Menu

Procterandgambleites

C
crsschk


[b]Trademark of the Beast[/b]

[i]June 10, 1998[/i]

Here's proof that you can't stop an urban legend, not even in a court of law.

In 1997, Procter & Gamble filed the most recent in a series of lawsuits against Amway Corporation and several of its distributors for allegedly spreading rumors to the effect that P&G, maker of familiar household products such as Mr. Clean and Tide laundry detergent, is affiliated with the Church of Satan.

In evidence, P&G lawyers submitted the transcript of a voicemail message in which an Amway distributor could be heard relaying what they characterized as false and malicious statements about Procter & Gamble to associates, including the allegation that the president of the company had avowed his personal allegiance to Satan on a nationally-televised TV talk show.

The text of the voicemail recording appears been lifted practically verbatim from a flier that has been circling the globe for many years via fax, snail mail, and, more recently, email. The rumors upon which it is based have existed for close to three decades and are still running rampant despite Procter & Gamble's best efforts to combat them -- as evidenced by a forwarded email that showed up in my inbox just last week:

PLEASE MAKE A DIFFERENCE
The President of Procter & gamble appeared on the Phil Donahue Show on March 1, 1994. He announced that due to the openness of our society, he was coming out of the closet about his association with the church of Satan. He stated that a large portion of his profits from Procter & Gamble Products goes to support this satanic church. When asked by Donahue if stating this on t.v. would hurt his business, he replied, "THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH CHRISTIANS IN THE UNITED STATES TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE."

Product list includes:
Cleaning supplies: Bold, Cascade, Cheers, Joy, Comet, Dash, Spic & Span, Tide, Top Job, Oxidol, Ivory Dreft, Gain, Mr. Clean, Lest Oil, Bounty Towels
Food: Duncan Hines, Fisher Nuts, Fisher Mints, Dehydrated Fruits
Coffee: Folgers, High Point
Shortening Oils: Crisco, Puritan, Fluffo
Deodorants: Secret, Sure
Diapers: Luvs, Pampers
Hair Care: Lilt, Head & Shoulders, Prell, Pert, Vidal Sassoon, Ivory
Acne Product: Clearasil
Mouthwash/Toothpaste: Scope, Crest, Gleam
Peanut Butter: JIF [nr] Personal Hygiene: Always, Attend Undergarments
Lotions: Oil of Olay, Wondra
Soap: Camay, Coast, Ivory, Lava, Safeguard, Zest, Oil of Olay
Fabric Softener: Downy, Bounce
Citrus Punch: Sunny Delight
Medication: Aleve, Pepto-Bismol

If you are not sure about the product, look for a Procter & Gamble written on the products, or the symbol of a ram's horn, which will appear on each product beginning on April. The ram's horn will form the 666, which is known as Satan's number. Christians should remember that if they purchase any of these products, they will be contributing to the church of Satan. Inform other Christians about this and STOP buying Procter & Gamble Products. Let's show Procter & Gamble that there are enough Christians to make a difference. On a previous Merv Griffin Show, the owner of Procter & Gamble said that if Satan would prosper he would give his heart and soul to him. Then he gave Satan credit for his riches.

Anyone interested seeing this tape, should send $3.00 to:
DONAHUE TRANSCRIPTS, JOURNAL GRAPHICS
26 BROADWAY NEW YORK, N. Y. 10007

WE URGE YOU TO MAKE COPIES OF THIS AND PASS IT ON TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE. THIS NEEDS TO STOP. LIZ CLAIRBORNE ALSO PROFESSES TO WORSHIP SATAN AND RECENTLY OPENLY ADMITTED ON THE OPRAH WINFREY SHOW THAT HALF OF HER PROFITS GO TOWARDS THE CHURCH OF SATAN.


Apart from the partial roster of Procter & Gamble products, which is accurate enough as far as it goes, the message contains nothing but false, misleading, defamatory statements without a shred of evidence to support them.

[i]Cont.[/i]

C
crsschk

The allegations aren't even plausible. There is no single "owner" of the Procter & Gamble Company blessed with the ability do whatever he likes with the profits, let alone tithe them to Satan. P&G is a publicly held corporation (as is Liz Claiborne, another company alleged to participate in Satan worship). The profits go to shareholders, to whom the companies' officers are answerable for every penny spent.

It's laughable, in any case, to picture the figureheads of such hugely successful companies — even if they did happen to be fanatical devil-worshippers — avowing their love of the Prince of Darkness on national television. People don't achieve that level of power and success by being morons.

What's more, we have Donahue's word for it that the president of Procter & Gamble never appeared on his show, let alone laid claim to being a Satanist:

[i]April 5, 1995
To Whom It May Concern

It seems impossible that the rumor of an appearance by the President of Procter & Gamble on DONAHUE is still circulating after more than a decade. There is absolutely nothing to this rumor.

The president of P&G has never appeared on DONAHUE, nor has any other P&G executive.

Anyone who claims to have seen such a broadcast is either mistaken or lying. It never happened!

Sincerely,
Phil Donahue[/i]

(Source: Procter & Gamble)

Donahue wrote this letter back in 1995, remarking even then that false rumors of an appearance by P&G's president on his show had been circulating for more than a decade.

The flyer claims the interview took place in 1994.

Nor was this the first statement Donahue had ever made on the matter. Jan Harold Brunvand, who debunked these selfsame rumors in his 1984 book, The Choking Doberman, reported at the time that Donahue, along with fellow talk show host Merv Griffin, had publicly denied the rumors as far back as 1982 (which was the same year, coincidentally or not, that P&G filed its first lawsuit against an Amway distributor for allegedly spreading misinformation about the company).

[b]Satan's number[/b]

Does the number 666 — the numeric "mark of the Beast" said to represent the Antichrist in the biblical Book of Revelation — appear in a ram's horn on Procter & Gamble packaging, as alleged in the flier?

No. There is no symbol of a ram's horn on P&G products, period. Once upon a time, the company logo featured a line drawing of the Man in the Moon with flowing white hair and a beard which curled off to a point in each direction [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procter_&_Gamble#Logo_controversy](see example)[/url]. Granted, these could be imaginatively likened to ram's horns, but there is no reason to think they were intended to be seen as such, nor any reason to suppose that the designers embedded a secret reference to the number of the beast within them.

It's a moot point anyway, since the logo hasn't appeared on Procter & Gamble products in years.

[b]The religious factor[/b]

Despite the fact that its claims are not only demonstrably false but downright silly, the Procter & Gamble rumor continues to enjoy a global circulation both online and off, partly because it plays into the paranoid fears of its intended audience.

"There aren't enough Christians in the United States to make a difference," Procter & Gamble's president supposedly announced. Outlandish as it may seem to believe that such a prominent company -- one that prides itself on being a "household name" -- would alienate every Christian on the planet by aligning itself with Satan, there are obviously a great many people ready and willing to believe it. As Jeff Siemon of Search Ministries observes, the rumor is especially compelling to "Bible-believing" Christians because it fits into a world view that presupposes a literal battle between the spiritual forces of good and evil on earth:

[i]When we think of hoaxes that relate to conspiracies that are being concocted against Christianity — in the case of Madalyn Murray O'Hair or Procter & Gamble — this is in some sense consistent with the Biblical understanding that a great war rages at a spiritual level. Certainly there are enemies of the faith. This does not mean that these hoaxes are real, but there will be resistance and enemies of Christianity. The Christian, with an understanding of the Biblical world view, is sensitive to these kinds of responses against the Christian faith.[/i] (Source: Christian Coalition Website)

Defending the faith does not require abandoning reason. Bob Passentino, another evangelical leader, argues bluntly that some Christians are just too gullible: "It's not just a stamp we're wasting. It's our credibility. Our credibility is on the line. People might think if Christians are stupid enough to fall for this falsehood, maybe early Christians were gullible enough to fall for the resurrection story."

The issue goes beyond credibility; it's also a moral one. People who believe they're combating evil by spreading unverified rumors may in fact be doing just the opposite. Tempting as it may be to always look for deceit in high places, we would all do well to remember that lies, intentional or otherwise, can just as easily pass from our own lips or through our computer modems. Before sharing such scurrilous allegations with others, we ought to stop for a moment and consider whose interests are really being served.

[b]Update:[/b] In January 2003, the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's dismissal of Amway Corporation as a defendant in the lawsuit, chastising Procter & Gamble for "vague and confusing legal arguments."

[b]Update:[/b] In March 2007, Procter & Gamble was awarded $19 million in its lawsuit against four Amway distributors for disseminating rumors tying the company to Satanism.

[url=http://urbanlegends.about.com/]About.com: Urban legends[/url]

[url=http://www.snopes.com/business/alliance/procter.asp]Trademark of the Devil[/url]

C
Compton

(edit)

Interesting stuff Mike.

MC


W
wayneman

This first started over thirty years ago. I believed in it at the time because this sort of thing is fun to believe in. My excuse is that I was about 12 years old.

C
crsschk

[b]Robb Thompson preached a message of fear and dread[/b]


In 1999 I paid close attention to the teachings of one particular minister: Robb Thompson, pastor of Family Harvest Church in Tinley Park, Illinois (formerly called Midwest Christian Center), and host of the TV show, Winning in Life. My interest in Thompson was due in part to the fact that I lived in the Chicagoland area at the time, my brother-in-law knew people who attended (what was then called) Midwest Christian Center, and he and I even had the opportunity to attend a pool party at Thompson's multi-million dollar home. [3] But my biggest interest in Robb was due to the repeated warnings he gave to his congregation about the horrors of Y2K (which I heard via his television program).

Robb Thompson preached a message of fear and dread, and - with all the melodrama of a Left Behind novel - alluded frequently to how Y2K could very well signify the "beginning of the end." Of course, nothing happened. January 1, 2000 came and went without incident. By January 2 the clearance racks of every bookstore were filled to capacity with the all the prophecy books fortelling the doom and gloom of Y2K, and how "the end is near." I saw several stores with books marked up to 80% off. They couldn't give those books away! The authors don't care; the poor souls who bought the books became their cash cow in 1999. Thus, while I'm certain many of them could care less, more than a few of these writers of false prophecy lost all credibility. I also know of a few folks with basements full of canned goods who vowed never to return to Midwest Christian Center.

Why are people so prone to such invincible irrationality? At risk of oversimplification, the problem lies in pastors who care more about money than ministry, media who care more about ratings than reality, and a majority of citizens who embrace feeling over fact.

Nevertheless, Robb still has his job, and is going strong three years later. Why? Because the same gullibility that led so many of Robb Thompson's followers to blow their savings to stock up on canned goods also led most of them to believe whatever excuse Mr. Thompson concocted to cover his behind. I'm sure there are those who attend Robb Thompson's church who are genuinely seeking God. I'm also sure there are several who are only after the "health and wealth." Robb uses both motivations to his advantage, which means, financially speaking, Robb Thompson is currently "winning in life." A man may gain the whole world, but at what cost?

The event undeniably more significant than Y2K was the terrorist attacks in 2001 (the year which marked the real beginning of the new millennium). Y2K and 9-11 were both huge news items for the media, and several members of the media exploited them for the sake of higher ratings. When Y2K was seen as a real threat to many, the media often catered to the fears of the public. In the days, weeks, and months following 9-11, the media relied on their familiar modus operandi: sensationalism. Does anyone deny the damage this type of programming can cause? The National Mental Health Association doesn't deny it, and, as the one-year anniversary of 9-11 approached, the Association cautioned that people should "cut back on TV time" to avoid adverse effects. [4] Many so-called journalists, like Robb Thompson and the afformentioned authors of false Y2K prophecy, care only about personal gain. Truth and propriety are abandoned when either becomes a hindrance.

http://www.a180.net/y2k_editorial.html

C
Compton

Truth and propriety are abandoned when either becomes a hindrance.

This can describe the buyer as well as the seller.

MC

C
ccchhhrrriiisss

Thanks Mike!

What is so sad is that you can say this to some believers...show them "evidence" online...show them webpages and court documents where P&G actually SUED people for spreading this...and you will STILL have some of those same believers claiming that it is still true. The "evidence" doesn't really matter when these sort of people so badly want the outcome to be otherwise.

Hmmm...it makes me think of some of the petty doctrinal issues that serve to divide believers. Are people looking for evidence to support their views...or are they searching for truth regardless of the outcome? It makes me wonder how many of us [i]strain a gnat and swallow a camel[/i]?

:-(

C
crsschk

[b]Apocalypse Then[/b]

[i][b]Remembering the Y2K Hysteria[/b][/i]


Exactly ten years ago this week I preached in our church's morning service. I can't remember if John MacArthur was ill or suddenly called out of town for some reason, but I remember being asked very late to fill in. I had about 24 hours to prepare.

It being the first Sunday of 1999, I decided to preach an appropriately forward-looking message on Matthew 6:34 and its context: "Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself."

In those days, the evangelical world was at the peak of the Y2K insanity, so I made reference to that issue in my message. At the time, Gary North was operating a heavily-trafficked website that included this:

[i]We've got a problem.[/i] It may be the biggest problem that the modern world has ever faced. I think it is. At 12 midnight on January 1, 2000 (a Saturday morning), most of the world's mainframe computers will either shut down or begin spewing out bad data. Most of the world's desktop computers will also start spewing out bad data. Tens of millions—possibly hundreds of millions—of pre-programmed computer chips will begin to shut down the systems they automatically control. This will create a nightmare for every area of life, in every region of the industrialized world.


North's Web site had links to more than 3,000 places where you could read similar doom-and-gloom predictions about the Y2K crisis. He grimly told visitors to his Web site that they had better heed these doomsday warnings, or they would certainly regret it.

Today, he admits, "I did not understand the Y2K thing in any sort of detail. I took someone elses [sic] word for it. . . ."

At the time, he was saying:

It took me from early 1992 until late 1996 to come to grips emotionally with the Year 2000 Problem. You had better be a lot faster on the uptake than I was. We're running out of time.

I don't mean that society is running out of time to fix this problem. Society has already run out of time for that. There are not enough programmers to fix it. The technical problems cannot be fixed on a system-wide basis. The Millennium Bug will hit in 2000, no matter what those in authority decide to do now. As a system, the world economy is now beyond the point of no return. So, when I say "we," I mean you and I as individuals. We are running out of time as individuals to evade the falling dominoes . . .. We are facing a breakdown of civilization if the power grid goes down.


(It frankly amused me that a postmillennialist like North, who had frequently derided premillennialists by referring to them as "[i][b]pess[/i][/b]imillennialists" would himself make a career of fear-mongering. But that is just what he has done. So much for the vaunted "optimism" of theonomic postmillennialism.)

In my message that morning a decade ago, I pointed out that the spirit of that kind of panic-mongering was 180 degrees at odds with a whole string of Jesus' commands in Matthew 6:25-33. I mostly just explained the biblical text.

I admit I wasn't prepared for the reaction I got that morning. There was a smallish group of people in the church who were fully into the Y2K hysteria, and they approached me in a phalanx as soon as the service was over. The guy who would have been their spokesman (if his wife hadn't kept interrupting him) was so angry he was red in the face and spitting when he talked. He said he was going to meet with the elders and demand equal time to tell the people of Grace Church they needed to start stockpiling food and preparing for the looming crisis. He likened me to me a holocaust denier.

I stood there and listened to them for ten minutes or so until they began to calm down a bit. I let them talk and did not interrupt, except to ask how [i]they[/i] thought Matthew 6:25-34 applied to our society in 1999.

As the spokesdude began to lose some of his steam, he said, "Look: all I know is that if you're wrong, you are guilty of placing the people of our church in mortal jeopardy by not encouraging them to stockpile food and prepare Y2K bunkers. But if [b][i]I'm[/i][/b] wrong, the worst that will happen is that I will have to come back and apologize to you for losing my temper."

"Will you do that?" I asked.

"Of course I would—if it turns out I am wrong," he avowed. "But I am [i][b]not[/b][/i] wrong."

"I will look for you on the first Sunday of the year 2000," I promised.


He moved to a remote part of Idaho that fall because he wanted to be as far as possible from any urban area when all the computers started spewing bad data. One of the hard-core Y2K aficionados in the group actually left his wife when it came to light that she did not share his fear of the coming apocalypse. He likewise moved out of state.

Ten years after the fact, not one of that group of Y2K cadets has ever come back and formally acknowledged that they were wrong, much less apologized for the scene they made that morning.

Gary North is now selling doomsday advice for a monthly fee—[url=http://www.garynorth.com/public/10.cfm]"approximately the cost of one movie ticket, a large box of popcorn, and a large soft drink per month."
[/url]

My advice: the popcorn is much healthier for you.

Even if you load it with butter.

Seriously.

[url=http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2009/01/apocalypse-then.html]Phil Johnson[/url]

G
ginnyrose

Mike,

I am curious: why are you bring this subject up now? (BTW, I agree with what you posted..) I think I know the answer but would like to hear what else you have to say...

ginnyrose

C
crsschk

I am curious: why are you bring this subject up now? (BTW, I agree with what you posted..) I think I know the answer but would like to hear what else you have to say...

Hi Ginny, others ... Apologize if this seems elusive, I am dealing with some things and don't have the wherewithal to write or speak much at the moment. Perhaps later ...

Painting a picture here, something that has been a growing concern for a very long time.

T
tjservant

My advice: the popcorn is much healthier for you.

Even if you load it with butter.

:-)

G
ginnyrose

If this rumor started 30 years ago, I was a young mother in my 30s. I remember it well! My! If you did not believe it you were suspect! Really! You could not believe the hysteria this story caused among adults. The reason people believe is because most are honest folks who assume others will be honest as well, so that makes honest folks vulnerable.

Back then there was no Internet to disseminate misinformation, it was letters and word-of-mouth. Today we have the Internet - and a proliferation of more legend legends - and there are sites set up to wade through stories, working to discern truth from error. I find www.truthorfiction.com to be good.

The flip side of it all is that in our country one still has the freedom to post whatever you imagine with little repercussions. Such is the down side of the 'freedom of speech'. To be discerning to stop rumor when we hear it becomes a challenge. (Hey, some are quite cute and inspiring! :-( )

ginnyrose

E
Earendel

I remember that Proctor and Gamble thing from the 80's. Their trademark is not the mark of the beast.

Revelation 13:16-17 Mark of the beast in order to control who buys and sells anything? That is one of the reasons why the mark of the beast comes, there are other reasons for the mark.

Control over Buying/Selling? Whoever controls the money, whoever controls the regulation of money - the regulation of business, controls it all. Whoever controls world economics and the banking sector, controls the buying and selling of goods and services. They set the prices of goods and services by creating inflation or deflation, by expanding or contracting credit within the banking system.

S
sermonindex

Yes and I prefer JIF peanut butter but why is this on this section where we look for ....

[b]Articles and Sermons[/b]
[i]This section is for posting and discussing of sermon articles and audio sermons by various speakers. There is a restriction to post to audio sermons outside of SermonIndex but text sermons can be posted for fruitful, edifying discussion.[/i]


Just threw me - I couldn't make out what the title was at first - thought it was some huge theological word that I'd never learned. :-(

M
MaryJane

Greetings Mike

I am really liking these articles. I am also looking forward to seeing what Father is showing you through these. Thanks for sharing.

God Bless
MJ

C
crsschk

[b]When Prophecies Fail[/b]

[i]Few aspects of the Jehovah's Witness movement are more fascinating to the outside observer than their predictions of the end of the world.[/i]

Yet the predictions themselves are just the surface ripples of a much deeper current in the lives of the movement's adherents. How the prophecies affect the members, how their belief in the prophecy gets stronger, and how they cope with disillusionment and finally regroup with greater strength is far more fascinating food for thought. There have been plenty of end-times scenarios that could be studied since the time of Christ.

As early as the second century, the charismatic leader Montanus gained a following around the belief that the second coming of the Lord was at hand, and that this would occur at a specific location according to his "New Prophecy". Harold O.J. Brown says, "Montanus' conviction that the end of the age was at hand led him to call on Christians to abstain from marriage, dissolve marriages already contracted, and gather in an appropriate place to await the descent of the heavenly city. The heavenly city did not descend when expected, and consequently Montanus and his followers had to come to terms with its delay, as the whole church had to learn to deal with the postponement of Christ's Second Coming." 1 What is interesting, however, was that the Montanists did not die out right away, but continued as a small cult for several centuries in Phrygia of Asia Minor."

[b]Leon Festinger's Theory[/b]

In studying this phenomenon, credit must be given to Leon Festinger for his cognitive dissonance theory, as developed in his book When Prophecy Fails, originally published in 1956 and co-authored by Festinger, Henry W. Riecken and Stanley Schachter. The authors comprised a research team who conducted a study of a small cult-following of a Mrs. Marian Keech, a housewife who claimed to receive messages from aliens via automatic writing. The message of the aliens was one of a coming world cataclysm, but with the hope of surviving for the elect who listened to them through Keech and selected other mediums. What Festinger and his associates demonstrated in the end was that the failure of prophecy often has the opposite effect of what the average person might expect; the cult following often gets stronger and the members even more convinced of the truth of their actions and beliefs! This unique paradox is the focus of attention in this article, and will be later applied specifically to the Jehovah's Witness movement.

Festinger observes: "A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point. "

We have all experienced the futility of trying to change a strong conviction, especially if the convinced person has some investment in his belief. We are familiar with the variety of ingenious defenses with which people protect their convictions, managing to keep them unscathed through the most devastating attacks. "

But man's resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view. 3

When Prophecy Fails focuses on the failure of prophecies to come true, termed disconfirmation by Festinger, and the accompanied renewal of energy and faith in their source of divine guidance. His theory presupposes the cult having certain identifying features, such as:

(a) belief held with deep conviction along with respective actions taken,
(b) the belief or prediction must be specific enough to be disconfirmed (i.e., it didn't happen),
(c) the believer is a member of a group of like-minded believers who support one another and even proselytize.

All of these characteristics were present in the saucer cult. Of particular interest in Festinger's book is how the followers of Mrs. Keech reacted to each disconfirmation (failed date). Little attempt was made to deny the failure. The strength to continue in the movement was derived, not largely from the rationalizations , but from the very energy of the group itself and its dedication to the cause. This explains why proselytizing was so successful later in reinforcing the group's sagging belief system.

Festinger relates: "But whatever explanation is made it is still by itself not sufficient. The dissonance is too important and though they may try to hide it, even from themselves, the believers still know that the prediction was false and all their preparations were in vain. The dissonance cannot be eliminated completely by denying or rationalizing the disconfirmation. But there is a way in which the remaining dissonance can be reduced. If more and more people can be persuaded that the system of belief is correct, then clearly it must, after all, be correct. Consider the extreme case: if everyone in the whole world believed something there would be no question at all as to the validity of this belief. It is for this reason that we observe the increase in proselytizing following disconfirmation. If the proselytizing proves successful, then by gathering more adherents and effectively surrounding himself with supporters, the believer reduces dissonance to the point where he can live with it." 4

In the end, the members of the flying saucer cult did not give up their faith in the Guardians from outer space with their promises of a new world. Despite numerous prophecies and the resultant disappointment accentuated by many personal sacrifices, the group remained strong. Summarizing the final stages of the flying saucer cult, Festinger says: "Summarizing the evidence on the effect that disconfirmation had on the conviction of group members, we find that, of the eleven members of the Lake City group who faced unequivocal disconfirmation, only two, Kurt Freund and Arthur Bergen, both of whom were lightly committed to begin with, completely gave up their belief in Mrs. Keech's writings. Five members of the group, the Posts, the Armstrongs, and Mrs. Keech, all of whom entered the pre-cataclysm period strongly convinced and heavily committed, passed through this period of disconfirmation and its aftermath with their faith firm, unshaken, and lasting. Cleo Armstrong and Bob Eastman, who had come to Lake City heavily committed but with their conviction shaken by Ella Lowell, emerged from the disconfirmation of December 21 more strongly convinced than before..." 5

[b]Application to the Watchtower[/b]

Festinger and co-authors review a few of the historic millennial movements. Among them were the Millerites, a cult centered around the advent hopes for the end of the world to come in the year 1843 as taught by William Miller. The feelings of those in the Millerite movement after the 1843 prophecy had passed were conveyed in the memoirs of F.D. Nichol (who continued to defend William Miller even after the disconfirmed date): "Our fondest hopes and expectations were blasted, and such a spirit of weeping came over us as I never experienced before. It seemed that the loss of all earthly friends could have been no comparison. We wept, and wept, till the day dawn. I mused in my own heart, saying, my advent experience has been the richest and brightest of all my Christian experience. If this had proved a failure, what was the rest of my Christian experience worth? Has the Bible proved a failure? Is there no God, no heaven, no golden home city, no paradise? Is all this but a cunningly devised fable? Is there no reality to our fondest hope and expectation of these things? And thus we had something to grieve and weep over, if all our fond hopes were lost. And as I said, we wept till the day dawn." 6

Interestingly, Festinger fails to discuss the International Bible Students (later known as Jehovah's Witnesses) who borrowed extensively from several millennial theories of the day. In January 1876 Russell began a partnership with Nelson H. Barbour, a former Millerite. Barbour convinced Russell that the year 1873 marked the end of 6000 years of human history.

Historian M. James Penton tells us that Barbour had gone far beyond Wendell and his associates, who had originally believed that 1873 would see the second advent and the consummation of the earth by fire. When nothing visible had happened in that year, they were at first quite perplexed until B.W. Keith, a reader of the Herald, discovered Benjamin Wilson's translation of parousia as "presence" Then, like Russell, Barbour and Paton began to believe in the idea of an invisible presence of the Christ, which they felt had begun on schedule in 1874." 7

Penton, a Watchtower historian and critic of the movement, relates additional information regarding the prophecies of Russell: "No major Christian sectarian movement has been so insistent on prophesying the end of the present world in such definite ways or on such specific dates as have Jehovah's Witnesses, at least since the Millerites and Second Adventists of the nineteenth century who were the Witnesses' direct millenarian forbears. During the early years of their history, they consistently looked to specific dates-1874, 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, 1918, 1920, 1925, and others-as having definite eschatological significance...When these prophecies failed, they had to be reinterpreted, spiritualized, or, in some cases, ultimately abandoned. This did not deter Russell or his followers from setting new dates, however, or from simply proclaiming that the end of this world or system of things was no more than a few years or perhaps even months away." 8

The results of disconfirmation of prophecy within the organization was later admitted by the Watch Tower itself: "The Watch Tower, and its companion publications of the Society, for forty years emphasized the fact that 1914 would witness the establishment of God's kingdom and the complete glorification of the church. During that period of forty years God's people on earth were carrying on a witness work, which work was foreshadowed by Elijah and John the Baptist. All of the Lord's people looked forward to 1914 with joyful expectation. "When that time came and passed there was much disappointment, chagrin and mourning, and the Lord's people were greatly in reproach; They were ridiculed by the clergy and their allies in particular, and pointed to with scorn, because they had said so much about 1914, and what would come to pass, and their `prophecies' had not been fulfilled." 9

The disconfirmation of the 1914 date did not deter the majority of the Bible Students. Russell had the ability to lift up their spirits with new fervor and hope, as the December 15, 1914 issue of The Watch Tower illustrates: "God has promised that He will give His true children the light at the time appointed, and that they shall have the joy of understanding His Plan at the appropriate season ... Even if the time of our change should not come within ten years, what more should we ask? Are we not a blessed, happy people? Is not our God faithful? If anyone knows anything better, let him take it. If any of you ever find anything better, we hope you will tell us. We know of nothing better nor half as good as what we have found in the Word of God." 10

Russell reworked his chronology and moved the date for the end of the world up to 1915. After the end failed to materialize in 1915, the end was set for 1918, when "God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by millions." 11

At the death of C.T. Russell in 1916, J.F. Rutherford took over the role of the `prophet,' proclaiming in 1920 that Millions Now Living Will Never Die in a booklet and lecture by the same name. Rutherford set a new date for the end for 1925, also claiming that it would bring the resurrection of the ancient men of God to the earth, such as Abraham, Isaac, David, etc. So sure was Rutherford of this that he made the following statements: "Therefore we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the faithful prophets of old, particularly those named by the apostle in Hebrews chapter 11, to the condition of human perfection." 12

"The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the scriptures than 1914." 13

"Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the scriptures. As to Noah, the Christian now has much more upon which to base his faith than Noah had upon which to base his faith in a coming deluge." 14

Rutherford even had a house built in San Diego for these ancients, and it was deeded to them when it was built! 15

Bearing witness to the ability of the Witnesses to ride out this period of disconfirmation, the house and the prophecy wasn't abandoned until 1943, when it was promptly sold. The Witnesses were later told that it was "built for brother Rutherford's use." 16

Rutherford kept the Witnesses occupied with proselytizing during the thirties. As with the flying saucer cult, Rutherford began teaching that there was some great significance in their disappointment over the disconfirmed prophecies and that the dates were somehow important, but they eventually decided against setting dates: "There was a measure of disappointment on the part of Jehovah's faithful ones on earth concerning the years 1914, 1918, and 1925, which disappointment lasted for a time. Later the faithful learned that these dates were definitely fixed in the Scriptures; and they also learned to quit fixing dates for the future and predicting what would come to pass on a certain date ..." 17

The disappointment didn't last long, however. The outbreak of World War II was seen as the beginning of Armageddon. An in-house publication of the Watchtower stated in 1940: "The Kingdom is here, the King is enthroned. Armageddon is just ahead. The glorious reign of Christ that shall bring blessings to the world will immediately follow. Therefore the great climax has been reached. Tribulation has fallen upon those who stand by the Lord." 18

The Watchtower of September 15, 1941 (p . 288) even stated that we are "in the remaining months before Armageddon." Armageddon fever was at an all-time high. Barbara Grizzuti Harrison, former member of the Watchtower's Bethel family, gives us a glimpse of the air of expectancy: "So firmly did Jehovah's Witnesses believe this to be true that there were those who, in 1944, refused to get their teeth filled, postponing all care of their bodies until God saw to their regeneration in His New World. (One zealous Witness I knew carried a supply of cloves to alleviate the pain of an aching molar which she did not wish to have treated by her dentist, since the time was so short till Jehovah would provide a new and perfect one. To this day, I associate the fragrance of cloves with the imminence of disaster.)" 19

[i]Cont.[/i]

S
sermonindex

When David Wilkerson's 'urgent' word came out - all I felt to post at that initial moment was the latter part of 1 Thess 5.

I think I know why now.

I believe Phil Johnson may need some of P&G's Pepto-Bismol before it's all over - plus.


The months before Y2K, my daughter and I began cutting out of the Newspaper Only, remarks by the Y2K Czar and other Senators and Government Officials [ie. FEMA, etc] and they were all saying what Gary North was relaying from them all. :-(
I still have all of those Newspaper Quotes from all of those Government Officials.


1Th 5:15 See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.
1Th 5:16 Rejoice evermore.
1Th 5:17 Pray without ceasing.
1Th 5:18 In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.
1Th 5:19 Quench not the Spirit.
1Th 5:20 Despise not prophesyings.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
1Th 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
1Th 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
1Th 5:24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.
1Th 5:25 Brethren, pray for us.
1Th 5:26 Greet all the brethren with an holy kiss.
1Th 5:27 I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren.
1Th 5:28 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

C
crsschk

[i]Cont.[/i]

[b]A New Date - 1975[/b]

The end came for Rutherford in 1942, as he passed away and N.H. Knorr took his place as the key member of the faithful and discreet slave, dispensing prophetic messages to the Witnesses. However, more credit is due to Frederick W. Franz, Knorr's vice-president, for the prediction of 1975 that first appeared in Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God (1966). Exercising caution in stating that this new date would definitely be the end, Franz (through his public lectures and Watchtower articles) made statements such as "according to this trustworthy Bible chronology six thousand years from man's creation will end in 1975, and the seventh period of a thousand years of human history will begin in the fall of 1975 C.E." 20

Any Jehovah's Witness knew that the end of 6000 years meant the beginning of the millennium of Christ's reign. The Awake! magazine of October 8, 1968 (p. 14) stated, "How fitting it would be for God, following this pattern, to end man's misery after six thousand years of human rule and follow it with his glorious Kingdom rule for a thousand years!" In lectures given to the members of the headquarters staff in New York, Franz stated (regarding the end) that "we don't know now if it will be weeks or months," before a crowd of 2000 Witnesses. 21

Many other statements were made in print. One traveling overseer even gave a public talk indicating it would be a total lack of faith to doubt that 1975 would be the end! 22

Franz became the fourth president of the Watchtower a year later. Unlike the flying saucer cult and the Millerites, the Watchtower was at first unwilling to accept blame for the disconfirmation, shifting it to "over-zealous brothers." Many Witnesses, however, were outraged and the Watchtower finally accepted much of the blame publicly.

Friends of those who were Jehovah's Witnesses often noted the changes in their lives as 1975 approached. Janice Godlove relates this regarding her JW brother and sister-in-law: "As 1975 approached, the signs of tension increased. Strange bits and pieces of the family atmosphere came to our attention. There was an almost morbid fascination with flocks of birds gathering in the fall. We were given all of their canned goods since they wouldn't need them anymore. An access panel had been cut in the wall behind their washing machine and the boys (who were 5 and 3 at the time) were told to run to the kitchen and hide if they heard screams. Bill was so disappointed by the failure of 1975 that he attempted suicide. But the tract we left by his hospital bed went unread and the family remained in the organization." 23

Today, 1975 is played down, but no recent reason is officially given for the disconfirmation, nor is there any further official date on the horizon. Some recent converts are even unaware of the 1975 expectations.

[b]A Pattern for the Future[/b]

A pattern emerges when we examine the growth figures before and after each disconfirmation. Typically, there was a rapid growth in numbers at least two years before the prophetic date, followed by a falling away of some (viewed as a "cleansing" of the organization of the unfaithful), then another growth spurt as a new emphasis on evangelism was put forward. It may seem incomprehensible how the Witnesses could ignore the implications of each disconfirmation.

Outsiders view the Witnesses as lacking common sense for not leaving the organization after numerous failures. They fail to understand the dynamics of mind control as used by cults. Even many ex-JWs fail to understand that the further disconfirmation of the importance of 1914 and "this generation" will not seriously affect the numbers of those swelling the ranks of the Watchtower. The results of mind control and unquestioning obedience will have the same effect today as it did in Russell's day. His view was, "Where else can we go?" Harrison writes regarding this attitude, "That, of course, is one of the keys to survival of the organization Russell founded on soft mysticism, glorious visions and worldly disaffection. The Witnesses had nowhere else to go. Their investment in their religion was total; to leave it would have meant spiritual and emotional bankruptcy. They were not equipped to function in a world without certainty. It was their life. To leave it would be a death." 24

This same dependency-unto-death phenomena is at work in thousands of cults all over the world. People wondered at Jonestown: "Why didn't they leave when they saw what Jim Jones was becoming?" The people of Jonestown answered by their actions, "Where else would we go?" They had burned their bridges to follow their Messiah unto death. Over 110 years and several failed prophecies later, the Watchtower movement is testimony enough that failed predictions do not mean the dissolution of a cult following. The failure of 1975 resulted in a decrease of less than 2%. 25

The Watchtower will always be able to develop clever rationalizations regarding their changing dates, as their history documents. Today, the Watchtower grows at a rate of about 5% per year worldwide, with over 3.7 million door knockers and over 9 million sympathizers! 26

When the dissolution of the Watchtower movement comes, as it inevitably will, it will more likely be due to dissension from within than from the disconfirmation of prophecy. Until that day, let us hope and pray that the eyes of many Witnesses will be opened up to the grace and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ and come to Him. FOOTNOTES: 1. Harold O.J. Brown, Heresies (New York: Doubleday, 1984), p. 67. 2.

In brief, Festinger explains the cognitive dissonance theory thusly: "Dissonance and consonance are relations among cognitions that is, among opinions, beliefs, knowledge of the environment, and knowledge of one's own actions and feelings. Two opinions, or beliefs, or items of knowledge are dissonant with each other if they do not fit together that is, if they are inconsistent, or if, considering only the particular two items, one does not follow from the other. For example, a cigarette smoker who believes that smoking is bad for his health has an opinion that is dissonant with the knowledge that he is continuing to smoke. He may have many other opinions, beliefs, or items of knowledge that are consonant with continuing to smoke but the dissonance nevertheless exists too."

Dissonance produces discomfort and, correspondingly, there will arise pressures to reduce or eliminate the dissonance. Attempts to reduce dissonance represent the observable manifestations that dissonance exists. Such attempts may take any or all of three forms. The person may try to change one or more of the beliefs, opinions, or behaviors involved in the dissonance; to acquire new information or beliefs that will increase the existing consonance and thus cause the total dissonance to be reduced; or to forget or reduce the importance of those cognitions that are in a dissonant relationship." (p. 25-26)

"Alternatively, the dissonance would be reduced or eliminated if the members of a movement effectively blind themselves to the fact that the prediction has not been fulfilled. But most people, including members of such movements, are in touch with reality and cannot simply blot out of their cognition such an unequivocal and undeniable fact. They can try to ignore it, however, and they usually do try. They may convince themselves that the date was wrong but that the prediction will, after all, be shortly confirmed; or they may even set another date as the Millerites did.... Rationalization can reduce dissonance somewhat. For rationalization to be fully effective, support from others is needed to make the explanation or the revision seem correct. Fortunately, the disappointed believer can usually turn to the others in the same movement, who have the same dissonance and the same pressures to reduce it. Support for the new explanation is, hence, forthcoming and the members of the movement can recover somewhat from the shock of the disconfirmation."

[i]From the Bethel Ministries Newsletter May/June 1990 (now the Free Minds Journal)[/i]

Leon Festinger, Henry W. Riecken, and Stanley Schachter, When Prophecy Fails, (New York: Harper and Row, 1956), pp. 27, 28.
3. ibid., p. 3.
4. ibid., p. 28.
5. ibid., p. 208.
6. ibid., p. 22; quoted from Hiram Edson, fragment of ms. on his life and experience, pp. 8,9, quoted in Francis D. Nichol, The Midnight Cry (Tacoma Park, Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Company, 1944), pp. 247-248.
7. M. James Penton, Apocalypse Delayed (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985), p. 18.
8. ibid., pp. 34.
9. Joseph Rutherford, Light, Book I (New York: Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, 1930), p. 194.
10. The Watch Tower, 12/15/14, p. 377.
11. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society (WTBTS), The Finished Mystery, 1917 edition, p. 485.
12. WTBTS, Millions Now Living Will Never Die, 1920, p. 89.
13. The Watch Tower, 9/1/22, p. 262.
14. ibid., 4/1/23, p. 106.
15. Consolation (WTBTS), 5/27/42, p. 3, also Golden Age (WTBTS), 3/19/30, p. 406, 407.
16. WTBTS, 1975 Yearbook, p. 194.
17. WTBTS, Vindication, Book I, 1931, pp. 338, 339.
18. WTBTS, The Messenger, 9/1/40, p. 6.
19. Barbara Grizzuti Harrison, Visions of Glory (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), p. 16.
20. WTBTS, Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God, 1966, p. 29.
21. F.W. Franz, verbatim as quoted by Randall Watters, present at the March 2, 1975 graduating class of the students of Gilead school. See The Watchtower, 5/1/75, p. 285.
22. Message given by C. Sunutko, Circuit Overseer, in 1967 (tape available).
23. The Bethel Ministries Newsletter, November, 1987, in a letter by Janice Godlove respecting her brother and sisterinlaw.
24. Harrison, p. 167.
25. Raymond Franz, Crisis of Conscience (Atlanta: Commentary Press, 1983), p. 212. 26. WTBTS, 1990 Yearbook, pp. 4041.

[url=http://www.freeminds.org/]freeminds[/url]

E
Earendel


crsschk wrote:
[i]Cont.[/i]

[b]A New Date - 1975[/b]

The end came for Rutherford in 1942, as he passed away and N.H. Knorr took his place as the key member of the faithful and discreet slave, dispensing prophetic messages to the Witnesses...

Oh how the grand enemy of souls desires the ruin of man's soul!

Know this, that when Satan thought that you were destroyed, the snare was broken and you escaped.
How it is a torment for those satans, to see men made the heirs of heaven while they are doomed to the lake of fire, having never been offered salvation.

The kiss of death will touch all the unredeemed in that day, and God's judgement will surely fall upon the unmerciful. But justice and mercy will surely triumph, in God's grace for those who are redeemed. For justice was fully satisfied at the cross of Christ in the just punishment of sin; and mercy triumphed, and was pleased there because salvation for poor sinners was completed. Oh, eternal praises to the name of Jesus for ever, that His grace has made me willing to accept this gift, and become an heir of salvation! For though the lost will lament that when salvation had been offered to them, they had refused it. Consider that it is therefore God's grace alone that helps us to accept it, and not to be high-minded against those who are lost. Oh to have the heart of Jesus, and to give ourselves to the love that He gave us, and to have a burden for lost humanity.

To the lost, all of their intolerable sufferings that shall come, will last to all eternity! [i]"Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,"[/i] is that which shall continually ring in their ears forever. Oh, that they could reverse that fatal sentence! Oh, if there was but a bare possibility of salvation from that eternal darkness to which they are plunged, but alas there is not! There is nothing they have, and this is the miserable situation they will be in, and shall be in forever.

Of all the torments of hell of those that reject Christ, and the just punishment of sin and recompense that unforgiven man by willful choice, will be made to endure in the Lake of Fire...but there is yet a better place to see the effects due to sin. That place can be seen when you behold the blessed Son of God upon the cross. There we may see the terrible effects of sin...for He bore it on His body...that is to say man's sin. There we may see all of sin's true evil. For all the sufferings of the damned souls of men, are but the sufferings of created beings; but on the cross you see a suffering God.”
For God is not untouched by us...How deep the love of my Creator, to save a sinking dying soul from hell, that he took my place and said "it is finished" I receive you Lord Jesus, with all of my heart! Amen! He is my hope forever, and I will love Him through out all eternity...and my hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in my heart by the Holy Spirit who has been given to me. Romans 5:5

C
crsschk

Reprinted from the [i]Fort Worth Star-Telegram[/i], 3/02/2003


[b]PROFIT in the pulpit[/b]
By Darren Barbee
[i]Star-Telegram[/i] Staff Writer


First of three parts

[i](Excerpt)[/i]


Mike Murdock peers into the television camera, seemingly able to see the people watching him. He says he can sense that the poor, the struggling and the lonely have tuned in to his program.

"You've got to have a breakthrough," he tells them.

Murdock offers the solution to all their problems: Give money to a man of God.

Murdock's unwavering message – on his program, at his seminars and in his books – is the Law of the Seed: Plant a seed and reap a harvest from God. The seed can be time, patience, love. But Murdock specializes in encouraging people to give money.

In return, Murdock promises, God will restore relationships, heal the body and provide financial salvation. The reward will be 100 times the gift.

All of the money, the Denton televangelist says, allows the Mike Murdock Evangelistic Association to spread the Gospel to the four corners of the earth.

"If any of this money is for Mike Murdock's personal gain," he often says, "may a curse be upon me and my ministry and may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth."

But a six-month [i]Star-Telegram[/i] examination shows that the ministry, which Murdock founded as a nonprofit corporation, spends more than 60 percent of its revenue on overhead.

Though Murdock says he despises poverty, the ministry's spending for needy families and benevolence is minuscule. For nearly a decade, less than 1 percent of donors' money has been used for such charitable works.

On the other hand, the ministry pays Murdock, its 56-year-old president and director, a salary that has helped him maintain a lavish lifestyle that includes Rolex watches, expensive sports cars and exotic animals.

In 2000, $3.9 million poured into the ministry, though Murdock's pitch is typically for small amounts. Send $31 a month or $58. Donate $1,000 to "break the back of poverty," he says. Give sacrificially.

"You say, 'Mike ... what if I don't have it?' " Murdock says during a November broadcast of his weekly television program [i]Wisdom Keys[/i].

God will provide, Murdock answers. Give the money anyway.

"Take a step of faith," he says.

Murdock has slipped in and out of the public's attention. He made a splash in the early 1980s on [i]The PTL Club[/i] television program with Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker.

Murdock, untouched by PTL's collapse in scandal, developed his own television ministry. Today, he still frequents the programs of more-successful televangelists, such as faith healer Benny Hinn.

In Texas, the public briefly took notice of Murdock's operations in 1998 after a string of women arrived in Argyle believing that he would marry or employ them. Murdock says he misled no one.

He later moved the headquarters from Argyle to Denton, where he resumed a largely anonymous local existence. He is detached from the community even as he reaches millions of people through his books, his seminars and [i]Wisdom Keys[/i], seen in at least 50 communities.

Though it's unclear how many viewers tune in, the ministry recently bought time on the Black Entertainment Television network, which Murdock said gives the show a potential viewership of 72 million households.

Murdock would not agree to an interview with the [i]Star-Telegram[/i] unless everything he said was printed verbatim.

The televangelist labels as "satanic" anyone who examines the ministry's operations. And if others question his extravagant lifestyle – or compare it with the humble existence of some of the ministry's staff members – he says they are attacking his theology.

[url=http://www.trinityfi.org/press/murdock01.html]PROFIT in the pulpit[/url]


2009 - [url=http://www.mikemurdock.com/Home/tabid/1545/Default.aspx]The Wisdom Center[/url]



"If any of this money is for Mike Murdock's personal gain," he often says, "may a curse be upon me and my ministry and may my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth."

Prov 18:6

C
crsschk

([i]excerpt[/i])

[b]Character Deficiency Syndrome[/b]


The sharpest description and diagnosis of such a crisis of character ever given is found in the wisdom literature of the Bible, which comprises the books of Job, Ecclesiastes, some of the Psalms, and especially the book of Proverbs. This literature teaches that moral character is grounded in reverence for God and constitutes wisdom. It calls the failure of character "folly." The sages who wrote these books, Solomon being chief among them, presented their observations with unsurpassed poetic virtuosity. Their true genius, however, is the method by which they made their observations. These ancient writers were the original behavioral profilers.


The art and science of criminal profiling has become a celebrated subject of motion pictures and television series. Though presaged to some extent by the Sherlock Holmes stories, it actually is a relatively recent development in the study of abnormal human behavior and as a crime fighting tool. John Douglas is the investigator who developed the FBI’s elite serial crime unit, applying inductive methods of constructing profiles of serial killers with uncanny accuracy. In the book [i]Mind Hunter[/i], Douglas writes that he always instructs his classes that whoever wants to understand Picasso has to study his art. Likewise, whoever desires to understand the criminal personality has to study his crime. He specifies the difference between his method and a psychiatrist’s:


The mental-health professionals start with the personality and infer behavior from that perspective. My people and I start with the behavior and infer the personality from that perspective.


The similarity between Douglas’s methods and Solomon’s cannot be missed. The same approach is taken throughout the wisdom literature of the Old Testament. It is a mistake to regard Proverbs only as a book of moralistic maxims. In fact, it collects into a single volume hundreds of concise masterpieces of inductive observation. It describes what people [i]do[/i] in order to show what they [i]are[/i] –or, as Jesus put it, how one may know a tree by its fruit. Gathering these diverse observations together by subject matter enables the reader to construct behavioral profiles that are often startlingly complete.


The challenge is to collect and collate all these observations in a way that the fuller picture can be constructed. The proverbs that preserve these observations are dispersed so unsystematically that they give the appearance of being disconnected and haphazard. There is purpose in the seeming randomness of lessons. It is to make the reader work, to think:


[b]To understand a proverb and the interpretation, the words of the wise and their riddles.[/b]


The search is part of the fun. First one must gather the bits of information on a theme, follow the threads that lead to other themes, and analyze the relationships between issues. Our common theme in this book is the fool and his folly.


The words "fool" and "folly" in the English Bible translate several Hebrew words used widely in the Old Testament for individuals who are deficient in character. Don’t be [i]fooled[/i] by our contemporary uses of the word "fool." The fool we’re talking about is not necessarily unintelligent. He is unwise. This is not someone who is silly or ridiculous, but someone who has never learned that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge."


I mentioned that there are [i]several[/i] Hebrew words. In this book we are going to look specifically at six terms. They are not interchangeable synonyms, but each one has a distinct shade of meaning which illuminates our central theme. Together they indicate at least four progressive stages or degrees of descent into moral and spiritual depravity. I call this pattern of descent [i]Character Deficiency Syndrome.[/i]


This is not an attempt to be jazzy or cute. I am not trying to create a New Age cliché here. Every word is deliberate and meaningful. The whole issue is about moral character. Wisdom means knowing the right thing to do and doing it. It is equivalent to the kind of sound and God-fearing character that thinks straight, makes good choices, and does what is right in a complicated world–even when doing right seems to make things even more complicated. "You’ve got to pay your dues," as the song says, and "it don’t come easy." Character willingly pays its dues. Folly amounts to a deficiency of that kind of character. The fool does not want to pay the dues. He wants the good life to "come easy." That is his first mistake. He goes downhill from there–and he [i]does[/i] go downhill.


Folly does not stay still. It is progressive. Weakness of character is degenerative, and the process of its degeneration has identifiable, integrally connected stages. When we put the biblical clues together, we can see a clear pattern of cause and effect. Hence the term "syndrome."


The first stage, the first degree of folly, signifies the [i]simple[/i] or [i]naïve[/i] fool, who is unthinking, gullible, and "devoid of understanding." He does not even have a basic comprehension of moral cause and effect. The second degree is the [i]self-confident[/i] fool. He is known mainly by his stubbornness and by his big mouth. The third degree is the [i]committed[/i] fool, who has decisively rejected wisdom and instead made a commitment to destructive ideas and behaviors. There are some other interesting–if distressing– dimensions to this stage of the syndrome that we shall talk about when we get to them.


Finally there is a terminal stage of Character Deficiency Syndrome: the [i]scornful[/i] fool, a mocker who is openly contemptuous of spiritual truth and moral righteousness. Many fools do not advance to this stage, if for no other reason than that it requires too much effort and commitment. On the other hand, some whom one would never suspect–including many that appear to be upstanding citizens, even clergy–actually descend to this level. They not only harbor a deep hatred for ethical absolutes, they have become evangelists for moral infidelity. They may well have passed a deadline beyond which God will have no mercy for their guilty souls.


This book, then, is about folly in all its inglorious dimensions: its symptoms, its diagnosis, its causes, and–if we may be permitted to borrow for analogy the "disease model" we criticized earlier–its cure.


First, however, we must clarify the context for this teaching–and that context is wisdom. It has already been suggested above that wisdom is not a matter of intelligence, but rather moral character. Much more needs to be said. In order to understand folly, we need to grasp what the Bible says about wisdom. Wisdom, we shall see, is not a system of laws and commandments, nor is it an addendum to God's laws. It is rather a worldview, a way of looking at all of life and reality.

([i]Cont.[/i])

C
crsschk

[i]Cont.[/i]

[b]Chapter 4


Without a Clue[/b]

Suppose you found in your mailbox today a letter on impressive, official-looking stationary from some office of a West African nation, say Nigeria. It is legitimately postmarked from that location. The text of the letter explains that a foreign contract overpayment has created a fiscal emergency in that country’s banking system, and that tens of millions of dollars must be quickly moved out of Nigeria into foreign banks. If you will make your bank account available to hold some of these funds, they will let you keep thousands of those dollars for yourself. There is no risk involved–except that they do ask that you disclose enough of your financial information to make sure you are trustworthy. They also want you to send an "advance fee" to pay for transfer costs. How do you respond?


If you decide to keep your own money in your bank account and your sensitive financial information to yourself, you may consider it profit. The many who have generously opened their accounts to this windfall have received nothing in return for their generosity but a sizeable debit in their bank accounts and a compromise of their personal security.


This is not a hypothetical situation, but an actual scam that has been around since the 1980s and continues to hoodwink thousands of victims out of millions of dollars every year. The Nigerian letter, known by law enforcement authorities as a "4-1-9" or "advance fee" fraud, is a new and sophisticated version of an ancient swindle. In the 1920s it spawned a variation known as "The Spanish Prisoner" con. The Internet has facilitated an explosion of frauds like this. In one six month period I received fourteen different email solicitations to get rich very quickly just by letting these folks use my bank account for awhile.


I have received dozens of such solicitations over the years, some of them with a religious or charitable theme, and not just from West Africa, but from Asia and the Middle East as well. I have treated them all as the first, which I immediately deposited (wistfully, I admit) in the household trash. I could only wish that I had always shown that kind of good sense and self-control in the face of the offer too good to be true. Unfortunately, I have on other occasions also suffered the same embarrassment and loss that comes to all who share the lapse of character we shall define in this chapter.


The first, or latent stage of Character Deficiency Syndrome is to be "simple," and the Bible provides a thorough description of the [i]simple fool[/i]. The Hebrew word is [i]pethi[/i] (pe-thee), from the root [i]pata[/i] (pa-tah), which means open, spacious, or wide. It is tempting to call this fellow an "airhead," but that would be missing the point. Remember, in the Bible neither wisdom nor folly is a matter of intellect or even personality. Both are moral issues, and both are a choice.


The simple one is empty, rather, in the sense of being naïve, immature, lacking judgment and discernment. The phrase most often associated with this word is "one who lacks understanding." There is a kind of simplicity that is a virtue. This is not it. This is not simplicity but [i]simpleness[/i], the front door to folly, which is the way of destruction. The word denotes someone, as we will see, who is gullible and easily enticed. He is usually contrasted with the "prudent" person, who has learned or is learning how to make choices based on moral convictions rather than feelings. Prudence is the normal (i.e., God-intended), healthy human condition–but [i]simpleness[/i] is the prevailing one, the universal default pattern of human behavior.


[b]Moral Carelessness[/b]


[i]The chief characteristic of the simple one is credulity, gullibility, dullness.[/i] One might think that the simple one needs only to become sophisticated through education and experience. His situation is not that, well–simple. Remember, the key issue is moral character, not intellect, or personality, or even common sense. This sort of naïveté is not merely the product of innocent trust. The simple fool chooses to trust those who are liable to mislead him, while at the same time he remains skeptical of those who would instruct and advise him about right and wrong. He may see himself as wise and understanding.


Moral character proceeds from choices that are freely made. The simple person, however, does not see his choices as being morally loaded. For him it comes down to a matter of what he wants. Notice how Solomon diagnoses his problem:


[b]The simple believes every word, but the prudent watches well where he steps.[/b]


In other words, the simple one trusts people without weighing either the wisdom of their words or the goodness of their motives. The only thing that matters is that someone is telling him what he wants to hear and to believe. This soul cannot–or rather, will not–tell the difference between someone who is telling the truth and someone who is feeding him a very clever line. It is a relatively mild form of character deficiency, but one that makes him easy prey for those who would take advantage of him or lead him astray into virtually any kind of vice. In his mind exercising discernment might short-circuit a good time or cut off a "once in a lifetime" opportunity. The simple one is a fish ready to bite the hook.


This habitual gullibility leads to a pattern of behavior that can only be described as careless and foolhardy.


[b]A prudent person foresees the evil and hides himself, but the simple pass on, and are punished.[/b]


He simply does not calculate consequences. It is not that he is over-confident. He just does not think ahead because that would be too much trouble. Neither does he consider that there are moral causes and effects. Moral thinking might interfere with what he wants to do. He may even regard prudent planning to be pessimistic. To him, optimism is to plunge ahead and assume luck will favor him.


At first glance, the proverb above presents the picture of two responses to an impending disaster. A hurricane approaches the coast. The prudent board up their homes and businesses and take their families to a safer place further inland until the storm is passed. The simple assume that the storm will probably pass by as usual and do nothing. The fun-loving among them take their surfboards out to catch the best waves that have ever hit the beach and play until the storm overtakes them and it is too late to escape.


There is more to be found in this proverb, however. It lies in the contrast between the attitudes of the prudent and of the simple. These attitudes not only control how the two react differently to a set of circumstances. They also control how each one actually creates his own set of circumstances. [i]The prudent individual acts with foresight, while the simple individual just acts.[/i]


Prudent foresight is not anything like psychic clairvoyance. No one knows the future but God. No one can truly calculate or comprehend all the compound effects of any single deed or word. It is only reasonable, however, to anticipate the direct consequences a given choice may produce. It is not hard to understand that doing right is good and that wrongdoing creates havoc. It is true that sometimes doing the right thing is difficult, or that the goodness of the moral choice may be obscured by pressing needs of the moment. It is also true that evil often wears the cloak of expediency. Doing right often must be done by faith. This is why we have the wisdom literature in the Bible: to show us the advantages of the right choice and the disasters of the wrong.

[url=http://www.seriouschristian.org/Fool_Sample.html]Fool[/url]

C
crsschk

[b]Christians & Conspiracy Theories[/b]

[b][i]A CALL TO REPENTANCE[/i][/b]

2 Corinthians 10:5 (KJV) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.

[b]1) Conspiracy Theory - Intro and Overview[/b]

Conspiracy Theory is more than just the belief in an occasional conspiracy. Simply put, it is a belief system that asserts that world events are being controlled in secret by a group of ultra-powerful puppeteers behind the scenes. While nothing much can be done about this overall conspiracy, at least we can have the satisfaction of being smart enough to have figured it all out.

If viewed as fiction, Conspiracy Theory is compelling and fascinating. If it were just a nightmarish novel meant to be unnerving and just a bit beyond plausible, like Asimov's Foundation, that would be one thing. But Conspiracy Theory projects its fiction onto real-life people, families, groups, and organizations. It purports to actually be true... and this is the problem.


[b]If The Root Is Unholy...[/b]

Conspiracy Theories are as old as politics. Hitler was a master at weaving conspiracy tales. Nero concocted one to shift the blame to Christians for the burning of Rome. Those who rejected the resurrection of Messiah came up with a Conspiracy Theory to explain the empty tomb and His many appearances. And so on.

The modern day mythology of conspiracy was brought into popular view by the self-styled Democratic candidate Lyndon LaRouche and his followers in the late 1970s. (You may remember the guys in the airports, right next to the Moonies.) The LaRouchites would pass out "Executive Intelligence Reports" (EIRs) that purported to inform us plebeians what was "really going on" and why we should thus support Lyndon.

Ironically, the hobbyhorse of an outcast Democrat has now made the shift from airport "kook" fundraising to mainstream commentators and talk show hosts on radio, both conservative and Christian.


[b]Regurgitated Propaganda, Or Wisdom?[/b]

The basic plotlines of Conspiracy Theory have a striking resemblance to anti-Semitic propaganda manufactured in Germany pre-WW2, with only the slight obfuscation of substituting "international bankers" for "Jews." Indeed, many in the Militia and Patriot movements have no illusions about this and have an open anti-Semitic message.

Lyndon LaRouche, and later a few credulous Christian prophecy teachers, brought these ideas into widespread exposure by omitting the original--and more obvious--anti-Semitic ravings and by weaving them together into a compelling whole. Before this, John Birch Society members often promoted them.

Somehow, these tales inflame the fears and paranoia of people to the extent that, even when the Jewish target is "removed," a residue remains in the human imagination that is happy to attach itself to a more vague target. For it must be admitted that some people get a perverse enjoyment from wallowing in such "snits" of paranoia, bogus "insight," fear, discontentment, etc. that propaganda like this evokes. The genius of the modern "Christian" versions of Conspiracy Theory is that now we do not have to be openly anti-Semitic to enjoy these effects.


[b]Strange Bedfellows[/b]

With the common bond of being "upset" and discontent in general, the modern co-belligerents of Conspiracy Theory are an odd group indeed. Nowhere is the absurdity of this more stark and ironic than among Jewish Christians who espouse it.

The sources of Conspiracy Theory notions are suspicious--to be generous. But regardless of a dubious historical pedigree, is Conspiracy Theory true or merely a paranoid delusion coupled with an active imagination? Or is it just the human tradition of "ghost stories" taken to a new level of story-telling believability?

These questions must be asked by modern-day Christians since Conspiracy Theory concepts and assumptions are intertwined with modern pop-eschatology "end times" teaching. This (unfortunately) being the case--and Conspiracy Theory assertions are clearly extra-biblical--we must "test all things" (1Thessalonians 5:21) by doing a thorough "fruit inspection" of these ideas. For we are told to judge a tree by its fruit (Matthew 7:16-20).

Unless we are ready to suggest that fear, paranoia, delusion, slander, and hatred are new "fruit of the Spirit" (Galatians 5:22-23), we need to go into this with the instinctive spiritual premonition that Conspiracy Theory is likely to fail the test and with the view to let the Holy Spirit lead us to repentance.


[b]2) Working in the Dark[/b]

The problem of testing the "theory" at the level of information is stark. Conspiracy Theory is by its very nature impossible to disprove. The revisionist history of Conspiracy Theory is based on "special knowledge" that plays by different rules than normal history, since it is dealing with "secret" history.

It is easy to spin these tales, but how can they be tested for being true? If you attempt to do this and find the notions bogus, are you one of "them?" As the joke goes, "Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean the world isn't really out to get me!"

So the "theorists" spin yarns, and nary a soul will contest them. After all, who is well-connected enough politically and economically to say for sure that no long-running international conspiracy exists? Get it? The deck is loaded.

The Conspiratist can go on and on without the need for any real research, except to imagine how it might be in a dark fantasy that will appeal to the paranoia and disenchantment of the intended audience and, in general, fit in with the overall Theory.

But those who do not "buy it" have to try to prove that a nonexistent group didn't have a supposed meeting at such-and-such a place, etc.; or worse still that this or that real group or person has been wholly misunderstood and misquoted. This second case is especially nasty, as many of the real groups and people, whom we would be defending and quoting correctly, have open (i.e., not conspiratorial) agendas we disagree with! It is a perfect trap: to counter the Conspirators' misrepresentation, exaggeration, and fantasy we will end up defending, giving time, attention, emphasis, clarification, press, etc., to ideas we loath!

It is not work to cheer the soul, so few have tried.

So the "theory" evolves and grows and goes on--largely unchecked. It is not possible to comprehensively disprove ALL cases, and only an impossibly long-suffering soul would spend time clarifying the SPECIFIC bad ideas that have been made worse by overstatement, exaggeration, alarmism, and fantasy.

The crowning beauty--or horror--of Conspiracy Theory is that conspiracy is by its very nature secret and thus cannot be proven or disproved.

Of course, the conspiracy buffs claim special "insider" knowledge. Should they be believed?

[b]3) The Theory Meets Reality[/b]

To start with, let us acknowledge straight off that there are people and groups of people out there who have plots, plans, and ideas that are secret, bad, even dangerous. The nature of these real conspiracies will be addressed briefly in counterpoint to Conspiracy [i]THEORIES[/i].

That people in power and wealth tend to promote people who agree with them or have some other common bond is no conspiracy, but simple human nature. A president, for example, is EXPECTED to appoint judges who are like-minded to him. Leaders in general form a liking for particular schools, sources of talent, consultants, etc. based on past history of success. If you are building a house, would you not favor a church member or good friend as a contractor, all else being equal, especially if you had received good service from them in the past? This may look like collusion to outsiders, but is simple pragmatic management to those involved. For Conspiracy Theory adherents to suggest that such normal activities prove a "conspiracy" is not good evidence that they are thinking clearly. We all know what a real conspiracy is, do we not?

Real conspiracies work best when small and short lived. They take significant energy and planning and are vulnerable to the light of scrutiny. Every person brought in and every day that passes adds to the risk of an ongoing conspiracy.

Occasionally people really do conspire. For example, our American founding fathers declared independence from England some 200 years ago. But the "conspiracy" in that case was just the means used, not the cause. It was needed momentarily, then dropped as a technique. The real and lasting causes were well known, even by the British. The American Revolution could have been reasonably predicted by traditional sociology and political science. The conspiracy aspect was a temporary sideshow.

Those who aspire to do anything (good or bad) often collude in secret before launching out. Consensus building in private, forming alliances away from public view, and strategic meetings in secret are certainly a "way of the world."

But this is mere conventional thinking, not Conspiracy Theory. Conspiratists believe not merely that an occasional conspiracy exists, but that this is the dominant theme of history, that an "unseen hand" is guiding the world inexorably to the whim of certain supra-rich and/or powerful individuals.


[b]The Clouded Crystal Ball[/b]

Conspiracy Theory assertions have a nasty habit of colliding head-on with reality. Its predictive power is poor, dismally so, since it rarely deals with real motives and forces in the world. Real people, including leaders, most often do things out of greed, altruism, self interest, passion, fear, ideals, racial or religious hatred, and the like.

To point out all the failed predictions of Conspiracy Theory would surely fill the internet, since every Conspiratist has his own unique spin on the Theory. As a challenge to the reader--from what you know of it--has Conspiracy Theory [i]ever[/i] been right? I’ve heard many failed predictions of elections, that US Christians are soon to be placed into concentration camps, and that Soviet armies are massing at the Mexican border...

Let’s face it, Conspiratists are much better at fanciful [i]reinterpretations[/i] of history than predicting what will happen next. But this does not stop them from trying. For the Conspiratist takes great pride in being "in the know."

Of course, when Conspiracy Theory fails to accurately predict world events, this often increases the inability to persuade those who believe in it. "Ah," they say, "It is all a grand plot to lull us further into to thinking THEY aren't really planning the opposite..." and so on. Conspiracy Theory is perversely flexible.

Should Christians be involved in the promulgation of esoteric theories as likely wrong as not and with such a dismal history of accuracy?

[i]Cont.[/i]

M
MaryJane

greetings

Thanks Mike for posting this, I look forward to the next part. I am really learning a lot from this.

God Bless
Maryjane

C
crsschk

[b]4) The Return of the Illuminati[/b]

With wild claims of inside information on international clandestine dealings, the conspiracy buffs end up in an ironic hypocrisy. They believe in an ongoing "Illuminati." The Illuminati were (are?) a group that claimed [i]special knowledge[/i], secret knowledge that set them above the common man. Does such a group exist in today's world? Are there those among us who see themselves as possessing secret knowledge not available to the common man? Ironically, the Conspiracy Theorists themselves are the best candidates to be found. They have "figured it out," and if you do not "see it," then you are just one of the dupes manipulated by the ghost Conspiracy that only the "enlightened ones" know about.

Have you noticed that the most vocal promoters of Conspiracy Theory seem to be uniquely unqualified? It seems, as a rule, they are custodians, bus drivers, clerks, etc.; but here they are on the radio or publishing a leaflet or book as an expert on insider business and political dealings at an international level! This is not to denigrate any profession, but merely to point out that there seems to be a common thread among the most enthusiastic supporters and proponents of Conspiracy Theory--they lack experience and access to the international political and business world, and seem to have careers that allow lots of time to fantasize about how things "really are."

To those involved in world affairs, these fanciful causal claims seem especially divorced from reality. They simply do not fit the facts. Of course, anyone making such a statement is likely to be accused of being a conspirator as well, so for most it seems more prudent to avoid the issue as a human embarrassment too shameful to directly address. The general silence and/or stares of unbelief are taken as further circumstantial "evidence."

While we may not often like the way things are, the causal factors rarely include a conspiracy. Are not the real problems we face usually all too open and obvious: workaday problems like greed, self-interest, fear, bigotry, laziness, etc., flagrantly displayed or perhaps thinly veiled at best?

[b]5) The Symbiosis and Risks of Alarmism[/b]

There are people and groups in this world who promote "everything under the sun." There is probably even a group out there somewhere who think humans ought to dress up like kangaroos. The question in analyzing any of these groups or ideas should be: is the group in question worth paying attention to? The motives and passions of a vocal minority of goofballs who do not count as "players" in the real world should not alarm or derail us. This is to be expected. But these kooks on the globalization lunatic fringe are the basic fodder for the conspiracy alarmists. The two groups need each other to exist, it appears, as no one else is listening.

Are we to believe that a few "visionaries" who are a little soft in the head about the benefits of a "one world government" are really winning the day? Is not the problematic drift in the world today towards nationalism, isolationalism, balkanization, sectarianism, and fragmentation? Is this not the obvious reason for several wars and conflicts going on in the world right now?


[b]Serious Threat Or Political "Hollywood Squares?"[/b]

Imagine this scenario: A smarmy academic gets up at a "New Age" UN seminar and offers a bromide on the unity of man and "spaceship earth." Now, as a result of this froof-rah, are the various ethnic, religious, and cultural wars being fought around the world going to skid to a sudden stop? Are Islamic militants going to smile and put away their suicide bombs and terrorist plans and recognize Israel's right to exist? What do you think? At an economic level, is the Japanese government going to give up protecting their farming industry, abandon their political power base, and join a global government? Is anyone who matters in these conflicts even listening to this prattle? Besides the conspiracy alarmists (who are taking vigorous notes and paying over careful attention), the audience appears to be only those on a nice paid boondoggle as "ambassadors" to New York. Or perhaps this giddy speech is being loftily set forth at a roundtable "conference" in some other nice vacation city to an attendance roster of political has-beens, wash-ups, wanna-bes--and the paparazzi who clamor after them--with a few serious "kangaroo suit" types thrown in for good measure?

While this is all great fun to watch, let us be sober-minded here. The coming one-world government is not likely to be created by the pathetic attempts of the likes of the UN utopians, or imaginary rich people who long to cut off the trade advantages that are the very branch they are sitting on; but rather in reaction to a global crisis of God's judgment on a world that will be groping in response. In the meantime, the way of the world is much more easily understood without the kaleidoscopic thrills of Conspiracy Theory. And while conspiratists project fantastic evils onto the Rockefellers or the Catholics or the US Congress or the Jews or whomever, real enemies who are hell-bent on destroying us go unnoticed.

The bottom line is that while it may be great fun and fantasy for those of a paranoid bent, Conspiracy Theory is NOT taken seriously by people who run this world, it is useless for predicting or explaining what is going on and why. Only those who do not need to be correct can hold this view for long.


[b]Sanity Check[/b]

The media has an undeniable liberal and anti-Christian bias. But let us keep in mind that while leaders of our media are responsible for their actions, we are responsible for ours as well. As slanted and distorted as our news is, should WE then resort to rumors and hearsay as an alternative? Is this not jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire? If the issue is truth, then the failure of our media is no excuse for us doing even worse!

And consider that in our world today there are cultures where Christianity is [i]totally censured[/i] and/or believers are imprisoned, even put to death for their faith. Our Kingdom is not of this world, and we will never have the "perfect situation" till Messiah comes again, even though we should not cease making every effort to improve all we can while we can. But let us get a sense of perspective here. Are we not being crybabies for complaining overly much about our media compared to what our brethren in other parts of the world are having to endure for His Name's sake? No one is forcing us to "buy" the liberal media "pitch," nor even incline our ears or eyes to it. We can just turn it off or engage it with discernment.

Real and destructive conspiracies exist, and it is good work to espose them. Although much that is called "conspiracy" in modern history could more properly be termed a "cover-up" (being done after the fact), great evil has been plotted--and is even now being plotted--by way of real conspiracy. It is indeed righteous work for Christians to expose and thwart all such, as we have opportunity.


[b]The Credibility Factor[/b]

But alas, we are disqualified before we start for this work. We have fallen into the "chicken little syndrome": because of our scandalous excesses of alarmism and intoxication with Conspiracy THEORIES and lack of regard for what is true, if a [i]real[/i] and truly dangerous conspiracy were detected would anyone take Christians seriously at that point? Have we not spent our credibility and voice on mere ghosts?


Colossians 4:5 (NAS) Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity.

This point will be expanded in the last section concerning a message [i]even more important[/i] than sounding the alarm of a real conspiracy.

[b]6) Conspiracy Theory versus Revelation[/b]

The theory of communism was built on a faulty premise and, thus, was doomed to not work in practice. Christians who believe in the Bible should be able to quickly apprehend that Conspiracy Theory is faulty at its core. Thus we should not be surprised at its failure in practice.

[b]Somebody Forgot To Check Their Scriptures...[/b]

Fundamental to Conspiracy Theory is a basic view of the world. This view is defined by its adherents as the "Conspiratorial View" of history. This explanation of the course of history is pitted against the "Linear View" of history (or somesuch). These, we are told, are the only options! (This smacks of Marx's false dichotomy that only two classes existed.) But it is just not true. Dare we mention it, at least one other possible explanation of why things happen is the "Biblical View."


Amos 3:7 (NIV) Surely the Sovereign Lord does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets.

And Scripture never mentions anything anywhere even approaching the scope of Conspiracy Theory.

In general, The Bible neither denies real human conspiracies nor suggests that they are a major factor in history. Scripture puts conspiracies where they belong: as an occasional and hard to maintain sideshow.


2 Samuel 15:12 (NIV) ... And so the conspiracy gained strength, and Absalom's following kept on increasing.

Acts 23:12 (NIV) The next morning the Jews formed a conspiracy and bound themselves with an oath not to eat or drink until they had killed Paul.


But never in the Bible are we encouraged to imagine that conspiracy is the grand explanation of history or the overarching issue of causality in human affairs. In fact, just the opposite is commanded.

Isaiah 8:12-13 (NIV) "Do not call conspiracy everything that these people call conspiracy; do not fear what they fear, and do not dread it. The Lord Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy, he is the one you are to fear, he is the one you are to dread."

The lesson seems to be that there are certain times that the temptation to blame what is happening on conspiracy or [i]alliances[/i] should be distinctly avoided, by direct command of the Lord.

Beyond skewering the fundamental thesis of the "Conspiratorial View" (unless we are willing to accuse God of "missing it"), Scripture makes it plain that if we are near the "end of the age," which [i]Christian[/i] Conspiracy Theory generally asserts, it is then in particular that we are clearly admonished NOT to be deceived into thinking that conspiracy is behind it. Anyone familiar with prophetic Scripture knows that God is very keen on letting us know that He is behind the events surrounding the first and second coming of Christ.


Psalms 2:1-2 (KJV) Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed....

Why indeed? A good question, eh? (Acts 4:28, Ps 2:4) Some answer this according to "the Gospel of Conspiracy Theory": that this is due to a human conspiracy. Some claim "ministries" spreading this distracting paranoia. But God, while lambasting many a real conspiracy throughout history, says it is not so. The following is representative of dozens of end-times passages:

Ezekiel 38:1-2,8 (NIV) "Son of man, prophesy... and say: This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against you, O Gog,... [i]I will turn you around[/i] and drag you along. [i]I will bring you[/i] from the far north and send you against the mountains of Israel. It is coming! It will surely take place, declares the Sovereign Lord.... "

God apparently thinks it important for us to know at the End of the Age that He is doing this, and it is of no human invention or scheme. Even if some have plans....

Psalms 33:10 (NIV) The Lord foils the plans of the nations; he thwarts the purposes of the peoples.

Is it not amazing that Scripture completely misses what Conspiracy Theory made popular? Boy did God blow this one! If He only knew what was "really going on." If He were only more "informed!"

So it is God versus the conspiracy buffs. Tough one, eh?

Who ya gonna believe nowadays?


Isaiah 8:12 (NIV) "Do not call conspiracy everything that these people call conspiracy; do not fear what they fear, and do not dread it."


[i]Cont.[/i]

C
crsschk

[b]7) "Conspiracy" in the Heavenlies?[/b]

The only grand "conspiracy" spoken of in Scripture is a SPIRITUAL one led by Satan. And it is no secret: it has been REVEALED to those with ears to hear. Thus, it is no "conspiracy" to Christians, but an open [i]war[/i] against the gospel of Christ and His life in the kingdom of God on this earth.

Our Lord Jesus has defeated the enemy of our souls at the cross. While we have yet to see the fullness of this victory play out in time, we will. The ultimate defeat of Satan is as sure as the Word of God. For our enemy's time is short.

At a mere human level, Conspiratists have pontificated at length about Masonic cabals bent on ruining the very economy which they supposedly constructed, while completely missing Militant Islam's open agenda calling for civilization's death and destruction. Radical Muslim clerics scream "Death to America" in US Mosques and Universities and on the Internet, and openly plot to bring the US and then the world under Islamic rule, and not one Conspiratist takes them seriously before they actually strike a blow. Even non-Conspiratists missed the threat due to religious political correctness. (While a particular terrorist "cell" is a closely guarded military secret, Islamism's worldwide goals for Israel, the US, and modern civilization have been published and broadcast and ranted about for many decades. Yet even with all the funds and weapons and virulent hatred for us, it seemed politically dangerous to point out that Islamists had declared open war against us.) My goodness, even at the level of the here and now (John 3:11), we humans seem to have a propensity to dramatically miss the point of where the real threat is coming from. Are we not doing even worse in the spiritual by missing the nature of the war that we are in with such dalliances as Conspiracy Theory--in direct violation to scriptural revelation and emphasis?

Are we showing discernment and good judgment by recognizing who the real enemy is and where we are being attacked spiritually? What is history really about, and what battle is really going on in God's world? Is eternal judgment real? What, then, should our approach and overarching strategy to life be? How, then, should we live? If we are members of the "Kingdom of God", just what should we be focusing on? Are we looking up, or down--and getting that all wrong? How would Jesus rate our sense of apprehending the reality of things? Are we wiser then He? Wiser than all of the holy prophets of old?

Are we shooting our guns off into the air of Conspiracy Theory... while a real enemy stands behind us? Even among us?


[b]8) We Didn't Lose, They Cheated![/b]

This section may be the most difficult for Conspiratist oriented Christians to accept, but may well be the explanation to the perverted attraction of Conspiracy Theories in the church, and why we think we need them.

Clearly and obviously, there are those who oppose what we Christians hold dear and actively promote what we think of as wicked. It should be noted that this battle is principally fought, lost, and won in an open battle in our culture, not via conspiratorial plotting.

Where we as Christians have lost ground or failed completely is in [i]acquiescence[/i] or [i]lack of resolve[/i], rather than being unable to "break the code" of some back-room conspiratorial plot. The fight was not generally in secret, but in the open, and we did not even show up.


[b]The Enemy Within[/b]

Perhaps part of the appeal of blaming things on conspiracies is that it assuages our own [i]lack of concern[/i] and [i]engagement[/i] in the public arena. Sure, we lost, but "Hey, they cheated!" Oddly enough, though, when we show up we do quite well, just as God promised. But when we fail to even try, we are tempted to accuse our opponents of "foul play" instead of reflecting objectively on the fact that we caved in, did not care, did not try, etc.

Where this gets nasty is where it becomes more than just a temporary meditation to relieve our consciences, and gets blown into a full-tilt philosophy. And this is what Conspiracy Theory is. "They" are pulling back-room strings with an unseen hand that makes it futile to even try. Why, we might even play into "their" hands, "they" are so clever. The only thing to do is to hunker down and protect our friends and family against the inevitable siege, or by laying so low that nobody takes notice of us, retreating further from being salt and light in our culture. None of the options coming from this fatalistic view are very good, frankly, and when the results in our society get inevitably worse, we go right back to blaming "them" instead of ourselves. And so it goes.


James 4:17 (NIV) Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins.

[b]Spiritual Wimps[/b]

Our spiritual enemy is winning a terrific battle against us if he can short circuit our zeal and eliminate our influence via the fatalism of Conspiracy Theories. Rather that being salt and light in spreading the Gospel of peace, we hide our lamps under a table so that "they" will not notice us. We bury our treasure in a bunker mentality of merely holding our own against the unassailable power of evil. With our consciences satisfied that the enemy is somehow cheating, we throw down our swords before the fight even starts.

The utility of Conspiracy Theory thus comes into focus. It shifts blame. It is a sophisticated excuse machine. This is how Hitler used it; this is how Nero used it; this is how we are using it. Has there even been a Conspiracy Theory concocted short of this purpose?

What could be a more obvious ploy by our spiritual enemy to thwart the life of Christ in us?

The tragic thing is that this attack comes not from without, but principally from within the church. And our itching ears and guilty consciences cannot seem to get enough of it.

Have we fallen so far from being "conquerors in Christ" that we need a systematic philosophy of paranoia? Is the life of Christ in us content to lay curled in fetal position in the corner reading another Conspiracy Theory book? Are we content to be losers quaking in the fear of men--in direct disobedience to our Lord?


[b]9) Slandering Our Enemies[/b]

Leviticus 19:16 (NIV) "Do not go about spreading slander among your people. Do not do anything that endangers your neighbor's life. I am the Lord."

Exodus 23:1 (NIV) "Do not spread false reports. Do not help a wicked man by being a malicious witness."


Instead of realizing the pragmatic, even convicting reasons why we have failed in so many ways to effect our culture, we accuse our enemies of cheating via conspiracy. The motive for this was discussed previously.

[b]Fruit Inspection[/b]

Proverbs 18:8 (NIV) The words of a gossip are like choice morsels; they go down to a man's inmost parts.

The Scripture describes a "gossip" as one who connives and dreams up a "twist" that is compelling and winsome. There is a perverted sweetness to this deception that is the principal lure of committing this sin. "Yeah, THAT is it! So and so is doing such and such." The more divorced from the truth this is, the more outlandish the slander, the better...

Matthew 15:19 (NIV) "For out of the heart come evil thoughts... false testimony, slander. These are what make a man 'unclean'...."

Proverbs 18:8 (NAS) The words of a talebearer are like tasty trifles....


Like all sin, slander and gossip can be fun in the moment. But like all sin, there is a price to be paid later. The price here is in defamation of character to the real-life people and organizations, and in self-delusion and inability to discern the truth for those who continue in it.

1 Peter 2:1 (NIV) Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.

Ephesians 4:31 (NIV) Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice.


We are told in some detail by God how to think and deal with rulers and government in Scripture. And consider that these Scriptures were written during a time when leaders and government were much worse than now.

Titus 3:1-2 (NIV) Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, to SLANDER no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and to show true humility towards all men.

Do the wild accusations and projected phobias and fears of Conspiracy Theory pass this test? You be the judge.

The bottom line is that "Christian" Conspiracy Theory makes about as much sense as "Christian Racism." Both are forbidden in Scripture.


1 Peter 2:17 (NIV) Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honour the king.

[i]Cont.[/i]

S
sermonindex

Reading this thread, I couldn't help but be reminded of the following:


~ VII ~

MY DEAR WORMWOOD,

I wonder you should ask me whether it is essential to keep the patient in ignorance of your own existence. That question, at least for the present phase of the struggle, has been answered for us by the High Command. Our policy, for the moment, is to conceal ourselves. Of course this has not always been so. We are really faced with a cruel dilemma. When the humans disbelieve in our existence we lose all he pleasing results of direct terrorism and we make no magicians. On the other hand, when they believe in us, we cannot make them materialists and sceptics. At least, not yet. I have great hopes that we shall learn in due time how to emotionalise and mythologise their science to such an extent that what is, in effect, belief in us, (though not under that name) will creep in while the human mind remains closed to belief in the Enemy. The "Life Force", the worship of sex, and some aspects of Psychoanalysis, may here prove useful. If once we can produce our perfect work—the Materialist Magician, the man, not using, but veritably worshipping, what he vaguely calls "Forces" while denying the existence of "spirits" — then the end of the war will be in sight. But in the meantime we must obey our orders. I do not think you will have much difficulty in keeping the patient in the dark. The fact that "devils" are predominantly comic figures in the modern imagination will help you. If any faint suspicion of your existence begins to arise in his mind, suggest to him a picture of something in red tights, and persuade him that since he cannot believe in that (it is an old textbook method of confusing them) he therefore cannot believe in you.

[i]Extract from The Screwtape Letters by C S Lewis[/i]


[url=http://members.fortunecity.com/phantom1/books2/c._s._lewis_-_the_screwtape_letters.htm]The Screwtape Letters online[/url]

C
crsschk

[b]10) Making Idols of Mere Men[/b]

Conspiracy Theory practitioners are miles away from "honoring the king," or showing "proper respect" for leaders. To fill this natural void, there is a backlash into worship and fear of imaginary leaders instead.

[b]The Gods Must Be Crazy...[/b]

It used to be that leaders promoted a facade of divinity and idolatry--erecting idols of themselves, demanding worship, and the like--and they still do so in some parts of the world. Though this is rare in public life in the US, the reflex seems so ingrained in us that we must create make-believe "conspiracy leaders" to worship when social conventions change and we see our public or elected leaders so obviously groping. "It must be an act to lull us. They really are in control. They really are gods!" Nowadays, "we the people" prop up the idols. Certain carnal instincts die hard. But these Conspiracy Theory idols, like all others, will be toppled and shattered.


[b]Why Dilbert Is Funny[/b]

At a local and experiential level, we all know the problems of position and responsibility. The higher the position, the more impossible to process all the information, to take everything into account, to please everyone, etc. That is why it is nice to dream of being in charge, but harder to sleep when you are.

There is hardly a profession where human limitations are more stark than in leadership. This is why "manager jokes" strike a chord in us. These barbs point out the hopeless situation most managers are in, diffusing with humor our exasperation at their inability to "get it," listen, solve ALL the problems, or whatever.

Our ability to laugh at these jokes demonstrates that--at least intuitively--we know the "problem" that our leaders face with their limitations as humans. This being the case, we are enjoined to pray for them and show them proper respect for the responsibilities they bear.

But for the Conspiratist, who can see this drama first-hand at their own job, city counsel, etc., there is a different set of rules for world leaders. These are a different breed, somehow. To listen to the Conspiracy buffs, it becomes clear that you must believe that certain people or groups possess superhuman powers of intelligence, time management, persuasion, influence, stealth, etc. These "puppeteers" have powers that would make Superman look like a weakling.

Up close, we see people for what they really are. At a distance, [i]they must be gods![/i]

This is clearly idolatry, and a rather ridiculous type at that. And again, we must be honest and admit that idol-making is great fun, and so is the reveling around the constructed image. But this makes God especially mad.


1 Corinthians 10:14 (Wey) Therefore, my dear friends, avoid all connection with the worship of idols.

The mythology of creating imaginary superhumans that act as objects to terrify our imaginations and excuse our failures is not something that a Christian should have any part of.

Luke 12:4-5 (Wey) "But to you who are my friends I say, Be not afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do nothing further. I will warn you whom to fear: fear him who after killing has power to throw into Gehenna. Yes, I say to you, fear him."

It might be countered that Conspiracy Theory believers are not gripped with the fear of real or imaginary [i]human leaders[/i], but demonic spirits--even Satan--who animate these people. But this is even worse! Instead of fearing God or honoring the temporal king, we now find ourselves emotionally and spiritually prostrated before demons and Satan, trembling for them!

Isaiah 57:11 (NKJ) "And of whom have you been afraid, or feared, that you have lied and not remembered Me, nor taken it to your heart? Is it not because I have held My peace from of old that you do not fear Me?"

Shall we dance around the golden calf of Conspiracy Theory and its constructors, or attend to the Word of the Lord and His Kingdom among us?

Matthew 6:33 (KJV) But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness...

Resonating to Conspiracy Theories is a clear indication that we are carnally minded, and not even to the "real world" (which would be bad enough) but to an idolatrous fantasy world of delusion and paranoia.

Luke 17:20-21 (NAS) "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!' For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst."

Philippians 3:20 (NAS) For our citizenship is in heaven...


Brothers and sisters, let us repent. Let us turn our minds from these dark meditations to the Word of God, and begin now to work and pray in accordance with His eternal and permanent kingdom.

Which kingdom do our private thoughts and feelings reveal we are vested in?

[b]11) Ideas Have Consequences[/b]

There were pervasive rumors running rampant before WW2 concerning the Jews. One of note was that Jews were purportedly using Gentile blood in the making of the Passover Matzos. These and other rumors were so outlandish and ignorant that they did not seem worthy of serious response. They were so ridiculous and divorced from reality that no one bothered to dispute them. So they became "common knowledge."

2 Peter 2:12 (NKJ) But these... speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption.

We often wonder what went so wrong in Germany that an entire segment of the population (many professing to be Christians!) would willfully and enthusiastically participate in the day to day executions of the holocaust. We are not going to suggest here that the ONLY reason this happened were the rumors, gossip, and slander running rampant in Germany unchecked for decades beforehand, but certainly these were a major factor in creating the climate that would allow, and even justify, the mayhem and shame that resulted.

[i]We[/i], of course, are much superior to the Germans, and immune to the effects of outrageous stories and lies coursing through our minds for decades, unchallenged.

The one thing we learn from history, it appears, is that we can never learn from history.

[b]12) Credulity and Witness[/b]

Proverbs 14:15 (NIV) A simple man believes anything, but a prudent man gives thought to his steps.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 (NIV) Test everything. Hold on to the good.


A casual survey of rumors coursing through the Christian community over the last few decades is not encouraging evidence that we are "testing all things." Perhaps this overview will jog a few memories?

I) Did you know that as a residue of the miracle of the creation of woman that man has one less rib than woman as an eternal reminder? This Christian legend still persists in sermons, homilies, and wedding ceremonies, despite the fact that it is not true. Men have the same number of ribs as women.

II) The FCC has received over 30 million pieces of mail protesting a petition supposedly authored by Madalyn Murray O'Hare to remove all Christian broadcasting from the airways. The embarrassing thing is... that no such petition or issue exists. But this does not stop copies of pamphlets and counterpetitions from circulating and being promoted. Try as the FCC might, the rumor cannot be quelled. The FCC even has a "religious petition" disclaimer option when you call the computerized switchboard and, now, a posting on the FCC website (see link section at end of article).

III) In the early 80s, the periodic alignment of the planets was going to torque the earth, causing earthquakes, tidal waves, etc. Have the pastors and teachers who promoted this bogus theory apologized or repented? The fact that those who made an industry of this error are still revered as established prophecy "experts" among us, showing no sign of repentance, circumspection, or humility, is perhaps the greatest scandal of this unfortunate episode.

IV) A rumor keeps recurring every few years that executives at certain large corporations have appeared on TV talk shows admitting to being Satanists. This slander ends up having a commercial motive and has led to several lawsuits. While the source of this particular rumor has been traced (and prosecuted, see link section for more on this) to certain Amway distributors, many of these also claim to be Christians, and it must be admitted that this slander has overflowed into many non-Amway Christian minds and mouths as well.

V) In the mid 80s, a new threat emerged in the "ten nation" European Economic Community (EEC), now termed the European Union (EU). This was portrayed as everything from a trade-war juggernaut to a fulfillment of prophecy. Despite all the hype, the economic progress after a decade has been modest, to put it generously. It actually started with six member nations and, eventually, passed through ten; when the eleventh and twelfth nations joined, it did not stop the interpretation of the EU as the nefarious "ten horn" alliance prophesied in Scripture. Luckily, the USA started with thirteen, not having to pass through the dreaded number ten, or we might also have been identified with Daniel 7 and Revelation 17. Unfortunately for the EU the stigma of this "teaching" absurdly persists. In the minds of some evangelical Christians, the EU sort of got "stuck" at ten, even though they now have fifteen member states. Again, the teachers who promote/promoted this error show no signs of remorse or humility, but are now well established as prophecy "experts" in the body of Christ.

VI) Another recurrent Christian legend is that of the "beast" computer in Brussels (or wherever). This first surfaced in the late 1970s, where the idea was to track every person in the entire world as a fulfillment of the 666 prophecy. We can now assess this from the cooler position of hindsight. Consider that the educational computers used in modern elementary schools NOW would run circles around the [i]best[/i] computer technology available back THEN, in speed, memory, reliability, and disc storage. Imagine [i]running the world[/i] from the paltry PC that your kid learns his math on! It was no less absurd back in the 1970s to people who knew better. But to point this out made you either not "in the know" or part of the "conspiracy."

VII) At a restaurant a few years back where we were splitting the check, $20 bills were confiscated and the plastic "security strips" (to thwart counterfeiting) woven in vertically (just under the U of the United States of...) were wiggled loose and pulled out from the top by a well-meaning minister present. When asked why this defacing of currency was necessary, he replied, "These strips allow the government to track how much money we have--and our movements--via satellite. By removing them, we can foil their plan."

VIII) The latest and most persistent Christian rumor, and the subject of this article, is that an overwhelming, worldwide, international conspiracy exists--manipulating nearly everything that we see--which is spearheaded variously by the Bilderbergers, the DuPonts, the Rockefellers, the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, black helicopters, and the ever popular "Illuminati." This dark fantasy is called "Conspiracy Theory," and has become the darling of Christians.

IX) Did you know that Jesus Christ came, died, and rose again on the third day, according to the Scripture? Yes, this important truth comes to you from the same people that brought you the above.


Romans 2:24 (NIV) As it is written: "God's name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you."

[b]Conclusion[/b]

2 Corinthians 5:20 (KJV) Now then we are ambassadors for Christ...

1 Thessalonians 2:4 (NKJ) But as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, even so we speak...

1 Corinthians 4:1-2 (NIV) So then, men ought to regard us as servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the secret things of God. Now it is required that those who have been given a trust must prove faithful.

1 Timothy 6:20-21 (Wey) Guard the truths entrusted to you, shunning irreligious and frivolous talk, and controversy with what is falsely called 'knowledge'; of which some have spoken boastfully in connection with the true faith, and have erred.

Lamentations 3:40 (NIV) Let us examine our ways and test them, and let us return to the Lord.

[url=http://www.acts17-11.com/index.html]Acts 7:11[/url]

S
sermonindex

Are we to believe that a few "visionaries" who are a little soft in the head about the benefits of a "one world government" are really winning the day?

I think I prefer His Word alone, over this couple's thoughts. I'm sure no one would mind.

1Co 4:6 [i]And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us [b]not to think of men above 'that which is written'[/b], that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.[/i]

C
crsschk

[b]Can You Be Deceived?[/b]
[i]Why People Are Duped and How Not to Be[/i]

by G. Richard Fisher


“‘Will you walk into my parlor?’ said a spider to a fly; ‘Tis the prettiest little parlor that you ever did spy’” (Mary Howitt).

The inspired Apostle Paul warned us: “Let no one deceive you” (2 Thessalonians 2:3). It is apparent that we are vulnerable to deception and we must not forget it. We must be on guard and protect ourselves against it. There is deception everywhere in the religious world. We [i]must[/i] be alert.

Deception can only deceive if it looks somewhat like the real thing. Apologist Craig Hawkins explains:

“We must realize that the way to deceive people with counterfeits is to imitate the genuine article as closely as possible. For example, if counterfeiters want to pass off fake one-hundred-dollar bills, they do not print Donald Duck’s picture on purple paper. Instead they attempt to duplicate a true bill. Similarly, despicable persons who try to deceive others attempt to appear genuine and sincere. They do not walk up to you and inform you that they are there to deceive and defraud you. The far more effective method is faking friendship and fidelity.”1

Goethe taught that we are never deceived but that we deceive ourselves. It is true that religious hucksters are believed because people want to believe them. People want the claims to be true. One of Martin Luther’s favorite sayings was [i]“mundus vult decipi”[/i] — the world wants to be deceived.

Once a person has invested blood, sweat, tears and [i]money[/i] into religious deception, he may be too embarrassed or too stubborn to admit he has been taken. Our hearts are where our treasure has gone. Our vested interest helps us keep the blinders on. We often only “see” what we want to see. The Bible presents a complex picture in regard to deception and assures us that God holds both the deceiver and the deceived accountable.

In the first chapter of the book of Zephaniah, the Lord charges and convicts both the people and the corrupt leaders they followed. Lamentations 2:14 indicates the same:

“Your prophets have seen for you false and deceptive visions; They have not uncovered your iniquity, to bring back your captives, but have envisioned for you false prophecies and delusions.”

It seems that for many complex reasons, one of which is the spurious idea of ongoing revelation (along with a diminished view of the sufficiency of the Bible), many people are predisposed to credulity. That is, they are gullible and likely ready to believe anything even on very slight evidence or sometimes with no evidence at all. Testimonials and dramatic stories sell.

The Bible does not go into a lot of intricate detail as to the psychology of deception; it does not have to. What it does is give us warning about its reality and specific instruction on how to deal with it.

The words deceit, deceitful, deceitfully, deceitfulness, deceive, and deceivability are used again and again in the Bible. It is one of the major themes. There are warnings everywhere in Scripture about being deceived. There are numerous warnings about the users and purveyors of deceit. The underlying Greek words for deceit cover everything from self-deceit to the practice of deceit by unprincipled religious teachers and con artists. So we are warned repeatedly and must be ready (2 Corinthians 11:3-4, 13-14).

Deceit is defined as:

“1. The act of representing as true what is known to be false; a deceiving or lying. 2. a dishonest action or trick; fraud or lie. 3. the quality of being deceitful.”2

British scholar W.E. Vine defines the Greek words [i]apate[/i] and [i]dolos[/i] that underlie the various English words for deceit:

“APATE ... to cheat, deceive, beguile, that which gives a false impression, whether by appearance, statement or influence ... In Col. 2:8, ‘vain deceit’ suggests that deceit is void of anything profitable. ... DOLOS ... primarily a bait, snare; hence, craft, deceit, guile.”3

UNHOLY WATER

Fiction writer Robert Rosenberg captures the concept of deceit in his first mystery novel, [i]Crimes of the City[/i]. Detective Avram Cohen is the lead character and is investigating the murder of two nuns in Ein Kerem, west of Jerusalem. A Messianic rabbi, Ovadia, who is using his religious influence to cover drug running, is described by Cohen:

“The only real difference seems to be that he figured out that if he calls it religion, he can get away with things. He’s playing the saint, selling blessed water from a faucet.”4

So, deceitful men get away with things under the guise of religion and playing the saint while they sell worthless panaceas. Years ago we would call them “snake oil salesmen.”

To help us in our study, first we need to see...

THE REALITY OF DECEPTION

Y2K scams proliferated and people were being bilked out of money through the selling of fear and paranoia. Internet myths are being circulated and are growing like fungus. One can be “ordained” over the Internet for no charge in 20 seconds. And, for what it is worth, there is an assortment of “degrees” that you can purchase. The myth that U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno promoted (on the news program [i]60 Minutes[/i]) a definition of “cult” that included evangelical believers was actually believed and proliferated even though it has been debunked. For the last 25-plus years, PFO has and continues to get pleas in regard to the bogus Madalyn Murray O’Hair/FCC petition. Other FCC stories continue to mutate and circulate.

The vanishing hitchhiker is still showing up regularly in evangelists’ stories. And then there’s the missing day, hell found and tape recorded in a Siberia cavern and, let’s not forget, Procter and Gamble’s sellout to Satan. All of these reports are still making the rounds. Rumors are fascinating and they do sell. There are so many myths and urban legends that retired English professor Jan Harold Brunvand has put together, [i]The Colossal Book of Urban Legends[/i] with the main title being, “Too Good To Be True.” Myth-debunking has spawned a whole industry for that genre of books.

The title of a new study of urban legends by Brunvand (and published by the University of Illinois Press) really underscores the susceptibility to hearsay: “The Truth Never Stands in the Way of a Good Story!”

Charismatics in Toronto (and elsewhere) are passing off as gold what has tested out to be cheap glitter. Also there has been the planting of feathers that are claimed to be the work of angels. Hokey pictures — and just plain bad photography — with fire superimposed on crowds of people is supposed to prove the new “baptism of fire.”

Even heartwarming stories from seemingly sincere men can be used to deceive. Paul warned us: “But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13).

IT’S IN THE BOOK — A LOT

Remember that Satan duped Adam and Eve in the garden (Genesis 3). The Israelites followed the impostor Korah to their own destruction (Numbers 16). Saul was drawn in and deceived by the witch of Endor (1 Samuel 28). Jeremiah warned of false and wicked “shepherds” who would deceive and destroy the sheep (Jeremiah 23). We can be easily seduced if we do not hold on to and really know God’s Word.

Kathryn Lindskoog has astutely commented that “Some Protestants love any heartwarming stories that seem to authenticate the Bible, whether they are true or not.”5 There is no end of undocumented stories and claims by modern pied pipers.

There are so many Christian myths and urban legends accepted as fact in the Church that it is embarrassing. In some instances they are harmless, in other instances they are costly and even deadly. However, the world looks at the gullibility and silliness of some professing Christians and mocks. We lose the battle because of the effects of our being deceived and looking ridiculous.

The Old Testament constantly exposes the cons. We are shown the magicians in Moses’ day who could fake the miracles of Moses (up to a point, Exodus 8 and 2 Timothy 3). Jacob’s tricking and scheming are laid out. Laban is exposed. In Isaiah 30:10 the people cried: “prophesy illusions.”

The book of Proverbs warns again and again about deceit, false balances, being taken in by deception whether in the moral realm, or the everyday realm of life and practical living. The Bible repeatedly insists on truth, calls us to truth, demands truth.

Jesus in Matthew 7:15 warns of false prophets and Paul in Acts 20:29-30 warns about “grievous wolves” who will not spare the flock.

WHOPPERS DELUXE

The deceivers are getting more shameless all the time. Inner-City Christian Discernment Ministry reports on Rod Parsley’s “Whopper.” Parsley sent his constituents a letter dated April 2, 1999, in which he claimed to heal a man of full-blown AIDS. No name, address or documentation was given. It was just a tall tale.

Joan Gieson, who served for many years at Benny Hinn Miracle Crusades doing stage introductions of the “healed,” reported at one of Hinn’s meetings that the woman on stage had been thrown out of a automobile, hit by three cars, run over by a tractor trailer, was taken to the morgue, marked DOA with a tag put on her big toe. The lady stood there looking like she was in a drug stupor. No documentation, proof or medical records were offered — just wild claims.

Marilyn Hickey is selling anointed red rubber bands to wear on the wrist for seven days for only $10.00. In the past she has offered blessed pennies, miracle carrot seeds and magical healing cloths. It is a travesty.

Former “signs and wonders” leg lengthener, C. Peter Wagner, reports stories that in Argentina people lose large amounts of weight in the meetings and that bald men grow hair. Again no proof, no documentation, no witnesses, no specimens. We are told if we do prayer walks, demons will flee out of their geographical strongholds. If this was true the demon busters could have taken back all the ZIP codes from Satan years ago.

[i]Cont.[/i]

C
crsschk

IT JUST IS NOT WORKING!

Inner-City Christian Discernment Ministry has also posted information on just how physically sick modern healers get. These healers also regularly seek medical attention for themselves and their family. It is one of their best-kept secrets although the facts are slowly leaking out.

In ICCDM’s report entitled “It’s Not Working For Them Either!” they chronicle:

• the deaths of John Wimber and his son Chris, both of whom died of cancer;

• E.W. Kenyon died in a coma with a malignant tumor;

• John Osteen sought medical help for his wife Dodie’s cancer;

• Word-Faith publisher Buddy Harrison died of cancer;

• Fred Price got chemotherapy for his wife. He did not name it and claim it.

Further, ICCDM reminds us that Jamie Buckingham died of cancer and Charles Capps’ wife got medical treatment for her cancer, as did Joyce Meyer. Mack Timberlake is getting medical attention for throat cancer and healer R.W. Shambach, who regularly tells his gullible followers, “You don’t have any problems, all you need is faith in God,” has had a quadruple bypass. Add to that, Prophet Keith Grayton who died of AIDS complications, Kenneth Hagin’s sister who died of cancer, Hagin’s wife who was operated on and Hagin himself who wears glasses and you begin to see the hypocrisy.

The list goes on and on. Kathryn Kuhlman died of heart disease. A.A. Allen died from alcohol abuse and Aimee Semple McPherson died from an overdose of barbiturates. John Lake died of a stroke and Gordon Lindsey of a heart condition. Daisy Osborn died of cancer that she claimed was healed. How does one explain this since all the above claim healing powers and special visitations from God? Self-deluded? Or just deluding others?

What about the other “miracle workers”? Robert Tilton dealt with lawsuits, lies and divorces while he collected millions. Peter Popoff was exposed by the secular world as a fraud when it was revealed his “words of knowledge” were received through an electronic earpiece. Leroy Jenkins was convicted for tax fraud. Jimmy Swaggert is a serial adulterer and multimillionaire. W.V. Grant was jailed for tax fraud and has divorced his wife. The world of televangelists is a sick, dysfunctional and sinful world.

These people claim that they have seen Jesus, seen angels, have extraordinary powers, are the anointed of God and the recipients of direct revelation. Charisma magazine touts them as Christian leaders, apostles and miracle workers and tries to give them credibility through smoke and mirrors using fantastic stories, unproven claims and slick advertisements. It is such a sham. Based on the above it should not be hard for the reader to decide what is really going on.

REAL JEWELS

Kathryn Kuhlman gave false hope, which is worse than no hope at all. Quadriplegic Joni Eareckson Tada recounts her experiences:

“And so, when I was released from the hospital, my friends would drive me to Washington, D.C., so I could be first in line at the door whenever the famous faith-healer, Kathryn Kuhlman, came to town. Miss Kuhlman breezed onto the stage in her white gown, and my heart raced as I prayed, [i]Lord, the Bible says you heal all our diseases. I’m ready for you to get me out of this wheelchair. Please would you?”[/i]6

Tada goes on:

“God answered: I never walked away from my chair. The last time I wheeled away from a Kathryn Kuhlman crusade, I was number fifteen in a line of thirty wheelchair-users waiting to exit at the stadium elevator, all of us trying to make a fast escape ahead of the people on crutches. I remember glancing around at all the disappointed and confused people and thinking, [i]Something’s wrong with this picture. Is this the only way to deal with suffering? Trying to desperately remove it?”[/i]7

Wheelchairs in a meeting are incredible props and powerful symbolic tools even if nothing happens. They create great effect for healers. W.V. Grant used to truck them in for effect. In Canada, architects have hung them on the pillars at St. Anne’s Church in perfect symmetry.

When the chips are down, the “biggest” names don’t come through — Oral Roberts prayed for Kathryn Kuhlman in the hospital twice. She was resuscitated by hospital staff twice but the enlarged heart she carried for more than 20 years finally gave out. Kuhlman pulled in an income of $1 million a year and died with a vault full of jewels.8 Joni Eareckson Tada will get her jewels in heaven.

Tada shares the sad aftermath of the healing crusades:

“I wonder how many of those sullen-faced folks at the elevator after the healing crusade still believe in God? That was almost thirty years ago. Are they still waiting in line? Still hoping? ‘Hope deferred makes the heart sick,’ and a heart can break only so many times.”9

Faith healer Benny Hinn, who claims to receive “anointings” at the grave sites of Kuhlman and McPherson, has fostered deceptions that are crass and blatant but very well-documented. His claims of surviving a plane crash unscathed do not match up with the law enforcement report which details the accident. The heroin-overdose deaths within his own organization show his impotence. His constant threats of lawsuits and cursing of detractors’ children show his spiritual bankruptcy. His claims of raising the dead have all been shown to be lies.

The banter can even turn rude, crude, vile and vulgar. Take the comments of Hinn’s wife, Suzanne, who is now “ministering” with her husband: “You need a Holy Ghost enema,” she told her former Orlando congregation. The rest we will leave out. Shortly after that she charged back and forth across the stage hollering into the microphone and did a big belly flop on stage to the howling delight of her audience.

Clips of the above were run on Comedy Central’s [i]The Daily Show[/i] for all the world to see and ridicule.10 It has provided Hinn with another black monetary hole of legal expenses in his empty threats of lawsuits against the network and [i]The Daily Show[/i] producers. It gives every Christian a bad name.

According to 1 Timothy 3:4-5, an elder is to rule his house well. If he cannot rule his house, he cannot rule the Church. At the very least Hinn could have his wife apologize, clean up her act and stop belly-flopping on stage.

How the shocking banter of Mrs. Hinn must grieve the Holy Spirit. Her husband at times has threatened those who disagree with him with suggestions that they are blaspheming the Holy Spirit. He even once called for a “Holy Ghost machine gun” to blow off the heads of his detractors. However, the suggestions of his wife may be very near blaspheming or at least seriously degrading and mocking the Holy Spirit. Yet there has not been an outcry from Hinn’s following.

Is the Charismatic world getting so jaded that nothing shocks it any more? Hinn has gone from getting an anointing at graveyards to full-blown necromancy (added to his lies and false prophecies) and his crowds only get bigger.11

One of the ways deception is promoted is by the terrible misuse and twisting of Scripture to try to shore up wild claims.

There has been a constant misuse of Jeremiah 31:22, “for the Lord has created a new thing in the earth.” We have been told that each new excess is that “new thing.” Holy laughter was described as the new thing. Various “revivals” and bodily manifestations were touted as the new thing. Some are claiming the new thing is yet to arrive.

CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT

Invariably, cults spawn false doctrine by using proof texts out of context. Extremists were saying that revival was sweeping the land and we could expect to see anything because God was going to do a new thing. But just as Peter warned, they are twisting the Scriptures to say that the new thing is anything they proclaim it to be, no matter how wild or weird.

The “new thing” is foretold in Jeremiah 31:22. In verse 31, the “new thing” is clearly expounded and explained as follows, “Behold the days are coming says the Lord, when I will make a [i]new covenant[/i] with the house of Israel.” So the new thing is [i]the New Covenant[/i].

Charismatic extremism, I believe, is trying to rob us of the new covenant. Keil and Delitzsch work out all the contextual nuances in the Hebrew text of Jeremiah 31 and conclude that the new thing is not some emotional experience, but that “Herein is expressed a new relation of Israel to the Lord, a reference to a new covenant which the Lord, ver. 31ff., will conclude with His people.”12

The so-called “new thing” of frenzies, manifestations, spastic fits, and out-of-control emotions is, in fact, not new at all but a reproduction of bizarre behavior that cropped up in the Church periodically and was soundly condemned when it did. Whether it be the Camisard “prophets” of 1706 or the other outbreaks of the 18th century, strong words were used against the excesses and the Bible upheld as the only source of truth.13

Having seen the reality of deception we need to try to understand secondly, the roots of deception.


[i]Cont.[/i]

C
crsschk

WHYS OF GULLIBILITY

Why are Christians so gullible and so prone to deception? What could possibly be behind it?

First, because the foundation of the Christian life is belief. However, that we can believe the wrong things is made abundantly clear by the Bible. We must know what we believe and why and that we are believing the right things. We cannot just believe anything. Our objects of faith must be God and His Word, not mere men or wild claims. Dr. Bruce Bickel reminds us:

“Too often what passes for unity is really compromise. It is better to be divided by truth than united in error.”14

Second, the Christian is commanded to love. Love tends to be accepting and is willing to overlook. However, love that is not structured in truth is sentimentalism and is so wishy-washy it can be manipulated and led astray.

We cannot confuse love and emotionalism or love and feelings. Love is a commitment to truth and the highest good of others. Love does, as Scripture attests, “cover a multitude of sins.”15 At times, that love means bringing a sinner back from the error of his ways.16 Love will not tolerate false teachings or lies which in the end hurt and destroy others. Biblical love insists on truth and true doctrine. Bickel has the correct take on love:

“Love, true love, cannot be divorced from truth. Scripture is quite clear that love rejoices in the truth! One cannot claim to love when one is not concerned about truth. The truth of Scripture must be the concern of one who truly loves.”17

Third, we have a tendency to want to believe Christian leaders and Hebrews 13:7 indicates that generally we should. However the verse alerts us to be aware of their conduct as well. So it is not a blind following. Is the leadership we are following really modeling Christ and the Bible? Paul said we are to follow him [i]“as he followed Christ.”[/i] As commendable as it is to love and trust our leaders, we still have to be Bereans (Acts 17:11) and test [i]all[/i] messages against Scripture. We do our leaders a great service by being mutually accountable. Leaders are vulnerable without the help and balance of others.

Fourth, we can be brainwashed by religious television and are being told that to question is “heresy hunting” or it is a “religious spirit” or “white cane religion” or a “Jezebel spirit” or worse. We are cowed by being threatened with the possibility of committing the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit even though we are just trying to be discerning. We should not be manipulated by a turning of the tables and a guilt trip laid on us for questioning heresy. We should not be in a church where there is no accountability or church discipline. In that setting, unrepentant sinners and autocrats are “above the law.”

[i]Regrettably, very little stress is being put on the gift of discernment[/i]. All Christians are called to be discerning. We must check things out (1 John 4:1-6). More credibility needs to be given to legitimate countercult organizations (and their struggle and sacrifice) so that “iron can sharpen iron.” Good apologetic groups not only expose error, they keep teaching truth and keep laying a good foundation of doctrine which is so desperately needed today.

Fifth, it is hard for us to believe or imagine that slick magazines such as [i]Charisma[/i] could be peddling deception and that such wonderful ministries (as being advertised) could not be on the up and up. It is hard for us to believe that “Christian” bookstores could be part of the problem. It is hard for us to believe that all the money being made is the reason for the collusion (and the advancement of the wild and weird). It is amazing that books teaching occult doctrine are now being marketed as “Christian classics.”

Sixth, perverted and unbiblical views that forgiveness means we put up with and overlook everything, even ongoing sin and disgrace. The word “repentance” is being milked and used to justify all manner of evil. True repentance will issue out in biblical change (Matthew 3:8, Acts 26:20, 2 Corinthians 7:9-11).

Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5 indicate that continuing sin and false teaching is not to be dealt with by forgiveness (unless there is repentance) but by a process of church discipline with a view to restoration. Love covering a multitude of sin cannot be taken to mean that we dump our blankets in the cesspool rather than try to clean it up.

Seventh, there is an enemy of our souls who goes about like a “roaring lion” (1 Peter 5:8). Satan is a master deceiver and we are called to put on the armor of God and confront his reasonings and errors and bring our thoughts into captivity and in alignment to Christ (2 Corinthians 10:3-5).

Albert Barnes says it so well:

“Every power of thought in the heathen world; all the systems of philosophy, and all forms of opinion among men; all the purposes of the soul; all the powers of reason, memory, judgment, fancy, in an individual, were all to come under the laws of Christ. All [i]doctrines[/i] were to be in accordance with his will; philosophy should no longer control them, but they should be subject to the will of Christ. ... All [i]the emotions and feelings of the heart[/i] should be controlled by him, and led by him as a captive is led by a victor. ... The strongholds of philosophy, heathenism, and sin should be demolished, and all the opinions, plans, and purposes of the world should become subject to the all-conquering Redeemer.”18

Eighth, the Scriptures predict there would be a departure from the faith because of seducing spirits and doctrines of demons and that people would opt for myths and fables over the truth (1 Timothy 4:1-2, 2 Timothy 4:1-4). Jesus warned of deception in Matthew 24:24.

Though this writer does not agree with everything Helmut Thielicke taught, his words at the end of World War II come to mind:

“In our time we have come far too much in contact with demonic powers, we have sensed and seen much too clearly how mysterious and abysmal forces have seduced people and entire movements and steered them [in a direction] they themselves did not desire; we have all too often observed how an alien spirit has taken hold of people who had perhaps been quite nice and reasonable before.”19

Ninth, because we are being conditioned by our culture and television, we have lost the ability to blush. Everything and anything is paraded before us in the media as being permissible for our mental diet. Murder, immorality, shock radio, abuse, perversion — nothing is off-limits. Nothing shocks us or grieves us. Our culture is becoming satiated and dulled and we are affected. Young people are piercing, branding and mutilating their bodies. Some seek even vampirism as an option.

Some in the Charismatic world need still more frenzy, wilder manifestations and altered states of consciousness to satisfy and then they keep going back for more “anointings.” They are spiritually and emotionally jaded. They are hooked not on heroin but on adrenalin. So many are addicted to emotions and emotional highs. Many burn out spiritually in their quest.

Tenth, we have become a culture of hero-worshipers and celebrity-seekers. Evangelical heroes and popular writers and speakers dictate, are given total allegiance and followed like rock stars. Like the Corinthians, we say we are of Paul and Apollos and Cephas (1 Corinthians 3:4). People have been led to believe that only the “biggies” carry the “anointing.” And if you want “it” you’ve got to come to them to receive it. “Fresh,” “Fire,” “New Wine” and every other brand and flavor of anointing are available to the Christian consumer.

Eleventh, we have substituted entertainment and “television religion” for a growing and intense serving relationship in a healthy, well-balanced church. Being in the presence of growing Christians in a doctrinally sound church is a wonderful reality check needed by all. Vibrant fellowship (including worship and Bible study) is an antidote to illusion and deception. We are full of blind spots and need others to help us make up areas in our pockets of deficiency and ignorance. Stray sheep are not only arrogant, they are very vulnerable.

Proverbs 27:17 forcefully reminds us: “As iron sharpens iron, so a man sharpens the countenance of his friend.” To stay sharp, balanced and informed, one must take the words of Hebrews 10:23-25 very seriously and be a vital part of a vital fellowship. People have abandoned the church looking for a supernatural quick fix.

Twelfth, people have become “cliché-bound.” They are gullible and become easily subservient if someone says, “God told me,” or “the Lord said,” or “the Lord spoke to me,” or “the Lord impressed upon me.” After all, who can argue with God? The Church finds itself drowning in a sea of subjectivism away from the safe moorings of the objective Word of God! “I feel” and “I sense” have come to replace, “It is written.”

The power of the cliché is explained by Peter Berger:

“Once a cliché is firmly established in the minds of a particular group of people, it attains the quality of taken-for-granted truth and is very difficult to dislodge even by clear empirical counter-evidence. Human beings do not like to be confronted with what the psychologists call cognitive dissonance (‘I have made up my mind; don’t confuse me with the facts’). What is more, thinking in general and rethinking in particular are fairly painful processes, and most people prefer to avoid this pain. The plausibility of a cliché does not depend on the amount or the quality of the evidence for it, but on the way it meets the social and psychic needs of a particular situation.”20

[i]Cont.[/i]

S
sermonindex

Greetings Mike,

I am trying to work out if you're posting these articles and chapters because you agree with them as they are, or, you are hoping to open up discussion on their content.

Several things strike me about the use of language and humour - as if raising a smile constitutes evidence on the part of the author; the assumptions that the authors' scepticism qualifies as 'evidence'; or that the fleeting references to biblical 'conspiracy' in the VanDruff offering, covers the extent to which the Bible does actually refer to conspiracies (agreements between two or more people).

Then, there is this - which doesn't [i]seem[/i] to have any biblical support at all:

Inner-City Christian Discernment Ministry reports on Rod Parsley’s “Whopper.” Parsley sent his constituents a letter dated April 2, 1999, in which he claimed to heal a man of full-blown AIDS. No name, address or documentation was given. It was just a tall tale.
I have racked my brain for one name of someone Jesus healed apart from Legion, who technically was delivered in the first instance. Who else can you name?

I have always thought this was a kindness of scripture, to protect the identities of those who were so intimately exposed by the narrative.

Am I really expected to doubt this healing - not knowing anything else about Rod Parsley - on the strength that his witholding of the name of the previously sick person, unequivocally determines that no-one was healed? The author can then claim Rod Parsley lied?

I have even more difficulty with his logic, having heard Norman Meeten testify about a couple in a certain place, who were [i]both[/i] healed of AIDS. Now, I think he did name them, and the place they were at, but, is the doubt expressed regarding Rod Parsley's claim more about the possibility of the healing of AIDS, or, about the lack of a secular standard of 'evidence'?

I thought this was a rather telling comment:

Our hearts are where our treasure has gone.
It certainly undermines the author's credibility.

The Bible does not go into a lot of intricate detail as to the psychology of deception
I simply do not agree. This is a [i]wildly[/i] inaccurate statement, requiring a much closer look at the attributes of the [u]many[/u] conspiracies which [i]are[/i] described in scripture. Don't you think?

C
crsschk

Hello brother,

Will do my best here ...

I am trying to work out if you're posting these articles and chapters because you agree with them as they are, or, you are hoping to open up discussion on their content.

Discussion is always open and encouraged - I would not agree with every nuance of some of these articles and excerpts but just allow them to speak on their own - It's a painting of sorts as I mentioned earlier - Using broads strokes in a general fashion. It's all hinged and centered on one word, the theme if you will. The next installment will expand on it some more.

I have racked my brain for one name of someone Jesus healed apart from Legion, who technically was delivered in the first instance. Who else can you name?

I have always thought this was a kindness of scripture, to protect the identities of those who were so intimately exposed by the narrative.

Am I really expected to doubt this healing - not knowing anything else about Rod Parsley - on the strength that his witholding of the name of the previously sick person, unequivocally determines that no-one was healed? The author can then claim Rod Parsley lied?

Not really sure if that was with an intentionality, to withhold names as you mentioned - Jairus daughter comes to mind, though her name is not given specifically, those who knew him would know her name, just as others that were healed would know by acquaintance, community, etc.

There is also;

[i]And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.[/i]
1Co 15:4-6

Paul's inference is certainly one where could go and speak to those who were still alive - Question them, 'investigate' if you will.

Here is a bit more on the "Whopper" story;

[url=http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/newpage17.htm]Rod Parsley's "Whopper"[/url]

[i]The Bible does not go into a lot of intricate detail as to the psychology of deception[/i]

I simply do not agree. This is a wildly inaccurate statement, requiring a much closer look at the attributes of the many conspiracies which are described in scripture. Don't you think?

"Intricate detail" - I do not find it wildly inaccurate. Taken it's context [i]the psychology of deception[/i] is not gone into in great length in scripture. But I think this is really parsing words at the expense of the greater issue at hand.


S
sermonindex

Greetings Mike,

Your reply is appreciated, and the link to the Rod Parsley reference.

I shall wait for the next instalment for further illumination on that 'one word', before expanding on the thought that 'instricate detail' is somewhat of a straw man which saves the author examining even the best-documented deceptions (in the Bible) with honest academic application.

C
crsschk

WHYS OF GULLIBILITY

Why are Christians so gullible and so prone to deception? What could possibly be behind it?

First, because the foundation of the Christian life is belief. However, that we can believe the wrong things is made abundantly clear by the Bible. We must know what we believe and why and that we are believing the right things. We cannot just believe anything. Our objects of faith must be God and His Word, not mere men or wild claims. Dr. Bruce Bickel reminds us:

“Too often what passes for unity is really compromise. It is better to be divided by truth than united in error.”14

Second, the Christian is commanded to love. Love tends to be accepting and is willing to overlook. However, love that is not structured in truth is sentimentalism and is so wishy-washy it can be manipulated and led astray.

We cannot confuse love and emotionalism or love and feelings. Love is a commitment to truth and the highest good of others. Love does, as Scripture attests, “cover a multitude of sins.”15 At times, that love means bringing a sinner back from the error of his ways.16 Love will not tolerate false teachings or lies which in the end hurt and destroy others. Biblical love insists on truth and true doctrine. Bickel has the correct take on love:

“Love, true love, cannot be divorced from truth. Scripture is quite clear that love rejoices in the truth! One cannot claim to love when one is not concerned about truth. The truth of Scripture must be the concern of one who truly loves.”17

Third, we have a tendency to want to believe Christian leaders and Hebrews 13:7 indicates that generally we should. However the verse alerts us to be aware of their conduct as well. So it is not a blind following. Is the leadership we are following really modeling Christ and the Bible? Paul said we are to follow him [i]“as he followed Christ.”[/i] As commendable as it is to love and trust our leaders, we still have to be Bereans (Acts 17:11) and test [i]all[/i] messages against Scripture. We do our leaders a great service by being mutually accountable. Leaders are vulnerable without the help and balance of others.

Fourth, we can be brainwashed by religious television and are being told that to question is “heresy hunting” or it is a “religious spirit” or “white cane religion” or a “Jezebel spirit” or worse. We are cowed by being threatened with the possibility of committing the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit even though we are just trying to be discerning. We should not be manipulated by a turning of the tables and a guilt trip laid on us for questioning heresy. We should not be in a church where there is no accountability or church discipline. In that setting, unrepentant sinners and autocrats are “above the law.”

[i]Regrettably, very little stress is being put on the gift of discernment.[/i] All Christians are called to be discerning. We must check things out (1 John 4:1-6). More credibility needs to be given to legitimate countercult organizations (and their struggle and sacrifice) so that “iron can sharpen iron.” Good apologetic groups not only expose error, they keep teaching truth and keep laying a good foundation of doctrine which is so desperately needed today.

Fifth, it is hard for us to believe or imagine that slick magazines such as [i]Charisma[/i] could be peddling deception and that such wonderful ministries (as being advertised) could not be on the up and up. It is hard for us to believe that “Christian” bookstores could be part of the problem. It is hard for us to believe that all the money being made is the reason for the collusion (and the advancement of the wild and weird). It is amazing that books teaching occult doctrine are now being marketed as “Christian classics.”

Sixth, perverted and unbiblical views that forgiveness means we put up with and overlook everything, even ongoing sin and disgrace. The word “repentance” is being milked and used to justify all manner of evil. True repentance will issue out in biblical change (Matthew 3:8, Acts 26:20, 2 Corinthians 7:9-11).

Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5 indicate that continuing sin and false teaching is not to be dealt with by forgiveness (unless there is repentance) but by a process of church discipline with a view to restoration. Love covering a multitude of sin cannot be taken to mean that we dump our blankets in the cesspool rather than try to clean it up.

Seventh, there is an enemy of our souls who goes about like a “roaring lion” (1 Peter 5:8). Satan is a master deceiver and we are called to put on the armor of God and confront his reasonings and errors and bring our thoughts into captivity and in alignment to Christ (2 Corinthians 10:3-5).

Albert Barnes says it so well:

“Every power of thought in the heathen world; all the systems of philosophy, and all forms of opinion among men; all the purposes of the soul; all the powers of reason, memory, judgment, fancy, in an individual, were all to come under the laws of Christ. All [i]doctrines[/i] were to be in accordance with his will; philosophy should no longer control them, but they should be subject to the will of Christ. ... All [i]the emotions and feelings of the heart[/i] should be controlled by him, and led by him as a captive is led by a victor. ... The strongholds of philosophy, heathenism, and sin should be demolished, and all the opinions, plans, and purposes of the world should become subject to the all-conquering Redeemer.”18

Eighth, the Scriptures predict there would be a departure from the faith because of seducing spirits and doctrines of demons and that people would opt for myths and fables over the truth (1 Timothy 4:1-2, 2 Timothy 4:1-4). Jesus warned of deception in Matthew 24:24.

Though this writer does not agree with everything Helmut Thielicke taught, his words at the end of World War II come to mind:

“In our time we have come far too much in contact with demonic powers, we have sensed and seen much too clearly how mysterious and abysmal forces have seduced people and entire movements and steered them [in a direction] they themselves did not desire; we have all too often observed how an alien spirit has taken hold of people who had perhaps been quite nice and reasonable before.”19

Ninth, because we are being conditioned by our culture and television, we have lost the ability to blush. Everything and anything is paraded before us in the media as being permissible for our mental diet. Murder, immorality, shock radio, abuse, perversion — nothing is off-limits. Nothing shocks us or grieves us. Our culture is becoming satiated and dulled and we are affected. Young people are piercing, branding and mutilating their bodies. Some seek even vampirism as an option.

Some in the Charismatic world need still more frenzy, wilder manifestations and altered states of consciousness to satisfy and then they keep going back for more “anointings.” They are spiritually and emotionally jaded. They are hooked not on heroin but on adrenalin. So many are addicted to emotions and emotional highs. Many burn out spiritually in their quest.

Tenth, we have become a culture of hero-worshipers and celebrity-seekers. Evangelical heroes and popular writers and speakers dictate, are given total allegiance and followed like rock stars. Like the Corinthians, we say we are of Paul and Apollos and Cephas (1 Corinthians 3:4). People have been led to believe that only the “biggies” carry the “anointing.” And if you want “it” you’ve got to come to them to receive it. “Fresh,” “Fire,” “New Wine” and every other brand and flavor of anointing are available to the Christian consumer.

Eleventh, we have substituted entertainment and “television religion” for a growing and intense serving relationship in a healthy, well-balanced church. Being in the presence of growing Christians in a doctrinally sound church is a wonderful reality check needed by all. Vibrant fellowship (including worship and Bible study) is an antidote to illusion and deception. We are full of blind spots and need others to help us make up areas in our pockets of deficiency and ignorance. Stray sheep are not only arrogant, they are very vulnerable.

Proverbs 27:17 forcefully reminds us: “As iron sharpens iron, so a man sharpens the countenance of his friend.” To stay sharp, balanced and informed, one must take the words of Hebrews 10:23-25 very seriously and be a vital part of a vital fellowship. People have abandoned the church looking for a supernatural quick fix.

Twelfth, people have become “cliché-bound.” They are gullible and become easily subservient if someone says, “God told me,” or “the Lord said,” or “the Lord spoke to me,” or “the Lord impressed upon me.” After all, who can argue with God? The Church finds itself drowning in a sea of subjectivism away from the safe moorings of the objective Word of God! “I feel” and “I sense” have come to replace, “It is written.”

The power of the cliché is explained by Peter Berger:

“Once a cliché is firmly established in the minds of a particular group of people, it attains the quality of taken-for-granted truth and is very difficult to dislodge even by clear empirical counter-evidence. Human beings do not like to be confronted with what the psychologists call cognitive dissonance (‘I have made up my mind; don’t confuse me with the facts’). What is more, thinking in general and rethinking in particular are fairly painful processes, and most people prefer to avoid this pain. The plausibility of a cliché does not depend on the amount or the quality of the evidence for it, but on the way it meets the social and psychic needs of a particular situation.”20

*

[url=http://www.pfo.org/deceived.htm]Can You Be Deceived?[/url]

*Note - This article continues at the link above with "WORTHY IS THE LAMB" - While I had originaly intended to use excerpts had forgotten their own wishes noted at the bottom of the article.

C
crsschk

Your reply is appreciated, and the link to the Rod Parsley reference.

Was in a bit of a rush yesterday and grabbed that reference somewhat on the fly - I do not know that this is the greatest example, just one that you happened to remark on. It also needs to be repeated that often the 'discernment ministries' need discernment ...

A better (read 'worse') example would be [url=http://www.bible.ca/tongues-popoff-39-17Mhz.htm]The Investigation Of Peter Popoff[/url] who was exposed in the greatest of fashion and today is once again twisting his way about - [url=http://www.peterpopoff.org/]Peter Popoff[/url]

Most of the excerpts and articles here are dated - Though many of them also are carrying on presently along with the deceptions and proving the point of Christian gullibility. Popoff manages to alternately make my skin crawl and ...

Not shortly after he was exposed, probably a year or two after things cooled down I was taken back around Christmas time to stumble across him on 'Christian' television - He had his then teenage boy's dressed up nicely, seated on a couch while he hovered behind them, giving them each opportunity to express their ... thoughts on the occasion - [i]"Jesus is the reason for the season"[/i] said one with the greatest lack of sincerity I have ever seen, the others forced out some rehearsed comment as if they were being held hostage, reading a script. It was the most pathetic display I have ever seen- The smirks and disregard ... A very long time ago but it has stayed with me all these years.

But this is again only an example, I wanted to present all this in a wide variety of form, not only as a particular set of personalities.


[i]For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.[/i] Rom 2:24

S
sermonindex

Hello Mike,

I read to the end of the last link, but there were some comments on the Whopper claim, which I decided not to pursue.

M Scott Peck has an interesting analysis in Further Along the Road Less Travelled, of the kind of person who persists in what is basically criminal activity. I don't have the book to hand any more, but he described uncannily accurately the key attributes of character of a dodgy person with whom I had far too much to do in the past.

I notice you seem to be tackling more than one issue through these articles. For instance, whether a person's ministry is ordained by God is one thing which can be checked to some degree by measuring the testimony of their life both in and out of the spotlight, against scripture.

For instance, Peter's choice of 'filthy' to describe 'lucre', (1 Peter 5:2), echoed by Paul to Timothy and Titus twice each, for instance, is a clear line in the sand. I think this is one of your points. And,

Christian gullibility
may be a natural consequence of a nominal belief system, lacking in the knowledge of God Himself through personal interaction with Him. Of course, this lack of personal knowledge may be a consequence of receiving His regularly being misrepresented on TV in the US. Even if not Bible knowledge, the indwelling Holy Spirit normally flags up to one's understanding, that all is not well with a person's heart, because of what one hears out of their mouth.

But on the matter of whether certain organisations exist, there was not much evidence that they [i]don't[/i] in the articles you've posted. Perhaps you should consider that some people come out of 'them' into the knowledge of Christ? Therefore, it may not be helpful (or fair), to question or to prevent (or disapprove of) such testimony being given - although it may be in very short supply(!) 1 Thess 1:9.

The case of the Ephesians is a good example of this, where they had been baptised in water in the name of Jesus, baptised in the Spirit and spoken in tongues after a false start with the baptism of John, [i][b]before[/b][/i] they were prompted by disturbing local events, to bring out the proof of their past occult activities, and burn them all together in testimony to the greater power of Jesus Christ. Some years had elapsed before Paul told them in Eph 5:12; Acts 19:18. The need for confession is not spoken against.

Again, I believe the Spirit of Truth either does or [i]cannot[/i] witness to what another 'Christian' claims as their experience of God. Nevertheless, let not genuine spiritual discernment be confused with uninformed cynicism towards uncomfortable truth, or undue skepticism towards the intricately detailed workings of God in a life.

C
crsschk

Hello brother,

I notice you seem to be tackling more than one issue through these articles. For instance, whether a person's ministry is ordained by God is one thing which can be checked to some degree by measuring the testimony of their life both in and out of the spotlight, against scripture.

I am, in the sense of the variety of things that can be taken as [i]Ipso facto[/i] without check, test ... common sense, that attribute that is seemingly uncommon anymore. I don't know that the measure is to start with whether or not something is ordained of God - This too often proves to be the counter argument of "[i]But[/i], look at all the [u]good[/u] they are doing." The inference being that it therefore [i]must[/i] be ordained of God. It really doesn't factor into the thought process, at least from the approach I would take to it.

Evidence is a very strong, key word in all these things. [i]Prove it[/i]. A great deal more could be said on this alone.

[i]Christian gullibility[/i]

may be a natural consequence of a nominal belief system, lacking in the knowledge of God Himself through personal interaction with Him. Of course, this lack of personal knowledge may be a consequence of receiving His regularly being misrepresented on TV in the US. Even if not Bible knowledge, the indwelling Holy Spirit normally flags up to one's understanding, that all is not well with a person's heart, because of what one hears out of their mouth.

Without a doubt. I am my own example in this having come out from under a very mixed up ... beginning if you will. More than a few of the long timers here have a testimony of being duped - In my case it was a somewhat suppressed quagmire of the 'prosperity', 'name-it-claim-it' nonsense due to my wife's having been caught up in it when we first met and my long road of finally coming to an understanding of the truth. The church we attended was of the same and promoted the associated Benny Hinn's, Creeflo's Hickey's etc. We followed Benny around to his members only meetings (where more of the discomfort really began to manifest itself) and it wasn't until some other voices began to challenge much of this that the suppression gave way. A greater deal of these things has been written in these pages.

But that is not always the case, from a couple pages back;


[i]Festinger relates: "But whatever explanation is made it is still by itself not sufficient. The dissonance is too important and though they may try to hide it, even from themselves, the believers still know that the prediction was false and all their preparations were in vain. The dissonance cannot be eliminated completely by denying or rationalizing the disconfirmation. But there is a way in which the remaining dissonance can be reduced. If more and more people can be persuaded that the system of belief is correct, then clearly it must, after all, be correct. Consider the extreme case: if everyone in the whole world believed something there would be no question at all as to the validity of this belief. It is for this reason that we observe the increase in proselytizing following disconfirmation. If the proselytizing proves successful, then by gathering more adherents and effectively surrounding himself with supporters, the believer reduces dissonance to the point where he can live with it." 4[/i]

How true is this when previously exposed 'ministries' can lay dormant until the heat dissipates and return as if nothing has transpired, the many examples given here. The 'prophetic' mumbo-jumbo that has taken on it's own life form in recent years - catering to an never ending thirst for a fix from the likes of this crowd in their almost daily dispatches. As was mentioned elsewhere, who has the time and wherewithal to chase these things down and challenge\\disprove-test them all? It would not be difficult in one sense, short of the time it would take, to go back to last year's utterances of one of these and ask, did these things come to pass? Is there any evidence whatsoever? But it is also that clever conundrum of lacking specifics in the first place that makes it all too easy to be lost in argument since they are so generally vague to begin with.

But on the matter of whether certain organisations exist, there was not much evidence that they [i]don't[/i] in the articles you've posted. Perhaps you should consider that some people come out of 'them' into the knowledge of Christ? Therefore, it may not be helpful (or fair), to question or to prevent (or disapprove of) such testimony being given - although it may be in very short supply(!)

Think you threw me there in the first part of this, unless you were just emphasizing the obvious - But, yes the consideration to come out of 'them' [i]is[/i] very much a thrust as was alluded to already. But it is helpful I believe -It was the 'louder' more forceful, in the right sense, that got my attention - A John MacArthur -Even [i]The Bible Answer Man[/i] (Who I might now have some misgivings with) who appealed to the scriptures more than just a sort of whitewashing of 'personalities', even if they were made spectacle by doing so.

I think too often the emphasis gets unfairly shifted or latched unto. That is often a problem with the so called 'discernment ministries'- Even some of the things, the approaches in some of these articles, for instance the Rod Parsely link is more often dealing with the surface rather than the core. The core is what I was after here in the variety.

There is food for my own kitchen in all of this. I realize how susceptible I can still be to running imagination forward as fact, even in seemingly inconsequential matters. I think if were we honest with ourselves these notions are often bounding about in the grey matter. A few scant pieces and we are all ready to be Sherlock Holmes in our minds, 'knowing' what our spouse or friends are up to - What tomorrow will bring - And without any checks and balances our wires get crossed spiritually and then it's [i]The Lord ______[/i], is 'doing, saying', "speaking". It's "[i]This season[/i]" or "That [i]season[/i]". Add in a healthy dose of the news, (taken without test), and we are ready to pontificate on any matter that is before us [i]and[/i] pronounce the end results.

Again, I believe the Spirit of Truth either does or cannot witness to what another 'Christian' claims as their experience of God. Nevertheless, let not genuine spiritual discernment be confused with uninformed cynicism towards uncomfortable truth, or undue skepticism towards the intricately detailed workings of God in a life.

Without a doubt. I realize the difficulty that can be introduced with putting doubts in the mind. There is a right and good doubting, a healthy suspicion that should cause that very Berean-like nobility to [i]test[/i] all things - I really think this has been given to much of a short shift and feel compelled to elaborate much more on it ... But what one 'knows' in their bowels should never be feared to be put to the test - In fact isn't it really the heart of the matter, a willingness to hold true truth, to coin a phrase?

My premise on the gullibility factor is on the one hand naturally, [i]do not be deceived[/i] but it is the purveyors, the 'teachers' who I have the greatest issue with. When people are earnestly seeking for truth, for honesty, for tangible reality they are as a matter of course opening themselves up to a certain vulnerability - That this is taken advantage of, manipulated, coerced and abused ...

Rambling.


S
sermonindex

Hello again, Mike,

Since you haven't posted another article yet, I thought I would clarify to you in response to

Think you threw me there in the first part of this, unless you were just emphasizing the obvious - But, yes the consideration to come out of 'them' is very much a thrust as was alluded to already.
Using your 'broad brushstrokes' picture, I was drawing a distinction between organisations which operate in darkness or shade invisibly to the 'church' and the world - generally described as occult, because they foster Satan's cause - on the existence of which some of the articles seem to cast doubt ('them'), and, false teachers and hirelings who are in the public eye of the world within the 'church' (putting them in the same category with each other). (Perhaps you might comment differently now this is clear.) Jesus said 'Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues'

[url=http://media.tscnyc.org/wmv/2071028S1.asx]Beware of the Angry Watchmen [/url]by Carter Conlon comes to mind. We so much want everything to be alright, without any personal upheaval. Yet it seems God knows that we are gullible until the fire touches [u]us[/u] and then we jump to our feet and start taking stock and run out the house in which we were formerly comfortable.

My premise on the gullibility factor is on the one hand naturally, do not be deceived but it is the purveyors, the 'teachers' who I have the greatest issue with. When people are earnestly seeking for truth, for honesty, for tangible reality they are as a matter of course opening themselves up to a certain vulnerability - That this is taken advantage of, manipulated, coerced and abused ...
9 Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the LORD Ezekiel 34:10. It takes a long time to get over this, and to regain one's trust in eldership, no matter how kind, how biblical, or how mature.

I really think this has been given to much of a short shift and feel compelled to elaborate much more on it ... But what one 'knows' in their bowels should never be feared to be put to the test - In fact isn't it really the heart of the matter, a willingness to hold true truth, to coin a phrase?
... [i]knowing[/i] that 'truth' is 'true', but [i]information[/i] may not be ('true'). Isn't this where the Spirit of Truth must guide us towards what we may safely believe, and what we may choose to [i]not[/i] 'believe'?

C
crsschk

Hello again brother,

Using your 'broad brushstrokes' picture, I was drawing a distinction between organisations which operate in darkness or shade invisibly to the 'church' and the world - generally described as occult, because they foster Satan's cause - on the existence of which some of the articles seem to cast doubt ('them'), and, false teachers and hirelings who are in the public eye of the world within the 'church' (putting them in the same category with each other). (Perhaps you might comment differently now this is clear.) Jesus said 'Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues'

In one sense ... is there much difference? If the Lord is not the author of confusion, then who is? A lot of blurring the lines in my estimation\\experience. The world, the flesh, the devil as it goes and the flesh especially, our fleshly minds the greatest battlefield. I see your point however and that could be elaborated on certainly.

[url=http://media.tscnyc.org/wmv/2071028S1.asx]Beware of the Angry Watchmen[/url] by Carter Conlon comes to mind. We so much want everything to be alright, without any personal upheaval. Yet it seems God knows that we are gullible until the fire touches us and then we jump to our feet and start taking stock and run out the house in which we were formerly comfortable.

Remember this very well as it came about right after the first Revival Conference in 2007 on the heels of his sermon; [url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/visit.php?lid=15982]Let Me Not See My Wretchedness by Carter Conlon [/url]. Regarding the former, a summary;

[i]There is a false revival on the rise. It is the rise of the angry watchman who will cast stones at those who have gone astray from the Lord. This false revival consists of ministers who have led people away from the truth through legalism and a misguided prosperity gospel. They will forbid and command prodigals not to come into the presence of God until you work your way back into His favor through human effort and religion. We must not remove the veil from the bride of Christ. We have a righteousness that cannot be taken away from us because Jesus is our veil.[/i]

It was interesting at the time of this message to hear some of the response that came about in discussion here. It seemed a few took away from it something different than what was intended. A certain emphasis on the [i]Angry[/i] watchman that was elasticated to shift the onus on anyone exposing or calling into question the very people, in his own words; '[i]This false revival consists of ministers who have led people away from the truth through legalism and a misguided prosperity gospel.[/i]' who were to blame. In a nutshell, it wasn't to expense one for the other, where we would lapse into a sort of soft sentimentalism of 'not naming names' or calling into question, rather calling on the carpet the dubious practitioners - But rather the bleated sheep who were under their ... spell. To be there for them and restore, encourage, point them in the right direction.

I am drawing from what I can now recall of it, what I thought he was aiming at.

It is unfortunately all very convoluted and muddled. There is as much insidiousness and clever contorting where this applies. Another example would be, believe it or not ...

[url=http://www.morningstarministries.org/Groups/1000040651/MorningStar_Ministries/Media/VIDEO_Todd_Bentleys/VIDEO_Todd_Bentleys.aspx]Todd Bentley's Restoration[/url]

Somewhere along the line happened upon this while researching for this post and was really taken back. I was certainly wrong several months ago making mention of a certain sympathy, prayer even for Todd and his family as it seemed he had done the right thing by being silent and where I had taken great issue with his 'mentors' (for lack of a better word) for their own duplicity at first, throwing their weight behind this so called revival in the beginning, only to retract and defend their involvement with 'statements' when it all went awry. Furthermore that these same 'Apostolic' so named and self perpetuated cohorts were going to be the ones to help him as it had rumored to be was adding injury to insult.

Now it is even more incredulous. To listen to both of these guy's 'explain' their way through this is the height of audacity. Todd's bit about 'the revival' having nothing to do with him or his problems, that it was all "god's" doing and that it was never about "Todd" in the first place is pure rubbish. It is like watching the Christianized version of the Maury Povich Show.

This is the sort of thing that just amazes and grieves me to no end. It is just as much part and parcel of this whole exercise here of gullibility and the serious lack of integrity in modern day 'Christianity'.

It is adjunct chaos. It is the flip-side or desecration of Carter Conlon's [i]Angry Watchman[/i] - We are to have no guttural principles of character and integrity and duty towards both God and man or taking our obligations seriously but rather a soupy, sloppy sentimentalism towards 'restoring' that which out to be destroyed - Not the [i]man[/i] but his concepts and shenanigans. Where is the Lords honor and testimony, the greatness and reverential [i]fear[/i] of Whom we have to deal with? Again;

[i]For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.[/i] Rom 2:24

There has been a supplanting of a dubious "Christian nicety' towards how we ought to approach these things by contorting for instance 2Ti 2:24 to be a one size fit's all occasions. Improbable when there is much weight of scripture to be staunch and straightforward, towards exposing principle truths. Duplicity is what slayed Ananias and Sapphira.

It is just plainly outlandish what gets swept under the rug or thrown under the bus in our generation. What is predominantly presented here on SI and reaches back even further of these classics in those that came before them is what is now lost in a quagmire of condensation and compromise. It is neither legalistic nor lethargic but those qualities that seem to mean so little today. Integrity and [i]responsibility[/i]. What has happened to that word [i]responsible[/i]? Taking ownership of ones faults and embracing the consequences. Ron Bailey (one of own here) made the astute comment branched from King David's failure .. "[i]When your repentance is more notorious than your sin[/i]".

It is not what we have in this hour - Instead it is a rush to 'restoration' as the case with Joyner and Bentley and the goal here seems far more to emphasize a return to 'ministry' and to the pulpit, where the credentials of integrity in the first instance were conspicuously absent to begin with. I hope the [i]man[/i] is restored but if he is ever to regain a true bearing of any spiritual stature it will be by accepting the consequences and responsibility of his actions, which also means out of the public eye and 'public' ministry, quite possibly forever.

I have no [i]Angry[/i] watchman mindset to destroy but to call these 'leaders' into account (nor am I implicating such a notion from the mention of it earlier - generalities here). Not to destroy but to [i]Stop[/i]. Stop this mindless madness.

The next hue in this might be summarized and surrounded around the concept and admonishen of [i]Critical Thinking[/i].

9 Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the LORD Ezekiel 34:10. It takes a long time to get over this, and to regain one's trust in eldership, no matter how kind, how biblical, or how mature.

I apologize if I took some liberties to launch off of your comments brother without seemingly taking them into consideration. A certainty here, one that I had to wrestle with upon realizing that I had been duped. It can be embarrassing to begin with and I recall a very strong sense of "Who is to be believed then?". It could have shipwrecked my faith at it's very inception. It is these sorts of ramifications that endure and are possible that compel .. how can we not speak out. There was fortunately a strong guttural sense that held, that I knew the truth was to be found, I have no issue stating that it was the Holy Spirit who had brought me thus far and would continue to do so going forward. But, that didn't stop the onset of what Zac Poonen would categorize as 'pendulumitis', a swinging to the opposite extreme. It became almost an overdose on 'apologetics' and theology a sort of setting forth to right all the wrongs and I was indeed [i]angry[/i] in a sort of mixed up bitterness and concern. I lived for years with the fallout and the attempts to unwind the notions that had so permeated my loved ones and acquaintances. You are right, it takes [i]time[/i], these things get so embedded that subconsciously they are affecting everything in this life. From simple decisions to the more complex. Even after leaving the confines of so much ridiculousness we found a church more ... nominal in the sense of being away from the outlandish, but still jumped right in to their building program by committing money we didn't have towards it - Shackled with debt yet the residue of an idea that the Lord would supply ('multiply') our efforts wasn't based on true prayer but a knee-jerk reaction coupled with the aforementioned residue of notions left by so much 'prosperity teaching'. To give it some clarity, we had only been in this new setting a couple of weeks at the time. To be frank and not skirt the responsibility that I take full account of, someone, anyone with a bit of discernment should have turned us away and refused our offer. This was a commitment I believe of 10 grand over the course of several years. We were 25k in debt at the time.

My premise is that it is the leaders that need to change, need to [i]Stop[/i] what they are doing. Those under them will naturally listen to them far more easily than those of us attempting to get them to just [i]think[/i] most of the time. In my case I was fortunate to take the criticism the right way, it was what I needed to hear, at first I bought the argument of 'touch not the Lord's anointed' and the similar idea that comes about with 'look at all the good they are doing', they [i]must[/i] be ... 'of God'. But I also have to recognize the sheer difficulty of those far more entrenched in churches, ministries, who have many friends and acquaintances, years of service of felt obligations. It can never be just so simple. No one wishes to be embarrassed or cause a controversy, we [i]are[/i] to be gentle in an overall sense.

We have had a thousand arguments here in these pages over all these things. Whether one should stay or leave, whether we are better off keeping silent and not 'naming names'. If it is worth the trouble, the commotion or if it is really just causing strife for no good reason. Dividing the body and creating ever new camps\\denominations. All these things have certain merits to them and certain motivations depending on the circumstances.

Since I am now being far too long-winded and apparently had much more bottled up than I even knew ...

The ability to [i]think[/i]. What a grand gift of God! It means we can change our mind! Change the way we process and absorb information, I believe as our brother alluded to. For what it's worth, I am not necessarily a 'cessationist' in the common definition of the term, but I would to God but wish that much of this nonsense would indeed [i]cease[/i]!

George Mueller would be a classic example, but note his [i]character[/i] and integrity just as well. Despite Mr. Bentley's confusion I do not know that the Lord does things in such a haphazard way, He may use a donkey to do His speaking but the excitable and enthusiasts as they were once termed ...

My own personal experience and even recent observation is still one of surprise in the ways of the Lord. I do not mean the sort of surprises that some are akin to anticipating- Gold dust and feathers and all sorts of out of character, scripturally bankrupt manifestations - But those things never anticipated at all.

Leonard Ravenhill once famously remarked about "not going through the Book looking for a 'word' for the year" but having on one occasion having a certain word grab him, that word was [i]rejection[/i]. "Great" said brother Len in his immutable style, a bit of sarcasm laced with it.

Right now, at this writing and going back a few months before the turn of the year, all of this year so far ... I could latch unto this word, it seems very much the case. I do not mean 'wholesale' and nor do I think that Len meant it in form that way either. It is just a very different time and season. I cannot pray as I am accustomed to. It is impossible to describe it adequately. My 'instinct' for a lack of a better word and a reluctance to spiritualize it is to just by and large ... shut up. :-?

This being a large breach in the matter of course. I could drive myself to distraction trying to understand it - I know my proclivities and what is still inherent, I still wage the war against sin, inwardly and out but have had many failings, especially in the thought process, the 'fantasies' and imaginative forward thinking, speculating - Likely what is driving all this to begin with. But I must tell you the sense of the Holy Spirit that was more dominant has all but been removed - 'Locked out of the house' is my sense of it, not He from me, be me from [i]Him[/i]. There are a million things going on simultaneously, a busy-ness, trying to get the financial ship in order, problems at home - "Cares of this world" that must be taken care of and somehow not given over to.

Just feel a need to be forthcoming in all of this. I am not eliciting sympathy since it is not a sort of devastation that I am lingering under -It seems that it is the way it is for a reason and I trust Him to do as He pleases even if I do often complain in my peculiar non-praying praying.

Perhaps I just wanted to give some impedance to where I am coming from in presenting all this here. Broad, general observance - I will return to letting others develop the painting, which I guess now needs the title;

[i][b]Think[/b][/i]

G
ginnyrose

Mike,
I have not read your entire post, but I must run but feel like making one comment:

I have no Angry watchman mindset to destroy but to call these 'leaders' into account (nor am I implicating such a notion from the mention of it earlier - generalities here). Not to destroy but to Stop. Stop this mindless madness.

The only way for these men to succeed is for the people in the pews to approve them by the giving of funds, attention, honor and respect. Deprive them of all of these will be(EDIT: one of] the kindest thing a saint can do for them.

My opinion,
ginnyrose

S
sermonindex

Brother Mike and others, I just read this article and thought of the intent of this thread and it's direction. I hope it fits in alright.

_________________________________________________

[b]Another Jesus or the True Jesus - Whom Are You Serving? [/b]

The apostle Paul was a man with a passion for the truth. While his ministry clearly focused on proclaiming the saving grace of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, he was also concerned when he saw the truth being compromised by Satan's subtle deceptive plan. While Paul made every effort to teach the church at Corinth the truth about Jesus and His death on the Cross to save them from their sins, false teachers and false doctrines had infiltrated the church. Obviously some were being led astray. Thus, he expressed his concerns:

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)

The urgent message Paul delivered to the Corinthians is the same message I believe God wants proclaimed today.

Satan's plan to deceive has not been altered throughout the ages. His efforts to produce "another gospel" inspired by "a different spirit" that seduces people into believing they know Jesus Christ when in reality they do not, are not new. Current trends indicate we may be headed down a similar pathway leading toward a strong deception that has the potential of deceiving the whole world.

Jesus made it clear there are serious consequences for those who think they have believed in Him but instead have been deceived by an experiential form of Christianity centered on the miraculous instead of an understanding of the Gospel. Proclaiming these thoughts in a message referred to as "The Sermon on the Mount" recorded in the Book of Matthew, Jesus said:

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. (Matthew 7:21-23)

These sobering words should be a reminder to all those who profess the name of Jesus to pay close attention to the statement Jesus made. Imagine what it would be like to be a sincere Jesus follower, then find out you were not following Jesus. While it is possible to encounter miraculous experiences in the name of Jesus, it is not these experiences that qualify anyone to go to heaven or validate their walk with the Lord. Instead one could spend eternity in hell.

I am reminded from Scripture, contending for a faith based on God's Word is not an option. As Jude wrote:

Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. (Jude 3-4)

My love and compassion for those who have been deceived compels me to share this message. The subject of where human souls spend eternity is a serious matter. The Bible teaches that Satan is the instigator and author of deception. His goal is to destroy mankind and take as many lost souls hostage with him to hell as he can. As believers in Jesus Christ, we must warn those who are in spiritual deception in an attitude of love.

The Bible teaches that the end times will be characterized by a strong spiritual delusion that blinds many from the true Gospel and also leads those who have believed into apostasy. As Jesus warned:

Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. (Matthew 24:23-25)

I challenge everyone to first, consider carefully and honestly what God has revealed in His Word. Second, consider the facts presented in light of current trends. May the light of God's Word shine bright and reveal the truth.

(from [i]Another Jesus[/i] by Roger Oakland)

This article or excerpt was posted on [url=http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/]April 10, 2009@ 1:07 pm.[/url]

C
crsschk

It fit's perfectly!

[i]corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.[/i]


The only way for these men to succeed is for the people in the pews to approve them by the giving of funds, attention, honor and respect. Deprive them of all of these will be(EDIT: one of] the kindest thing a saint can do for them.

Good point.

C
crsschk

[b]Fantasies, Legends, and Heroes
What You Know May Not Be So and How To Tell The Difference[/b]

By Bob Passantino, Copyright 1990 by Bob Passantino.

Answers In Action
P.O. Box 2067
Costa Mesa, California 92628
(949) 646-9042

[i]Answers In Action[/i] c/o aia@answers.org

[url=http://web.archive.org/web/20050203193810/www.answers.org/aia_intro.html]Answers In Action[/url]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Perhaps the most important tool cult apologists possess is the ability to think critically. Without that ability, we would be overwhelmed by the mass of confusing religious ideas swirling through the worlds of the cults and the occult. If I were speaking before any other professional audience, say of lawyers or doctors, or maybe even of theology professors, I would never attempt a test of critical thinking ability. But since all of you think critically in the course of your ministries, I am sure you will be able to pass my test.

There is a room with no windows and only one door. It is completely empty except for a $100 bill lying on the floor. A leprechaun, an honest lawyer, and a dishonest lawyer are ushered into the room. The door is sealed. The money disappears.

Now, use your critical thinking apparatus. Which one of the individuals took the money? Think very carefully and I'll give you the answer in a few minutes. Since you are all good critical thinkers you should all get the right answer. After all, we have patterned ourselves after the great apologist, the Apostle Paul, who declared to Festus, "I am not [crazy]...but speak the words of truth and reason."

Why is critical thinking so important in cult apologetics? It is because, as scripture reminds us, "we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places." We are fighting a spiritual battle with dimensions far beyond what we can test empirically, or with our five senses. Our physical strength or dexterity is not nearly so important as our mental and spiritual strength. Thinking critically is part of our defense against the serpent's deceit and craftiness, which Paul says can corrupt us from the simplicity that is in Christ.

As cult apologists we have a responsibility, an obligation, to equip ourselves to confront the real world with the power of truth. Second Corinthians 10:3-5 warns us, "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ."

Let's go back to our critical thinking test. Whom do you think took the money? The leprechaun, the honest lawyer, or the dishonest lawyer? Of course, it could only have been the dishonest lawyer. Both the leprechaun and the honest lawyer are figments of the imagination, fantasies. (You should hear the applause when lawyers hear the story!) And the subject of fantasies is one of three parts to my message today.


[b]Fantasies, Legends, and Heroes[/b]

I have retitled my talk Fantasies, Legends, and Heroes: What You Know May Not Be So, and How to Tell the Difference because I want to emphasize that cult apologetics is as vulnerable to mistakes, inadequacies, frauds, and stories as any other field of study. Certainly our goal is both to "rightly divide the word of truth" and "test all things; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil." But the road to reaching our goal is full of potholes, cracks, and detours, any of which can sidetrack us from our goal. Most of these problems can be divided into two major categories for which I have made my own labels. First, fantasies are the logical fallacies, wrong assumptions, misunderstandings, and other delusions we often labor under, mistakenly thinking we are practicing apologetics. Second, legends are the personal experience stories we too often substitute for comprehensive research, viable evidence, and critical evaluation. Finally, cult apologists can become "heroes" to those they help if they demonstrate their trustworthiness and integrity by their research, evidence, and critical evaluation. We can tell the difference between fantasies and legends on the one hand, and "heroes" on the other, by being equipped for responsible apologetics research, some of which I will survey here.

[b]What Is at Stake?[/b]

Cult apologetics is not a game. It is a very serious calling and ministry predicated on the ability of cult apologists to help those harmed by the cults and the occult. Second Timothy 2:24-26 tells us that "a servant of the Lord must not quarrel, but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will." At stake are the lives, well-being, and souls of those who have been harmed by the cults and the occult.
Second, at stake is our credibility within the Church as Christians who can be trusted to educate and warn about cultism and occultism. Titus 1:9 lists as one of the qualifications and duties of a church leader that he hold "fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict."

Third, at stake is our credibility outside the Church as people who tell the truth, even if the non-believers don't always respond to the truth. I had an agnostic friend and we used to spend hours talking about anthropology, his field of study, and Christianity. Despite the arguments and evidence that I gave him for the truth of Christianity, he didn't become a Christian. However, he respected me as someone who had integrity. When his sister, who was a Christian, became confused because of college classes antagonistic to Christianity, he asked me to talk to her, to, as he put it, "straighten her out so she doesn't lose her faith because of what ignorant philosophy professors say." Responsible apologetics is one way of speaking to the world. Peter says we are to have "our conduct honorable among the Gentiles, that when they speak against [us] as evildoers, they may, by [our] good works which they observe, glorify God."

Fourth, at stake is our personal integrity as representatives of Christ's Body. Even if no other Christian knew how we helped someone who was a cult victim, even if no one in the world saw our efforts on behalf of the gospel, we have an obligation before God to act as though we were his representatives to do his will, "in all things showing [ourselves] to be a pattern of good works; in doctrine showing integrity, reverence, incorruptibility, sound speech that cannot be condemned, that one who is an opponent may be ashamed, having nothing evil to say of [us]."


[b]Why Is It Important?[/b]

First, the Bible tells us it is the truth (embodied in Christ) that sets us free, and so the best help we can give those harmed by the cults and the occult is truth. I'm sure each of us could think of many cultists who have gone from one cult to another, often through several different cults, searching for truth, but never finding it until they encountered the truth which is in Christ Jesus. We can't give anything more important than truth to those who are seeking. That is why we are in cult apologetics. That is why we care enough to come to a conference like this. We want to help people who are trapped by the cults and the occult.
Second, the Bible gives us standards for those who seek leadership or teaching positions in the Body of Christ. If we attempt to influence or persuade someone else about the gospel and Christian living, then we are teaching and leading, and we need to meet biblical standards. Paul gives us a good summary of those standards:


...if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination....blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled, holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.

Third, responsible cult apologetics is important because the Bible commands us to be without reproach even from the heathen, a testimony to the truthfulness and life-transforming power of the gospel. Peter reminds us, "as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct."

Fourth, responsible cult apologetics is an indication of the integrity we have as individual Christians before our Lord and Savior. Personal holiness, made possible by the transforming life of the Holy Spirit within us, and evidenced even in our research and apologetics, reflects our commitment to God. Responsible research and apologetics comes from a life characterized by the fruit of the Spirit.

There is a lot at stake in responsible cult apologetics research, and much to be gained from ministering in truth, both for individuals and the Body of Christ. If we are aware of the pitfalls, and we are committed to responsible ministry, we will fulfill the calling God has given us.

Today we will survey the problems of cult apologetics research and the principles of responsible research. With a good introduction, we will have a good foundation by which we can test our work and its correspondence to biblical truth.


[b]How This Talk Is Structured[/b]

My message is divided into three parts, "Fantasies," "Legends," and "Heroes." Within the first two sections we will survey some of the most prevalent problems in apologetics research, and in the third section we will survey the principles of good research.
Fantasies refers to mistakes in thinking and judgment that do not provide a sound system of discernment. I will discuss first why people accept fantasies and lies, and second, some of the kinds of logical fallacies for which we fall or even which sometimes we use unwittingly.

Here's an example. How many of you have thought about why crime, especially violent crime, increases during a full moon? Of course we reject the superstitious explanation that the full moon is the time of werewolves and vampires, but what reasonable explanations can we come up with? Think about it for a minute.

Here's the fantasy. Careful, multiple statistical studies have shown that there is no significant increase in violent crime during full moons. We don't have to postulate satanic or witchcraft calendars, extra light at night, or other reasonable explanations. There is actually nothing to explain. Careful research avoids the trap of fantasy.

Legends are the stories of what I call "novel people." That is, people and stories that tend to substitute personal experiences, delusions, guesses, fictions, and other "stories" for solid, evidential research.

Here's an example of a legend. How many of you have heard that Darwin repudiated evolution on his deathbed and embraced the gospel? What an argument against evolution! If the father of evolution finally gave it up, then it must not be true, right?

Wrong. First of all, Darwin could have given it up because he was senile, because he was hedging his bets at the end of his life and wanted eternal "fire insurance," or because he was given some insidious mind-altering drug. His repudiation doesn't say anything about the truthfulness or falsity of evolution. Second, the story itself is a legend. While Darwin appeared to be somewhat religious and referred to the Bible in conversation and correspondence, there is no verified evidence that he rejected his ideas concerning the origin of the species, the theory of evolution.

When I use the term heroes, I am not referring to the somewhat larger-than-life egos some of us get from our much learning. Instead, I am referring to the good, old-fashioned hero of the TV western, the guy with the white hat who saves people from certain death and vanquishes the enemy from the land.

Cult apologetics heroes help victims of the cults and combat evil by (1) thinking critically; (2) preparing research adequately; and (3) conducting responsible research and evaluation. In my last section I will discuss the fundamentals of research, the legitimate role of personal experience, field research, libraries, networking, interviewing, testing, and reporting.

[i]Cont.[/i]

C
crsschk

[b]FANTASIES

Why People Accept Fantasies and Lies[/b]

One morning my daughter Karen, who has very vivid dreams and even more vivid stories retelling her dreams, was telling me about a dream she had just had. "It was a great dream," she started, "just like real life, but better!"

Following are ten common reasons even cult researchers sometimes accept what's not true instead of what's true. The common thread running through most reasons people accept fantasies or even lies is what Karen said, "just like real life, but better!"

And yet, as cult apologetics researchers we have a serious responsibility to observe, understand, and explain the world as it really is, not "better" than real. We can't treat our ministry like a child treats a dream, or we risk drawing both ourselves and others who trust us into deceit. Paul admonishes,


. . . we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness by which they lie in wait to deceive, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head -- Christ. . . .

Keep in mind that one of the reasons we can be so susceptible to fantasies is that we sometimes unwittingly suspend our critical thinking ability. After the following survey of common reasons people accept fantasies, I will discuss some of the most common logical fallacies, into which and for which we sometimes fall in our research and evaluation of the cults and the occult.

1. It fits into our world view.

Because something is possible, doesn't mean that it is true; and just because something exists, doesn't mean every report we receive of it must be true.

Let me explain what I mean with an example. As Christians we believe that God specially and directly created life on this planet. Given his attribute of omnipotence and the fact that he is the God of all existence, and not just, like the Mormons would say, of this planet, it is certainly possible that God could have created life somewhere else in the universe. However, we have no biblical or scientific evidence that he did. It is possible, but it is not necessarily true.

Another example will illustrate my second point. How do you explain UFO reports? As "lying signs and wonders in the air"? As demonic apparitions? If you're thinking critically, you won't accept my question in the way it was posed. Instead, you will ask, "Which UFO reports do you want me to explain?" In fact, careful investigation shows that the vast majority of UFO sightings are of natural or manmade phenomena, misidentified by observers.

Second Corinthians 11:4 and 13-15 teach us that Satan and his followers can transform themselves so that they look like "ministers of righteousness." In our biblical world view, we would expect to find instances of demonic evil masquerading as what is good, perhaps as UFO phenomenon. However, we fall for fantasies if we do not discriminate among the reports of evil-in- progress.

We tend to believe what is allowed for and predicted by our world view, but investigation is necessary to determine the explanation for a particular report. This is a vulnerability to which counselors seem especially prone. We tend to believe the personal experiences we're told that correspond to our world view without checking to see whether there is any validity to the report at all.

2. We accept what we're told.

Researchers under time constraints sometimes find themselves accepting what they're told without sufficient testing. It's not that we don't want to be critical, but we don't always have time to check everything we're told. We forget that finding someone willing to tell us what to think about a certain situation is not the same as finding the right person to tell us what can be verified.

How many different applications of the term "brainwashing" can you think of? We're told our kids are brainwashed by television commercials, Christians are brainwashed by televangelists, Moonies are brainwashed by too much rice, Americans are brainwashed by the liberal media, and adult Jews are brainwashed by Jews for Jesus. I'm sure you can think of other examples.

But how many of you have studied classic brainwashing and know its symptoms, how it is accomplished, and how its effects are maintained? I don't mean what you've been told, I mean the reports of clinical studies and military research on, for example, U.S. POWs in North Korea? In fact, most of us are not even aware that out of 4500 American POWs in North Korea, who were exposed to classic, isolationist brainwashing, only twenty-two elected to stay voluntarily in North Korea after the war. All too often we have accepted what we've been told about brainwashing, even when it refers to cultists, without checking it out for ourselves.

3. We base our knowledge on common sense.

Something I said earlier bears repeating here. Sometimes we stumble on the truth even in the midst of our vulnerability. If I were paranoid, I could attribute all sorts of menacing motives to each of you to support my contention that you are all out to get me. But just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean you're not out to get me. Your fiendish plot couldn't be proved by my delusional ravings.

Often common sense parallels the truth. That is, what we commonly think makes sense, and it may even correspond to truth, but common sense is not a trustworthy method to find truth.

Let's take a quick survey. How many of you think college enrollment goes up during a recession? Why do you think so? Maybe because out-of-work people have more time for classes and want to better their job market potential? That's a sensible idea.

Now, how many of you think college enrollment goes down during a recession? Why? Maybe because fewer people have the money to afford college and people don't want to have their time tied up in case they get offered a job? That makes sense, too. Common sense can be used to answer my question either way, but only an actual investigation of college enrollment figures before, during, and after recessions can tell us what the true answer is.

4. We place too much faith in "experts."

This is a tendency I can see in myself when it comes to my children and their welfare. My wife and I may be pretty sure that one of our children has the flu, but I accept the diagnosis a lot better if I pay the pediatrician forty dollars to tell me the same thing. I can help my children with their homework, check their papers, and talk to them about what they're learning in school, but I feel much more assured of their progress at Parent-Teacher Conference time when their teachers agree, "You children are doing fine in school." But because pediatricians and teachers are "experts" doesn't make them infallible. It is possible to place blind faith in experts. What if our pediatrician misdiagnoses my son's illness as flu when it's really meningitis? What if my daughter's teacher has missed a serious learning disability that doesn't show up in standard classroom work?

Even cult apologetics research is susceptible to placing too much faith in experts. This is especially true when there are very few experts in any one area and we are forced to get all or most of our information from one source, or when we trust experts to tell us about something outside their field of expertise. We seem to think that truth gets truer if someone important says it, even if that important person has no particular knowledge of that field. On the contrary, two plus two still equals four, no matter if a mathematician, a zoologist, or our young son says it. Conversely, the popular proposition, "People can achieve anything they want" isn't true whether Shirley MacLaine, Ronald Reagan, or even Mother Theresa says it.

One contemporary book relegating psychology to the world of the cults quotes Nobel prize winner Richard Feynman criticizing psychoanalysis as being unscientific "witch doctoring." Well, that proves it! Psychoanalysis is down the drain! Now, I'm not trying to defend psychoanalysis, and I have other reasons for questioning its validity, but Richard Feynman's opinion and status as a Nobel prize winner isn't sufficient.

Richard Feynman was a brilliant atomic physicist who worked in pioneering atomic energy and weaponry. His Nobel prize was awarded for his work in physics. He was an inspiring scientist, teacher, and innovative researcher. His ability to think creatively in the field of quantum electrodynamics was unsurpassed.

But he was not an expert in psychology, psychotherapy, or the philosophy of science. (In fact, he thought philosophers operated in a state of complete chaos.) He was opinionated and cared little for subjects that didn't interest him. He is entitled to his opinion about psychoanalysis, but he has no special knowledge, experience, or education to give it special weight.

Believing an expert without appropriate authority and without corroborating evidence is not a trustworthy way to discern truth.

5. We think seeing is believing.

Raised in the "scientific" age, we tend to think that whatever we encounter empirically, or with any of our five senses, must be real. We describe something incredible by "You have to see it to believe it!" We express our doubt by "I won't believe it until I see it!" And even the Apostle Thomas affirmed his scientific status by qualifying what it would take for him to believe Jesus' resurrection, "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe."

There's nothing inherently wrong with empirical testing. In fact, some things must be tested empirically. But we need to be careful of two things.

First, not everything is empirically verifiable. What laboratory experiments can you devise to test my assertion that I love Jesus? My ministry? What if I'm doing it for the vast fortune I can amass from cult apologetics? (Ok, maybe that's not a great "what if.") My public profession of faith? What if I was coerced into it by "cultic brainwashing"? My attendance at church? What if I only go because I don't want to listen to my wife nag me? You get the point. Some things are not inherently material and cannot be tested adequately by the senses.

Second, when we test empirically, we cannot always trust our senses. We have to add critical thinking to our sensory experience. If sensory experience were sufficient in itself, we would assume that pencils bend each time we place them in glasses of water because they look bent. Critical thinking reconciles what our eyes tell us with what other tests tell us. That way we can explain the illusion of the bent pencil in terms of light refraction in the two different mediums of air and water.

How does this relate to cult apologetics? As cult apologists, we need to be careful that we don't fall for misperceptions by our senses. For example, when I was a young Christian, the church I was involved in was really into miraculous healing. They even imported a traveling healing evangelist. Since I was practically blind in my left eye, I got in line that night to have the evangelist pray for my healing. I believed God could do it, and I even activated my faith by my offering. But here's what happened.

Finally I was at the head of the line. The rest of the congregation sat and watched as the evangelist asked me my problem. "I'm practically blind in my left eye," I told him. "Praise God!" the evangelist shouted, "This man is blind in one eye and we're going to pray for his healing right now!" After his very impassioned prayer, he put his hand over my left eye, the nearly blind one, and shouted, "Can you see, brother?" "Yes, but that's not the eye . . . . " "Glory be to God, He can see! Hallelujah! Everybody say Amen!"

Well, the entire congregation thought they saw me healed of blindness, but I still have worse than 20/400 vision in that eye. (Maybe it is healed and I just have the symptoms left. That makes as much sense as believing the "healing" I received.)

6. We draw conclusions from faulty evidence.

Here's a common reason we believe fantasies. We do a great job of thinking critically from evidence to conclusion, but we forget to check our evidence. What if the evidence is faulty? All the critical thinking in the world can't change bad evidence into good evidence.

Contemporary cultic and occultic "myths" fall into this category. A caller to our radio program once told us what she had decided to do in light of the evidence that a major luxury hotel in our area was owned by the Church of Satan. She was going to call all of the radio, television, and newspaper offices she could to get the widest possible publicity about this terrible situation, and she was urging all Christians to boycott the hotel as a protest against satanism. There was nothing wrong with her action plan.

Except she hadn't checked her evidence. It is true that the Westin South Coast Plaza Hotel in my city of Costa Mesa is at 666 Anton Way, and it is true that Anton is also the first name of Anton Szandor LaVey, the founder of the Church of Satan. But it's not true that the Church of Satan owns the hotel (it's owned by one of the wealthiest families in Southern California, the Segerstroms); it's not true that the Church of Satan picked the street number 666 (the hotel falls just past half-way through the 600 block square of the Costa Mesa city street number grid); and Anton Way is in honor of two Segerstrom family members, not LaVey. Trusting faulty evidence had sabotaged our caller's entire action plan.

7. We draw faulty conclusions from good evidence.

It's fairly easy to recognize when we draw conclusions from faulty evidence, but it's harder to recognize drawing faulty conclusions from good evidence. Check for this vulnerability the next time you have a conclusion that doesn't seem true, and yet you have checked, double checked, and even triple checked your evidence. Maybe your evidence isn't the problem. Maybe you have drawn a faulty conclusion from your evidence.

For example, we have heard the warning that, since Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, we should devote a large portion of our American cult apologetic ministry to combatting Islam. However, that conclusion doesn't necessarily follow from the evidence. We need to find out why and where Islam is the fastest growing religion before we can justify making it the number one target of American cult apologetics. In fact, Islam's growth is due mostly to Islamic nationalism in the East and to the fact that strict Muslims neither practice birth control nor kill one-third of their unborn children, unlike Americans. I don't mean that we shouldn't care about evangelism to Muslims. My former organization published materials by the noted missionary to the Muslims, William McElwee Miller; we have had representatives of the Zwemer Institute on our radio show; and we have assisted several Christian missions to Muslims. But one can't jump from an isolated statistic on membership growth to an immediate and close threat.

8. We believe what makes us feel comfortable.

How many calls do you think your ministry receives in any given week from people who want you to come witness to their Jehovah's Witness neighbor, their Mormon co-worker, their New Age relative? How many of those callers make you feel good by commenting something like this, "I just know you can get through to So-and-so. I want so much for him (or her) to know the Lord, but he needs a real professional to talk to him." Well, comments like those make the caller feel even better. Why? Rarely is it because the caller is totally incapable of sharing the gospel with the cultist. Mostly its because the caller wants to be believe only a professional can witness to a cultist. That way the caller can feel comfortable about never witnessing or sticking up for the gospel with the cultist.

9. We see the world as we would like it to be rather than as it really is.

I get upset at injustice. I can't stand to see someone taken advantage of, the victim of a scam. When I get a chain letter in the mail, I turn it over to the Postmaster, fully confident that the perpetrators will be caught. When I see a police officer make an illegal U-turn, I think I should be able to complain to the desk sergeant and have the officer disciplined. When I talk with a cultist, I never give up. I keep thinking that if I can hit upon the perfect combination of arguments, or the exact set of scriptures, any cultist will see the error of his ways and come to Christ.

I also spend time being frustrated. Postmasters don't have time for petty crooks. The desk sergeant makes illegal U-turns too. And some people won't believe no matter what, even if, as Jesus said, someone were to rise from the dead with the truth. I have to keep reminding myself that the world is not really the way I would like it to be. When I forget, I don't make accurate evaluations about the world.

10. We base our beliefs on personal experience.

We have a serious disease in Christian apologetics today. That is, we too often substitute personal stories or experience for comprehensive, accurate research and evaluation. It's so much easier to tell a story or get a guest speaker with a great story than it is to put in good, hard work at apologetics.

Christian bookstores are full of personal stories, testimonies, and experiences on everything from possibility thinking through "I was a baby breeder for Satan." Most of these stories are characterized by subjective emotionalism, undocumented assertions, and little or no biblical or theological evaluation. But that's ok, we're told, because So-and-so really experienced it, so he knows all about it. We don't need doctrine. We don't need theology. We don't need facts. We don't need documentation. Just tell a story. It makes people feel good, and who can argue with a story?

But personal experience doesn't always tell the truth. Think about "personal experience" and cult apologetics. How many Jehovah's Witnesses have you had tell you that they used to be "born- againers" before they joined the Watchtower, and they used to believe Jesus was the Father, so they know that's what the deity of Christ means." Or Mormons who say that they won't argue about the Book of Mormon because they've prayed about it and they testify to you that they know the Book of Mormon is the Word of God and Joseph Smith is a prophet of God. Personal experience can be deceiving.

Have a healthy skepticism toward Christian "stories," too. If the book you're reading on satanism, for example, has no dates, no places, no names, no events -- is completely undatable and untestable, how can we know it is true? And even if the events recorded happened, how do we know they are interpreted properly by the story teller? No matter how tempting and easy, don't substitute stories for responsible research and evaluation.

[i]Cont.[/i]

C
crsschk

[b]Summary[/b]

These are ten of the most common reasons people -- sometimes even cult apologists -- fall for fantasies instead of truth. Closely related to, and often overlapping, these vulnerabilities are the logical fallacies that scatter the landscape of cult apologetics. Sometimes we fall for logical fallacies when they are used by cultists or occultists, and sometimes we fall into using logical fallacies ourselves.

In common language, a logical fallacy is a false idea or notion, something that appears to make perfect sense, and yet doesn't. A lack of critical thinking ability creates two kinds of Christians: (1) those who don't think at all and who consequently don't worship and serve God with their minds; and (2) those who attempt to use their minds, but who end up making mistakes that could be avoided by learning to think straight.

Mistakes in thinking and reasoning, or logical fallacies, make up the largest group of discernment faults. If an argument or accusation cannot stand the test of logic, is inconsistent, and fails to prove its point, then it loses all rational force. However, it can be used destructively to obscure the truth, mislead people, or even harm the very cultists and occultists who need our help. These problems become even more pronounced and have even greater consequences when they are picked up by novice readers or listeners and are misused even more.

There are many logical fallacies, some with long fancy Latin names and some with ordinary folk names. This talk is not the forum for a lengthy listing or discussion of logical fallacies, but I refer you to my recommended reading list for several good books on logical fallacies.

My survey today will cover a few of the fallacies that I have seen frequently in cult apologetics. Remember, logical fallacies are very user-friendly. The same ones can be used both by cultists (to mislead us), and by us (as mistaken substitutes for critical thinking).

1. Unfalsifiability

This is the favorite fallacy of the conspiricist. How does Satan-battler Rebecca Brown explain the devastating medical and legal documentation of the loss of her medical license for mental instability and drug abuse? Easy -- the satanists and witches' conspiracy manufactured false records. When every piece of even hypothetical evidence that could be proposed to falsify a claim is twisted to be an evidence for the claim, then the claim is unfalsifiable and useless.

In one movie, a client at a mental institution claimed that he saw a man sitting in a cypress tree, talking to an owl. When the medic pointed out that there were no cypress trees on the grounds, the client responded, "Anyone with money can dig up a tree. And after that it's a simple matter to fill in the hole." Because his story was unfalsifiable, it was unbelievable. But you don't have to go to a mental institution to find instances of unfalsifiability. Cult apologetics abounds with unfalsifiable conspiracies. I was even accused of being part of a conspiracy.

Several years ago I received a letter from someone I'll call Roscoe. He said he had ordered materials from us for witnessing to the cults but had not received them. I wrote back that we had no record of his order or payment, but that if he would re-order and send a copy of his canceled check, we would be happy to replace his order and reimburse him for the extra postage and the copying cost of his check.

I didn't hear from Roscoe, but we did hear from our local Postal Inspector. Roscoe had lodged a formal complaint against us for mail fraud. Two reasons were listed on the complaint form. First, he repeated his claim that he had ordered materials and not received them. Second, he accused us of misrepresentation since we called ourselves a "counter-cult ministry" and yet we had no publications against what he termed "the biggest cult of all, the Great Whore of Babylon, the Roman Catholic Church."

It was easy to provide the Postal Inspector with copies of our correspondence asking for verification that his check had cleared, and we went ahead and sent his order without proof of payment (which we never did receive) to go the extra mile.

Fortunately, the Postal Inspector didn't require us to respond to him concerning Roscoe's second charge. He said that if he got involved in that, he'd be violating separation of church and state and free speech. But we wanted to respond to Roscoe anyway.

I got his phone number from directory assistance and called him one evening. Our conversation quickly degenerated into Roscoe shouting epithets at me about my conspiracy with Roman Catholicism. I tried in vain to reason with him. Then Roscoe's real argument came out. He was convinced that I was on a secret mission of the Roman Catholic Church, commissioned by the Jesuits to masquerade as a non-Catholic cult apologist. In fact, Roscoe announced, he was convinced that I was a Jesuit myself!

I tried to reason with him. "Look, Roscoe, how can I be a Jesuit?"

"That's easy," Roscoe cut in, "Look at your last name -- Passantino -- that's Italian Catholic if I ever heard it!"

"But Roscoe," I answered, "you can talk to my mother. She'll tell you I haven't practiced Catholicism since I made my first communion. Talk to my pastor. He'll tell you I'm not Catholic. And because we don't have a tract against them, and I don't think they're the Great Whore of Babylon, doesn't prove I'm their secret agent, much less a Jesuit. Come on, Roscoe, Jesuits spend half their lives in Catholic schools and seminaries. They've taken vows of celibacy. Roscoe, I have a wife and children. I can't be a Jesuit!"

"Only a Jesuit would have such a clever disguise!" Roscoe hung up.

2. Accident

The accident fallacy does not mean a fallacy you made by mistake, although I hope all of you don't make fallacies on purpose. The accident fallacy is a useful (but not valid) way of getting out of responsibility for a general principle you don't like. For example, a general principle is that we should obey speed laws. But how many of us rationalize to ourselves, "Well, if I had a medical emergency instead of being late to work, it would be all right to speed. So I don't really have to obey the speed law." That's the accident fallacy at work: you overturn the trustworthiness of a general principle on the basis of an extreme case, the extremity of which has nothing to do with your general principle. The extremity is an "accident" of the principle.

Plato brought up an accident fallacy. Is it really good to repay what you borrow? What if you borrowed weapons from a man who since has gone crazy? Surely you would not put human life in danger by repaying what you borrowed! In fact, it can be dangerous to believe that principle! (Plato's example omits the fact that the man's mental instability is incidental, or accidental, to the general moral.)

Here's another one. Someone might tell you that cult apologetics can't possibly be biblical because he knows someone in a cult who was so depressed after a Christian witnessed to him that he went out and got drunk. Cult apologetics can't be of God if it gets people drunk! (The critic has failed to notice that the cultist's drunkenness was not caused by the witnessing, but was accidental to it.)

3. Affirming the Consequent

You "affirm the consequent" when you have an "if....then" argument, but you put things backwards, affirming your "then," or "consequent," before you affirm your "if," or the antecedent which rightfully proves the consequent. This is kind of complicated, so let me quote an example from The Book of the Fallacy:


'If he had wanted to cut up the body, he would have needed a big saw. Such a saw was found in his toolshed. [Therefore, we can assume he is the murderer.]'

(There could be alternative explanations, innocent ones, for all of these actions. It would be fallacious to say that any of them proved him guilty. But as they mount up, it becomes progressively easier for [juries] to eliminate reasonable doubts about coincidence. No doubt they are sometimes wrong and thereby hangs many a tale, together with the occasional innocent man.)


We find this fallacy in cult apologetics when a cultist's "if" doesn't have only one "then," but the cultist wants you to believe there's only one "then." This is a handy fallacy for someone whose story of cultic involvement isn't credible and is being questioned. The person can respond to all inquiries for documentation with, "You wouldn't be asking me these questions unless you were out to get me. You must be out to get me!"
Whitley Strieber, horror novelist, talk show gadfly, and, he would have you believe, UFO abductee, uses this fallacy well. So does fellow UFO enthusiast and author Budd Hopkins. Without going into their whole stories, here's how they use "affirming the consequent" as one way to prove that hundreds, maybe thousands of people have been abducted by UFO entities.

Now, as we all know, UFO entities don't want anyone to know they're here. But they also have to do their specimen studies on us humans. So after they're done abducting us and studying us, they erase that portion of our memory so we don't know we were abducted. We are left with a "time gap," or "missing time," a period of time for which we cannot account.

This is Strieber and Hopkin's use of "affirming the consequence." They say that they have been contacted by hundreds of people who have "time gaps," evidence that they are abductees. Strieber and Hopkins conclude that the time gaps themselves provide one of the proofs of UFO abductions. While it is possible that the time gaps are the result of UFO abductions (whatever those are), they could be due to daydreaming, inattention, forgetfulness, mind-altering drugs -- a variety of options.

4. Argumentum ad Baculum

Behind the Latin phraseology is a very persuasive fallacy: believe (or do) what I say, or I'll smash your face! This is an appeal to force. Kruschev put it this way, "When Stalin says dance, the wise man dances!"

Sometimes cult apologists find themselves hard pressed to reject this fallacy, especially when it is used against them. How many of you have written books on Scientology or Witness Lee's Local Church? "Oh," but you respond, "those groups (we won't call them cults -- that might be misconstrued as libelous) have a reputation for suing their detractors!" But does that have anything to do with whether or not their doctrines are biblical? Where is the liberal press and the ACLU when we need them to help us with prior restraint problems?

5. Blinding with science

This is one of my favorite fallacies. There's such a solid sound to an argument that's filled with scientific jargon and fifty dollar words. One is "blinded with science" when an argument consists of complicated, technical vocabulary or allusions to sophisticated scientific reports, charts, or (best of all) statistics. You don't understand a word of the argument, but you're not about to let anyone know, or argue with it when you don't know what you're talking about. Your opponent has won by default. Pirie notes the rules for using this fallacy:


The first rule for using this fallacy is to remember to use long words . . . . Never use a four-letter word, especially if you can think of a twenty-four lettered word to take its place. The jargon itself is harder to master . . . . Remember that the basic function of words is to transform what is banal, trivial and easily refuted into something profound, impressive and hard to deny . . . .

The fallacy of blinding with science is well worth the time and trouble required to master it. The years of work at it will repay you not only with a doctorate in the social sciences, but with the ability to deceive an audience utterly into believing that you know what you are talking about.


Think about your work with the cults. Which cult used to be known as a religion (old Beatle fans don't get to vote), but now bills itself as a scientific method of relaxation? Which cult has voluminous appendices "explaining" its aberrant translations of the Bible?

Do you ever use "blinding with science?" Do you explain clearly and simply what you mean by "an anarthrous predicate nominative"? Do you report to your supporters about witnessing to people, or "handling cases"?

6. Arguing in a circle

This is one of the most common fallacies. This fallacy occurs when you try to prove one point by another point that is in turn proved by the first point. It's kind of like the Three Stooges vouching for each other's intelligence. Larry says Moe is smart, Moe says Curly Joe is brilliant, and Curly Joe returns the compliment to Larry. Does such circular endorsement prove anything about the IQ's of the Three Stooges?

Circular arguing is encountered frequently in cult apologetics. I have noticed what appears to be a particularly disturbing use of it recently in attempts to document individuals' involvement in satanism and witchcraft. We might get a phone call from someone who tells us he used to be a satanist. In an attempt to determine the caller's credibility, we might ask him to describe the satanism he was involved in. But we ask him leading questions which actually reveal to him some of our own knowledge. By the end of the conversation, our caller could acquire a credible amount of knowledge about satanism just from what we said, and yet because he echoes it back to us, we believe him, and, to complete the circle, add his "testimony" to our list of people "confirming" what we know about satanism! This circular arguing is even more easy to fall for when we expand our circle to include other cult apologists. Let's say my hypothetical caller has also called four other ministries to cults and got even a little bit of information from each one. Then he calls five more after me. By the time he has finished ten phone calls, he's mixed all the information together, passed it off as his own experience, and added it in bits and pieces to every other ministry's accumulation of information. We have helped to create a phantom data base and to elevate someone's dubious testimony to legendary status! We don't really know any more than when we started, but the real danger is that we think our knowledge has multiplied abundantly.

7. Complex question

This is another of the most common fallacies. A "complex question" is formed when your proposition affirms more than one thing, but your question allows for an answer to only one thing. The standard example is the question, "When did you stop beating your wife?" Two things are affirmed: First, that you beat your wife, and second, that you stopped. Once the two affirmations are made, then the question remains, "When?" The respondent has no opportunity to deny the first affirmation. He is stuck with providing information just about the second affirmation.

"Is your stupidity inborn?" is another complex question. It assumes that you are stupid, and then asks you to explain the source of your stupidity.

Cultists often use complex questions when they ask, "Why are you persecuting us?" They haven't established that we are persecuting them, but they're already demanding to know why.

8. Emotional appeals

How many of you have given a talk on satanism? How many of you have given a talk on satanism accompanied by pictures of bloody cauldrons, skulls with wax dripped on them, and church windows with satanic graffiti? What is the difference in your audience's reactions?

If your experience is like mine, I think you will agree that talks with graphic slides generate more response than those without. Why? Because of emotional appeal. Facts and figures can communicate truth, but, as the saying goes, "a picture is worth a thousand words." This is because of emotional appeal. Satanism isn't really any better or worse with or without pictures, but when our emotions are engaged, we tend to take things more seriously.

Appeal to emotion can be an effective tool of cult apologetics, but it should never be confused with proof or valid argumentation. For another example, abortion is as bad whether you give a dry and boring lecture on it or show a picture of a bloody, dismembered victim of abortion. But the picture catches our emotions.

9. Equivocation

Equivocation is the skill of being able to use one word or idea with varying meanings depending on what you want your hearer to think you mean. Those of you who are parents know the most equivocable word in our parental vocabulary: "Maybe." It serves as the universal answer to any request from any or all of our children. "Dad, can I have ice cream for dinner tonight?" I answer, "Maybe. Leave me alone. I'm working." At that moment I want my child to understand "maybe" as "Sure -- as long as you let me work in peace." But at dinner time, when the broccoli and cod stare up from his plate, I want him to understand "maybe" as "I said maybe, not yes, now eat your dinner! It's good for you!"

Jehovah's Witnesses are good at equivocation. "Greek scholars support our translation," they'll say. They want us to believe their translation is reliable and approved by Greek scholars. But when they're pressed, we find out they really mean that they have quoted Greek scholars out of context and to "prove" things the scholars' statements were never meant to prove.

Mormons equivocate on the "miraculous" birth of Christ, hoping Christians (and even many of their unsuspecting members) will (mistakenly) think that "miraculous birth" means the same thing as "virgin birth." They also say they only believe in "one God." Of course, they want you to think that means they believe only one God exists, but they know it means they worship only the one God of this planet.

10. Secundum Quid

My final fallacy for consideration today is better known by its common name, "hasty generalization." That is, you make a general conclusion based on insufficient evidence. We in cult apologetics can slide into this fallacy easily because we never have enough time, money, staff, or resources to do the exhaustive research projects we would like. How much easier, quicker, and less expensive it is to make a general conclusion about a cult based on two or three brief encounters with its members than to do a full-scale research project! Unfortunately, our brief encounters are not always representative of the cult as a whole.

How many cultists have you talked to who have made eternal decisions based on a hasty generalization like, "I've known three so-called Christian pastors, and all three were dishonest. That proves Christianity is a lie! I'm so thankful I left it for my cult!"


[b]Summary[/b]

By now you have a good idea of why we tend to fall for fantasies instead of truth. It should be no wonder, then, that the religious world is full of "legends," people, stories, and ideas that are poor substitutes for real apologetics. Now, armed with our critical thinking, we can take a brief look at some of these legends before we move to the last portion of our study, the right way to accomplish religious research.

[i]Cont.[/i]

S
sermonindex

Was waiting for the continuation to be sure this was the end of this last article. I'd like to copy it. (?)

Do you have anything about this new craze of posting dreams for a mob to give multiple interpretations for those dreams?

In the meantime - may I throw in another link into the mix for research purposes.

http://www.crossroad.to/index.html

Seriously though - I am looking for Scriptural critiquing of this "dream" disseminating for interpretations craze we're seeing so much of these days.

I do believe GOD can speak to or even through an individual on occasions with or through a dream - but to put it out there for anyone and every form of interpretation to me, is a form of spiritualism or in a similar category as 'psychic hotlines' and causes many to drift away from depending on His Word and His Spirit of Truth.

Hope none of this is off topic to the theme of this thread.

Thank you!

C
crsschk

Was waiting for the continuation to be sure this was the end of this last article. I'd like to copy it. (?)

Just an interlude, been kind of preoccupied ...

Do you have anything about this new craze of posting dreams for a mob to give multiple interpretations for those dreams?

That's a new one on me ... not too surprising though.

Have come across the site you mentioned, kind of a mixed bag as it might pertain to all of this.

Hope none of this is off topic to the theme of this thread.

Not at all, seems quite fitting - Feel free to elaborate or expound, what have you.

C
crsschk

[b]LEGENDS

The People[/b]

Keep in mind the reasons people fall for fantasies. Keep in mind the logical fallacies I've mentioned, and others you may be familiar with already, as we look at just two of the people whose legends have fooled a lot of people -- sometimes even cult apologists -- at least some of the time. The legend people are the Joe Isuzus of religious research.

Let me first make an important distinction here. Although I will be referring to people whose stories have been shown to be false, there are actually two kinds of legends. The first is what we commonly think of as legend, that is, a story that purports to represent personal experience but doesn't. It's "made up." Obviously, this kind of legend should never be trusted as part of cult apologetics research.

The second kind of legend is a story that really is someone's personal experience, but which cannot be verified or falsified. For example, one of my first encounters with witches happened almost twenty years ago, before I began in cult apologetics. I was backpacking on Mt. San Gorgonio, near Palm Springs, and night had fallen. As I crested a ridge, I saw robed figures with candles moving through the trees toward a ritual site. The witches never saw me as I hid and watched. That's my personal experience that really happened to me.

But if there hadn't been two people with me to confirm my experience, it would have been this second kind of legend, true but not verifiable or falsifiable and therefore not trustworthy as research.

So, there are two kinds of legends, neither of which is trustworthy as research: people's stories that never happened, and people's stories that (may) have happened, but which are unverifiable and unfalsifiable. For stories to be useful for research, they must have some verifiability and falsifiability. In other words, research stories at least must have explanatory power and empirical adequacy.


[b]John Todd[/b]

How many of you remember John Todd, who claimed to have been a "Grand Druid" of witchcraft and a member of the secret high council of the "Illuminati"? Todd claimed that there was a secret conspiracy to take over the world and destroy Christianity. He had his time in the limelight as a traveling speaker in churches and as one of the people promoted through Jack Chick Publications. Todd implicated Christian leaders such as Walter Martin and Pastor Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel. For example, he claimed that, as a courier he delivered $8 million worth of checks to Chuck Smith to start Maranatha! Music as a satanic plot to deceive Christians. He made outrageous claims based on what he claimed was his "personal experience," but could provide no objective or empirical documentation for his claims. In fact, any evidence that was adduced to disprove his claims, he said were manufactured by the conspiracy. His story was neither verifiable nor falsifiable, and was thus untrustworthy for research.

In fact, his story fit the first kind of legend: Investigation showed that the story was false. Listen, for example, to the contrast between Todd's unprovable allegations and Pastor Chuck Smith's response:


Maranatha Music was actually started with my own personal investment of $3,000.00. The first album was made on a 4-trac[k] tape recorder. The first distribution was out of the trunk of the car to the local bookstores. If we had a $1 million budget, or $4 million, or $8 million budget, you can believe we would have started out fancier than we did . . . . . . Even to the present date [October 5, 1978], Maranatha Music has not done a total of $8 million in business, and this also can be easily verified and confirmed, and any reputable person is welcome to look at the books of both Calvary Chapel and Maranatha Music in order to prove the statements I make are correct.

Pastor Smith's "story" can be checked out -- it has both explanatory power and empirical adequacy, and is therefore trustworthy for research.

[b]Carlos Castaneda[/b]

Christians aren't the only ones who accept legends substituted for real research. Those of you who are around my age and who remember (or were even part of) the 1960s age of "drug enlightenment" probably remember Carlos Castaneda as the anthropologist who discovered that hallucinatory drugs bring spiritual enlightenment. He didn't do it the way many of my generation did, by dropping acid, staring into a flower, and suddenly realizing that everything is "God." He did it by spending portions of several years in the American Southwest and Mexican deserts as apprentice to an Indian shaman.

UCLA awarded Castaneda a Ph.D. in anthropology in 1973 for his field work and ethnography dissertation on Native American shamanism. The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yacqi Way of Knowledge represents that work and is known worldwide for its vivid portrayal of Castaneda's apprenticeship to the shaman, Don Juan.

However, practically nothing about Castaneda, including his name, birth date, and original nationality is what it appears to be. In fact, careful investigation and analysis shows that his books represent more of the Castaneda his college friend described as "witty, imaginative, cheerful -- a big liar and a real friend" than they do Castaneda as the serious anthropologist and reporter who sacrifices himself for scientific ethnographic research.

Like most legends, the Castaneda legend is missing dates, times, people, places and documents. Careful research and investigation uncovered gaping holes, inconsistencies, and outright fabrications in the convoluted stories Castaneda told in his four books.

But the reason I mention the Castaneda legend particularly is that I never would have expected the professional reaction to the expos. Rather than relegating his books to the legend shelf, some professionals still depend on them for ethnographic information, and still herald him as the father of the ethnographic "revolution" in anthropology!


What is most interesting is the response that has greeted the revelation that Castaneda's works are fictional. First, there has been no real attempt to revoke his Ph.D., based as it is on fraudulent "research." Secondly, as de Mille . . . documents, the response among many anthropologists and others who share the Don Juan type of philosophical outlook has been neutral. In other words, it doesn't matter if the works are fictional because the underlying philosophy is, in some vague sense, true. An excellent example of this approach is Shelburne's (1987) article titled "Carlos Castaneda: If It Didn't Happen, What Does It Matter?" Shelburne argues that "the issue of whether it [Castaneda's experience] literally happened or not makes no fundamental difference to the truth of the account" (p. 217). Such excuses are little more than intellectual used-car salesmanship.

Let's relate this back to our legend/research paradigm. Castaneda based his "revolutionary" cultural anthropological ideas on fiction. That's like building a house on sinking sand instead of solid rock. Now Shelburne and other professionals like him say it doesn't matter, because the "truth" is the same. That's like saying your sinking sand house is fine where it is -- the house itself is well- built. But, no matter how well-built the house is, it will fall apart since it's built on sand instead of solid ground. You need both a well-built house and solid ground if you expect to live in the house.

This is very different from using personal stories as illustrations or examples of what your research and evaluation have already determined. I collect stories on the cults and the occult like any other cult apologist. But I don't base my argument on stories. I heard an excellent story during our summer speaking tour this year about the emotional bondage someone can be under for going to a psychic and getting a scary prediction. It makes a good illustration when I'm talking about the subject. But hypothetically one of you could come up to me today and tell me the story isn't true. You've checked it out and the guy who told it to me made it up. That wouldn't change my basic talk on the power of suggestion in psychic predictions at all. I just wouldn't use that anymore as an example.

When Christian leaders like cult apologists substitute legends for critical thinking, evidence, and comprehensive evaluation, we lose the trust of those who have believed us, we participate (even unknowingly) in promoting what is not true, and we fail to give the trustworthy help those harmed by the cults and the occult really need.


[b]The Stories[/b]

Stories that are not necessarily autobiographies can also be legends. Many of you may be familiar with the term "urban myth," which refers to stories everybody hears about and everybody believes, nobody knows the source of, and nobody can prove. You've probably heard about the alligators in the sewers of New York. Or the young person who had been stalling about making a commitment to Christ, showed up at church one night for a service without knowing it had been canceled, assumed the empty church meant the rapture had happened but he had been left behind, and so he repented, sure he would have to suffer through the Tribulation. Or even the one about George Washington chopping down the cherry tree and then confessing. Each of these are legends.

Legendary stories appeal especially to the vulnerabilities I mentioned at the beginning of my talk such as "It fits into my world view," "I accept what I'm told," or "I base my knowledge on common sense." Legendary stories impact cult apologetics, too. Four examples will show you what I mean.

We still get questions from people who want to know how to protest and boycott Proctor and Gamble products because "if you buy any products with this symbol, you will be taking part in supporting the Church of Satan." The legend achieved its first popularity in 1982. It includes the story that the president of Proctor and Gamble confessed that company profits go to the Church of Satan on the Phil Donahue Show and the story that the familiar P&G symbol of the man in the crescent moon with thirteen stars was a satanic symbol. Of course, like all good myths, none of this is true, and Proctor and Gamble has spent hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars combatting the rumor.

The story I recounted earlier in my talk about Darwin's deathbed repentance is another legend. This legend fits especially well the ninth reason I gave for why people fall for fantasy -- it confirms the world as I would like it to be rather than as it really is. Wouldn't it be nice if Darwin repented? Wouldn't that strike a blow at evolution and warm our hearts? It ought to be true. There's one short step from "it ought to be true" to a legendary story.

And if Madayln Murray O'Hair isn't given enough credit for waging battle against Christianity through her American Atheists Association, Christians are happy to give her more by creating their own legends for her. They spun stories about her petitioning NASA to forbid astronauts to read the Bible out loud during their space flights, about her suing to have all of the United States place names with religious elements changed, and the most popular O'Hair legend to date, that she is petitioning the FCC to ban all religious broadcasting. One typical legend- repeating petition reads, "Madalyn Murray O'Hair...has been granted a Federal hearing in Washington, D. C. on the subject (F.C.C., THE PETITION, R.M. 2493) which would ultimately pave the way to stop the reading of the Gospel on the airways of America. She took her petition with 27,000 signatures to back her stand." However, there is no truth to the legend at all. The FCC statement reads, "the Commission isn't considering taking religious programming off the air, nor has a petition making such a suggestion ever been filed with the Agency." Propagation of such a rumor costs our tax dollars to cope with. At the end of 1985, the FCC averaged 100,000 letters per month protesting this non-existent petition.

Worst of all about this particular legend is that we are being duped by the atheists, from whose ranks this "rumor" evidently first started. Christians are called foolish for perpetuating a myth, and doubly foolish for perpetuating a myth started by atheists!

Our last legend story concerns the Evangelical Ministries to New Religions (EMNR), the sponsors of this conference. Have you heard the story that EMNR banned Constance Cumbey from its last conference (in Denver in 1985) and even hired security guards to keep her out? Here's what Cumbey said,


Walter Martin and a number of others got together and organized a conference in Denver in 1985. I was the only person in the country who was not invited. They hired security guards to keep me away.

We carefully investigated Cumbey's charges. We talked independently with several of the people who organized the conference, and with several people who attended. No one with direct knowledge backed up Cumbey's claims. Dr. Gordon Lewis, who hosted the conference at Denver Seminary, confirmed that Cumbey was not asked to be a speaker or make a presentation at the conference, but that she was welcome to attend like anyone else. There were many professional cult apologists who attended without being speakers. They didn't feel discriminated against. It was not a closed meeting, and those who attended without receiving personal invitations didn't feel slighted, either. Elliot Miller of the Christian Research Institute noted,

Dr. Martin was a speaker there, but . . . he was not involved in the conference's planning and organization . . . . It's true that Mrs. Cumbey was not invited to speak (which is no more strange than Walter Martin's not being invited to speak at certain end-time prophecy conferences where Cumbey is a featured attraction). However, she was more than welcome to attend. The claim that there were security guards hired to keep her out is both false (this writer was there) and preposterous.

Legendary stories may intrigue and entertain, but they do not educate and protect people from the real dangers of the world.

[b]Characteristics of a Legend[/b]

Now, think about some stories you know. Could any of them be legendary stories? Be extra cautious if the story fits any of the following characteristics.

1. There's no evidence to back it up.

Sometimes there is no evidence because of the very nature of the story, like if I had been alone when I saw the witches while I was backpacking. That doesn't mean such a story can't be true, it just means that it's not a story that can be considered trustworthy research. At most it's an illustration or example.

2. Its strongest commendation is that it ought to be true.

Be careful that you are not persuaded to believe a particular story simply because you wish it to be true. This can be a strong temptation, but don't give in to it. God won't excuse us for supporting made up stories because they serve a useful purpose.

3. It's so detailed or bizarre that we can't believe someone could make it up.

When I was in the National Guard (like my buddy Dan Quayle) I sold a car stereo to another guardsman. He still owed me ten dollars. At every monthly drill I would remind him about the ten dollars. Each time he had a different elaborate story about how he had saved the money for me, but somehow something always happened and he didn't have it with him. Finally, after months, I told him to forget the money. It wasn't worth having to put up with all of his stories. "Wait," he said, "I can't let you do that! Tell you what I'm gonna do. I raise and breed champion dogs and I'll give you a puppy for free instead." I was skeptical at first, until he told me all about his house, his dogs, his kennels, his horses, his tenants quarters, and his machine shop. What a spread! He couldn't make up something like this!

Well, the months went on and he always had some reason that a puppy wasn't available that month, but for sure would be the next month. Finally I wormed his address out of him and told him I would come to his house the next evening to pick up my dog. By this time I didn't really believe his story, but he would never admit he was lying. If he had told me the truth, I would have said, "forget it." But when he gave me his address, and agreed to meet me there to give me the puppy, I had second thoughts. Maybe he was telling the truth. Who would make all that up and then give me his address?

The next night I showed up at the address the guardsman had given me. No mansion, no kennel, no stable, no tenant's quarters, no dogs. Just a run down little California bungalow with some tools in the garage. Of course, no one was home. But I couldn't resist going next door and asking the neighbor who lived there. The name and description matched the guardsman, but the neighbor said he was a backyard mechanic with no steady employment.

At the next Guard drill, I walked up to the guardsman. "What happened to you? I went to your house, but you weren't there."

"Yeah, one of my dogs got sick and I had to go to this special vet across town. He only treats show dogs."

"But what happened to your other dogs? There weren't any dogs there at all."

"Oh, I forgot to tell you. They're at my parents' house while I'm getting the kennel remodeled."

"But there wasn't any kennel. There wasn't any mansion or stable, either."

"Oh, you must have gone to my tenant's quarters instead. You got it mixed up. My house is way in the back of the lot. You can hardly see it from the street. You must have been confused."

I never did tell him I had talked to his neighbor. But I figure I got my ten dollars worth anyway. The story makes a great illustration! Be skeptical of a story that seems too detailed or too bizarre to be made up.


[b]Summary[/b]

Legends are poor substitutes for adequately researched evaluations. "Novel people" do not make trustworthy experts, and legendary stories don't equip us to deal with the real threats of the cults and the occult.

Whether or not the people of legends know their stories aren't true, are simply delusional, or even if their stories are true but unverifiable and unfalsifiable, they should never be used as the basis for research evaluation. Bad testimonies hurt real victims and hurt our credibility, too. When we trust people who aren't telling the truth we trust a lie. When we trust people who are delusional we exploit people who need Christian counseling and discipleship. When we trust people whose stories can be neither proven nor disproved we are substituting vicarious experience for evidence.

[i]Cont.[/i]

C
crsschk

[b]HEROES[/b]

Now that we've cleared away the dross of cult apologetics research, we can talk about how to do responsible religious research. This last portion of my talk is divided into three sections: (1) Critical Thinking; (2) Preparation for Research; (3) and How to Do Research.

1. Critical Thinking

Here are some considerations to help you think critically as a researcher. Of course, steering clear of the pitfalls and fallacies we have already surveyed is one important way to think critically.


[b]Objectivity in research[/b]

You may think this principle goes without saying. After all, no researcher plans to be subjective. But you would be surprised how many times subjectivity creeps in without you even being aware of it. Subjectivity keeps us from looking at all sides of an issue and from understanding alternate perspectives. This does not mean that we should believe all sides, or that we don't have a particular, Christian point of view. But it means that we are capable of accurately understanding and representing what we don't agree with and answering it on those terms rather than terms manufactured out of our own subjectivity.

Subjectivity fails to take into account even major differences among world religions and world views. This is especially easy to do when one does not have a solid background of study and education in biblical doctrine. It is easy to confuse Mormonism and Hinduism, thinking that they have the same religious ideas, simply because both believe in more than one god (polytheism), even though the way they explain and understand their respective beliefs about god are very different. In the same way, many people don't realize that Hinayanic Buddhism, while incorporating religious practices and traditions, is actually atheistic. Others lump Satanism and witchcraft together, failing to understand that their beliefs are as divergent from each other as are the views of the Way International cult from those of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Failing to understand someone's beliefs and world view harms our credibility, both among Christians and in the world. It also makes people think you don't care enough to find out what they really believe -- you just want to ridicule them. Subjective understanding or presentation of contrary beliefs sabotages one's apologetic against those beliefs. It is impossible to be persuasive in your refutation of a position if you can't even articulate or properly present that position. We cannot afford to be subjective in our research.

One step toward objectivity is to use primary sources in your research. Don't take someone else's word for what happened, or why a cult has a particular practice, or what someone believes. Check it out with the cult, or the cultic literature, or the cultist.

Another principle of objectivity is to try to understand your research from the perspective of its source. If you were a Mormon, how would you think about this doctrine? If you were a satanist, what would you mean by this phrase?

A third step in objectivity is checking your research with others. Let someone you trust see your research and check your conclusions. Try your ideas on someone with knowledge in the field. Try your new apologetic argument on several cultists before you put it in your new book.


[b]When to believe or reject a story[/b]

Here's a brief checklist that can give you a good general indication of whether or not you should tend to believe a story you hear:

1. Is the story documentable? Does it have names, dates, locations, facts that can be checked? Be especially wary of the story that has what I call "phantom documentation." That is, the story teller may say, "I would give you the documentation, but the satanists said they'd kill me if I tell anyone," or, "There used to be records that I graduated from that seminary, but the New Agers sneaked in and changed the records." Phantom documentation is no more trustworthy or useful for research than is no documentation.

2. Is the source for the story reliable? Is the main figure in the story someone whose credibility, integrity, and honesty are well-known or can be checked? If not, you need to find out why not, and reconsider trusting that story.

3. Does the story fit the biblical world view? Does anything in it contradict the Bible or Christianity? Someone may tell a very convincing story about remembering past lives, but reincarnation contradicts what we know from the Bible to be true. No story that contradicts biblical truth can be trustworthy.

4. Is there reliable, appropriate data supporting the major quantifiable statements in the story? For example, if a story says there were 1500 satanists following one leader in a rural area, but the population and crime data for that area makes such a claim incredible, then it should not be trusted. A story whose claims are completely unsupported by available data is not trustworthy as research.

5. Does the story teller seem to aggrandize his role in the story, artificially inflating his importance, power, or victimization? Although this question is sometimes very difficult to answer, in clear-cut cases such myopic subjectivism lessens the credibility of the story.

These are a few principles that will help you to decide which stories to reject outright, and which ones merit further investigation and perhaps inclusion in your research.

[b]Different tests for different cases[/b]

Critical thinking recognizes that different kinds of situations need different kinds of proof. Empirical information, involving the senses and the material world, need to be tested empirically. Spiritual propositions need to be tested by spiritual values. And philosophical arguments need to be tested by philosophical means.

The story teller who tells you he can heal broken limbs through crystal power needs to provide empirical verification -- x-rays, scientifically repeatable tests, etc. The story teller who tells you he loves God should provide spiritual verification -- he should live morally, attend church regularly, express his love for other Christians, preach the gospel, etc.

Use your critical thinking ability to figure out what kinds of claims your story makes, and which tests are appropriate for such claims.


[b]The Golden Rule Apologetic[/b]

We're all familiar with the Golden Rule, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you," but unless you know me, you probably haven't heard of the Golden Rule Apologetic. This is my way of saying that whatever you require of another, you should be willing to provide of yourself. For example, if you reject someone's argument about New Testament Greek because he doesn't understand enough Greek to present his argument, but you expect him to believe your argument even though you don't know enough Greek to understand the argument you photocopied from a Greek scholar, then you are not practicing the Golden Rule Apologetic. In addition, if you wouldn't be persuaded by an argument too complicated for you to understand, don't condemn the cultist you argue with if he won't give in because he doesn't understand your argument. Conversely, if a cultist rejects your witness by saying you're judging him and Christians aren't supposed to judge, the Golden Rule Apologetic gives you every right to ask him if he is judging you.

The Golden Rule Apologetic says that your test should be fair enough that you would be willing to be judged by it as well as those you are investigating. If you practice the Golden Rule Apologetic, your research will be fair and objective.

These four principles can help us start to think critically in all of the cult apologetics research we undertake. With proper preparation and procedures, we should produce quality, trustworthy research.

2. Preparation for Research

Some preliminary remarks are in order concerning preparation for research. First, we need to remember that cult apologetics research necessarily requires discernment and judgment. It cannot be avoided. The Bible does not forbid us to judge, it demands that we judge with biblical standards, and that we remember that we are judged by those same standards. If we judge with biblical standards, our research will preserve truth, reject falsehoods, protect integrity, expose duplicity, uphold the innocent, and judge the guilty. Don't discontinue your research because someone accuses you of judging and tells you to "just leave it in God's hands, brother." If you are in cult apologetics, you should be here because God has called you to this ministry and he will use you as his hands in this area.

Second, we need to remember that simply because a person or story does not meet the special demands of cult apologetics research does not mean necessarily that it is untrue or fraudulent. The principle that a man is presumed innocent until proven guilty should govern our heart attitude, even though we rightly reject it from our research pool. My story about the witches on the mountainside, if it were not corroborated by my friends, would not be adequate as research information. But I've never made that story the basis for my knowledge about and evaluation of witchcraft. Standards for stories as illustrations, anecdotes, or examples are much less rigorous than are the standards for stories as research. When a person bases his authority in a particular field (say, for example, satanism) on his personal experience in satanism, then we can and must demand much more verifiability and falsifiability from him than from someone who bases his authority on comprehensive research, and uses his previous experiences in satanism as merely illustrative of his research findings.


[b]Ethics of research[/b]

Some general principles concerning the ethics of research are (1) be honest; (2) don't betray a confidence; (3) don't reveal your suspicions or hopes until they are fully verified; (4) don't steal any other researcher's work or ideas, or usurp his report; (5) don't withhold vital information from someone who needs to know; and (6) don't fabricate research or documentation.

Being honest doesn't mean that you have to tell your whole life story and the five year goals of your ministry every time you ask a research question. But it does mean that you conduct your research with a strong commitment to truth. You should remember the Golden Rule Apologetic and treat the subject of your investigation in exactly the same way you would want to be treated if it were your story.

A Christian researcher must be trusted to keep his word regarding what is told him confidentially. No Christian researcher should find himself in a position where he has to betray a confidence. If you are asked to keep a confidence, weigh the matter carefully before you agree. Make it a personal research practice not to agree to confidences unless you are certain there would not be any occasion when you would feel compelled to break that confidence. You should maintain this trustworthiness with your fellow researchers, too. For example, if you receive confidential information about an ongoing research project another researcher is doing, you have an obligation to keep that confidential. If you don't, you may compromise the rest of his research, needlessly hurt people, spread information that is ultimately unproven, and destroy any trust the researcher may have had for you.

Leaking information from your research before it is completed is a dishonest way of promoting your opinions without having to prove them. Telling stories you haven't verified about a group or individual is gossip, not research. You can misrepresent, slander, libel, and cause serious harm by declaring your conclusions before you do enough research to prove your conclusions true. In addition, even if you are on the right track, your precipitous report gives the target of your research the information it needs to cover its tracks or otherwise countermove.

Stealing research is as wrong (and often illegal) as stealing a watch or money from a bank. There is not enough power, fame, or fortune in the business of cult apologetics for any of us to be able to afford having our research stolen. Often the article, speaking engagement, or book resulting from our research is the only source of reimbursement we get for our hours of research and hundreds of dollars of research expenses. More often, the monetary return on our research is nowhere near enough to cover our research expenses, and the recognition or acknowledgment we get from our work is the only "profit" involved. The researcher who steals research or scoops another researcher's story works against all the rest of us. The principle some try to use, "it's all for the Lord anyway," is a perversion of biblical truth. "He who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope."

There's not really a contradiction between "don't break a confidence" and "don't withhold information from someone who needs to know." You should never, for example, agree to keep a confidence that involves covering up about a criminal act that has been or is likely to be committed. You should never agree to keep a confidence if doing so gives someone the direct opportunity to harm someone physically, emotionally, or spiritually.

There are many ways to fabricate research or documentation. The obvious way is to make up research or documentation without any regard for the facts. Most fabrication in cult apologetics research is less deliberate.

Quoting from a secondary source as though it were a primary source is one form of fabrication. This is how we create "bibliographical ghosts." Let's say I write an article and within my article I quote the Book of Mormon. But I accidentally transpose two words and the quote ends up being inaccurate, but not noticeably so. Now let's say one of you decides to give a talk on Mormonism. You read my article, like the quote I use from the Book of Mormon, and decide to use it in your talk. But you don't actually check the Book of Mormon to make sure the quote is accurate, and when you give your talk you say, "the Book of Mormon says..." instead of "Bob Passantino says the Book of Mormon says..." You have created a bibliographical ghost. Another common form of fabrication occurs when you quote or cite incorrectly from memory. Sometimes your data isn't quite what you wish it were, and you inflate it just a bit so it looks better, or you embellish a quote from someone you interviewed because it would make your case stronger if he actually said what he only implied. Even though it takes a lot of work and patience, be scrupulous about not fabricating. If those who trust you find out your ministry produces fabrications, you will lose their trust and hurt the very people you are trying to help. We can't serve in the name of the God of truth with fabrications.


[b]Personal integrity[/b]

Cult apologetics is by nature a profession where individual integrity is often questioned and challenged. You cannot afford to be slain by the same sword you wield against the cult leaders and occultists.

Nobody is perfect, and most people have a few skeletons in their closets. But you must be honest and above board where your personal integrity is concerned or you will have none. If you don't have advanced degrees, don't let people think you do. If you don't have experience, don't pretend you do.

Maintain scrupulous finances for your organization. Handle all financial matters openly, honestly, and in compliance with the law.

Think about your life before you were a Christian. What are the worst things about your life before you became a Christian that someone could reveal and criticize you for? Now think about your life after you became a Christian. What are the worst things about your Christian life someone could reveal and criticize you for? Now think about your organization. What are its most vulnerable points regarding its professional and organizational integrity?

Carefully weigh the consequences and take the most appropriate steps necessary to ensure your personal, professional, and organizational integrity. You don't have to publish your own edition of True Confession, but you do have to be able to live with what your previous actions or associations may cost you. Maybe an appropriate step to take is to reconcile with someone you wronged years ago. Maybe you need to pay back a loan you received when you first started your ministry. Maybe you need to revise your printed biography so it doesn't give a false impression anymore. Maybe you need to disincorporate your organization and start over with a new Board of Directors. Maybe you need to print a retraction or apology for something you published that wasn't true.

There is a high cost for integrity. But there is also nothing more valuable. Be someone hurting people can trust.

[i]Cont.[/i]

C
crsschk

3. How to do research

In this section I will survey research fundamentals; field research; library research; interviewing; networking; and reporting your research. While the scope of this talk cannot include detail on any of these areas, the following principles and the recommended reading will introduce you to comprehensive research.


[b]Research fundamentals[/b]

Since we've come this far together, I assume that you agree with me that fantasies and legends are no substitutes for good research. Good research takes a lot of time and many people consider it boring, but it is essential to responsible cult apologetics.

Five Ws and One H

When I begin a new research project, I turn first to what are known as the journalists' six friends: "The Five Ws and One H." These provide the framework into which I plug the information I gather during my research. I know that when I have enough information to answer Who?, What?, Why?, Where?, When?, and How?, I will have the results of a well-rounded research project.

Answering the "Who" question identifies the players. Who founded the cult? Who is attracted to the cult? Who are its members? Who is its current leader? Who is critical of it? Who left it? Who knows more about it?

Answering the "What" question identifies the problem. What does the cult believe? What happens to its members? What attracts people to it? What makes people stay? What makes them leave? What do outsiders say about it? What do critics say about it? What kind of world view does it promote? What does the cult teach about God, Jesus Christ, man, sin and salvation, and scripture? What do its leaders say? What do its members say? What are its primary sources for revelation, doctrine, and rules of conduct?

Answering the "Why" question gets behind the actions or events to the causes or motives. Why do members believe the cult teachings? Why does the cult leader think he's the Messiah? Why did all the members move to Tibet? Why do the members believe God is impersonal? Why are certain beliefs ridiculed by this cult? Why is this cult so antagonistic to Christianity? Why do the members have to follow certain dietary restrictions? Why are members told not to talk to outsiders? Why are ex-members shunned?

Answering the "Where" question situates the problem within its geographical and cultural setting. Where is the cult leader from? Where did the cult start? Where do most of its converts come from? Where is its headquarters? Where does its leader travel? Where is its literature distributed? Where can I find more information on it?

Answering the "When" question gives a chronology or history of the problem. When was it founded? When did other historical events happen in relation to its founding and other significant developments? When was its leader born? When did the leader first reveal himself as a spiritual leader? When does the cult see the fulfillment of certain prophecies taking place? When did the first critics respond? When are potential converts pressured to join? When are troublesome members excommunicated?

Answering the "How" question facilitates understanding the dynamics of the group or event and its relative strength. How is the cult financed? How is evangelism conducted? How does the group promote itself and its teachings? How does the power structure within the organization operate? How can I persuade members to talk to me? How can I get copies of primary source documents? How does the leader persuade members to believe him? How many people are involved?

As you can see from this short example, by asking enough Five W and One H questions, and then searching for the answers to those questions, you can develop a good base of research categories from which you can develop your evaluation. These questions can be adapted for other kinds of research, too.


[b]Twenty Questions of Research[/b]

Remember the game "Twenty Questions?" That game is really a critical thinking exercise by which research is evaluated to give a conclusion that reaches its goal. It's a very simplified form of research method. By asking the right questions you can know what it is you need to find out in your research. Asking the right questions saves you from having to master all of the knowledge in the universe in an effort to ensure you have done enough research. The important questions you ask in your research will change somewhat from one project to another, but here are twenty that I find generally helpful in most of the research I do:

1. What is my quantifiable goal for this project?
2. Does this project involve mostly field research, interviewing, library research, statistical sampling, or what other kind of research?
3. Will I be likely to find most of my information in contemporary sources or historical sources?
4. In what geographical area(s) will I be likely to find most of the information I need?
5. Which people do I need to contact who have secondary information?
6. Which people do I need to contact who have primary information?
7. Do I know anyone who has special access to information I need?
8. What other research has already been done on this problem?
9. Which public or government agencies, directories, documents, or data bases might have information I need?
10. Which other cult apologetics ministries might have information I need?
11. Are there photographs, pictures, maps, or drawings that will help me?
12. What ideas does the reference librarian have for getting this kind of information?
13. What general information sources are available (atlases, history books, encyclopedias, almanacs, etc.)?
14. How much time can I devote to this project?
15. When does this project need to be completed?
16. What will this research be used for?
17. How will the target of my research respond to my evaluation?
18. Who will criticize my research, why, and how?
19. What do I think is the most important piece of research to find?
20. What am I going to do with this research?

Don't forget that creative thinking is one of the most important aspects of good research.
Don't think that not working if you're not pounding on a keyboard or conducting an interview on the phone. Sitting and thinking through your research project, organizing your thoughts and goals, and creating a workable action plan is essential for good research.

[b]Errors corrected by research[/b]

Good research can check your critical thinking and ensure a reliable evaluation of your problem. The following summary of errors corrected by research is prepared from Arnold Binder and Gilbert Geis' Methods of Research in Criminology and Criminal Justice:

1. Errors of observation. Humans not only fail to see important features in a given scene but often invent false observations. Good research can reconcile conflicts in observation and confirm accurate observation.
2. Selective observation. Different people viewing the same event or phenomenon will notice different things according to their interests and biases. Good research identifies those interests and biases and reconciles those with the recorded observations and the actual concrete evidences of the event.
3. Errors of interpretation. Our personal biases, fears, and inclinations determine how we will interpret what we observe. Good research will investigate the situation from all perspectives, enabling us to sort the misperceptions and affirm the accurate perceptions.
4. Incorrect generalization. This error results largely from a failure to distinguish between what actually is the case and the general principles we infer from the case. Good research ensures that no generalizations are accepted without abundant justification.
5. Dependence on authority. Many people's beliefs are based on the statements of people they consider to be authorities. Those statements may or may not be valid. Good research sorts opinion from fact and points us toward the evidence rather than the theories.
6. Inappropriate use of evidence. Data may be based on accurate observation and seem like good evidence for a certain conclusion. But that data might not be the right data or give us the answers we need for the situation we face. Good research distinguishes between adequate and inadequate data and tells us when we have the right data and when we need different data.

[b]Developing a research pool[/b]

Those of you who have unlimited budgets, plenty of extra time, and are wondering how to keep your staffs busy don't have to listen to this part. You can afford to start each research project from scratch. The rest of us need to develop research pools into which we can put research as we find it, even if it doesn't pertain to our current project; and from which we can then retrieve it when we need it.

A research pool includes your research files, your ministry phone directory, your list of colleagues and their specialties, your ministry library, your collections of cassette tapes and videos, your periodicals collection, your computer data base, etc. It's everything you can get your hands on that contributes to your researching ability.

The more organized and detailed your research pool is, the more accessible its information base is, and the more helpful it will be to you. This is one part of research where you are very vulnerable. The best book in the world is no good to you if you can't remember where you put it. The greatest photocopy won't do you any good if it's misfiled and you can't find it. The world's leading authority is no help if you lost his phone number and address.

The basic principle behind a workable, useful research pool is organization. Keep what will be useful. Throw out what isn't. Carefully label what you keep, put it in the right place, and keep your index up to date and handy. In a remarkably short time you will be amazed at how much research you can do in your own office.


[b]Summary[/b]

The fundamentals of research, built on top of your critical thinking bedrock, constitute the foundation of your research apparatus. You can add to good fundamentals, good field research, library research, interviewing, and networking and be able to meet almost any research challenge.

[b]Field research[/b]

Field research is varied and complex, so I will only comment briefly on some of its most common aspects. Field research means any research you can't do within your own office or library. It includes going to a physical site, telephoning someone for information, checking public records, etc.

Often cult apologetics researchers forget about field research because the library research is so easily accessible and usually also so overwhelming. But field research can add invaluable information to your research, and in some instances it is the only source of information you have.

If you go to a physical site for research, plan ahead. Know what you are looking for. Write down the questions you hope the on-site investigation will answer. Under each question, list the kinds of things you should look for that will provide the information you need to answer the question. Be sure you bring your notes, blank paper and pen, and, if appropriate, a tape recorder (with batteries and blank tapes) and camera (with film). Once you are at the site, survey the area in a general way before you concentrate on the particular things you came to investigate. Make notes of things you will need to remember later, or things to follow up on at a later time. Write down everything of significance. Record or photograph as necessary. When you are ready to leave the site, review your investigation. Look over your notes. Correct any errors you notice immediately, before you forget. Check to be sure you haven't overlooked anything before you leave. While the scene is still fresh in your mind, write down leads you would like to follow at a later time. Make a list of the information you were able to obtain, a list of what you couldn't find, and a list of what you still need to locate or check.

Telephone field research overlaps interviewing, so I will just mention it here. Before you jump into your car and rush over to the local cult headquarters for some information, think about whether you could accomplish what you need to better by phone. In fact, sometimes people are more apt to give you the information you ask for on the phone than they are if you show up in person. Maybe they assume phone calls are harmless. Here are some good contacts by telephone: reference librarians, personnel offices, authorities in the field, public officials, statistical offices like the Centers for Disease Control or the U. S. Weather Service, 800 information lines, etc.

Public records are a big part of the field research domain. There are public records on births, deaths, marriages, adoptions, wills, passport applications, educational enrollment and graduation, employment history, name changes, home addresses and phone numbers, articles of incorporation, boards of director, non-profit organization tax information reports, civil and criminal complaints, real estate transactions, address changes, etc. If you are diligent at using public records, you can find a wealth of information before you even contact the person or organization you are investigating.


[b]How to discover a credible chronology[/b]

Let's say you wanted to research the founder of a new cult. You know that the cult was founded in 1987 in Kansas City, and the founder mentioned in a speech that he was four years old in 1940. You want to learn everything you can about the founder. So far all you have is that he was born in 1936 and has lived in Kansas City at least since 1987. That accounts for three of his fifty- three years. Start with his recent history and work your way back. Listen to his speeches. Read his books. Maybe in one speech he mentions he came to Kansas City right after he returned from his pilgrimage from San Francisco to Tibet, and in another speech he says he spent two years in Tibet, beginning in 1983. Now you know that he was born in 1936, he was in Tibet from 1983 through 1985, and he has been in Kansas City since 1986. You check with the county recorder in San Francisco and find out he applied for his passport in 1982 and listed his address as San Francisco. Now you know that he lived in San Francisco at least in 1982. And you know he hadn't been out of the country legally before 1982. Check with the reference librarian at the San Francisco Central Library and see if his phone number is listed in the phone book for 1982. It is. Have the librarian check further back. His number is also listed in 1981, 1980, and 1979. It's not listed in 1978. You now know he lived in San Francisco from at least 1978 through 1982, in Tibet from 1982-1985, and in Kansas City from 1986 through the present. By using your public document access and critical thinking, you can build a chronology for the vast majority of people you need to research. Sometimes there's no substitute for field research.

[b]Libraries[/b]

Each of you probably has your own cult apologetics library, whether it consists of less than one hundred books or of close to 10,000 books. And it's probably divided into at least two categories: primary sources and secondary sources. But there are other libraries that can be invaluable sources of research information.

Start with your local college or university library. Visit the library and ask the reference librarian to give you a tour of the reference section. You won't believe the hundreds of different kinds of reference books available in the reference section of the average university library. There are books listing every accredited doctorate degree granted in the United States; all the religious denominations, sects, and cults with their reported memberships; every major United States corporation, its officers and boards; all of the major periodicals, with separate books for each type (sociology, religious, engineering, etc.); dictionaries tracing the historical developments of a particular language, etc. After you feel comfortable with the reference section, tackle the main part of the library.

Find out what special libraries there are in your area. If you have legitimate research needs, most special libraries will let you use them, although they may restrict you from checking books out. Many major corporations have specialized libraries dealing with their field of commerce. Hospitals have medical libraries. Courts have law libraries. Museums have historical libraries.

Find out if any of the libraries you are interested in have computer modem accessible catalogs. If you have a computer with a modem, you can access these libraries from your own computer and save a lot of time looking for the resources you need. We access the University of California library system by modem. We do our catalog search (for books and periodicals) by modem, print out the titles we want, and then run over to the university to pick them up. We know exactly what we want and where to get it.


[b]Interviewing[/b]

As more and more cultic and occultic phenomena proliferate, cult apologists are going to spend more time interviewing. Sometimes interviewing is the only way to get information about a new cult which has produced no literature yet and about which nothing of significance has been written. Interviewing is also important for understanding exactly what someone means by what he says. In fact, often we misunderstand and even misrepresent someone's beliefs or arguments because his written words are ambiguous and we didn't interview him to allow him to explain what he meant. Interviewing could be one paper topic in itself, but a few considerations should be mentioned here.

The purpose of an interview is to get information from someone else. The information may or may not be reliable, but someone else has it and you need it. A good interviewer sets his subject at ease, moves from general questions to specific requests, doesn't respond emotionally to his subject's answers, reveals as little of his own information as possible, doesn't ask leading questions that can obscure his subject's intended answers, learns to distinguish between his subject's opinions and the facts he knows, recognizes information he wasn't expecting and follows up on it, and leaves his subject willing to talk more at a later time.

It is well worth the time to study a few good resources on interviewing, and then to practice interviewing until you begin to understand how to implement these different techniques. I especially recommend Robert F. Royal and Steven R. Schutt's The Gentle Art of Interviewing and Investigation, Jacob Fisher's Faces of Deceit, and Horgan's Criminal Investigation.


[b]Networking[/b]

I have seen a serious and growing lack in cult apologetics over the last few years. We have all become so busy and there are so many more of us now that we don't communicate with each other as we ought. Conferences like this are essential for us to maintain good working relationships with each other. We can all help each other. We can share information, resources, ideas, and research. This is not supposed to be a competitive field. We have a unity of purpose, a unity of the Spirit, and a unity of faith that should bind us in close association, with helping those hurt by the cults and the occult as our mutual goal.

If we remember to work with integrity, respect each other's projects, communicate clearly and frequently, and share what the Lord has given us, we will multiply our research efforts almost exponentially.


[b]Reporting[/b]

Once we have finished our research project, we need to report on it. The form of our reports will vary considerably. We might write an article, publish a newsletter, give a television interview, prepare a new speech, or contribute to someone else's project. But all good research reports contain some key common elements.

First, good reports are complete. Partial facts can distort the picture. Incomplete information can prevent us from drawing valid conclusions from our research. Be sure your report contains the negative as well as the positive. Sometimes what you don't find is as important as what you do. Consider what your report does not cover. What work would need to be done to answer some questions your report doesn't answer? Be sure your report has complete documentation and footnotes.

Second, good reports are concise. Don't take three sentences to say what can be said in one sentence. Long, repetitive, boring reports lose your reader's interest and encourage him to draw faulty conclusions because he has forgotten what you said in the beginning. Eliminate unnecessary words, technical phrases, and parentheticals. Say what you need to say and then stop.

Third, good reports are clear. Short, clear sentences written with unambiguous vocabulary communicate effectively and accurately. Never leave your reader in doubt about what you mean. Avoid generalities when being specific is more clear and accurate.

Fourth, good reports are accurate. Accuracy is essential to your trustworthiness as a researcher. Restrict your report to facts or what you can prove. Don't mix speculation or guesses in with what you know for sure. Errors or omissions in reports raise doubts about the accuracy, reliability, and ability of the reporter.

These are essential characteristics of any good report. When you couple sound, comprehensive research with good reporting, you are able to communicate effectively and accurately.

There are three other considerations to keep in mind. First, don't let exclusivism prevent those who need to know from receiving the results of your research. It is reasonable for you to want the right to report on your research before anyone else does. But if one stall after another happens and you don't report in a timely fashion, have the grace to let someone else make your report (with due credit to you for the research, of course). Did you know that at least 400 documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls have never been publicly translated and published, more than forty years after their discovery? The scholars with proprietary rights to them have not yet found the time.

Second, it is a good idea to submit your research and reports to your peers for evaluation, suggestions, and criticism. This cooperative effort ensures quality, tested research and reporting. Better to have your colleague find out your argument is flawed than to wait till it's published and the cultist finds the flaw!

Third, be mature enough to recognize when you don't have adequate research from which to make an adequate report. Sometimes it's impossible to come up with a sufficient amount of the right kind of research, and we have to realize that we can't make a definitive statement on the subject as we had hoped. Don't publish an inadequate report. It doesn't meet the need, and it can mislead people.


[b]CONCLUSION[/b]

In this far-reaching survey we have seen the good and the bad of religious research theory, techniques, and application. We've learned how to tell the fantasies and the legends from the truth, and we have established some basic guidelines for responsible religious research.
I leave you with the challenge to follow in the footsteps of the early Christian research reporter, Luke:


Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which are most surely believed among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account,...that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.

([i]End.[/i])

B
broclint

Brother Mike,

Perhaps this thread could be made into one of those sticky threads kept nearby for reference. I confess my own tendency to "jump to conclusions" is far more prevelant than it ought to be... far too ready to "believe" according to preconceptions, even far too ready to "doubt" many times by the same token. Far too quick to jump before seeing what is on the bottom. But may God place in my heart such a love for truth, and such a love for Him who is truth, such the spirit of the Bereans, that I may be guarded from errors of the kind that have far too often clouded my vision... and unfortunately clouded some posts of late. May God forgive me, and all those who visit these forums.

Clint

C
crsschk

Hi brother,

Have this line about '[i]being fed from your own kitchen[/i]' stuck in the mind - It related to Spurgeon hearing one of his own sermons preached one time ...

I confess my own tendency to "jump to conclusions" is far more prevelant than it ought to be... far too ready to "believe" according to preconceptions, even far too ready to "doubt" many times by the same token. Far too quick to jump before seeing what is on the bottom.

Without a doubt - The seemingly inconsequential over against the more outrageous, perhaps not so much. That is to say, the gullibility factor and the outlandish that so much of this warns against, but the little conjuring's of the mind in day to day matters.

This whole running post is a large data dump - It's not all one grand agreement in so many nuances. It's not setup as a large apologetic or 'watch dog' though it contains those elements. Just another attempt to cause some thought, I guess yes, [i]critical[/i] thinking - We being such tricksters of our own fallen minds.

Pretty much had run through those things that I had found originally but certain words have again brought up more food for thought - Fear. Facts. Integrity, even the very cementing phrase you just used - [i]love for truth[/i] - How often do we settle for those things that are not true, that fall short of 'true truth' and lapse into heeding so much soothsaying, speculative reasonings, 'prophecies' that with the insert of even a couple of months just fade into the abyss, as if they were never worth considering but cause all kinds of excitement and [i]fear[/i] while they are in motion?

Would love to see and hear others thoughts towards it all, additions, subtractions, what have you.

S
sermonindex

Hope this is a good addition, from J. C. Ryle -

[i]"We live in an age when men profess to dislike dogmas and creeds, and are filled with a morbid dislike to controversial theology.

He who dares to say of one doctrine that 'it is true,' and of another that 'it is false,' must expect to be called narrow-minded and uncharitable, and to lose the praise of men ... The danger is real, great, and unmistakable.

Never was it so needful to say, Be not carried about (with divers and strange doctrines)"[/i]

- Warning #5 to the Church


[b]All Kinds of Strange Teachings[/b] by J. C. Ryle

"Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings. It is good for our hearts to be strengthened by grace, not by ceremonial foods, which are of no value to those who eat them" (Hebrews 13:9)

The text which heads this paper is an apostolic caution against false doctrine. It forms part of a warning which Paul addressed to Hebrew Christians. It is a caution just as much needed now as it was eighteen hundred years ago. Never, I think, was it so important for Christian ministers to cry aloud continually, "Do not be carried away."

That old enemy of mankind, the devil, has no more subtle instrument for ruining souls than that of spreading false doctrine. "A murderer and a liar from the beginning. . . .your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour." Outside the Church he is ever persuading men to maintain outrageous customs and destructive superstitions. Human sacrifice to idols, gross revolting, cruel, disgusting worship of abominable false deities, persecution, slavery, cannibalism, child murder, devastating religious wars--all these are a part of Satan's handiwork, and the fruit of his suggestions. Like a pirate, his object is to "sink, burn, and destroy." Inside the Church he is ever laboring to sow heresies, to propagate errors, to foster departures from the faith. If he cannot prevent the waters flowing from the Fountain of Life, he tries hard to poison them. If he cannot destroy the remedy of the Gospel, he strives to adulterate and corrupt it. No wonder that he is called "Apollyon, the destroyer."

The Divine Comforter of the Church, the Holy Spirit, has always employed one great agent to oppose Satan's plans. That agent is the Word of God. The Word expounded and unfolded, the Word explained and opened up, the Word made clear to the head and applied to the heart. The Word is the chosen weapon by which the devil must be confronted and confounded. The Word was the sword which the Lord Jesus wielded in the temptation. To every assault of the Tempter, He replied, "It is written." The Word is the sword which His ministers must use in the present day, if they would successfully resist the devil. The Bible, faithfully and freely expounded, is the safeguard of Christ's Church.

I desire to remember this lesson, and to invite attention to the text which stands at the head of this paper. We live in an age when men profess to dislike dogmas and creeds, and are filled with a morbid dislike to controversial theology. He who dares to say of one doctrine that "it is true," and of another that "it is false," must expect to be called narrow-minded and uncharitable, and to lose the praise of men. Nevertheless, the Scripture was not written in vain. Let us examine the mighty lessons contained in Paul's words to the Hebrews. They are lessons for us as well as for them.


1. First comes the broad warning. "Do not be not carried away by all kinds of strange teachings."

The meaning of these words is not a hard thing to understand. "Be not tossed back and forth," the Apostle seems to say, "by every blast of false teaching, like ships without compass or rudder. False doctrines will arise as long as the world lasts, in many numbers, with varying minor details, in one point alone always the same--strange, new, foreign, and departing from the Gospel of Christ. They do exist now. They will always be found within the visible Church. Remember this, and do not be carried away." Such is Paul's warning.

The Apostle's warning does not stand alone. Even in the midst of the Sermon on the Mount there fell from the loving lips of our Savior a solemn caution: "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves" (Matthew 7:15). Even in Paul's last address to the Ephesian elders, he finds time to warn his friends against false doctrine: "Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them"
(Acts 20:30).

Note what the Second Epistle to the Corinthians says: "I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ"
(2 Corinthians 11:3). Note what the Epistle to the Galatians says: "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel." "Who has bewitched you?" "After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?" "How is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles?" "You are observing special days and months and seasons and years!" "I fear for you." "Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery."
(Galatians 1:6; 3:1, 3; 4:9, 10, 11; 5:1).

Note what the Epistle to the Ephesians says: "No longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching" (Ephesians 4:14). Note what the Epistle to the Colossians says: "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ" (Colossians 2:8). Note what the First Epistle to Timothy says: "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith" (1 Timothy 4:1). Note what the Second Epistle of Peter says: "There will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies" (2 Peter 2:1). Note what the First Epistle of John says: "Do not believe every spirit. Many false prophets have gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1). Note what the Epistle of Jude says: "Contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. For certain men have secretly slipped in among you" (Jude 1:3, 4). These things were written for our learning.

What shall we say about these texts? How they may strike others I cannot say. I only know how they strike me. To tell us, as some do, in the face of these texts, that the early Churches were a model of perfection and purity, is absurd even in Apostolic days, its appears, there were abundant errors both in doctrine and practice. To tell us, as others do, that pastors ought never to handle controversial subjects, and never to warn their people against erroneous views, is senseless and unreasonable. If we did this then we would have to ignore most of the New Testament. Surely the dumb dog and the sleeping shepherd are the best allies of the wolf, the thief, and the robber. It is not for nothing that Paul says, "If you point these things out to the brothers, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 4:6).

A plain warning against false doctrine is especially needed in the present day. The school of the Pharisees, and the school of the Sadducees, those ancient mothers of all mischief, were never more active than they are now.

--Between men adding to the truth on one side, and men taking away from it on the other.

--Between those who bury truth under additions, and those who mutilate it by subtractions.

--Between superstition and infidelity.

--Between Roman Catholicism and neology [New Theology].

--Between Ritualism and Rationalism.

Between these upper and lower millstones the Gospel is near being crushed to death! Strange views are continually propounded by pastors about subjects of the deepest importance. About the atonement, the divinity of Christ, the inspiration of the Bible, the reality of miracles, the eternity of future punishment, about the Church, the ministerial office, the Lord's Supper, Baptism, the confessional, the honor due to the Virgin, prayers for the dead. About all these things there is nothing too outrageous to be taught by some ministers in these latter days. By the pen and by the tongue, by the press and by the pulpit, the country is incessantly deluged with a flood of erroneous opinions. To ignore the fact is mere blindness. Others see it, even if we pretend to be ignorant of it. The danger is real, great, and unmistakable. Never was it so needful to say, "Do not be carried away."

Many things combine to make the present inroad of false doctrine peculiarly dangerous. There is an undeniable zeal in some of the teachers of error: their "earnestness" makes many think they must be right. There is a great appearance of learning and theological knowledge: many fancy that such clever and intellectual men must surely be safe guides. There is a general tendency to free thought and free inquiry in these latter days: many like to prove their independence of judgment, by believing novelties. There is a wide-spread desire to appear charitable and liberal-minded: many seem half ashamed of saying that anybody can be in the wrong. There is a quantity of half-truth taught by the modern false teachers: they are incessantly using Scriptural terms and phrases in an unscriptural sense. There is a morbid craving in the public mind for a more sensuous, ceremonial, sensational, showy worship: men are impatient of inward, invisible heart-work. There is a silly readiness in every direction to believe everybody who talks cleverly, lovingly, and earnestly, and a determination to forget that Satan often masquerades himself "as an angel of light" (2 Corinthians
11:14). There is a wide-spread "gullibility" among professing Christians: every heretic who tells his story plausibly is sure to be believed, and everybody who doubts him is called a persecutor and a narrow-minded man. All these things are peculiar symptoms of our times. I defy any observing person to deny them. They tend to make the assaults of false doctrine in our day peculiarly dangerous. They make it more than ever needful to cry aloud, "Do not be carried away!"

If any one should ask me, What is the best safeguard against false doctrine?--I answer in one word, "The Bible: the Bible regularly read, regularly prayed over, regularly studied." We must go back to the old prescription of our Master: "Diligently study the Scriptures" (John
5:39). If we want a weapon to wield against the plans of Satan, there is nothing like "the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God." But to wield it successfully, we must read it habitually, diligently, intelligently, and prayerfully. This is a point on which, I fear, many fail. In an age of hurry and activity, few read their Bibles as much as they should. More books perhaps are read than ever, but less of the one Book which makes man wise to salvation. The Roman Catholic Church and new theology could never have made such havoc in the Church in the last fifty years, if there had not been a most superficial knowledge of the Scriptures throughout the land. A Bible-reading congregation is the strength of a Church.

"Diligently study the Scriptures." Mark how the Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles continually refer to the Old Testament, as a document just as authoritative as the New. Mark how they quote texts from the Old Testament, as the voice of God, as if every word was given by inspiration. Mark how the greatest miracles in the Old Testament are all referred to in the New, as unquestioned and unquestionable facts. Mark how all the leading events in the Pentateuch are incessantly named as historical events, whose reality admits of no dispute. Mark how the atonement, and substitution, and sacrifice, run through the whole Bible from first to last, as essential doctrines of revelation. Mark how the resurrection of Christ, the greatest of all miracles, is proved by such an overwhelming mass of evidence, that he who disbelieves it may as well say he will believe no evidence at all. Mark all these things, and you will find it very hard to be a Rationalist! Great are the difficulties of unbelief: it requires more faith to be an unbeliever than a Christian. But greater still are the difficulties of Rationalism. Free handling of Scripture--results of modern criticism--broad and liberal theology--all these are fine, swelling, high-sounding phrases, which please some minds, and look very grand at a distance. But the man who looks below the surface of things will soon find that there is no sure standing-ground between ultra-Rationalism and Atheism.

"Diligently study the Scriptures." Mark what a conspicuous absence there is in the New Testament of what may be called the Sacramental system, and the whole circle of Ritualistic theology. Mark how extremely little there is said about the effects of Baptism. Mark how very seldom the Lord's Supper is mentioned in the Epistles. Find, if you can, a single text in which New Testament ministers are called sacrificing priests, or the Lord's Supper is called a sacrifice, or private confession to ministers is recommended and practiced. Turn, if you can, to one single verse in which sacrificial vestments are named as desirable, or in which lighted candles, and pots of flowers on the Lord's Table, or processions, and incense, and flags, and banners, and turning to the east, and bowing down to the bread and wine, or prayer to the Virgin Mary and the angels, are sanctioned. Mark these things well, and you will find it very hard to be a Ritualist! You may find your authority for Ritualism in garbled quotations from the Fathers, in long extracts from monkish, mystical, or from Popes; but you certainly will not find it in the Bible. Between the plain Bible, honestly and fairly interpreted, and extreme Ritualism there is gulf which cannot be passed.

"If we would not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings," we must remember the words of our Lord Jesus Christ: "Diligently study the Scriptures." Ignorance of the Bible is the root of all error. Knowledge of the Bible is the best antidote against modern heresies.

Now "strengthening of the heart" is one of the great wants of many professing Christians. Especially is it longed after by those whose knowledge is imperfect, and whose conscience is half enlightened. Such persons often feel in themselves much indwelling sin, and at the same time see very indistinctly God's remedy and Christ's fullness. Their faith is feeble, their hope dim, and their consolations small. They want to realize more tangible comfort. They fancy they ought to feel more and see more. They are not at ease. They cannot attain to joy and peace in believing. Where shall they turn? What shall set their consciences at rest? Then comes the enemy of souls, and suggests some shortcut road to establishment. He hints at the value of some addition to the simple plan of the Gospel, some man-made gimmick, some exaggeration of a truth, some flesh-satisfying invention, some improvement on the old path, and whispers, "Only use this, and you shall be strengthened." Plausible offers flow in at the same time from every quarter, like quack medicines. Each has its own patrons and advocates. On every side the poor unstable soul hears invitations to move in some particular direction, and then shall come perfect strength.

"Come to us," says the Roman Catholic. "Join the Catholic Church, the Church on the Rock, the one, true, holy Church; the Church that cannot err. Come to her bosom, and rest your soul in her protection. Come to us, and you will find strength."

"Come to us," says the extreme Ritualist. "You need higher and fuller views of the priesthood and the Sacraments, of the Real Presence in the Lord's Supper, of the soothing influence of daily service, daily masses, confession to priests, and priestly absolution. Come and take up sound Church views, and you will find strength."

"Come to us," says the violent Liberationist. "Cast off the traditions and rules of established Churches. Enjoy religious liberty. Throw away forms and Prayer-books. Join our party. Cast in your lot with us, and you will soon be strengthened."

"Come to us," say the Plymouth Brethren. "Shake off all the bondage of creeds and Churches and systems. We will soon show you higher, deeper, more exalting, more enlightened views of truth. Join the brethren, and you will soon be strengthened."

"Come to us," says the Rationalist. "Lay aside the old worn-out clothes of unfruitful schemes of Christianity. Give your reason free scope and play. Begin a freer mode of handling Scripture. Be no more a slave to an ancient old world book. Break your chains and you shall be strengthened."

Every experienced Christian knows well that such appeals are constantly made to unsettled minds in the present day? Who has not seen that, when boldly and confidently made, they produce a painful effect on some people? Who has not observed that they often beguile unstable souls, and lead them into misery for years?

"What does the Scripture say?" This is the only sure guide. Hear what Paul says. Heart strength is not to be obtained by joining this party or that. It comes "by grace, and not by foods." Other things have a "show of wisdom" perhaps, and give a temporary satisfaction "to the flesh."
(Colossians 2:23). But they have no healing power about them in reality, and leave the unhappy man who trusts them nothing bettered, but rather worse.

A clearer knowledge of the Divine scheme of grace, its eternal purposes, its application to man by Christ's redeeming work, a firmer grasp of the doctrine of grace, of God's free love in Christ, of Christ's full and complete satisfaction for sin, of justification by simple faith, a more intimate acquaintance with Christ the Giver and Fountain of grace, His offices, His sympathy, His power, a more thorough experience of the inward work of grace in the heart, this, this, this is the grand secret of heart strength. This is the old path of peace. This is the true panacea for restless consciences. It may seem at first too simple, too easy, too cheap, too commonplace, too plain. But all the wisdom of man will never show the heavy-laden a better road to heart-rest. Secret pride and self-righteousness, I fear, are too often the reason why this good old road is not used.

I believe there never was a time when it was more needful to uphold the old Apostolic prescription than it is in the present day. Never were there so many weak and worried Christians wandering about, and tossed to and fro, from want of knowledge. Never was it so important for faithful ministers to set the trumpet to their mouths and proclaim everywhere, "Grace, grace, grace, not foods, establishes the heart."

From the days of the Apostles there have never been a lack of quack spiritual doctors, who have professed to heal the wounds of conscience with man-made remedies. In our own beloved Church there have always been some who have in heart turned back to Egypt, and, not content with the simplicity of our worship, have hankered after the ceremonial fleshpots of the Catholic Church of Rome. To hear the Sacraments incessantly exalted, and preaching played down, to see the Lord's Supper turned into an idol under the pretext of making it more honorable, to find plain worship overlaid with so many newfangled ornaments and ceremonies that its essentials are quite buried, how common is all this! These things were once a pestilence that walked in darkness. They are now a destruction that wastes in noonday. They are the joy of our enemies, the sorrow of the Church's best children, the damage of English Christianity, the plague of our times. And to what may they all be traced? The neglect and the forgetfulness of Paul's simple prescription: "Grace, and not foods, strengthens the heart."

Let us take heed that in our own personal religion, grace is all. Let us have clear systematic views of the Gospel of the grace of God. Nothing else will do good in the hour of sickness, in the day of trial, on the bed of death, and in the swellings of Jordan. Christ dwelling in our hearts by faith, Christ's free grace the only foundation under the soles of our feet--this alone will give peace. Once let in self, and forms, and man's inventions, as a necessary part of our religion, and we are on a quicksand. We may be amused, excited, or kept quiet for a time, like children with toys, by a religion of "foods." Such a religion has "a show of wisdom." But unless our religion be one in which "grace" is all, we shall never feel strengthened.

In the last place, I proceed to examine the instructive fact which Paul records. He says, "Ceremonial foods are of no value to those who eat them."

We have no means of knowing whether the Apostle, in using this language, referred to any particular Churches or individuals. Of course it is possible that he had in view the Judaizing Christians of Antioch and Galatia, or the Ephesians of whom he speaks to Timothy in his pastoral Epistle, or the Colossians who caused him so much inward conflict, or the Hebrew believers in every Church, without exception. It seems to me far more probable, however, that he had no particular Church or Churches in view. I rather think that he makes a broad, general, sweeping statement about all who in any place had exalted ceremonial at the expense of the doctrines of "grace." And he makes a wide declaration about them all. They have got no good from their favorite notions. They have not been more inwardly happy, more outwardly holy, or more generally useful. Their religion has been most unprofitable to them. Man-made alterations of God's precious medicine for sinners, man-made additions to Christ's glorious Gospel, however superficially defended and plausibly supported, do no real good to those that adopt them. They confer no increased inward comfort; they bring no growth of real holiness: they give no enlarged usefulness to the Church and the world. Calmly, quietly, and mildly, but firmly, decidedly, and unflinchingly, the assertion is made, "Ceremonial foods are of no value to those who eat them."

The very history of our own times bears a striking testimony to the truth of Paul's assertion. In the last twenty-five years some scores of clergymen have seceded from the Church of England, and joined the Church of Rome. They wanted more of what they called Catholic doctrine and Catholic ceremonial. They honestly acted up to their principles, and went over to Rome. They were not all weak, and illiterate, and second- rate, and inferior men; several of them were men of commanding talents, whose gifts would have won for them a high position in any profession. Yet what have they gained by the step they have taken? What profit have they found in leaving "grace" for "ceremonies," in exchanging Protestantism for Catholicism? Have they attained a higher standard of holiness? Have they procured for themselves a greater degree of usefulness? Let one of themselves supply an answer. Mr. Ffoulkes, a leading man in the party, within the last few years has openly declared that the preaching of some of his fellow "Perverts" is not so powerful as it was when they were English Churchmen, and that the highest degree of holy living he has ever seen is not within the pale of Rome, but in the quiet parsonages and unpretending family-life of godly English clergymen! Intentionally or not intentionally, wittingly or unwittingly, meaning it or not meaning it, nothing can be more striking than the testimony Mr. Ffoulkes bears to the truth of the Apostle's assertion: "Ceremonial foods do not profit" even those who make much ado about them. The religious system which exalts ceremonial and man-made ritual does no real good to its adherents, compared to the simple old Gospel of the grace of God.

Let us turn now, for a few moments, to the other side of the picture, and see what "grace" has done. Let us hear how profitable the doctrines of the Gospel have proved to those who have clung firmly to them, and have not tried to mend and improve and patch them up by adding, as essentials, the "foods" of man-made ceremonies.

It was "grace, and not foods," that made Martin Luther do the work that he did in the world. The key to all his success was his constant declaration of justification by faith, without the deeds of the law. This was the truth which enabled him to break the chains of Rome, and let light into Europe.

It was "grace, and not ceremonial foods," that made our English martyrs, Latimer and Hooper, exercise so mighty an influence in life, and shine so brightly in death. They saw clearly, and taught plainly, the true priesthood of Christ, and salvation only by grace. They honored God's grace, and God put honor on them.

It was "grace, and not ceremonial foods," that made Romaine and Venn, and their companions, turn the world upside down in England, one hundred years ago. In themselves they were not men of extraordinary learning or intellectual power. But they revived and brought out again the real pure doctrines of grace.

It was "grace, and not ceremonial foods," that made Simeon and Daniel Wilson and Bickersteth such striking instruments of usefulness in the first half of the present century. God's free grace was the great truth on which they relied, and continually brought forward. For so doing God put honor on them. They made much of God's grace, and the God of grace made much of them.

The list of ministerial biographies tells a striking tale. Who are those who have shaken the world, and left their mark on their generation, and aroused consciences, and converted sinners, and edified saints? Not those who have made asceticism, and ceremonials, and sacraments, and services, and ordinances the main thing; but those who have made most of God's free grace! In a day of strife, and controversy, and doubt, and perplexity, men forget this. Facts are stubborn things. Let us look calmly at them, and be not moved by those who tell us that daily services, processions, incense, bowings, crossings, confessions, absolutions, and the like, are the secret of a prosperous Christianity. Let us look at plain facts. Facts in old history, and facts in modern days, facts in every part of England, support the assertion of Paul. The religion of "ceremonial foods" does "not profit those that are occupied therein." It is the religion of grace that brings inward peace, outward holiness, and general usefulness.

Let me wind up this paper with a few words of practical application. We are living in an age of peculiar religious danger. I am quite sure that the advice I am going to offer deserves serious attention.


(1) In the first place, let us not be surprised at the rise and progress of false doctrine. It is a thing as old as the old Apostles. It began before they died. They predicted that there would be plenty of it before the end of the world. It is wisely ordered of God for the testing of our grace, and to prove who has real faith. If there were no such thing as false doctrine or heresy upon earth, I should begin to think the Bible was not true.

(2) In the next place, let us make up our minds to resist false doctrine, and not to be carried away by fashion and bad example. Let us not flinch, because all around us, high and low, rich and poor, are swept away, like geese in a flood, before a torrent of Catholicism. Let us be firm and stand our ground.

Let us resist false doctrine, and contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. Let us not be ashamed of showing our colors and standing out for New Testament truth. Let us not be stopped by the cuckoo cry of "controversy." The thief likes dogs that do not bark, and watchmen that give no alarm. The devil is a thief and a robber. If we hold our peace, and do not resist false doctrine, we please him and displease God.

(3) In the next place, let us try to preserve the old Protestant principles of the Church, and to hand them down uninjured to our children's children. Let us not listen to those faint-hearted Churchmen who would have us forsake the ship, and desert the Church in her time of need.

(4) In the last place, let us make sure work of our own personal salvation. Let us seek to know and feel that we ourselves are "saved." The day of controversy is always a day of spiritual peril. Men are apt to confound orthodoxy with conversion, and to fancy that they must go to heaven if they know how to answer Catholic Priests. Yet mere earnestness without knowledge, and mere head-knowledge of Protestantism, alike save none. Let us never forget this.

B
broclint

By the pen and by the tongue, by the press and by the pulpit, the country is incessantly deluged with a flood of erroneous opinions. To ignore the fact is mere blindness. Others see it, even if we pretend to be ignorant of it. The danger is real, great, and unmistakable. Never was it so needful to say, "Do not be carried away."

There is a general tendency to free thought and free inquiry in these latter days: many like to prove their independence of judgment, by believing novelties. There is a wide-spread desire to appear charitable and liberal-minded: many seem half ashamed of saying that anybody can be in the wrong. There is a quantity of half-truth taught by the modern false teachers: they are incessantly using Scriptural terms and phrases in an unscriptural sense. There is a morbid craving in the public mind for a more sensuous, ceremonial, sensational, showy worship: men are impatient of inward, invisible heart-work.

We learn from the study of church history that every age had its issues to deal with that made "true truth" just as much of a challenge to discern as today. Paul's challenge to each individual is not a "do what is right in your own eyes" but the reminder that each of us will give account of himself to God in that verse in Philippians 2:12.

C
crsschk

An outstanding addition to all this ...

J.C. Ryle (1816 - 1900) and now, 100 some odd years later, what a stark contrast by comparison.

Between these upper and lower millstones the Gospel is near being crushed to death! Strange views are continually propounded by pastors about subjects of the deepest importance. About the atonement, the divinity of Christ, the inspiration of the Bible, the reality of miracles, the eternity of future punishment, about the Church, the ministerial office, the Lord's Supper, Baptism, the confessional, the honor due to the Virgin, prayers for the dead. [b]About all these things there is nothing too outrageous to be taught by some ministers in these latter days. By the pen and by the tongue, by the press and by the pulpit, the country is incessantly deluged with a flood of erroneous opinions.[/b] To ignore the fact is mere blindness. Others see it, even if we pretend to be ignorant of it. The danger is real, great, and unmistakable. Never was it so needful to say, "Do not be carried away."

And it is as old as the scriptures themselves as he well pointed out - But [i]how much more[/i] presently?

An abiding concern, very much to the whole of this treatise that is being attempted;

I believe there never was a time when it was more needful to uphold the old Apostolic prescription than it is in the present day. Never were there so many [u]weak and worried[/u] Christians wandering about, and tossed to and fro, from want of knowledge. Never was it so important for faithful ministers to set the trumpet to their mouths and proclaim everywhere, "Grace, grace, grace, not foods, establishes the heart."

Fear and worry - Two things that we are instructed [i]not[/i] to have anything to do with and yet it is fed to and fed on ... the analogy to 'foods' is not a stretch of the scripture.

Psa 78:19 Yea, they spake against God; they said, Can God furnish a table in the wilderness?

Psa 23:5 Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.


I may be deriving something from this, but the sense of contentment, trust and lack of it's extremities, it's opposites, are hard to cast aside - The old adage - [i]Cool heads prevail[/i]. Are we, will we be those that can be trusted while the world and even our own 'kind' are promoting a million absurdities, prophecies, new fangled 'coming attractions' or dissecting the news as imminent ends and 'doings' of the Lord?

"If" - "When" something truly, factually confronts, will we be those with enough fortitude of character and integrity of spirit to be trusted, relied on, appealed to? Calm, cool and collected? Able to convey the bewilderment to those who are outside the camp those qualities of [i]Whom[/i] we have believed - Even if they believe not they would still have to admit that we are a very, peculiar people to have our wits about us.

But is this what is promoted and taught anymore -These core matters of spiritual strength and trustworthy character? Are we [i]credible[/i]?

I digress.

B
broclint

Important digression that Paul repeated often enough as in Philippians 4:8...

Clint

C
ccchhhrrriiisss

Great message(s), Mike! Thanks for sharing!

S
sermonindex

Mike wrote:

[i]""If" - "When" something truly, factually confronts, will we be those with enough fortitude of character and integrity of spirit to be trusted, relied on, appealed to? Calm, cool and collected? Able to convey the bewilderment to those who are outside the camp those qualities of Whom we have believed - Even if they believe not they would still have to admit that we are a very, peculiar people to have our wits about us.

But is this what is promoted and taught anymore -These core matters of spiritual strength and trustworthy character? Are we credible?"[/i]

1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear

2Pe 3:11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
2Pe 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
2Pe 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
2Pe 3:14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
2Pe 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.
2Pe 3:17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
2Pe 3:18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

C
crsschk

Great scriptures you guy's - The words leap out ..

Virtue
Peace
Diligent

[i]what manner of persons ought ye to be[/i]

The things we think on ...

Beware.

Am hesitant to offer up the next bit that I have been siting on - Remedies are needed which are interwoven throughout but perhaps not as decidedly. Maybe the concern is not to overdose on negativity and a hope that some of this will stick, sink in.

The next piece - One man's opinion, take it with that in mind- I chose it for the word that it is developed around.

C
crsschk

[b]The Death of Integrity in America[/b]

Don Koenig 2008

Once upon a time in America a man's word was his bond, most people had Integrity. People did not even need contracts a handshake was reliable. Today, even if you have a written contract you have little guarantee that those who entered into the contract will even attempt to fulfill it. About one half of Americans simply cannot be trusted anymore.

I have been observing this trend toward a nation of people who lack integrity for quite some time. I guess you might blame it on postmodern thought where morals and truth are said to be relative. Nonetheless, hiding behind the philosophy of relativism does not mean that these people do not actually know the difference between good and evil. They really do, they simply choose to be selfish liars.

The root causes of the lack of integrity in America appears to be selfishness and having no empathy or love for others. Many people just no longer care what their own actions do to others. It is all about "me" and that is why this is called the "me generation".

Some might think the lack of integrity is limited to mostly the younger generation but that is not true. Lack of Integrity is found across the board. It seems that all age groups have now become infected with this selfishness through media brainwashing, bad example and permissiveness where there is very little negative consequence for doing what they know is wrong.

I guess on a Christian website we should first point out the lack of integrity of many of our Christian leaders. I am not going to get into self centered liberal, postmodern or legalistic theology in this article. They are subjects beyond the scope of this article. There have been obvious signs that there is a major problem in the lack of integrity in the clergy across denominational lines when top "Christian" leaders are constantly being exposed as pedophiles, fornicators, homosexuals, hypocrites, greedy, con artists, liars and thieves.

You would think our so called "men of God" would be above such things but apparently many are not. What you see on the news are only the high profile cases. That is only the tip of a iceberg. The sins of "Christian" leaders run deep and many so called fishers of men, ship's have been sunk due to lack of integrity.

Many pastors today simply cannot be trusted. They gossip and even lie about people in their own congregation and attempt to deceive their congregations on their own actions. You may believe you are speaking in confidence to your pastor but he often will just blab what you said to his buddies or the deacons who may blab it to everyone else. There are quite a few pastors who tell the congregation one thing on Sunday but they do the opposite on Monday because they lack personal integrity.

One problem in Christianity is that we hire unproved often immature Christian outsiders to lead our local churches instead of picking a proven person beyond reproach able to teach from within our congregations and sending them for advanced leadership and formal Bible training if it is necessary. The outsiders we pick have little allegiance to the local church and they are constantly job shopping for more money or a more prestigious position. They tell you God led me to this church this year but by next year they say that God suddenly is leading them somewhere else. As if God just decided that He wants them to leave their church cold without a shepherd so they can advance their own career.

Many of these same pastors say God told them to start this or that expansion program at their church but by the time it is done the pastor is long gone along with some of the congregation. Then the need for expansion no longer exists in the church just like the pastor who promoted it. So God was in the wind all along and not in the still small voice?


Frankly, many Christians are now fed up with the way churches operate and they have stopped attending. Many church boards either operate like a Mafia board or like a corporate board of directors. The meetings are contentious and control freak big contributors have undue influence. Besides from the opening prayer there is not an ounce of difference between the way many conduct internal church affairs and how the world runs their own businesses.

There also are many Christian societies and institutions that mainly exist to build elaborate buildings, fund raise, and pay the fancy salaries and expenses of those in charge.

The astute know what I am saying rings true about many Christian leaders and Christian institutions in America. Those that are the problem will never admit it. That is why Christian institutions led by people who lack integrity are constantly recruiting new members and givers and always looking for new gimmicks to increase their bottom-line.

Some Christians would rather deal with unbelievers in business then with Christians they are acquainted with because Christians often expect expensive favors. Or they will default on their dealing and expect you to forgive them their debt. At least with non believers you know what to expect.

Moving on to the secular world, about half of the businesses and services in America can no longer be trusted to give you what you paid or contracted for. Try finding someone who make a contract with you today to fulfill it as agreed tomorrow -- without litigation.

Try getting the earnest money on a house when someone backs out of their purchase contract for their own convenience and costs you much time, money and a selling season. Why does the State and lenders require real estate Inspections by the same people who stand to gain if they find a problem? They make it easy for those without integrity to rip us off.

Try getting rebates promised on items you buy or getting a company to honor a warrantee these days. Try getting your vehicle fixed without being ripped off by mechanics working on commission to sell you parts that you do not need. I could go on and cover most services in America but those living here already know that there is very little integrity found in the marketplace anymore.

Do we find integrity among the lenders when they loan to people they know will not repay but they do not care because they will just package the bad loans with the good and sell them like canned fish for financial predators? What about the greedy brokerages and banks managers who risked whole corporations in credit default swap casinos? Does anyone think that they are people of integrity? They should be in jail; instead many are rewarded with millions.

They were the real cause of the 2008 financial crises. They thought they could never lose because their own card counting experts told them they had a win win situation. They gambled everything they had and kept nothing in reserve in order to play for high stakes in the shadowy unregulated House of Cards Casinos. But they did lose because the House of Cards Casinos were given many counterfeit bills packaged by the sub-prime fish packers. Then the House of Cards Casinos could not cover their losses and the gamblers could not pay back their backers so they pressured and panicked Uncle Sam to pay off their bills by telling him his investment and retirement accounts would crash if he did not come up with enough cash to pay back the backers of the gamblers. So much for the integrity of those who hold and invest our money.


What about the buyers who asked for loans they knew they could not afford but they had nothing to lose because they put nothing down and the seller paid all their closing costs? Now these same people want the taxpayers to pay off their debts to keep them in the house they knew they could not afford in the first place. Are these people of Integrity? So far the lenders and the buyers lacking integrity have cost others in this nation trillions of dollars.

What about home builders who promise 2-10 year warrantees on your house but when you have a problem they put you on a waiting list and tell you it will take years before then can even get to your problem? Are these builders people of Integrity? What about the credit card companies that look for any reason to double your interest rates would you call them people of integrity? Do we find Integrity in the insurance companies who find any way possible not to pay?

In politics who has integrity? National politicians with integrity are rarer than diamonds and local politicians at best are members of self serving special interest clubs and at worst they are part of organized crime syndicates. In most cases the first priority is not to serve the people, it is to spin events so that they get re-elected or to raise special interest money to move up the political ladder. If you watched your local election ads I bet they were all accusing each other of something corrupt. With good reason I might add, it takes a crook to catch a crook. So who are you supposed to vote for when un-elected party heads lacking integrity insure that only corrupt people are placed on the ticket?

Few would accuse most national leaders of having integrity. They are always promising things they they know they can never deliver and once in office will not even try. There are many things they deceive the people about and cover up because they lack integrity. Most know our government is about bankrupt but only a few men of Integrity such as Ron Paul will dare to tell you the truth and then when they tell the truth they are mocked by the press who lack integrity.

Now people who lack integrity will abuse their power and try to panic the people to support taxpayer bail-out after bail-out and the national debt will be gradually turned up on Americans like frogs in a pot. They are counting on us frogs not jumping out of the pot before our goose is cooked for the feasting pleasure of several thousand global elite.

News media lies to us and spins news stories to promote the liberal views of their handlers and owners. Most of the reporters who have any personal integrity no longer work for main stream news media because they either got fired or could not advance.

People in education only teach the politically correct views of the secular humanist establishment so children will never learn anything outside of the politically correct socialist agenda. Many people of integrity have long since left the teaching profession as well. Those of integrity that remain often find their career is at a dead end.

Self serving men with no integrity buy air time on TV and lie to us about man caused global warming and the promise of cheap energy blowing in the wind. They do not tell you they they will make billions selling their expensive carbon credits, windmills and natural gas. They claim on ads that We the American people demand their expensive fixes within ten years but they are liars. We the people of America have never demanded to be robbed by these elitist wind bags and frauds. Men of no integrity think if they tell lies long enough and loud enough people will believe in their lies. It seems so far that they are correct because much of America is already brainwashed by them.

We the people of America tell those in office to drill here and drill now but those without integrity will not even have a honest vote on the issue in Congress. They think they know what is best for America and that is to make Americans slaves of the enlightened elite.


Illegal drugs are used by people with no integrity and they enable gangs that kill many thousands of people each year. Drugs and drug gangs are the biggest problem in the America's yet almost half of Americans have used illegal drugs. Why? Because they have no personal integrity.

Many of our high elected officials have used drugs and we even elect past drug users to the office of President even though such men would have a difficult time ever obtaining a basic security clearance. Yet, we will entrust our nation to them?? The users in America do not even care that they are destroying our society all they care about is getting high. They do not care that over a million people are in jail and ten's of thousand of people are now dead just to supply their "recreational" high. Everything is about their own lusts and damn the nation. People with no integrity use drugs and just blame the problem on the sellers.

Do people of Integrity make porno the number one business in America? Every city in America has people who prey on the innocent but nobody sees the porno connection? Children cannot even play on the street anymore and must fear strangers for darn good reason. However, the main danger is in their own homes and with people they know and trust.


No matter where you look you will see that there is very little integrity in America anymore. You can hardly trust anyone. With a nation filled with people with no integrity how can such a nation remain great? It cannot. America is now in great decline and we see that in every new "progressive" position she now embraces.

Progress to people with no integrity is more moral decline and the fulfillment of their own lusts.

There are two Americas in America but the one that now seems to prevail is the nation that is full of self centered lustful people without Integrity. Half of the nation is now doing whatever they can get away with and not what real Americans would be doing if they were still people of integrity.

May God have mercy on the America that still has integrity, His mercy will not endure on the other.

[url=http://www.thepropheticyears.com/comments/comments1.htm]Don Koenig[/url]

S
sermonindex

Oh Brother, do you know what happened when I looked at this ... the wording changed.

Here is the line that changed while I read it ...

"There are two Americas in America but the one that now seems to prevail is the nation that is full of self centered lustful people without Integrity. Half of the nation is now doing whatever they can get away with and not what real Americans would be doing if they were still people of integrity."


This is what I read ...

There are two Christianities in the world but the one that now seems to prevail is the Christianity that is full of self centered lustful people without Integrity. Half of Christianity is now doing whatever they can get away with and not what real Christians would be doing if they were still people of integrity.

Oh my, I've really got tears in my eyes.

Edit: Brother, also I keep hearing "unto us - unto us" but I don't know which scripture that might be, if any?

C
crsschk

This is what I read ...

There are two Christianities in the world but the one that now seems to prevail is the Christianity that is full of self centered lustful people without Integrity. Half of Christianity is now doing whatever they can get away with and not what real Christians would be doing if they were still people of integrity.

A stand alone statement ...

Edit: Brother, also I keep hearing "unto us - unto us" but I don't know which scripture that might be, if any?

Many - But I am following you. I cannot tell you how much throwing this all out there gives pause for concern in the daily things of life - "[i]When no one is watching[/i]" ... That great lie. The things that are the property of the gray matter ... Integrity there? The anti - opposite - Php 4:8

C
ChrisJD

Mike,


I think that this issue of integrity really is having a huge impact on our society. The issue of trust is so important and I think we need desperately to pray for one another and for the people all over our land.

Last night I spoke to a man that was on the corner outside of what was appearantly a very expensive resturaunt. One of his legs was amputated and he was sitting on the ground. He had lamented that noone had helped him all night when someone came by and gave some money as we were talking.

I asked him if he had any prayer requests that I could pray for after I left and he asked that we pray that people would love one another more.

But as we continued to talk he mentioned how he had seen the Mayor and the Govenor go into the resturaunt before and he said what he claimed they gave him for money. He went on and said some things about Church goers and about how God is watching us all.


There's no way I could repeat to anyone what he claimed the Mayor and the Govenor gave him, it would absolutely not be fair to them. And I have no way of knowing if what he said was true or not either.


We do indeed need to love one another more and more.

The more selfish we become the more we treat others like Micah said, as though we hunt them with a net.

The more lying and self-serving become a part of our way of life the more it is like Jeremiah said, that every brother will utterly supplant and every neighbor walk with slanders.


And it is like a cancer that spreads everywhere into every part of the society, as Isaiah said:the mighty man, the man of war, the judge, the prophet, the prudent, the ancient, the captain, the honourable, the counselor, the skilled craftsman, and the eloquent speaker.


All of them can help to strengthen a society if they do their work with truth and integrity.

But if they cannot be trusted? If the mighty man uses his strength to oppress? If the man of war loves war for the sake of bloodshed and profit? If the judge can be bribed and the prophet is for hire? Or the skilled craftsman cuts corners for the sake of gain and the eloquent speaker uses his words merely to pursaude, and without regard for which side of the truth he is on?

Then truth is fallen in the streets and equity cannot enter in.

S
sermonindex

"Evil men and seducers will wax worse"

I suppose, looking at the whole of it - I couldn't understand how we could expect the unregenerate to behave any other way. That "we" are the "light" of the world - and What have they seen from us? All they see is the TV "Shows" of "christianity" and when one of them falls, it makes the News. They don't see the countless missionaries and other quiet workers out there that represent Him in truth.

I found four places where "unto us" is said twice in one verse. I couldn't post it till now. I did get a bit emotional over this.

This story from Nehemiah in the whole of this chapter -

Neh 4:12 And it came to pass, that when the Jews which dwelt by them came, they said unto us ten times, From all places whence ye shall return unto us they will be upon you.


and the whole of this Psalm -

Psa 115:1 Not unto us, O LORD, not unto us, but unto Thy Name give glory, for Thy mercy, and for Thy truth's sake.


and we are without excuse because of THIS / HIM.

Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.


This one you will understand clearly -

Isa 30:9-11 That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD: Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits: Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.

S
sermonindex

Hello Jesus-is-God,

I believe your 'unto us' verse is Isa 9:6 in the context you first mentioned it, because if He is born [i][b]in us[/i][/b], integrity is restored to the man if we allow it.

The original piece was slightly disingenuous to suggest

and not what real Americans would be doing if they were still people of integrity
that being American would give a person [i]that[/i] kind of integrity which only comes from Christ being able to abide in us, as Governor, Counsellor, mighty God, everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

J
jsisrl

"Evil men and seducers will wax worse"

so true, Jesus-Is-God.

*sigh*

God bless you all richly!

M
mjnjm

John Wimber visited our Thursday night bible study. There were no 'visitors' in wheelchairs to heal. He spoke on the people in scripture who were NOT healed and finished his sermons with this statement: "But somtimes God DOES heal, so let's try!"

Sometimes God doesn't heal, but I've healed 3 people while I've prayed for many more and I have been healed twice, but have other issues that could be healed. There's no need to say there is no healing when it's not 100%.

It hurts to see the same tired issues separating the church. Rapture, Tongues, Healing...sheesh.

C
ccchhhrrriiisss

I take it that this visit happened at least 12 years ago, right? John Wimber died in 1997.

:-)

S
sermonindex

Hi Mike,

I've had a question brewing for a long time, which is now sparked off by your post in rbanks thread on Pagan Christianity. One snippet of your thoughts reads

This feeds into a large part of what was attempted in Procterandgambleites- Misrepresentation and those things that are lead out of them - Fear and fear mongering, tall tales - Poor research ... source material, etc. etc.
The reason I ask is that some of the so-called refutations in the articles posted earlier in this thread are no more based on fact, than the absence of objectively verifyable evidence, somewhat like the scientists presume to ask of the Christians with regard to the existence of God, when Paul has laid out his table in Romans 1 precisely.

I also, having done word searches on 'evil', 'wickedness', 'iniquity' and 'liar', wonder how you deal with these scriptural definite articles?

2 Cor 11:14

C
crsschk

It's a mixed bag for sure, I recognize that as well ... Had posted this earlier here;

[i]This whole running post is a large data dump - It's not all one grand agreement in so many nuances. It's not setup as a large apologetic or 'watch dog' though it contains those elements. Just another attempt to cause some thought, I guess yes, critical thinking - We being such tricksters of our own fallen minds.

Pretty much had run through those things that I had found originally but certain words have again brought up more food for thought - Fear. Facts. Integrity, even the very cementing phrase you just used - love for truth - How often do we settle for those things that are not true, that fall short of 'true truth' and lapse into heeding so much soothsaying, speculative reasonings, 'prophecies' that with the insert of even a couple of months just fade into the abyss, as if they were never worth considering but cause all kinds of excitement and fear while they are in motion?

Would love to see and hear others thoughts towards it all, additions, subtractions, what have you.[/i]

Not sure if that helps answer the question.

S
sermonindex

Not sure if that helps answer the question.
I wanted to say 'I'm not sure either.' But 'the Truth' is, it doesn't even touch certain realities; for instance, John 3:3, 5, 6, 7; 1 John 5:19, Gen 6:5, Jer 17:9, Eph 4:22.

I suppose I wonder where you imagine (and I use that verb advisedly) unregenerate man gets his rectitude? We all know what we were before we were born again, so why attempt to defend the indefensible?

There is also, in scripture, a very detailed account of the length of time certain men in high positions of local authority plotted to have Jesus Christ put to death; for what? This is backed up by Paul's open statement in 2 Cor 4:2.

I can't help but suggest that if it was good for Paul to own up to having shared in 'hidden things of dishonesty', 'walking in craftiness', and 'handled the word of God deceitfully', how can those who don't use the word of God for anything - don't read it and don't claim to live by it - actually [u]be[/u] honoured on a default setting which attributes to them qualities not afforded to them in scripture?

My other concern is that we are in danger of not being able to take testimonies seriously, if we dumb down the realities of sin from which we and others may claim to have been delivered. This does not tend towards truth and the enormity of transformation God works in us, but, through not being able to take our own past sins seriously enough, towards unbelief and mediocrity.

This discussion is archived and closed to new replies. Start a new discussion to carry the subject on.
Archived
1 of 73 posts

Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.

Donate