult. So through that “wake up call”, and subsequent study of the Scriptures and godly men like Finney, Wesley, Spurgeon, Whitefield, Edwards, and many others, I learned that the NT teaching concerning “false brethren” (e.g. Galatians chapters 1-2) is there for a REASON.
In short, there are some who profess to be Christians (such as Hitler, his fraternity brothers, Bush, and Dan Stratton) who obviously are NOT. They masquerade as Christians to “take people captive” according to Paul, as he wrote in Galatians; and the men I have cited as examples surely have done just that.
Further compounding this fact is that 80% or more of professing “Christians” in the USA (including among Evangelicals and Charismatics) are NOT born again, and thus, are not truly Christians. Thus, they cannot live holy lives and win the lost, because they cannot fathom redemption (having not experienced it themselves). I discuss this in great detail within How God Uses Heretics, so see that post for more teaching on this VERY important point.
In closing, I do NOT support Sarah Palin (who advocated the murder of Mr. Assange, founder of Wikileaks), Mitt Romney (a Mormon), Mike Huckabee (a CFR member, who therefore advocates a one-world-government), or any other such false brethren. They seek power, and not service on behalf of the Lord. As Jesus said, “a tree is known by its fruit.” I have checked the “fruit” of these people, and they are rotten. Thus, the tree is known, and they will not get my vote or support. I learned my lesson on Bush, and do not plan to follow such an errant path again.
However, I certainly believe that a godly Christian person can be called into politics in order to affect godly change and to take a strong public stand for righteousness. They will try to be a “servant of all” (Mark 9:35 and Mark 10:42-45) and not to “lord it over the people” as the heathen politicians do in their unending quest for power and self-gratification. (Such “public servants” only serve themselves of the public, and are not worthy of their posts.) A godly and humble man or woman who seeks to please God, and to conduct themselves according to biblical standards for the welfare of ALL people, would be a delightful addition to any government (provided they have the character to resist the temptations and are courageous enough to weather the severe persecution).
Thank you for your inquiries, Terence. I was not offended at all. I hope my answers here have helped. I probably should do an entire post on this topic at some point, but for now, this will have to suffice due to my schedule.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich
Only just discovered your blogs. My wife and I were on staff in the UK for a very well known prosperity preacher, who we believe got into error re money.
During the time we were there, our own personal finances went down and down, we got into greater debt, our situation got worse, even though we did our best to not waste money.
Yet, we were still believing for the “hundredfold” on our giving, and boy did we need it!
We have been left that minstry quite a while now, but because of our bad experience while with them, now it comes time to REALLY HAVE TO BELIEVE GOD AND WALK IN FAITH for His plan for our lives, we are finding it mentally difficult to trust in God’s provision!
Ie:- “God didn’t honour our giving there, so perhaps He won’t here”. Yet we have long gone past that particular teaching now.
I was prompted to write here because I’m reading “Midas Touch” by Rev Hagin at present and discovering the errors.
Will we ever be able to see the Lord “supply” our needs? We are ministers who I believe have been badly damaged by the over emphasis on money.
We just want to fulfil God’s will for our lives, which really is healing ministry & evangelism…
Please pray and help us to get our thinking free of the “unbelief” that the over emphasis on money has bound our minds in…
Godbless Rich
Tony & Ann (UK)
Tony & Ann,
It is a huge blessing to hear from two of my siblings in the UK. I apologize for taking so long to post your comment and to respond, but I have been very busy lately. I have several other comments in the queue to process too, but I will eventually catch up.
I know where you guys are at, having been there myself. You are in that “questioning” phase where you are doubting the teaching that you have been exposed to, and wondering what was biblical vs. what pure bunk. Let me encourage you that this is a temporary phase, and that you will come through it just fine as long as you have a “Berean” attitude (see Acts 17) which “searches the Scriptures daily to see whether these things be so.” In short, compare everything that you question with studious research of God’s Word. What does not seem to hold up, reject it, or at least put on a shelf until you can analyze it more later.
Good teaching that balances these topics properly in accordance with the Bible, will help also. So continue to read the Midas Touch by Hagin, as that is a very helpful start. Please study my TheWisdomOfGold.com website too for some verbose teaching on financial/economics topics that goes much broader and deeper than what Hagin felt himself qualified to address. I also highly recommend that you read my Decline of the Prosperity Gospel page on EconomicTheology.com.
Now to answer your question “will we ever be able to see the Lord ‘supply’ our needs?” the answer is YES! The Lord is still in the miracle business, and He still takes care of His children. Those are biblical concepts from Genesis to Revelation. The “prosperity gospel” heretics merely twisted that biblical truth into a “cash cow” for their own material benefit, while leaving the people bereft of genuine wisdom regarding finances and true Gospel ministry. As you settle into the will of God for your lives, and get your eyes off of material things and back onto the Lord and His Word, you will get back on track and will begin to be led by His Spirit into the fields of ministry that He has for you. He will supply all your needs according to His riches in glory, by Christ Jesus, so long as you are doing His work with a pure heart.
Lastly, I recommend that you read Charles G. Finney’s “Ordination” sermon from 1842, which addresses core ministry and heart issues in a way that I feel is beyond comparison elsewhere. (There may be another one out there which is just as good or even better, but I have not found it yet…chuckle.) I do not agree with every other sermon of Finney’s, but it is extremely hard to find any point within this one with which I do not completely agree. So read it reflectively and prayerfully, and ponder each point’s application to your own lives, ministry, and those things which you have seen in others (good and bad). I believe it will minister to you tremendously. It did to me, and it has to others that I recommended it to as well.
One quick note on Finney’s use of the phrase “disinterested benevolence”: In our modern vernacular, that would seem to be a conflict of words. To that former lawyer from the 19th Century, however, that meant “benevolence without a conflict of interest” or “benevolence without an eye toward what you can get out of it.” Everything else should be clear when you read it, as the English is still fairly modern other than that one phrase.
Thanks for posting. Come back anytime.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hie Rich. Thanks for the reply. However why don’t you make more videos and post them on youtube? I am sure a man of wisdom will be very beneficial to the body of christ in this dark hour. Youtube is free and has a bigger audience and people are starving for truth. It could be any kind of videos. Please, may you ask the Lord about this. Thank you.
Thank you again for the kind commentary, Terence. I will give the matter some prayer, for sure.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
I am so upset at your blog against Brother Copeland. Shame on you. Wheather you are right or wrong. This is not the issue. The issue is that you are trying to build your ministry by attacking another fellow man of God. You are using Brother Hagin as well. But if you knew brother Hagin as much as you want people to believe, you would know that brother Hagin would have never used your practices… You better repentant before God and before Brother Copeland. Pastor Donato Anzalone
PS: Let us see if you dare to put this comment on your websites. all of them.
Well, I am glad you stopped by, Donato! I have had several things on my heart lately, and your comment above was just perfect to help me formulate my thoughts on several issues for this website.
However, the real issue is NOT Copeland here, nor our public rebuke of that errant minister. The real issue is your own heart, because you show several signs of being a “wolf” yourself. Thus, I am VERY concerned about the state of your own soul, and have taken the time to press forward several issues for you that I believe will help you to understand the terrible plight you are now in. So when you wrote in your comment above:
I have decided to do something even better.
First, I have written an entire article to address your comment, and it is appropriately entitled:
When Wolves Remove Their Clothes (Simply click the title and a new window will open up.)
Now, you may notice that I have removed your website link from the comment that you posted. Please not worry, however. I have added TWO (2) links within that article, just in case others want to visit your website to review it in more detail.
Of course, I have not spread your comment around my other websites as you “dared,” and I have fully explained why I have not done so within that same article noted above. (Although I did decide to advertise the above article on most of our websites.)
So please avail yourself of the above post, and read it with sincerity of heart and mind. I spent several hours composing it for your eternal benefit, and I hope thereby that you will discover your dangerous condition and turn away from the precipice before it is too late.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
I understand you. I loved the Copelands. I spent a year or so fighting this. Especially when it came to Miriam Franklins so called prophecy of Gloria. I did not believe in Mrs. Franklin and I fought tooth and nail for my “spiritual parents”. I loved them. I don’t think that site is still around. I was under the name of Dawn Survivor back then. At first I thought just like you seem to think now. But too many things did not add up. I chose not to be blind to them. I felt a Judas to the spiritual parents who had been there for me. But I know know of ties to freemasonry and ministry watches rating of their ministry being an F. O, I just caught on. I might be a bit slow, so just bear with me…but perhaps you are like a wolf too?
Let it be know that the 6/1/11 comment I just made was meant for reply to Donato. It just did not line up the way I thought it would.
Kathy in Rochester
Hie Rich. In christian circles, there is this burning question that has never been truly been answered. Do you believe in the doctrine that says once saved always saved? For example if you believe in Jesus and all the necessary stuff you need to believe get saved (you know what I am saying I think) you can still go out there and live the worldly life and sin a bit or you can have balanced Christian life whereby you will be mixing with worldly stuff and YOU WILL STILL BE HEAVEN-BOUND.
In my life, I have found out that this is impossible as sometimes I feel I am clashing with the Holy Ghost {these clashes are getting very bad}. I feel like I have to give it up all for Christ. I did not know my life was designed for Christ not my needs or to use him. Because of my stubbornness I actually feel like I am rejecting the Holy Ghost. I think if I keep on this path he might actually leave me.
I find it very strange that some pastors these days elevate the celebrity life style and they even admire them. But the I feel that the Holy Ghost is against most of the worldly stuff that goes on. You got guys like Steve Furtik admitting that he watches Oprah, on the pulpit. Is he serious? You got Paula White mixing up with guys like Donald Trump and several celebrities.They say she is “anointed” and she is one of the biggest women ministers out there. Have you seen the way she dresses when she preaches? She looks very good. I am 20, my head wonders around a lot of times. I mean is the Kingdom of heaven this close? I recently saw a book by Creflo Dollar called “Live Big”. Does this mean driving expensive cars, you know, live for the moment ? I think I have received a different spirit from these people.
Thanks Rich for this awesome website. I have been reading your articles: ” When Wolves Remove Their Clothes”, “How God Uses Heretics”, “When Foolish Apathy Becomes Slavery” and “Prosperity vs. Theological Error”. They have caused me to evaluate myself and consider rededicating my life to Christ. Oh yeah, don’t forget about “YouTube” issue, I don’t think you realize how much wisdom God has given you.
That is a great question, Terence. That is a suitable topic to touch on “briefly” here.
However, it would take an entire book-length treatise to do it justice.
Let me begin by first reiterating the message of “When Wolves Remove Their Clothing” and the PDF attachments found at the bottom of that same page: Not everyone who calls themselves a “minister” is even born again. Thus, when discussing people like Steve Furtik (who I am not familiar with personally) or Paula White (who I unfortunately DO know about), the discussion is not about Christians but about wolves in sheep’s clothing. Or actually, in Paula White’s case, Proverbs 11:22 says that we may be actually discussing a “swine” who has a “gold ring” it its snout:
They may look good on the outside, but inwardly such women that this verse discusses are whorish pigs. Men of a “whore monger” character are no better either, I might add. Both of types of people exchanged demons with others whenever they become “one flesh” with them (note 1 Corinthians 6:15-17). So such people not only have a propensity to spread diseases, they also spread demons (which no “safe” precaution or “protective device” can prevent). Thus a pure life sexually can be the ONLY true “safe” protection against both body-destroying diseases and soul-destroying demonic influences.
With that said, let’s discussion your question more specifically…
The first thing to note about the so-called “once saved, always saved” doctrine is that its originators did NOT intend for that message to be propagated as it often is today. The doctrine of Eternal Security (its official title), as preached by the old timers, such as John Calvin and Charles Spurgeon, can simply be summarized as the idea that once a person is born again, nobody (not even the devil) can take their salvation away from them. It also included the idea that one could not “accidentally” lose their salvation by committing a single act of sin or some other error. In short, the Eternal Security that we have in Christ is firm and steadfast. This point is best summed up in the Words of Jesus Himself:
All genuine born again Christians, who have come to the Lord Jesus Christ in repentance, and put their faith in HIM and HIM alone as their source of righteousness and salvation (i.e. not in their own works or self-righteousness), are the “sheep” of the Lord Jesus. The Lord promises that such people will not be cast away or lost. This was the point of the Eternal Security doctrine originally, though men have surely perverted it into the blasphemous form that you have described above. (And some even are so presumptuous to call themselves “Calvinists,” which 1 Corinthians chapters 1 & 3 testifies means that they are “carnal” at best; and their twisted doctrines themselves testify that such people are liars or deceived, and thus, they may not be born again themselves.)
Now this brings us to our second point to note: Is the particular professing “Christian” that we are discussing truly born again? In other words, are they really born of God’s Spirit, and genuinely saved? Jesus used allegorical terms that compared truly born-again Christians with false converts. There are the “wheat” but also “tares” (Mat. 13:24-30, 36-43); “good fish” but also “bad fish” (Mat. 13:47-50); “sheep” but also “goats” (Mat. 25:31-46); “wise virgins” but also “foolish” ones (Mat. 25:1-13). And Jesus Himself said that there would be some people who thought that they were Christians, who will hear the terrifying words from Him:
Oh, what a horror! Nevertheless, the parable of the wise and foolish virgins seems to imply that as much as 50% of those who profess to know Christ will find themselves “in outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (See the reference given above.)
So when we see someone who claims that they are a Christian, and yet they sin as a “lifestyle” (which is really a “death style”; see Romans chapter 8), can we possibly conclude that they were NEVER truly born again to begin at all? Yes we can:
Did you notice all the “no one” declarations above that I put in bold text for emphasis? These are absolute truths that are without debate. Those who are genuinely “born again” as Jesus stated was necessary in the Gospel of John chapter 3, have God’s nature in them. Thus, they “practice righteousness” as their manner of life. Those who continue to “practice sin” as their rule are demonstrating that they were NEVER born again—regardless of what they profess, or how strongly they argue with others about their profession of Christianity.
Note the picture that the above passage paints: Like a child born into a family is fully human, he or she need to “practice” feeding, walking, talking, and all the other behaviors that demonstrate a mature humanity. They fall, spill, and make messes…but they keep on practicing. Eventually, they start to look like their parents in conduct, not just purely in their appearance.
We would put it this way for an even clearer metaphor: Someone “practicing” an instrument, such as a violin, will look (and sound) pretty bad at first. However, if they are driven to master that art, they will continue to practice. Over time, their skills will grow and become more and more perfected. Likewise, a genuine Christian does not just “play church” but they truly desire to serve God, and their hearts drive them to “practice righteousness.” They make mistakes, and the “noise” can sometimes be quite irritating to others when they do (this is especially the case with those who are young in the Lord). But genuine born-again Christian just repent, pick back up where they left off, and begin practicing again.
Those who are NOT genuine converts will only put on a “religious show” when others are around. In private, they “practice sin”, and drink iniquity like wine. They love sin, and crave lustfully to fulfill those desires. Thus, they may “play church” for others, but if you monitor their lives and speech, they will eventually show signs that their religiosity is not sincere. Their doctrines will reflect that eventually too, especially if they profess themselves to be “ministers.” Some will eventually give up putting on pretenses of salvation, as they cannot fulfill the righteous requirements of the God’s law in their own strength. Thus, the “sheep’s clothing” drops, and the wolf exposes their true nature openly. Others just “back slide” and leave the Church (which is really more honest than the former hypocrites), which is a phenomenon described again by John:
A third point to note: The Bible DOES make it clear that even a genuine Christian can “walk away” from Christ in apostasy. Note, for example, Hebrews chapters 6 and 10; 2 Corinthians chapters 12-13; and the example of Judas, Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5), and even some of the people contained within some of the Bible passages cited in this answer of mine.
So in summary and closing: I firmly believe that a genuine child of God, who has been truly born again and who has “passed from death into life” will show the genuine “fruits” of being born again. Further, they will be able to rest secure in the faith of Jesus Christ, knowing that their Great Shepherd will “never leave them, nor forsake them, even to the ends of the earth.” AS LONG AS THEY DO NOT walk away from the Lord into pure apostasy through willingly abandoning the One Who bought them with His Own Blood (see 2 Peter 2:1), true Christians can know that though they make mistakes when “practicing righteousness” God is faithful to forgive when they repent, pick themselves back up, and get back to their practice.
However, those who are false converts, can only put on pretenses of religiosity; and their “fruit” will, on close inspection, prove that they are NOT born again:
Please note also that “repentance” is a core requirement for salvation too. Paul preached repentance as a part of the Grace of God in Christ. Thus, it is my observation that MOST (if not all) of those who are false converts and showing themselves “practiced in sin” are doing so because they NEVER repented of their idolatry and sinful behavior, regardless of any profession of faith that they may have made.
Do a study of Acts chapter 8 (which I don’t have time to do for you here, having written so much already) and you will see that the ONE THING that is missing from Simon the Sorcerer’s “conversion experience” is repentance. Thus, note also in that chapter what Peter said about the man’s heart once he saw the “fruit” of the man:
Some people who may read my answer to your question may think me to be “judgmental” or “hard-hearted” in my rather stern statements about Paula White further above. However, how did Peter “see” that Simon’s heart was not right “in the sight of God”? He judged the “tree” by its manifest “fruit” (see Matthew chapter 7). So I am certainly on biblical grounds to make such frank statements about people with such obvious “bad fruit” as Paula White. (And my post “The Biblical Basis for This Public Rebuke” explains that in detail with both video and text.)
The answer for Simon’s spiritual condition was NOT faith, but it was rather repentance (though there is no record in church history that he ever repented). I similarly “judge” people such as Paula White, Kenneth Copeland, Rob Bell, and the such like, to similarly be “poisoned by bitterness, and bound by iniquity” because their manifest “fruit” indicates the true state of their unregenerate hearts. The answer for them is the same one that would have saved Simon: Repentance.
Well, I hope my “short answer” was sufficient to help your quandary, and to encourage you into your Bible to look up the passages I cited from above within their FULL context.
I do appreciate your zeal, Terrance. If you press forward to go “all out for Christ” as you stated above, by turning your back on the world and running to the Cross of Christ, you will be thankful that you did for ALL of eternity (though in this life you will have tribulation for the cause of Christ). I hope to sit with you in Heaven and laugh in joy with you for not only our own presence there, but also that we were BOTH responsible for bringing many others to Christ to join us there in our jubilant mirth.
Lastly, for a detailed presentation of the Gospel that I have written (my most treasured article to date), please read The Supreme Value of Righteousness. That piece is a comprehensive biblical presentation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ within the context of God’s Holy Law—the way it is supposed to be, in order for people to properly understand it.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich Vermillion
P.S. Lord willing, we’ll do something in video this year. Please keep that in prayer.
Terence, let me add a quick note here to suggest that you largely stop watching MOST so-called “Christian television” as most of the people thereon are wolves that I have seen. Of course, there may be folks on there that I am not aware of, who are actually on-track. But of the “big names” on the TV, the only ones I would give two cents for (and this is a qualified endorsement, because I reserve the right to revoke it if I find that either begins to teach error, or is a Freemason or is affiliated with Freemason’s knowingly) are Ravi Zacharias and Ray Comfort. Again, there may be other good ones on there, but you will need to “learn to discern” good ministry from wolves if you are to avoid corruption through the wrong influences.
So what I recommend is that you study the “old-timers”—i.e. the great theologians and preachers of the past, whose character we can examine through history, and whose doctrine was relatively pure (i.e. only God’s doctrine is perfectly pure…the rest of us are not omniscient, and we have blind spots). By studying their writings, you will build a foundation upon which you can better identify true ministry by modern preachers/teachers, verses the self-serving hype of wolves (and wolvesses) in sheep’s clothing.
Here is my “short list,” in order of preference:
• John Bunyan
• Charles H. Spurgeon
• George Whitefiled
• Charles G. Finney (I recommend most especially his pre-1843 sermons, plus his biography. Note: Some pseudo “Calvinists” falsely accuse Finney of being a “Pelagian heretic” and that “Finney denied the substitutionary atonement of Christ,” BOTH of which are patently untrue. I have read their accusations, and found them the most disgusting demonstration of defamation that I have ever seen in ministry; they were using quotes out of their context and false assumptions with which to “base” their case. Anyone willing to do such a thing is either so blinded by their own doctrine that, like the Pharisees during Jesus’ time on earth, they cannot read another minister’s biography and “Systematic Theology” without blatant bias; or they are just not born again themselves. You can read about this, and my analysis of one of these so-called “Reformed” nuts, within the comments section at the bottom of my post, Back in the Saddle Again.)
• John Wesley
• Dwight L. Moody
• John Calvin (And I mean his actual works, and not the so-called “Calvinist” writings of others…which is too-often at variance with his own writings, and typically is very poor at representing his original teaching.)
.
And now for a “short list” of Pentecostal preachers whose sermons/writings are worth reading in conjunction with the writings of the men above:
• Howard Carter (Referring to the preacher, and not the archeologist.)
• Smith Wigglesworth (Whose sermons were inspiring and powerful, though theologically oftentimes inferior to his peers above.)
There are tons of materials by many of these men above available for free on the Internet, and others you can buy in book form. If you dive into them—and compare their teachings with the Bible, like the Bereans did in Acts chapter 17—then you will be well on your way to spiritual maturity and rapid growth in Christ.
Ephesians chapter 4 explains that we ALL need five-fold ministry gifts to mature and “perfect” us (even we ministers continuously need that, because none of us will be perfect in this life, we just strive toward perfection in Christ). So by comparing the above preachers with the Word of God, and each other, you can gain that “perfecting” input without any concern that you are “feeding/grazing” within the shadow of a wolf.
Of course, please continue to avail yourself of the teaching we have posted on our own websites. Also consider the works of Ravi Zacharias and Ray Comfort, who I mentioned above.
I also recommend the ministry of Dwayne Sheriff, who is a RHEMA graduate but considered a “black sheep” among those circles—which is a good thing. (This is because, in his own words, “I won’t bow down and pray three times a day toward Tulsa Oklahoma.”) He is Charismatic, but NOT Charismaniac. I have a relative who attends Dwayne’s church, and I have met with him myself a few times briefly. I have also listened to enough of his teaching to be very comfortable in his integrity and adherence to the Word of God to the best of his ability. (Again, none of us is omniscient.) He also offers video his website for free, and he has even had a free CD ministry (originally a free tape ministry) for many years, in which he literally gives away his materials instead of selling them (an unusual characteristic these days, for sure). One word of caution, however, if you have kids: In his church, the children are dismissed right before the main teaching begins. So he often discusses topics (even as tangent topics) during his messages that are a bit too mature for little ears to hear, though the discussions themselves are not crass or vulgar at all.
Here are some links for all the modern preachers mentioned above:
• Living Waters and Way of the Master (Ray Comfort; the latter link has free videos and downloads thereon too.)
• Ravi Zacharias International Ministries
• Dwayne Sheriff Ministries
Since these last three are modern ministries, these will typically give you sound teaching in reference to the current events of our modern age. (And I know of others, thankfully; but since I have provided you so many suggestions herein already I will limit the list of modern ministers to only three for now, plus our own stuff, of course.) The “old-timers” above will give you time-tested teaching/preaching by which you can safely build your foundations, and even judge the modern ministers’ doctrine (including my own). Compare everything with your Bible, however. That is of utmost importance.
I hope this helps you, Terence! (And, of course, I hope it also helps others reading this).
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich, thanks for the swift replies. I will definitely have a look at the list of the preachers online. I wasn’t aware that to repent means to turn away from your sins, I thought repentance was just admitting that you are guilt and that you need a saviour. The reason I say that is because since salvation is a free gift you don’t need to add your works [repentance] to be saved. Again thanks Rich for taking out time to answer my question.
Repentance is not a “work” in and of itself, Terence. It is a complete humbling of the soul, and a change of heart. It is to be either accompanied or followed by faith in the One true Savior, Jesus Christ, in order for the person to be saved. (There have been people throughout history who have been convicted of their sins, but never expressed faith in Jesus; and thus, they remained unsaved.)
Then, appropriate “works” will follow repentance and genuine faith, because ALL genuine faith results in works. For example, do you “believe” you have a job? Then you will get yourself ready for work at the appropriate time, and go to your place of employment. Do you “believe” the chair in front of your desk will hold your body weight? Then you will sit thereon. If, however, you cease to believe either of these, your corresponding actions will change accordingly as well. You will not show up at work, because you believe you are fired or laid off. You will not sit in the chair, because you believe you will fall on the floor and risk injury. Here are a few passages that explain this faith/works nexus:
Please note that the above passage was extremely irritating to Martin Luther. He understood the fact that when the New Testament discusses “works of the law” verses faith, it does so in reference to people trying to earn their righteousness. However, Luther could not grasp the fact that faith ALWAYS results in corresponding “good works.” Thus, he wanted to have the Book of James excluded from the Lutheran canon of Scripture. (Thankfully, he was unsuccessful.) What Luther needed to do was to study more closely to see that the discourse above, written through the apostle by the Holy Spirit, was in complete conformity with what Paul preached. Note first what Paul wrote in Ephesians in this very familiar passage (given here in a fuller context), and then what he said his Gospel presentation consisted of within TWO passages from the Book of Acts:
Paul preached EVERYWHERE that men should “repent, turn to God [i.e. have genuine faith], and do works befitting [i.e. corresponding to, or appropriate for] repentance.” Or as Ephesians explained, Paul’s message explained that faithless “works” cannot save a person, but that once a person is saved he or she is “recreated in Christ Jesus” FOR good works, which God prepared beforehand “that we should walk in them.”
Why? Because, as I said above, genuine faith always has corresponding works. A “faithless” works cannot get you to sit in a chair, for you may profess that you “believe” it will hold you, but your works betray your actual beliefs. A “faithless” works cannot save you, because despite your profession in Jesus as your Savior, you are trying to still “earn” your righteousness. However, a person who has genuinely repented of their sins, and put their faith in Jesus Christ alone as his or her source of righteousness, will be born again. Such a person will “practice righteousness” (1 John chapter 3) because the nature of God is now in them. So a genuine faith will DEMONSTRATE good works, and thus, prove the heart-level change that occurred in the born again person. A “faithless” religious pursuit of righteousness through works (e.g. such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and other groups do) will prove that the person does NOT have a genuine faith in the REAL Jesus Christ, because they are trying to “earn” something that the Lord offers freely to those who repent and receive His salvation by faith.
Now to emphasize the need for repentance in order to be born again, here are just a few MORE Scriptures that state that repentance is essential to salvation:
Note that Jesus said that “repentance for the remission of sins” was to be preached to all nations. Note also that Peter directly confronted the sins of his audience, in the light of God’s holy Law (i.e. “Thou shalt not murder,” the Sixth of the Ten Commandments). This brought conviction of sin which “cut” them “to the heart” and caused them to cry out, “What shall we do?” What was Peter’s answer? “Just believe!” NO! It was obvious that they already believed what he said, because they were convicted of their sins. So what did they need to do? “REPENT!” he shouted, and then told them they would need to put their faith into action by appropriate “good works” that demonstrated the sincerity of their faith.
For a listing of all the MANY passages of the New Testament that discuss the word “repent” (in its various forms) CLICK HERE. You will readily see how much that is emphasized by the Bible, and why it is SURELY necessary for salvation.
Not every passage dealing with salvation specifically states something about repentance, but it is implied by that passage, for it is taught throughout the entire Bible (i.e. not just the NT). For that matter, not every passage dealing with salvation specifically states something about faith either. Are we to conclude that faith is unnecessary, when the rest of the Bible attests that it is critical for salvation? Of course not. It is clearly implied in ANY passage that deals with salvation, just as repentance is as well, because the whole Bible explains that faith is required by God to receive His grace.
Again, a close study of Acts chapter 8 will demonstrate that the ONLY thing that Simon the Sorcerer was missing was genuine repentance. Thus, he did not get born again, and he was counted among the “bad fish” that the Gospel “net” brought into the Church:
Of course, when you talk about the requirement of repentance for salvation, then some people get really upset about such an idea. However, when people display hostility toward the concept of repentance, it indicates that they have NOT repented themselves; and thus, are likely not born again. This is even true with some professed “Reformed theology” adherents and pseudo “Calvinists.” Such people betray that they are religiously zealous, but not according to knowledge (Romans 10:2); and that they have not likely experienced the new birth, despite their doctrinal arguments and claims otherwise. Note what Charles Spurgeon (considered a genuine Calvinist) said about such things:
Does this clarify things for you? I probably should copy/paste this over into the post editor, and build it out into a new article. I believe it would help people if I did. (And I should demonstrate that belief by corresponding works, should I not?)
Thanks for your excellent questions Terence!
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich thanks for your answers on the key issues in Christianity. I can’t resist asking questions. What are your views on replacement theology? Bearing in mind that, people can be Zionist all they want, they can say all the wonderful things about Israel, but if these people don’t believe in Jesus and the majority (Israelites) still don’t they will perish. Paul and Jesus made clear of this.
I get irritated (I am being Honest) when people like John Hagee come on TV and say that we should imitate Israel’s tradition and love them above all nations. I understand God has a plan for Israel and he is not finished with them, but surely to suggest that I should love Israel more than other countries and hate the Middle East (this is implied, he usually says God will destroy Israel’s enemies) is not logical in biblical and secular terms. Are we not supposed to love anyone unconditionally?
Peace Always
Terry
Terence, I just love your questions. You are doing great, my friend. Keep the studies going, and the questions coming. I’ll answer them as quickly as my schedule allows.
“Replacement theology” (the belief that the Church replaced Israel in God’s plan of redemption) is in error. “Dual Covenant theology” (the believe that Israel has its own covenant with God separate from the NT, and therefore, have their own way of salvation) is pure heresy. This latter one is what John Hagee believes, as has been documented by many other websites on the Internet.
He, and some of his similarly-minded friends, have denied this, of course. However, what people really believe is demonstrated by their actions and teaching, regardless of what rhetoric they use in reply to confrontation (e.g. Luke 6:45 and James 2:14-26). John Hagee, Mac Hammond, the Copelands, George Pearsons, & etc., have demonstrated that they hold to “dual covenant” theological beliefs (and again, others have done a marvelous job documenting these things on the Internet elsewhere).
First, the “replacement theology” is shown to be error (not heresy, but error) in the fact that the NT distinguishes between three people groups upon the earth today: Jews, Gentiles, and the Church of God, i.e. those redeemed out of the first two groups through Jesus Christ (or in Hebrew, Yeshua Ben David, Ha Meshiach). Here is a sample passage for this point:
So “Replacement theology” is incorrect and in error, because what God did was to create “one new man out of the two, making peace” between Jew and Gentile in Christ Jesus (see Ephesians chapter 2). The Church of God did not “replace” anybody. We are “new creatures” in Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:17).
On the other hand, “dual covenant theology” is outright heresy because it denies that Jesus is the sole source of salvation. Like every other heresy, such adherents (as John Hagee) conveniently overlook COPIOUS quantities of Scripture in order to “cherry pick” a few upon which to build their false doctrine. As St. Augustine correctly pointed out, “Pride is the mother of all heresies” and thus, we can readily see WHY they would dare to advance such blatantly false doctrines. Most such false teachers propagating the “dual covenant theology” (in either word or deed) are likely also Freemasons (secretly, of course) because “dual covenant” doctrine fits well with their Cabala teachings and Deist beliefs.
That said, here are a few passages that show that the OT “Law” (Torah in Hebrew) was completely incapable of saving anyone then, and thus, cannot save anyone today. ALL people—Jew and Gentile alike—must accept God’s sacrificial “Lamb” as their sole source of salvation, because their own works will profit them nothing before our Just and Holy God:
God created the Law in-part to point the way to the Messiah, Who is Jesus Christ (there were other practical reasons for the Law of Moses as well). The Law was never a means to salvation, for even those who were counted righteous within the Old Testament were counted so because of their faith in God’s mercy and promises (e.g. see Romans chapter 4).
Thus, in closing: Those who teach “replacement theology” are in error, and their ability to reach the lost among the Jewish people is VERY hampered because of this errant view of Scripture. Such teaching tends to promote bigotry and antisemitism as well.
Those who teach and/or demonstrate a belief in “dual covenant theology” (such as John Hagee and many of his friends) are heretics, and are driven by motives other than those that are characteristic of true men of God (e.g. pride). They are likely Freemasons as well, as there is very little reason for someone to “embrace” that heretical doctrine apart from having other heretical beliefs “supporting” such views. Thus, such people are either apostates, or were never truly born again.
I hope that helps you, once again, Terence! Thank you for your questions, my friend. I am always pleased to answer sincere questions from sincere inquirers. (The others, I merely ignore.)
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
May the good Lord continue to bless and enlarge your coast, amen. I have a personal question Sir…
I was raised in a middle class Methodist family. My parents were not rich but through them I got a godly heritage. The course of my life changed forever when I married this man…He has cheated on me so many times that I’ve actually lost count of the number of affairs…He went as far as infecting me with HIV!… He tells me that as a man, he cheat but as a woman I should remain faithful irrespective. I love God and I have heard many conflicting views on this issue, please advise me as you are directed by the spirit of God.
[Rich Note: This question was edited because of its content, to make it more appropriate for this website and "Ask Rich" page. Only the "bare-bones" details were left, in order to provide context for my brief reply.]
Nike,
This “Ask Rich” page is NOT the best place for such counsel, and I am not the best person to provide you such counsel anyway since I am not your pastor. Thus, I have edited down your first question post to just the bare-bones so you know that I am addressing you personally. The other details are just not appropriate for this website, though I certainly can understand your pain.
I will only say here briefly that you have biblical grounds for divorce in such a situation (as you have described it). The Bible is quite clear that if your spouse commits adultery, you have grounds to divorce them (e.g. Matthew 5:32; 1 Corinthians chapter 7). This applies equally to both male and female spouses, as each owns the other’s body within the bonds of marriage (see 1 Cor. 7) and adultery violates the “one flesh” principle and violates that part of the marriage covenant (see 1 Corinthians chapter 6, and especially verses 15-18).
So obviously, if your husband has a history of such behavior, you have plenty of grounds to get away from the guy. Given what you described, he would also seem to have serious psychological problems caused by demonic influences (as not only HIV, but demons can be also transmitted/obtained through sexual intercourse). So for your own sanity, health, and spiritual well-being, you would need to divorce him under such circumstances.
I would also high recommend that you get some of the books by Liberty Savard, a female Christian author with a wonderful revelation about issues that wound and hurt a person’s soul. This is a list of her titles on Amazon, and I recommend personally at least the first two books of her trilogy which begins with “Shattering Your Strongholds,” and then progresses to “Breaking the Power.” I believe these will help you tremendously toward being healed up emotionally from all that you have been through.
Lastly, I highly recommend that you find a godly female pastor or Christian counselor to talk to who is knowledgeable of such things. Be sure to talk with them to see if that person has their own anti-male issues before you open up too much, however; I have hears of men-hating female counselors who just made things worse for the lady they were “helping” as they projected their own problems upon them. But a good and godly female Christian pastor/counselor in your local area is who you need to be talking to, and NOT to men. That is a more biblically wise and appropriate protocol at this point in your life.
That’s the best I can do for you: Point you the right direction. Again, this page is not the appropriate forum for such questions, nor am I the right person to talk to for what you need. So please get the books above, and find a good female Christian pastor/counselor to pray with and talk to. Of course, pray and spend time in your Bible as well.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Nike,
Let me also add here that I am concerned about how you seem to be leaning upon your godly Methodist family upbringing as your Christian heritage. Given the number of terrible decisions you have shared with me (most of of which I edited out of your question above), I highly suggest that you also take the time to study my article, The Supreme Value of Righteousness, prayerfully and in great detail. I share some of my own testimony in there, plus lots of biblical truth.
Please avail yourself of that resource right away, and then look into the other things that I shared above thereafter.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
If anyone reading this “Ask Rich” page has a question about my theological position regarding the “catching away” (i.e. rapture) of the Church in the Last Days, or the timing thereof, please see my reply to that question by “Kathy in Rochester” within the comments of my article When Wolves Remove Their Clothes.
Please note: Kathy posted several comments on that page, so look for the one where she asks about the rapture specifically in order to see my “short answer” reply.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich,
I am trying to go away because I see I am so full of questions and “needing to know” and I don’t want to drive anyone nuts! But I wanted to know is there any truth to reincarnation? Maybe you have already aswered it somewhere on here, just let me know where. I am trying not to sit infront of this computer so often, I feel I am starting to grow roots! “chuckle”
A yes or no answer will be fine to. I just feel God is not the author of confusion and reincarnation would be too confusing to me.
Thanks,
Kathy.
Kathy, you may ask all the questions you wish. Please do not feel like you are a both to me or anyone else reading this website. In fact, you probably are asking questions that many people want to know; so in a way, you are helping those people too.
No, there is NOTHING to reincarnation. That is one of many tricks of satan (whose name I use a lower-case letter for intentionally) to deceive people. Most people who “remember” something that they think is from a “former life” (General Paton is one that comes to mind) were being influenced by demons. They may not be “possessed” (which is a pretty intense condition of demonization) but they are certainly being influenced by such spirits. Obviously, since demons have been around since BEFORE the Garden of Eden (which is another topic that will have to await another day, as I do not have time to cover that here at the moment), they are familiar with historical events, people, places, & etc. So it is easy for them to feed “verifiable” information that impresses the recipient, but is nothing more amazing than a History Channel recap of the same event.
Some people seek information about their “past lives” from everything from psychics, to hypnotists. Such “experts” operate by demons like the fortuneteller in Acts chapter 16. Thus, if the person (victim) was not demonized BEFORE they showed up for “counseling,” they quickly end up demonized AS A RESULT of seeking such demonic input. A “transference of spirits” takes place, and they walk out deceived into thinking they have some new “information” about themselves, and carrying a demon within their mind/body as well. Sad.
Let me note here quickly for those reading this who may question the above: I was trained in hypnosis and “Nero Linguistic Programming” (NLP) before I was saved, AND I had practiced witchcraft as a teenager as well. I have long since renounced such things, of course; and I am thoroughly born again…and I mean REALLY born again (it was a dramatic experience for me…see part of my testimony here within this article). So I really do know what I am talking about here, and in regard to the tactics of the many “wolves” masquerading around as “ministers” when they are actually “ministers of satan” (see 2 Corinthians chapter 11).
I hope this answer helps too, Sis.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Rich,
I have read on thewisdomofgold.com the article The Supreme Value of Righteousness. You are concerned with the salvation of souls above everything. That is like a breath of fresh air in the midst of a sea of televangelists that just make it appear as they if do.
Your answer about reincarnation blessed me. I did not think God was in to that. I would be one confused soul if I had been all kinds of different people before.
I do wonder about the origins of demons though. But I tell myself I don’t need to know. Wow, me not needing to know something! “smiles”
I say that because some have said that demons were God’s original creation of people. And God turned His back on them. That would confuse me. Why if that was the case would he not love that creation as much as this creation or not have His own Son die for them as He did for us? Or, are demon spirits the spawns of fallen angels?
I have wondered about such things since as a kid I read “Pigs in the Parlor” by a couple with the last name Hammond.
God is sovereign. He is King, and Lord. But if His love fell short for another creation, my heart would sink with the asking of “why”. Thank God for our salvation. And perhaps I should not always need to know EVERYTHING.
But I do want to know about the mark of the beast. In times past some thought getting a social security number was part of it. Well, as a baby I didn’t get a vote! They got me one anyway. Some say it will be the microchip. Some say fight the drivers licenses that will have the chip in it and fight needing to give your finger print for things because it is bringing it all to pass.
What exactly will the MARK be? What am I to fight? What am I to be OK with because I do not want to go against the law, I am to be “law abiding”. But as one such as the radio talk show guy Alex Jones basically says, we are to come against this whole new world order system that is being “set up” even as we speak.
I just wish I had a teaching on when to be a law abiding good hearted citizen, and when I am to put my foot down in the name of my God and for the future of my family and country.
I think these fake televangelists are part of this new world order. They are like the pacifier for the Christian mouth to keep us all quiet and focused on just certain things like our personal “victory” in life, when there is so much at stake.
Please advise, and may many more like you rise up to come forth and proclaim boldly what is true. So many years I listened to the flock of preachers on stations like TBN thinking they were God’s spokes people on the earth and looking up to them. Now I so want righteousness to be proclaimed and the fakes to be shown for what they really are. I mean their fruit will reveal the truth once that fruit is exposed. I mean things like two famous preachers on TBN getting divorced because they had an affair with each other?! I can’t prove that to be true or not, but the more I see and hear, the more I cry out for Godly men and women to come forth and for the Lord to put to an open show the fake preachers that we once held in such high regard.
Thank you,
Kathy.
Thank you again, Kathy, for the kind comment. I took the liberty to link the title of my article within your comment, to the article itself. I thought that would be convenient for people reading this thread.
Yep, the salvation of souls is what it is all about? Jesus said, “What good will it do for a man to gain the whole world and yet lose his own soul?” (Matthew 16:26, and again in Mark 8:36). So I think it is appropriate to ask, “What good does it do to ‘teach’ a man something without first ensuring that he is saved?” I often wonder about so-called “ministers” who are nothing more than “positive mental attitude seminar speakers” because they do little to nothing to confront sin, and address the state of their hearers’ salvation. Oh, sure…they might do an “alter call” right after teaching on “how to have your best life now.” But is that a biblical presentation of the Gospel of Christ. NO! So in effect, such things are nothing more than whitewash upon a flimsy wall, as the Lord told the prophet, Ezekiel:
You addressed some questions to me within this last post that I will have to take my time to answer, however. I am prepping to begin a new book project, so my time will be somewhat limited. I will say here that I agree with your statement, “I think these fake televangelists are part of this new world order.” Since most are Freemasons or are “good buddies” with such people, that is likely true about 90% or more of the time. However, there are a few on TV that I think may be good folks with pure intentions. I will refrain from naming names here, however, in case one decides to prove me wrong.
“Pigs in the Parlor” is a Pentecostal classic, for sure. It is also a good example of how poorly they put their theology together at times. There are merits to that text, but lots of assumptions and errors too. So to be frank, it is NOT on my recommended reading list.
Regarding the origin of demons: There are a few theories from glimpses that God has given us within the Scriptures. You seem to allude to the “Pre-Adamic Creation” theory, which is based mostly (but not entirely) upon a comparison between Genesis 1:2 and Jeremiah’s vision starting at 4:23. This theory has merit, but is not the only one out there. Further, if such a population existed, they were likely NOT created according to God’s Own Image like man was. Thus, the concept of “if His love fell short for another creation” is misapplied, because they would have been a different class of created beings. Like Lucifer (and probably with him…see Isaiah 14 and Revelation 12:4), they fell, and their fate is already decided. Regardless of their origin, however, like the angels, there is no redemption for demons (see 1 Peter 1:12 and James 2:19, and then compare that with what the demons said to Jesus in Matthew 8:29).
Nevertheless, let me please point out that God saw fit to be a bit vague within His Scriptures on such topics, so no theory is conclusive. Since the Lord did not “major” on this topic, then it would be best to “minor” on it yourself. There are more important subjects to study in order to be sound in the faith, while this topic is more of a theological curiosity or side issue. At some point I may write on the subject within a book as a related side issue to a more comprehensive topic, such as the reality of Hell. For now, however, don’t sweat it, Kathy. It is not an important issue, and thus, should not be the focus of much of your time.
Well, that’s about all the answers I can provide for now. I will try to get to some of your other topics in due season. Some might have to be addressed in full-length articles later, however.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Rich,
Thank you. I will wait patiently for the other answers. But if you do see something that may be “most likely” what is to be considered the mark of the beast….SEND OUT AN ALARM!!! I mean I heard things like they want to microchip seniors with dementia and also military personnel. Sounds like a good plan to provide HELP when needed. But what if things accepted for our good and welfare can turn ugly quick! I don’t want to disobey the Word and accept something I shouldn’t or encourage an elderly parent to be chipped for in case she goes missing.
Thank you.
Oh, I did forget to address that part briefly. Forgive me. Yes, the microchip in the hand or forehead is already planned. The technology is there, and already in use on animals, U.S. fighter pilots, & etc.
However, there is good news about all of this End Times stuff, which you can read about here in this post: Economics, Gold, and The Word of The Lord (Part 2)
In fact, the good news I have only briefly elaborated upon within the above post should be exciting for most Christians (some might want to argue it, however, and thus, not be excited about it). On the other hand, it will be absolutely shocking and horrific news to those within the New World Order (NWO) groups who think they will soon rule the world together.
So read it, and be encourage thereby. Feel free to post comments/questions underneath it also; but again, keep in mind I may be a bit slower to respond with answers if you any ask “biggie” questions.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Rich,
I followed your link and read it. I now am not feeling it will be as scary as so many preachers and movies portrayed it to be. (it being antichrist and last days happenings). I don’t know if you know about Alex Jones from Radio and such, but he opened my eyes to many things. Like Bohemian Grove and NWO and such. I feel he is right about so many Christians thinking that they are just going to be raptured out before they could see anything bad happening, and that point of view makes us lazy and uncaring about what goes on around us. (I think you mentioned the same thing)
I have been set straight on many things. I am calmer, and for the better; now that I have learned many things you have spoken about.
Thank you.
Hi Rich, I really want to thank you for the list of preachers that you gave me; I have had a look at it and its great. I really like John Bunyan and Charles H. Spurgeon, can’t believe such valuable material is free. I appreciate the work you are doing for Christ through your websites and may the Lord continue to show you grace and more revelations!
You are VERY welcome, Terence. I am thrilled that you have been blessed by the rich treasures available within the writings of those men–Bunyan and Spurgeon in particular (my two favorites also).
Thank you for popping back to update us, and for your kind encouragement. Blessings to you sir!
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich
I asked this over at the wolves in sheep clothing post, so maybe it is more appropriate here regarding K. Copland’s adherance to Jesus having to be ‘reborn’ or subject to Satan for 3 days, or as some say “Jesus died spiritually”.
What do you feel on this, let alone the 3 days spoken of in the Bible after Jesus death on the cross?
I am actually working on replying to your other question post under the “wolves” article now. Give the numerous questions/points you made, it is taking me a while to respond. But be a bit patient with me, and I will have a robust reply on there soon for you.
Hi Rich,
What is your position on “tithing”? Do you believe that tithing is commanded for New Testament Christians?
Also just an FYI… Tithing expert Russell Earl Kelly has refuted Kenneth Copeland on the issue of tithing here:
http://www.tithing-russkelly.com/id173.html
Thanks you!
Victor
Victor, I can say without ANY reservation…that my understanding of tithing differs dramatically from Creflo Dollar’s murderous and heretical version! Take a look at Creflo Dollar Says: “Shoot Them All Dead”, an article written by my wife with a little input from me, for the details of that mad man’s doctrine.
As to my own position, it would take quite a bit of text to flesh it out thoroughly. So I hesitate to get into that topic on only “one foot” (so to speak) and give people the wrong impression. Here are a few key points, however, which I will share for now:
(1) Tithing is NOT required for salvation (as Creflo Dollar seems to think)
(2) Tithing will NOT guarantee that you will “miss Hell” (as Creflo Dollar also seems to think)
(3) Modern church government/methods are based on business models, not biblical models; and the “tithe” is viewed as the “revenue” for the corporation (a grievous paradigm).
(4) Thus, the “tithe” is viewed as belonging to the office of a pastor alone…and let the other four ministry gifts of Ephesians 4 just fend for themselves (which is wrong).
(5) Tithing is a NT principle (e.g. note Hebrews chapter 7, wherein our resurrected Jesus is portrayed as “receiving” tithes even today) but NOT in the manner taught by 95% or more of pastors, and especially NOT as the “prosperity” cult leaders (e.g. Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, etc.) like to teach it as they appeal to people’s greed.
Now, my answer above probably leaves more questions that answers (chuckle) but again, it would take LOTS of text to flesh that out. Furthermore, I am in the midst of praying and studying through several other viewpoints on the topic as a part of a wider study of biblical church government and structures. Thus, it would be premature to get into that without the other context…and without the full study being complete. In short, I may come out with a book that covers a wide range of church life eventually (to include the tithe topic), but that is a way off since I am working on other things right now.
Thanks for popping by and asking the question, however. I did quickly check out that link above, and would disagree with his “OT only” position because it can be proven otherwise (i.e. within a fuller exegesis). But I will examine his approach more fully later when I have more time.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Rich,
Thank you for “praying and studying through” instead of just giving quick answers! I respect you for that! “smiles” I had the same question as Victor did too!
Kathy.
Thank you, Kathy, for being so sweet.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich,
Thank you for responding to my question. In my opinion, the doctrine of tithing is the very foundation of the prosperity gospel. Let me respond to your 5th point and regarding Russ Kelly’s work.
In doing so, I by no means find fault with you and your are doing an awesome job in exposing false teachers. Your ministry is unique and it needs to continue until Jesus comes.
In your response:
(5) Tithing is a NT principle (e.g. note Hebrews chapter 7, wherein our resurrected Jesus is portrayed as “receiving” tithes even today)
It is about Hebrews 7:8
In this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on.
1. In the Greek “he” is not there. This verse is about Melchizadek and not Jesus.
2. Tithing is not the primary subject of Hebrews 7 but the author’s intent was to prove the superiority of Jesus’ priesthood to the Levite priesthood by comparing Jesus with Melchizadek. Hence Jesus’ sacrifice is superior to animal sacrifices offered by the Levites. The author of Hebrews want to make a point about the superiority of Jesus’ priesthood and in that process he mentions about tithing as a passing (incidental) remark.
3. Hebrews 7 does not command Christians to tithe.
Other facts about tithing:
a)Tithing was only from food and livestock even in the OT but never referred to earned income (money).
b) Jews tithed 23.3% in 6 years and in the 7th year they did not.
c) There were 3 different tithes in the OT (all of them related to eating the tithes)
By God’s grace I did some research about Church Father’s believed about tithing. They are in my blog.
Again I commend your great work and thank God for using you!
I just wanted to bring the topic of tithing to your attention because you can do a far greater and better job than others if you have that ammunition!
God Bless You!
Love in Jesus!
Victor
Hello again, Victor!
I suspected from your first comment/question that you would be back to offer another perspective. That is fine, of course. Dialog is good. However, please understand that I cannot afford too much time to dialog with you endlessly on this topic. Again, I have a full plate, and this subject is something that I plan to address more fully sometime later.
So let me please post a “quick” response, and let’s not get into an argument here on this thread (which your kind comments in your last post tend to imply you are not wanting to do either). I will use your ordinal numbers to answer, and people reading my reply can compare it with your sequence.
1. The Greek word “ekei” is there in Hebrews 7:8, and means “there, in or to that place” by itself, but in context, “there he [receives them]” is the proper translation. You can view the Strong’s numbers here: http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Hbr&c=7&v=1&t=KJV#top So technically, you may be correct; but textually, it seems to be at least implied.
That said, your point is irrelevant. The discussion is Jesus in that passage, and NOT Melchizedek. This is indicated by the phrase, “of whom it is witnessed that he lives.” That is the Greek word “zaō” and means “to live, breath, be among the living (not lifeless, not dead).” That does NOT apply to Melchizedek, but ONLY our resurrected Savior, Jesus Christ. Old “Mel” is dead. Here “men that die [i.e. are mortal] receive tithes” and the comparison is with the One Who never dies, Who is also “there.” Who does the church “witness” is alive? Melchizedek? Not me! I preach about the resurrected Jesus.
Thus, you cannot throw out that passage as not referring to Jesus, because it clearly does.
2. I agree with you that tithing is NOT the main subject of Hebrews chapter seven. I never said it was, and agree that it was a minor point made within the context of a major one (though I consider ANY passage of Scripture as being God’s Word, and thus, important in its own right). I referenced it because it reinforces a point I will make next.
3. I never said that Hebrews seven “commands” Christians to tithe. My point is that Hebrews seven indicates that the principle of tithing is still conveyed within the NT and did NOT end at the Cross of Christ. However, please note my theological points under the aforementioned “Creflo” article for further points.
a) You are partially correct. However, you missed passages such as Leviticus 27:31, which I explain more fully in the “Creflo” post. Therein, you will note that God said that the agricultural products could be “redeemed” (i.e. paid for) for 20% over the market price if the people wanted to keep the produce and pay money instead. This likely resulted in monetary payments for those who traveled great distances to come to Jerusalem because it would be cheaper (and easier) to pay the 20% premium than to transport all that stuff to the Temple. Also, note the “heaps” described in 2 Chronicles 31. The description therein would suggest that these tithes (as they were called in that passage, especially v. 6) were not just produce because of the time frame in which they were built, and also the storage that resulted. MUCH of it likely was produce…but such perishables spoil over time; so the context implies MORE than just produce. So you are partially correct that it was primarily agricultural tithes, but quite likely incorrect to insist that it was exclusively such, as there is evidence to conclude otherwise (i.e. with an unbiased view).
b) There was no tithe on the Sabbatical year, you are correct. I have no idea how you came up with 23.3% however, since the word “tithe” means “tenth” (10%) unless you are doing some strange Calculus that I am not familiar with.
c) Note Number 10:38:
Note the meaning of the Hebrew word for “treasure house,” according to Gesenius’s Lexicon:
Now note 1 Kings 7:51:
Note also that Abraham paid “tithes of all” to the aforementioned Melchisedec, which was from the spoil of the kings (and thus, not “fruit” of the earth, but other valuable stuff). In discussing Abraham’s promise from God in reference to the Law that came later, Galatians 3:19 says:
So tithing was INCLUDED in the Law, but predated it. Even the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” can rightly be considered a “tithe” (of sorts) in that it was the ONLY thing from which Adam could not eat, of all that God gave him. Thus, the “law” of tithing was actually a “principle” that we can find (literally) from Genesis to Revelation (as I will elaborate on more fully toward the close of this reply).
Thus, your point about “eating tithes” is partially true, but not entirely.
Church Fathers: I will check that out sometime, when I approach this topic more specifically. However, I am quite sure I can find reference to early church fathers who supported the concept.
Let me note in closing a couple of points:
However, again the modern concept “business model” churches is unbiblical and ungodly, and the tithing principle has been grossly distorted by such money-centric philosophies. The “prosperity-cult” took that even further, and made “tithing” an alleged “ATM” for the Christian…but which was really an ATM for only the wolf preachers!
If Jesus is the Lord of the tithe ( and again, Hebrews 7:8 indicates that He truly is), then He tells a person where to put it. It should go to the needy (according to Scripture), as well as toward the propagation of the Gospel. But in the latter case, it can go directly to a faithful teacher of the word (Galatians 6:6), a street evangelist, or even directly into stuff like tracts, equipment, etc. I also believe the Lord may on occasion tell the person to “eat” or “spend” their tithe because they need it, and in the NT we are “not under law, but under grace” and have relationship with the Lord that the “nations” (including Israel) never knew anything about.
Further, it does NOT have to be paid to the “local church” (i.e. that is not required, as is so often taught today; the modern definition of “local church” is also not biblical anyway) and certainly does NOT belong exclusively to the pastor’s office (which is only mentioned ONCE in the NT, the other 4 being mentioned and emphasized far more than pastors).
So in closing, that’s as much as I am getting into this topic for now. People reading this can pop over to your website by clicking on your name, and read what you have there for themselves and give it some consideration. But I cannot afford any more time for this topic right now, as I have other projects in process.
Thanks for your input, however! Thank you also for your encouragement and kind remarks.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Dear Rich
I was just passing through your website, although here in UK I am only vaguely aware of the Copelands (which sounds a good thing from some of the comments here). I was thrilled to see that you are investigating the biblical basis for tithing, as it has been a particular ‘thing’ of mine for about three years now. Suffice to say that I changed my mind about it after looking at all the biblical texts on it. May your studies be very very fruitful and I would love to read your final thoughts on it in due course.
With every blessing
Thank you, Rose, for the wonderful comment. Sorry for the slowness in approving it and replying, however. I have been a bit busy today.
I have a good friend in the UK, so I am very pleased to have another sibling in Christ pop over from there to visit my website.
Blessings back to you, and please pop back anytime.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Pastor Rich..I wish I could have a Pastor like You in Minnesota..Do You have any fellow Pastor Friends up my way In Minneapolis, Minnesota?? I’d love to find a new Truthful, BIBLE based, Humble, Serious, Joy of The Lord Church for me..Thank you..PS I like the smaller churches so I can fellowship with people..How do You get close to 5,000 congregation member churches..You are Very Serious about the TRUTH and I love it..
Connie, I am not aware of any churches up there that come to readily mind and which I could recommend. However, I will give the matter some prayer and perhaps check with some of my ministry friends to see if they know of any. If I do discover one, I will email you directly using the address you provided when submitting your question.
I agree with you that smaller churches are better for fellowship. In fact, to be frank (and I should probably write on this soon), the modern concept of “church” is not biblical, but is rather based upon secular business models. The “pastor” is the CEO; the leadership structure is hierarchical (which is pagan in origin, and not biblical); they “sell” a products and services, intended to make people “feel good” rather than get saved; (and on, and on…). Thus, it is hard to find a “good” church today because the model is flawed to begin with, and it tends toward corrupting pastors into becoming mere hirelings (though there are some good men and women out there who do try to be good shepherds of God’s people despite the poor ministry model they work within). Smaller churches have less problems along these lines, because smaller budgets tend to allow more freedom for the pastors to be genuine godly teachers instead of “feel good” hirelings trying to support opulent salaries and budgets (or worse yet, wolves). Plus you can observe the pastor more directly as you check out their character and “fruit” to see if they are genuinely concerned about the welfare of God’s people and propagation of His Truth.
Thank you for the question, and I hope my brief reply is somewhat helpful. Thank you also for the encouragement. You are a blessing. Please come back anytime.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich,
Thank you so much for your response regarding my 2nd tithing comment. Rest assured, I won’t bother you with another tithing question.
Here is a different question:
Are you still a Charismatic? Have you become a cessasionist since you have left KC? I have heard about some people who have left the word of faith movement have become cessasionists.
If you are still a Charismatic, do you think the word of faith movement has hijacked the Charismatic movement?
Thanks in advance!
Victor
A very good question, Victor.
No, I am NOT a Cessasionist. That is a rather blasphemous heresy, actually. It essentially calls God a liar, because His Word says that He never changes (i.e. He is Eternal and outside of time) and Jesus said that He would never leave us, nor forsake us. To say that He does not do miracles or supernatural things today is to assert that He has either changed His Eternal nature (which is logically impossible) or that He no longer loves (in Greek, agape or agapao) His people (which heinous assertion attacks God’s very character). In either case, it is blasphemous.
Consequently, there are really very few bona fide “Cecassionists” today, as most people have enough sense to see through that to identify the blasphemy. Most are either quasi-Cessassionists (i.e. believe that God can do miracles today, and perhaps does once in a while…but they have “never seen one” and they doubt about every account of others, who believe they experienced one); or they are pseudo-Cessationists (i.e. just endorse such doctrine hypocritically in order to cover the fact that their spiritual life is non-existent). However, these variants are just as blasphemous by implication as the full-blown heresy itself, though they are a bit more “sugar coated” in order to hid this fact.
Those that are “former Charismatics” have in many cases never been truly filled with God’s Spirit. Many were never born again in the first place (as false converts abound in the Church in general, and among Charismatics in particular). Thus, they were NEVER filled with the Holy Spirit as the world cannot receive Him (John 14:17). They spoke in gibberish, and NOT other tongues as the Spirit gave utterance (Acts 2:4). So when they wake up one day to realize that their entire spiritual life is a farce, they blame it upon Charismatic/Pentecostal theology, rather than realizing it is their OWN experience that is faulty. It never occurs to many of them that they were never saved.
Of course, the above fact is greatly the fault of the preachers and their poor theology, in that they overemphasize Charismatic doctrines (or in many cases, doctrinal errors and heresies) and fail to properly emphasize the fundamentals of the Christian faith. So the biggest blame needs to be assigned to the preachers of “Charismania” and not those poor souls who were befuddled by such a pitiful grade of doctrine. (Let me quickly recommend here my article regarding the Four Characteristics of Sound Doctrine for those who would like to understand how to identify good teaching.)
So in short: I am STILL a tongue-talking, devil-rebuking, healing-believing, miracle-experiencing, BIBLE-BELIEVING, Spirit-filled Christian. I usually do not use the terms “Pentecostal” or “Charismatic” to describe myself, however, because of all the foolishness associated with such labels (i.e. because of the wolves and idiots). I prefer to simply use the term “Spirit-filled” instead, as that is a bit more generic and points toward the person’s attention towards the presence of the Spirit of God in my life, and the Bible’s account of such a manner of living in Christ.
I do agree that the WoF movement heavily influenced the Charismatic movement for both good and evil. It started off somewhat good…but went downhill quickly, as wolves like Kenneth Copeland took the movement down the “broad way that leads to destruction”:
So now, more than a few of us are working by God’s grace to get “Charismania” back under the influence of God’s Word and sound doctrine, so that people can be saved, delivered, and winning the world for Christ by both their godly conduct in Christ AND their solid presentation of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.
I trust this answer helps! Thanks for popping back by, Victor.
Always in Jesus,
—Rich
Victor, let me add to what I wrote previously above the following note: Not only is there an epidemic of false converts within the Church (and Charismania in particular), but this is ALSO a problem among the ministers! In other words, one of the reasons there is so much fakery and nonsense among Charismaniac “ministers” is that many of them are unsaved. Thus, they have to fake miracles and prophecies, because they have not the Spirit of God. Here is what the Book of Jude in the Bible had to say about that:
Or, as the great evangelist, George Whitefield (1714-1770), explained it during the days of the Great Awakening:
So to summarize: Many of those who are “ex-Charismatics” not only awakened to the lack of spiritual substance within their own lives, but could readily see that the same situation was evident in the “preachers” that they were listening too. Thus, they concluded the whole thing was a farce, instead of realizing the “blind were leading the blind” and that they had both fallen into the same ditch together.
Fake “miracles” and fake “Chasismania” does not detract from the Word of God one bit, and thus, leaves the truth-loving person the responsibility of seeking what is TRUE and righteous, as distinguished from what is false and unholy fakery.
I have to run for now. I hope this second answer helps to clarify things a bit too.
Always in Jesus,
—Rich
Thanks a lot for the detailed answer Rich. I am really impressed after reading what George Whitefield had preached.
A related article by Oswald J. Smith
“You Have Gone To The Inquiry Room, But Are You A New Creature In Christ —A New Creation?” is available here!
http://romanstennine.wordpress.com/2009/03/20/you-have-gone-to-the-inquiry-room-oswald-j-smith/
Amen! That is a great article, Victor. It expresses my own sentiments exactly, as well as those of George Whitefield (and others, who knew their Bibles). Thank you for sharing that.
Oh, and you are welcome for the detailed answer too.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Victor, I also noticed from incoming traffic that you have a discussion thread going on the tithe issue elsewhere, and that you recently added my second response there. Thank you for encouraging that group to refrain from attacking my Ask Rich page with rebuttals. That is a very courteous of you, and I appreciate your suggested protocol for them to follow. To date, they seem to have complied.
Let me encourage the group, however, to read my latest post “Four Characteristics of Sound Doctrine” and understand that I am neither a novice at exegesis, nor do I state my positions without substantiation. I noticed a few that responded to you on your thread were using logical fallacies (especially ad hominem attacks, and begging the question epithet fallacies) in response to my brief comments about tithing back here on this page.
My position is this: If one cannot state their position clearly, Scripturally, and logically, and such people resort instead to logical fallacies and emotional language to “prove” their arguments, then they really do not have any real arguments. Thus, I would recommend that they study my aforementioned article, and ask themselves if they really have the four critical elements necessary to substantiate their beliefs.
However, again, I do thank you for your kind comments on that thread about me, and for encouraging them to follow a respectable protocol. Be assured that if any tried to express such emotional and abusive language on my own page here, it would be deleted before I ever completed reading it…and thus, it would never see the light of day on this page.
You are a blessing, Victor! I cannot say enough how much I appreciate your courtesy, and you good hearted approach to dialog. Thank you.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Thank you Rich for posting my post. I respect you, thank you. Also, thank you for not riping into me. It does seem I look at things one way and then the other. But on one side of the ledger it looks bad, and then there are other things on the other side of the ledger that make you say…..Yea, but if things are completely so…Then how come such and thus?
Thanks.
Howdy, my Friend in Rochester!
I am actually in a quandary with your post, and am glad you popped back here to post a short comment. Here is what I need you to do:
First, I need you to MOVE your comment over under When Wolves Remove Their Clothes, as that is a better place for it topically. I have stated here on the Ask Rich page that I am NOT posting new comments/questions about Copeland any longer; and though I reserve the right to make an exception, I am pretty strict about that policy. So if you can still see your comment as “awaiting moderation” within your browser, then do a copy/paste over into the commentary filed underneath that other article (if not, then you will simply have to retype it…sorry about that). Once I see that it is re-posted there, I’ll delete your first one without displaying it here.
Second, I am working on a pretty major project right now, and am only checking my emails and responding to comments, during occasional breaks. I have just finished responding in detail to another commentary, and will likely not be taking that much time to respond again as it was quite time consuming. Thus, please be patient in awaiting my response. I’ll get to it when I can. It may be tomorrow, or within a few days.
Thanks for your understanding. And it is good to hear from you again too. I trust you are doing well.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich
I saw in one of your posts {cant find it anymore, otherwise I would have provided a link}, that you implicitly recommended Ron Paul, for the presidency of America. However I seem to recall in that article, you pointed out his pros but not his cons…. I would like to know how you can defend his idea of abolishing social security? Any serious and sincere person, even if they are against social security they would agree its necessary. I hear that he let his previous campaigner manager die because he did not have health care coverage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8PCHis_PnM&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL.
Speaking of politics what do you think of Rick Perry? The The Response Prayer Rally?
Its sad these days, that Godly man can be deceived by these obviously: deviously, cunning, craft, sly, evil and these sons and of daughter Satan.
I do not get why the so called “born again ” politicians receive so much support from the Christians when they are great deceivers and liars especially Michele Bachmann, why do they tolerate her lying? The same thing happened with Bush, it was very clear that the guy was a great deceiver, but people still CHOSE to be deceived????? and history is repeating itself with Rick Perry, what more does American need before these wolves in sheep clothing destroy the world??? What’s worrying me is that it doesn’t take too much intellectual effort to decipher that these people are crooks!
Howdy, Terence! A couple of things in reply:
First, I am being “low key” on political things these days on this website this time around. I felt impressed in prayer that it would distract too much from our ministry teaching if I took too obvious a position in U.S. politics. I am already dealing with enough controversial topics on RichVermillion.com with regards to theological and ministerial matters, so to add “politics” to the mix might distract some people, who may be predisposed towards partisan politics. That might prevent them from considering what I believe (biblically) to be matters of eternal consequence (and thus, weightier and in need of more emphasis). So the articles you remember are some older ones from the 2007-2008 election cycle, as I have not (at this time) posted any articles political on this website during this election cycle.
That said, I will briefly address your questions:
Yes, I would most strongly support Ron Paul morally during this election cycle (though I am not very active in doing so this time around). However, you misstated Ron Paul’s position with regard to Social Security. Thus, what you consider as an immoral thing may be so; but that is NOT what Ron Paul’s position is. You just misunderstand what he believes, and thus, have spoken against something that does not apply to him. Here are a couple of quotes and links to point out some more specifics:
In short, the entire Social Security system is a fraud in the USA (and a tax scheme, not a retirement savings system). It is also insolvent, as the retirees will soon begin to outnumber the workers who FUND it through payroll taxes (as the government already spent the money that the previous generations put in there). Ron Paul wants to first eliminate the taxes on Social Security checks (which is an ungodly tax), and then eventually rework the system in such a way as to support senior citizens according to the “contract” that the government made with them (his words)…but in a manner which is sustainable economically. Thus, any and all hype on the Internet that tries to make it appear that Ron Paul is trying to destroy the retirement income of senior citizens is flatly untrue, and based upon misquotes and flat out lies. So please don’t buy into such tripe, Terrence.
Along those same lines: The news video you linked to above was full of logical fallacies, especially the “Straw Man” fallacy that misstates Ron Paul’s positions, and the “Begging the Question Epithet” variant which uses emotion and hype to “convince” people of a point NOT proven logically by facts. The video guy stated simply that Kent Snyder had complications from pneumonia and died with over $400,000 in medical bills, but did so in such a way as to suggest that Kent’s lack of insurance is the REASON for his death (which is not true). The TV guy’s position insinuates clearly what is called in logic a “false dilemma.” The subtle suggestion he makes that either (a) the government takes over the insurance industry to help such people, or (b) people die and/or go bankrupt. That is a “false dilemma” because there are a myriad of other options, several of which have been proposed by Ron Paul (who is a medical doctor, by the way, and knows how these things work). For example:
(1) Reform medical malpractice law to eliminate much of the wasteful law suits that run up liability premiums for medical professional, thus reducing the cost of health care.
(2) Improve the free-market system in this realm by reducing needless paperwork in the health field created by overbearing regulation, and let the states supervise their own health systems (which is constitutional, as the US government does not have jurisdiction over health care constitutionally). This reduces health care costs even further, while improving the quality of health care.
(3) Reduce the TAX BURDEN on everyone, so that charities can once again pick up and help those in need. (This is my point.) You have to understand that prior to recent decades (especially prior to World War Two), MOST of the major hospitals in the USA were run by Christian organizations that would forgive debts on many patients that couldn’t pay. The USA tax system effectively depleted them of their sources of revenue over time, while turning the US government into the “granny” who would take care of the population. Many of the former “church” hospitals are not corporate businesses in essence, and have lost that charitable aspect (though some still have that, as I know of at least one case personally). In short, the Church was deprived of its prerogatives and cannot help people like it once did, and the government is “playing god” in its place.
Today we have an overcomplicated and over-regulated medical system, that is priced too high for most people, and it ridiculously complex in regards to Federal government interference. (My mother is retired from working in the medical system, so I know of what I speak.) The solution is to REVERSE this trend, and bring the system BACK into constitutional guidelines by kicking the US government out of the health care business, and freeing up the tax system to allow charities to once-again pick up the difference when needed.
This is essentially Ron Paul’s position (with my added point about the charities), and the guy on the video you provided above misstated the entire situation and thus, lied about Ron Paul. One can easily infer from that fact that the TV guy is either (a) totally misinformed, and spreading his ignorance; or (b) lying intentionally, because he has an ulterior motive (e.g. another political agenda).
That said: You asked, “[you did not point out] his cons.” That is because PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD, Ron Paul has very few “cons” at all. I agree with his positions 98% of the time, and where I differ it is typically on points of approach and not substance. Here is his “issues” page, with which I agree substantially on virtually all points, and which also includes his statement of faith: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/
Thus, since I disagree substantively with MOST of the other candidates on MANY issues, I cannot see any benefit to be found in nit-picking minor details about Ron Paul when he would obviously (in my opinion) be so far superior to any alternative that is out there. Few “cons” = few “reasons” to point them out within the context of such political hypocrisy, as is evident within the other candidates (excepting Herman Cain, who is largely unknown).
Again, Ron Paul PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD is right on 98% of the issues, in my opinion, and FAR MORE biblical in his approaches to the problems the USA faces than ANY other candidate in the field. Thus, he is a threat to MANY groups with ulterior motives and anti-Christ agendas, and thus, he is often misquoted (especially out of context) and misrepresented by those who wish to undermine his candidacy.
I do not care for Rick Perry at all, as having lived in Texas I am well-aware of his hypocrisy and flaws. However, I will refrain from going into further detail on that because others have documented his errors elsewhere, and I don’t want to wade into that fiasco here on this blog for reasons I already stated above.
I will simply point out that SUBSTANTIVELY, one can look at ANY of the other candidates (except Herman Cain, who does not have a political record) and see what they REALLY believe (i.e. in contrast to their campaign rhetoric). Thus, one does not have to take the common tactic of using “straw man fallacies” and emotional hype to “discredit” any of them. They simply need to cite the public record accurately, and let the public come to their own conclusions. The opposite is true with Ron Paul, as his public record is 100% in agreement with his public policy statements and campaign speeches. Thus, the need for political opponents to misrepresent the man in an effort to paint him as a heartless villain.
As far as the “born again” candidates: Jesus said simply “look at the fruit” in Matthew chapter seven. John explained this same concept in this way:
In short, their behavior and history speak much louder than their rhetoric. GENUINE Christians have the fruit that proves that fact, while any hypocrite can put on a show for the cameras…or for that matter, put on a show for a couple of hours on Sunday. If the “pews” are full of unconverted professors of Christianity, why should we expect any less in politics when they are motivated to get elected?
I hope my reply helps.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich
Thanks for the reply, I apologize if I came across as rude. American politics is incredibly fascinating to watch, however its sad at the time, because you would expect sound politicians from one of the most powerful nations in the world. However it seems like the politicians all liars and devils.
Ron Paul has won so many straw polls, how come these guys in the media they never bother to mention his name? What’s their beef with him?
Oh, please do not mistake my reply for being angry with you at all, Terence. I did not in ANY way think you were being rude at all, my brother. I was just wanting to refute some of the misinformation you have been exposed to on these subjects.
The answer to your question about media bias is simple: They hate Ron Paul. Most media pundits are Socialist Liberals (aka, Marxist-light), and most of those that claim to be conservative are actually Socialist Conservatives (i.e. Keynesians). In short, they all want some form of a socialist system in the USA, and they absolutely hate true free market principles.
In contrast, Ron Paul is a bona fide economist and historian, plus an expert on many of his policies (especially health care, since he is a medical doctor). Thus, his arguments are well-grounded on facts of logic and history; and his monetary science is VERY sound as well. That is TOTALLY unacceptable to people with either Socialist or “New World Order” agendas. They want a big government, and he wants a small one. That is actually how the media and political “establishment” treated Ronald Reagan, but he won anyway: http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2011/10/10/from-outsider-to-leader-of-the-movement/ So the similarities are striking between Reagan and Ron Paul, are they not?
Anyway…just watch the fireworks from a safe distance and lets see what we end up with in the USA. I have high hopes that Ron Paul may pull this off; but I am not concerned that God our Father will be surprised one bit by the election results, whatever they may be. Since God is eternal, He is also outside of time and already knows what will happen; and has it calculated into His Divine end game. The Lord will return VERY soon (no…I am NOT naming dates…that is stupid and unbiblical, and Harold Camping is both a fool and heretic for doing so); the “signs of the times” indicate that fact. So I am at peace about the matter, and will only lift my proverbial “pen” (i.e. typing on the computer keyboard, such is in my replies) when I feel it is appropriate. I am laying low for the time being in this election cycle other than that, unless the Lord tells me otherwise at some point.
Thanks for popping back, Bro. “Cheers!” to you and your family there in the UK!
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Rich, I appreciate what you are doing to expose the apostasy that is in the Body of Christ. I found your blog yesterday and read almost everything in it and gave us insight about what is going on in the circles we have been involved in for years and we have had questions about certain weird manifestations and false prophets. Thank you for the sound biblical truths you give concerning the days we are in. Bless you!
Thank you, Ray, for the encouragement. I am thrilled that we could be such a blessing to you with our content, as well.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Hi Rich
Here we go again, it seems that America preachers right now, want America to attack Iran, believing that, America will get blessings for defending Israel.They also believe that the reason that America has been going down, is for not supporting Israel enough. Rich, do you believe this too?
It seems more than 95% of preachers believe this.
I am deeply confused about this whole issue. America has been supporting Israel for a long time and clearly they have not been receiving God’s blessings. America has been a curse upon mankind in the last 50 years: {Hollywood,Satanic music, World -class false preachers, promoting secularism, Pornography, False democracy, Homosexuality}.The biggest threat to Christianity, is the American Christianity, were God is used to satisfy or serve Human beings (abomination).
American Christianity is truly poison, it sells a God, who is all loving and caring. This is wrong, thousands upon thousands, will wake up in hell because of this. So how have been Americans been blessed for supporting Israel?
Something is not right!
Howdy Terence! Or rather, since you are in the UK, “top of the day to you, gov!”
No, I do NOT want the USA to attack Iran. No, it is NOT biblical to do so, because we do NOT have a legitimate right to do so.
Most of the preachers who advocate such tripe are either (a) Ignorant of the Scriptures; (b) Ignorant of world affairs; (c) Stupid; (d) Freemasons (who are looking for a third world war in the middle east to bring about their new world order), but masquerading as Christian ministers (i.e. wolves in sheep’s clothing); (e) Are heavily invested in oil futures; (f) or a combination of one or more of the above.
(I am joking about the oil futures, by the way…most of these guys are not that market-savvy.)
I wish I could disagree with you about the American brand of “Christianity” (which is really apostasy), but I cannot disagree one bit. However, the supporting Israel thing is a misnomer. We have bullied and harassed Israel, and have repeatedly tried to dictate their foreign and domestic policy. Is that truly “supporting” them? I think not. Again, there is a Masonic connection on this point — most U.S. politicians and ambassadors are Freemasons. Thus, the connection with the apostate “preachers” mentioned above should now be clear to you.
The United States of America is NOT presently a “Christian nation” by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. Thus, the nutty stuff going on regarding Iran is a demonstration of apostasy, and nothing more. I am a former U.S. Marine, but now a born again Christian. So while I can see defending our country from an attack as being biblically supported…I cannot see “nation building” or harassing other nations for their domestic and/or foreign policy, to be in the least bit biblical. I cannot invading another country without TRUE provocation to be compatible with the teachings of Jesus Christ.
And I do not buy the “nuclear weapons” argument, because Pakistan has nukes, is Islamic, and hates Israel…but has not been stupid enough to attack a nation that has MORE nukes than they do! It is well known that Israel has a “Samson Scenario” in regards to defending its existence. If you remember, Samson was willing to DIE in order to have vengeance on his enemies, and brought down the entire pagan temple upon everybody in order to avenge himself:
Israel is KNOWN to have the same strategy in mind should they fear that their existence is threatened — and everybody in the Middle East governments/military know that. So do you think they want a decisive nuclear response from Israel’s 100+ silos? No, they do not.
So I agree with you that all of this is an unbiblical farce, Terence. The good news is that NONE of the goofy stuff planned by such wicked people will actually happen, because God already said it would not. So be comforted by my article Economics, Gold, and the Word of The Lord (Part 2) in which I discuss these things from an eschatological perspective.
Rom 15:5 Now may God, the source of endurance and encouragement, allow you to live in harmony with each other as you follow Christ Jesus,
Rom 15:6 so that with one mind and one voice you might glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Rom 15:7 Therefore, accept one another, just as Christ accepted you, for the glory of God.
Php 1:15 Some are preaching Christ because of their envy and rivalry, while others do so because of their good will.
Php 1:16 The latter are motivated by love, because they know that I have been appointed for the defense of the gospel.
Php 1:17 The former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition and without sincerity, thinking that they will stir up trouble for me during my imprisonment.
Php 1:18 But what does it matter? Just this, that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is being proclaimed, and because of this I rejoice. Yes, I will continue to rejoice,
i was thinking how dangerous “wolf judging” is?
Thank you for your question, Benthe. I presume since you are in Finland that English is a second language for you. So please forgive my use of some technical terms in my reply. I will link the most difficult ones out to online resources for additional information, just in case you are not familiar with the term being used. If I fail to provide a definition link for a word that you do not understand, however, simply use one of the pages for the other words to look it up manually on that website.
Now, first I want to commend you for wanting to see peace and unity in the Church of Jesus Christ. That is a VERY good and desirable thing, indeed.
That said, you have fallen into what I call the “equivocation trap” in your interpretation of the Scriptures that you have cited. Whereas in informal logic, “equivocation” is typically when someone switches the definitions for the same sounding (or even same-spelled) word, what I am referring to is “contextual equivocation” where you have assumed that the Romans 15:5-7 and Philippians 1:15-18 passages are referring to “wolf judging,” when they actually have NOTHING to do with that subject. Thus, you have “equivocated” (i.e. “made equal” within your own mind) the situations being addressed in those passages, with the subject of “wolf judging” (to use your term), and have reached a FALSE conclusion as a result.
Let me illustrate the problem here by pointing out that if YOUR interpretation of the passages above (written by the apostle Paul by the Holy Spirit) is correct, then Paul was a hypocrite. Note what he wrote to Timothy:
And note also what he wrote to the Galatians:
So if Paul meant what YOU have assumed within the passages that you cited, then he contradicted those precepts within the passages that I just cited above. That would mean that his epistles are all necessarily “suspect,” because how can they be authored by the Holy Spirit (i.e. Divinely inspired, see 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:19-21) if they are logically self-contradicting? Under your interpretation of the passages that you cited, therefore, ALL FOUR of the epistles that you and I have cited MUST be considered of human origin. Thus, your reasoning logically ends with a heresy, and thus, an absurdity (both biblically and logically speaking).
Furthermore, you have brought the very ministry of Jesus Christ into question with your interpretation of the forgoing Scriptures that you cited. Note that Jesus not only TOLD us HOW to “judge wolves,” but actually rebuked TWO churches in Revelation for FAILING to do so:
So Jesus Christ HIMSELF told us to judge “wolves,” told us how to identify them, and then later chastised two churches for failing to hold such people accountable as He had commanded. In other words, the two churches in question above “allowed” the wolves to operate through passivity. If they had acted upon the precepts given by Jesus within the Gospels, they would have necessarily had to confront those wolves/heretics and drive them away from God’s “sheep” in order to avoid the rebuke that they received for FAILING to do so.
Thus, we can see the following fact: For your thesis regarding the passages you cited to hold true that we should NOT “judge wolves,” then most of the New Testament would have to be discarded as self-contradictory writings of mere men, because God CANNOT self-contradict Himself (see 2 Timothy 2:13 and Titus 1:2). Therefore, your entire thesis has to be rejected as necessarily fallacious, and of course, unbiblical.
Okay, so where is the problem with your thesis? Simply that you “equivocated” the subject matter being addressed in the Romans and Philippians passages, with “judging wolves,” when those two passages are NOT talking about that at all. So what are they talking about?
The Romans passage is addressing the need to avoid petty (minor) “schisms” (e.g. differences of opinion on minor theological or traditional issues, but NOT regarding major doctrinal points). We should certainly all strive to do just that, and endeavor to walk in the “unity of the faith” (see Ephesians 4:1 and 13) with other genuine believers whose traditions/opinions in minor issues differ with our own.
The Philippians passage is referring to some schismatic (partisan) people who were actually trying to get Paul into MORE trouble! (What ungodly nuts those people were!) In other words, Paul is telling the Philippians that there were actually people who were — for their own ungodly purposes — actively trying to get him into MORE trouble with the Roman authorities. These people were opposing a TRUE minister of Christ being persecuted by the governing authorities, in HOPE of creating MORE problems for the man!
So do either of these passages you cited have ANYTHING to do with genuine “wolves,” “heretics,” “false ministers,” or the like? No. Not one of them has ANYTHING to do with that subject whatsoever.
So is it “dangerous” to “judge wolves,” in the sense of possibly creating problems within the Body of Christ or violating Scripture (as I assume you mean to imply)? Well, let me answer that question by asking you this one in return: If Jesus chose the metaphor of “wolves” in relation to “sheep” to describe the activities of false ministers in relation to the Body of Christ, IS IT “DANGEROUS” to confront wolves when they threaten a flock of sheep? I think we can all agree that it is FAR MORE DANGEROUS for the sheep (and even the shepherds) if they FAIL to confront wolves when they are on the prowl, correct? Yes, that is the case.
Jesus knew what metaphor to use, as it conveys the clear image of the NEED to chase off hungry “predators” when they stalk God’s people for their own personal gain (and please note 1 Peter 5:1-4, Acts 20:17-36, and both the books of 2 Peter and Jude in their entirety, to see the attitude that the apostles had about this very subject).
I hope this reply clarifies things for you much better. I believe your heart is right, but you need to learn to apply SOUND biblical reasoning to properly understand the Scriptures. As a part of that, you need to take into account the CONTEXT of what is being addressed when comparing various passages of Scripture. As the English proverb says, “You need to compare apples with apples, and not oranges” in order to reach the correct conclusions. To help you with that, I would like to recommend the following articles to you:
— Four Characteristics of Sound Doctrine
— When Wolves Remove Their Clothes
— The Biblical Basis for this Public Rebuke (i.e. of Kenneth Copeland specifically)
— The “Convenient Doctrines” of Preachers in Sin
The last two above are on our redemptive project website, and clearly explain from the Scriptures (using both video and text) the fundamental theological foundations of BOTH public rebuke/judging of “wolves,” as well as the “defensive” doctrines that they have come up with in order to avoid such confrontation. The first two articles above, however, are found upon this very website you are viewing. I suggest that you begin with those first, as they discusses in some detail four key points that can help you ensure that your doctrine is correct and truly biblical, and some very specific issues regarding “wolves in sheep’s clothing.”
Thank you for your “Ask Rich” question.
Always in Jesus,
-Rich
Let me post a quick clarification, Benthe, since I am assuming you speak/read English as a second language.
I want to clarify that I was NOT accusing you of denying the veracity (Divine inspiration) of Scripture, but merely pointing out that the ONLY way that your thesis COULD be correct, was if the majority of the New Testament was false. In other words, I was merely pointing out the logical significance of your thesis.
Thankfully, we know that ALL the sixty-six books of the Protestant Bible are the infallible and Divinely-written Word of God. So we can know the veracity of Scripture is here to support us, as long as we “rightly divide the word of Truth” (2 Timothy 2:!5). Thus, we can safely assume that your thesis is false and not the Bible itself. As Paul wrote by the Spirit:
Amen!
Always in Jesus,
-Rich