Posted in false christians, theology

The Worst Danger

By Elizabeth Prata

I’ve been in danger before. I’ve been stalked by a serial rapist. Gypsies surrounded me in Ecuador and and slashed my pants trying to get to my wallet. The Storm of the Century tossed my boat on its side like a matchstick. I’ve been trapped under a raft in white water rapids. I’ve been inches from a lightning strike that fused the sand on the ground into glass next to my feet.

Most of those dangers were unexpected and unknown. I didn’t see them coming. Continue reading “The Worst Danger”

Posted in billy graham, discernment, false christians, wolf

Billy Graham: a wolf who offers only dreams of meat to those who are starving

On the occasion of Billy Graham’s 96th birthday on November 7, Orthodox bishop Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev of the Russian Orthodox church was ushered in to Billy Graham’s living room at his home in North Carolina in order to offer the elder man well-wishes.
The Press Republican stated of the photo-op,

“The photo-op on Nov. 7 was symbolic and, for many, historic. The elder statesman was the Rev. Billy Graham, and rather than an evangelical superstar, the man who met with him at his North Carolina mountain home was Russian Orthodox Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev. This visit was linked to a Hilarion address to a Charlotte gathering of Protestant and Orthodox leaders, organized by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. (BGEA)

The Russian Orthodox Church is not a true church because it adheres to orthodoxy that is false. They were a schism church formed after splitting from Roman Catholicism. The Orthodox group of churches (Greek, Russian, etc.) do not believe in justification by faith. They believe in part:

  • The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture
  • Discouragement of individuals interpreting the Bible apart from tradition
  • The perpetual virginity of Mary
  • Prayer for the dead
  • Baptism of infants without reference to individual responsibility and faith
  • The possibility of receiving salvation after death
  • The possibility of losing salvation

Therefore it is unfortunate to read that the BGEA organized a conference this month and invited a mix of men who preach a different Gospel with Protestant leaders, for what has darkness to do with light, For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? (2 Corinthians 6:14)

From Twitter. Met. Hilarion Alfeyev visiting Billy Graham on his 96th birthday.

Though Billy Graham has for decades made public statements confirming his place in the pantheon of destructive wolves, there are many today who still don’t believe that such a man could be a false Christian. To that end, here are some quotes from Billy Graham, from newspaper media, books, and transcripts from interviews, which show clearly that such a man is not of the faith. Graham said these things throughout his life, not simply in his advanced years. Some claim he was ‘confused’, but no such claim can be made of a man who has made assertions contrary to the bible in each decade of his life. Some of these things he said as far back as 1948, at the beginning of his television crusade career.


On Evolution:

Graham: I personally believe that it’s just as easy to believe that God took some dust and blew on it and out came a man as it is to accept the fact that God breathed on a man and he became a living soul and it started with some protoplasm and went right up through the evolutionary process. Either way is by faith, and whichever way God did it makes no difference as to what man is and man’s relationship to God. (Billy Graham: Candid Conversations with a Public Man By David Frost)

Here we begin with a basic tenet: Hath God said? The original question in the Garden to Eve which she answered incorrectly and led to the Fall of man, is here again posed to Mr Graham. Hath God said he formed man from the dust of the ground? (Genesis 1:26-27, Genesis 2:7). Or not? Indeed, God hath said how He made man and it is only a man without the Spirit in Him who finds it easy to dismiss the plain words of God and accept “arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God,” (2 Corinthians 10:5). “Either way” that man appeared on the earth, as Graham believes, is NOT by faith. One is by faith and the other is by satan.

Are you in favor of the ordination of women?

Graham: It would be according to the circle I was in, because I feel I belong to all the churches. I am equally at home in an Anglican church or a Baptist church or a Brethren Assembly or a Roman Catholic church and I would have to say that I would identify with the customs and the culture and the theology of that particular church.
But do you welcome that development? (ordination of women]
Yes. … from my study of the scriptures there were many women preachers in the bible. Candid Conversations with a Public Man, David Frost

Once a man accepts man-made opinions and not God’s word, all else falls from there. Here we see Mr Graham accepting culture and bowing to tradition, the way reeds are swayed by the wind. (Matthew 11:7, Jude 1:12). Whatever the people around him believe, Graham believes. That is what he is saying here. The bible says pastoring is for men only. Finally, Christians belong to Jesus, not “all the churches.” A man who “feels” he belongs to all the churches, including RCC, is not a man who has the Spirit in him.

On salvation

Free pics

Graham: I used to think that pagans in far-off countries were lost–were going to hell–if they did not have the Gospel of Jesus Christ preached to them. I no longer believe that. … I believe there are other ways of recognizing the existence of God–through nature, for instance–and plenty of other opportunities, therefore, of saying yes to God. (James Michael Beam, article “I Can’t Play God Anymore,” McCall’s Magazine, 1978)

Only a man without the Spirit could deny that Jesus is the only way, and to say that other opportunities exist for men to say yes to God. Additionally, many say yes to God but deny the Son. Mr Graham did not speak of Jesus as the exclusive way to Christ, but spoke only of a nebulous allusion to nature.

In fact, the method of recognizing God through nature which Mr Graham is alluding is a verse about the wrath of God upon those who plainly see the existence of God in nature but suppress this truth in their unrighteousness. (Romans 1:18-20).

It could not be clearer: a man who disbelieves that those in countries who do not hear the word are not going to hell is not in the Spirit. This means that Mr Graham disbelieves the first and last condition of man: sinner born from the womb and being condemned already. (John 3:18)

On follow up after the Crusades

Graham: Anyone who makes a decision at our meetings is seen later and referred to a local clergyman, Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish. -Billy Graham, San Francisco News interview on Sept 21, 1957.

Many of the people who reach a decision for Christ at our meetings have joined the Catholic Church and we have received commendations from Catholic publications for the revived interest in their Church following our campaigns. This happened both in Boston and Washington. After all, one of our prime purposes is to help the churches in a community. If after we move on, the local (sic) churches do not feel the efforts of these meetings in increased membership and attendance, then our crusade would have to be considered a failure. (Billy Graham, Pittsburgh Sun-Telegraph, 1952)

No man in the Spirit would celebrate the consignment of a seeking soul to the church of the spirit of antichrist! The Roman Catholic Church is not a local church but a synagogue of satan. No one who seeks Jesus will find him in a Jewish synagogue either. If Mr Graham’s “prime purpose” as he states, is to add souls to the number of those who are bound for hell, then Graham is of hell and making sons of hell twice as bad he is. (Matthew 23:15).

Free pics

On infant baptism

I do believe that something happens at the baptism of an infant, particularly if the parents are Christians and teach their children Christian truths from childhood. We cannot fully understand the mysteries of God. But I believe that a miracle can happen in these children so that they are regenerated, that is, made Christians through infant baptism. If you want to call that baptismal regeneration, that’s all right with me. (Wilfred Bockelman, “A Lutheran Looks at Billy Graham,” Lutheran Standard, 10 October 1961)

No person is made a Christian by having water sprinkled on their infant body. We are made Christians by the way God said we become Christians:

So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. (Romans 10:17)

I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard? (Galatians 3:2 )

Can an infant believe what he has heard?

Graham on hell being metaphorical and not real

The good folks at Answers in Genesis are right: once you chip away at the word in the first few chapters of the bible, all other doctrines crumble.

Graham: I think that hell essentially is separation from God forever. And that is the worst hell that I can think of. But I think people have a hard time believing God is going to allow people to burn in literal fire forever. I think the fire that is mentioned in the Bible is a burning thirst for God that can never be quenched. (Orlando Sentinel, Orlando, Florida, April 10, 1983)

You see the connection here: Graham says that “people have a hard time believing” about hell being eternal punishment. Rather than Mr Graham teach it clearly and scripturally, he bows to the wind of doctrine like a broken reed: therefore he says, “I think”. Notice he does not use scripture to support his view. It’s always, ‘I think’, or ‘I feel’… However the bible is very clear on the fate of the unbeliever.

But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice

Pixabay free pics.

magic arts, the idolaters and all liars–their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death. (Revelation 21:8)

Hell IS separation from God forever, though not separation from His wrath. However, the unbeliever was already separated from God before he went to hell. The fiery lake of burning sulfur is very specific about the hell the unbeliever will endure. Hell is not only separation from Jesus, but it is fire, sulfur, and physical torment (Luke 16:24; Jude 1:12-13, Revelation 14:11; 2 Thessalonians 1:9)

These are just a few, certainly not all, of the shockingly aberrant doctrines Graham has held during his life and has espoused publicly. We must not fail to mention the doctrines he does NOT preach about, either. When a person looks at the life of a man like Billy Graham, 60 years of seemingly tireless promotion of Jesus to the masses, they cannot believe that such a man would not be saved. They won’t believe he is a wolf, one of the pack that was prophesied to come in after Paul left the earth. (Acts 20:29)

Yet Jesus said, “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.” (Matthew 7:15)

In sheep’s clothing means that the exterior will be molded to look like a believer, but inwardly they are not. It takes time, prayer, maturity and skill given by the Spirit to detect the wolves. And yet, is it really so hard after all? A man who denies basic doctrines, diverts seekers from Christ, and partners with all religions as equal is not so hard to see is a wolf. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary says,

Beware—But beware of false prophets—that is, of teachers coming as authorized expounders of the mind of God and guides to heaven. (See Ac 20:29, 30; 2Pe 2:1, 2) which come to you in sheep’s clothing—with a bland, gentle, plausible exterior; persuading you that the gate is not strait nor the way narrow, and that to teach so is illiberal and bigoted—precisely what the old prophets did (Eze 13:1-10, 22) but inwardly they are ravening wolves—bent on devouring the flock for their own ends (2Co 11:2, 3, 13-15).

Gilbert Tennent (February 5, 1703 – July 23, 1764) was a religious leader, born in County Armagh, Ireland. Gilbert was one of the leaders of the Great Awakening of religious feeling in Colonial America, along with Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield. His most famous sermon, “On the Danger of an Unconverted Ministry” compared anti-revivalistic ministers to the Pharisees described in the gospels. (Wikipedia)

Gilbert Tennent, On the Danger of an Unconverted Ministry

I may add that sad experience verifies what has been now observed concerning the unprofitableness of the ministry of unconverted men. Look into the congregations of unconverted ministers, and see what a sad security reigns there; not a soul convinced that can be heard of for many years together, and yet the ministers are easy, for they say they do their duty! Aye, a small matter will satisfy us in the lack of that which we have no great desire after, but when persons have their eyes opened and their hearts set upon the work of God, they are not so soon satisfied with their doings, and with lack of success for a time. O! They mourn with Micah that they are as those that gather the summer-fruits, as the grape-gleaning of the vintage. Mr. (Richard) Baxter justly observes that those who speak about their doings in the aforesaid manner are likely to do little good to the Church of God. But many Ministers (as Mr. Bracel observes) think the gospel flourishes among them when the people are in peace, and many come to hear the Word and to the Sacrament. If, with the other, they get the salaries well-paid, then it is fine times indeed in their opinion! O sad! And they are full of hopes that they do good, though th ey know nothing about it. But what comfort can a conscientious man, who travails in birth that Christ may be formed in His hearer’s hearts, take from what he knows not? Will a hungry stomach be satisfied with dreams about meat? I believe not, though, I confess, a full one may.

That is what Mr Graham offers: dreams of meat, while they spiritually starve. Tennant again:

And more especially, my brethren, we should pray to the Lord of the harvest to send forth faithful laborers into His harvest, seeing that the harvest truly is plenteous, but the laborers are few. And, O sirs, how humble, believing, and importunate should we be in this petition! O! Let u s follow the Lord day and night with cries, tears, pleadings, and groanings upon this account! For God knows there is great necessity of it. O! Thou Fountain of mercy and Father of pity, pour forth upon Thy poor children a Spirit of prayer for the obtaining of this important mercy! Help, help, O Eternal God and Father, for Christ’s sake!


Further Reading

Billy Graham’s Legacy of Evangelism Continues Online; 5 Millionth Person Indicates Decision to Accept Jesus as Savior

Life, ministry of Billy Graham chronicled in special release

Billy Graham: ‘His impact for good in the world is incalculable’

Billy Graham and the Catholics

Posted in billy graham, false christians, franklin graham, jesus

Franklin Graham part of "a new evangelization" partnering with Catholics, Graham’s Three Rivers Festival hosts Catholic Bishop Zubik

As many already know. Billy Graham is an ecumenical religionist who preaches an aberrant, unsaving doctrine. [Read also “When Did Graham’s Compromise Begin?]

The elder Graham has been a friend of Rome for a long time, partnering with Popes and priests in various ecumenical endeavors as if the Catholic religion was true.

Occasionally people have asked me if the son, Franklin Graham, believes the same about Rome. There is an oft-repeated quote from a newspaper article from 1999 which seemed to indicate the younger Graham does. Franklin Graham told the Indianapolis Star (6/3/99) that his father’s longstanding ecumenical alliance with the Catholic Church and all other denominations, “was one of the smartest things his father ever did.”

But was one quote enough? Not to me. I waited and watched to see what would come out later. Would the fruit be thorns, or grapes? It didn’t seem likely that Graham the Younger raised in such an environment as Graham the elder’s, would emerge with beliefs that were true, but in any case, I was in wait and see attitude.

Meanwhile, in 2011 I saw a very interesting article from Maryland. It’s obvious that Rome’s doctrines are not saving doctrines and that the Roman Catholic Church is false. Yet astoundingly,

“An Episcopal church has decided to convert, en masse, to Catholicism. The parishioners, along with the pastor, wants to be under the authority of the Roman Catholic Church and its pope. Why? “[C]hurch members said, they were satisfying their longing for a clear religious authority by welcoming the leadership of Pope Benedict XVI. … they decided that the Reformation was a mistake. “It feels fantastic,” Delaney said. “It’s like correcting 500 years of history.””

I was flabbergasted that they would choose such obvious falsity. However, that little trickle was an example of what by now has become a broken dam. Falsity of all sorts of Catholic mischief has flooded into the faith. Lighthouse Trails has a good rundown of the examples of formerly evangelical leaders embracing various aspects of Catholic ritual. (Labyrinths, Contemplative Prayer, Lectio Divina, ecumenical partnerships, acceptance of Catholic dogma etc.) Just this month, I wrote about the infiltration of the Protestant use of Catholic prayer bead rosaries.

Since my first awakening notice of Catholic-Protestant unification in 2011, I’ve seen that Catholicism has become all the rage in Protestantism. The avalanche since 2011 in Catholicism entering Protestantism has been veritably sweeping away many individuals and whole churches. The acceptance of and promotion by top Protestant evangelical leaders is furthering this cause.

Jasmine Goldband Photography

Case in point- Franklin Graham. In August at the Three Rivers Festival (Franklin refuses to call the gatherings “Crusades” like his father,) the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association hosted a Catholic Bishop on stage, partnered with the city’s Catholic church as part of the “evangelistic outreach.” Bishop David Zubik was the Catholic representative, and he was invited to give the opening prayer. Worse, seekers were encouraged to come to the Catholic church for counseling, since they were ‘right next door.’ Here are the Bishop’s words. This is from the August 10 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

Bishop David Zubik said the festival dovetails with calls by recent popes to a ”new evangelization,“ bringing back cradle Catholics who drifted or became estranged from the faith.

“We felt as long as there was a Catholic component to this particular crusade, we wanted to be a part of it,“ Bishop Zubik said. Those who respond to Rev. Graham’s invitation to make a decision for Christ, and who identify as Catholic, will be given the opportunity to go to Epiphany Church — adjacent to the Consol Energy Center — for the sacrament of reconciliation, or confession. ”We’re right next door,“ Bishop Zubik said.

Franklin Graham and Billy Graham will have to answer to our Holy Savior for their part in decades of consigning babes to darkness. They are false apostles, workers of darkness making sons of hell twice as worse as they are (Matthew 23:15, Luke 13:27). Their end will be as they deserve.

And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. (2 Corinthians 11:15)

Did you know that Bob Jones Sr. called the elder Graham a “limb of satan”? We must call evil what it is. Denny Burk wrote a good essay the other day, “We must call evil, “evil.” He was referring to Islam, but I apply his concept here to Catholicism. Just because Islam is ferocious and obviously false doesn’t make it more evil than Catholicism, which sort of looks partly Christian and acts kind of nice. They’re both evil, because both religions and its adherents are doing evil against Jesus.

Bishop David Zubik said the [Franklin Graham Three Rivers] festival dovetails with calls by recent popes to a ”new evangelization,“ bringing back cradle Catholics who drifted or became estranged from the faith.
I’m very sad that I must call the younger Franklin a false teacher, a false worker, but the evidence is clear. It gives me no pleasure to say it nor to see it. I do grieve for the many people who come to his ‘festivals’ (of darkness) and are brought full circle back to their unsaved state. If anything comes from this essay let it be two concepts that stay with you:

1. We must see evil what it is; and after prayer and evidence, call it out (Jude 1:3,) and marking those who cause divisions (Romans 16:17)
2. We must be vigilant. These are dangerous times (2 Timothy 3:1).


Further reading

Like Father, Like Son: Franklin Graham (Son of Billy Graham) Allows Roman Catholic Bishop To Pray At His Pittsburgh Evangelistic Revival! Watch The Video Here!

Pittsburgh Post Gazette: Revival Headliner Franklin Graham has trail of support

Pittsburgh Catholic Newspaper: Catholics extend welcome to [Franklin Graham’s] Festival of Hope crowds

The End Time: “The dangers of the bible…AND…

Posted in doctrine, emergent church, false christians, focus on the family

Focus on the Family, Bono, & who is a Christian; Part 3

Bono on his Co-Exist tour wearing his Co-Exist headband

Last week, President of the Christian organization Focus on the Family Jim Daly sat down with U2 rocker Bono. Mr Daly emerged from that interview trumpeting Mr Bono as a Christian, and write a glowing piece for Focus on the Family’s website and also published in the Washington Post called Why Orthodox Christians Should Appreciate An Unorthodox Bono“.

In parts one and two of the series of three parts, I looked at–

1. Focus on the Family’s increasing apostasy
2. Whether Bono is a Christian

And now in part 3 we’ll look at the lack of discernment in Christians today. Not everyone who claims Jesus is a Christian and it is important to understand that. I’ll tell you why.

–Accepting unquestioningly all people who claim Christianity but who obviously are not, blurs the lines of the faith.
–We are supposed to share truth to a lost and dying world. Non-Christians, including false Christians we accept as genuine, do not have that truth to share.

As GotQuestions states, “The evidence of a true Christian is displayed in both faith and action. “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” (2 Corinthians 5:17). James says, “I will show you my faith by my works” (James 2:18). Jesus put it this way: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (John 8:12). A true Christian will show his faith by how he lives. Despite the wide variety of beliefs that fall under the general “Christian” label today, the Bible defines a true Christian as one who has personally received Jesus Christ as Savior, who trusts in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ alone for forgiveness of sins, who has the Holy Spirit residing within, and whose life evinces change consistent with faith in Jesus.”

We are supposed to care who says they are a Christian because Christians are supposed to have the truth of Jesus in us and abide by the Spirit. If we do then we’re brethren, and we build each other up, pray for each other, and help each other. If they are not, we know to evangelize them with our words, witness to them with our lives, and separate from them in our spirit. Mindlessly accepting everyone who utters “Jesus” like a magic password, blurs those lines and foils the notion that we are supposed to be separate, holding onto the only truth in a dying world of relativism. This unwillingness to engage in what is at root a problem of discernment is the number one problem in the church.

John MacArthur said,  “People ask me this all the time, “… What do you see as the biggest problem in Christianity? The biggest problem in the church? It’s simple for me to answer that. The biggest problem in the church today is the absence of discernment. It’s a lack of discernment. It’s the biggest problem with Christian people, they make bad choices. They accept the wrong thing. They accept the wrong theology. The are prone to the wrong teaching. They’re unwise in who they follow, what they listen to and what they read.”

He continues, “I’m afraid that is pretty typical of the contemporary evangelical scene. There is a lack of precision in thinking, there’s a lack of consistency, there’s a lack of integrity. It’s just a hodgepodge, listening to anybody and everybody, reading anything, making no particular judgments. In fact, to make a judgment may be seen as unchristian. Boundless, endless credulity, anything and everything except there’s got to be good in all of it, how dare you question anybody’s view on anything. And I really believe that because of this pervasive attitude, evangelical Christianity, biblical Christianity as we know it is fighting for its life. Amazing to think about.”

Bertrand Russell had a lot to say about our lack of consistency and lack of integrity to the truth, as we’ll see below.

The reason biblical Christianity is fighting for its life is related to something that Martyn Lloyd Jones predicted 40 years ago. Martyn Lloyd-Jones wrote in his 1970 book ‘Romans: An Exposition of Chapters’:

Martyn Lloyd-Jones

“Disapproval of polemics in the Christian Church is a very serious matter. But that is the attitude of the age in which we live. The prevailing idea today in many circles is not to bother about these things. As long as we are all Christians, anyhow, somehow, all is well. Do not let us argue about doctrine, let us all be Christians together and talk about the love of God. That is really the whole basis of ecumenicity. Unfortunately, that same attitude is creeping into evangelical circles also and many say that we must not be too precise about these things. If you hold that view, you are criticizing the Apostle Paul, you are saying that he was wrong, and at the same time you are criticizing the Scriptures. The Scriptures argue and debate and dispute; they are full of polemics.”

Polemics defined is: contentious arguments that are intended to establish the truth of a specific understanding and the falsity of the contrary position. (source). That is Christianity in a nutshell, isn’t it! Jesus is the only way to heaven…you must repent or die…Jesus is God and there is no other… These are polemical arguments.  A polemic is one definite controversial thesis. Debate is the second cousin to polemics. Debate is not so definite, debate allows for common ground between the two disputants. A polemic is intended to establish the truth of a point of view while refuting the opposing point of view. In polemics, there is one truth only. In debate, there is compromise and common ground. That is why we cannot debate and compromise in Christianity.

The problem today is that people debate. They don’t engage in polemics. A polemicist says, “There is only one truth and here it is, there is no other name by which you many be saved than that of Jesus. If you do not claim that name in repentance, you will go to hell.” (Acts 4:12, 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9). Saying that truth today is becoming increasingly radical. Also radical is marking the boundaries of Christianity and claiming that such and such a person is outside of it.

Christianity is itself a polemic. The book of John establishes right and wrong, good and evil, light and


dark. There is either or. Jesus is either God or He isn’t. You are of this world or you are not. Yet today there is a refusal to state the one truth, polemically, and this has allowed all manner of untruths to creep in. For example,

“But there are some things in the Word of God that are very clear and those are the things that are at the heart of our faith. And one of them is to understand who is a true Christian. And it’s astonishing to me how confused people are. I talked to one of the students at the college who went to Amsterdam 2000 this summer, this convocation of thousands of evangelists. And he is a college student, he said to me, “I couldn’t believe what I heard. The thing was opened by a Roman Catholic priest, and there was a man there who denied the resurrection of Jesus Christ and they all received applause and a standing ovation.” By evangelicals? And when somebody steps in and says, “Stop this charade, this pretense of Christianity, let’s get down to who’s really a Christian,” you get vilified and marginalized and alienated. But that’s okay because what matters is the truth. So we’re trying to deal with the truth.” (source)

Christianity by nature of its polemical stance, is divisive. It is supposed to be. I am not saying that people are supposed to be divisive on purpose by being disagreeable for the sake of being disagreeable. However, stating the truth divides. Didn’t Jesus say,


“The Sword of the Gospel”
“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.” (Matthew 10:34-36).

So no, Bono by believing in other religions is not a Christian. It is important to say these things. So how do you tell who a Christian is, here is MacArthur again:

“And the way to understand who a Christian is, I’ve concluded after a long time trying to get to this point, is to understand deliverance, the theology of deliverance. You can tell a Christian because they’re delivered. That’s what the Bible teaches.”

“The first category of deliverance is those who are really Christians have been delivered out of error into truth. Now listen to what I say. No one is a Christian who does not understand, believe, embrace and love the truth. What truth? The truth that we call the gospel. …When the Spirit of truth regenerates, He moves people from error to truth. He brings the sinner the understanding of, belief in, embracing of, and total commitment to the truth.”

You can tell a Christian because they know the truth and a non-Christian doesn’t. Simple.

It is important if we are a Christian be clear about any interlopers in our midst. Look at poor Bertrand Russell. The philosopher Bertrand Russell gave a lecture in 1927 in London, called “Why I am Not a Christian.” In it, he bemoans the watering down of what the definition of Christianity is, and mocks those of us who are holding the hose.

Bertrand Russell

“As your chairman has told you, the subject about which I am going to speak to you tonight is “Why I Am Not a Christian.” Perhaps it would be as well, first of all, to try to make out what one means by the word “Christian.” It is used in these days in a very loose sense by a great many people. Some people mean no more by it than a person who attempts to live a good life. In that sense I suppose there would be Christians in all sects and creeds; but I do not think that that is the proper sense of the word, if only because it would imply that all the people who are not Christians — all the Buddhists, Confucians, Mohammedans, and so on — are not trying to live a good life. I do not mean by a Christian any person who tries to live decently according to his lights. I think that you must have a certain amount of definite belief before you have a right to call yourself a Christian. The word does not have quite such a full-blooded meaning now as it had in the times of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. In those days, if a man said that he was a Christian it was known what he meant. You accepted a whole collection of creeds which were set out with great precision, and every single syllable of those creeds you believed with the whole strength of your convictions.”

Having certainty and conviction of clear doctrines was something that atheist Russell could respect, even get behind. Ultimately, so can Jesus.

“‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.” (Revelation 3:15-16).

Russell says our definition of Christian is too elastic, and he is right to wonder about the whole shebang of Christianity when we let so precious a truth become elasticised and stretched beyond recognition! It is his way of saying, “If they don’t care what Christianity is, why should I?” And when the false professors we have allowed into our midst fall away, and they always do, then what?

Phil Johnson

Phil Johnson of Grace Community Church and Executive Director, Grace to You, was assigned the task of explaining and critiquing the emerging church movement in one of the 75-minute sessions at the 2006 Shepherd’s Conference The resulting paper is titled, “Exposing the Postmodern Errors of the Emerging Church”. (a .pdf).

Pastor Johnson said the emerging church movement is an “irrational agglomeration of unorthodox ideas”, and of Bono, Johnson said he is one of the prime leaders of it. “This may help you more than anything I have said so far to understand the flavor of the “emerging church movement”: Bono—the Irish rocker and politico of U2 fame—seems to be the unofficial icon of the movement. If you’ve been tuned into pop-culture at any time over the past two decades and know anything about Bono, that might help you to grasp something about the look and feel of the movement”. … emergent types seem to quote Bono all the time. I would say that he sometimes seems to be the chief theologian of the “emerging church movement,” but in all fairness, that honor belongs more to John R. Franke and Stan Grenz. .. But he and Franke are the two academic theologians who have done more than anyone else to blend postmodernism and theology into a kind of quasi-evangelical doctrine”.

And that is what we have today. We have a long-standing organization such as Focus on the Family promoting an icon in Bono who represents a false movement which is bringing quasi-evangelical doctrine to quasi-evangelical Christians. On the other side we have an elder of the faith in Pr. Johnson who says that movement Bono represents is full of irrational agglomeration of unorthodox ideas, has contempt for biblical authority, breeds doubt about the perspicuity of Scripture, and sows confusion about the mission of the church.

At the January 2013 Convocation of the Bangor Theological Seminary in Maine, Rev. Steven Lewis noted that there are indicators that the religious landscape of North America has radically changed. “That landscape change includes a spiritual revival and renewal afoot but it is not religious, the Rev. Steven Lewis, academic dean of Bangor Theological Seminary, said in January in the opening session of Convocation. He called it “humanitarian spirituality.”

Who wouldn’t be confused about who’s really a Christian when seminaries are graduating theologians who are told these terrible things? It is exactly this ‘humanitarian spirituality’ which Bono exemplifies-that Jesus will vomit out His mouth. As blogger Elliott Nesch said of the Daly-Bono meeting and the resulting version of Christianity which was unfortunately validated through it, “Philanthropy is no substitute for the Gospel of Jesus Christ! … Bono is embraced and given the upper-hand in both religious and political spheres of influence. Many are following Bono in social justice but throwing the Gospel out the window. Bono’s hip Christianity will inspire many Christians to embrace ecumenism and apostasy in the cloak of philanthropy. This is a politicized social Gospel which is contrary to the doctrine of Christ.”

And THAT’S why we care about who is a Christian.

Focus on the Family, Bono, & who is a Christian Part 1

Focus on the Family, Bono, & who is a Christian? Part 2

Posted in beth moore, end of days. prophecy, false christians, sin, when godly people do ungodly things

Conclusion: How do Christian authors end up channeling spirits and producing books from them? Pride

Part one: Making no distinction between Victorian channeling writers of yore and today’s Christian authors
Part two: Walsch, Young, and Beth Moore: ungodly channelers all

Part 3: Walsch, Young, and Beth Moore: ungodly channelers all (Part 3)

I hope that the thoughts expressed here these last three essays have offered you food for thought and an area of discernment to look for when digesting ‘Christian’ books. I’ve spent the first two essays showing you how a person can wind up being used by the other side, and the third essay illustrating potential reasons why. Now in this conclusion I want to speak of pride.

Pride in my opinion is the the root cause of sin. Satan fell due to pride. What happened to Satan? Ezekiel recorded “Your heart became proud on account of your beauty, and you corrupted your wisdom because of your splendor” (Ezekiel 28:17). Isaiah explains that satan fell because he thought he was better than God. Isaiah 14: 12-15 states — “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.”

“An high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked, is sin.” (Proverbs 21:4)

I want to bring your attention to two statements from writers I’ve been showing you, Beth Moore and Neale Donald Walsch. They are really blasphemous, in my opinion, and need to be examined thoughtfully against what the bible says.

Neale Donald Walsch has said: “In the spring of 1992…an extraordinary phenomenon occurred in my life. God began talking with you. Through me.”

Let’s pull that apart for a minute. God is speaking to the world through Walsch. However, the bible says, “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,” (Hebrews 1:1a). “Has spoken” is an ongoing past tense. So now one must decide whether God is speaking only through Jesus in the Word, or is He speaking to the world through Jesus AND Walsch, or is He speaking only through Walsch. If you decide that God can speak to the world through Jesus AND Walsch, that means Walsch is elevated to a position of equality with Jesus. If you believe God is speaking to the world through Walsch alone, it means God has supplanted Jesus as the verbalizer of the faith. In some way, you must reconcile what Walsch has said with the Hebrews verse.

“Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.” (Mt 7:24)

If you accept that God is speaking through Walsch, then do we place our house on the rock of Walsch’s words?

Jesus said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.” (Mark 13:31) So does that mean that Walsch’s words will not pass away, either?

We can go on here, but I think by now you see the extreme pridefulness of what Walsch has said, and that it cannot be reconciled with the Word. Therefore avoid the books Conversations with God.

In the preface to Beth Moore’s book When Godly People do Ungodly Things Moore said on page xi,–

If she didn’t write the book, the rocks and stones would cry out?? Here is the biblical reference: “Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples!” I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.” (Luke 19:39-40). Barnes Notes explains what is happening in the context of that scene-

“The stones would …cry out – It is “proper” that they should celebrate my coming. Their acclamations “ought” not to be suppressed. So joyful is the event which they celebrate – the coming of the Messiah – that it is not fit that I should attempt to impose silence on them.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary explains:
“Whether men praise Christ or no he will, and shall, and must be praised (v. 40): If these should hold their peace, and not speak the praises of the Messiah’s kingdom, the stones would immediately cry out, rather than that Christ should not be praised.”

So Moore is saying that her book is so important that all of creation would cry out if she didn’t write it. That is what she is saying. And further, she is putting herself as an equal to the Apostles who were praising JESUS at that time. Moore’s pride in elevating her book to the level of importance akin to joy expressed at the arrival of the Messiah illustrates a prideful heart. We can go on here, but I think by now you see the extreme pridefulness of what Moore has said, and that it cannot be reconciled with the Word. Therefore avoid Beth Moore’s books.

Now, pride is dastardly, It is something that the prideful person may not even detect as a sin. I mean, sexual sin is obvious. If you are having an affair, you know you are sinning. But pride…that one is sneaky. explains God’s view of pride like this:

“Psalm 10:4 explains that the proud are so consumed with themselves that their thoughts are far from God: “In his pride the wicked does not seek him; in all his thoughts there is no room for God.” This kind of haughty pride is the opposite of the spirit of humility that God seeks: “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). The “poor in spirit” are those who recognize their utter spiritual bankruptcy and their inability to come to God aside from His divine grace.”

Check yourself for pride. It is a sly, sneaky sin and it besets us before we know it. I did a repentance check myself this morning, asking the Lord to reveal to me any and all pride I have and to remove it whilst giving me a humble heart. I don’t want to be proud, not even for a moment. It is way too easy to believe your own press clippings, and Walsch and Moore among others, have lost their way detouring along the prideful path. Pray for them that the light will guide them back. I want for all Christians to gain discernment in matters such as books, movies, doctrines, tracts and all other things purporting to be biblical through your own study, prayer, and seeking the Spirit’s guidance. We need pure food these days, and pride is a dish best left to the garbage heap.