Why Can’t They See It? Demonic Activity In Nazarene Schools and Churches

Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.  James 4:4

An Alarm That Needs to Be Sounded But Will Largely Be Ignored
(John Henderson)

http://youtu.be/Nk_I3fNCWxQ   ENC Harlem Shake
http://youtu.be/iExjofik6wg  Unmasked Version of Harlem Shake
http://youtu.be/9dxWxv376xM  “Original Version” at Mid America
http://youtu.be/Tm23MxS6xz8  Olivet Nazarene University
http://youtu.be/yNCP7YOM3Pk  Olivet Coaches
http://youtu.be/4kHaOnOSGNc  Point Loma Nazarene University
http://www.treveccalive.com/angelotate/harlem-holiness-shake/  Trevecca “Holiness” Shake
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9gh-XlOMvm0#!  Northwest Nazarene
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FpUABrTCfY  Southern Nazarene

 

The above You Tubes clearly demonstrate there is something wrong in our Church of the Nazarene.  Except possibly for the second one (and there were others so vile I could not share them here), they are all at Nazarene Universities.  The one at Olivet is set up by who is apparently the chaplain.

I might say that this is the ultimate emergent heresy unabashed and out of control.  I would be right.  I might say it is just a cousin to the demonic kundalini and I would be right because it is demonic through and through.  People who are demon possessed are not born again because God’s saved cannot be demon possessed.  They can be harassed but not possessed of demons.  These people are demon possessed.

What I do say is a serious question:  Where on God’s green earth are the university presidents, administration, and faculty?  Where, in the precious name of Jesus are the university board members?  Where are the general superintendents, department heads, district superintendents, and major pastors in the Church of the Nazarene?  Why is no one calling a halt to this?

It is ironic that we Nazarenes who stand for the truth of the Scriptures are snubbed, insulted, and demeaned because we raise a voice against this stuff from hell!  It is ironic that pastors are bemoaning the exodus of people and offerings from their churches while they “hee-hee” this filth and continue to offer up cultic substitutes for worship and prayer.  It is ironic that we wring our hands at the consequences of the lawsuit out of the Bethany sex scandal that now forces every Nazarene church to conduct a “background” check on everyone who has direct contact with its children.

Isn’t it high time that we Nazarenes start being Nazarenes?  I tell people that I am a traditional Nazarene, that I am not an emergent Nazarene, a postmodern Nazarene, a new age Nazarene, a progressive Nazarene, and so on.  I take the Bible at its word—God’s Word to be precise.  I believe the creation was a real event.  I believe that God is omnipotent, omni-present, and omniscient—that He knows the future just as if it was today.  I believe that sin is awful and damning and that if anyone is not fully trusting Christ as Savior that person is lost and has only Hell to anticipate and dread.  I believe the Bible is totally true and accurate by divine action.

I believe that God expects us to live above the world in attitude, conduct, speech, and even our outward appearances—we are to live beyond the world-order in holiness of heart, mind, body, and soul.  We are not of the world so we are not to take on its identity in any form.

This world cannot teach us a thing.  We are on a divine mission to win and teach them.  There is to be no compromise or accommodation on our part.  We have a clear message that has often been summarized accurately in three words—repent or perish.

It is so pitiful that we have received a call to intercessory prayer by our denominational leaders leading up to the 2013 general assembly.  It is clear that we need to do that.

A Failure Of The Shepherds To Exercise Leadership In The Church Leads To Such As This
(Manny Silva)

The worldwide phenomenal popularity of a new dance video craze called the Harlem Shake is clearly obvious.  YouTube videos with well over 40 million hits collectively prove that.  It is yet another fad that soon will die out as many other fads do.  Briefly explained, as described in an article by Stand Up For The Truth:

First you see a subdued, well-behaved group or crowd. Suddenly you hear music audio declaring, “Con Los Terroristas!” A sole individual is then seen dancing while wearing a helmet or mask, while the others seem oblivious to the gyrations in their midst. When the song breaks into “Do the Harlem Shake!” the video cuts and shows the room filled with people in costumes dancing wildly and seductively. It is reminiscent of the Golden Calf scene in the Ten Commandments movie.

By the way, Con Los Terroristas  means “with the terrorists.” When you see one of these from a Christian viewpoint, it is clearly a worldly performance that most of the time looks demonic.  Much of it is sensual, oftentimes bordering on the pornographic, with many of the participants often scantily clad, dressed in devilish costumes, and making extremely vulgar gestures.  Certainly not something any professing born again Christian would do, right?

Wrong.

It is now a craze that is sweeping evangelical Christian schools and even church youth groups.  In the Stand Up For The Truth article, they document how Christian organizations such as Liberty University, Rick Warren’s Saddleback Youth Ministry, Kentucky Christian University, Cedarville University, and others, have jumped onto this bandwagon and brought this phenomenon into their chapels and churches!  In one of the videos from a church in San Antonio, Texas, you even see this being performed in the middle of a sermon, with the pastor joining in enthusiastically.  And in a blasphemous performance, a C3 church in Australia did it while re-enacting Jesus Christ’s crucifixion.

But… what about Nazarenes?  After all, we are a holiness denomination, are we not?  Surely not us!

Out of curiosity, I did some research.  Why am I not surprised?  The first one I found was actually from my alma mater, Eastern Nazarene College. Probably the many years of a liberal “kids will be kids” attitude, coupled with an ecumenical philosophy and the emergent rejection of doctrine in favor of being like the world, has poisoned the minds of our youth.  And this is the result.  Worldliness in a Nazarene school, or a Nazarene church, and many of the youth and many of the adults have no problem with this at all.  More likely, they think this is cute and so much fun, and think that the world will love how we like to have a good time.

Such is the state of the church, and how it continues to go deeper and deeper into worldliness until it will no longer have any kind of distinction from the non-believers.  (At the end, you will find a full list of what I have found (so far) at our Nazarene universities, churches and youth group meetings).

And will anyone in Nazarene leadership say a word?  Why should they?  They have not taken a serious stand on all the apostasy that has started to destroy the Nazarene denomination, so clearly I do not expect any of our General Superintendents, or our District Superintendents, or any of our college presidents, to say a peep about this.

But if I’m wrong, I guess I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

You make your own judgment about this, but I agree with my friends who have said that this is nothing but demonic activity, and it is truly sad how our university and church leaders have contributed so poorly to the spiritual development of our youth.  The result is this and much more that we have already sounded the alarm about.  And the majority of the sheep sit quietly in the pews, meekly listening to feel good sermons and bragging about how they are proud to be Nazarene.  Well, for the first time in my life, I am no longer proud to be a Nazarene.

As Scripture clearly teaches us, those who are in such positions as supposed shepherds in the church will have much to answer to the Lord someday.

 “Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.”  James 3:1

 

APPENDIX: (Viewer discretion advised.  As John said, some of these are pretty vile in their content)

Mid-America Nazarene University:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dxWxv376xM

Wenatchee Nazarene Student Ministries:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSwhbacXGz0

Muncie First Church:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MZViVviAgE

Point Loma Nazarene University:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laryefkPsTY

Olivet Nazarene University:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhK6pfgo72U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iExjofik6wg

Bethany First Church Youth Ministry:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25UqkFylwHY

Chicago First Church, Edge Student Ministry:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe1iI8Y-iEQ

Maysville Nazarene Church:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG-YBKawRkg

Southern Nazarene Univ. student bus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FpUABrTCfY

Eastern Nazarene College:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nk_I3fNCWxQ

ENC’s Facebook page brags about it:  http://www.facebook.com/EasternNazarene

Trevecca Nazarene University:
http://www.treveccalive.com/angelotate/harlem-holiness-shake/

Northwest Nazarene University:http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9gh-XlOMvm0#!

A Nazarene church in MN:
http://www.ffnaz.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=555:harlem-shake-youth-ministry-style&catid=22:youth-ministry&Itemid=132

Why We Do What We Do

Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.”  John 14:21

My friend John Henderson sent a message recently to his email list, and it very accurately reflects what drives me and many others who are in the middle of this spiritual battle with Satan’s minions who are busy trying to destroy the church from within.  I thought I would share this with you as well.  Christians who are solely interested in the truth of God’s word, and could care less about losing friends, will relate to this.  Oh, we do want to keep rather than lose friends, but certainly not if we have to compromise in any way in order to please others.  That is not and never will be our mission, God willing.  As John states at the end, “My time is short and I cannot waste what remains on mundane things.  There is a final judgment just ahead.”

By John Henderson:

I use emails and online posts primarily as a ministry to which I feel called by God and to which I am deeply committed.  It is not a ministry I chose for myself but came to realize I should join with those who share a deep concern for the authority and integrity of the Scriptures and the traditions of the evangelistic movement in general and the Wesleyan holiness movement in particular..

There came a point in these my latter years where the departures and compromises from Biblical doctrine and tradition among Wesleyans and other evangelicals I had observed over time had come to a head and had erupted mainly in the form of the emergent church movement where the Scriptures were questioned, the divinity of Christ was challenged, Eastern and New Age mysticism was replacing Christian worship, and a Biblical stance on sinful behaviors and attitudes such as homosexuality were being openly softened.

I came across a group of like-minded Christians through a Facebook site, Concerned Nazarenes. It is a Nazarene group that includes a coalition of Christians from several Wesleyan denominations and is in fellowship with like-minded Christians of non-Wesleyan groups.  It seemed right that I should identify with them.

Our only objective is the protection, defense, proclamation, and preservation of Biblical truth.  We are not concerned with personalities and never attack persons themselves.  We only address the content and context of what leaders, writers, and others among us and elsewhere state or write for public consumption.  Names often come up in connection with one’s own statements and we do not hide it because they have not hidden their own identity.  In spite of that, we labor to avoid engaging in character assassinations and the use of ad hominem methods.[1]  We will bend over backwards if necessary before we will do that.  At the same time, we will not, by way of illustration, redefine a mugger as a troubled victim of society and we will not kowtow to those preaching heresy as misguided saints.  They speak for themselves and we do not seek to smooth over what they reveal of themselves by their own words and actions.

On the other hand, we typically receive responses from leaders and others using ad hominem methods where we are personally attacked in some apparent attempt to avoid dealing with issues they have no Biblical answers for.  I am not aware of one instance where those who disagree with us have actually engaged us in objective debate.  I am, however, aware of several instances where we have been refused participation in objective and public discussions that include mutually respectful appeals to legitimate (Biblical) authority—or whatever other authority they want to appeal to.  The characteristic responses we receive instead are zingers, insults, and false (un-supported) accusations—often against our own personal characters.  We are more likely to be shut off than faced; especially if there is a chance others may observe or become aware of the exchanges.  We are unafraid of open public discussions but are usually refused when we have offered it.

A common criticism of us is that we are troublemakers.  That means that we have raised serious questions about important changes in our denominations and churches that we are expected to accept on the basis of their unconditional authority.  They have never answered our questions on any topic where they have offered evidence that agrees with the inerrant Scriptures.

Those of us who do not unquestionably accept major changes in doctrine and practice among us are then branded as troublemakers.  As such “troublemakers” we are not allowed a place at the table of ideas.  That means that we must put forth our message in other ways.  This is one of my own efforts to hold forth the light of Truth as it is in Christ and His Scriptures. I care for nothing else and have no personal agenda in these matters.

Some say we think of ourselves as sole possessors of truth. It is not that at all.  We are possessed by the Truth and choose to not deviate from it but to stand by it at any personal cost.  We know that the only truth is in Christ and that the Bible is totally true without exception because He is its Author.  No man and no system can stand above that.

All of what I write of these kinds of topics follows this principle.  I am committed to it.  I believe it to be what God has given me to do.  My time is short and I cannot waste what remains on mundane things.  There is a final judgment just ahead.  We shall all be there.

If you are comfortable with that, I welcome you to my email list.  If you are not comfortable with it, please let me know and I will honor your wishes without prejudice.

P.S.   You might see this letter or something like it in the future if I add another group.

---

[1] Ad hominem: Attacking an opponent’s character rather than answering his argument; or, appealing to one’s prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one’s intellect or reason.

 

[RECOMMENDED MINISTRY: Intermountain Christian News.  ICN publishes primarily for Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming.  Dr. Anthony Harper's ministry reaches many churches and businesses.  He is a member of the White House Media Pool, and is always ready to ask difficult questions related to government and its role in relation to Christians and their religious freedom.  ICN's Vision statement says: "To be a conservative weekly non denominational evangelistic newspaper in newsprint, DVD format and via our web site with distribution at as many secular locations in our Intermountain region where secular newspapers are distributed."  Dr. harper has boldly published stories that many other Christian newspapers will not print, and has taken a hit for speaking the truth about the apostasy around us.  We need to support ministries like this and make sure they continue for  along time.  Please visit ICN, and I encourage you if you can to subscribe and support in any other way you can for this faithful ministry]

Lord, Did We Not Do Many Wonderful Things In Your Name?

(By John Henderson)

Matthew 7:21-23” “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” “…I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works” (Revelation 2:23b).

I shared through email an article by Terry Ivy[1] in which he discussed the failure of churches that focus largely on programs at the expense of conversions, as evangelical believers understand conversions.  He was not decrying programs as such but the fact that vigorous conversions were conspicuously missing and all that was left were programs and events.

It has become a sickness of the soul of the church and these activities seem to be all they have left that makes them think of real church.  It is their substitution for commitment to the call of Jesus to go into the world and win souls, then nourish them in the things of Christ.  It is their abandonment of the New Testament Church principle of adding to the church daily such as will be saved.

In fact, when they say they want to return to the practices of the early church that is not the early church they mean.  They never go back past AD 200, but rather dawdle about in the budding heresies of the centuries after that, seeking to resurrect those old errors, many of which even the modern Catholic Church is abandoning.  They eagerly run after their accommodating teachers, “having itching ears,”[2] and miss the call of God altogether.

They must somehow know that deep inside, but choose rather to close the eyes and ears of their spiritual understanding against the Spirit’s warnings and arrive at a place where they actually think they are serving Christ. Once fully self-deceived, they move forward in haughty self-reliance all the way to the Judgment Bar of Christ.  Even then, they still think they have served the Lord until the Lord Himself has to tell them differently.  What an irreversible tragedy!

If you read the entire account in Matthew, you will see there were two groups.  One group, the saved, was so focused on loving the Lord that they completely overlooked the value of their service to Him.  The lost group was so focused on their “service” to Him that they completely overlooked loving Him.  Both groups called Him Lord, but He was Lord only of those who had “lost” themselves only to find it again in Him.  The other group only saw themselves as pushing self to the front for Him to notice and lost it all in the end.

One of my active email recipients on the west coast, a Nazarene who often responds in significant ways, wrote me the following about the Terry Ivy blog:

“Again, these ‘things’ in themselves are not wrong or even sin. But on the other hand, anything that pre-empts, distracts, plays on one’s feelings, and especially ‘mixes in’ with the Gospel needs to be evaluated…Believers continually seem to be coming up with all kinds of ways and means to entertain….instead of coming up with prayer meetings and focusing all the messages in the church on the saving grace and the price Christ paid for me on the cross. Anything at all in life and especially in the church can become a stumbling block, discount, discredit and demean the Gospel – therefore; it should compel us to judge all in light of Christ’s redemptive work on the cross. The cross is no longer held in high esteem when all these ‘things’ come into the church. Anytime these venues are used to ‘draw’ people, I always notice that the simple clear message of the Gospel which compels sinners to come to the cross, becomes diluted and often not even mentioned.

That same person then followed with a response to my question that has become the topic of this article:

“Yes, very possibly this could pertain to the verse, ‘Lord, did we not do many wonderful things in your name?’ but…unfortunately due to the fact that the doors have been opened to the enemy – this verse is lost on those being entertained.”

Another Nazarene correspondent in the eastern U.S., responding to the same Ivy article, sent me this message:

“I believe this was also true in the (earlier) days (my childhood years) in the COTN[3].  There was spirited singing, and solid preaching, and that was about it.  We went out ‘calling’ and witnessing – and that’s what brought people in.  Strong preaching, always ending in an either/or – heaven or hell -  confrontation, resulted in real conversions at the altar (mourner’s bench) – and many times it took more than the 2 or 3 minutes it takes to pray the ‘sinner’s prayer’.  And the church grew.”

I am not a pessimist.  Although I know there is to be a great falling away just prior to Christ’s Second Coming and that many will be led astray, I also believe that Jesus will not be coming for a Church hunkering down from the world’s attacks.  He will be coming for a busy Church, a Church that is attending to its mission while keeping an eye on the sky.

Luke 12:37-38: “Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them. And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.”

---

[1] Terry Ivy. ReThinking Church, Part 5 – Biblical Conversions (http://blogs.christianpost.com/guest-views/rethinking-church-part-5-biblical-conversions-9823/).

[2] Having an itching in regard to hearing things that glut their own carnal desires “because they have an insatiable curiosity to hear new things” (from 2 Timothy 4:3, NET).  For this reason, they will not tolerate sound doctrine.

[3] COTN is a common abbreviation for Church of the Nazarene

The Crux of the Matter: Concerning Inerrancy of Scripture, Part 1

(John Henderson)

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.- II Corinthians 11:3-4

 

2 Thessalonians 2:7a,10-12: “For the mystery of iniquity doth already work …And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

2 Peter 3:16 “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”

2 Peter 3:3: “Above all, understand this: In the last days blatant scoffers will come, being propelled by their own evil urges…” 3:5: “ For they deliberately suppress this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed out of water and by means of water.”  3:17-18: “Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard that you do not get led astray by the error of these unprincipled men and fall from your firm grasp on the truth. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the honor both now and on that eternal day.” (NET

Romans 1:24-26: “Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature….”

 

This is “installment two” of addressing the limited inerrancy falsehood.  Number one was “The Word is Nigh Thee.” Under good advice, I am struggling with how to put things in a simpler manner so that the average person who does not spend as much time as I on these things can grasp what is happening.  Several of us have discussed these things back and forth and have come to the conclusion that all emergent error is based in one thing:  a denial of the full (total) and complete inspiration of the Scriptures in every detail.  Everything else feeds off of that intentional delusion.  An email corresponded wrote:

Having just finished reading one of Dave Hunt’s Berean Calls, I wanted to send along some of his quotes that align completely with what I have seen in my former [large Nazarene] church.

“The Bible allows for no compromise, no discussion, no dialogue with the world’s religions (emergent) in search for common ground. Remember, Christianity is not a religion but distinct from all of them.”

“Jesus didn’t say, ‘Go into all the world and dialogue about faith.’ He said, ‘Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel.’”

“A reasonable and genuine faith must take very seriously what Jesus said – not what somebody says about what Jesus said, but His very words as recorded in the Bible.”

These quotes are what I try to explain to those who believe because they hear ‘gospel words,’ the name of Jesus, and all kinds of key Christian terms….that it does not mean the emergent agenda speaker is ‘preaching the Gospel’. Why? Because he does not believe in the inerrancy of scripture and has been brainwashed into believing only parts of the Bible. He often is doing the above-mentioned…dialoguing, debating, explaining, arguing, speculating, scrutinizing, telling stories in essence, making excuses, and of course having conversations. This is not preaching the anointed power of Christ’s message that compels sinners to come to the cross…and reminds believers that they daily must make their lives right with God.

From what the writer is saying, it is not possible to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ unless you unequivocally embrace the total inerrancy of the Scriptures.  Otherwise, you will be preaching “another Jesus,” a false “Jesus”.  You will end up doing just as she indicates and that is talking all around the Word of God instead of correctly preaching the Word of God.  You will throw yourself wide open for the infiltration of all sorts of detestable heresies such as substituting the creation account for a modified atheistic viewpoint, lying that God is limited in any way, denying miracles (Jonah, the Virgin birth, dead raised, etc.), and end up nit-picking passages—in essence placing the wisdom of man above the revelation of the omniscient God.  Theoretical meandering such as this seeks to overrule revelation even when passages of the Bible are referenced—but not actually observed.

An important point being made in the writer’s statement has everything to do with how the emergent heresy is slathered (spread thickly) with a pretense of gospel preaching, a look-alike “gospel”.  The method works for a period but becomes apparent as the lavish counterfeit eventually wears thin and even the least perceptive observer starts to notice things are not as they seem.  I’ll not belabor that point, having talked about it often in previous articles.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the entire emergent structure will instantly crumble if the errancy of the entire Bible is not firmly established, if the cover-up is not maintained, with those they try to persuade.  In fact, everything they say that is part of their system of teachings can be traced right back to their denial and misuse of the Scriptures in some manner.  An idea of limited inerrancy or total errancy is the hinge-pin[1] for all they embrace.  It is what holds them together and makes them operate.  They have no message apart from it.  If they should accept the full authority of Scriptures, their many arguments that go against plain Scripture are immediately refuted by those Scriptures.

I mentioned in the previous article the paper written by Jason Bjerke[2] in which the writer addresses the controversy surrounding the Bible’s inspiration, inerrancy, and authority.  He acknowledges the historical attacks from the outside but brings sharply-focused attention to the attacks from within.  He makes ample references to statements by some of the modern leadership of the Church of the Nazarene as examples of attacks from within.  It should be noted that the Church of the Nazarene is not alone in this because there is evidence that similar or identical attacks come also from other denominational leaders, including Southern Baptists, the Evangelical Friends, the Wesleyan Church, and Pentecostals; as well as from publishers, para-church organizations, and missionary organizations that once were solidly Biblical. 

Neither Bjerke nor I intend to besmirch the Church of the Nazarene, their leaders, or those other groups but it is important to inform the main body of those groups of what is actually being taught them to an extent they at least can make an informed decision about what they want to do about it one way or the other. 

No lies.  No cover-ups.  No looking the other way.  No making excuses.  No denials in the face of evidence.  No ducking for cover.  No hit-and-runs, as so many of them so often do to those who question them. 

I remain willing to be publically corrected by the Scriptures if I am wrong about anything.  I am willing to have my rationale publically examined and challenged according to the common rules of rational logic.  I ask the same of them—but do not expect they will ever rise to that challenge. They have not risen to that challenge so far.  Perhaps there I still a chance they will.

Among Bjerke’s opening statements is this:  “This attack [on the inerrancy of the Scriptures] is not blatant or overt but rather subtle in its nature as it begins with the compromising of orthodox Christian beliefs.”[3] He defines orthodox as theological views that are affirmed by the Bible and have been held to since the New Testament Church. 

Modern new liberalism leaders have taken orthodox content and subtly shifted it into a neo-orthodoxy.  Neo-orthodoxy is a form of liberalism that, at its root, departs from the traditional understanding of inspiration of Scriptures.  “Neo-orthodoxy denies [the] orthodox approach of inerrancy and inspiration, saying that inspiration was not given…[by a method of divine inspiration apart from the will and design of man], but that the author interpreted the events or word of God, thus writing his own interpretation. This denies what God has revealed to us in the [Scriptures].”[4]

“Neo-orthodox ‘truth’ is therefore defined as that which is relevant to my experience, compared to the orthodox approach which states that truth is concretely stated in the word of God and is not dependent on anyone’s experience to verify it. Neo-orthodox ‘truth,’ therefore, becomes relative and not a concrete fact by which true Christianity can be measured. Neo-orthodoxy further teaches that Scripture is not the only form of revelation, but that revelation can be directly obtained from God, for God is still speaking / revealing at present.….If the church has come to a point where it believes that truth is relative to the interpretation of each individual or minister and that God is still declaring new revelation, then it is sure to lose the truth.”[5]

The “new” revelation idea, “new things” as variously expressed in emergent practices, is not limited to far-out charismatic and “prophetic” elements, such as kundalini.  It can be seen in an almost over-the-top reference to the “leadership” of the Holy Spirit in ordinary functions of otherwise normal Christian service. It is in the same category of:  “He doth protest too much.”

Neo-orthodox “theologians” will try to go beyond the idea of the Bible writers’ writing through their own personalities but will also attempt to claim that the inspired authors functioned under the limitations of human knowledge and human conditions and that those limitations are revealed in their writings to the extent that errors occurred in the original manuscripts.  Thus they will say that the Bible BECOMES (not IS) the infallible Word of God as a rule of faith (pertaining to our salvation).  All else (in those 66 books) are not Scripture by default. 2 Peter 1:21 is not written in that context.  The verse right before it plainly says: “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.”

New liberals may try to deconstruct words like “prophecy” and say it applies only to foretelling.  That incomplete statement might work some until they have to deal with another of their denials that God is omniscient. 

Actually, the foretelling meaning of that word is critical to inspiration.  Only God knows with absolute certainty all events that will unfold from before creation and into eternity beyond this existence.  No man could ever do that with 100 percent accuracy.  As we know, the Bible is not a history or current events book.  That is not its purpose.  It always looks to God’s future and must necessarily be completely accurate, even when speaking of ordinary things in the present tense.  That is only possible through full inspiration.

Emergent liberals try to smooth it over by talking about “the story of salvation” and “the Scriptural message” so that you might think they are referring to every part of the Bible.  They are not and they eventually tell you so.  They are being seductively selective as to which passages they say are inspired—thus are Scripture according to them; and which they say are not inspired—thus not Scripture according to them.  

They exert neither the intellectual honesty nor the necessary courage to go so far as to tell you which passages are and which are not inspired.  That is why you have something like that pretentious decision tree to lead you into further delusions.  You will even hear them say it is a Wesleyan position but that very assertion is subjectively developed according to their own whims to get you to think they are speaking from a perspective John Wesley would endorse.  There is little chance, from his writings, that Wesley would recognize the “Wesleyanism” touted about these days.

The decision tree I just referenced and wrote about in the previous article is an illustration of that very error whereby the reader is left to his or her own biases, prejudices, understanding, and interpretation to determine inerrancy.  That doesn’t sound like being moved by the Holy Spirit unless, of course, you are making a wild claim as mentioned above about being extra-biblically guided by the Holy Spirit—something that He would never do.  One would easily hear from seducing spirits in that fashion but never from the Holy Spirit!

I listened to a television news program where a prosecuting attorney and a defense attorney were discussing with the moderator the two views of the same case.  The prosecuting attorney made a very important comment:  “The truth doesn’t change.  The truth remains what it is.”  When that idea is applied here, we see that we are discussing the problem of promiscuously trying to change the truth into what it is not because it has never been and never will anything but the truth is and always has been.

---

[1] A hinge-pin A short cylindrical rod of hardened steel running laterally near the front of the bar of a break-open gun’s action around which the barrel hook revolves when the gun is opened.

[2] Jason R. Bjerke. “Limited Inerrancy and its Theological Issues“. (Gospel of Christ Ministries, www.gcmin.org). April 11, 2011. (See the attached chart that is in his article)

[3] Ibid. 4.

[4] “What Is Neo-Orthodoxy?” www.GotQuestions.org. (clarifications added in the brackets).

[5] Ibid.

The Word Is Nigh Thee

[Note:  My appreciation to Mike Jobbins and others for making this data available to me.  You people did a fantastic job in bringing this together.  I am honored to have received your work to comment on.]

Deuteronomy 30:14: “But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.”

Romans 10:7-9: “Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)  But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”

One of the issues that fully convinces me that the Church has entered the predicted falling away, where men prefer deception to revelational truth and are willing to essentially sell  their souls for the flesh pots of the Great Apostasy, is the pretentious and hypocritical assault on the Scriptures by those who should know better.  The most tragic of it is that most of this assault comes from within denominations and their people that once preached and lived a Scriptural holiness that was unapologetic, unashamed, and relied on the full authority of all Scripture to prove their claim.

The most insidious error is the massive subtlety in how the Scriptures are maligned.  Their disparagement of the Scriptures furnishes the basis upon which all of the rest of the whimsical inaccuracies of all postmodern emergent teachings rest. By corrupting the plain statements of the Word of God, they attempt to turn the Bible against itself.  They resort to a system of inconsistent ideas and statements whose falsehood is a logical consequence of the act of holding them to be true based on nothing better than assumptions.  In plain English, they not only put their theological foot in their mouths, they only open their mouths to change feet.

Regardless of any other claims they may make, they always throw back to logical fallacies and human reasoning based on those fallacies.  That is where they stop.  They go no further. 

Jason R. Bjerke, wrote a paper April 11, 2011 titled, “Limited Inerrancy and Its Theological Issues.”  It is published by Gospel of Christ Ministries at www.gcmin.org.  Page 40 is a chart of this kind of false reasoning that is the topic of his paper.  I have named the chart for my purposes, “A Heretic’s Decision Tree on Scripture Inerrancy.”  Since the chart does not copy into emails and other places, I will furnish a brief description of it, along with some of Bjerke’s comments on the issue.  One can take any passage from the Bible and follow down the decision tree to decide if that passage is “inerrant” or merely “accepted as truth under the big tent approach.”

The decision on the inerrancy of any given passage or verse is made by subjectively answering the question, “Does the Bible passage relate to salvation.”  I say it is subjective because no guideline or authority is presented for determining the answer; and the answers (“solutions”) are all subjective.  I should say about legitimate decision trees that they depend for their usefulness on answers based on evidence or a common understanding of the facts.  This tree offers no such basis for the answers at all.  Bjerke provides a scholarly and comprehensive response to many of the false, often adamant, explanations offered by proponents of limited inerrancy.

The “Yes” answer leads you to the statement:  “The Bible passage is Scripture and is inerrant.”  The “No” answer leads you to the statement: “The Bible passage is not Scripture and is not inerrant.”  Notice that both answers offer an up-front determination about a passage of the Bible without the slightest offer of data.  Under the “No” answer, it supposedly “becomes the Word of God as it is read.”  Under both are two similar statements that the passage is supported by experience, church tradition, and critical thinking (reason), with a possibility of yes and no answers that lead to other conclusions.  Again, no authority is offered for those conclusions.

If you have grasped this gobbledygook by now, you are three steps ahead of me.  I have absolutely no idea how they came up with those answers, especially considering the previous paragraph I just presented.  It is clear they did not go to the Scriptures for their authority.  That means they went elsewhere, somewhere way outside of the Book of God.  They meandered into human reasoning capabilities and experiences.  In fact, they as much as say so on both sides of the so-called determination path to either “Accepted as Truth under the Big Tent Approach” or “Accepted as Scripture which is inerrant”—the final answers for both answers.  Even the “inerrant” decision has a lot of wiggle room on this chart.

The first question, “Does the Bible passage relate to Salvation?” offers no objective way to determine that answer.  Apparently, that is left up to the subjective judgment of the reader of the Bible passage.  I have had that thrown at me before with such remarks as, “You have your opinion and I have mine.”  Opinions, however, are not evidence.  Personal choices or personal preferences are opinions.  Thus begins the path to error, no matter how you answer the question because “thus saith the Lord” is completely disregarded.  Revelation is a non-factor in this approach.

We already know that God does not have a library on a cloud so we can find out which parts of His Word are inspired and which are not.  We only have from Him that 66-book library we call the Bible.  All that other “information” has its origins somewhere besides Him.

As far as I can tell at this point in time, this notion is the foundation for all claims to limited inspiration, including “only in matters pertaining to our salvation.”  They call it Scripture one moment and then call it not Scripture almost at the same time.  Which is it?  Both answers are based solely on experience, tradition, and “critical thinking.”  Do I need to go into that to show that each are among the most unreliable aspects of proving or disproving anything, let alone the Word of God.  They are tenuous aids at best and far from strong in making a believable point.

There is a world of difference between saying that “Scripture is not everything contained in the Bible, but rather the passages concerning salvation” and the clear teaching of Scripture that everything inspired by God is Scripture and therefore inerrant, as Bjerke pointed out on page 12.

It is dangerously presumptuous to take a position that comes up short of the Bible being anything but fully inspired and fully inerrant in all matters whereof it speaks.  It is apostasy on parade that is more shameful than a gay pride parade in New York City on a sunny summer afternoon.  We can wrack our brains with myriad of philosophical approaches and pseudo-scientific “proofs” and never be able to either prove any jot or tittle of the Bible is erroneous or to prove any position other than it is totally inerrant and that “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”.  It is to call God a liar or stupid.  We know He is neither of those.  All of the sanctimonious babble on it is plain hooey, and that is far more than just my opinion versus another’s.

The notion of judging the Bible by an arbitrary standard such as “pertaining to our salvation only” is man-concocted—purely imaginary and arrogantly condescending upon the Word of God.  It does not come from God and can be found nowhere in the Scriptures. It comes down to the fact that many among us are pushing the boundaries of revelational truth and trying to make it into what God has never said that it was. It is vital that we pull back those artificially extended boundaries created by conceit and spiritual depravity and return to the simple truth of “thus saith the Lord,” and nothing else.

If no one objects (or even if they do), I will just stick with a favorite Bible verse and John Wesley on this:

Hebrews 4:12: “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”

Wesley:  “…if there be any mistakes in the Bible, there may as well be a thousand.  If there be one falsehood in that Book, it did not come from the God of truth.”  Just so we are clear:  Wesley was not making allowances for any error in the Bible.  One flaw discredits and nullifies all.

If I am to take seriously Deuteronomy 30:14 and Romans 10:7-9, the only conclusion is that every jot and tittle of the Scriptures are indeed inspired Scriptures and, in truth, pertain to our salvation so that it is an exercise in sinful futility and carnal arrogance to try to nit-pick the holy Word of God and claim differently.

Ravi Zacharias has said that argument will take you in all kinds of directions but that people naturally need to go beyond argument to actual experience, observation, things that elicit emotions.  Oddly, postmodern emergents rely on just that very thing.  If they can get you to feel good, they have won the argument with you.  That means that those who hold firmly to spiritual truth must understand that logical argument alone will not win the day.  We can talk all day about the legitimacy and wonders of marriage, for instance, but love must be there as well; otherwise marriage is just a concept.  I have heard holiness preached precept upon precept and watched the constant glaze-over in the eyes of the congregation.  I have also heard holiness preached and watched the enthusiasm in those who were listening.

One of my daughters reminded me of the need to express these matters in simple concepts and terms.  That is so true.  Much of this error is convoluted and camouflaged in clouds of terminology that superficially sounds so wonderful but lacking in substance.  We counter-emergents tend to fall into their trap and respond in kind, further confounding the issue for the ordinary person who does not spend a lot of time researching these things as others do. 

Once we have the idea, we are duty-bound to translate it all into the common language we all understand.  We need to get into the habit of not only appealing to the intellect but also to the heart.  A young man who seeks to win the affections of the girl of his dreams does not tell her, “I hold dear, adoring, and enduring affections for you.”  All she needs to hear is, “I love you.”  She will respond more favorably to simplicity than clouding the message.  Keeping it simple can be challenging.

Dr. Gran’pa
(John Henderson)
[NOTICE:  ANYTHING I write over this signature may be copied or shared with others

and is deemed as published material unless otherwise stated herein]