Seven Tactics of The "Heresy Hunters" (Part 1) -- The Word Was God

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 06:39:44 08/10/02 Sat
Author: Rev. Jack Howell
Author Host/IP: 205.188.197.27
Subject: Seven Tactics of The "Heresy Hunters" (Part 1)

Take a good close look at these dishonest tactics employed by "heresy hunters" and compare them with the tactics displpayed by Sola and SAK on this board. You will notice their dishonesty.

Webster defines "heresy" as, "an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards."[1] In 1 Timothy 4:1 we are told: "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to
seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils." We are told yet again in Heb. 13:9, " Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines.
For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace..." These passages show us that there is a definite need for the true
apologetics[2] ministry in the church.
The early church fathers such as Iraeneus, Origen, Chrysostom, Polycarp, and others spent quite a bit of time defending the truth of Christianity against the well known heresies of their era. These men were true apologists in every sense of the word. Even before them, Paul, John, and the other early apostles had to continually defend the truth against the error that crept into the church.

Though I may not have always agreed with him, Walter Martin, the founder of the Christian Research Institute, was a true apologist. God raised up such a man when the American scene was becoming so filled with cults that it became difficult to distinguish them from Orthodox Christianity. His landmark book, Kingdom of the Cults, provided us with sufficient information on the different cults in America and how to deal with them

The Difference Between Apologists and Heresy Hunters

Nevertheless, there comes a fine line between the valid ministry of an Apologist (one who is defending the faith given to the church) and the need to search for something to use against those you may disagree with theologically in order to make them appear cultic and heretical to the general public. The latter is a Heresy Hunter. Heresy Hunting has become a cultic practice unto itself and the purpose of this essay is to show the reader the invalidity of such a practice. I will show you seven tactics that these people use in their vendetta against those they do not agree with. I will especially show you how these tactics have been used in the attacks against the Word of Faith movement.

1. False Labeling

The heresy hunters seem to enjoy labeling those that they theologically disagree with as "cultic, heretical, etc." The Word-Faith movement has been labeled a "metaphysical" movement when their has been no trace of metaphysical teaching within this group. We have also been called "Gnostic," "Universalists," "Eastern Mysticism," and a host of other names. One web site labels Marilyn Hickey as the "fairy God-Mother" of the Word of Faith movement.

The heresy hunter even like to falsely label themselves. Many of them say that they are Pentecostals or that they are Charismatics. They do this so that they can be accepted among these particular groups while still attacking everything uniquely Pentecostal or Charismatic. They do this in order to turn the hearts of Pentecostals and Charismatics away from the essential truths that distinguish these two movements. The unfortunate thing is that it has actually worked. Many Pentecostals and Charismatics treat their Word of Faith brethen as if they have been sprayed by skunks. They now do everything to separate them from their groups.

Many of the heresy hunters say that they are members of Assemblies of God churches or affiliated with "Charismatic" churches such as Calvary Chapel. Yet, when you listen to them talk they often sound like Hyper-Calvinists and Cessationists. It's a shame because the same criticism that they make against the Word-Faith and other movements were made against the movements that they claim to be affiliated with.

In the beginning of the Pentecostal movement at Azusa street in 1906, the leaders of this movement, William J. Seymour and Charles Parham were labeled "rulers of spiritual Sodom." Another person labeled them, "Satan's preachers, jugglers, necromancers, enchanters, magicians, and all sorts of mendicants." This same person also labeled the Pentecostal movement as "spiritualism." Another well known preacher of that time labeled it, "the last vomit of Satan." A Bible teacher whose writings I love made a statement about the Pentecostal movement that I disagree with: "emphatically not of God and founded by a Sodomite".[3]

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Pentecostals were also falsely labeled as "hypnotists," "mentally unstable" and attributed the miraculous
manifestations in the churches as "demonic power." One historian makes this observation:

That Pentecostalism was initially successful cannot be gainsaid. It seemed to be scripturally oriented and appeared to
be the answer to the prayers of countless thousands as the revitalizing force needed to combat spiritual lethargy which
they had felt had engulfed the religious world of the twentieth century. Within a short time, however, the Pentecostal
revival became the object of scurrilous attacks. It was denounced as "anti-Christian," as "sensual and devilish," and as
"the last vomit of Satan." Its adherents were taunted and derided from the pulpit as well as in the religious and secular
press. Some leaders were actually subjected to violence.[4]

I suppose now that many Pentecostal denominations have established a certain amount of "respect" in the evangelical community, they would not want to be associated with a movement that is being rejected by the community at large. It is recorded later that the American Assemblies of God, a major Pentecostal denomination, rejected what is known as the Charismatic movement. Those who were Assemblies ministers who approved of this movement lost their ministerial credentials and were disfellowshipped from the AoG. Two of the more well known are David Du Plessis and Ralph Wilkerson.[5] Is this not a case of the persecuted becoming the persecutors?

Centuries before this, John Calvin and Martin Luther were persecuted for discovering the truth of "justification by faith." Once this truth was established, Luther persecuted the Anabaptists because they felt the need to bring further Biblical reforms into the church. Luther blasted these "zealots" from the pulpit and written literature. He labeled them "stupid spirits," "rabble preachers," "infiltrators," and "messengers of satan."[6]

George Mueller, who was a great man of faith, was able to trust God for a millions dollars a day to feed thousands of orphans. He did this with no advertisements and no letters appealing to others for support. He totally prayed and relied on God. Unfortunately, due to his tremendous faith, some in his time had falsely labeled him and connected him to spiritualism, the cultic influence of that time:

A striking case is that of Mr. George Muller, of Bristol, who has now for forty years depended wholly for his own
support and that of his wonderful charities on answers to prayer.... The Spiritualist explains all this as a personal
influence. The perfect simplicity, faith, boundless charity, and goodness, of George Muller, have enlisted in his
cause beings of a nature; and his mediumistic powers have enabled them to work for him by influencing others to
send him money, food, clothes, etc., all arriving, as we should say, just in the "nick of time."[7]

Muller was one of the greatest men of faith and greatest example to the church in how to put our full trust and reliance upon God. Because of this apparent success in prayer, he is labeled a medium and the "spirits" (presumably "demonic" spirits) are given the credit for the provisions that he received.

Muller is now respected in both Charismatic and Evangelical churches and is often used as an example of the kind of faith that is needed to do the work God has called us to do. However, there were some that wanted to imply that he was embracing "spiritualism." Is it any wonder that in our day our major faith teachers who have demonstrated faith in God are made to look "cultic" by those who disagree with them?

God's persecuted children are in good company. John the Baptist and even our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ have had to deal with false labeling by religious leaders:

For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil. The Son of man came eating and drinking,
and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of
her children. -Matt. 11:18-19

John the Baptist was labeled as demon possessed, and Jesus was called a few other names. Later on Jesus Himself would be accused of being in league with the devil (Matt. 12:23-26).

So God Himself, who came to earth to shed His precious blood for all men is being labeled a man who is in league with the devil whose works he came to destroy (1 John 3:8). These accusations were made by the religious leaders of his day. Sounds familiar? Jesus goes on to tell us that because we are his disciples, we can expect this same type of persecution:

It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord. If they have called the master of the
house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household? -Matt. 10:25

By giving the false labels to Word-Faith which these heresy hunters have done, they have placed themselves in the same league as the Pharisees of Jesus day and have placed us in the same company as our Lord Jesus. Those of us affiliated with the Word-Faith movement should be thankful for this minor persecution.

2. Taking Statements out of context

This is an attempt to misconstrue the original intent of what the person was intending to say or trying to convey. This is outright dishonest. It is equivalent to what many do in the secular media. The secular media uses soundbites, half quotes, and one sided approaches to give the appearance of "evil" to the watching public. The secular media has been quite successful in destroying businesses this way and even a few ministries. The heresy hunters have done an excellent job of incorporating this tactic in their attacks on the Word-Faith and others they disagree with.

Although there are enough books that one can buy that gives plenty of examples of this particular heresy hunting tactic, one need not waste his or precious hard earned dollars. There are enough examples on the world wide web. Take notice of a Kenneth Hagin quotation on the Watchman Fellowship web site:

Word-Faith teachers say that not only is God a big man, but man is a little god. Kenneth Hagin has asserted,
"man...was created on terms of equality with God, and he could stand in God's presence without any consciousness of
inferiority.... He made us the same class of being that He is Himself.... He lived on terms equal with God.... The believer
is called Christ, that's who we are; we're Christ" (Zoe: The God Kind of Life, pp. 35-36, 41). "[8]

Notice all of the "..." used in this misquotation of Hagin's teaching. Those "..." show that the person quoted was not fully quoted. If I had never read Hagin's books and this was the first quote I ever read by him, I would stand against his theology too. I would shout "heresy" along with the rest of these heresy hunters. However, when we look at Hagin's teaching in it's full context, we will see that Hagin's statements were completely taken out of context:

For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and the gift of
righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. -Romans 5:17

What does this verse mean? It means that everyone of us who has been born again and has received the life of God
has come into a kingly state. We are accepted by God to reign as kings in life. We are no longer servants in the realm
of spiritual death, but we have passed out of death, Satan's realm, into the realm of the heavenlies. Man was never
made to be a slave. He was made to reign as king under God. He was made on terms of equality with God, and he
could stand in God's presence without any consciousness of inferiority. Notice Psalm 8:4,5: "What is man, that thou art
mindful of him? And the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and
hast crowned him with glory and honour." In some translations there is a number or letter by the word "angels" in this
text. If you read the margin you'll find that the Hebrew word here is Elohim - the same word or name for God. The
Hebrew Bible actually says (talking about man), "Thou hast made him a little lower than God." That means that God has
made us as much like Himself as possible. He made us in His image. He made us in His likeness. He made us the
same class of being that is Himself. He made Adam with an intellect of such caliber that he could name every animal,
vegitable, and fruit, and give them names that would describe their characteristics. When God could do that with man,
man belonged to the realm of God.....

God made man His understudy. He made him king, to rule over everything that had life. Man was master. Man lived in
the realm of God. He lived on terms of equality with God. (Zoe, pp. 35-36)

2 CORINTHIANS 6:15

15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial?

Finally, the believer is called "Christ" and the unbeliever is called "Belial." That's who we are; we're Christ!

Jesus is the head and we're the Body of Christ. Your head doesn't go by one name and your body by another, does it?
You don't call your body Henry Jones and your little finger Louise Simpson, do you? Your little finger has the same
name as the rest of your body because it belongs to that body. (p. 41)[9]

Notice that Mr. Hux neglected to deal with the Scripture passages that Hagin used. Notice also how Mr. Hux totally misinterpreted Hagin's message. Hagin was not demoting God and elevating man as Mr. Hux would imply. Hagin stated that man was God's understudy. Does this sound as if Hagin was promoting man to a higher level than God? Hagin was simply teaching the level on which God created man. Take Psalm 8:4-5 for example. There are a host of Bible translations that state that man was made a little lower than God.

When Hagin and others speak of man being in God's class, most of this teaching centers on passages in Psalms 8:4-5; Heb. 2:7; Psalm 82:1, 6, and John 10:35. The KJV took the Hebrew word "Elohim" in Psalm 8:5 and translated it to "angels" instead of God. I understand that it was also translated this way in the Septuagint, which is the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Many Bible translations have decided to translate the Hebrew word correctly. Among the older ones are Revised standard version, Young's literal Translation, American Standard Version, Hebrew Names Version, World English Bible, and the Amplified Bible. Among the newer translations that quote it this way are God's Word To the Nations translation, Contemporary English version, New Living Translation, and Today's English Version. These all speak of God creating man a little lower than Himself versus creating man a little lower than the angels.

Commentaries by men who are respected in the church who also seem to agree with this interpretation is John Wesley, Adam Clark, Warren Wiersbe, Ray Stedman, and John Calvin.

Therefore, Hagin was simply stating that man was created in God's image and has a higher place than the angels and other created beings. In this sense, Hagin is teaching that man was created in God's class. Further more, Hagin was simply teaching the truth that we are members of Christ's body. He was not teaching that each Christian is the Messiah Himself. He was teaching that we are a part of one body and that we have a place and position in Christ that we often do not recognize. Besides, Mr. Hux neglected to include Hagin's proof Scripture (2 Cor. 6:15) as well as Hagin's full statement. Hagin was by no means teaching that God was a big man and that we are on His level.

3. Comparison method

Used to compare the statements of well known faith teachers against those of well known heretics and/or cultic leaders. These statements are often taken out of context.

Jesus methods of healing and deliverance were also compared to the cultic exorcists of His time on earth. Jesus was accused of being demon possessed:

And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This
fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto
them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall
not stand: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? -Matt. 12:23-26

One web site does this by quoting major faith teachers out of context and then compares their statements to those of Mormon leaders such as Brigham Young and other Mormon leaders. It's an endless charade.

An example of how some of these "apologetical" websites do this is displayed below. One Apologist takes a quote by Copeland and compares it to a quote by a New Age leader:

�Faith activates the force of God fear is a force that activates the Devil. Copeland says, God did not create the world
out of nothing, He used the Force of His Faith.' (Spirit, Soul and Body, #01-0601, Tape #1)

New Ager Benjamin Creme says, for example, �One doesn't pray to oneself, one prays to the God within. The thing is to
learn to invoke that energy which is the energy of God. Prayer and worship as we know it today will gradually die out
and men will be trained to invoke the (inner) power of deity.� (The Reappearance of Christ and the Masters of Wisdom,
pp. 135-136)[10]

This is just one example of how Copeland's "force of faith" teaching is compared to a well known cult to make him look as if he were receiving his theological perspective from them. One other person makes it sound like Copeland has been watching too many science fiction movies:

Faith is a Force (like Starwars).
(Spirit, Soul and Body, #01-0601, Tape #1) [11]

I am giving you the exact quote as it was written on this website which is supposed to be a compilation of "erroneous" quotes from Word of Faith teachers. I am absolutely sure that the "like starwars" insertion in the parenthesis was not from the person quoted, but the interpretation of the quoter. The Heresy Hunter will add or take away from the words of the faith teacher in order to make the faith teacher sound heretical.

I will now use this same tactic and compare the "force of faith teaching with quotes from a classic Bible teacher that many consider "orthodox" and whose books are even sold and read by some of these apologetical ministries:

Many grand deeds have also been born of faith, for faith works wonders. Faith in its natural form is an all-prevailing
force. God gives salvation to our faith because He has touched the secret spring of all our emotions and actions.[12]

Now what "heretic" would make a statement like that? Long before the so called New Age movement, and long before the popular Star Wars movies (long before movies, period), Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892) made the above statement. In a later essay on this subject I will show you similar statements by other men of days gone by, men who bare the names of Albert B. Simpson, Edwards M. Bounds, Frederick Marsh, and others. These men also believed that faith, prayer, and even the death of Christ is a "force." Were they heretical too? You will be surprised at the statements these men made that would be considered "heretical" in today's heresy hunting atmosphere.

However, allow me to quote another surprising statement by the "prince of preachers himself once more in this regard:

Faith is the mightiest of the mighty. It is the monarch of the realms of the mind. There is no being superior to its strength,
no creature that will not bow to its divine prowess. The lack of faith makes a person despicable; it shrivels him up so
small that he might live in a nutshell. Give him faith, and he is a leviathan that can dive into the depths of the sea, a giant
who takes nations and crumbles them in his hand, vanquishing hosts with his sword and gathering up all the crowns as
his own. There is nothing like faith. Faith makes you almost as omnipotent as God, by borrowed power of its divinity.
Give us faith and we can do all things.[13]

Now is that heretical by today's standards or what? Is this any more heretical then Copeland saying that faith activates the force of God? So perhaps Spurgeon and modern day faith teachers were heretical. Was Jesus heretical when He said that "all things are possible to him that believes" (Mark 9:22-23)? Was Paul heretical when he compared faith to a "shield" (Eph. 6:16)? I have no doubt that Copeland had no intentions of implying that faith was something similar to the star wars force or the New Age definition. Faith is a weapon or force that can be used in resisting the devil (1 Pet. 5:8-9; James 4:7).

Let's look at another Scripture that is not often taught outside "spiritual warfare" circles:

And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by
force. -Matt. 11:12

Was Jesus speaking of a "metaphysical force" when He made this statement? No. The word "force" used in this passage comes from the Greek word Biazo. According to Vines dictionary this word can be translated to be "....expressive of the special interest which the doer of the act has in what he is doing."[14] It can also be synonymous with violence.

Paul tells us, "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." (Romans 14:17).
Perhaps when Copeland speaks of the force of righteousness, or the force of Joy, or the force of faith, he is speaking of taking the kingdom of God by this type of force. Or perhaps he meant it as a comparison to the "force" of electricity as F.B. Meyer did in one of his sermons over a century ago.[15]

Comparing Copeland's words to a well known cultic antiChristian group or to a popular science fiction movie and not take other, more orthodox references into account is totally dishonest on the part of these heresy hunters. They should be ashamed of themselves.

4. False Implications

After quoting a person out of context, and then comparing the person's statement to a well known cult leader or heretic, the next step is to make a false implication concerning what the individual teaches. The interpretation of a statement by the Heresy Hunter is usually never what the writer/preacher originally meant to convey.

In John 2:18-21 we find this incident concerning Jesus Christ:

Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Jesus
answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six
years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body.

Now it is clear that Jesus was not speaking of the literal temple but of His own body. It is also clear that he said nothing about destroying this temple Himself but that others would do the destroying. Now watch how this is expertly used against him during His trial just before He is crucified:

Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death; But found
none: yea, though many false witnesses came, [yet] found they none. At the last came two false witnesses, And said, This
[fellow] said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. And the high priest arose, and said
unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what [is it which] these witness against thee? (Matthew 26:59-62).

Now you see how these men came to the wrong conclusion concerning Jesus' statement. Jesus spoke of the temple of his body but these men made it seem as if Jesus were speaking of the temple (building). The incorrect implications were drawn from the Lord's statements. The Bible calls these men "false witnesses." This spirit is still resident in our time in the "ministries" of the modern day heresy hunter. We can see how this tactic is used on one "apologetical" website:

E.W. Kenyon wrote, �We have sung �Nearer the cross� and we have prayed that we might be �Nearer the cross� but the
cross has no salvation in it. It is a place of failure and defeat� (Advanced Bible Course, p.279) [emphasis mine]. As
usual, the others merely echo Kenyon�s ideas about this.

What the Bible says:

�May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ� (Galatians 6:14). �I decided to know nothing among you
except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing but
to those who are being saved it is the Power of God� (1 Corinthians 1:18) See also Ephesians 2:16; Colossians 1:20
and 2:15.[16]

The conclusion we draw from this misquote of Kenyon's work is that Kenyon has no regard for the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ. Sounds almost similar to a Rev. Moon philosophy (I'm surprised that this apologist did not use this "comparison" method).[17] The author then attempts to prove that Kenyon has made a heretical statement by quoting a passage of Scripture that supposedly contradicts what Kenyon said. First we will look at the fool context of this quote so that we can see EXACTLY what Kenyon was saying, we will give Scripture references that show that Kenyon was attempting to convey a truth to his students that was not often taught in his time, and then we will show you from Kenyon's own writings what he truly believed in regards to the cross of Christ. Here's Kenyon's full quote:

If Jesus had gone no further than dying on the cross, no one have ever been saved through Him. There is no New Birth,
no New Creation, in the dead Christ.

We have sung �Nearer the cross� and we have prayed that we might be �Nearer the cross� but the cross has no
salvation in it. It is a place of failure, a place of death, a place where Jesus was made sin, a place where God forsook
Jesus, turned His back upon Him after He had made Him sin. It was a place where Satan had apparently won a victory
over the Man who had ruled him for three and a half years. So for us to sing, "Jesus, keep me near the cross," is for us
to be kept near failure and defeat.

No, there is no salvation in a dead Christ or a suffering Christ hanging on the cross.

Many who read this will feel shocked because they have worshipped a dead Christ. Had Jesus stopped, had He gone
no further than the cross, we would never have heard from Him.

You see, the disciples only understood what the physical senses registered, as they gathered about the cross and
watched Him in His death throes.

The next picture of Jesus is the one that has brought life and light to the human race. It is the Resurrected,
Ascended, and Seated Christ.[18]

So what was Kenyon teaching here? He was teaching that so many focus on the death of Christ and do not focus on His RESSURECTION and EXALTATION. They look at the DEATH of Christ but overlook the other aspects. They forget He is no longer on the cross. Kenyon was teaching people to get past the cross and move towards the resurrection and ascension. The cross was a necessary part of salvation but Kenyon is teaching here that the death of Christ would mean nothing had He not been raised from the dead and seated at the right hand of God.

In a paragraph above this, Kenyon relates the story of how he saw a picture in the street of Christ dead on the cross. This seems to be the only picture of Christ that has been in the minds of many in the church. I remember before I received Christ as my personal savior, my girlfriend sent me a cross. I thought I would impress my friend, who was a true born again Christian by showing him. When I did, he said, "Troy, Jesus is no longer on the cross." Those words struck me. As far as I know, this man was not a Word-Faither. He was Protestant.

Christ is no longer in the grave. He has risen. This aspect of Christianity is what separates us from Islam, Buddhism, and a host of other world religions. It is not as Rev. Moon stated (that Christ failed) but the resurrection proves that Jesus was SUCCESSFUL. He was victorious.

There were good reasons why Kenyon needed to point this out. For example, our salvation relies not so much in the death of Christ, as important as this aspect is, but it relies primarily in His having been raised from the dead:

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. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is
made unto salvation. - Romans 10:9-10

Our victory over sin and our identification is to not only acknowledge the cross but the resurrection as well:

God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were
baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that
like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should
not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with
him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. - Romans
6:2-9

Because of this resurrection that Christ is able to work His mighty power toward those of us who believe:

And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly
places, Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this
world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all
things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all. -Eph. 1:19-23

There is a full abundance of Scripture that we can use in this regard, but this is sufficient. F.E. Marsh (1858-1931) said it this way, "A crucifix is not an emblem of Christianity, but an empty tomb is. How much that empty tomb proclaims!"[19]

What Kenyon Believed About The Cross

How Did Kenyon feel about the cross? Was it an unimportant aspect of redemption? If we read Kenyon's books we would see that he held the cross of Christ in high esteem. Remember in the quote from his book, Advanced Bible Course, Kenyon was expounding on the importance of the resurrections. This by no means implies that Kenyon did not think that the cross was important. Kenyon states in one of his books:

The cross was the climax of love in manifestation. There is no love without action. It is not love until it acts. Love was
unveiled on the cross. That God Man who hung there had come of His own volition. He was not a martyr; He was a
supreme lover.[20]

Kenyon believed that the cross held a very important place in the work of God. Kenyon believed that the cross is where Jesus became our substitute on the cross. In another of his books, Kenyon says, "But God has dealt with the sin problem in His Son. He has put sin away by the sacrifice of that Son."[21]

Kenyon believed that the cross is where Jesus bore our sins. Kenyon certainly believed that the cross was a necessity. The reading of several of his books would affirm this. The references are too numerous to quote. However, Kenyon believed strongly in the message of the cross. He simply wanted his readers not to stop there and settle on the cross but to go beyond that to the resurrection and the ascension. However, the modern day apologists will not tell you that.

5. Sensationalizing

This is an attempt to make a person believe that the group that they are attacking is a real threat to present day Christianity. In other words, the said group or doctrine along with it's teachers and adherents is causing a real "Crisis" with Christendom as we know it. Unless these "heretics" as they are labeled are done away with, the whole foundations of Christianity will be destroyed.

What really gets me is one internationally known heresy hunter who claimed that the Faith teachers were causing a Crisis in Christianity was the same one to criticize other brethren (although I agree he was correct in doing so) for using sensationalism to promote the Y2K scare back in 1999. If only this same "apologist" had followed his own advice about sensationalism to sell books.

This same critic of the faith teachers have labeled another group of people that use similar tactics as himself as "a Cult of Gossipers." Although I may agree with him on this, I must also say that this is the proverbial "pot calling the kettle black." It is terrible that these heresy hunters will see sin in their brothers and yet commit the same sins. It's the case of not being able to pull the speck out of your brother's eye until you have pulled the moat out of your own (Matt. 7:1-5)

The caption on one Heresy Hunter's webpage would be funny if it were not so pathetic: "JUST LIKE AIDS�The Christian Church is Being Destroyed from Within!" This is in reference to the Faith movement, of course. Is God not able to remove a "cancer" or "AIDS" from His own body (The Body of Christ)?

This type of sensationalism is used quite often in the secular media to stir up viewer's emotions. The Heresy Hunter has skillfully adopted this technique in his war against the Faith Movement. What good Christian would not want to remove AIDS from the body of Christ? What good Christian would want to keep the church from being destroyed from within?

God is fully capable of keeping His church from being "destroyed from within." However, the Heresy Hunter must use such sensational tactics as Christianity being in a "Crisis," or that the Faith Teachers are preaching a "different" gospel, or that we have become a "cancer" or "AIDS" in the body of Christ.

It's So Sensational

Sensationalism sells books. Non Christians often use this tactic but unfortunately so do Christians. In 1988 the Christian bookstores sold a book titled 88 Reasons Why Christ Will Return In 1988. The book sold well and it also disappointed so many people when their expectations were not met.

We mentioned the Y2K scare earlier. So many Christians "prophesied" about the disasters that would occur when the clock struck twelve
midnight due to the negligence of our major computer programmers to figure in a four digit date into all of our computerized appliances. Many of these same people sold shelters and survival kits. I am sure that the reader remembers that the impending doom did not occur.

Unfortunately, the Charismatic movement that I have aligned myself with has been guilty of sensationalism. In the 1940-50s during the healing revival we have often sensationalized this wonderful provision of God with our flamboyance. This gave a bad name to healing. The 1970s gave us some insight into deliverance from demonic possession but again, the church moved into sensationalism, giving the deliverance ministry a bad name. Even now so many of our brethren are using sensationalism to promote their ministries.

(Continued)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]