Bill Johnson’s Christology: A New Age Christ?, part IIIb

[See also: Part I, The Christ Anointing and the Antichrist Spirit, Part II, Part IIIa and Part IV (Conclusion).]

1In the beginning was the Word [Logos.]
and the Word [Logos] was with God
and the Word [Logos] was God.
2He was in the beginning with God.
3All things came into being by Him,
and apart from Him
nothing came into being
that has come into being
14And the Word [Logos] became flesh,
and dwelt among us,
and we beheld His glory,
glory as of the only begotten from the Father,
full of grace and truth.
[John 1:1-3,14 NASB]

The prologue to the Gospel of John is among the most beautiful passages in all of Scripture.  It is also one of the most theologically brilliant.  Not only does John assert that the Logos was WITH God in the creation account of Genesis by paralleling the first few verses with those that begin the canon of Scripture, John states the Logos WAS God.  He is illustrating the plurality of the Godhead, i.e. that God is monotheistic yet more than one ‘Person’ (John would describe the Person of the Holy Spirit later in 14:15-16:15).  The Gospel writer makes it clear that God the Word/Logos became flesh, yet He was fully God in the flesh and not ‘merely’ human.

However, other groups claimed that John had different thoughts in mind for the Logos.  Some Gnostics in the 2nd century (and later) claimed John’s Gospel has a dualistic Gnostic backdrop with his contrasts of light and darkness (v 1:5) and other dichotomies, and they interpreted John’s Christology as congruent with Gnostic redeemer myths117 (redemption through autosoterism, or self-salvation).

Some have claimed Hellenistic (ancient Greek) influence.  According to NT scholar Craig Keener, Heraclitus, a Greek philosopher of the 6th century BC, “reportedly spoke of ‘Thought’ as guiding and ordering the universe” and his work refers to the Logos as being “eternal, omnipresent, the divine cause”.118  The Stoics took this further as Zeno “identified Socrates’ logos, or rational principle, with that of Heraclitus” calling this “the common law” or “natural law”.119  Apparently, these groups believed the Logos was present in all of creation, i.e. they had a panentheistic (God is in all) worldview.

Others asserted that it was Philo’s Logos that John had in mind.  Philo combined aspects of Stoicism (including the Logos as the divine mind, or nous120) with his own theology which was influenced by Platonism (from the philosophy of Plato):

In Philo’s scheme, the Logos is directly below God and directly above the powers through which God rules creation; the powers appear as angels when related to OT imagery, but Philo elsewhere identifies them with Platonic ideas.  The Logos, as God’s archangel and eldest offspring, functions as ambassador to humanity and separates the creature from the Creator; as such it is a mediator of God’s activity in the world and of revelation.  The Logos is God’s image, through whom the universe was formed.  In Platonic thought the sensory world is merely a copy of the real world of ideas, of eternal forms.  The Stoics, by contrast, saw the Logos as immanent in the world of matter.  Philo combines these strands of thought, following the syncretistic lead of middle Platonism in his day.121

Still others claim that John had in mind the Wisdom literature in Scripture [Proverbs 8, 9, etc] and extra-Biblical writings of the time including the Apocrypha (the Deuterocanonical books in the Catholic Bible including “Wisdom of Solomon”, “Wisdom of Ben Sira”, etc.) and the Pseudepigrapha (literary works circa 200 BC to 200AD).  This position asserts that John had envisioned Jesus as Wisdom personified given the many seeming parallels between his use of Logos and the way Sophia, the Greek word for Wisdom, is used in the Wisdom literature.  Yet the Gospel writer never actually uses Sophia in reference to Jesus. Therefore, some scholars claim reliance on this motif while others may affirm perhaps partial influence.122

Andreas Kostenberger sees John’s intent more in line with personifying the Word of God in the OT noting the strong parallel of John 1 with Genesis 1, the parallels of John 1:14-18 with Exodus 33-34, and the Logos concept in Isaiah 55:9-11 (and other passages in Isaiah).123  In addition, Kostenberger seems to suggest the Logos concept was used as an apologetic against prevailing Greek thought:

…Though John does not elaborate on the precise way in which Jesus was made flesh, his contention that deity assumed human nature in Jesus would have been anathema for Greeks who held to a spirit/matter dualism and could hardly have imagined immaterial Reason becoming a physical being.124

It seems quite plausible that the Gospel writer, being well aware of current philosophical and religious thought, wrote the prologue and parts of the rest of the Gospel with a dual purpose – as both a Gospel and an apologetic against these threats.  This is especially possible if one assumes a late date of authorship as do most scholars (between 90AD and 100AD).125  In fact, Irenaeus, in his Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies), circa 180AD, makes the claim that the Gospel of John is an apologetic against the burgeoning Gnostic (or proto-Gnostic) threat of John’s day.126  John’s Gospel (and, of course, his epistles, especially 1 John which contains elements of the Gospel’s prologue) can function as an apologetic against current Christological heresies as well since some of the concepts above are being perpetuated in slightly different forms today.

The Word Becoming Flesh

Christian orthodoxy affirms that Jesus Christ was/is the Word made flesh; i.e., the Word/Logos, the second Person of the eternal Triune God, added human flesh to Himself and became the unique God-man in the womb of the Virgin Mary.  This hypostatic union retains throughout eternity, for Jesus Christ is yet still both human (with a glorified body) and divine as He sits at the Father’s right hand.  However, Bill Johnson explicitly denies the uniqueness of the Word made flesh:

…It’s the Spirit of God that makes this thing [the Bible] come alive to where we actually have the privilege of the Word becoming flesh in us again, where we become the living illustration and manifestation of what God is saying.127

What does he mean by “the Word becoming flesh in us again”?  Are we to be just like Jesus, i.e. divine?  Or was Jesus not the second person the Trinity made flesh in the first place?  Is this what Johnson means by “Jesus emptied Himself of divinity and became man”?128  Perhaps this is speaking of the false parousia as mentioned in part II?  Or, is this a combination of some or all of these?

In yet another sermon, titled “Jesus is Our Model” – the same from which is the blasphemous ‘born again Jesus’ statement – we have Johnson speaking on the word Word yet again:

…Look at verse 3 [of Luke 4], “And, the devil said to Him, ‘IF you are the Son of God command this stone to become bread.’”  Jesus answered Him saying, “It is written: Man shall not live by bread alone but by every WORD of God.”  What was the first temptation?  It wasn’t to turn stone into bread, it was to question who He was129

Not many theologians would agree with Johnson that the first temptation was “to question who He was” by emphasizing if.  The majority of scholars assert it was a test to satisfy His hunger by miraculous power rather than relying on the Father for provision.130  But, more importantly, Johnson stresses Word having in mind the Word of Faith (WoF) “rhema” Word, i.e., ‘new revelation’ – NOT that Jesus is Himself the unique, second Person of the Trinity Word/Logos made flesh, although that is how it may appear at first.  This will be evident as we continue on with Johnson:

…Jesus explains this later to the disciples in Matthew 13; I’ll just read the one phrase to you that’ll help that concept to make sense.  He was talking about people who had no root in themselves; they hear the Word but there’s no depth in their personThey’ve not been prepared for what God is saying and doing131

In applying Matthew 13 to both Jesus and mankind rather than just mankind, Johnson has reduced Jesus to a man who Himself is indwelt by (NOT in hypostatic union with) the “rhema” Word.  Simultaneously, he’s reinterpreted this Scripture to pertain to those who either accept or reject the WoF “rhema” Word.  [The Greek words rhema and logos are used interchangeably in the Bible although the Apostle John specifically refers to Jesus as the Logos made flesh (John 1:1,14).]  Continuing on:

…It says, “for when tribulation or persecution arises because of the WORD [3 second pause for emphasis] immediately they stumble.  Persecution, difficulty, conflict arises because of the Word.  The WORD of the Lord attracts CONFLICT.  It’s not punishment.  It’s not to humiliate.  It’s for two basic reasons: it’s because the Lord wants to give reward and He wants to honor character.  Character is not formed in the absence of options.  There has to be two trees in the Garden where I am honored for a decision.  Do I honor what God has declared over my life or not?  Do I consider other options, other possibilities?132

Please note that the Scripture in Matthew 13 [13:21-22] refers to the Gospel message, not the “rhema” Word as Johnson would have us believe.  Scripturally, either one accepts the Gospel message and stays true to the Faith (the true convert) or one drifts away when trials and tribulations arise, when persecution comes, or the message is choked out by the concerns of life (the false convert).

At this point we’ll compare to more text from Levi Dowling’s New Age book which was referenced in part IIIa:

  The Christ is son, the only son begotten by Almighty God, the God of Force and God omniscient, the God of thought; and Christ is God, the God of Love.  

…Through Christ all life was manifest; and so through him all things were done, and naught was done in forming worlds or peopling worlds without the Christ.  

Christ is the Logos of Infinities and through the Word alone are Thought and Force made manifest.133

This is obviously a perversion of the prologue in John’s Gospel.  Both “Thought” and “Force” are capitalized in the original [“thought” is not capitalized the first time though].  This sure reads like WoF doctrine with “faith” as a ‘force’ and the “rhema” Word, ‘new, ongoing revelation’, coming into our thoughts.  “Christ” here is in reference to a member of this false Trinity who also “pervades all spaces of infinity”134, as in panentheism, meaning that all matter contains a “seed” of “Christ”, including man, and it takes the “Christ Spirit” to activate these “seeds”:

Into the soil…these seeds, which were the Thoughts of God, were cast…and they who sowed the seeds, through Christ, ordained that they should grow…and each to be a perfection of its kind.135

To reiterate, this “Christ” is the occult version of “Christ in you, the hope of glory” [Col 1:27] with “Christ” being the dormant, non-activated seed as well as a member of this false Trinity who permeates all matter.  This is evident in the following words of Levi’s “Jesus”:

Look to the Christ within who will be formed in every one of you, as he is formed in me.136

Now, let’s pick up where we left off in the sermon of Johnson:

…This story in Matthew 13, the parable of the seed and the sower actually gives this picture of soil; and the seed of God’s Word, the sperma of God, is released into the seed, through His Word, into the soil.  And, then it says, but other things grow and they choke out the life of that seed of God.  Think about it: the Word of God, the most powerful thing in the universe, is put into an environment that if we give attention to other IDEALS, other VOICES, other WORDS, we actually give them a place in our heart to take root and they choke out the Word of God, the most powerful thing in the universe.  For a season, the Lord has allowed our choices to affect the power, the effect of the most powerful thing in the universe.  It’s stunning…137

We’ll elaborate more on the “sperma of God” in the section below on “spiritual DNA”; but, it seems obvious that it’s analogous to Bob Jones’ “God sperm seed” from part II.  This “sperma of God” compares remarkably well with Levi’s “seeds” account above, does it not?  In addition, Levi’s statementthrough the Word alone are Thought and Force made manifest” seems akin to Johnson’s “rhema” Word made manifest in both Jesus and ‘believers’ as we consider Johnson’s words, “we actually have the privilege of the Word becoming flesh in us again, where we become the living illustration and manifestation of what God is saying.”

Also, note Johnson’s negative emphasis on ideals, voices, and words – is this a knock against Christian theological orthodoxy?  Perhaps so, since later Johnson speaks of ‘religion’ as, “mowing down the seeds so that they all look the same”.138  Bill Johnson continues to make more parallels to Levi’s doctrine:

The most powerful thing in the universe, the Word of God – that created the world, that spoke things into being, that Word has been planted in your heart.139

You’ve got to know the mind of the Lord if you’re gonna stand strong.140

Overall, Johnson appears to be making the point that to be strong, to grow in the faith, one must become more and more attuned to the ‘continuing revelation’ of the “rhema” word.  This is instead of the Christian orthodox view of sanctification by submitting to the Holy Spirit’s leading rather than our own flesh, carnality.

Levi’s teachings are not unique to him as these are also common in Gnostic literature (as stated earlier, Gnosticism also informs New Age doctrine).  In Benjamin Walker’s Gnosticism: Its History and Influence, he uses this same “seed” concept referencing Matthew 13 like Johnson.  Walker notes how man may either “identify with the upper realm and be transformed by it, or with the lower and perish as a result.”141

This type of man hears the call, but whether he listens and responds, or not, lies entirely within himself.  He is capable of receiving the seed sown by the sower.  But he is fertile ground for both tares and wheat (Matt. 13:25).  He must take care that the thorns of intellectualism and disbelief do not grow and choke the seed.  He has free will and tends both to good and evil, and must make up his own mind in which direction he will move…142

Biblically, the parable of the wheat and the tares/weeds [Matt 13:24-30] is about true Christians and false Christians.  The false Christians (tares/weeds) will be intertwined with the true (wheat) until the eschaton, the consummation, the end of all things.

This same false teaching is also in the Unity Church doctrine.   The following is a portion of the Unity Church’s definition for “kingdom of God” in their Metaphysical Bible Dictionary which compares favorably with both the Gnostic account above and Johnson’s version of Matthew 13:

…Jesus likened the kingdom to a seed because a seed has unexpressed capacities, and needs to be planted in the soil best suited, and when planted in a receptive mind it brings forth the fruits of the Spirit.  The life of the word is the spiritual idea it contains.

The kingdom of heaven is attained, first, by one’s establishing in one’s mind the consciousness of the truth of Being; second, by one’s outer life to Truth.

Jesus used many commonplace things to illustrate the establishing of the kingdom of heaven in consciousness in order that we might the more easily adjust all our thoughts and acts in harmony with the ideas that make heaven.

Jesus likened heaven to a man that sowed good seed in his field, but when he slept an enemy sowed tares there (Matt. 13:24-30).  The explanation is this: The field is consciousness; the good seed are our true thoughts, which are sown when we express our mind positively.  The tares are the error thoughts that drift in when the consciousness is negative or ignorant143

For further comparison, here are two quotes from Constance Cumbey’s September, 1988 New Age Monitor in which are transcriptions of question and answer sessions with David Spangler and Michael Lindfield, both of Findhorn Foundation, an openly New Age organization (which has been around for 50 years and counting).  Both individuals were taped at Boulder Episcopalian Church in Boulder, CO on October 26, 1987144 the day following an important series of meetings with Evangelicals and New Agers over the weekend.  First is Spangler:

…Even today, you know, in meeting with people who are leaders of the evangelical and pentecostal community, it was quite evident they were saying, ‘you know, the Spirit of Christ is in the world.’  It is in all people.  That is in scripture and as a consequence, people who have never encountered Christianity can still encounter Christ.  And a number of these evangelicals came up with examples of this in their travels around the world, and pointed to scriptural passages to substantiate this…145

Spangler makes the claim that both Evangelical and Pentecostal leaders stated that ‘Christ’ is “in all people” such that even non-Christians can “encounter Christ.”   Lindfield makes a similar claim about himself having his “own essential Christhood” and then makes a further claim about the “word made flesh”:

…I claim my right to freely explore my relationship with God and with Christ.  And if that makes me a New Ager, I will proudly wear that label, if that makes me a fundamental Christian, I will proudly wear that label.  Whatever it is that allows me to freely explore my relationship with God – my own essential Christhood – I will gladly take that on…There are many books and many writings purporting to express ‘this is the New Age.’  But in essence what I feel we are searching for is the word made fleshnot just the word made paper146

Levi Dowling makes this concluding statement with respect to the “Word made flesh”:

…[A]fter thirty years of strenuous life the man [Jesus] made his body fit to be the temple of the holy breath [Holy Spirit] and Love [Christ] took full possession, and John well  said when he declared: ‘And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.’147

Dowling’s point is that Jesus of Nazareth so demonstrated His worthiness to become ‘the Christ’, the World Teacher of the Piscean Age, that He was fully possessed by ‘the Christ’, the member of the false Trinity.  That is, Jesus, like all others, had the seed within Him (‘Christ within’, the “Thoughts of God” which pervade “all spaces of infinity”) which was then activated by ‘the Christ’, the Son of the false Trinitarian Father, who eventually  “took full possession” of Him.  Once ‘the Christ’, the Logos of Infinities, the false Trinitarian Christ, took full possession of Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus then became ‘the Word made flesh’.  The now ascended Master Jesus, the “World Teacher” for the Age of Pisces, is now our example to follow towards our own ascension to godhood.  To that end, we ourselves must also become “the Word made flesh”.

Given the earlier comparison (in part IIIa) of some Christological quotes of Bill Johnson to those of Levi and the comparisons in this particular section, it is entirely plausible that Johnson intends the same meaning as Levi with respect to “the Word made flesh”.

Interestingly, later in the “Jesus is our Model” sermon, Johnson comes close to correctly explaining Jesus’ first temptation as Him not succumbing to the Devil’s temptation to turn stone into bread: “He could have used the anointing that the Father had given Him through the Holy Spirit to turn the stone into bread.  But, He would not prostitute the favor, the anointing, the power, for personal gain…He faced it; He quoted Scripture; He brought the Word back into focus.”148   However, note that He refrained from using “the anointing that the Father had given Him” rather than His own inherent divinity.

Yet, Johnson follows this up conflating Scripture with the “rhema” Word, then he proceeds to use an example of a personal predictive prophecy which purportedly came to pass years later thereby emphasizing the “rhema” Word and, hence, coming full circle.  Subsequently, he closes his sermon and restates his original wrong exposition on Jesus’ first temptation.149

So, initially, Johnson goes to great lengths to show that Jesus’ first temptation was to question who He was as the “rhema” Word made flesh; yet, he later claims that Jesus first temptation was to get Him to use the power of ‘the anointing’ “for personal gain” thereby contradicting his first interpretation.  However, he asserts once again that Jesus’ first temptation was to “question His identity” near the very end of this sermon.150  This aptly illustrates Johnson’s duplicity.

The Word Becoming Spirit

In the following is another example of Johnson proclaiming Jesus as the “rhema” Word made flesh in yet another sermon.  However, Bill Johnson goes a bit further.  In this first bit, Johnson is making the point that most don’t have the full reality of what God ‘has already imparted into us’.  By this, he apparently means we’ve not yet fully actualized the seed implanted in us:

…We take such small risks because we live with such ignorance of what we possess.  I pray…that the ongoing revelation of God would come upon us as a people to discover what He has already been imparted to us; so that we can reasonably pursue the increase in what we’re lacking, what we’re missing…the real issue is that we live in ignorance of what has already been deposited into our lives.151

This “ongoing revelation”, this “rhema” Word, activated by “the sperma of God” will help us to literally release ‘the Word’ into the atmosphere – as it did for Jesus:

…Jesus said the Kingdom is within you.  Now that Kingdom is released in many different ways.  It is released through touch, it is released through the prophetic act, it is released through word.  In John chapter 6, Jesus said, “My words to you are spirit and they are life.”  Whenever Jesus spoke, He spoke what the Father was saying; so, nothing originated [from Him]…152

Johnson goes on with his usual kenotic motif of ‘Jesus did nothing of Himself being totally reliant on the Father in order to model a Spirit-filled life for the believer’.  Then he continues, claiming that when Jesus, “the Word made flesh”, spoke, His Words literally became Spirit by taking John 6:63 out of context.  He expounds on this proof-text by taking Romans 14:17 out of context as well which is followed by more Scripture twisting in order to make his esoteric point:

…So Jesus makes this declaration: “My words to you are spirit and they are lifeJesus is the Word of God made flesh; but, every time He spoke, the Word of God became SpiritWord made flesh; Word made Spirit…  Why is that important? 

…Paul said this in Romans, that the Kingdom of God is not meat or drink, but it is righteousness, peace and joy IN the Holy Spirit.  The Kingdom of God is not meat or drink, it’s righteousness, peace and joy IN the Holy Spirit.  The Kingdom of God is IN the Holy Spirit.  When words become Spirit, the realms of God’s dominion are released over humanityWhen we say what the Father is saying then we literally impart Presence through speech.  It is not the volume.  It is not the profundity.  It is the source: Was it from the heart of the Father?  If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain.  The realm of God is contained in the realm of the Spirit. When we say what the Father is saying, we change the options of every hearer…

When Jesus said, “Repent for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand” He was letting them know ‘when I talk to you, a reality is released over you that changed your options’.  And your answer is within reach.  It’s at HAND.153  

Is this Levi’s (God of) Force ‘made manifest’ “through the Word”?  The similarities are striking indeed.  Later in this same monologue, Johnson tells the audience the entire purpose of “all ministry” which is to literally “impart the Person of the Spirit of Christ”.  Which “Spirit of Christ” is being imparted?

…It’s my conviction that all ministry can be summed up…can be boiled down to one thing: All ministry is actually imparting the Person of the Spirit of Christ into the atmosphere, into a situation.  It’s actually imparting [ED: Johnson here points to his mouth] the person.  “Freely you have received, freely give.”  What have you received?  Him.154

This doctrine is not found anywhere in the pages of the Holy Bible; however, this concept is remarkably similar to an occult teaching regarding the etheric realm.  In Alice Bailey’s Telepathy and the Etheric Vehicle, she describes the etheric realm as the panentheistic realm – that substance of ‘god’ which is within all matter.  She uses the term omnipresence to describe its nature:

…Omnipresence has its basis in the substance of the universe, and in what the scientists call the ether; this word “ether” is a generic term covering the ocean of energies which are all inter-related and which constitute that one synthetic energy body of our planet.155

In panentheism, God is both transcendent (outside the cosmos) while simultaneously immanent, within all matter.  This immanence is the ‘god within’ (or “Christ within”, seed, divine spark) which inter-connects with all others; i.e., the ‘god within’ one person or thing is of the same essence as the ‘god within’ another.  This ‘divine immanence’ is the etheric realm, and omnipresence characterizes the nature of the entire etheric body.  This then makes omniscience possible to all:

It is a fact that omnipresence, which is a law in nature and based on the fact that the etheric bodies of all forms constitute the world etheric body, makes omniscience possible.  The etheric body of the planetary Logos is swept into activity by His directed will; energy is the result of His thoughtform playing in and through His energy body.156

Bailey asserts that this inter-connectness of the panentheistic, etheric realm makes collective omniscience possible since “divine thought” permeates this realm.157 Through “concentration and meditation”, individuals become “inspired Thinkers” with the power to direct this energy thereby acquiring “the clue to ultimate world salvation”:158

The thought-directing energy has for its source a Thinker Who can enter into the divine Mind, owing to His having transcended human limitation; the thought-directed receiver is the man, in exoteric expression, who has aligned his brain, his mind, and his soul.159

…Advanced humanity, the mystics and the knowers, are becoming increasingly aware of the mind which directs the evolutionary process.  When this awareness is cultivated and the individual mind is brought consciously into contact with the mind of God as it expresses itself through the illumined mind of the Hierarchy of adepts, we shall have the steady growth of omniscience.  This is the whole story of telepathic interplay in the true sense; it portrays the growth of that oligarchy of elect souls who will eventually rule the world, who will be chosen so to rule…160

Going back to Johnson, “The realm of God is contained in the realm of the Spirit”.  And, “If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain”.  So, in speaking the “rhema” Word (or through touch or the “prophetic act”), we release the “person of the Holy Spirit”, or, in other words of Johnson, we impart “the person of the Spirit of Christ into the atmosphere, into a situation”.  This is the purpose of “all ministry” as per Johnson.  In comparing to the Bailey concept above, it seems plausible that Johnson is releasing the ‘etheric realm’ into the atmosphere through the spoken “Word of God” via the omnipresence inherent in the ether.  Let’s compare this to more words of Bailey from another book:

Instruction is being given at this time to a special group of people who have come into incarnation at this critical period of world’s history.  They have come in, all at the same time, throughout the world, to do the work of linking up the two planes, the physical and the astral, via the etheric.161

It would be instructive to point out that occult / New Age / New Spirituality teachings are also expecting a “kingdom of god” as illustrated in Alice Bailey’s From Bethlehem to Calvary: The Initiations of Jesus, her 1937 work explaining how Jesus is ‘our model’:

It is time that the Church woke up to its true mission, which is to materialise the kingdom of God on earth, today, here and now…162

…A new kingdom is coming into being: the fifth kingdom in nature [ED: kingdom of God] is materialising, and already has a nucleus functioning on earth in physical bodies.163

Bailey explains this concept of bringing in the “kingdom of god” in yet another book, The Externalisation of the Hierarchy, with the book’s title about the intent of ‘externalizing’ the “Spiritual Hierarchy” (of demons) onto the physical plane (the earth):

Hovering today within the aura of our planet are certain great spiritual Forces and Entities, awaiting the opportunity to participate actively in the work of world redemption, re-adjustment and reconstruction.  Their Presence is sensed at times by the spiritually-minded people of the world, and Their reality is recognised by the mystics and occultists working in every land.  Men and women express this recognition according to the trend of their religious and psychological training and the particular mental or emotional bias…164

The book goes on to note how the different religions await various messianic figures each according to its own particular religious views and how this can create a powerful “thoughtform”.   This collusion of thought can hasten an event:

…[W]hen a thoughtform has been constructed of sufficient potency and has been built over a long period of time by the people of the world, a further and final stage becomes ever possible.  The form can be rendered so magnetic that it can attract an Energy which will inform it and give it active potency; it can then become a vital link between the subjective world of energy and the objective world of forces and a thing of power, of impelling and guiding activity, and therefore the expression of a Life.  This thoughtform, duly informed, becomes a mediating factor, constructed by humanity but animated by the will-to-good of some great and spiritual Entity… 165

Is this the method Johnson has in mind “to impart Presence through speech”?  Is this what is meant by his conviction that the ultimate goal of ministry is “actually imparting the Person of the Spirit of Christ into the atmosphere, into a situation”?  While Johnson does not make any explicit or implicit claims of omniscience in believers with his words above, he implies it in the following section (while Bob Jones does so explicitly).

We’ll close this section with additional words of Alice Bailey stating fairly concisely the intents and purposes of the “Spiritual Hierarchy” of which she communed indicating the needed cooperation of humanity:

Emphasis should be laid on the evolution of humanity with peculiar attention to its goal, perfection…man in incarnation, by the indwelling and over-shadowing soul…The relation of the individual soul to all souls should be taught, and with it the long-awaited kingdom of God is simply the appearance of soul-controlled men on earth in everyday life and at all stages of that control…The fact will appear that the Kingdom has always been present but has remained unrecognized, owing to the relatively few people who express, as yet, its quality….166

Getting Down to the DNA of Spiritual DNA

In his Shepherd’s Rod 2005, Bob Jones used this same concept of the ‘Word becoming flesh in us again’ with the ‘Word’ being the WoF “rhema” word, i.e. new, ongoing revelation, in referencing spiritual DNA:

The Living Word or Bread of life once again desires to be made flesh through a body of people joined with Him in a holy consummation.  As we live not by natural bread alone but by the living Word proceeding from the mouth of God, the bread of abundant life, even so the hidden truth of godliness will become part of our spiritual DNA.

…Mysteries reserved deep in the heart of the Father, locked away in the mind of Christ, and dispersed by the Spirit who searches the deep things, await the passionate embrace of a latter-day company of overcoming, holy, victorious ones…167

Since Jesus identified Himself as the “Bread of Life” [John 6:35, 48], it is clear Jones is claiming that some believers will, at some point, be just like Jesus as “the Word made flesh”, thus mirroring Johnson above.  Apparently, in living by the “living Word proceeding from the mouth of God” the spiritual DNA is expanded.

In part II it was shown how Bob Jones differentiated between the physical body which contains our DNA as compared to “His [God’s] genetics” / conscience / spirit within each person that has “authority over DNA”.  This is subsequently added to the human body (clay).  Jones’ teaching appears to be a ‘Christianized’ version of the esoteric/occult doctrine of reincarnation.

Apparently, “spiritual DNA” provides the means with which one can attain the literal mind of Christ (omniscience) as Jones also mentions in his teaching at the 2011 Piercing the Darkness prophetic conference:

…But there are Christians who are maturin’ now in their mind to where they’ll have the mind of Christ, and they’ll have the answers…168

This presumably occurs when one taps into “the Wisdom of the Ages” [see part II and below].  It is entirely possible, if not probable, that Jones has in mind ‘the Christ’ which is part of the false Trinity of Levi, i.e. the one which “took full possession” of Jesus of Nazareth (or a similar teaching).  This then would mean that when Jones speaks of ‘Christ’ “coming IN my people” [see part II] – referencing the false parousia – he’s referring to this same false Christ.

To reiterate, and perhaps make clearer, here’s additional context of Jones’ “God sperm seed” statement in which his claim is that this “spirit of God” comes into everyone at conception:

…Everyone of you, when you were conceived in your mother’s womb, a spirit of God came into you.  It’s your human spirit which is your conscience.  When this came into you, this spirit was as mature as it’ll ever be because this spirit came from God.  And, this is what’s been guiding your life – your conscience, your human spirit.  Man is six things.  He’s mind, will, and emotions.  He is human spirit, Holy Spirit and Wisdom of the AgesWhat happens if you begin to tap into the Wisdom of the Ages?  In that little bitty God sperm seed – 1st Peter 1:23 is all the Wisdom of the Ages.  That genetic thing – you have authority over DNA169

When Jones speaks of those Christians “who are maturing’ now in their mind” he’s speaking of those who are in tune with this ‘spirit’ which has “been guiding your life”, a “spiritual guide” which is providing these ‘new revelations’.  For those not familiar with New Age or esoteric/occult terminology, “spiritual guide” is the term used most commonly for a disincarnate spirit which guides the individual (which can seem like a ‘god within’).  Jones adds more to the above (quoted in part II):

But what He put in here [ED: the body] was not DNA.  It was His [God’s] genetics that has authority over DNA… For this conscience of yours is really your spiritual guide.  God gave this to you to guide your lives.  Don’t violate your conscience.  In certain places it’s called your spirit.  Especially in 2nd Corinthians 7:1 it’s called spirit and flesh.170

Jones is reiterating that it’s the spirit which is “as mature as it will ever be” which was “put in here [the body]” at conception.  It seems Jones’ “God sperm seed” is the agent which activates “His [God’s] genetics”, “your conscience”, which allows one to “tap into the Wisdom of the Ages”.  This “God sperm seed” is apparently what activates the “spiritual DNA” which “has authority over DNA”.  This appears to be very similar to, if not the same as, Johnson’s teaching on the “sperma of God”.

Johnson sets up his account of the “sperma of God” by explaining that ‘God’s Word’ brings conflict; however, again, Johnson is not speaking of Scripture.  He is referring to the “rhema” word as in the Word of Faith teachings as noted above:

…This story in Matthew 13, the parable of the seed and the sower actually gives this picture of soil; and the seed of God’s Word, the sperma of God, is released into the seed, through His Word, into the soil.  And, then it says, but other things grow and they choke out the life of that seed of God…171

Johnson’s point is essentially that other concerns “choke out” the ‘rhema Word’ preventing the “seed of God’s Word”, which is the “sperma of God”, from growing in the soil of the human.  With this teaching, he may well be promoting, in a more subtle way, the same doctrine of reincarnation that Jones has explained a bit more explicitly in part II.  The following quotes will help explain this a bit more.

In his book When Heaven Invades Earth, Bill Johnson speaks of “spiritual DNA” in two different passages.  Bracketed comments are inserted for explanation:

God is our Father, and we inherit His genetic code [at conception].   Every believer has written into his or her spiritual DNA [activated by the “sperma of God”] the desire for the supernatural….172

It is abnormal for a Christian not to have an appetite for the impossible. It has been written into our spiritual DNA [activated by the “sperma of God”] to hunger for the impossibilities around us to bow at the name of Jesus.173

God’s “genetic code” is the not yet activated “spiritual DNA” that all receive at conception.  This “spiritual DNA” is activated when one begins to listen to the ‘Word of God’, or “conscience” / ‘spirit’ as Jones would put it, thus beginning the ‘born again’ experience.  Here are some additional quotes:

…Exposure to the supernatural works of God changes the capacity of leaders to lead, thereby changing the bent of the people of God to pursue Him.

Such exposure is the equivalent of a spiritual change of DNA.  Something is altered in that person that enables him or her to lead in a way that the people of God inherit a heart for God through the leader’s influence.174

It is said that when a kernel of corn is planted, every kernel that grows has the exact same DNA as the original kernel in the ground. Jesus became the ultimate seed that was planted in death, and we were born again by the same Spirit that raised Him from the dead.  Every born-again believer has the DNA of Christ.  That is amazing!

This DNA of Christ in us is practical in that it enables the Godlike capacity to dream…He [Jesus] was planted to redeem people unto something.  And that unto something involves accurately and fully representing who Jesus is on earth as in Heaven.  We have His DNA and therefore manifest His face to the world…175

In this context, ‘born again’ refers to the point at which the ‘spiritual DNA’ is activated.  Once again, Johnson stresses how Jesus was raised by the Spirit rather than by the Father AND Christ Himself as per orthodoxy.  And this same ‘Spirit’ provides the ‘born again’ experience of every ‘believer’.  Johnson stresses this elsewhere in the same book: “The Holy Spirit in us is the same Holy Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead.  He is the Spirit of the resurrected Christ.”176  Johnson emphasizes ‘the Spirit’.  Could Johnson be referring to the same “Christ Spirit” that Benjamin Crème had in mind as indicated at the end of part IIIa?

Also, his assertion that we should be “accurately and fully representing who Jesus is on earth as in Heaven” in this context has overtones of the heretical Manifested Sons of God (MSoG) teaching.  And the ‘kernel of corn’ comparison reads much like the “seed of God’s Word”, “sperma of God” teaching above.  Johnson reiterates this teaching in a Charisma piece from last year’s special issue featuring Bethel Church:

When the Spirit of the resurrected Christ took up residence in our bodies, all of heaven positioned itself to see what we would conquer in His name. Resurrection power is in our nature, in our spiritual DNA.  When we were born again, we received the same spiritual DNA as Jesus.  His resurrection power now is to dwell in us through the Holy Spirit…177

This “resurrection power” described above was discussed in Bill Johnson’s ‘Born Again’ Jesus, Part II illustrating likely roots in MSoG teaching which has a parallel teaching in the occult / New Age / New Spirituality which itself is predicated on the false doctrine of reincarnation.

Let’s compare Johnson’s teachings with those of Eternal Vision Ministries which adheres to the following creed: “We believe that all of creation was designed and set forth to fulfill God’s Eternal Purpose”.178  Their teachings are reminiscent of other hyper-charismatic ministries with a decidedly New Age bent.  There’s no explicit mention of the Gospel while there’s a vague “Gospel of Eternity” promoted.  The following is from their teaching “The Function of the Bride”:

It is clear that growth cannot be accurately measured by the number of doctrines we learn or the amount of knowledge we achieve. Spiritual growth is measured by the spiritual life we have received from Him. This is the Zoe Life that IS Christ in us. This is the Life that comes into us as the sperma of God when we are born again. This “sperma” is the living and abiding word of God. It is also called the Spirit of Christ or the Spirit of His Son. The same “sperma” that was impregnated into Mary to develop into the Man Christ Jesus also comes into us. The growth of that “sperma” was the incarnation of God in a human body.

God’s goal for the church is the incarnation of Christ IN His body now on earth. For that reason God begins by infusing the “sperma” of God which is the living and abiding Word of God into each of us individually. Then individual “members” are assembled into a local body called the church. The corporate church is said to be the fullness of Him that fills all in all. In other words this church is the manifestation of Christ.

Jesus said if you have seen Me you have seen the Father because He was the manifestation of the Father on earth. Hopefully we will be able to say if you have seen me you have seen Christ, at least if we see His fulness we will see the “corporate Christ”. A “body with many members”.179

This looks a LOT like Bill Johnson’s teachings.  Not surprisingly, Eternal Vision asserts that Jesus was formed from the same “sperma” that ‘infuses’ “each of us individually”.   This correlates to Johnson’s teaching of Jesus as explained above regarding Jesus as the “rhema” Word made flesh by this “living and abiding word” indwelling Jesus rather than Jesus as the second Person of the Trinity made flesh via the hypostatic union.  Of course, this also correlates with the teaching of Levi above.

In an article titled Creating Heaven on Earth, is an interview of New Ager Jean Adrienne by Asa Wulfe in which they discuss bodily ascension as a way of creating Heaven on Earth in the here and now.  Note the similarity in title as compared with Johnson’s When Heaven Invades Earth.  In the Adrienne/Wulfe interview, Adrienne describes the process of ascension as being “started by activating additional strands of DNA – the spiritual DNA”:

…[I]f additional strands are activated, we awaken new abilities, gifts, and powers that have been dormant…Perhaps our DNA could be a ladder into the Fifth Dimension…180

This “Fifth Dimension” is analogous to Bailey’s “Fifth Kingdom,” also known as the “Kingdom of God”, which is only accessed by achieving the fourth (and higher) initiations with the fourth initiation resulting in the attainment of a manifested son of God.  [see “Christ” in the New Age article on this site]:

Certainly, everything that we are physically is encoded in the DNA.  We have physical DNA in our cells, and spiritual DNA that is in our energy field.  These two energies have to be connected, just as the left and right hemispheres of the brain must become integrated and balanced as we move into the Fifth Dimension.

All of our inner knowledge is stored in the DNA…When we become authentic, we no longer search outside ourselves for ‘true knowledge.’  It is within us.181

Bill Johnson’s friend Che Ahn of HRock Church has clearly defined spiritual DNA in an old Ministry Today article:

While no two of us are exactly alike physically, it would appear we have the same spiritual DNA, according to the Scriptures. Like Adam and all of humanity to follow him, the image of the Godhead has been passed down…

…[C]an we fathom the untold significance of having our Father’s DNA?

I no longer merely confess that I am the righteousness of Christ. I realize that with His DNA in me through His blood, I could be nothing else. I realize the attributes of His DNA reside in me—whether dormant or active.

No longer do I see the fruit of the Spirit as something we “will” by self-effort or following the law. Rather, I see that in my DNA, God has already placed genes of love, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. They are waiting to be activated by the Holy Spirit.182

This sounds much like what Bill Johnson is stating although it explains some aspects a bit more clearly.  From another New Age / New Spirituality site we see, once again, the same concepts:

In our current DNA structure, we have two visible strands, which are called backbone DNA, but all the other 10 other strands are present…According to Esoteric teachings, the first two strands are Physical DNA, the other ten strands are Spiritual DNA.

Activating your dormant DNA, which in time will also give you access to the secrets and mysteries of which you are and what your life-purpose is, will allow you to realize your full potential here on Earth.183

Divine Nature Activated

Bill Johnson’s friend Todd Bentley defined “DNA” as “Divine Nature Activated” under the Supernatural Training Center tab on his old Fresh Fire Canada site.  This seems an apt way to define the activation of the “spiritual DNA”:

Christ wants us to know Him intimately by the power of the Holy Spirit and to catch His vision for our lives.  His desire is to build godly character into our DNA – Divine Nature Activated….184

Also, his now-defunct Fresh Fire Canada site featured his “Joel’s Army Internship” in which was found the following quote from Jerame Nelson of Living at His Feet Ministries:

…I have experienced a true impartation of the Fire of God, as well as faith to see the divine nature of Jesus Christ manifest in the earth today185

Do we have a divine nature?  Scripture shows we have a fallen, sinful human nature but never does the Bible say or even allude to humans having a divine nature. Yes, the Holy Spirit is in the true believer which makes us “partakers of the divine nature” [2nd Peter 1:4 NKJV] but only through Him.  The word partake does not mean become.  Yes, we can say “Christ in us, the hope of glory” [Col 1:27]; but, this does not mean we become Christ or divine.  Only the Trinitarian Godhead is divine.

However, as explained earlier, esoteric/occult teaching is such that man has a dual nature – one human and one inherent but latent divine nature which must be actualized through self-effort.  Once an individual acknowledges their inherent divinity, then they can work towards actualizing it.  This seems like the best explanation for Bill Johnson’s concepts of the “sperma of God”, “Word made flesh”, “spiritual DNA” and the other material brought forth in this article.

The significance of “Divine Nature Activated” is explained quite well by New Ager John Lewis of Age to Age Ministries:

Citizens of planet Earth, you have been incarnated in your present physical form at this time to witness and participate in the Transformation of human kind.  This phase of human evolution is to bring him into full manifestation of his Divineness

You are not here by accident, chance, or coincident.  Your parents were only convenient for you arriving in the physical 3 dimensional existence you now experience.  You came through your mother, but you came from God.  Parents gave you the physical and biological stuff to house who you really are until the appointed time of the Divine Nature Activated.  You are being summoned and wooed to an experience that transcends what is known as the human experience.  Therefore, arise and shine because the Light within is coming to full expression and the glory of God will become more visible on your physical being.186

Once again, one can almost hear the refrain of the popular song by the soul/rock group The 5th Dimension “Aquarius/Let the Sunshine In”.  Clearly, this is very similar, if not the same as, Manifest Sons of God teaching.  Continuing with Lewis in his subsection titled, “DIVINE NATURE ACTIVATED”:

We are partakers of his divine nature.’  97% of our DNA is unused, not active; therefore, the science communities don’t understand it.  I believe that the discovery of DNA at the time it was discovered was carefully orchestrated by God in man….

 …The 97% of your DNA that’s not activated is GOD waiting to be activated in man.  You have the information and intelligence of the Adam the son of God encoded in your DNA.  Access and activation to this information will cause you to live as Adam the God-man in the Garden of your Be-ing….

One will only be able to fulfill the Divine purpose when he is walking in awareness of his own divinity.  It is our belief system that hinders us from being the Gods we are…187

John Lewis’ teachings sure do resemble those of Johnson, Jones, Ahn and Bentley, do they not?

Part IV will discuss how some other teachings of Johnson resemble those of occult / New Age / New Spirituality and will conclude this series.

117Rudolph, Kurt; trans. R McLachlan Wilson Gnosis: The Nature & History of Gnosticism. © 1977 Koehler & Amelang; translation (from German) of second, revised and expanded version © 1984 T&T Clark Ltd, Edinburgh; 1987 (1st paperback), HarperCollins, New York, NY; pp 159-160, 305-306.  Craig Keener, in his commentary on John [The Gospel of John: A Commentary, Volume One.  2003, 1st Softcover Ed, 2010, Hendrickson, Peabody, MA; pp 339-363], exhaustively covers the various possibilities for the Gospel writer’s reason for using the term Logos.  Keener contends that any Gnostic influence on the Gospel writer is “not probable” [p 340].
118Keener; p 341
119Keener; p 341
120Keener; p 344
121Keener; p 345
122Keener; pp 347-363.  While Keener is convinced of the parallel, Andreas Kostenberger [Kostenberger, Andreas J. Encountering John: The Gospel in Historical, Literary, and Theological Perspective (Encountering Biblical Series). July 2009 (8th prtg (paperback), (1999)), Baker, Grand Rapids, MI; pp 52-57] is less so as he sees “Wisdom” as a divine attribute instead [p 53].  Kostenberger believes the parallel is not close enough and, “if no closer parallel can be found, it may be necessary to conclude that personified Wisdom constitutes at least a remote parallel to the characterization in John” [p 53].
123Kostenberger, Encountering John; pp 52-56
124Kostenberger, Andreas J. John: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. July 2009 (4th prtg (2004)), Baker, Grand Rapids, MI; p 41
125Keener; pp 140-142.  Keener notes that “John’s literary freedom” [p 140] makes it easier to date the Gospel.
126Bercot, David W., Ed. A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs.  © 1988 David Bercot, November 2000 (3rd prtg), Hendrickson, Peabody, MA; p 91
127“whizzpopping” YouTube video, Bill Johnson – Friendship with God. Uploaded November 1, 2009 , taken from Bethel Church in Redding, CA, <http://www.ibethel.tv/watch/399/open-heavens-conference/2009/10/14?session=113> Open Heavens Conference October 15, 2009, morning session, Bill Johnson  <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4RZ_ctiwlE>; 1:24 – 1:37; as accessed 04/23/12.   Caps from emphasis in original; other emphasis added.
128Johnson, Clark, The Essential Guide to Healing; p 75. Emphasis added.
129“ewenhuffman” Jesus is our Model- Sermon of the week 20 Dec 09. Posted December 23, 2009, “Bill Johnson sermons for downloading”, mp3 audio, taken from <http://www.ibethel.org/> December 20, 2009, original sermon titled “Jesus is Our Model”  <http://ewenhuffman.podbean.com/2009/12/23/jesus-is-our-model-sermon-of-the-week-20-dec-09/> 24:07 – 24:24 (Johnson continues reiterating this thought until 24:57 at which he point he explains this via Matthew 13); as accessed 04/21/12.  Emphasis added.
130Bock, Darrell L. Luke, Volume 1 – 1:1—9:50 (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament). © 1994 Darrell L. Bock, Baker, Grand Rapids, MI; pp 372-374
131“ewenhuffman” 24:57 – 25:17.  Emphasis added.
132“ewenhuffman” 25:17 – 26:18.  Caps from emphasis in original; other emphasis added.
133Dowling; p 6
134Dowling; p 6
135Dowling; p 6
136Dowling; p 8
137“ewenhuffman” 26:19 – 27:11.  Caps from emphasis in original; other emphasis added.
138“ewenhuffman” 27:30 – 27:48.
139“ewenhuffman” 29:11 – 29:28.  Emphasis added.
140“ewenhuffman” 32:14 – 32:17.  Emphasis added
141Walker, Benjamin Gnosticism: Its History and Influence. © 1983 Benjamin Walker, 1989 (1st published 1983 Aquarian Press), Crucible/Thorsons Publishing Group, Northamptonshire, England; p 62
142Walker; p 62
143Unity School of Christianity Metaphysical Bible Dictionary. 1931 (1955, 8th pr.), Unity School of Christianity (no publisher specified), Lee’s Summit, MO; p 388.  Emphasis added.
144Cumbey, Constance E. “An Evening with David Spangler” New Age Monitor. September 1988, Vol. 3, No. 1, Pointe Publishers, Center Line, MI; p 8
145Cumbey, “Evening with Spangler”; p 10
146Cumbey, “Evening with Spangler”; p 12
147Dowling; p 8
148“ewenhuffman” 30:21 – 31:01.  Importantly, Johnson indicates Jesus refrains from using the power of “the anointing” as opposed to stating Jesus refrained from using His inherent divinity which would be the predominate historical orthodox view.
149“ewenhuffman” 31:01 – 33:00
150“ewenhuffman” 35:03 – 36:04
151“ChasingRiver” YouTube video Bill Johnson – The Resting Place – VERY POWERFUL MESSAGE. Uploaded October 1, 2011, taken from GodTV <http://www.god.tv/node/503> and <http://www.god.tv/node/504> , venue: International Church of Las Vegas (ICLV), <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsQmLuG-Exo&feature=related> 11:17 – 12:04.  Emphasis added.  As accessed 04/23/12
152“ChasingRiver”; 12:14 – 12:39.  Emphasis added.
153“ChasingRiver”; 13:09 – 15:08.  Emphasis added.
154“ChasingRiver”; 34:40 – 35:08.  Emphasis added.
155Bailey, Telepathy; p 2
156Bailey, Telepathy; p 7
157Bailey, Telepathy; p 7
158Bailey, Telepathy; p 6.  Emphasis added.
159Bailey, Telepathy; pp 6-7
160Bailey, Telepathy; p 7
161Bailey, Alice A. Initiation, Human and Solar. © 1951 Lucis, NY, 4th paperback ed, 1980 (First printing 1922), Fort Orange Press, Albany, NY; p 67.  Emphasis in original.
162Bailey, Bethlehem to Calvary; p 210
163Bailey, Bethlehem to Calvary; p 254
164Bailey, Externalisation; p 222
165Bailey, Externalisation; pp 222-223
166Bailey, Externalisation; p 588
167Jones, Bob & Paul Keith Davis Shepherd’s Rod 2005. © 2002 Bob Jones and Paul Keith Davis, Bynum Printing, Waynesboro, MS; pp 15-16. These “Shepherd’s Rods” are purportedly ‘prophetic words’ Jones receives each year on Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement.  What is the significance of Yom Kippur as the Day of Atonement to the Christian when Jesus’ blood sacrifice IS the Day of Atonement and the fulfillment of this Jewish holy day?  The year of Jones’ “Shepherd’s Rods” is always the year following Yom Kippur, in this case the actual date was September 25, 2004 (from page 1 of the booklet).  Paul Keith Davis is of White Dove Ministries.
168Jones, “Coming Kingdom”; 5:02 – 5:11.  Emphasis added.
169Jones, “Coming Kingdom”; 10:53 – 11:59.  Emphasis added.
170Jones, “Coming Kingdom”; 24:48 – 25:30.  Emphasis added.
171Jones, “Coming Kingdom”; 26:19 – 26:38.  Emphasis added.
172Johnson, Heaven Invades; p 81. Emphasis added.
173Johnson, Heaven Invades; p 25. Emphasis added.
174Johnson, Release Power of Jesus; p 140.  Emphasis added.
175Johnson, Clark, Essential Guide to Healing; p 147.  Bold from emphasis in original; underscore added.
176Johnson, Clark, Essential Guide to Healing; p 135.  Emphasis in original.
177Johnson, Bill, “Super-Natural by Nature” Charisma. June 09, 2011, online version <http://www.charismamag.com/index.php/component/content/article/1571-features/31221-super-natural-by-nature> par 13.  As accessed 4/26/12.
178Eternal Vision Ministries, home page <http://www.eternalvisionministries.com>.  As accessed 4/27/12.
179Eternal Vision Ministries “The Function of the Bride”, <http://www.eternalvisionministries.com/_writings/writings/10022_bride_function.html> par 4-6.  Emphasis added.  As accessed 4/27/12.
180“The Spirit of Ma’at” website by Asa Wulfe “Creating Heaven on Earth with Jean Adrienne”, Vol 4, No 5, n.d.      <http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/dec4/adrienne.htm> par 13.  As accessed 4/27/12.
181Wulfe; par 14-17.  Emphasis added.  As accessed 4/27/12.
182Ahn, Che “Spiritual DNA” Column: First Priority, Ministry Today; June 30, 2007, online version  <http://ministrytodaymag.com/index.php/first-priority/15390-spiritual-dna>;  par 4-8.  Emphasis added.
183Humanity Healing Network website, ‘hhteam’, “Spiritual DNA”, <http://humanityhealing.net/2010/08/spiritual-dna/>; par 6-7, 15.  Emphasis added.  As accessed 4/27/12.
184Fresh Fire Canada website, Todd Bentley, “Supernatural Training Center” courtesy Internet Archive (the Wayback Machine),<http://web.archive.org/web/20070826155456/www.freshfire.ca/index.php?Id=4&pid=994>;  par 3.  Emphasis in original.  As accessed 4/27/12.
185Fresh Fire Canada website, Todd Bentley, “Joel’s Army Internship” ‘Testimonies’, courtesy Internet Archive (the Wayback Machine), <http://web.archive.org/web/20070825050149/www.freshfire.ca/?Id=943&pid=994>; emphasis added.  As accessed 4/27/12
186Age to Age Ministries, John Lewis, “DNA 2002: Divine Nature Activated”    <http://www.atam.org/DNA.html>; par 1-2.  Emphasis added.  As accessed 4/27/12.
187Age to Age Ministries, John Lewis; par 21, 24, 32.  Bold from emphasis in original; underscore added.  As accessed 4/27/12

381 Responses to Bill Johnson’s Christology: A New Age Christ?, part IIIb

  1. TimBain says:

    Craig,
    outstanding !!! …..a home run!!!…. TKO! …anyone still thinkin ol’ Billy, Bob and Tod are just a couple’ah good ol’ boys who meant no harm?!?….well, their DNA may not be the only thing thats still “dormant”,- of course its nothing a healthy ‘ dose of Logos’ can’t cure. Again, just a phenomenal job brother, I’m positive folks will be snatched from the brink thru your labor of love thanks for providing such an in depth and articulate resource to point people to !

  2. Craig says:

    Tim,

    If folks don’t see the many problems inherent in these teachings and recognize that these ‘teachers’ are not affirming Jesus Christ as God incarnate, then they do not have “ears to hear”. This is quite clearly a different Jesus, a different spirit, and a different gospel [II Cor 11:3-4].

  3. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    I’m still reading through this — but I wanted to point out that there is an error that I caught.

    You wrote:
    “This same false teaching is also in Unitarian doctrine. The following is a portion of the Unity church’s definition for “kingdom of God” in their Metaphysical Bible Dictionary which compares favorably with both the Gnostic account above and Johnson’s version of Matthew 13:”

    The Unity church is not the same thing as Unitarian Universalists. I don’t think that people who go to Unity churches are called Unitarians. The name is similar, yeah, but these are two totally different groups.

    One of my roommates when to a Unitarian Universalist “church,” as does my uncle. This cult was originally two separate groups that later joined together. Unitarians simply denied the Trinity, especially Jesus’ deity. Universalists didn’t believe that anyone would go to hell. The two groups merged. They tried to use Christian terminology for a long time. However, they have changed over time. It’s now more of an atheist group of people who meet together to hear about ethics or secular humanism type things. However, they do like to hear “sacred” stories about all religions so that they can take moral lessons from them. This is how my roommate described the congregation she attended. The theologically liberal “Christians” might accept them as being “Christian” in some sense. Unitarian Universalists were welcome at my graduate school, which was a seminary.

    One of my other roommates tried interviewing for a position at a Unity church in the city that my grad school was in. I’d done reading on various cults, and I warned her not to go to the interview. John Shelby Spong and Bart Ehrman have spoken at the Unity Church’s national gathering (whatever it is called.) I listened to Spong’s speech on the Unity Chruch’s official website. Liberal Christians accept the Unity Church as a liberal or progressive Christian denomination. It is a New Thought/Metaphysical group. Unity Church focuses on spirituality, and I think is extremely dangerous. Spong still associates with this group. In the speech that I listened to on their website several years ago, he spoke highly of the Eddy woman and said that he hoped that the Unity version of spirituality became the future of Christianity :(

    Unitarian Universalists and the Unity Church are two different theological cults of Christianity.

    Unitarian Universalist website:

    http://www.uua.org/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarian_Universalism

    Unity Church’s website:

    http://www.unity.org/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_Church

    Just wanted to be clear on that.

  4. Arwen4CJ says:

    And, yes, I’m very aware that John Shelby Spong and Bart Ehrman are theologically liberal Bible “scholars” who deny everything in the Bible. Spong came to my seminary and gave a speech. His talk seemed to have some holes in his thinking — he claimed that Jesus didn’t physically rise from the dead, but that it was a spiritual thing, among other heresies. He was disgusted by the doctrine of original sin and the cross of Jesus Christ. He basically said he hated it — he hated Jesus’ blood.

    Later, when I found Spong’s speech that he gave to the Unity Church, his theology made a whole lot more sense — I could see the perspective by which he views Christianity. The speech that he gave to the Unity church was identical to the one he’d given at my seminary, except he added in little tid-bits where he praised the Unity Church, Eddy, New Thought, etc. Like I said before, he said that he hopes that the theology of the Unity Church becomes the future of Christianity!

    So — that is what I’m seeing with theologically liberal Christians. They are denying all the essentials of our faith and replacing them with New Thought theology. They don’t openly state it except to New Thought groups. Clearly, they are trying to push the church in that direction.

    It makes sense — if you empty Christianity of its real spirituality and theology, you have to replace it with something else.

    In Spong’s speech to the Unity Church, he said that Bart Ehrman would speak after him…so yeah….both of them are in this together.

    Could a similar phenomenon be happening in the hyper-charismatic movement–pushing New Thought demonic doctrine on the church? Absolutely.

  5. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    I’d never heard of “Unitarian Universalists” before and used the word “Unitarian” as descriptive of the Unity Church. Thanks for bringing this forth. I’ve changed the article accordingly.

  6. Craig says:

    New Thought, Unity, Christian Science all were influenced by the Theosophy (Blavatsky, et al); so, Theosophy is the real root. Of course, Theosophy is rooted in 1st/2nd century Gnosticism which itself is rooted in Platonism and it’s dualistic thought.

  7. cherylu says:

    I just have one quick question at this time. Why are you so sure that Johnson is saying that we receive the Father’s DNA at conception? I read that first quote in a bit larger context in the book and there was nothing there that made me think he meant at conception. I couldn’t find the second quote in a larger context.

    This seems particularly pertinent to me since he speaks later of receiving Jesus DNA at conversion.

    I am not following why you come to this conculsion at all as I don’t see that he actually says this.

  8. Craig says:

    cherylu,

    First a question: do you see Johnson as teaching Jesus as the “rhema” ‘Word made flesh’? Then, I’ll answer your question.

  9. cherylu says:

    Probably, yes. But I am not sure that he means that to at all refer to “The Word became flesh,” in John 1. I think he is speaking of two different things.

    Now, back to my question…..

  10. Craig says:

    Understanding this is central to the point of this part. That is the reason why the “spiritual DNA” section comes after the lengthy discussion of Jesus as “rhema” ‘Word made flesh’ and subsequently the “Word made flesh; word made Spirit”. So, let’s discuss this first as it directly pertains to the understanding of Johnson’s teaching on “spiritual DNA”.

    Given that Johnson’s claim is that the first temptation was to “question who He was” which is then followed by his explanation of Matthew 13 to ‘prove’ his assertion regarding the first temptation which is then followed by the “sperma of God” concept, why don’t you understand that this is referring to the “Word” in John 1:14?

  11. cherylu says:

    Craig,

    I simply do not have the time at the moment, (I am cooking for my hubby), to go into the reasons behind what I said. Besides, knowing how these conversations go, it would probably take 50 more comments of discussing this point!

    So, for the sake of my question, I will assume you are basing what you said on the rhema word becoming flesh and being the same word as spoken of in John 1 having something to do with the answer. So going with that assumption, how are you so sure that the DNA spoken of by Johnson comes at conception?

  12. Craig says:

    cherylu,

    It seems you tend to have a sort of myopia on some things inordinately focusing on one aspect while ignoring others. This is why I asked you the questions I have. And, by focusing on merely one thing you sometimes miss the main point, unfortunately. If you don’t ‘buy in’ to the first part for whatever the reason, I can understand your hesitation to ‘buy in’ to the rest. So then, taking just one aspect of the first section, how do you interpret the “sperma of God” concept by the context provided? I’ve provided the audio (in the footnote) which you can listen to in order to get even more context. And, keep in mind Johnson’s statement “we actually have the privilege of the Word becoming flesh in us again, where we become the living illustration and manifestation of what God is saying.”

  13. Craig says:

    One thing all readers should keep in mind: This is part of a much larger article. Part IIIa compared some of Johnson’s quotes to those of Levi Dowling’s popular New Age book (from 1907) The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ and noted some similarities. Also noted was how Johnson emphatically claims Jesus “DID NOT” raise Himself from the dead, contrary to John 2:19-22/10:17-18. One has to wonder why Johnson would purposely violate Scripture, especially when this particular teaching is in occult / New Age / New Spirituality doctrine.

    With the foregoing in mind, this current part compares Johnson’s concept of the “sperma of God” to Levi’s “Thoughts of God” permeating all matter and that Levi’s ‘Christ’ which is the “God of Force” and “God of Thought” and through this ‘Christ’ (Word), “through the Word alone are Thought and Force made manifest“. And furthermore:

    …Into the soil…these seeds, which were the Thoughts of God, were cast…and they who sowed the seeds, through Christ, ordained that they should grow…and each to be a perfection of its kind.

    All the “seeds” were cast into all matter and it takes ‘Christ’, to make them grow with ‘Christ’ alone who makes “Thought” and “Force” manifest.

  14. cherylu says:

    Craig,

    I will listen to the audio when I have the opportunity. However, being a weekend and my hubby being home, I don’t know when that will happen. It isn’t always something that works well to do when he is at home.

    You say I have a form of myopia and focus on one thing and miss the rest. Well, it seems to me that you have a different affliction–you are so intent on what you see as the big picture, that you don’t really look at all of the details that make up that picture. You tend to seem to relegate many of them to the “irrelevant” or “he is just being duplicitous” bin.

    A case in point being the quotes I provided last night in the other thread. In regards to one of them, Johnson said that Jesus set aside the privleges of his divinity. Not that He laid aside His divinity. He also clearly spoke of Jesus receiving worship as God and God being well pleased. Shouldn’t those things, along with the growing numbers of times he has stated very bluntly that Jesus was eternally God or never stopped being God be taken into consideration as having a bearing on his overall beliefs and possibly even explaining some of the rest of what he has said? But you simply seem to write them off and make the other statements the end-alls for what he believes. Of course, continuing to accuse him of deceit/duplicity as you do so.

    And very frankly, an article such as this one that is full of “doesn’t that sound a lot like,” “Is Johnson saying the same thing as,” or “it is likely, even probably the same thing as,” etc, etc, etc, is just way too full of speculations and assumptions to be at all convincing in my mind. And some of the connections you draw don’t even seem to follow to me at all. The most notable one being the references to reincarnation. I thought you were really reaching when you brought it up the first time. This time I am just left shaking my head and going, “huh?”

  15. cherylu says:

    One more quick thought on the issue of Jesus raising Himself from the dead. I don’t remember how it is justified if I ever knew. But I do know that, as with other issues, JB is not the only one that “has gone to the trouble to teach this.” I have heard it taught myself. I don’t know how widespread this teaching is, but it is definitely something that is out there in the charismatic or WoF branch of the church.

  16. Bud Press says:

    cherylu, what do you think Bill Johnson meant when he said Jesus “did not raise Himself” from the dead?

  17. Craig says:

    cherylu,

    I have quite a few of Johnson’s books. I’ve painstakingly transcribed audio/video, which itself helps drill in my mind what he is teaching. I state all of this to indicate that I’ve analyzed his material, some of which is orthodox, some of which isn’t. To filter a few orthodox statements through his unorthodox ones is exactly what he’d like you to do. He literalizes metaphors and metaphorizes the literal. His duplicity is evident right in the audio containing the ‘born again Jesus’ statement as I point out in the last few paragraphs of the first section. Given that, and his obvious deception with regard to the Liardon library, why would you be surprised if Johnson is duplicitous elsewhere?

    How do you equate “setting aside privileges of His divinity” with “Jesus emptied Himself of divinity”. I’m pretty certain there’s no other definition for “emptied”. And, since Johnson claims Jesus “set aside the privileges of His divinity” it seems he’s defined divinity as per orthodoxy, does it not? That’s contrary to your continued assertion Johnson may mean something different.

    As usual, you fail to take into consideration that Johnson states quite clearly that Jesus didn’t even receive the title of Christ until the dove rested upon him:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/03/17/the-christ-anointing-and-the-antichrist-spirit/

    This indicates Jesus was not God at the Virgin Birth and, in other Johnson quotes, Jesus was only God by virtue of “the anointing”.

    The “doesn’t this sound like” is stated for the mere fact that it LOOKS like the other doctrines; but, I can’t know for sure if this is what he intends. One should wonder why he uses terms and concepts foreign to the Bible yet found in occult literature.

  18. Craig says:

    cherylu,

    Once again, you miss the point. It doesn’t matter if anyone has taught that Jesus DID NOT raise Himself from the dead. The question is why Johnson teaches this in direct violation of Scripture. I’ve already pointed out that the concept is in occult literature which means Johnson didn’t invent it.

    Johnson violates quite a bit of Scripture in his teachings and yet, while you do state there are some things wrong with Johnson, you seem to make excuses for him as if the fact that he’s not the only one teaching this particular doctrine provides a good excuse and/or a good reason to claim that he’s not doing this on purpose.

  19. cherylu says:

    I admit there are SOME things wrong with Johnson?? As I think you know, that is the understatement of the year!

    And, once again, the reason that I point out that Johnson isn’t the only one teaching this is to say that there are other charismatics/WoF people that believe and teach the same thing. The likely hood that this belief comes from his own circles of church people would be a very strong possibility I would think.

    I don’t know for sure why Johnson teaches this. I reckon it is because it fits so well with the “Jesus is our model” theology that the charismatic and WoF churches all push so strongly. But I don’t know either if they are doing it “in direct violation of Scripture” as they understand it. I would like to know what they do with those verses. But like I said, I don’t remember if I ever knew. And I haven’t found any info on line directly pertaining to this issue either.

  20. cherylu says:

    So then, taking just one aspect of the first section, how do you interpret the “sperma of God” concept by the context provided? I’ve provided the audio (in the footnote) which you can listen to in order to get even more context.

    I had a few minutes and was going to listen to that audio. But I don’t think I am finding the one you mean. Can you give me the link here?

  21. Craig says:

    cherylu,

    You wrote, “the reason that I point out that Johnson isn’t the only one teaching this is to say that there are other charismatics/WoF people that believe and teach the same thing. The likely hood that this belief comes from his own circles of church people would be a very strong possibility I would think.

    Exactly. And that’s precisely why I quote some of Johnson’s admitted “friends” in order to show what they teach as a way to sort of ‘fill in the gaps’ in what Johnson omits. He may not state outrightly that we have the Father’s DNA at conception; but, his “friends” Che Ahn and Bob Jones do. New Agers do so. Then, why would we think Johnson’s version is different when he uses similar terminology and the same concept? His “sperma of God” teaching infers it.

    OK, here’s John 2:19-22:

    19 Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

    20 Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”

    21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them;[a] and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said. [NKJV]

    I don’t see how this can be interpreted any other way except that Jesus raised Himself from the dead. Here’s John 10:17-18:

    17 “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.” [NKJV]

    Clearly, Jesus says that He Himself will raise Himself through His own omnipotent power.

    To my knowledge, Johnson never does expound on the above Scriptures. But, he does proof-text a portion of John 5:19 (“The Son can do nothing…”) in teaching his kenosis which is actually quite the opposite of the context of the passage which states, essentially, that Jesus does not act independently of the Father, but rather WITH the Father. He even “gives life to whom He chooses” like the Father [5:21] in the then present [5:24-25] which illustrates Jesus Christ did, in fact, use His “divine prerogatives”, His inherent divinity/deity, in hypostatic union.

    To put it succinctly, Johnson twists, ignores, and adds to Scripture toward his own ends. Whether he copies someone else in doing so is beside the point.

  22. Craig says:

    The audio is right here [footnote 129]:

    http://ewenhuffman.podbean.com/2009/12/23/jesus-is-our-model-sermon-of-the-week-20-dec-09/

    You can follow the footnote references with the applicable times.

  23. Carolyn says:

    It doesn’t matter if a person like BJ is orthodox sometimes…the Scripture says.

    In John 2 KJV
    5And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another.
    6And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.
    7For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
    8Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
    9Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
    10If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
    11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

    2 John NIV
    4 It has given me great joy to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as the Father commanded us. 5 And now, dear lady, I am not writing you a new command but one we have had from the beginning. I ask that we love one another. 6 And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love.
    7 I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Watch out that you do not lose what we[a] have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. 9 Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take them into your house or welcome them. 11 Anyone who welcomes them shares in their wicked work.

    In either version of preference… the warning is to the one who is making allowances for deceivers and transgressors. We cannot have it both ways. And if someone is denying the deity of Christ, we are to have nothing to do with him or any of his teachings. We are to warn a divisive person once then again. After that we are to have nothing to do with them. Titus 3:10

    I understand BJ is denying the deity at the incarnation of Christ.
    I don’t have to read anything else. It’s settled for me. He is a false teacher. Doesn’t matter if he’s said ten thousand things that agree with orthodoxy…if I condone a false teacher, I will be in danger of sharing in his wicked work and losing what I have worked for.

  24. Bud Press says:

    cherylu:

    In an above post I asked, “what do you think Bill Johnson meant when he said Jesus ‘did not raise Himself’ from the dead?”

    You replied with, “I don’t know for sure why Johnson teaches this. I reckon it is because it fits so well with the ‘Jesus is our model’ theology that the charismatic and WoF churches all push so strongly. But I don’t know either if they are doing it ‘in direct violation of Scripture’ as they understand it. I would like to know what they do with those verses. But like I said, I don’t remember if I ever knew. And I haven’t found any info on line directly pertaining to this issue either.”

    Consider the following: Why does Bill Johnson teach that Jesus did not raise Himself from the dead? The Bible informs us that false teachers resist the truth and are destitute of the truth (2 Timothy 3:8; 1 Timothy 6:5). God reads the minds of men, and knows what motivates them to say what they say. Johnson may never reveal “why” he teaches falsely, but God knows, and He will deal with Johnson in due time.

    The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus raised Himself from the dead. For whatever reason, Bill Johnson denies it. Therefore, he is not only in “direct violation of Scripture,” he denies the very words of Jesus. To deny Jesus’ words is to call Him a liar.

    Christians are called to be “fruit” inspectors, not mind-readers. We are to concern ourselves with what God teaches, as opposed to what false teachers say. Throughout the Bible, God is against false teachers. Unless they repent and become born again, they will go to hell (2 Peter 2:1-2). Bill Johnson’s “fruit” is rotten to the core–not because I say it–but because God says it, and He teaches us how to inspect Johnson’s “fruit” in Matthew 7:15-20.

    Bill Johnson is the “senior pastor” of Bethel church. He claims to receive divine revelations from God. If this were true, Johnson would not deny Jesus’ words. God will not contradict His word by telling Johnson something totally different. We can discuss the in’s and out’s, and look for reasons “why” until we pass-out from sheer exhaustion. But the answer to “why” Johnson teaches falsely is within the pages of God’s written word.

    Finally, all we have to do is chill-out, submit to and trust in God’s word as our ultimate and final authority, and leave the things that we can’t comprehend to God. To do the opposite is to doubt Scripture, lean to our own understanding, dwell in confusion, and enable Bill Johnson.

    Cheryl, I love you in Christ. I hope this helps.

    Bud Press, Research Consultant,
    Christian Research Service
    Acts 20:27-31

  25. Carolyn says:

    Craig, the quotes speak for themselves. We are not the ones who have to prove anything…rather,we are to compare their twisted teachings with Scripture and test the spirits. I think BJ and his prophets of Baal have to do the proving. I’d love to hear him and his comrades retract their New Age teachings, but I won’t hold my breath. The more I read, the more I see a steady departure from the simple truth of God’s Word…from a waiting for the hope that we were promised. They have a determination to bring heaven and the Manifested sons of god to earth and set up a kingdom on earth, a dominion, with a hierarchy of apostles to rule it, imparting Christ consciousness through strange teachings like the latest about DNA and “infusing the sperma of God”. And this, leading into the standard, panentheistic divinity that shapes the basis of what the Bible describes as the kingdom of antichrist.

    Instead we are encouraged by the Truth to wait for God’s timing

    1 Thessalonians 1:10
    And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

    and to look up! Our redemption is near!!
    1 Thessalonians 4:17
    After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.

    1 Peter 4:6-8 (King James Version)
    7But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.
    8And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

  26. Craig says:

    Carolyn/all:

    One of the benefits of WordPress sites is their stats page which provides a number of useful statistics one of which is search terms used to arrive at the site. Many times they are interesting in and of themselve and at other times they’ve actually helped me to make connections I’ve not made before. Today is one such: “release the power of jesus pg 72″.

    In looking at the larger context, I find this on page 71:

    Our job is to learn how to release the reality and power of Testimony in the same way Jesus did. Jesus represented God much differently than the Ark of the Testimony represented Him. There is a significant difference between a box of inanimate objects that points to spiritual realities and a living testimony that interacts with and manifests those realities. [emphasis added]

    I’ve already pointed out that Johnson appears to have a definition for reality which looks like Kenyon’s which in turn looks like that of Theosophy – a doctrine called maya in Brahmanism in which the spiritual realm is ‘real’ while the physical realm is not:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/02/20/learning-etymology-with-bill-johnson-a-new-age-repentance/

    Johnson earlier [p 70] makes the point that we are now the temple of the Holy Spirit with the Holy of Holies residing in us. So then, like Jesus had done, we can release reality by providing “a living testimony that interacts with and manifests those realities.” On page 72, Johnson states:

    The very word testimony in Hebrew comes from a root word that means “to repeat, to do again.” [emphasis in orig]

    Johnson continues stating we are to repeat what Jesus did in ‘word and deed':

    …When we declare the testimonies of the Lord…we are putting a demand on Heaven for that covenant to be renewed and demonstrated in the present as it was in the past.

    Does he mean creating ‘Heaven on earth’ as it was in the Garden of Eden like New Age/occult thought? Continuing on:

    …[P]utting this demand on Heaven is exactly what God wants us to do…because in doing so we create an atmosphere and an opportunity for Him to do again what He had done. Just as Jesus did, we are to create a context for His presence within us to be released to those around us through the declaration of the testimony.

    …When we declare the testimonies of God to people, we are setting them up to meet God in the same way we are declaring. This is a powerful reality…If we are going to fulfill our role in the covenant relationship, we must learn to keep the testimony, and in doing so learn to release His power to the world around us. [pp 72-73; emphasis in orig]

    So, using the analysis in “The Word Becoming Spirit” section of this article, we are to impart the etheric, panentheistic realm just like Jesus did since He also was the temple of the Holy Spirit with the Holy of Holies inside Him. Is this in partnership with Bailey’s “Spiritual Hierarchy”?

  27. cherylu says:

    For many years the “Holy Spirit”/anointing has been a force,a substance, a whatever in hypercharismatic and WoF circles. He (or what was usually referred to as “the anointing”) has been blown out of people’s mouths, sucked from an imaginary straw in the middle of a group of people, thrown like a ball, wafted across the room with pillows, poured out of a violin onto someones else, passed from person to person by touch or even by looking at someone else. And those are all ones I have seen myself in my years there or heard the folks that were around me at that time talk about. (All of that was part of what caused me to “run for the hills”.)

    Is all of this that Johnson talks about the “next step” in all of this, or is it something else altogether?

  28. Craig says:

    I think this is working towards ‘the next step’. As the deception grows deeper, more and more folks will blindly follow along. If my analysis is correct in “The Word Becoming Spirit” section, then more and more people will become increasingly “soul-controlled”, or, in other words, demon-possessed for the unconverted and demon-oppressed for the Christian.

  29. Craig says:

    I remember vividly reading the following on Todd Bentley’s now-defunct Fresh Fire Canada site 4 years ago:

    From time to time Todd will have weekly associate ministries and friends blast you in the Holy Ghost

    Can we really ‘blast’ someone in/with ‘the Holy Ghost’?

    This is still available courtesy of Internet Archive / The Wayback Machine (referenced in footnote 185):

    http://web.archive.org/web/20070825050149/www.freshfire.ca/?Id=943&pid=994

    It’s under the “Discipleship” heading. How appropriate.

  30. cherylu says:

    Bud,

    Thanks for your further explanation.

    To all,

    As you know I agree that Johnson has departed from the truth in many ways and teaches many very serious errors.

    I don’t think I would have the problem with this issue that I have had though if both sides of what he teaches were brought out. He has said that Jesus is eternally God several times while in the same breath as saying that He laid His divinity aside. He has said that He imposed limitations on Himself and He has said that He chose not to exercise the privileges of His divinity. (And yes, that does sound like he uses the word divinity in the way we usually understand it.) When questioned on FB twice he has said that He is eternally God, that never changed, and he never stopped being God. To only present one side of the issue to the readership stating that this is what he believes and teaches seems quite biased and unfair to me. It seems to me that in all fairness and to present an accurate picture, both types of quotes need to be dealt with.

    After all, what happens when someone reads these articles asserting this is what he believes and teaches and then they come across his statements to the contrary in his books, articles or on FB? Are they really going to think that these articles present an accurate and unbiased picture? We do need to present all of the facts when drawing conclusions, or possible conclusions on a matter.

    I agree that teaching even once that He was not God at the incarnation is a very serious thing, (if that is even what he intended to teach.) I don’t think anyone here has at all denied that he is a false teacher. BUT, the whole scope of his teachings do need to be taken into consideration and dealt with seriously and fairly when talking about him and where he is coming from.

    I hope that helps clarify my concerns.

  31. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig, Thanks for adding in the correction in the paragraph regarding the Unity Church :)

    Yes, the New Thought (Unity, Christian Science, etc.) cults all came from Theosophy.

    People like Spong are actively trying to bring this into the liberal part of the church. These same ideas seem to be coming through the hyper-charismatic part of the church as well. I think it is only in this kind of New Thought/Theosophy that the two groups will meet. It might be only then that some people in the church will realize that much of the church has become apostate.

  32. Craig says:

    cherylu,

    I do believe you’ve made your point. I also believe others here have expressed their points of view. I agree with the majority view as expressed on here: Johnson’s statements of orthodoxy really don’t matter when he states many others which flatly contradict those. Furthermore, when his other teachings look more like occult teachings than Christianity we must keep in mind that occult literature by very nature mixes truth with false and puts forth contradictions.

    Given that you’ve made your point, I’m going to ask you to cease from this line of thought on here as it’s a distraction from the more important things brought forth in these articles.

  33. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    Spong is less of an academic and therefore in some ways less of a threat than Ehrman as I see it.

    The “spiritual DNA” teachings are prevalent in the hyper-charismatic wing as well as the “emergent church” both or which are largely, if not wholly, apostate. There’s been some convergence between the two; and, you may be correct that when both camps fully converge the Church at large will realize the gravity and scope of the apostasy.

  34. Craig says:

    Interestingly, I just ‘stumbled’ across the following a bit ago. In an Alice Bailey book I’ve started to read a while ago but later abandoned because it didn’t seem to have any immediately useful material, I ‘happened’ to open it at a certain page. Here’s a portion:

    …The Hindus teach that the human soul [aka "spirit"] is a portion of an immutable Principle, the Soul of the World, the Anima Mundi, the all pervading Ether (Akasa) of space. This Ether is simply the conductor of certain types of energy and serves as the inter-relating medium between essential spirit and tangible matter. [The Soul and Its Mechanism, (c) 1965 by Lucis Trust (1930; 6th prtg, 1973), Fort Orange Press, Albany, NY; p 75]

    In viewing wiki (see hyperlink above) on “Anima Mundi” we see the idea originated with Plato and Neoplatonism.

  35. Carolyn says:

    Craig, in you post Carolyn/all:
    “Johnson continues stating we are to repeat what Jesus did in ‘word and deed’:

    …When we declare the testimonies of the Lord…we are putting a demand on Heaven for that covenant to be renewed and demonstrated in the present as it was in the past.

    Does he mean creating ‘Heaven on earth’ as it was in the Garden of Eden like New Age/occult thought? Continuing on:

    …[P]utting this demand on Heaven is exactly what God wants us to do”

    Is it really? What saith the Word?

    Where does it say that God has to meet the demands we make on Heaven to fulfill a fictitious covenant? We are not in a covenant with God…we are redeemed – he does not depend on us to make the heavens declare the glory of God – he has already done it. Our job is to believe in the One he has sent and to declare HIS redemption to the world.
    John 6:40
    And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

    Transferring the power of heaven to earth from God to man is a New Age/Satanic deception. You find the finger of God touching the finger of man in Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel painting portraying the idea of transference of power. As above so below. Also when ET puts his glowing finger to Elliot’s forehead and says, “I will be right here”, it is a transference of heaven to earth, of the extra terrestrial connecting with the divine in the human.

    The whole thing about the teachings of the NAR prophets is a transference of heavenly powers to earthly beings. As in heaven so in earth and most emphatically! this is not Biblical Christianity. It is going beyond what is written. It is seeking to use the occult (hidden) powers where we become the ascended masters, where we brandish the source of power, as Benny Hinn waves his jacket like a magic wand and where we “make our demands on heaven because the heavenly, divine energy has been imparted to us. Now as we, as equals with Christ can impart the divine to others. Blasphemy!!

    As you said:

    “So, using the analysis in “The Word Becoming Spirit” section of this article, we are to impart the etheric, panentheistic realm just like Jesus did since He also was the temple of the Holy Spirit with the Holy of Holies inside Him. Is this in partnership with Bailey’s “Spiritual Hierarchy”?”

    Yes, as Christian’s Christ remains the head and we are the body. We are the temple of the Holy Spirit. We obey Him. Whereas, in New Age and Occult…the Spirit is the energy that we make obey us. Using similar language with vastly different origins the NAR prophets are fulfilling the spiritual hierarchy Bailey speaks of.

  36. Craig says:

    Carolyn,

    Absolutely! To be fair and complete, I should have included the fact that Johnson referenced Jeremiah 31:31-34. The new covenant Jeremiah refers to here was the NT with Jesus’ Atonement fulfilling the Mosaic Law. However, that does not match Johnson’s proof-text (as usual) as He’s making an entirely different unorthodox point. We NEVER make demands on Heaven; but, as you point it, this is the sort of thing done in the occult (like ritual magick).

    Sandy Simpson at Deception in the Church made the connection to panentheism back in 2004:

    http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/newpantheism.html

  37. Pingback: wheat and the tares | KevStar.us

  38. Carolyn says:

    Craig: This DNA teaching is getting closer to the secret knowledge that Masons have been keeping to themselves down through the centuries; that of the inevitable introduction of a third strand of DNA into the human genetic code in order to make the leap into becoming gods with immortal souls. Tap into the Wisdom of the Ages (Bob Jones) in our DNA and we have the third strand…and the good news is that it is…. already there!!!

    NewAger – Adrienne: [I]f additional strands are activated, we awaken new abilities, gifts, and powers that have been dormant…Perhaps our DNA could be a ladder into the Fifth Dimension…180

    Bob Jones: …Everyone of you, when you were conceived in your mother’s womb, a spirit of God came into you. It’s your human spirit which is your conscience. When this came into you, this spirit was as mature as it’ll ever be because this spirit came from God. And, this is what’s been guiding your life – your conscience, your human spirit. Man is six things. He’s mind, will, and emotions. He is human spirit, Holy Spirit and Wisdom of the Ages. What happens if you begin to tap into the Wisdom of the Ages? In that little bitty God sperm seed – 1st Peter 1:23 is all the Wisdom of the Ages. That genetic thing – you have authority over DNA…169

    NA – Human Healing Network: …Activating your dormant DNA, which in time will also give you access to the secrets and mysteries of which you are and what your life-purpose is, will allow you to realize your full potential here on Earth.183

    Che Ahn: No longer do I see the fruit of the Spirit as something we “will” by self-effort or following the law. Rather, I see that in my DNA, God has already placed genes of love, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. They are waiting to be activated by the Holy Spirit.182

    BJ: God is our Father, and we inherit His genetic code [at conception]. Every believer has written into his or her spiritual DNA [activated by the “sperma of God”] the desire for the supernatural….172

    Todd Bentley: Christ wants us to know Him intimately by the power of the Holy Spirit and to catch His vision for our lives. His desire is to build godly character into our DNA – Divine Nature Activated….184

    NewAger – Lewis: One will only be able to fulfill the Divine purpose when he is walking in awareness of his own divinity. It is our belief system that hinders us from being the Gods we are…187

    BJ: …we live with such ignorance of what we possess. I pray…that the ongoing revelation of God would come upon us as a people to discover what He has already been imparted to us; so that we can reasonably pursue the increase in what we’re lacking, what we’re missing…the real issue is that we live in ignorance of what has already been deposited into our lives.151

    As I read through this section once again, I saw more clearly how these people are all saying the same thing. Our “divine within” needs to be activated by becoming conscious of what we actually possess. We have the seed of God. Our spiritual DNA needs to be acknowledged In order to manifest Christ on earth. The ability to do so lies in our knowledge (gnosis). If we stay ignorant, we will never activate our potential.

    The NAR prophets are teaching levels of ascendency through ever increasing awareness of our potential for being the manifestation of Christ on earth…of seeing our own divinity. Prove me wrong. If this isn’t New Age through and through…I’m a monkey and Evolution is true.

    I believe this teaching about spiritual DNA is all preparation for a real physical biogenic manipulation that is coming. It will promise increased consciousness of spiritual dimensions and possession of abilities never before imagined. Perhaps the mark of the beast??? The storm clouds are approaching…

  39. Craig says:

    Carolyn,

    The similarities are striking, arent’ they? At the minimum, we have to wonder why any Christian would adopt terminology from occult/New Age teaching. Harmless metaphors? Not when the explanations themselves resemble the occult/esoteric teachings.

    Bill Johnson is a bit more reserved in his explanation of DNA and spiritual DNA; but, if you take the rest of what is posted here and see how his ‘friends’ explain it, the message is pretty clear. I thought this phrase was interesting:

    If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain… [exerpt from quote at footnote 153]

    Is this like Jones’ question “…What happens if you begin to tap into the Wisdom of the Ages?

    Yes, I do believe you are correct that this hyper-charismaticism is New Age/occult. I do believe as time goes on it will prove to be more overtly. This ‘evolution’ is what former US Vice Presidential candidate Barbara Marx Hubbard calls the next phase of human development – into homo universalis. We will move collectively from homo sapiens to homo universalis, or ‘universal human’. We will learn to be ‘co-creators’ – something else Jones speaks of in his ‘sermon’ “The Coming Kingdom” (although he just says those special ones will be able to create, not ‘co-create’):

    http://www.shareguide.com/Hubbard.html

  40. Brenda says:

    Thanks, Craig, for all your research and for discerning the “new age” core of these blasphemous teachings. It’s beyond sad that so many (supposedly) born-again people believe these false teachers. So few really study their Bibles. If they believe this malarkey they certainly aren’t hearing the Voice of The True Shepherd, Who laid down His Life for the sheep. Thanks for these informative articles. Stand firm, Precious Brother, as we see the day of the LORD approaching! God Bless you & your fellow watchmen. ~Brenda

  41. Arwen4CJ says:

    You know, this speaking things into existence reminds me of Dutch Sheets’ teaching on birthing something in the spirit realm. The pastor of the church that I left preached a sermon about Elijah praying after his confrontation with the false prophets. The pastor claimed that Elijah was in a birthing position, and had to birth something in the spirit realm. The pastor used to attend Dutch Sheets’ church, and plugged Dutch Sheets book on intercessory prayer in the same sermon.

    Anyway, the pastor claimed that Jesus and others did the same thing — that they “had” to birth something into existence in the spiritual realm. (In other words, by praying, they were doing something in the supernatural realm that allowed for something to happen in the physical realm.) The pastor took all kinds of passages out of context, including Jesus praying in the garden before He was betrayed.

    This speaking something into existence, whether in prayer or whatever — is really dangerous, and is really getting pervasive.

  42. Craig says:

    In other words, by praying, they were doing something in the supernatural realm that allowed for something to happen in the physical realm.

    This is the occult “as above, so below” ideology used in ritual magick.

    It’s all about “the anointing”.

  43. Arwen4CJ says:

    Oh, and I should add that the pastor said that this birthing something in the spirit realm is co-creating. :(

    Also, that Abraham-HIcks New Ager/channeler teaches that we are co-creators through our thoughts. Our thoughts make reality. :(

  44. Craig says:

    They expect to ‘birth the man-child’, the ‘corporate Christ’. See my comment above at 6:35am about Barbara Marx Hubbard for her view on ‘co-creating’.

  45. Arwen4CJ says:

    Yes, there is no doubt that there is occult teachings and practices going on in the hyper-charismatic world.

  46. Craig says:

    OH, and regarding the ‘doing something in the supernatural to affect the natural’, keep this Alice Bailey quote in mind:

    Instruction is being given at this time to a special group of people who have come into incarnation at this critical period of world’s history. They have come in, all at the same time, throughout the world, to do the work of linking up the two planes, the physical and the astral, via the etheric.

  47. Carolyn says:

    yes, it makes you wonder why they and the gods of Thought and Force are using particular words like “released”, “the air we breath” “releasing into the atmosphere” and using terms like “realm” or “kingdom/kings domain”

    your above quote “…If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain… [exerpt from quote at footnote 153]”

    Ephesians 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

    Barmes Notes: “Robinson (Lexicon) supposes it to be because he is lord of the powers of the air; that is, of the demons who dwell and rule in the atmosphere. So Doddridge supposes that it means that he controls the fallen spirits who are permitted to range the regions of the atmosphere. It is generally admitted that the apostle here refers to the prevailing opinions both among the Jews and pagan, that the air was thickly populated with spirits or demons. That this was a current opinion, may be seen fully proved in Wetstein; compare Bloomfield, Grotius, and particularly Koppe. Why the region of the air was supposed to be the dwelling-place of such spirits, is now unknown. The opinion may have been either that such spirits “dwelt” in the air, or that they had control over it, according to the later Jewish belief. Cocceius and some others explain the word “air” here as meaning the same as “darkness,” as in profane writers. It is evident to my mind that Paul does not speak of this as a mere tradition, opinion, or vagary of the fancy, or as a superstitious belief: but that he refers to it as a thing which he regarded as true. In this opinion I see no absurdity that should make it impossible to believe it”

    The Word identifies these atmospheric spirits who dwell among us in the 5th dimension. They are longing for the day when they can physically manifest as “sons of god” and turn this planet into the kingdom of this world, the domain of Satan. The dragon and the demonic spirits will take charge and take possession of rebellious souls who do not want anything to do with God.

    There is one breath that will not originate from Satanic sources. And that is the one that will overthrow his kingdom:
    2 Thessalonians 2:8
    And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

  48. Arwen4CJ says:

    I don’t think it’s just the man-child that they are applying this language to. They are also using it the same way that some use positive confession. They actually believe they can make stuff happen by praying or speaking or whatever.

    Ultimately, yes, the man-child is what they would “birth,” but that isn’t something that all of them would subscribe to. From what I’ve seen, people are accepting these things on a continuum. Once they start accepting a little of the teaching, they start accepting more.

  49. Carolyn says:

    And this is the final end of their “king’s domain”, of Satan’s realm and demonic gods of Force:

    Revelation 11:15
    The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said: “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign for ever and ever.”

    Revelation 19:20
    But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.

    Revelation 20:10
    And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

    Hallelujah!!! Can’t wait for that day!

  50. peacebringer says:

    Good stuff as always Craig. This one is hard to read cause the twisting is so clearly there and gives me a strong reaction to it that just have hard time reading it over.

    Cheryl- God creates us each with gifts. Big picture, detail oriented. Keep working through things. Examine this further.

  51. Carolyn says:

    Arwen: I was going to say a few things about the Rhema versus the Logos. The Rhema captivated me for many years. It was idolatry.

    You will love this doctrine of demons if you are wanting to get control over your environment. If you can follow a law of attraction or if you can know a secret that can bring success, if you can make the elements and nature obey you…why suffer? why be poor?, why do you need discipline? why read the Word?…it’s old school. No, we lust for power. We can bypass the objective truth of God, in fact we can bypass God…you don’t have to ask him for anything…you can demand, you can command the heavens….because you now have the ability yourself to speak the Rhema Word. You have God’s seed within you, the male sperma of God…the divine Y chromosome and if you speak the word…the universe, the atmosphere, the cosmos has to obey. The doctrines of speaking the Rhema have progressed into physical manifestations of glory walking, astro travel speaking with angels on a daily basis, etc. And according to Scripture, the Rhema manifestations will get even more impressive.

    The Logos, as Craig pointed out…remains the same. He never changes. God has laid our his plan from eternity and we cannot change it by our subjective heresies. If we listen to his objective truth, it is not about me and what I can do or say, it is about Him, the Logos, the [edited/corrected] inspired Word of God. He has spoken and he will bring it to pass. Our mission, should be accept it, is to believe, trust and obey the Logos.

  52. Arwen4CJ says:

    Carolyn,

    I think that the very purpose of prayer has changed in the minds of some hyper-charismatics. I don’t think that they think of it as asking God for anything, but rather as a means of connecting with God so that they can make things happen.

    Yes, I think that you are right that much of this hyper-charismatic doctrine is about control over your environment.

  53. Carolyn says:

    Arwen -purpose of prayer have changed, yes. As per Johnson:

    “God is our Father, and we inherit His genetic code [at conception]. Every believer has written into his or her spiritual DNA [activated by the “sperma of God”] the desire for the supernatural….172
    It is abnormal for a Christian not to have an appetite for the impossible. It has been written into our spiritual DNA [activated by the “sperma of God”] to hunger for the impossibilities around us to bow at the name of Jesus.173″

    When you have extra-biblical references, you have extra-biblical purposes. Christ taught us to pray…Our Father…give us this day…deliver us from evil….forgive us our trespasses…
    The NAR prophets propose that we are to desire for the supernatural, hunger for the impossibilities…

  54. Craig says:

    There was an earlier comment suggesting a tenuous connection with these teachings and the doctrine of reincarnation. Here’s Bob Jones’ statement:

    …Everyone of you, when you were conceived in your mother’s womb, a spirit of God came into you. It’s your human spirit which is your conscience. When this came into you, this spirit was as mature as it’ll ever be because this spirit came from God

    I think everyone would agree that Jones is stating that at conception everyone in his audience would have “a spirit of God” ‘come into them. Since no one is conceived as a Christian, logically, Jones would seem to be applying this concept to everyone, all humans. By his phraseology, we would have to deduce this spirit is literally a part of God Himself since it’s “as mature as it’ll ever be because this spirit came from God.”

    Does God die? Of course not. Therefore, this “spirit that came into you” “when you were conceived in your mother’s womb” is immortal/eternal. Given that this concept is NOT Biblical but matches well with the occult doctrine of reincarnation, I think it is safe to assume reincarnation. Since this is part of Jones’ “God sperm seed” concept which sounds like Johnson’s “sperma of God” concept, I think it safe to assume Johnson is propounding reincarnation as well.

    The doctrine of reincarnation is essential to the occult/esoteric manifested sons of God doctrine which includes the belief that any progress a soul/spirit achieves in one lifetime carries over to the next. It’s cumulative. According to occult / New Age doctrine, even Jesus Himself didn’t attain to manifested sons of God in one incarnation. He was incarnated multiple times before He attained this status and He had already achieved the second (of five) initiations by the time He incarnated as Jesus of Nazareth. And, since “Jesus is our model” according to the occult / New Age, we cannot realistically expect to attain MSoG in merely one life.

    Moreover, it makes sense that as time marches on these souls, given the accumulation of time, will have progressed up the spiritual ladder as well. Therefore this doctrine fits in logically with the rest of Latter Rain teachings including an army of “super Christians” who will transcend physical boundaries being in their glorified bodies because they’ve progressed so.

  55. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    This ‘sperma of God’ teaching does away with man’s sinful nature and the need for Jesus as the lamb of God Who came and died on the cross to pay for our sin. I guess this is why they no longer preach on sin and the gospel of salvation…only the gospel of the kingdom on earth now – and the ability to do the supernatural signs and wonders.

    I know they have spoken of everything returning to the way it was in the Garden of Eden before the fall…it sounds like they are preaching what was preached in the garden – ‘you will be like god’. Definitely doctrines of demons.

  56. Carolyn says:

    What?? It seems I have made an error. I said Logos…”spoken word”….should read “inspired word” to clarify who the word originates with….man or God.

  57. Craig says:

    I’ll edit the comment.

  58. Craig says:

    Mary,

    And New Agers also teach that the “kingdom of God” will be just like the Garden of Eden pre-Fall. New Age belief is that the Garden of Eden was not a physical place but rather a spiritual state from which mankind fell. We have the power to reattain that position through ‘evolution’ – becoming homo universalis, virtual gods.

  59. Craig says:

    Mary,

    I wanted to come back to your comment at 10:31 on 05/01 and state that you’re, of course, correct with your thought/reasons about the Gospel not being preached in favor of the ‘gospel of the Kingdom’. The ‘spiritual DNA’ teaching essentially is the same as the occult concept of all humans having a dual nature – one human (of course) and one latent divine nature. Awakening the extra ‘spiritual DNA’ by the “sperma of God” (“the ‘rhema’ Word) IS the means of salvation. So, the orthodox Christian meaning of the Atonement effected by the Cross in virtue of the shed blood of Jesus Christ our Savior is superfluous.

    In the occult, it is replaced by Jesus’ life providing a symbolic pattern for all to follow. We “die to self”, i.e., we replace the lower human nature with the divine as we progress forward. This ‘dying to self’ is NOT the same as the Christian ‘picking up our cross daily'; it’s overcoming our human nature by actualizing our divine, our own godhood. Once fully actualized, the human nature is no longer. This will be discussed further in part IV.

  60. Arwen4CJ says:

    Oh….I just came across this website that talks about kundalini — it sounds identical to what is going on in the hyper-charismatic churches:

    http://www.cit-sakti.com/kundalini/kundalini-manifestations.htm

    Some characteristic symptoms of the awakened kundalini are here given below from Mahayoga Vijãna, a treatise on the subject in Hindi by Shri Yogãnandji Mahãrãja, the author’s revered guru. They are illustrative and by no means exhaustive:-

    When throbbing of mooladhar begins, the whole body shakes, involuntary kumbhak (filling in of the lungs with air) starts beyond control, breath is forcibly exhaled out, without volition deep inhaling and exhaling of breath starts and the body gets uncontrollable, know then that Kundalini has awakened. You then should give up your assertion and sit witnessing what happens.

    When Your body begins trembling, hair stands on roots, you laugh or begin to weep without your wishing, your tongue begins to utter deformed sounds, you are filled with fear or see frightening visions, semen passes out, think that the Kundalini Shakti has become active.

    When your posture becomes fixed, uddiyan, jalendhar, and moolbandhas come involuntarily, your tongue reverts back or rises up towards the soft palate and the whole body becomes so active that you are unable to sit still, your hands and legs stretch out forcibly, you ought to know that the Divine power of the goddess Kundalini has come into action.

    When your posture becomes fixed and sight is attracted toward the middle point of eyebrows, the eyeballs begin to revolve, you get automatic kewal-kumbhak, cessation of breath comes with no effort for inhaling or exhaling and the mind becomes vacant, void of all outward knowledge, understand that Mahãmãyã the first born Shakti, the goddess Kundalini has come into action.

    When you feel currents of Prãna rising up your cerebrum within you, automatic repetition of Aum starts and the mind experiences waves after waves of blissful beatitude, think the Universal Mother Kundalini has come into action.

    When different kinds of Nãd become audible, in your spinal column you experience vibrations, feeling of bodily existence for the time being is lost, in other words you feel as if there is no body, everything looks vacant, your eyelids become closed and open not in spite of your efforts, electric-like currents seem flowing up and down the nerves and you have convulsions, know that Mahãmãyã Kundalini has come into action.

    When with the closing of eyelids your body falls to the ground, or begins to rotate like a grinding stone and breath comes not out, the body squatted on floor crosslegged begins to jump from place to place like a frog, or moves from place to place, or lies down like one dead, hands may not be lifted even if so desired, you feel contraction of nerves, you feel as if your life is passing away, the body undergoes convulsions like a dying fish, know that Yogamaya Kundalini has come into action.

    When your mind gets influenced spiritually as if some spirit has taken possession of your body and under that influence different postures of yoga are involuntarily performed, without the least pain or fatigue and you feel increasingly buoyant, and simultaneously strange sort of breathing exercises start, think that the Divine power of Kundalini has come into action.

    When no sooner you have sat with eyes closed than in an instant the body begins to show activity of throwing out limbs forcibly, deformed sounds are loudly uttered, your speech begins to utter sounds like those of animals, birds and frogs or of a lion or like those of jackals, dogs, tigers, fear inspiring and not pleasing to hear, understand that the Great Goddess Kundalini has come into action.

    When you feel vibrations of prana at different stations inside your body and feel its flow wherever you fix your attention and nerves begin to show easy jerks like jerks of electricity as if passing through them, know that the Goddess Kundalini has come into action.

    When all day and night you feel within your body some activity of prana and whenever you concentrate your mind, your body at once begins to shake or begins tossing and your mind remains filled with joy and bliss at all times, even when at call of nature, even during sleep you feel currents of prãna rising up in your sahasrãr and even in dreams you experience Her presence, know that the joy-inspiring Kundalini has come into action.

    As soon as you sit for prayers your body begins to shake and in ecstasy of joy you begin to sing hymns in tones of music charming to hear and whose composition and poetry come out involuntarily, your hands giving a rhythmical clapping, and you pronounce languages you know not, but the sound ecstasizes your mind, know that the Goddess of speech, Saraswati, has awakened into action.

    When you feel intoxicated without taking any drug, while walking your steps fall majestically or like one drunk and you are unable to do any other work and you like to remain mute and dislike speaking to or hearing others and you feel like one drunk of Divinity, know that your Atma Shakti Kundalini, the power of Self, has come into action.

    While walking, when your mind is filled with an impulse to walk faster and your feet begin to move a running, you feel your body light like air and do not feel fatigued even having walked long enough, you feel buoyant and joyful, you are not unhappy even in dreams, you can keep the balance of your mind undisturbed in all ups and downs, and you acquire an inexhaustible energy for work, know that the Brahma Shakti Kundalini has come into action.

    When you are in meditation you see visions divine and fall in a dreamy state of mind, have divine smells, see divine figures, feel divine tastes, hear divine sounds and experience divine touch and receive instructions from Gods, then understand that the divine power of Kundalini has come into action.

    When you are in meditation, future unfolds its secrets to you or the hidden meaning of scriptures, Vedas and Vedãnta shine in your understanding, all doubts vanish, you acquire an insight into the abstruse meaning of the works on spiritual science even at their first glance, you acquire strange powers of oratory and feel not the need of approaching even Brahma, the creator himself, for knowledge and you acquire self-confidence, understand then that Kundalini the bestower of siddhis (occult powers) has come into action.

    When seated for meditation your sight becomes fixed on the mid of eyebrows, your tongue rises up for Khechari, breath stops altogether and mind plunges into the ocean of bliss, shambhavi mudrã operates and you experience the pleasure of savikalpa samãdhi, know that subtle power of Kundalini is in action.

    When at morning and evening hours punctually and automatically your body becomes charged with such of the divine influences, and body, mind and prãna become overpowered by Her, know that the Goddess Kundalini is rightly functioning.

  61. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    Yes, you are absolutely correct! This connection has been made by others for a while now. Here’s one article I’ve referenced in a previous post:

    http://www.dharma-haven.org/oas/kundheal.htm

    She actually states:

    “Kundalini rising is sometimes a violent experience, radically changing one’s subtle energy field (making it much less subtle!) and consciousness and perception of energy. The experience can be (and often is in the West) mistaken for insanity (usually acute schizophrenia) or emotional or physical breakdown on a fairly large scale.”

    There are all sorts of maladies which can come from a kundalini awakening. HOWEVER, this does not mean that if someone has an affliction such as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) that kundalini is necessarily the cause.

    Kundalini can be aroused by a Shaktipat touching a person in the ‘third eye’ area, by touching other places, and in some cases merely blowing on an individual. As the link also states it can be transfered by an object or letter (and even video as in the case of Bentley/Lakeland, I’m told).

  62. Arwen4CJ says:

    I do not think that there is there any such thing as real thing such as kundalini energy. What Hindus think is kundalini energy is really demonic influence or power.

    It just goes to show how pagan (demonic) spiritual practices produce demonic responses in people.

    Satan seems to sort of be a chameleon, who will conform to what people except to see, based on their spiritual context, culture, etc. To the Hindus, his power comes in their religious context (they meet their Hindu gods, see Hindu spiritual visions, etc.). In hyper-charismatic churches, these spiritual experiences come in seeing angels, Jesus, meeting biblical characters, taking trips up to third heaven, etc.

    These are the above things that especially stood out to me:
    When you feel intoxicated without taking any drug, while walking your steps fall majestically or like one drunk and you are unable to do any other work and you like to remain mute and dislike speaking to or hearing others and you feel like one drunk of Divinity, know that your Atma Shakti Kundalini, the power of Self, has come into action.

    When you are in meditation you see visions divine and fall in a dreamy state of mind, have divine smells, see divine figures, feel divine tastes, hear divine sounds and experience divine touch and receive instructions from Gods, then understand that the divine power of Kundalini has come into action.

    When no sooner you have sat with eyes closed than in an instant the body begins to show activity of throwing out limbs forcibly, deformed sounds are loudly uttered, your speech begins to utter sounds like those of animals, birds and frogs or of a lion or like those of jackals, dogs, tigers, fear inspiring and not pleasing to hear, understand that the Great Goddess Kundalini has come into action.

    Don’t Bob Jones and other hyper-charismatic leaders talk about smelling heavenly smells?

    I agree that not all mental issues (and I would venture to say most) are not caused by kundalini….however, kundalini can cause these types of symptoms in people.

  63. Arwen4CJ says:

    Wow —

    These “Christians” unashamedly link the Holy Spirit with kundalini! :( They think that God wants to use kundalini power in relating to us.

    Here is one comment:
    “You mention about the crushing sensation of God’s Love. We have mentioned on some other thread the ‘heavy’ presence of God. I think it’s called Kavod, right? It is so clearly not anything like kundalini.

    It’s like a thick, weighty presence. That sense of having a waterfall pouring down around me, so heavy that I can’t stand up under it. I remember describing that on another thread, when I went up to recieve an impartation blessing from Bill Johnson. The heaviness of this Power was literally unbearable, blinding. I had to cover my face, my hands plastered desperately covering my eyes and whole face against this Love…I was crying and out of control with awe and repeating OMG, OMG, OMG! realizing I was not a fraction of the person I’d need to be to bear a fraction of His Love …yeah, the unbearable weight of Glory.”

    http://shalomplace.org/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/25010765/m/68310806

  64. Craig says:

    As Luke Skywalker said, “Let the Force by with you.”

    By the way, just where in Scripture are we instructed to receive an “impartation” such as this? That’s rhetorical, of course.

    In the East, some Kundalini practitioners call the spirit behind Kundalini arousal the ‘Holy Spirit’.

  65. Arwen4CJ says:

    Yeah — exactly — the whole idea of impartation is something that bothered me about some of the leadership in the church I left. They talked about impartation The whole idea of it seems unholy and irreverent to me, plus it is not mentioned in Scripture.

    I have talked to people following Eastern religious ideas, and they have called the Holy Spirit chi energy.

    But wow — Bill Johnson and his friends like to turn the Holy Spirit into a force or power — and at least some of his followers understand Him to be this way. :( I knew this before, but reading these comments in this forum….wow. To be fair, not all of these comments are Johnson supporters. The above comment is actually the only one he is specifically mentioned in that I’ve found so far, but others have stated they are charismatic.

  66. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    What do you think of the information in the article regarding the possibility that hyper-charismatics are imparting the ‘etheric’, or panentheistic realm?

  67. Arwen4CJ says:

    Oh — I found another thread where in which some of the same people talk more about their experiences in hyper-charismatic land, their “kundalini” experiences. Too bad they don’t realize that it is actually demonic.

    http://shalomplace.org/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/18910625/m/35310206?r=51410206#51410206

    http://shalomplace.org/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/25010765/m/74310806?r=74310806#74310806

  68. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Well, let me read over that part of your article again and give you a clear answer.

    Okay.

    Johnson’s quote here:
    “…It’s my conviction that all ministry can be summed up…can be boiled down to one thing: All ministry is actually imparting the Person of the Spirit of Christ into the atmosphere, into a situation. It’s actually imparting [ED: Johnson here points to his mouth] the person. “Freely you have received, freely give.” What have you received? Him.154″

    It depends on exactly what Johnson means here. Since he tends to be vague and not explain himself very well, so that he can sound “okay” to whomever is listening to him, interpreting his quotes can be difficult. Is he actually doing this on purpose? If he is, then he is definitely trying to bring occult understandings into the church. However, if he is simply not a very good communicator — teacher, writer, etc., and is simply sloppy with his writings because he doesn’t think theology matters much, then he might not actually mean what you are suggesting he means.

    Since Johnson is never clear, I think we need to accept the possibilities of two possible interpretations.

    1.) The interpretation you have suggested — that he is suggested that the Holy Spirit is a force that can be put into the atmosphere, in any situation — literally — He is in the air, from our mouths when we speak. (This seems to be the more likely meaning)

    2.) That he is speaking metaphorically here — and it is simply welcoming the Holy Spirit into a given situation, to have His way. (Given the fact that Bill Johnson is word of faith, is so into miracles, and that some of his followers understand the Holy Spirit to be more of a force, then this understanding seems less likely.)

    If by that quote, he means #1, then that is definitely an occult view. If we can just speak and make the Holy Spirit do something, or if we view the Holy Spirit as a force — then he is in very dangerous territory.

    Although this viewpoint would be occult to the core, I’m not quite sure we can say that he is teaching the same thing as Alice Bailey suggested with the etheric realm as the panentheistic realm. It is valuable to note the correlation, and it is possible that Johnson does mean what she spoke about, but I think there is a gap. I’m not sure that we can easily bridge it to say that it is identical to what she was talking about.

    I think that a person might be able to make a close correlation, but we need more bridges in order to do so. I think that may be why some people have been responding the way that they have with these articles. There are valid similarities, but sometimes I feel like the articles make a leap across a gap where a bridge is missing. Does that make sense?

    Johnson’s quotes are disturbing and show that he is definitely not teaching Christian orthodoxy, they teach related concepts to Alice Bailey, but it is sometimes a stretch to say that they are teaching identical things.

    For example — yes, there are clear panentheistic ideas in how the Holy Spirit is talked about, impartations, teachings, etc. The Bob Jones DNA teachings are certainly telling, and offer correlations, but they still remain correlations.

    See, I don’t think Bill Johnson is quite teaching this:
    “Bailey asserts that this inter-connectness of the panentheistic, etheric realm makes collective omniscience possible since “divine thought” permeates this realm.157 Through “concentration and meditation”, individuals become “inspired Thinkers” with the power to direct this energy thereby acquiring “the clue to ultimate world salvation”:158″

    Perhaps a closer correlation might be made if we consider things like guided imagery, soaking, and contemplative prayer as being part of what Bill Johnson and his followers do as part of their spiritual life. Thus, when they come into a situation where they want to pray for someone, they are taking what they received from these practices with them when they go and “witness” for Christ.

    I’m pretty sure that that is what Johnson means — witnessing — (his way of witnessing, which means demonstrating miracles and healing the sick, etc.)

    You wrote:
    “Going back to Johnson, “The realm of God is contained in the realm of the Spirit”. And, “If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain”. So, in speaking the “rhema” Word (or through touch or the “prophetic act”), we release the “person of the Holy Spirit”, or, in other words of Johnson, we impart “the person of the Spirit of Christ into the atmosphere, into a situation”. This is the purpose of “all ministry” as per Johnson. In comparing to the Bailey concept above, it seems plausible that Johnson is releasing the ‘etheric realm’ into the atmosphere through the spoken “Word of God” via the omnipresence inherent in the ether.”

    I think what Johnson means by “the realm of God is contained in the realm of the Spirit” has to do with the activity of the Holy Spirit in doing the miracles and other signs and wonders. I think he means that that is where God’s heart is, thus engaging in these things is living the supernatural life. I might be wrong, but that is how I would understand his quote, given what my exposure to the charismatic world has been. I don’t agree with that focus, but I think that is what he is trying to say.

    As for the second quote:
    “If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain”

    This is pretty much what the pastor I talked about said when he talked about birthing something in the spirit realm. The pastor of the church I left was moving in this direction when he taught about birthing something in the spirit realm, telling us that if we prayed, we’d make something happen on earth.

    It doesn’t go as far as Bailey went, in and of itself. Yes, Johnson is speaking about the Holy Spirit like He is a power or force, which is occult, but I don’t think he’s necessarily talking about activating divine sparks in people. Rather, it’s more like he’s saying we can control God by what we say. Like, if we “activate” something in the spirit realm by speaking in “prayer” (spirit realm meaning where God lives). However, maybe it does go beyond just controlling God to simply using a “force,” in Johnson’s understanding.

    There’s still a bridge missing between Bailey and Johnson here.

    Unless Johnson is totally given over to the demonic, which he might be, he appears to genuinely want to see God move on earth. From appearances, it seems as though he believes we have a link with God, and we can just command things and speak them into existence. Since I haven’t really been involved in a Word of Faith church, I might not have all understanding here, but I do know that the new pastors at each of the churches I spoke of had a mindset about wanting to see God move on earth in supernatural ways.

    In the Vineyard, there was an understanding that the kingdom of God was God’s rule and reign. I don’t know if Johnson subscribes to this view about the kingdom or not, but there is a possibility that that is what is in view here when he talks about the King’s domain.

    In the sound pastors that I knew, they held this view of the kingdom, but they didn’t make it their main focus. They believed that God could, if He wanted, transform lives in any given situation, including healing someone. The new pastors that were off also held this view, but they made it THE gospel instead of preaching about Jesus. If I had to guess, I would say that that’s probably what Johnson has in mind as well.

    I never heard anyone talking about imparting Jesus into the atmosphere or any such thing, so that is a step way beyond what I’ve heard.

    I’m just not convinced that Johnson is teaching Bailey’s concept of the etheric realm. Certainly, a correlation could be made between Bailey and the astral travel that some of the hyper-charismatics teach. I’m not sure whether Johnson teaches it or not. I know some of his buddies and followers teach on it, which means that Johnson condones it, we would need his view on it to directly correlate it with Bailey.

  69. Craig says:

    Thanks for thinking through and taking the time to comment. Please keep in mind that the part in question, “The Word Becoming Spirit” is predicated on the previous section “The Word Becoming Flesh”. In addition, we must take into account the previous parts of this article. Johnson has already made it clear that Christ = the anointing and that antichrist (spirit) = ‘anti-anointing’. This is, of course, after briefly defining both Christ and antichrist correctly and subsequently redefining them to the aforementioned. So, given the Christ means “the anointing”, this “anointing” is obviously central to his theology as his words bear out. That’s not to mention the fact of his duplicity in correctly defining then redefining the same terms:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/03/17/the-christ-anointing-and-the-antichrist-spirit/

    This duplicity is also evident in the Liardon library acquisition and, as noted, in “The Word Becoming Flesh” in which he incorrectly exposits Jesus’ first temptation, subsequently does a 180 and (mostly) correctly exposits it, and then goes back to the first incorrect exposition. It looks like a pattern of deception to me; and, given this, one shouldn’t be surprised when he’s vague.

    In addition, one should keep all this in mind when analyzing Johnson’s various statements about Jesus supposedly ‘laying aside divinity’, ‘emptying Himself of divinity’ while being “eternally God”. Who’s to say Johnson does not mean, like the kenoticist Ebrard of the 19th century, that Jesus'”divine properties, while retained, were possessed by the Theanthropos [ed: God-man] only in the time-form appropriate to a human mode of existence. The Logos, in assuming flesh, exchanged the form of God, that is, the eternal manner of being, for the form of man, that is, the temporal manner of being” [Chafer, Vol I, p 380]. In other words, Jesus is God eternally in the eternal realm while being man in the temporal realm. In taking all the quotes from part I, this could well be construed.

    Given that Johnson uses Matthew 13 as a way to ‘explain’ his exposition that the first temptation is ‘questioning who Jesus was’, and that he explicitly speaks of “the sperma of God” (“the seed of God’s Word”) being released “into the seed” which is in the “soil” of the individual, Johnson is stating that Jesus Himself had the “sperma of God” released into His “seed into the soil” allowing Him to either hear the Father (via the “seed of God’s Word”) or listen to “other voices” such as Satan. This sure sounds like the “divine spark” concept using a “seed” rather than a “spark”, does it not?

    Keep in mind the following words of Johnson:

    …Jesus is the Word of God made flesh; but, every time He spoke, the Word of God became Spirit – Word made flesh; Word made Spirit

    The Kingdom of God is not meat or drink, it’s righteousness, peace and joy IN the Holy Spirit. The Kingdom of God is IN the Holy Spirit. When words become Spirit, the realms of God’s dominion are released over humanity. When we say what the Father is saying then we literally impart Presence through speech…If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain. The realm of God is contained in the realm of the Spirit.

    Note the words “literally impart presence”. He’s not speaking metaphorically; he’s making that clear. You must also remember that “the anointing” = the ‘Holy Spirit’ (and vice versa) which is NOT the orthodox Christian version of the Holy Spirit as it’s a ‘force’ instead. It’s the occult concept of “as above, so below”.

  70. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Even with the above details in mind, all we can really do is make a correlation with Alice Bailey. We have to “fill in the gaps” in order to make his teachings identical to hers. Is such a rendering possible? Yes. And I thank you for making this clearer.

    However, unless Johnson actually makes the connection himself, by spelling out what he is saying, then we just have to be careful that we don’t say “this IS what Johnson teaches.” Since Johnson is rarely ever clear, we’ll simply be left with a correlation/speculation.

    As I said, the metaphor interpretation is less likely.

    I agree that Johnson has shown duplicity on a number of issues, and that deception is not a foreign concept for him.

    He may very well subscribe to Alice Bailey’s understanding.

    I know that he talks about the “Christ anointing” and has redefined Anti-Christ. I know that he lied about the library (or gave a false prophecy about it), and I know that he teaches that Jesus emptied Himself of His divinity. It is likely that he holds to some form of “Jesus is God eternally in the eternal realm while being man in the temporal realm.”

    As to the sperma of God, the teaching is disgusting and sounds blasphemous. It COULD be the divine spark concept, but I’m not convinced that it is for sure. Either way, it is false teaching.

    Now….
    “…Jesus is the Word of God made flesh; but, every time He spoke, the Word of God became Spirit – Word made flesh; Word made Spirit…

    The Kingdom of God is not meat or drink, it’s righteousness, peace and joy IN the Holy Spirit. The Kingdom of God is IN the Holy Spirit. When words become Spirit, the realms of God’s dominion are released over humanity. When we say what the Father is saying then we literally impart Presence through speech…If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain. The realm of God is contained in the realm of the Spirit.”

    Again, this is false teaching on Johnson’s part. No question. However, it appears that he is talking about operating in signs and wonders by relying on the Holy Spirit. His concept of Word of God is heretical for sure. With a larger context of the above quote, it does seem like he might be subscribing to a panenthisitic view of the Holy Spirit.

    However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that that’s what he is talking about. He might be attempting to talk about keeping in step with the Holy Spirit (of course, by that he would mean doing signs and wonders and miracles). However, the next sentence, “When words become Spirit, the realms of God’s dominion are released over humanity,” makes that interpretation wrong.

    I think you are right here….it seems like Johnson is actually holding to a panentheistic view. Wow. I didn’t notice the full quote when I made my initial reply to your question because I looked for the panetheistic part. I’d forgotten about that quote.

  71. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    I will admit that this is VERY difficult to wrap one’s mind around. It takes me a LONG time to put these articles together as I don’t want to paint with too broad a brush as that’s just not right. In comparing Johnson’s thoughts to Bailey’s concept of the ‘etheric’ realm, I posited a possible explanation given that the concept is clearly not Biblical. Putting all the other things together thus far, I don’t think it’s just a wild guess but rather very plausible as I’m delighted you are now seeing.

    I don’t believe we’ll see Johnson spelling out exactly what he means in the very near future; but, I he may well do it eventually.

    I suggest you take a listen to the video/audio from which this section is taken. He very deftly makes his points. He seems to be particularly “on” in it. He’s quite good at what he does:

    You can find the quoted portions by refering to the footnotes which provide times.

    I will say that he’s also “on” in the “Jesus is our Model” audio referenced in “The Word Becoming Flesh” section.

  72. Craig says:

    As to the sperma of God, the teaching is disgusting and sounds blasphemous. It COULD be the divine spark concept, but I’m not convinced that it is for sure. Either way, it is false teaching.

    I agree 100% that it is blasphemous and is most certainly false. Now, is it the “divine spark” concept? I think if you compare it closely to Bob Jones teaching on the “God sperm seed” it’ll become clearer as I note in my comment at 05/01 6:16pm. If nothing else, Jones’ is clearly heretical in claiming that all have a “spirit of God” at conception which “is as mature as it’ll ever be because this spirit came from God”; and, given that Johnson stated he’d “publicly rebuke” for “actual heresy” it’s alarming that he’d not only not rebuke the teaching but sell it at Bethel. Duplicity or agreement?

    However, if you’re inclined to agree that Johnson may be subscribing to a panentheistic concept in “The Word Becoming Spirit” section, the “divine spark” concept goes right in line with it.

  73. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    I watched the video — here are my notes/reactions — these are the parts that stood out to me as being most false, along with the quotes you already pulled out:

    open heavens — what in the world

    prayer — primary categories, or realms of obtaining answering, getting breaktrhoughs, the ongoing source of joy

    religion — form without power

    empowering darkness by praying “wrong thing”

    host the presence of God — change atmosphere

    what you are aware of, you’re able to release

    releasing presence into the earth

    demand on what Jesus carried — presence anointing

    Holy Spirit is the connection between Jesus and the Father

    He talks about Jesus like He’s just a normal, everyday human being

    He makes it sound like God told us that we are to heal people. God doesn’t heal people, we do, because of our will.

    Peace is substance, air of heaven. Comes in the form of a person.

    He thinks it’s wrong to pray, “I must decrease, You must increase.”

    He says that our prayers must get interpreted once they get to heaven.

    He doesn’t understand that since Jesus is God and promised the Holy Spirit, that His breathing on the disciples was in fulfillment of something He’d already promised. This is a one time thing.

    Nothing happens unless there is a decree :(

    When does Johnson believe people receive the Holy Spirit?

    Whatever you are aware of you can impart

  74. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Thanks. Yes — just as long as we are talking about correlation, and strength of those correlations with Alice Bailey, I’m fine. :) It just sounded like from the articles that you were saying that Johnson’s teachings were definitely what Bailey was talking about. Now that I know that that isn’t the case, then I have no problem with the article :)

    From the full context of the video, it seems like Johnson is trying to preach that the purpose of our Christian life is to walk into rooms and change the atmosphere of everything around us because we have the Holy Spirit living inside of us.

    Oh….I do want to know when Johnson believes people receive the Holy Spirit. Because, if he believes that a person receives the Holy Spirit whenever a person is in the presence of a Christian, then I’d have a major issue with that. From this, it seems like he might be suggesting that. At the same time, though, maybe he is just saying that when a Christian walks into the room, the Holy Spirit will just make things better by changing the “atmosphere,” but not necessarily that the people around will receive Him.

    On the other end of things, if he believes that everyone is already born with the Holy Spirit because of the sperma doctrine, then I would say that there is definitely a strong correlation with Bailey on this.

    I’ll take a closer look at the reference you made to Bob Jones’ quote on the subject.

  75. Arwen4CJ says:

    It is clear that the hyper-charismatic world is delving more and more into the occult. I think that this is helped along by the fact that they do all this soaking and contemplative prayer. They also are after power, and anything spiritual, and they are turning away from Scripture.

    Since they are listening to the same demonic spirits that are prevalent across all false spiritual systems, there definitely will be more and more stronger correlations with things being taught in eastern spirituality and the New Age.

    If Bill Johnson continues going in the direction that he’s going, eventually he probably will make more clear statements about his stance on issues.

    Even if his teaching doesn’t exactly line up with Bailey, clearly some people who attend hyper-charismatic churches, including Bill Johnson’s, understand the Holy Spirit to be a force or part of the atmosphere…some sort of power.

  76. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ, you wrote, “Since they are listening to the same demonic spirits that are prevalent across all false spiritual systems, there definitely will be more and more stronger correlations with things being taught in eastern spirituality and the New Age.

    BINGO!

    Open Heavens (short promo for upcoming conference {now passed}):

  77. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ, you wrote, “On the other end of things, if he believes that everyone is already born with the Holy Spirit because of the sperma doctrine, then I would say that there is definitely a strong correlation with Bailey on this.

    Keep in mind the strong correlation between the “sperma” doctrine and “spiritual DNA”. With that in mind, check out Che Ahn’s teaching on “spiritual DNA” here:

    …I no longer merely confess that I am the righteousness of Christ. I realize that with His DNA in me through His blood, I could be nothing else. I realize the attributes of His DNA reside in me—whether dormant or active.

    No longer do I see the fruit of the Spirit as something we “will” by self-effort or following the law. Rather, I see that in my DNA, God has already placed genes of love, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. They are waiting to be activated by the Holy Spirit

    And, compare to this Johnson statement (truncated a bit):

    Jesus is the Word of God made flesh; but, every time He spoke, the Word of God became Spirit – Word made flesh; Word made Spirit… Why is that important?

    …Paul said this in Romans, that the Kingdom of God is not meat or drink, but it is righteousness, peace and joy IN the Holy Spirit. The Kingdom of God is not meat or drink, it’s righteousness, peace and joy IN the Holy Spirit. The Kingdom of God is IN the Holy Spirit. When words become Spirit, the realms of God’s dominion are released over humanity. When we say what the Father is saying then we literally impart Presence through speech…If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain. The realm of God is contained in the realm of the Spirit. When we say what the Father is saying, we change the options of every hearer…

  78. Tim Bain says:

    Cosmic Humanisum (“spirituality” as Oprah calls it ) has clearly replaced secular Humanisum as the religion of the masses and BJ knows he’s a pointman for thousands if not millions (Jones claims billions!)… just think what it will look like when the “Contemplative (centering) Prayer” crowd ie… Rick Warren, Bill Hybel,Oprah, Beck, All the New Agers…catch up with these “assended masters” – what will it require of them to keep their elite uniqueness then, when every one is “empowered”… yesterdays gold dust and the like won’t cut it then… I wonder what will?

  79. Craig says:

    Tim Bain,

    Once enough folks have ‘fully evolved’ then they believe we will have actually fully attained the “Age of Aquarius” in which all will have become homo universalis, universal man, having made the next evolutionary leap beyond mere homo sapiens. Those who refuse to evolve will be destroyed by ‘Joel’s Army’ – a doctrine common to both New Age and Latter Rain – or ‘banished to another plane of existence’.

  80. Arwen4CJ says:

    Yeah — wow… Che Ahn’s comment is blasphemous. He claimed that he actually has Jesus’ DNA inside of him. And saying, “I realize the attributes of His DNA reside in me—whether dormant or active,” that’s just…wow. :(

    I need to know whether or not they believe that this DNA magically becomes part of them once they accept Jesus, or if they think it happens when they receive the Holy Spirit, or if they think that everyone is born with it, and only Christians have it activated.

    If it is either of the first two, then it is disturbing and false, but it would still be correlated to the New Age teaching — the modification would be that it would only apply to Christians. If it is the last, then yes, it is very closely related to what Bailey was saying.

    So, Che Ahn no longer thinks the fruits of the Spirit are from the Holy Spirit, but rather that they are in his DNA. The Holy Spirit just activates them :(

    Even though I think that Bill Johnson’s comment seems blasphemous, I still don’t see a direct connection between that and the DNA stuff. However, I can say that since he runs around in the same circles as Bob Jones and Che Ahn, he is condoning their teachings on the spiritual DNA. The only way I could see a direct connection is if he thinks that everyone is born with the Holy Spirit, or if he thinks that anyone who is in the presence of a Christian receives the Holy Spirit.

  81. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    Recall these Johnson statements on “spiritual DNA” or “DNA”:

    It is said that when a kernel of corn is planted, every kernel that grows has the exact same DNA as the original kernel in the ground. Jesus became the ultimate seed that was planted in death, and we were born again by the same Spirit that raised Him from the dead. Every born-again believer has the DNA of Christ. That is amazing!

    Every ‘believer’ receives the “ultimate seed that was planted in death” and “every born-again believer has the DNA of Christ” – Is this the now activated “spiritual DNA”? Also:

    When the Spirit of the resurrected Christ took up residence in our bodies, all of heaven positioned itself to see what we would conquer in His name. Resurrection power is in our nature, in our spiritual DNA. When we were born again, we received the same spiritual DNA as Jesus.

    These comport well with the concept of having latent, inactivated DNA which, when activated become “spiritual DNA”. In addition, recall Johnson’s teaching on the ‘Christ title':

    …The outpouring of the Spirit comes to anoint the church with the same Christ anointing that rested upon Jesus in His ministry so that we might be imitators of Him.

    So, we get the same “Christ anointing that rested upon Jesus”. When? At the ‘Baptism of the Holy Spirit:

    …It was not sufficient that Jesus be sent from heaven to earth with a title [Christ]. He had to receive the anointing in an experience to accomplish what the Father desired.

    The word anointing means “to smear.” The Holy Spirit is the oil of God that was smeared all over Jesus at His water baptism. The name Jesus Christ implies that Jesus is the One smeared with the Holy Spirit.

    And:

    The outpouring of the Spirit also needed to happen to Jesus for Him to be fully qualified. This was His quest. Receiving this anointing qualified Him to be called the Christ, which means “anointed one.” Without the experience there could be no title.

    Without the ‘Baptism in the Holy Spirit’ Jesus could not have received the ‘title’ of Christ. He received this only because He received the “Christ anointing”. Could this “Christ anointing” be the point in which both Jesus and ‘believers’ activate their dormant DNA, i.e. receive their “spiritual DNA”?

  82. Craig says:

    On a different note, this portion of Johnson’s quote (which he’s stated many different times), “…we were born again by the same Spirit that raised Him from the dead…” has a number of problems when one looks at his different contexts. This goes along with his following statement:

    …Jesus gave Himself to be crucified. He did not raise Himself from the dead…His job was to give His life to die. The Father raised Him by the Spirit

    As pointed out before, this has three problems: 1) Jesus DID, in fact, raised Himself from the dead [John 2:19-22/10:17-18]; 2) by Johnson’s phraseology, the Father only had a passive role in raising Jesus, contrary to Acts 2:24/5:30; and, 3) to make Atonement, all three Persons of the Trinity had to raise Jesus’ body from the dead. In addition, if we take the 2nd quote and add it to the 1st, we have to wonder just what ‘spirit’ raised Jesus from the dead according to Johnson. This is important as this affects all other related statements. I think it obvious that it’s “the anointing” Johnson refers to here, the WoF ‘force’ (and/or potentially Alice Bailey’s panentheistic ‘force’).

    [Edited; added the following] Also, recall this one:

    “the anointing is what linked Jesus, the man, to the divine enabling Him to destroy the works of the devil.”

    Since “the anointing” is the vehicle linking “Jesus, the man, to the divine” it would seem this same “anointing” is what provides the ‘believer’s’ born again experience.

  83. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Thanks again. I’m sorry that it’s taking me awhile to put all this together, and that you have to spell it out for me.

    I guess it would be easier for me to see if Bill Johnson had said all of this in one sermon. The comparison with Bailey would be a lot easier. I think that when we pull quotes from different sermons, we need to be extra careful that we aren’t taking things out of context. That is the the challenge. I think you do a good job of this, but because they are from different sermons, I’m a little reluctant to form a theory about it.

    Now, with that said — in the sermons that you have quoted in your most recent comments — let me think about this.

    So — Johnson is teaching that “every born again believer has the DNA of Christ.”

    The next question is — what does Johnson mean by DNA in the context that he is using it? Is it a metaphor for speaking about the believer’s spiritual state? Or is he talking about a literal change in DNA? And if literal, what does he mean here? What would the significance of having this DNA be?

    Yes, he does believe that words change the atmosphere, and that they are Spirit. So, there could be a connection with his other sermon if he believes that Jesus is saying that the a person hears the gospel, and it is because of powerful words, or the Spirit’s presence spoken through words that a person gets their DNA changed.

    This talk about the resurrected power of Jesus reminds me of the new pastor from the church in my graduate school town. I had to stay at grad school one of the year’s for Easter. His Easter sermon was all about living in the power of the resurrected Jesus. He claimed that most Christians don’t live like Jesus rose from the dead because they don’t heal people or perform signs and wonders :( Since he was a fan of Johnson, Johnson could have influenced his view here.

    Anyway…wow, it is disturbing to see how Johnson implies that the resurrection gives us power to do anything, “to conquer in His name.” With this quote, he does again affirm his view on spiritual DNA. “When we were born again, we received the same spiritual DNA as Jesus.”

    That statement is a bit more disturbing than the first. This is because it puts us and Jesus on the same level, suggesting that Jesus possibly had to receive this spiritual DNA. At least that’s how I read the quote the first time I really looked at it. However, maybe that isn’t what Johnson is saying. Maybe he is saying the exact thing as the previous quote (which, of course, is still very off biblically.)

    Whether or not Johnson believes we all have latent DNA that needs activating depends on whether he believes we are born with this DNA. Is it just activated? Or do we get totally new DNA? The answer to this question will determine how closely his teaching correlates with Bailey.

    You are right to remind me of Johnson’s quote regarding the anointing teaching. His use of “Christ anointing” and not believing that Jesus was born the Messiah are heretical. It is also true that he teachings that we too can receive the Christ anointing by receiving the Holy Spirit.

    You asked this question:
    “Without the ‘Baptism in the Holy Spirit’ Jesus could not have received the ‘title’ of Christ. He received this only because He received the “Christ anointing”. Could this “Christ anointing” be the point in which both Jesus and ‘believers’ activate their dormant DNA, i.e. receive their “spiritual DNA”?”

    My response to this:
    That depends on who he thinks is a born again believer. I know different Christians have different answers to this question. The United Methodist pastor of the church I grew up in claims that a person becomes born again (and receives the Holy Spirit) when they get baptized with water. From recent discussions I’ve had with Christians in various denominations, this seems to be what some mainline denominations teach. I’ve talked to some Christians who claim that some people are born with the Holy Spirit. I personally believe that a person becomes born again, and receives the Holy Spirit, when they come to faith in Jesus Christ.

    Then, there are some charismatics that teach that a person needs to have a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” that is separate from water baptism. Some teach that this is necessary to be born again. Others teach that a born again believer is one of the beliefs I just discussed in the preceding paragraph, but that a person can become more empowered by the Holy Spirit through a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” or a filling of the Holy Spirit.

    So, where does Johnson stand on this?

    At whatever point a person becomes born again, yes, Johnson seems to equate being born again with receiving the “Christ anointing.” It seems very probable that Johnson thinks that this is when a believer activates his or her dormant DNA.

    Yes, Johnson is wrong when he claims that only the Holy Spirit raised Jesus from the dead. His denial of it being a triune act certainly opens the door for his teaching that we all can do anything with the power of the Holy Spirit.

    Hmmm…with your additional quote:
    “the anointing is what linked Jesus, the man, to the divine enabling Him to destroy the works of the devil.”

    I think that this does really make the argument stronger — since Johnson uses the Holy Spirit as a force in practice and in speaking how he did in that sermon you linked me to earlier, but I see it as still somewhat of a stretch.

    You wrote:
    “Since “the anointing” is the vehicle linking “Jesus, the man, to the divine” it would seem this same “anointing” is what provides the ‘believer’s’ born again experience.”

    That is definitely possible.

  84. Craig says:

    No apologies necessary as I can very much understand not seeing this the way I see it initially. I’ve been reviewing Johnson’s material for nearly two years; and, I have had a very difficult time piecing together his meanings of various doctrines. It wasn’t until the Jones “The Coming Kingdom” that I was able to see the whole “spiritual DNA” teachings more clearly. And, “The Word Becoming Flesh” section did not come together until I ‘happened’ upon an old reference I found to Johnson’s “sperma of God” comment just 3-4 weeks ago which led me back to the “Jesus is Our Model” audio from which is the ‘born again Jesus’ statement. Then, another individual sent me the video of “The Resting Place” around this same time which, after quite a bit of scratching my head as to his meaning in “The Word Becoming Spirit” section I ‘happened’ upon material I had already used of Bailey regarding the “etheric realm”.

    The bottom line is that since it’s taken me so long to grasp Johnson’s material I can only imagine how long it takes an outsider.

  85. Craig says:

    While it’s certainly not prudent or fair to assume an individual believes the same as another even if similar phraseology is used, I do believe this short article indicates that the belief that an individual’s DNA literally changes at conversion is rampant in hyper-charismatic circles when compared to the quotes in Part IIIb:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/01/28/does-becoming-a-new-creature-in-christ-mean-new-dna/

  86. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    You wrote, “You are right to remind me of Johnson’s quote regarding the anointing teaching. His use of “Christ anointing” and not believing that Jesus was born the Messiah are heretical. It is also true that he teachings that we too can receive the Christ anointing by receiving the Holy Spirit.

    For the benefit of both you and other readers, I wish to point out that there are others who do not agree with my analysis that, as per Johnson, Jesus was not “Christ” until “the anointing”. They point to other passages of Johnson, one of which I discuss in the following article in the “Johnson Contradicts His Kenosis by Affirming Jesus Christ’s Deity?” section:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/kenosis-christology-and-bill-johnson-part-ii/

  87. Arwen4CJ says:

    Are we sure that Bill Johnson associates with Damon Thompson and agrees with what the guy talks about? I know that Dutch Sheets has spoken at The Ramp, and it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that Bill Johnson has as well.

    Yes, it is clear that other hyper charismatics teach about changing DNA, but would Bill Johnson go this far? Maybe and maybe not.

    Right — that is true — it is difficult to really get a finger on what Johnson actually teaches. Not everyone has agreed with your conclusions.

  88. Craig says:

    I didn’t mean to imply Johnson necessarily agrees with Damon Thompson. I merely meant it is certainly possible given that this belief is common in hyper-charismaticism.

    My point in referring below to my previous article is that I answer this particular question re: ‘Jesus as Messiah not until Baptism’.

  89. Craig says:

    I wanted to add also to my comment re: Ebrard’s kenotic understanding of the person of Christ mentioned in my comment at 1:36pm on 05/04. I’ve been reviewing a bit of Charles Hodge’s systematic on the Person of Christ and he adds a bit more on Ebrard. He quotes Ebrard specifically in the original German; but, thankfully this is one of the few times Hodge translates to English:

    …that Eternity and Time are not parallel lines

    That is, they are separate and distinct from one another with no overlap. With this view in mind, Johnson’s Facebook statement on 3/21/2001 would be merely stating that Jesus was/is “eternally God” which “never changed” in the eternal realm, yet the incarnate Christ was not eternal and thereby strictly limited to the time/space restrictions of the temporal realms “as a man”.

    “Jesus was (and is) God. Eternally God. That never changed. But he chose to live with self imposed restriction while living on earth in the flesh – as a man. In doing so He defeated sin, temptation, the powers of darkness as a man. We inherit His victory – it was for us. He never sinned!”

    This is another point I made the Kenosis II article.

    This in fact removes the contradiction in the statement on his book on healing:

    “…Jesus emptied Himself of divinity and became man (see Philippians 2:7). While He is eternally God, He chose to live within the restrictions of a man who had no sin and was empowered by the Holy Spirit. In doing this, He provided a compelling model for us to follow.

    Looking at the Johnson quote further, as I noted in Part II of this current series, Johnson seems to be equating the fact that Jesus “never sinned!” to the Atonement, i.e. that this was the “victory” which was/is “for us”. This would mean that we too can be sinless as he intimates in other material (again, as noted in part II).

  90. Carolyn says:

    This whole idea of open heavens trying to bring a manifestation of our promise to pass before its time is very disturbing to me. We are told to wait for a saviour from heaven. Here are just a couple of Scripture passages that tell us that we are saved by hope not be tearing open the heavens and possessing the kingdom through our own cultic ideas.

    1 John 3:2 (King James Version)

    2Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

    Romans 8 (King James Version)

    16The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

    17And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

    18For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

    19For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

    20For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

    21Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

    22For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

    23And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

    24For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?

    25But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.

  91. Craig says:

    Carolyn,

    Thanks for the Scripture reference. This whole ‘open heavens’ thing is part of Johnson’s ‘bringing heaven to earth’ ideology which has many parallels to New Age thought. “Open Heavens” are New Age “portals” in which we can, through our own efforts, “thin the veil” thereby creating these “portals” or “open heavens”. And, the whole ideology is predicated on Hermeticism: “as above, so below”.

  92. Carolyn says:

    Also, as per the above video…the resting place, the teaching about the dove resting on our shoulder…extra biblical teaching that sounds more like a demon resting on our shoulder. This teaching is far removed from actual Scripture:
    2 Corinthians 1:22
    set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.

    Again…we are a created being waiting for the promise. We don’t make the promise happen ahead of time, except at our own peril.

  93. Arwen4CJ says:

    I was looking up the Confessing Movement of the UMC — this came up as a discussion with a friend at the church I grew up in.

    Upon googling, I found this:

    http://ucmpage.org/articles/cnoren.html

    It discusses a UMC bishop who has changed the meaning of what it means to be Christian.

    He writes this:
    “on the third day he rose again.’ Sprague writes, “I believe in the resurrection of Jesus, but I cannot affirm that his resurrection involved the resuscitation of his physical body.” (42) “…the resurrected Jesus power or Christ Essence that infused the disciples and apostles, called the church into being…” (42) What seems missing from Sprague’s essay is any sense that the actual person Jesus was raised from the dead –or even that Jesus’ soul, if not body, is immortal. Instead, “Christ essence or resurrected Jesus power” is something that is gradually understood or experienced by people. For Sprague, resurrection is “a metaphorical, symbolic expression of truth itself.”

    To me, this seems like this Bishop Sprague is talking about a very similar thing to what we’ve been saying about Johnson.

  94. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Yes, I think you are right — Johnson seems to be suggesting that since Jesus never sinned, we can live just like Him — without sin. In fact, it’s my understanding that Johnson teaches that Christians don’t sin or something like that.

    They do talk about portals in hyper-charismatic circles, as was seen in several of the Todd Bentley videos around the time of the “revival.” The concept in Bill Johnson’s church certainly seems to be in line with an occult view. He seems to teach that we can force God to act (or rather, by the power of the Holy Spirit we can make things happen) by creating these little open heavens over cities and situations. Yes, the as above, so below concept.

    And Carolyn — yeah, the dove resiting on people’s shoulders was completely weird and taken out of context. He talked about doves being flighty things, as if the Holy Spirit is an actual bird, so we need to be careful of how we walk — we don’t want to scare the birdie away. It was absolutely ridiculous.

  95. Carolyn says:

    In this imaginative lecture, if I understand him, BJ is saying that we don’t get our joy from what the Word says because that is what we already possess…we get our joy from what we make happen by speaking forth this “Presence of Christ”, or by Christ consciousness. We make things happen…we create by force, by our words. In turn, we are “manifesting” sons of God bringing the Presence of Christ to life. Whoever walks in our shadow is walking in the shadow of Christ’s presence. That’s when things get exciting.

    No, this is when things get dangerous…when we add things to the Word, to hype up Christ’s followers into a deluded thinking that “if we are experiencing the supernatural,
    the signs and wonders…then who cares about holiness or doctrine…all is well…we are gods…we have the DNA of Christ, we have arrived, we have been transported into the 5th dimension of reality….

    Todd Bentley on Sid Roth the other day…oh the presence of God is so heavy…I spend most of my time crying and repenting in the presence of God these days…kids that come to the school are just falling down in the presence of God, parents who come to pick them up are falling down and repenting….really??? repenting of what? They should be repenting of being ignorant of the Word of Truth, but they are too ignorant to know they are ignorant. Sid Roth said, Did you feel that? I just felt something, it must have been an angel coming into the room…the atmosphere just changed. And Todd agreed…he felt it too.

    oooooooh…doesn’t it make you feel all tingly with excitement?

    On the contrary…this is when things get exciting for us as believers…when we present Christ in all his wisdom and holiness

    Colossians 1:28
    Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:

    Colossians 3:16
    Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

    1 Thessalonians 3:13
    To the end he may establish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.

  96. Carolyn says:

    Something to remember…is that Christ was begotten of the Father…not created. We are not in any sense in the same category as Christ. When the Holy Spirit empowers us…we are still created beings with a fallen nature.

  97. Carolyn says:

    Arwen…just read your comment on the dove…LOL…

  98. Craig says:

    Carolyn,

    Perhaps Bentley has redefined repentance as shown here:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/02/20/learning-etymology-with-bill-johnson-a-new-age-repentance/

    The “Word of Truth” would be the “rhema” Word which is found by ‘going inward’, “repenting”.

    You just have to have the right dictionary to speak the hyper-charismatic lingo. ;)

  99. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    Here’s a direct Johnson quote from When Heaven Invades Earth as referenced in the Bill Johnson’s ‘Born Again’ Jesus, part II article:

    “Many believe His power exists only to help us overcome sin. This understanding stops very short of the Father’s intent for us to become witnesses of another world. Doesn’t it seem strange that our whole Christian life should be focused on overcoming something that has already been defeated? Sin and its nature have been yanked out by its roots…”

    “…Many in the church are camped on the wrong side of the Cross…I don’t need power to overcome something [sin] if I’m dead to it.” [p 110]

  100. Arwen4CJ says:

    Carolyn,

    Yeah, true about the joy stuff. There were so many issues with that sermon that it’s easy to skip over parts when discussing the issues. He certainly had a twisted view about joy and where it comes from. Since he’s ALL about the supernatural, then he claims that it is only by supernatural experiences that we are able to find real joy. He then said that those of us who do not look to supernatural experiences to get our joy have to rely on just the Bible, and he claimed that that led to religion, which then led to religion without power. :(

    Therefore, if someone has an incredible spiritual experience that is from some other spiritual source, then that is superior to someone who stands by Scripture.

    Yes, he did go on even more ridiculous tangents by talking about our shadows touching people, us leaking the Holy Spirit by just being there. His story about the New Age health food store where he didn’t even tell anyone about Jesus, but thought that if he concentrated on his Holy Spirit power, he could change the atmosphere so that anyone in the store that he comes into contact with (or his shadow) would change the other people’s options. Wow….changed lives with no gospel. Hmm…..perhaps it is a demonic spirit, Bill? You wonder why the New Age store owner could sense that the atmosphere changed when you walked in? Maybe because it was a familiar spirit or a spirit who cooperated/was in line with those who visited the store.

  101. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Right — I knew Johnson taught that. Thanks for the references :)

  102. IWTT says:

    Witnesses of another world???? Is the world in BJ statement meaning the Kingdom… here is a recent devotion on witnessing..

    Fools for Christ’s Sake–J.A. Matteson

    It is fashionable today to assert souls may be won to Christ merely by observing the chaste lifestyles of the saints. While the premise may find great acceptance in the pews it is foreign to Scripture, “Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed” (1 Cor. 15:11). From Genesis to Revelation God’s redemptive plan is contingent upon the conveyance of spiritual truth to the lost. Particular truths pertaining to the Fall, sin, the law, grace and the Redeemer cannot be grasped apart from human language, whether written or spoken. To maintain otherwise is to place oneself at odds with Scripture. The message of the cross has and will continue to be foolishness to those that are perishing, and it is plausible that wishing not to appear foolish some saints would prefer to employ softer means to maintain their dignity in the eyes of the world. This is folly, for again the apostle says, “How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher?….So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:14, 17). Beloved, let us be fools for Christ’s sake to the praise of His glorious Name.

  103. Carolyn says:

    Craig: just reading through your post on redefining repentance…excellent.

    Points to ponder:

    “In Johnson’s book The Supernatural Power of a Transformed Mind is the explanation of the word “repent”:
    Renewing the mind begins with repentance. That is the gateway to return to our original assignment on earth. Jesus said, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ To many Christians, repent refers to having an altar call where people come forward and weep at the altar to get right with God. This is a legitimate expression of repentance, but it’s not what the word repentance means. ‘Re’ means to go back. ‘Pent’ is like the penthouse, the top floor of the building. Repent, then, means to go back to God’s perspective on reality. And in that perspective there is a renewal, a reformation that affects our emotions, and every part of our lives…5″

    BJ: “the gateway to return to our original assignment on earth”

    …taking dominion over the earth, I presume. They don’t want to wait for the age to come…they want the age of Christ’s kingdom now! before he returns. Makes perfect sense RME (rolling my eyes in case you are unfamiliar with this abbrev. in internet chat)

    BJ: “Repent, then, means to go back to God’s perspective on reality.”

    Define reality:

    “from another Johnson book, When Heaven Invades Earth, we see the same concepts as explained above, “Repentance is not complete until it envisions His Kingdom”.38
    The focus of repentance is to change our way of thinking until the presence of His Kingdom fills our consciousness. The enemy’s attempt to anchor our affections to the things that are visible is easily resisted when our hearts are aware of the presence of His world…
    If the Kingdom is here and now, then we must acknowledge it’s in the invisible realm. Yet being at hand reminds us that it’s also within reach
    …39
    Note how Johnson compares the ‘visible’ to the ‘invisible’. Is this like Kenyon’s ‘sense realm’ as opposed to ‘reality’? Johnson continues with the same reference to Nicodemus in John 3:3 claiming we should be able to “see” the Kingdom now on earth rather than Jesus’ intention that this will be in the future at the consummation, the Second Coming. Continuing with the quote:
    …That which is unseen can be realized only through repentance. It was as though He said, ‘If you don’t change the way you perceive things, you’ll live your whole life thinking what you see in the natural is the superior reality…40″

    I don’t believe what I’m hearing…

  104. Carolyn says:

    When I read:

    “In New Ager Cynthia Bourgeault’s book The Wisdom Jesus: Transforming Heart and Mind – a New Perspective on Christ and His Message is a reinterpretation of Jesus’ earthly ministry as a “teacher of the transformation of consciousness”.18 She agrees with fellow New Age author Jim Marion as she writes:
    …Jim Marion’s wonderfully insightful and contemporary suggestion is that the Kingdom of Heaven is really a metaphor for a state of consciousness; it is not a place you go to, but a place you come from. It is a whole new way of looking at the world, a transformed awareness that literally turns the world into a different place. Marion suggests specifically that the Kingdom of Heaven is Jesus’s own favorite way of describing a state we would nowadays call a ‘nondual consciousness’ or unitive consciousness.’ 19″

    That’s what I thought I heard Bill Johnson saying in the video the Resting Place…” a transformed awareness” “a metaphor for a state of consciousness” .

    “After establishing his definition on repentance and how important a renewed mind is to ‘bring heaven to earth’, he [Johnson] makes this statement:
    …He [God] wants you to see reality from God’s perspective, to learn to live from His world toward the visible world…33
    This sounds very much like a quote from Bourgeault’s book, “…the Kingdom of Heaven is really a metaphor for a state of consciousness; it is not a place you go to, but a place you come from”. Also, compare this to part of one of the Kenyon quotes above “This is God imparting His own nature to the human spirit” plus the following quote from Kenyon:
    This is not psychology or metaphysics. This is absolute fact. God becomes a part of our very consciousness.34″

    And I say…this is denial.

    The Historical Meaning of Repentance
    Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary provides the following definition of repentance:

    re•pen•tance \ri-‘pent-en(t)s\ n: the action or process of repenting esp. for misdeeds or moral shortcomings

    And here’s the Biblical view of Repentance and what we are to expect in the future?

    3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
    4And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
    5For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
    6Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

    7But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
    8But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
    9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
    10But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
    11Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
    12Looking 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?
    13Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

    Does this sound like the NAR utopian Kingdom of Heaven coming to Earth?

  105. Carolyn says:

    Arwen:

    You wonder why the New Age store owner could sense that the atmosphere changed when you walked in? Maybe because it was a familiar spirit or a spirit who cooperated/was in line with those who visited the store.

    I think so. This heavy, tangible presence….

  106. Craig says:

    Carolyn,

    If one assumes Johnson’s meaning of reality is the same as Kenyon’s which is the same as Theosophy, Brahmanism, and other metaphysical cults, then it makes more sense. That is, that reality means the spiritual realm as opposed to the physical or “sense” realm as Kenyon would say. So, in “repenting” as in getting ‘inside the larger, divine mind’ we will see reality more clearly. The more one “repents”, the more reality is seen. How does one repent exactly? By going inward through contemplative prayer, ‘soaking’, Transcendental Meditation, or ‘increased intimacy with God’ — it’s all the same concept different in name only.

  107. Arwen4CJ says:

    I think one important factor in these hyper-charismatics is “hearing the heart of the Father.” They want to feel God’s love for them. Experience is all that matters to them. This experience can be sensing God or feeling His love for them, or in doing miracles, signs and wonders. As Johnson stated in his sermon in that video, “that is where joy is found.”

    That is the purpose of their soaking and contemplative prayer. They want to increase their intimacy with God — to feel more loved by Him. This is the same reason that the pastor of the church I left was strongly promoting guided imagery into feeling God’s love.

    Since Bill Johnson and other hyper-charismatic leaders focus so much on experiencing God like this, it is possible that they have incorporated some Theosophy concepts. Maybe they don’t even realize it. The “Jesus” that they meet in these spiritual exercises (contemplative prayer, soaking, guided imagery) could be leading them into more and more error. After all, if “Jesus” or an “angel” teaches them a doctrine, they accept it.

    Perhaps Johnson’s redefinition of repentance does help bridge the gap to Bailey’s panentheistic reality.

    If so, then several possibilities exist:
    1.) Johnson is aware of what he is teaching — he knows that it is panentheistic and occult/demonic in nature. He is simply bringing it into the church slowly.

    2.) Johnson is unaware of what he is teaching, and is simply teaching what he has heard from a spiritual source (demon). His spirit guide is bringing the teachings slowly to Johnson’s mind.

  108. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Do you know of any other “witnessing” examples that Johnson has given in which he doesn’t preach the gospel, but instead just shows up with holy spirit force power?

  109. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    I’m hard-pressed to find any material in which he actually very clearly preaches the gospel. In fact, in a somewhat recent sermon he claimed that it’s only truly the ‘gospel’ if signs and wonders are present. Sorry, I don’t have the source handy.

  110. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    That’s fine. I did find a sermon in which he titled it the gospel. It was a false one — it was from December 2011.

    But what I’m looking for now is another example of him not preaching the gospel, but rather claiming that he is witnessing to someone, like he did in the above video clip — talking about going into a New Age store and simply changing the atmosphere when he walked in.

    Ah, nevermind. One example is enough — it was quite telling.

  111. Craig says:

    Here’s a direct quote from When Heaven Invades Earth [p 27 of 1st edition]:

    Stories of this nature [ED: miracle workings] are becoming the norm, and the company of people who have joined this quest for an authentic gospel — the gospel of the Kingdom — is increasing… [emphasis in orig]

  112. Craig says:

    Also, here’s an old quote of Rick Joyner about the gospel of the Kingdom; see how he differentiates it from ‘the gospel':

    “The doctrine of the kingdom is yet to be preached. The doctrine of salvation has gone into most of the world, but not the gospel of the kingdom. There are some today who are preaching A doctrine of the kingdom, but we have not heard THE gospel of the kingdom…The kingdom is going to come far more subtly than we are being led to believe…

    “..We know that we can live in the kingdom now by abiding in the King…We have come to the most exciting and significant time in history, and we’re here to take action.” ["The Stock Market and the Titanic" from The Harvest Trilogy, 1989, MorningStar Publications; p 32]

  113. Arwen4CJ says:

    Thanks, Craig.

    It is difficult trying to understand this hyper-charismatic language and theology.

    So…it appears that Johnson might teach that there are two gospels — since his buddy Joyner does

    1.) gospel of salvation

    2.) gospel of the Kingdom (signs and wonders)

    If this is correct, then Johnson spends most of his time talking about the signs and wonders, and not salvation.

    Has Johnson ever preached “the gospel of salvation?” I haven’t found any evidence of it.

    So…this witnessing that he does would be all signs and wonders. Witnessing would be the same as walking with the power of the Holy Spirit (anointing), and giving it away through coming into contact with other people.

    And if the Kingdom is only about performing signs and wonders, then it isn’t just the rule and reign of God. Johnson might subscribe to this, but it seems as if he would definitely add power to that, including open heavens and whatnot.

    I’m trying to reason this through….

    So — if the Holy Spirit is an anointing, a power that drips off of Christians, then it must be this “gospel” that Johnson and his followers promote at the expense of salvation.

    Okay.

    Then, if they think that this gospel of the Kingdom is about signs and wonders and open heavens, and whatever, then it is possible that he has a false kingdom in mind — he is trying to convert them to signs and wonders rather than to faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

    Then we need to connect this back to Bailey….and that panentheistic realm thing, which perhaps IS what Johnson is talking about when he speaks about the Kingdom.

  114. Craig says:

    Note how Joyner states, “The kingdom is going to come far more subtly than we are being led to believe…” What does THAT mean? It certainly comports well with the Bailey version since it’s clearly not Biblical. Biblically, the consummation of the Kingdom is fulfilled at Jesus Christ’s Second Coming.

    I would say the “gospel of the Kingdom” is the preeminent ‘gospel’ supplanting the REAL Gospel. ‘Salvation’ by “the anointing”.

  115. Carolyn says:

    Arwen: You said, Perhaps Johnson’s redefinition of repentance does help bridge the gap to Bailey’s panentheistic reality

    how about this:

    Perhaps Johnson’s redefinition of repentance does help bridge the gap to Bailey’s panentheistic reality through the lusts/desires of the flesh.

    Titus 2:11-13 (King James Version)
    11For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
    12Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly LUSTS, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
    13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

    I propose that the LUST for supernatural power has been the bridge that has brought them from the kingdom of God (the simple message of Christ’s redemption for sinful man), into the kingdom of theosophy, as Craig said, “getting inside the larger divine mind”….and into Panentheism…where god is in all.

    When we start talking about activating divine thought and energy in aligning with the purposes of God, then we have the foundation for “all is one”. We can now dispense energy into the atmosphere, we have become conscious of universal thought and matter becomes fluid and transitional. The gods are manifesting through us and around us. How exciting. The spiritual dimension is now manifesting in the physical king’s domain and we have our New Age Spirit of Christ coming in the flesh.

    As well, the feelings of intimacy that you mentioned, Arwen are also lusts of their flesh. The desires of their flesh are eclipsing the Word of God. So the dynamic becomes “who we can become and what we want” rather than “WHO God is and Christ, His more sure Word of prophecy”.

  116. Arwen4CJ says:

    Well, yes…this hyper-charismatic “gospel of the Kingdom” is the preeminent ‘gospel’ supplanting the REAL gospel.

    I have no clue what Joyner means by saying that the kingdom is going to come far more subtly than we are being led to believe. Johnson’s signs and wonder are not very subtle, unless of course he is referring to an “Christian with the Holy Spirit changing the atmosphere kind of thing.”

    I don’t know — but yeah…a Bailey type belief system is becoming more and more possible.

  117. Carolyn says:

    Ok. Good talk. I think we’re all saying the same thing. Until next time….

  118. Craig says:

    Given your background Arwen4CJ, you are likely aware that according to Theosophy (and the Gnosticism from which it emanates), the goal is a reintegration of all the panentheistic divine sparks/seeds within all of creation along with the annihilation of all matter (the physical realm) which is deemed evil. For the time being, our bodies and the rest of the physical realm is merely a necessary expedient, vehicles to be used until the time when ‘god’ once again is “all”. That is, when all the sparks/seeds have reunited with the transcendant ‘god’.

  119. Craig says:

    Glad to see were all in one Honda – all in “one accord”…

  120. Arwen4CJ says:

    Carolyn,

    Yes — we can say that their desire for supernatural things to happen is indeed a type of lust.

    The desire to be a god rather than the desire to surrender to God. They make much of themselves and what they can do through supernatural power. They seek after signs and wonders. They don’t feel right without experiencing these things — they don’t feel joy, as Johnson stated, without these things.

    It defines their life and defines what it means for them to be Christian.

    They want to be super heroes.

    And, yes, such a view can become panentheistic — if the people believe that God is in everything.

    Oh….thinking about it — I’m not sure that these hyper-charismatics quite take it that far. They might believe that the Holy Spirit is a force that can be thrown around, blown on people, transferred, imparted, and has the ability to change the atmosphere of a room….but that isn’t necessarily panethenistic. It could be a limited panentheisitc view in that it is something that is in all Christians, but I’m not sure they would say that God is in everything.

    Maybe they see the Holy Spirit the way that Jehovah’s Witnesses do — simply a force like electricity, that can be moved from one place to another through currents. Maybe they think that believers are the carriers.

    This doesn’t mean that it cannot be compared to Bailey. Certainly there are closer and closer connections that I’m seeing.

    Hmmm…

    Yeah…the feelings of intimacy is lusting after the feeling, the experience…the feeling close to God.

  121. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Yes, I do know that the goal of Theosophy and Gnosticism is a reintegration of all the panetheistic divine sparks/seeds within all creation along with annihilation of all matter, and that matter is thought to be evil while spirit is good.

    Yes, they think it is important for the sparks/seeds to be reunited with their god.

    Now…that is sort of what they are doing when they spend more and more time soaking. It is temporary. They might want to feel lost in or part of God. Now, this would be a temporary feeling.

  122. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    The gospel of the kingdom is the only ‘gospel’ they preach…the gospel of salvation is ‘old fashioned’…they have all these precious young people believing they are in the kingdom just because they’ve had some sort of experience/healing/sign/wonder (gold-feathers-glitter, etc.). They do all this witnessing in malls and parks (they call them ‘treasure hunts’) and they wait for God to ‘download’ some info about someone and then they go up to them and begin their prayer for healing or for whatever the need may be… They would meet at church and pray and ask God to show them who they are supposed to minister to. It may be ‘someone in green shirt’ or ‘blond hair’ etc. and then they would go to wherever they had decided to go to find the ‘treasure’.

    When I had the meeting with my pastors about my concerns about our church turning into a ‘little Bethel’ – and how no one was hearing the gospel message of salvation anymore – that it was all about signs and wonders, they basically said ‘and your point?’…

  123. Arwen4CJ says:

    Wow — they actually didn’t care that the gospel message of salvation was not being preached anymore?

    I’ve heard of treasure hunting from a couple of sources. The new pastor at the church in my grad school town had one during a conference that the church was hosting. I didn’t participate in that.

    Then, I heard about it from a counselor I knew who was into all the Bethel stuff. She showed the moving ‘Finger of God’ to all the counselors on staff, including us interns. She talked about treasure hunting, as did that video.

    Sigh…that isn’t how anyone in the Bible witnessed to anyone. While I think that God COULD lead someone to pray about someone in that manner, I don’t think that we should go looking for it. I mean, that kind of thing seems to puff us up, especially if the intent is to perform signs and wonders.

    I’ve been led by God to witness to certain people, but it isn’t by some clue that I receive. I just sometimes feel led to talk to someone about Jesus and share the gospel with them. The real gospel, not some healing/supernatural thing to wow them with.

    Craig, did you ever get a chance to read that book you had ordered about it? I would be interested in your reaction to that.

  124. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    I’ve barely skimmed the book. It’s in the ever growing piles of ‘books to be read at some point’. Today, I took a break and starting reading some orthodox books for a much needed change. I read parts of Charles Hodge’s Systematic and a bit of Christian philosopher Richard Swinburne’s Was Jesus God?.

  125. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    That’s understandable :)

  126. Craig says:

    Something I was not able to include in this article due to its length was information on ‘telepathy’ and how it’s used in the occult. A clue is in the title of Alice Bailey’s book Telepathy and the Etheric Vehicle; obviously telepathic communication is effected through the ‘etheric realm’. In another Bailey book, Initiation, Human and Solar, she and Djwhal Khul, the demon who channeled through her, provide a helpful glossary of terms which defines etheric body:

    (Etheric double.) The physical body of a human being is, according to occult teaching, formed of two parts, the dense physical body, and the etheric body. The dense physical body is formed of matter of the three lowest subplanes of the physical plane. The etheric body is formed of the four highest or etheric subplanes of the physical plane. [(c) 1951 Lucis Trust, (1922, 14th prntg, 1980), Fort Orange Press, Albany, NY; p 218]

    Compare the above to Bob Jones’ two part teaching on the creation of man (at footnotes 169 and 170) and, with that and the above in mind, digest this from Bailey’s The Consciousness of the Atom. She’s making the point that the Garden of Eden and the Fall of man is not to be taken literally but rather allegorically:

    …What is the occult truth underlying this story? Simply that the truth about the fall of the spirit into matter [ED this is a consistent Gnostic/Kabalistic teaching] is conveyed by means of a picture to the infant mentality of man. The process of the converging of these lines is a twofold one. You have the descent into matter of the entity, of the central life, and the incarnation of spirit, and then you have the working up, out of matter, of that life or spirit, plus all that has been gained through the utilisation of the form… [(c) 1961 Lucis Trust, (1922, 9th prntg, 1974), Fort Orange Press, Albany, NY; pp 86-87. Emphasis added]

    I’ll pause here to explain a bit. This “descent into matter” is what occurs each time a new human is conceived but the initial one was an error on Adam’s part as he (his spirit) ended up getting entangled in the ‘evil’ matter of creation. Now, our bodies are merely temporary expedients to be used as best we can to our advantage. Our bodies enable the spirit (which is our essence according to the occult) to progess and, as stated earlier, progress accumulates from one human mode of existence to the next as we reincarnate. The goal is to transcend matter. Continuing:

    …By experimenting with matter, by dwelling within the form, by the energising of substance, by the going out of the Garden of Eden (the place where there is no scope of necessary development), and by the wandering of the Prodigal Son in the far country, you have the various stages which are pictured in the Christian Bible where man makes the discovery that he is not the form, but that he is the one who utilises it… [p 87. Emphasis added]

    Occult/esoteric belief is that Jesus of Nazareth Himself went to the “far country” accounting for the time period between the ages of 12 and 30. This is spelled out in the Levi Dowling book referenced in part III (a and b). Continuing where we left off:

    He is intelligence, and therefore he is made in the image of the third Person of the Trinity [ED: in occult literature, the Son is the third member of this false Trinity]; he is love, and through him the love aspect of the Deity will some day perfectly manifest, and he will be able to say with his elder brother, the Christ [ED, "the Christ" here is the occult "Master Jesus", "the Christ"/World Teacher of the Piscean Age], in reply to the demand “Lord, show us the Father,” that “he that hath seen me hath seen the Father,” for God is Love; and finally, through him the highest aspect, the will of God, will become manifest, and he will be perfect, even as his Father in heaven is perfect. [p 87]

    OK, so, I quote all the above to show the ‘etheric vehicle’. Telepathy is effected throughout the entire panentheistic realm of the omnipresent ‘ethereal’. In the book Telepathy and the Etheric Vehicle, communication is described as “impressions” and “inspiration”. For those acquainted with hyper-charismaticism – sound familiar?

    Here’s a quote from Telepathy. Prior to this, the point was made that the “Lord of the World” needs humanity’s help and that all should learn the “Science of Impression because it is the factor that makes relationship and contact possible and it is also the source of all understanding”. [pp 126-127]:

    Because of this uniformity of experience [ED: "common humanity"], the art of contact and the science of impression become entirely possible and normally effective. The great and omnipotent Lives in Shamballa [ED: Shamballa is the place where the "Spiritual Hierachy" dwell - see "Christ" in the New Age article for more] can impress the omniscient Lives and lesser lives in the Hierarchy BECAUSE They share a common humanity; the hierarchical Workers or Masters and Initiates can consequently impress humanity because of shared experience and understanding… [p 127. Emphasis added.]

    Food for thought…

  127. Arwen4CJ says:

    Hmm, so are you suggesting that the treasure hunting is a form of telepathy?

    As for impressions and inspiration in hyper-charismatic land, that is a possible explanation of it, although I do also believe it is possible for the real Holy Spirit to provide enough information in order to bring someone to repentance, so that they will come back to God.

    I know a couple people who contend that God has let them know something about a stranger — like someone living a life of sin and needing to come back to God, without knowing all the details — or who say that God told them to give a word to someone, but they don’t know why — and they were obedient to the Holy Spirit, and the result was conviction on the part of the person they shared it with. The people who have told me about such incidents were not seeking these things out — they just happened to be somewhere and God just told them something about someone else. They were simply obedient and shared it. Then, God did His work in the person they shared it with.

    However, what often happens in hyper-charismatics doesn’t lead anyone to repentance, and seems to serve no purpose — knowing someone’s address, knowing information about childhood, knowing what toy someone played with as a little kid, etc. Those things only serve to snare someone into trusting in human beings or in the “power” to see someone’s past.

    When I was in college and went with Campus Crusade For Christ to share the gospel with strangers on the beaches of Panama City Beach, Florida — we simply asked God to open the hearts of people. I prayed that He would lead me to the people that He wanted me to talk to. And He did. I didn’t have to get any sort of impression or whatever. As I would walk passed people on the beach, sometimes I felt like God really wanted me to talk to someone, but I had nothing to go on ahead of time.

    To trust in impressions or images that a person receives might tend to make someone trust in that instead of in God actually leading them in real life. I mean, if you trust in impressions, or your ability to receive them, then it can be really dangerous.

    The people at the church I left had held a class in which they invited people both inside and outside the church to discuss Christianity. Something that I remember that really bothered me is that they wanted us to try to get impressions and then share them out loud. However, they didn’t make sure someone was a Christian before doing this. They just left it open to anyone and everyone. The idea of impressions really bothered me anyway, so I didn’t try to get any impressions. What they asked us to do was to see if we got any images, impressions, ideas — then the leaders asked people to share these things out loud.

    I know that there was at least one non-Christian there, and someone had gotten some impression of a toy, and when it was said out loud, the non-Christian said it applied to him. It did make him wonder about the existence of God, but it didn’t convict him of sin or bring him to Christ.

    I don’t know — the whole thing was unsettling to me, but then I don’t know everything about how God works. I think it is possible for both the real Holy Spirit and a counterfeit spirit to give these kinds of impressions, so I don’t think it is a good way of evaluating whether or not someone is teaching sound doctrine. If the impressions go against Scripture, then we can safely say that that impression is from a different spirit. I don’t think people should be seeking out impressions at all, nor should they be emphasized.

    I believe that the real Holy Spirit can and does do this sometimes, but I think that it is in God’s timing, and not ours. If the Holy Spirit has an assignment for someone, then He will equip them for it. If He wants to reveal something about another person that will bring them to conviction, He can do it. However, if people just close their eyes and speak out loud any impression that they “get,” then I think things can get really dangerous. It’s too easy to just speak out of the flesh, especially if a person wants others to think they are super spiritual, or open themselves up to the occult realm, to another spirit who is all too happy to get people to look at him.

  128. Craig says:

    My point was more broad. Telepathic communications along the ‘etheric realm’ can explain any number of ‘impressions’ or ‘inspiration’. To be more precise as regards ‘inspiration’, I finished reading Bailey’s The Soul and Its Mechanism and she specified that ‘inspiration’ is chaneled, or automatic writings.

  129. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Interesting — I just listened to an audio clip a little while ago of someone who was in the Bethel area and had a baby-sitter for his kids. This Bethel student had these journals that she wrote in, and she told him that sometimes she wrote them through automatic writing — she had the pen in her hand, and she’d just write without thinking. She had demonic encounters that were scaring her. The guy asked her if she had any sort of occult object, and she mentioned the journals. They took them and burned them.

    I don’t know how common this is — this is the first I had heard about it in hyper-charismatic land, but I know that it is common in the occult.

    This is just one more piece of evidence to show that the spirit operating at Bethel is not the Holy Spirit.

  130. Craig says:

    That’s disturbing. What’s the url for the audio?

  131. Arwen4CJ says:

    Let me find it again —

    [audio src="http://www.firstplumbline.net/billjohnson/babysitter.mp3" /]

    That’s the direct link to the clip I heard. It was linked from this site:

    http://blogs.redding.com/mbeauchamp/archives/2011/06/thats-sure-a-lo.html

    Oh…and look at this page:

    http://www.ibethel.org/bethel-school-of-supernatural-creativity-workshops

    Read the descriptions of the classes that are offered. These descriptions are disturbing as well.

    You suggested that maybe Bethel teaches reincarnation….I found this in this section;
    Workshop: Script to Screen: Breathing Life into the Written Word

    “René and his wife, Rena, host “Sanctuary” a monthly gathering at their LA home that ministers to the spiritual needs of the Hollywood creative community.In other lives, René has worked as a smuggler, war correspondent, and missionary.”

    What do they mean by “in other lives.” Could this be a reference to reincarnation?

  132. Craig says:

    At 3:35:

    “…While she [babysitter] was writing these journals, that the pen would take over for her and write the journal…”

    Arwen4CJ, you wrote, You suggested that maybe Bethel teaches reincarnation….I found this in this section;
    Workshop: Script to Screen: Breathing Life into the Written Word

    “René and his wife, Rena, host “Sanctuary” a monthly gathering at their LA home that ministers to the spiritual needs of the Hollywood creative community.In other lives, René has worked as a smuggler, war correspondent, and missionary.”

    What do they mean by “in other lives.” Could this be a reference to reincarnation?

    Looking at the context on the site, no, I don’t think so. I think it’s a metaphor for previous employment or activities; but, I could be wrong.

  133. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Yeah — I thought it might be previous employment as well, but I wasn’t sure. You’re probably right, though — they aren’t speaking about reincarnation here.

  134. Craig says:

    I had heard the story of the babysitter, but I couldn’t recall where or the specifics. Thanks for sending. We must keep in mind, however, these sorts of anecdotes could be 100% true or they could be false. They could come from a disgruntled former attendee or member. The information should be taken “as is”, so to speak. Having said that, I would not be surprised to find out that it’s 100% true and accurate.

  135. YesNaSpanishTown says:

    In April 2011, Lance Wallnau and other Dominionists, Bill Hamon, et al, held a Social Transformation event at Harvard. You can read the report about it here https://7mu.com/news/5. You’ll be hard pressed to find any mention of salvation by the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is all about the 7 Mountains, 7 spheres stuff. The report was particularly disturbing toward the end. You’ll see a picture of a blonde-haired wiccan who gives a glowing report of how wonderful it was. She was so blessed.

    …These are not the dark witch variety, though they do send curses, according to our guest.

    Barbara’s conclusion? “You people sure are a lot more happy than the people I hang out with — I’m gonna hang out with you more often!”

    I asked if she received any prayer and she said, “Boy did I! You guys prophesy on me better than I prophesy!” Wow, when was the last time you heard that sort of candor at a prophetic event? While she spoke to me one of the speakers, Larry Bizzettea, was ministering in prophetic prayer to Hindu students who were so impacted they had difficulty staying on their feet.

    Are you as disturbed as I am? First of all, passing off the wiccan as not being of the “dark witch variety”… Well I guess that is a relief… so some witchcraft is better than others? Secondly, those of us familiar with hyper-charismatic practices know full well what is meant by the Hindu students having “difficulty staying on their feet”. This is appalling! (In a separate situation, another preacher, not directly associated with this event, very boldly declared that nonChristians can have manifestations of the power of God.) Wallnau goes on later to reference the glory of God advancing not on a cart, but on the shoulders of the priest. This absolutely disgusts me. Wallnau should open his Bible and actually read it. When Uzzah reached out and touched the ark to keep it from falling he was instantly killed. Am I to believe that the same God who struck Uzzah dead, today is manifesting His glory in unsaved Hindu students–and they actually lived!!?? What blasphemy!

    This is the kind of rot that goes on in place of the word of the truth of the Gospel. The true Gospel, empowered by the Holy Spirit, brings conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment followed by fruits of repentance.

  136. Craig says:

    I note the typical false dichotomy posited which prompts one to take sides: will you side with those leftist antichristians or will you side with Hamon, Kelly, Hillman and the ‘Christain’ right? As if we have to choose between the two at all.

    Bailey speaks of the ‘Black Lodge’ and the ‘White Lodge’ (witchcraft) – again, a false dichotomy as they’re both occult.

    …The true Gospel, empowered by the Holy Spirit, brings conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment followed by fruits of repentance.

    Amen!

  137. Arwen4CJ says:

    This isn’t Christianity; it is paganism. It promotes spirituality at the expense of the gospel and Jesus Christ.

    And Craig, you are right — it is just one person’s testimony. We don’t know whether or not it is true. Someone could have made the whole thing up. However, it also might be true. That testimony is out there — I’d like to learn more about this journaling. If the story is true, then other Bethel students have probably experienced the pen writing itself in an automatic writing kind of way.

    Specifically, we need to find out what Bethel teaches about writing in journals. I found another link to a different website that suggests that this is called prophetic writing. Okay. We need to find out how Bethel understands prophetic writing. What is it? How is it done?

    Once that is established, we can determine whether or not this story has a chance of being true.

  138. Tim says:

    @Arwen4CJ

    When I was in college and went with Campus Crusade For Christ to share the gospel with strangers on the beaches of Panama City Beach, Florida — we simply asked God to open the hearts of people. I prayed that He would lead me to the people that He wanted me to talk to.

    I couldn’t help myself. I had to share this story since you mentioned doing this. I did Camous Crusade when I was a teenager in a town called Bakersfield in California. We had done the training and then broke off in pairs to go out and share Christ using the 4 Spiritual Laws Booklet. So the team I was on spent time praying asking God the same request as you did.

    So we go out and we end up in a local mall and walk around until we felt led to talk to someone. We found a couple on a bench inside the main area and began to share the “spiritual law” with them. It took a bit of time and then we got done. When we finished the people we talked to told us we did an excellent job at presenting the information we were using and then told us who they were. It turned out they were directors for Campus Crusade and they let us go through the whole thing to see how we would do. We all got to laughing about it. Unfortunantely it was time to head back to the church for the rest of the services and never really got a chance to witness to someone that really needed to hear the gospel. But WE DID DO A GOOD JOB. Imagine, picking to people and they turn out to be directors. Brother!

  139. Tim says:

    Are you as disturbed as I am? First of all, passing off the wiccan as not being of the “dark witch variety”… Well I guess that is a relief…

    Sounds like the “Land of OZ” to me… the good witch and the wicked witch…. {click} {click} “there’s no place like home, theres no place like home….”

  140. Carolyn says:

    Ha Tim…funny story. I have learned that being led by the Spirit is something quite different than the hype that causes goosebumps to rise on your arms.
    Being led by the Spirit is a walk where you you can rest in the Word, where the Word leads the natural man imperceptibly, although definitely… where the Lord steers the natural without interference our creative tactics. God does his work in and through his creation, without our abstract “treasure hunts” for witnessing opportunities or trying to get in tune with some abstruse impression. We focus on the Word…he does the rest. We will find ourselves carrying out his will.

    Whereas, in the occult, the natural forces and the carnal man are manipulated by the supernatural, by strange impressions, by objects being moved, by sounds and frequencies being heard by the natural ear and vibrations and changes in atmospheres being felt by the natural body.
    Twelve years ago, I had a friend that was getting up early every morning and instead of reading her Bible, she was writing about it. She wrote reams and reams of pages about the Bible. She was quite taken by her “insights”. About that time, strange things began to happen in her home. Papers were moved, pictures that she had put away in storage would appear on her desk, towels were scattered over the floor as though something swished them from their neatly folded place on the dresser, cupboard doors were left open, a mirror shattered in a thousand pieces for no reason, she discovered a lamp facing the opposite direction. It was scaring her half to death. Then she started hearing noises. Prior to that, she was a perfectly sane individual, carrying on a busy life in the community.
    The experience baffled me, until years later I correlated the two things. I now believe that her “automatic writing” was the open door to the occult and she was experiencing the full force of it.

  141. Carolyn says:

    YesNa: The priests of Baal (Wiccan) hanging with the priests of Baal (NAR). Are you surprised?

  142. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    This is precisely why we must not go beyond what is written…just because something is supernatural/spiritual/mystical does not mean it is from God. When we go beyond our ‘realm’ of existence, we get into ‘bubble, bubble, toils, and troubles’ and find ourselves dabbling in the occult. These NAR leaders believe that they (and anyone who listens to them) cannot be deceived and are protected by the ‘Holy Spirit’ to keep them ‘safe’ and can, therefore, listen to all these ‘voices’ of new revelation. I don’t know what they do with all of Jesus’ warnings to ‘beware’. (that’s the problem, they don’t need scripture anymore because now they have a ‘fresh’ word.)

    Along with the ‘prophetic writings’, they are also into ‘prophetic art’…we had a couple of easels set up on stage (just like Bethel) so that those who would like could express themselves in art and they would present it, along with a ‘word’ from the Lord, to someone in the congregation after the service as they felt led…

    A couple of months before I left my church, one of the other admin staff and I were working on something together, when she told me about a crazy dream/nightmare she had the night before…it was basically that she was in church when many of the people in the congregation turned into demons flying through the air….after I closed my mouth, I told her she should remember that one…it may mean something to her in the future…take heed.

  143. Craig says:

    Mary,

    And, when the ‘Holy Spirit’ is really “the anointing”, there will very likely be “other voices” involved.

  144. Tim says:

    These NAR leaders believe that they (and anyone who listens to them) cannot be deceived and are protected by the ‘Holy Spirit’ to keep them ‘safe’ and can, therefore, listen to all these ‘voices’ of new revelation.

    And there is the issue/problem. As Bob DeWaay would say, “…it works…” There is something happening and the question would be “…who is really doing the works…?” This is why they do not heed the warnings and beware(s). It works and it is working all over the world. IMHO, THIS IS THE GREAT END TIMES APOSTASY. It comes from within the church. It is those that are falling away from the truth of the scriptures, the “Gospel that is powerful even unto salvation” is no longer enough but instead “signs and wonders” are the new “gospel” and it is working, negatively, but working.

  145. Craig says:

    Tim,

    I agree. I wonder how much deeper the deception [Matt 24:24; 2 Thess 2:9-12] will be? Of course, it will deepen once the Antichrist is revealed.

  146. Tim says:

    I think it will get very deep. I believe that that a great number of people in the church will be deceived and only a small remnant will not. That would be why the warning about the “Mark of the Beast” and even the “…even deceiving the elect if it were possible…” (there will probably be some around who know the truth). Not only that, but the more those who are decieved have children, the more populated decieved there will be and as those who are strong in the Word die, you can see a total flip in what will be the “religion” of the day. It’s kind of the Dialectic process. Get everyone to compromise so that we have “unity” and “peace” and then watch who comes!

  147. Arwen4CJ says:

    Mary,

    Could you tell me a little more about the prophetic writing stuff? Can you affirm or deny whether or not it is automatic writing? All I’ve heard on it is that one audio clip that I found about the testimony of the guy’s baby-sitter who was involved at Bethel. I’m looking for a source that can confirm this or deny it.

    Thanks.

    This stuff wasn’t in the church I left, and it wasn’t in the church in my graduate school town either. Thankfully, neither church was this far off the deep end.

  148. Arwen4CJ says:

    Tim,

    I can’t speak for your experience — but I do know what mine was like.

    When I just approached people on the beach without specifically feeling led to talk to them, the conversations ended up being very short. The individuals weren’t that interested in hearing the gospel, and their hearts were hardened against it. I would not say that nothing good came from it, because I do believe that no gospel sharing is wasted, but I do not think that those individuals were ready to hear the gospel.

    However, every single person that I felt led to talk to ended up being long conversations. The people were really, really thirsty. I spent several hours talking to some of them. They would just ask me question after question, and I would read long passages of Scripture to them. They wanted to hear more about what Jesus did for Him, why He died, etc. We had good conversations — just really great exchanges. I know that God was at work in their hearts. These encounters were very beautiful and fruitful.

    I would be happy if these were the kinds of encounters that the students at Bethel had that were having these Treasure Hunts, but that doesn’t appear to be the case. As I understand it, these people go out to try to wow the people with signs and wonders, never mentioning the gospel. They don’t take out their Bibles and show them God’s truth from Scripture, reading passage after passage after passage to them, answering their questions, etc.

  149. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    Arwen4CJ – I left my church about 2 1/2 years ago…although I worked there until April 2011. I had stopped attending any of the services/meetings/classes (School of Supernatural Ministry – from Bethel – used their DVDs) – so I don’t personally know of any actual prophetic writing in the sense that something took over one’s pen – but I do know they would write their thoughts/impressions – and/or speak them to each other – practice giving prophetic words (downloaded from God)….why doesn’t that raise lots of red flags to them????! I believe this is so intoxicating because it totally appeals to the ego/flesh and can be used in ‘look – see how spiritual I am – I’m special to God’…..so sad. His dying for us didn’t show how special we are to Him…sigh

  150. Arwen4CJ says:

    Mary,

    Thanks. I suppose that some people at Bethel might get more involved in the occult than others, or some might experience more occult activity than others. I wish that we had someone who attended Bethel School of Supernatural Ministry who could provide more information about this prophetic writing to find out whether or not they knew of an automatic writing kind of thing happening with anyone.

    What you describe is what some people in the church I left were doing. I don’t know how many of them actually kept journals, but I do know that some people in the church thought that doing so would be a good idea, and attempted to do it.

    The reason that I personally wasn’t suspicious of that activity was because the preaching was solid at the church while the old pastor was there. Also, I thought that they truly taught about spiritual gifts. I’d been exposed to sort of a weird Bible study my freshman year of college, and I knew that their idea of spiritual gifts was off, and I thought this church probably had it right. I mean, the church I grew up in (a mainline denomination) never even mentioned spiritual gifts at all.

    I only got suspicious of the prophecy stuff when I noticed that all of the prophecies were pretty much the same — “this person will be such a great man/woman of God,” “God has great things for this person,” etc. Also, some stuff never came to pass that was prophesied. For example, the church was trying to figure out what to do about getting a new building. One person prophesied that a certain building they were considering would be the place to move the church to, and that it would be an amazing place for God, and that revival would break out in our city, etc.

    Still, this wasn’t the main emphasis of that particular church, although some members made it more important than others. I ignored the prophesy stuff because I still valued the preaching and the mission of the church. It was only after that pastor left and a new one came, and the people that were into the prophesying and other stuff took over the church that I ended up leaving. The false preaching was the last straw.

    I was taken in by the prophetic words for the first year or so of my attendance at that church. A couple people had given me words about things, and I thought those words were true. I did spend time hoping someone would have a special word for me. However, God convicted me of this — and thankfully this was only a couple months that I desired to have special words spoken to me.

    I understand how it draws someone in.

    I was never on the giving end of the prophetic words, although someone prophesied to me that I would be giving words to others soon. I never felt comfortable with the thought of it, even when I was totally given into the idea. I never attempted to receive a special word from God — the idea just felt wrong to me. I felt like if God wanted to use me in that way, He would give the words to me without my trying to force it from Him.

    I did witness people giving words to each other, and I can definitely see how pride could be an issue here. It would be so easy to feel special because a person believed they received special revelation from God about other people all the time.

    I ended up coming to the conclusion that God CAN give words to someone or reveal something about someone to someone else, but always for His purposes — conviction or pointing them to the real Jesus. I don’t think it works the way that some of the people at that church practiced it — as you said, looking for impressions or thoughts or words all the time. I think real prophecy is a lot rarer than these people believe it is.

  151. Tim says:

    I used to be part of the prayer and prophecy team that would pray over the Master Commission graduates. We would prepare by praying asking God to give us a word for each person we would pray for and in tht prayer time we would have pen and paper and be prepared to write the prophetic word we would get. I bet this is what is really going on, unless they are really expecting something to take over the pen. Almost like a home made wegee board?

  152. Arwen4CJ says:

    I just came across this person’s blog:

    http://alexatbethel.blogspot.com/2011_11_01_archive.html

    This is a Bethel student — listen to this:
    “A huge part of my life and my being is the hunger and pursuit of the miraculous, and I am talking the real miraculous. Healing miracles are cool, and I love them, but what really gets me excited is are bonafide crazy miracles. Levitating, walking on water, summoning objects out of nothing, these are the things that I am passionate about. This is one part of the back story.”

    Levitating? Summoning objects out of nothing? This…this is occult stuff.

    Wow…and here he prayed for someone who had nothing wrong with her — the woman just wanted to be taller. Similar to Johnson’s botched miracle that Craig referred to…..listen to this:

    “Last week when we went out we encountered a lady and I asked her if she had any pain that she wanted prayer for. She said that she had pain in her toes because her shoes were too small. I explained to her that it was really easy for God to make shoes bigger and I know that because I have seen him make legs grow longer, and if He’ll do it for legs He can do it for shoes. When she heard this she decided that she wanted to be taller as well so we sat her down in a chair and prayed for her legs, one at a time. First I commanded her left leg to grow and (after a couple tries) she felt a tingling sensation and, when I measured her legs together, her left leg was almost a centimetre longer, then I had her pray for her other leg and after she commanded it to “Grow, grow, grow” she felt a tingling sensation in that leg too and it became even with the left one. Now, I am just as skeptical as anyone else about these things. I have had times when it was all hyped up people actually just shifting around there hips and it looked like it changed but really didn’t, but this time was legit.”

    http://joyannapratt.wordpress.com/

    This Bethel student talks about performing poetry…..

  153. Craig says:

    Good research!

  154. YesNaSpanishTown says:

    Automatic writing stuff:

    Two books are gaining in popularity now. Jesus Calling by Sarah Young, and the book that inspired it, God Calling by two anonymous listeners. I know of many Christians who use GC as a devotional. It is not surprising, then, that the automatic writing/journaling would be the next step in spiritual practices by those seeking (ie. lusting) after spiritual experiences.

    GC can be found free on line here http://www.twolisteners.org.

    Two good reports on GC can be found http://www.equip.org/articles/god-calling/ and http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=3764.

    Just open up any day and you will see how subtly deceptive it is. Some of the terminology is blatantly new age, but to the uninformed sheep, it seems so “godly”.

    GC is edited by A.J. Russell who denied the substitutionary blood atonement and wrote For Sinners Only. FSO was almost required reading during AA’s initial formation. Russell was also associated with Frank Buchman, founder of the Oxford Club/Moral Rearmament. Buchman practiced and promoted “Quiet Time”. Where have we heard that term before?

    I have more to add to this topic, but will need to do so later. Blessings all.

  155. Carolyn says:

    Yes Na: Thanks for the link to Lighthouse Trails. My mom had this book sitting on the table and as an indiscriminate, teenaged reader, I often picked it up for my devotional, with never a discerning notion that it might be the product of automatic writing. But in every sense it is just that. Same old lies from the Garden….

    THE MESSAGE: “YOU ARE GODS”
    Just like Satan in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:5), the whispered message of the God Calling is “your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God”:
    “To dwell in thought on the material, when once you live in Me, – is to call it into being. So you must be careful only to think of and desire that which will help, not hinder, your spiritual growth. The same law operates too on the spiritual plane. Think Love and Love surrounds you and all about whom you think, Think thoughts of ill-will and ill surrounds you, and those about whom you think. Think health – health comes. The physical reflects the mental and spiritual.” [January 20]
    This theme is much like the imagination/visualization techniques described in The Spiral Dance by Wiccan author Starhawk: “four basic abilities: relaxation, concentration, visualization, and projection.” [Page 62]
    No wonder this book has had such resurgence with the 21st century’s unprecedented interest in reincarnation and “listening prayers” and “secrets” about knowing God. Even demons know their day of judgment is coming, and there is no such thing as reincarnation! (See Matthew 8:29). We are warned in the Bible to fear God, who will destroy both body and soul in hell. The true God never communicates through the “transmigration of souls” despite the marketing of the media. (See Matthew 10:28). “Familiar” spirits come at people to deceive (Galatians 5:7-8; Revelation 17; 21:8, 27) them away from the true and living Savior. (See John 14:6). The enemy of our souls wants people to believe it is the true God calling with a different Gospel (Galatians 1) when all along it is the “ruler of the world” and the “father of lies” (John 8:44; 14:30) masquerading a dangerous, dark spirit as Light. (2 Corinthians 11:14-15)

  156. Craig says:

    I just posted this on Learning Etymology with Bill Johnson thread and thought I’d post it on here as well:

    In reading Andrew Louth’s excellent The Origins of the Christian Mystical Tradition: From Plato to Denys I discovered that this Hindu/Brahman/New Age concept of maya was in Plato’s Republic (circa 380BC). You can read a lengthy Plato passage on pages 3-5 here:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=TXpTgww3b9YC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

    Louth comments that once one is awakened to this ‘fact’ “the soul must then unlearn its apprehensions of false reality [the physical world] and begin to accustom itself to true reality. Plato sees this as a gradual process…” Would that process be via Johnson’s version of ‘repentance’?:

    …That which is unseen can be realized only through repentance. It was as though He said, ‘If you don’t change the way you perceive things, you’ll live your whole life thinking what you see in the natural is the superior reality…

  157. Arwen4CJ says:

    Hey, I need to know the original source of this quote:

    “Jesus emptied Himself of divinity and became man.”

    Someone linked to it in one of the comments. It is something Bill Johnson said in a magazine or something.

  158. Craig says:

    That exact quote is in his book co-authored with Randy Clark The Essential Guide of Healing as here at footnote 75 here:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/04/02/bill-johnsons-christology-a-new-christ-part-ii/

    It was paraphrased in Charisma:

    http://www.charismamag.com/index.php/new-man/1622-features/32505-youve-got-the-power

  159. matt says:

    Hey Craig! Just wanted to check in with you as I’ve been so busy working I haven’t had the opportunity to check in with you in a long time. Enjoy reading a lot of your stuff and hope to get engaged in conversation with you soon.

  160. Craig says:

    matt,

    Good to hear from you. I’m looking forward to your input.

  161. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig — Thanks. Do you know if there is a copy of the book available online? Well, the charismatic magazine is online…..

  162. Arwen4CJ says:

    Thank you, Craig :)

  163. Craig says:

    Yer welcome.

  164. Craig says:

    I’ve found another source for J. H. A. Ebrard’s (1818-1888) kenosis in which the Word/Logos, while remaining God, was transformed into the time-space limitations of our temporal existence.

    “The Son’s transition from eternal existence-form to human existence-form is possible because temporality and spatiality are capable of being united with the divine essence. Indeed, it is the divine purpose that the whole of humanity should be permeated by the divine essence. Christ is simply the initiator of this process. Furthermore, an affinity exists between God and the human being, which stems from the fact that the human being is a ‘spiritual being which is eternal in itself,’ and ‘an eternal ego which is infinite itself.’ Because of the affinity between God and humanity, it is not a violation of the divine essence for the Son of God to become a human being… [David A. Fergusson, Ed. The Blackwell Companion to Nineteenth-Century Theology © 2010 David R. Law, Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA; p 261 Emphasis added.]

    The way I read this, it is Ebrard’s position that the Logos remained ‘eternal’ while in the temporal realm although in a sort of ‘reduced’ form of eternality; and, even though joined to a human nature/body He remained so since the human is a “spiritual being which is eternal in itself.” The author states so explicitly earlier:

    ”…In the incarnation the eternal essence remains intact but now subsists in the temporal-form of human existence.” [ibid; p 262. Emphasis added.]

    Jesus is eternally God.

    This sounds like it could work with Johnson’s Christological phrases; however, Ebrard’s view was different with respect to the ‘omni’ traits. In the Ebrard version the ‘omni’ attributes are retained but in reduced potentialities. Omnipotence is Christ’s abilities to perform miracles while omniscience is Jesus’ “infallibility” and omnipresence enables Him to walk on water while remaining within the time-space constraints limitations of being in only one place at one time. [ibid; p 262]

    With a little modification, the Ebrard concept could work with Johnson’s. If we accept, like Thomasius (the first and most well-known of the 19th century kenoticists), that the ‘omni’ attibributes are ‘relative’, i.e. non-essential to the Incarnation, then this would necessitate that all Jesus’ supernatural workings would be effected via the Holy Spirit. That brings us back to Johnson’s.

    So, basically, if we take the Ebrardian concept of eternity with respect to the incarnate Christ and couple this with Thomasius’ assertion that the ‘omni’ attributes are non-essential for incarnational divinity/deity, we nearly have the Johnson kenotic model. To complete the model, we just borrow the Ebrardian understanding that Christ is the initiator of and vehicle for the ‘permeating of the divine essence’. As Johnson states

    ”…The outpouring of the Spirit comes to anoint the church with the same Christ anointing that rested upon Jesus in His ministry so that we might be imitators of Him…”

    I note also that Ebrard’s phraseology of how mankind is to be “permeated by the divine essence” with Christ as ‘initiator’ is much like that of Gnosticism as well as the occult/New Age Christology.

  165. Arwen4CJ says:

    Thanks again! :)

    Yes, this does seem consistent with some Johnson follower’s understanding of kenosis.

  166. peacebringer says:

    A related article on information at Morningstart in 1999 by Michel McCumber at Deception Bytes found here: http://adeepdeception.com/featured-articles/1344-another-gospel-lost-notes-from-morningstar

  167. Craig says:

    Arwen4CJ,

    I wanted to make it clear that my main intention of quoting the source on Ebrard is to consider that framework as a lens to view these Christological statements by Johnson:

    Jesus was (and is) God. Eternally God. That never changed. But he chose to live with self imposed restriction while living on earth in the flesh – as a man…

    While Jesus is eternally God, He emptied Himself of His divinity and became a man (see Phil. 2:7). It’s vital to note that He did all His miracles as a man, not as God…

    If we understand Johnson to mean a ‘diminished form’ of Incarnational eternality such as Ebrard then these two discreet statements perfectly harmonize with no self-contradiction. And, the “self imposed restriction” can mean a total divestment of divine attributes prior to becoming man which would make both statements non-contradictory with each other.

    Then, we would not have to do linguistic gymnastics on these two statements in order to ‘fit’ them into a functional kenotic account (the Word retained all divine attributes yet did not utilize them during the Incarnation relying on the Holy Spirit instead) as they will harmonize as ontological kenosis instead:

    Jesus Christ said of Himself, ‘The Son can do nothing.’ In the Greek language that word nothing has a unique meaning—it means NOTHING, just like it does in English! He had NO supernatural capabilities whatsoever!…He performed miracles, wonders, and signs, as a man in right relationship to God…not as God.

    …Jesus had no ability to heal the sick. He couldn’t cast out devils, and He had no ability to raise the dead. He said of Himself in John 5:19, ‘the Son can do nothing of Himself.’ He had set aside His divinity. He did miracles as man in right relationship with God because He was setting forth a model for us, something for us to follow….Jesus so emptied Himself that He was incapable of doing what was required of Him by the Father – without the Father’s help…

    Taken together, these statements suggest a metamorphosis of the Word who ‘became man’ by divesting Himself of divinity/deity. This then is ontological kenosis rather than functional kenosis – the Word no longer had any divine attributes to pull from having “emptied Himself of divinity”. This is why “The Father, by the Holy Spirit, directed all that Jesus said and did.

    Of course, when we factor in Johnson’s teaching that “Christ” = “the anointing” and “antichrist (spirit)” = ‘anti-anointing’ we cannot understand Johnson’s Christology as remotely orthodox.

  168. Craig says:

    peacebringer,

    Yes, I saw that. It just goes to show how Bob Jone’s false teachings undergird the hyper-charismatic movement in general.

  169. Arwen4CJ says:

    Most of the people that I’ve been talking to who are Johnson followers have a ontological kenosis understanding rather than a functional one, although some hold to functional.

    Part of the problem is that I think they lack a basic theological understanding regarding terms. They seem to be either confused about the meaning of divinity/deity, or they are faking not knowing that it has to do with God/Godhood. So, for them to hear that Jesus emptied HImself of His Deity, apparently, they don’t realize that that statement means that He stopped being God.

    In other words, they might not actually know what Johnson is saying.

  170. Craig says:

    Johnson’s words are sufficiently confusing that it’s very difficult to understand what he’s saying even for folks who have some theological background. It’s more difficult for newbies and those who are of the impression that theology isn’t all that important. Even though functional kenosis is the closer of the two to orthodoxy, it still does not pass the Biblical test in a number of ways. But, once we factor in the teaching on “the anointing”, Johnson’s Christology devolves into separationist, i.e., the “Christ anointing” descends upon Jesus via the dove indicating Jesus wasn’t even Christ until that point. By the Apostle John’s definition that’s antichrist:

    Christ is not Jesus’ last name. The word Christ means “Anointed One” or “Messiah.” It [Christ] is a title that points to an experience [Spirit resting upon Him after baptism in the Jordan]. It was not sufficient that Jesus be sent from heaven to earth with a title [Christ]. He had to receive the anointing [“Christ anointing” resulting in Christ title] in an experience [Spirit resting upon Him] to accomplish what the Father desired.

    The word anointing means “to smear.” The Holy Spirit is the oil of God that was smeared all over Jesus at His water baptism. The name Jesus Christ implies that Jesus is the One smeared with the Holy Spirit [after water baptism in the Jordan].

    According to Johnson above, when was Jesus “smeared with the Holy Spirit”? Answer: at baptism. So then, Jesus received the name/title of Christ at that point. He explains this further in a different book:

    The outpouring of the Spirit also needed to happen to Jesus for Him to be fully qualified. This was His quest. Receiving this anointing qualified Him to be called the Christ, which means “anointed one.” Without the experience [“Christ anointing” by the Spirit after water baptism] there could be no title.

    Before “the anointing” Jesus could not even have had the title of Christ. Therefore, Jesus was merely Jesus of Nazareth prior to “the anointing” and became ‘Jesus Christ’ in virtue of “the anointing”; hence, we have the Gnostic heresy of the 1st/2nd century and this doctrine is part of current occult / New Age / New Spirituality teachings.

    Both quotes were used in part I

  171. Arwen4CJ says:

    Over the last couple of days, I have come to the following conclusion — and this is based off of talking to people who are heavily into Johnson’s teachings:

    This is in terms of his Christology, reflecting on Johnson’s two statements:
    1.) That Jesus emptied Himself of His divinity/deity. (His followers understand divinity to be equal to deity).

    2.) That Jesus is eternally God and never stopped being God.

    The problem is that either Johnson has once again switched definitions/terms here, so he can deceitfully introduce heresy, or Johnson just has no coherent position. Since he obviously does have a position, I reverent back to the first possibility. He is trying to pass off heresy as if it is orthodox by just stating “Jesus has always been God, but He emptied Himself of His deity.” Since his followers can be ignorant of theology and be ignorant of theological terms, they don’t pick up on what he’s really saying. They don’t understand how contradictory his statement is. A person cannot state that Jesus has always been God, yet at the same time say that He emptied Himself of all of His deity.

    Even though Johnson didn’t attend much pastoral training, he has to at least know what divnity/deity means. He has to know what he is teaching people and trying to slip in.

    I have honestly tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I cannot any longer.

    I also believe that he is teaching an occult view of Jesus, again based on what ardent followers of him have told me. They themselves have come to hold to such a view. I think that Craig is really onto something with these articles.

  172. Carolyn says:

    I cannot understand why anyone is giving Bill Johnson any credibility for saying that Jesus is eternally God, especially when it is obvious that his “Jesus” is not even the Jesus of the Scriptures. He has long passed the error of Liberal Christianity which empties not only Christ of his deity, but also the cross of its power and man of his sin.

    He has entered the realm of the occult. Instead of the Spirit giving gifts to us as he wills, making us all interdependent, but at the same time, keeping us all on equal footing (the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of you) …the New Revelations (doctrines of demons) teach us that we are passing through levels of mastery on our way up the ladder to perfection. We are ascending (ascended masters)…this is the occult, this is Masonry, this is New Age…not Biblical Christianity. It’s not that complicated. Demonic roots produce demonic fruit.

    I agree with you Arwen. Thank God for people like Craig and others who are speaking up, putting their own credibility on the line to expose this movement for what it is and not pretending that there is something orthodox about the things that are being said or done for the sake of making themselves “believable”. Anyone who is still trying to protect their own image is not worthy of Him.

    The capstone is about to be put in place and it will not be Christ…it will be Antichrist…
    1 John 2:18
    Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

  173. Carolyn says:

    From Wiki: “Ascended Masters, in the Ascended Master Teachings is derived from the Theosophical concept of Masters of the Ancient Wisdom or “Mahatmas”, though they differ in important aspects. They are believed to be spiritually enlightened beings who in past incarnations were ordinary humans, but who have undergone a process of spiritual transformation originally called Initiation in Theosophy but in the Ascended Master Teachings it is referred to as Ascension.”

    Just to make a point…why do these NAR teachers use the same language as theosophical teachers…”initiates”, “transformation”, “ascension”, “progression”

    …because the same demons that have fed the students of the occult theosophical societies lies of higher consciousness, producing altered states of consciousness and atmospheres of drunkenness, are feeding these NAR false “prophets” their New Revelation and New Age propaganda which they, in turn, are passing on to their initiates…

    For those unfamiliar with the Bible except to use as some sort of catalogue of formulas that you decree in order to make the supernatural align with your confession and transform your reality and society, here’s what it actually says:
    Galatians 1:
    3Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,
    4Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:
    5To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
    6I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
    7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
    8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
    9As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

    Be warned. It is not those of us in the 21st Century pronouncing judgement against the followers of a false gospel, It is the Inspired Word of God. In this passage, Paul repeats his anathema twice for emphasis…”let him be accursed”. If you care about your eternal soul, you will take heed and begin to study the Word for yourselves. It will not be long before you will see the contradictions as I have, and leave the assemblies of Babylon forever.

  174. Craig says:

    There are many terms used in hyper-charismaticism which are also used in the occult / New Age / New Spirituality. “Thinning of the veil” is one which is equivalent to an ‘open heaven’. In doing a search, I found this article by Paul Keith Davis of “White Dove Ministries”:

    http://www.whitedoveministries.org/Index.cfm?zone=docs/TheRoleofinnerhealinginthechurchtoday.htm&page=Articles

    Interestingly, according to the article, there will be a third baptism – obviously the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is not the highest ‘level’. Quoting from the article:

    Both Paul Keith Davis and Bob Jones have been taken into visions where the Lord has shown them that God has designed the DNA of people differently for different dispensations of the church age. In particular he has reserved a special breed for the end-time generation. In Bob Jones’ vision he saw angles gathered around a conveyor belt on which something like seeds were passing by. As they passed the angels would call out “There’s one, there’s one.” and pick up certain seeds and place them in a huge pile that was reserved for the end-time.

    These were the seeds or souls of the end-time generation, a generation with a special DNA designed for a unique destiny. What has been sown into these souls is a hunger for God and a thirst for the supernatural. We are beginning to see this emerging in the raw faith of the youth as seen at the recent The Call gatherings, in Lou Engle’s 24/7 prayer internship program in Washington D.C., and at the growing number of IHOPs and other harp and bowl prayer and worship gatherings.

    …God has programmed the DNA of certain members of the younger generation to have radical faith for the supernatural. This new emerging generation is experiential. They will not be won over by words but by demonstrations of the glory of God….

    There’s that DNA teaching again. The ‘Omega Generation’ or “elected seed” doctrine of endtimes ‘super Christians’.

    The Three Baptisms and Three Kinds of Christians in the Last Days – In the years to come it will not just be nice or exciting to live in the supernatural. It will be necessary for our survival. According to Neville Johnson’s prophetic word, outer court Christians (those who have experienced only the first baptism – water baptism for repentance and salvation) will not survive the tribulation. Only those who have made it to in the inner court by receiving the second baptism (the baptism of the Holy Spirit) will survive. But those who have received the third baptism – the baptism of fire unto holiness – will do great exploits as Sons of the Kingdom.

    Stage Three Spirituality – Bob Jones calls it the Third Baptism, John G. Lake called it the union experience with God, and John Paul Jackson calls it Stage Three Spirituality. In the tabernacle of Moses, the Holy of Holies was also called the tabernacle of witness. That was because what happened there proved the existence of God (as when Aaron’s rod budded, and the Lord came down and met with Moses). Those that attain Stage Three Spirituality become the abode of God, a tabernacle of witness.

    For those Christians who are at least somewhat acquainted with their Bibles, we are already ‘the abode of God’ by virtue of the Holy Spirit indwelling. This, however, is speaking of the attainment to that of manifested sons of God. This “union with God” is the over-riding principle of hyper-charismaticism. This mysticism has been around even before Christianity.

    When all the tares in our soul are removed, we become like him, we become the tabernacle of God, a manifestation of the sons of God. The parable of the tares and the wheat indicates that there will be sons of the Kingdom (the good seed) on earth, before the Lord returns. He will come to a bridal company that does the very same things that he did and the greater works that he promised. We have the Lord’s “very great and precious promises” that “we may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption of this world” (2 Peter 1:4) and taste “the powers of the world to come” (Heb. 6:5) on this side of eternity.

    …The tares in our souls limit how close we can get to God and how much he can trust us with the powerful end-time anointings and mantles that are coming available…

    Notice the similarities to Johnson’s teaching on Matthew 13 (the wheat and the tares) and the other occult / New Age / New Spirituality ones as referenced in this CrossWise article.

    We are entering a period when the veil between the natural and supernatural realms is becoming very thin. The door is being opened to come up here and pass back and forth between the spiritual and physical planes of existence. Portals are being opened. We are hearing a lot about portals these days. Gary Oates is in the process of writing a book on portals. Portals are open doors to heaven. Portals give us open access to an open heaven. Portals bring heaven to earth and are doors to the spirit realm.

    Some portals will be healing pools and anyone who comes into them will be healed. Other portals will be places of profound revelation. Some will be in churches, some will be in geographical areas, some will be connected with movements and leaders and will move with them and some will be hidden and only known by those who God calls to those places to be commissioned.

    Portals, veils = occult / New Age / New Spirituality doctrine.

    The Enoch Mantle - There is an end-time anointing to walk with God. Some are calling it the Enoch mantle (Todd Bentley, Neville Johnson, Bob Jones, Jeff Jansen and others). God wants his church to walk with him like Enoch walked with him. We are going to have to learn to do that. Jesus told us, “As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man (Matt. 24:37). There were a lot of bad things occurring in Noah’s days, but remember Enoch was a contemporary of Noah.

    Enoch was alive for part of Adam’s life and must have heard many stories about how it was to walk with God in the Garden of Eden. Ultimately, Enoch learned many things in his own walk with the Lord and was continually going back and forth to heaven and being shown numerous future events which he recorded in The Book of Enoch before he was permanently translated into heaven.
    The Enoch Mantle – There is an end-time anointing to walk with God. Some are calling it the Enoch mantle (Todd Bentley, Neville Johnson, Bob Jones, Jeff Jansen and others). God wants his church to walk with him like Enoch walked with him. We are going to have to learn to do that. Jesus told us, “As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man (Matt. 24:37). There were a lot of bad things occurring in Noah’s days, but remember Enoch was a contemporary of Noah.

    Enoch was alive for part of Adam’s life and must have heard many stories about how it was to walk with God in the Garden of Eden. Ultimately, Enoch learned many things in his own walk with the Lord and was continually going back and forth to heaven and being shown numerous future events which he recorded in The Book of Enoch before he was permanently translated into heaven.

    Enoch, of course, was translated, or ‘raptured’ into heaven averting death. The occult LOVES this guy using him as an example of ascension. Note the (1st – there are 3 in total) Book of Enoch is pseudonymous (was written by someone OTHER than Enoch) and most scholars agree it was written over time beginning around 175BC or so and likely by a few different authors – well after Enoch’s earthly existence.

    Folks, if this stuff ain’t occult, I don’t know what is!

  175. Arwen4CJ says:

    Aren’t there two Enoch’s in the Bible? One is the righteous one and the other was descended from Cain or something…I think. The one whom the occult followers that I talked to credit as being the author is Cain’s son, not the one who was taken up to heaven.

    But yeah, the Enoch that was taken to heaven is someone that the occult loves too.

    Yes…this is what I thought:
    Genesis 4:17
    Cain had relations with his wife and she conceived, and gave birth to Enoch; and he built a city, and called the name of the city Enoch, after the name of his son.

    Genesis 5:18
    Jared lived one hundred and sixty-two years, and became the father of Enoch.

    Two men named Enoch.

    Anyway….yes, this stuff is certainly occult.

  176. Carolyn says:

    Craig…that’s some interesting research…much to consider.

    I just have to say (tongue in cheek)…now that the angels are doing all the work for us…we no longer have to put our own energy into studying the Scriptures and understanding what the will of God is. We don’t have to trouble ourselves with meditation on the Psalms, or tracking inspirational stories of faithful men or holding to truths taught by tried and tested prophets. Our fathers would be so envious. Here they spent their lives searching the Scriptures, devoting themselves to studying it and to believing that the Word was “a lamp to their feet and a light to their pathway”. Had they lived in this generation, they would be enlightened to the reality of angel power and that all that study would have been so unnecessary. Instead they could have been spoon fed by angel drops and they could have danced their way through silvery streams of gold dust. They could have travelled on fiery beams of light energy into dimensions of thinning veils and open heavens to learn all the mystical secrets of the divine mind. They could have lived on a wing and a prayer that in following GOD, they would not be deceived. But to their eternal credit, they believed the warning that such deceptions would come through Satanic angels and their apostles:
    2 Corinthians 11:13-15
    13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
    14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
    15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

  177. Carolyn says:

    It sent a cold wave (not a third wave) down my spine when I read your quote:

    “In Bob Jones’ vision he saw angels gathered around a conveyor belt on which something like seeds were passing by. As they passed the angels would call out “There’s one, there’s one.” and pick up certain seeds and place them in a huge pile that was reserved for the end-time.

    These were the seeds or souls of the end-time generation, a generation with a special DNA designed for a unique destiny. What has been sown into these souls is a hunger for God and a thirst for the supernatural.”

    It reminds me of a similar time in history where angels corrupted the DNA of a generation and destined them all to God’s wrath because they had contaminated the genetics, they had altered the image of man, they had polluted the earth, they had perverted the seed (DNA) and produced a hybrid, a giant, mighty men who were violent and unsalvageable.
    Note: sons of God=angels

    Genesis 6:
    1And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
    2That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
    4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
    5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
    6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
    7And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
    8But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
    11The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
    12And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
    13And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

    Will demons, masquerading as angels once again, as in the days of Noah, mingle their DNA (seed) with the seed of men to produce a hybrid generation? The Bible tells us they will:
    Daniel 2:43
    And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

    Matthew 24:37
    But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

  178. Carolyn says:

    This excerpt from a very interesting article by Mike Oppenheimer on http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain41.htm should give us pause as to what “fire” they are actually calling down upon themselves:

    The Baptism of Fire

    A good portion of what is taking place with Bentley sounds like Rodney Howard Browne’s encounter with the fire. Bentleys own words of in experiencing the Pillar of Fire — screaming, shaking and vibrating- The fire, the fire! Burn up my flesh! I want to feel the fire!” I was screaming” “The fire, the fire, I’m burning up! The fire is similar to what Rodney Browne said of his experience that was like the Kundalini power found in the serpent fire of Hinduism enlightenment.

    Rodney Howard Browne “I cried out to God in sheer desperation. I wanted Him to manifest Himself to me and in me. I was hungry.” “As I prayed that day, I told the Lord, ‘Either you come down here and touch me, or I am going to come up there and touch you.’ I was desperate. I must have called out to God for about twenty minutes that day.”

    Then one day “Suddenly the fire of God fell on me. It started on my head and went right down to my feet. His power burned in my body and stayed like that for three whole days.”

    The similarities to Rodney Browne are certainly there. “I was plugged into heaven’s electric light supply…my desire has been to go and plug other people in. My whole body was on fire. (Rodney Howard Browne. “The Touch of God” pp. 73-74.)

    In Bentleys experience at the hotel with his friends being caught up in visions they are being being tormented, no prophet was tortured like this from their vision or experiences. “every single person in the room starts screaming, shaking and vibrating. …I had a vision of a fire and I started yelling out “My God is a consuming fire! My God is a consuming fire!” …As I see the fire come down I scream, “The fire, the fire! Burn up my flesh! I want to feel the fire!”

    The concept of electricity and fire as the Holy Spirit seems to be a common denominator in these experiences which prove they are not a biblical power but an occult one. The Bible says nothing of a fire experience like these. These are commonly found and used in other religions and the occult.

    “Purification: Let the fires of divinity burn out all dross. Let the pure gold emerge. Give me the gold of living love to shower upon the sons of men.” [From Alice Bailey's "Discipleship in the New Age; Vol. I - Instructions to Disciples"]

    ….and this should give further pause when contrasting this teaching about burning away sin with what the Scriptures actually say about the sufficiency of the blood of Christ in contrast with the teachings of Occult masters…from the same article by Mike Oppenheimer:

    Hinn says the Church is deficient because of the absence of a “fire” anointing. He explains:“ the reason the Church has had partial liberty, is because we have not known the fullness of fire. The anointing as fire is coming to your life.” Hinn tells us that this new “fire” anointing will burn away bondage and sin.

    Is the blood of Jesus Christ not sufficient to cleanse from all? (1 jn.1:9) Now we need a fire baptism to burn away sin? (1 Peter 1:18-19). Just like it was taught from the Latter Rain.

    Benny Hinn often promises to give fire on people “Many of you feel a tremendous anointing on you, like fire, he repeats “fire” about a dozen times. They all go down when he says “fire on you.”

    “Many of you feel the power like that of fire. Others feel like electricity just rushing through your body.” “You begin to feel a mighty fire when we’re holding the service. Some began to feel fire and warmth come on you only in the service. (Benny Hinn Honolulu Blaisdell Jan.21 1999)

    Choo Thomas says of her experience “I received the fire of the Holy Spirit while I was praying at home in January 1994. About a month later, I saw the Lord’s presence while I was worshiping at the Neighborhood Assembly of God in Tacoma.”

    In the Occult and Gnosticism there are teaching that angels that bring fire with them. Could this be what is taking place in these meetings that are out of order. The ascended masters: “Beings called Yan yin, Mary Diana angels of sacred fire, the legions of the angelic hosts all are called upon for service and power to release and distribute the flame.”

    “The more you understand the reality and the presence, the more you can accept the presence of these healing violet flame angels, the closer, they will come and the greater their strength and power of that sacred fire wrapped around you” (I Am healing decrees Saint Germaine press 1976 p.6)

    Fire what does this mean? It is not a Bible concept for the believer these occult energies are like fire. Being formerly involved in the new age movement I experienced the energy released in spiritual experiences and they are just like what I see taking place in these revivals. There is no biblical precedent for this and the energy does not set one free but brings them into bondage.

  179. Craig says:

    I want to make another comment on the Paul Keith Davis article referenced earlier. From the article

    We are entering a period when the veil between the natural and supernatural realms is becoming very thin. The door is being opened to come up here and pass back and forth between the spiritual and physical planes of existence. Portals are being opened. We are hearing a lot about portals these days. Gary Oates is in the process of writing a book on portals. Portals are open doors to heaven. Portals give us open access to an open heaven. Portals bring heaven to earth and are doors to the spirit realm.

    Compare this to the goal of Alice Bailey’s demon who channelled through her as quoted in the the current CrossWise article:

    Instruction is being given at this time to a special group of people who have come into incarnation at this critical period of world’s history. They have come in, all at the same time, throughout the world, to do the work of linking up the two planes, the physical and the astral, via the etheric.

    ‘Bringing heaven to earth’, ‘linking’ the two, via the etheric by the “thinning of the veil”.

  180. Arwen4CJ says:

    Reminds me of a wiccan girl that I knew when I was in college. She talked about specific places on campus that were “gateways to the spirit realm.”

  181. Tim Bain says:

    Craig; I couldnt agree more reguarding the “portals” correlation, these portals are of HUGE signifigance to the big players in NAR they will move ” ministries”, family,…you name it, to get under one, ironicly GODTV just played a (2012) Morningstar conference with Bob Jones and Rick Joyner where the two were elaborating on the purchase of ” Moravian Falls” retreat center which they belive to be a portal or open heaven. Rick J. stated that one of the other key leaders wasnt willing to get on board (with the purchase and moving there) but wanted to start something at the “beach” and Rick and Bob told him it was a “matter of life and death” that he get on board with their prophetic program…long story short he refused ,went to the “beach” and shortly there after one of his granddaughters died in a firey car wreck …which Rick J. interpreted as a judgement from God, noting that she had prayed earlier that God would make her life a “living sacrifice” which Rick J. termed a “Burnt offering”!!!! …these guys are beyond belief as to the extent they will go to validate their “pathetic prophetic mantles”

  182. Arwen4CJ says:

    Oh — and one thing that I thought of regarding kenosis —

    If Jesus had no ability to use His powers as God, except by relying on the Holy Spirit, then how could Satan tempt Jesus to turn stone into bread?

    The Holy Spirit certainly wouldn’t have allowed Jesus to use His power for Satan’s will. If it was only by the Holy Spirit that Jesus did everything, then the Holy Spirit wouldn’t have helped Jesus out here. The Holy Spirit wouldn’t have fallen for Satan’s temptation. The Holy Spirit would not go against God’s will.

    In order for it to be a real temptation, Jesus would have had to have the ability to perform this miracle in and of Himself — He would have needed real power Himself.

    When Satan tempted Jesus, Jesus’ response wasn’t, “I can’t…I don’t have the ability to do so.”

  183. Carolyn says:

    Just read the article from White Dove Ministries you are referring to, again…since I cannot make anything he says fit with the Bible as it reads in plain English, I thought I would insert a practical guide to Bible Reading for those who might read this and wonder how their New Apostles are teaching an interpretation of the Bible so different than the norm. This is an excerpt from:

    http://www.douglashamp.com/how-should-we-read/

    A frequent accusation against the Bible is that one can make it say whatever one wants. Unquestionably there are people that take such liberty and try to make the Bible fit into their philosophies. However, is it true that the Bible allows for such liberties? Is God’s Word really so ambiguous? Or is there a method to properly understand and capture the message that He intended for us to receive? The importance of this question is staggering because where one begins will often determine where one ends up. If our method of interpretation is so fluid that the Bible can say anything, then it generally will. However, if our method assumes that what is said is what is meant, then we will arrive at trustworthy conclusions not based on how clever we are in our interpretation, but on our simply reading and believing what the text says.

    This type of interpretation is known as the grammatical-historical method. It assumes that the words and thoughts that are conveyed in the Bible are used in the same way that normal speech, writing, and conversation occur in everyday life. Basically stated, we don’t have to read between the lines of the Bible to understand what it means. The greatest advantage of interpreting the Bible in a straightforward manner is that we are able to test our conclusions regarding what it says against archeology, historical documents, and examination of the Hebrew and Greek grammar of the particular passage.

    The teachings on portals and thinning the veil are both obvious occult terminology. The Morning Star and Prophetic teachers use the Bible to back up their use of occult terminology but those Satanically inspired, occult words are not in the Bible. On the other hand, I can, at any given moment, google those same words/phrases and come up with pages of New Age and Occult/Spiritualist/Healing sites which do use that terminology. And I get the same creepy feeling I get when I listen to these guys mangle the Word and insert occult-speak into their demonically inspired messages. They are raising up a new breed of occultists right in the middle of their so called “churches”.

    Psalm 84:10
    Better is one day in your courts than a thousand elsewhere; I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked.

  184. Carolyn says:

    Here’s a perfect example of how the false teachers twist God’s Word to support their own ideas.

    Compare Christ’s words where he specifically details the meaning of tares:

    “Matthew 13:37-39 (King James Version)
    37He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
    38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
    39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.”

    with the confused teachings of White Dove Ministries, Dr. Scott Flanagan where there is no resemblance to the original meaning of the word tare

    “Our emotional wounds tend to separate us from God. They represent the unsanctified parts of our hearts. The tares in our souls limit how close we can get to God and how much he can trust us with the powerful end-time anointings and mantles that are coming available.
    Those who are going to be elevated into supernatural giftings will become targets of the enemy. Satan can only attack us in places that are not dedicated to the Lord. The tares of our soul need to be extracted and those wounded places healed so that when the power and anointings come we won’t fall into sin.”

  185. Carolyn says:

    My final point…if Satan is behind all the false teaching, the twisting of the Word and the use of counterfeit end times messages, what is his main point? How can this teaching of “healing the unsanctified parts of our heart” and “extracting the tares from our soul” be so evil? I would say, because if our salvation has already been bought and paid for by the finished work of Christ on the cross, then this “extra” work would divert us from a life of faith and put us into bondage. Our vision has now shifted to “works” to feeling healed, to experiential and esoteric workings which are not faith…. Precisely what 1 Timothy 4 says:
    1 The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.

    By Christ’s stripes we are healed…not by feelings of purging fires or by breathing in holy atmospheres or by entering into different dimensions through occult means.

  186. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    An interesting article about tares is on the Deception in the Church website at

    http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/tares.html

    Tares are considered to be the darnel plant…the article speaks of what happens if this plant is accidently ingested (if it’s not separated from the wheat at harvest).

  187. Craig says:

    Interesting indeed! Thanks for posting.

  188. Tim Bain says:

    Mary M.

    that article on tares….now thats just TOO SPOOKY! ….one wonders if the correlation between tares and the last days harvest has more to it then meets the eye…again wow, cant wait to share that one with a few fence sitter I know… thanks!

  189. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    and with their emphasis on the gold, gems, etc., reminds me of the Rev 17:1-6 woman: ‘ Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me,[a] “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, 2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her
    fornication.”

    3 So he carried me away in the Spirit into the wilderness. And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication.[b] 5 And on her forehead a name was written:

    MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT,
    THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS
    AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS
    OF THE EARTH.

    6 I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And when I saw her, I marveled with great amazement.’

  190. Arwen4CJ says:

    Hey…I googled “portal to spirit world” and came up with About 12,000,000 results, the first of which are all occult in nature.

  191. Tim Bain says:

    Arwen;
    my all time favorite “portal” story (video-10 min.at- Open Portal To Heaven?I’m Speaking Truth ) is Todd Bently’s trip via portal to a heavenly operating table (warning…graphic) while at a conference with Bill Johnson speaking, were todd had an “implantation” of divine character(?), wisdom and knowledge preformed by 4 angels and later he and Randy Clark and friends opened another portal in their hotel room which he claims “literally” burned down 2 rooms above them(the portal ran thru those rooms…ya see) Im not sure the surgery was`a big success though…Todd sure has an impartation of imagination…I’ll give him that…not sure of its origin though, but it sure “tickles ears”

  192. Carolyn says:

    The Bible tells us that there are only two gods, the One true God and Satan, who manifests himself in as many versions of god as there are versions of portals, at least 12 billion, I’d say.
    According to the Bible, there really are only two two paths…one broad, one narrow, two gates one that leads to hell and one that leads to eternal life. Christ is the exclusive portal to heaven.

    por·tal
    noun
    1.
    a door, gate, or entrance, especially one of imposing appearance, as to a palace.

    There are only two portals. Christ said, “I am the door”…”I am the way”….

    I pray that the gospel will be clarified enough in the minds of those with honest hearts, so that they can stop trying to find portals of illusion and magic and find the One true God in the One true Logos that He has given for life and godliness. 2Peter 1:2-4 Christ is the only portal through which we will find eternal life.

  193. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    Yes, Carolyn…the more people try to complicate the gospel the more it stays the same…In the Garden of Eden there were also only 2 choices – to eat the fruit or not…one way led to death/hell and the other led to eternal life – basically, to obey or not. The world is constantly saying how ‘narrow minded’ Christianity is but in actuality – God made our salvation very easy…one way…not cluttered or confusing with all the many ways the god of this world tries to lead people. And Jesus asks, ‘who do you say that I am?’…

  194. Arwen4CJ says:

    Tim,

    Yeah, I saw those videos while I was researching the Florida “Outpouring” and warning people against Todd Bentley. I didn’t realize that it was Randy Clark who was with Todd Bentley for the fire in the hotel room. (I hadn’t really heard of Randy Clark then). I only recently researched Randy Clark because he was one of the “apostles” who the church I left was showing in the Voice of the Apostles Conference.

    That just speaks volumes — thanks for reminding me of those spiritual occult encounters that Todd Bentley and his friends had.

  195. matt says:

    Craig, could you give me some good biblical reasons why tithing is not necessary. Hate struggling with this issue. I know giving is highly important for the church. I just despise how so many people use the tithe to milk money out of people. You can delete this comment from this thread as I know it doesn’t go with subject matter. I just didn’t know how to get a hold of you otherwise. Email me if possible on this one.

  196. Craig says:

    matt,

    I’ll leave your comment here even though it doesn’t pertain to this thread as this is one teaching that really irritates me. Dr. Russell Kelly does a great job in answering this question:

    http://www.tithing-russkelly.com/

  197. Craig says:

    matt,

    And, you can contact me through the “About” tab.

  198. YesNaSpanishTown says:

    I received an email today from someone who takes trips to Israel to open portals through worship music. She had forwarded a video on Jerusalem that is being developed as an Imax film to be released in 2013. (The film is not from her ministry.) I watched it trying to keep an open mind. Having toured Israel a few years ago, I thoroughly enjoyed the beautiful scenery. The Imax style is breathtaking. My heart immediately longed to go back to J’lem. Only one statement by the narrator gave me a pause having referenced Israel as the source of monotheism. (Well, yes, if you mean Judaism and Christianity. But Muhammad received his “revelation” in Mecca.) Then, at the very end of the clip came the name of the producer: Arcane/Cosmic Picture Film. Here are the links: http://www.jerusalemthemovie.com and http://www.arcanepictures.co.uk.

    The Arcane website describes it’s purpose for the film, “The Project will seek to build trust and respect between Jews, Christians and Muslims by showcasing their common heritage and will inspire them, and the public, to better understand each other’s beliefs and practices.

    I clicked “Reply All” and explained the source of the film, defined arcane and what is meant by cosmic. I also explained that the above quote, given its Arcane source, means far more than just fostering cooperation and tolerance. I shared who Alice Bailey was and quoted her charge to infiltrate the church and redefine its doctrines. I also quoted her as saying that the goal cannot be achieved without mysticism.

    I closed the email emphasizing the need for Biblical discernment and the danger of accepting everything as from the Holy Spirit or anointing without using the Bible as our source. There were over 35 recipients from my email. At least 25+ know me personally. The person who sent me the email replied. Her statement was positive and thankful for my discernment.

    I can’t help but wonder how many of them felt the “anointing” when they saw the film. (Well, I’ll leave that to the Lord. It’s really His business, not mine.) It truly leaves you feeling a spiritual exhilaration, at least it did me having been there. I hope it is a wake up call to these folk who follow this spirituality. Most of the recipients are big Bill Johnson followers. One other person also hit “Reply All” and praised the film saying it was beautiful and that she wants to return to Israel some day. I assume given the timing of my email and my knowledge of her, she stated that after reading my commentary.

    God said that for the elects’ sake these days will be shortened. I pray it will be soon.

  199. Craig says:

    YesNa,

    Thanks for sharing this. This is very disturbing. There are those who promote Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as the “Abrahamic Faiths” in an attempt to homongenize the three. Tony Blair does so in his “Faith Foundation”. (Rick Warren is on the board – see hyperlink).

    Very astute of you to put it all together in an email: the definition of arcane, the intent of Satanic forces as communicated through Alice Bailey to infiltrate the church, redefine Christian doctrines to esoteric/arcane meanings using mysticism as a vehicle.

    Arcane Pictures is apparently well-connected as they state the following film was “a project which is integrated with the work of NGOs and progressive companies to achieve this change.” NGOs (non-governmental organizations) have consultative status with the United Nations:

    http://www.arcanepictures.co.uk/films/?category=documentaries

  200. Tim Bain says:

    Yesna & Craig:
    A few years ago the ministry I was with was agressively pursuing the purchase of a compound with multiple buildings in jerusalem we were working directly with Ray Hughes who was working with Bethel and others– the objective was to establish a school of the supernatural in jerusalem focused on prophetic worship and prophecy. I have no dought the effort continues and will eventually be an extention of BSSM in the future, at the time I didnt take the new age stuff (portals, various manifestations of “angels” etc.) as seriously as I do today, I certainly didnt think this stuff could be demonic-God forbid!! all I saw was a Revival!,major move of God! miracles! just like most of the younger folks do today.
    Knowing what I do today I can say with confidence that if they establish anything like what was planned in Jerusalem the ramifications would be dier. Jerusalem is considered the most signifigant “portal” (for obvious reasons) on the planet by the NAR and one can only imagine the clout these “apostles” wish to gain by doing their thing from Jerusalem! -(Revealations talks about someone else who wants to set up there “headquarters” there too–antichrist).
    What Craig mentioned with reguards to Tony Blair makes me think of the bigger picture -the correlation between the NAR and New Age coming into full bloom helping to establish these false apostles as close to the front of the program as possible . GODTV is already there and it won’t be long before all the big news from NAR will come from there– besides think of all the “anointings” and mantles that can be salvaged there!

  201. Carolyn says:

    Here are some interesting NARisms about portals and thinning spaces from some of our favourite NARites. This article was written in 2008 but still relevant for today…same messages coming forth, perhaps their ideas are a little more developed 4 years later. Anyhow, to spice up your day…an excerpt:

    Jerusalem is a ‘Portal’
    Jackson continues..

    “Divine portals into the heavenly realm exist around the Earth today. The city of Jerusalem is a portal. In fact, it is the major portal on the face of the Earth. That’s why both David and Isaiah said that Jerusalem is the center of the earth. Why do you suppose the enemy is trying to capture Jerusalem? He is trying to block or close off this portal.”

    More here: DT9 Portals To Heaven

  202. Craig says:

    About a year ago, I found and bought on eBay a 4 cassette series by Earl Paulk titled The Prophetic Word in YOU! [undated but from 2002/2003 as Paulk mentions he's 75 years old]. In this is a tape titled “The Word in the Flesh” which refers to YOU. Just like Johnson, Paulk taught essentially that we are like Jesus as the Word made flesh – meaning we are, like Jesus was, the “rhema” Word made flesh. Here are direct quotes:

    “I want to speak to you today not particularly about the Word BECAME flesh, though that’s true that it is, but I want to speak to you about the Word IN the flesh. The Word, capital ‘W’ – the Word IN the flesh.”

    “…The Word of God that proceeded out of the mouth of God to maintain the universe has now been delegated TO the flesh and IN the flesh. Is God yet speaking? Perhaps. How is He speaking? Now the Word of God that has power and force has been delegated to the flesh first demonstrated in Jesus Christ and now sustained and promoted through the Church…The Word of God that created and maintained the universe first demonstrated to us when the Word became flesh – John 1 – NOW is demonstrated and proceeds out of the mouth of the Church…”

    “…The intention and goal of God in this universe was to create and maintain a universal community…And this universal community is ruled by harmony, peace, and love.”

    “…Some things God created with a purpose; but there are some things God placed with a destiny, the DNA spiritual destiny that’s in the human being that God put there and it’s a destiny.”

    “…In the flesh alone lies the potential to restore the universe…”

    “…Jesus Christ in the flesh first demonstrated through His obedience through the power of His Word how to influence and overcome the world…Jesus Christ IN the flesh was the first to demonstrate total obedience. And through the power of His obedience and the power of His Word He showed us how to influence and overcome world systems.”

    “…The final victory will be accomplished through the Church in its flesh form…The final victory will be accomplished through the Church in its FLESH as it demonstrates the power of God through the power of the Word…The final victory will come through the Church, us, the Church, as it demonstrates God’s power through the power of the spoken Word…Yes God spoke and God said and now He designated and delegated that to Jesus Christ who spoke and can speak to the winds and to the trees; but, now He says I’ve brought that to YOU to impact the world by the WORD that is nigh unto you even in YOUR mouth… ”

    Compare this to the information presented in this current article and you’ll see how it correlates.

  203. Arwen4CJ says:

    Scripture twisting by John Paul Jackson who teaches on portals.

    http://forum.narrowistheway.ca/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1113&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

  204. Craig says:

    From the article Arwen4CJ referenced:

    We are entering an hour when God wants to give us a mighty outpouring of His Spirit and an unprecedented visitation of heavenly hosts on the Earth (Joel 2:28-29). This new wave of God’s Spirit will begin to flow with great power, bringing healing and life, much like Ezekiel’s vision of the river of life (Ezekiel 47).

    This sounds to me like Bailey and her demon’s intent on The Externalisation of the Hierarchy (of demons) onto the physical plane by “linking up the two planes, the physical and the astral, via the etheric.” [see footnote 161.] In other words, the goal of “soul-control”, or demonic possession.

  205. Arwen4CJ says:

    Yep, and that seems to be the intent with finding these portals — connect with angels of light and gain spiritual experiences.

  206. Craig says:

    John Paul Jackson was one of the three major ‘prophetic voices’ at Kansas City Fellowship (KCF) which eventually turned into IHOP. The other two were Bob Jones and Paul Cain. Jones and Cain are referred to as “spiritual fathers” by Mike Bickle. The following is a transcript of audio from 1989 recorded at KCF with Cain speaking:

    …I tell ya, I had a vision – I can’t get around John Paul without havin’ a vision – you know prophets when they get around each other they, if they don’t have anyone else to work on, they just work on each other. I mean they just say, “thus saith the Lord” and then they’ll turn around and say, “thus saith the Lord to YOU!” [audience laughter] and, then I’ll turn around and say, “thus saith the Lord to YOU buddy!” – and so on. Ya know it’s a really exciting thing. But every time I get around Bob he has a word from the Lord for me; and, I’m very humble – I don’t usually come back right away. But I go home and the Lord gives me some stuff that almost makes me explode, and I’m just BUSTIN’ to give you this. But John, I know this is irreverent…

    Cain is speaking of John Paul Jackson and Bob Jones. The “John” referred to here is John Wimber. This is part of the following article (in the “Paul Cain a True Prophet” section):

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2011/10/17/in-exonerating-paul-cain-is-the-%e2%80%98aberrant-practices%e2%80%99-document-invalidated/

    Oh, and Patricia King (formerly Patricia Cocking) claims to be a former witch now saved.

  207. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    FYI – Bill Johnson has a new book and Ch 1 can be downloaded…http://www.hostingthepresence.com – there are also 3 video snippets – but I haven’t had a chance to listen to them yet.

  208. Craig says:

    Thanks; yes, I saw that. I’ll skim it later this evening.

  209. Carolyn says:

    Mary, I just had time to look at the first chapter. This is what I caught my attention:

    In the “About the Book” It says, “Take a journey and meet many great prophets and kings from the Old Testament who were known as people of the Presence—people who, in Johnson’s words, “God wanted to be with.”

    “known as people of the Presence”??? More of the same…fiction to promote the “annointing”.

    And an excerpt from Chapter One: “In one moment we find ourselves rejoicing in the dance, arms raised with heads lifted high. In the next we are bowed low, not be- cause someone suggested it would be an appropriate response, but be- cause the fear of God has filled the room. In one moment our mouths are filled with laughter—we have truly discovered “in [His] presence is fullness of joy” (Ps. 16:11 NKJV). In the next we find ourselves weeping for no apparent reason. Such is the walk with God. Such is the life of the one who has given himself to host this One.”

    While Todd Bentley soaks in the atmosphere that is as thick as honey and Bill Johnson tries to explain “hosting” the Holy Spirit, they attempt to make what they are doing sound so normal, like what we should be doing every day, all day. In reality it is totally removed from normal living where we have to deal with trials, testing of our faith, character development and training in righteousness.

    The prophets and apostles were a few men, very few, who were chosen for a specific task. This was not a learning process of technique and soaking in an ethereal atmosphere (occult). They were not teaching others how to submerge themselves in the “annointing” in order to make it work for them. They were men who were called to bring the message that God gave them. And they suffered intense persecution and hardship because of it. They toiled in order to teach God’s people how to live godly lives in this present age.

    We are not to try to be like the prophets of old but we are to listen to their message. That’s how we will get to know who God is and what he wants. Not by trying to host the One.

  210. Tim Bain says:

    Well put Carolyn….”method” (annointing) has become the new “message” all the focus is now on “better methods” and so what if the message is changed “a little” as long as folks is excited ‘ bout church!

  211. Carolyn says:

    Mary, also, I had a listen to the video clips. In the third tape down…while I would agree with the fact that some people light up a room when they enter it and a positive attitude gives a positive vibe, it is not the same as what Bill Johnson is talking about. He’s talking about a “Presence” that we emit when we walk into a room, an aura of the “fragrance of Jesus”.

    2 Corinthians 2:15-17 (King James Version)
    15For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:
    16To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?
    17For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

    My question is how does a room full of atheists know which one you are unless you speak a doctrine of Christ? How do they know you are a “Presence” of Jesus by just an aura that you radiate? Couldn’t they be mistaken that you are just another pp (positive person)?

    I submit this is just one more doctrine of antichrist which takes the place of the true gospel of salvation in Christ. It is a doctrine of works whereby we practice the Presence, we keep our focus on an Open Heaven and we delight ourselves in supernatural experiences rather than the knowledge of God. Our joy is not found in form. Neither is it found in a Presence. Our joy is found in our Saviour.
    Philippians 3:9
    And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

    Bill Johnson can “Host his Presence”. I will find joy in the God of my salvation. Habakkuk 3:18

  212. Carolyn says:

    Tim – God holds us responsible for even one little change in the gospel message. He made it simple. He made it direct. And he told us specifically not to add to it or subtract from it.

  213. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    Yes, Carolyn – ‘people of His presence’…. even sounds wrong! (creepy, actually) He is so off-base about this presence impressing people when they enter a room – that puts the glory on them and not on God. He will not share His glory and He is no respector of persons. I’ve seen a couple of the Oprah new age ‘conversations’ lately, and those people are all impressed with their ‘presences’ also. In fact, if you changed a couple of the terms and phrases, you’d think you were in one of these church services. A lot of ‘church’ people would be totally shocked to find out just how much they are morphing into the new age…

  214. Craig says:

    In the Bill Johnson vernacular, the Holy Spirit “was already in Jesus life”, yet the Holy Spirit came upon Jesus just after baptism in the Jordan when the ‘Holy Spirit came as a dove and rested upon Him’. Johnson makes this ‘resting’ into a continual thing – Jesus was so “trustworthy with the presence of God” because of His “faithfulness” that the dove remained upon Him. Presumably, had Jesus not been so “trustworthy” the “dove” would have flown away. Johnson explains this (as quoted in part I) in Face to Face with God in the following after quoting John 1:32

    …Certainly this is not talking about the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit that was already in Jesus’s life. This was the inauguration of Jesus’s ministry, and the Holy Spirit came to rest upon Him [baptism in the Holy Spirit / “Christ anointing”] as a mantle of power and authority for that specific purpose. But the fact that the Holy Spirit came to rest on Him is evidence of Jesus’s faithfulness to be perfectly trustworthy with the presence of God. The same principle is true for us.

    The Holy Spirit lives in every believer, but He rests upon very few… [see footnote 26]

    There’s Johnson’s familiar refrain: “Jesus is our model”. We must emulate Him in having the “dove” rest upon each of us. From the new book Hosting the Presence: Unveiling Heaven’s Agenda:

    …The apostles learned from Jesus’ example that the greatest treasure was the Presence of the Holy Spirit resting upon Him. Learning to host the Presence of God is the biggest challenge of the Christian life. [from the link provided p 6 of pdf, p 26 of book]

    Yet, curiously it is only BY this “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” / “Christ anointing” / “hosting the Presence” that Jesus could “see” and “hear” the Father [again, as quoted in part I]:

    This anointing [“Christ anointing” / “baptism in the Holy Spirit”] is what enabled Jesus to do only what He saw the Father do, and to say only what He heard the Father say. It was the Holy Spirit that revealed the Father to Jesus. [at footnote 27]

    So then, how could Jesus know to be “about My Father’s business” as a 12 year old at the Temple given that this ‘dove’ would not “rest upon” Him until He was about 30 years old?

    We too can “see” and “hear” the Father as Jesus did with this same “anointing”:

    If the Son of God was that reliant upon the anointing, His behavior should clarify our need for the Holy Spirit’s presence upon us [“baptism in the Holy Spirit”] to do what the Father has assigned….This anointing [“Christ anointing”] is actually the person of the Holy Spirit upon someone to equip them for supernatural endeavors. [at footnote 29]

    The second baptism deals with…getting us filled with God so we can walk with Him and more effectively represent Him as His agents of power on the earth. [at footnote 30]

    Without “hosting the Presence” the Holy Spirit cannot perform any supernatural through an individual; the Holy Spirit indwelling is not enough – not enough for Jesus and not enough for anyone else.

    [ED: clarification] Not that I’m of the opinion that Jesus was indwelt with the Holy Spirit as Jesus was “the Word made flesh”. That is, Jesus was the 2nd Person of the Trinity who took upon Himself a human nature/body; and, in so doing, He had become God in the flesh. The Holy Spirit descending “as a dove” was the sign to John the Baptist that He was indeed the Christ, the Messiah [John 1:32-34]. This “dove” did not continue to ‘rest’ upon Jesus.

  215. Loyalbooks says:

    Carolyn said “They were men who were called to bring the message that God gave them. And they suffered intense persecution and hardship because of it. They toiled in order to teach God’s people how to live godly lives in this present age”

    Well said. When I was in these circles it was implied that we should be going around giggling and glazed over everyday- and some people did have that glazed over look much of the time.

    The contrast with the lives of the apostles is evident. Are these people in these churches being taught anything that would get them through real persecution? Would this ‘presence’ sustain them in prison? Through beatings? In isolation? Or would the ‘presence’ they ‘host’ disappear in a puff of smoke?

  216. Bud Press says:

    Hi Loyalbooks, you asked some interesting questions about the “presence”. The answer is simple: the “presence” is what the Apostle Paul warned about in 2 Corinthians chapter 11, and it will continue to betray them.

    Bud Press, Research Consultant,
    Christian Research Service

  217. Tim Bain says:

    guy’s (and Gal’s)……just in case any of you might be starting to think this discussion is getting a little to far ” out there”…all this talk of portals, DNA, Quantum Physics, astral travel etc. etc….allow me to point you to one of the other Blogs listed right here on Crosswise…”.Herescope” has been running right down the exact same track this month, pursuing others (like chuck Missler) who have bought into New Age Lies like Quantum Spirituality and Mysticism,bi-location,astrol travel etc. I think you’ll find that some of the dots start to connect when you compare what we’ve been disscussing with the last two or three posts on Herescope. personally, I’m amazed at how many “ministries” mysterious connections make perfect sense now (ie; Johnson and Crowder) ….anyway it”ll make sense (if one can call it that) after you wade thru a bit of the Quantum soup….either that or I’m loosing my mind?!?!??

  218. Craig says:

    Tim,

    I have to admit that I get a bit bleary-eyed on any discussion that uses the words quantum physics as I have absolutely no knowledge of even basic physics. I’ve only skimmed some of the recent Herescopes because of that. However, from what little I have gleaned it looks like some folks are really “out there” in correlating quantum physics with spirituality, DNA, etc as you point out. But, the hyper-charismatic and emergent camps all do seem to be gooing down the same track. And mysticism, going back to Plato, seems to be the common denominator.

  219. Tim Bain says:

    Craig;
    The key component that ” Quantum” physics seems to add to the Mystical ,Spiritual mix seems to me to be the “multi-dimensional” aspect. By offering a “logical” or “scientific” sounding reason for folks to embrace what sounds like the Biblical concept ( our being a spirit,not just flesh) but then completely redefining the spiritual realm based on their new found superior insight which stems from a combination of Quantum Physics and special Revealation (angels,dreams,visions etc.). “Quantum” seems to be the” pass” to any number of new ideas reguarding the”spirit realm” which may well be a key part of the platform from which the new spiritual “unity” grows. Chuck Missler sounds like Rick Warren when he talks about taking “risks” in an effort to explore this new found arena, it’s the old “dialoge…conversation…common ground ” approach Rick Warren uses to “unify” his crowd. I can’t help but think that BJ likes the Quantum theories because it helps him justify( in his own mind at least) his pet doctrines, it certainly fits with his confusion about Jesus being eternally God( in one dimension) and just a man (in another dimension)…ie Quantum realities or dimensions existing simotaniously yet distint.

  220. Craig says:

    Obfuscation sure seems to be the objective. Hey, but, if it sounds ‘good’, some will believe it. Whatever “it” is.

    I do see what your point, now.

  221. Carolyn says:

    Mary, you said: “A lot of ‘church’ people would be totally shocked to find out just how much they are morphing into the new age…”

    I have been interested by some of the words that I have found being used by Bill Johnson and other of his fellow prophets; words like blueprint, frequencies, vibrations, quantum, dimensions, consciousness and even expansion…not in the Bible, by the way. Yes the NAR prophets meld it into some kind of Christian directive but what they are teaching is still making you go beyond the teachings of the Word in context. In this article, Bill Johnson uses the word Expansion. From Occupation to Expansion Where in the New Testament does Christ tell us we need to Expand to Occupy? BJ should have named this teaching, “Preoccupied with Getting into Supernatural Dimensions and Expanding into Unknown Territories across the Veil”, for that is what I hear him saying, going beyond the realm in which we have been placed by God. Then he states emphatically, that if we don’t make this Expansion our “passion”, then we are not pleasing God. What a perversion of the Gospel!!!

    Mary, here’s the first chapter of an online New Age book that talks about all these things and if you were to skim through it, you might think you’re reading a prophetic “Christian” manual since it has been generously sprinkled with quotes from the Bible. Mind you, the quotes are as far from the original Biblical context as you can get, but so are the quotes you find in NAR articles: The Expansion

    The author of this online New Age book, in her Acknowledgements, thanks the “Angels that have come into her life and who have and are lovingly guiding it”. Are these the same angels that are guiding the NAR prophets? Since they are using the same terminology and building up to the same theories, I have a hunch….

    Eph 5:
    8 For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light 9 (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) 10 and find out what pleases the Lord. 11 Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

  222. Carolyn says:

    Tim/Craig: I read the Quantum Mysticism series on Herescope. I did not know that Tom Horn was allied with Chuck Misler. I also was not aware of Gary Stearman’s quantum direction in Time Travellers. I have heard him talk about the book but the quantum theories weren’t mentioned. I am saddened. This is a departure from the simple gospel into science falsely so called. In the NA book I referenced yesterday (above), there is no mistaking where the “obfuscating” doctrines are coming from…demons posing as angels and spirit guides channelling messages of gnosticism. And the lie that we are God/gods, is always the end point.

    I thought I was past being surprised but in this case, I was caught off guard. And I suppose there is that same old filtering process that we all do so well, hearing things the way we want to and not the way they actually are.

    Having the terms clearly defined by New Agers, there can be no doubt that the path of quantum mysticism will lead to the same end, that we are all part of God. He is not a separate Creator. It’s a risky road to travel, no doubt about it, one that I’m not prepared to set foot on. I think we can read this New Age material with a detachment so that we can be aware and help others see it for the deception it is, but when we embrace the teachings as some of these men have done, it will be to their destruction.

  223. Tim Bain says:

    Carolyn…”Quantum Mysticism” really sums it up it a nut shell…something for the spiritually minded-(mysticism)…and something for those that dont feel comfortable with anything they percieve as non- scientific ( Quantum ). Now “everybody” can be like God as they see fit, now that one can travel at will to other parrallel dimensions just for recreation and have access to “new” knowledge and understanding superior to that old outdated “Bible stuff”….sounds familiar…”you shall be AS Gods KNOWING”….
    perhaps this is how two seemingly total opposites will find “common ground” and harmony.

  224. Loyalbooks says:

    @Bud. Indeed that is a frightful possibility, and I’m inclined to agree with you.

    My hope is that some of the folks immersed in all the “holy-spirit-is-giddy-with-laughter/ god-is-in-a-good-mood/ jesus-is-my-boyfriend-” churches will see the stark contrast to this lifestyle and the lives of the early apostles.

    The meeting induced, music induced, trance induced ‘presence’ of charismania bears no resemblance to the Spirit evident in the apostles’ lives as they were hunted down, chased out of town, stoned, beaten, whipped, thrown into prison, exiled, starved and killed.

  225. Carolyn says:

    Loyalbooks…what opened your eyes to the deception? Was it a gradual or sudden exit? There is so much false teaching, it’s hard to know where to begin, isn’t it?

    Tim: The Latter Rain seems to be merging with end time eschatology in the realm of “Strategic Level Warfare” and now “Techno-Dimensional Spiritual Warfare” imagining that we can take over the spiritual dominions for Christ. This is their reasoning behind why we have to know this stuff….gotta fight the bad guys we can’t see in dimensions we don’t know by weapons we don’t have. It’s all a demonic illusion, playing with fire. In this case, knowledge is not power…it is dangerous.

    Jude 10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.

    Even Christ did not rail against Satan…he said, “it is written”. We stand in the Word, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, not our own clever, extra biblical techniques.

  226. Martin says:

    To be honest Carolyn, most of us are deluded not just the heretics.

  227. Craig says:

    Martin,

    If I’m understanding you correctly, I don’t disagree. None of us have perfect revelation of Scripture which accounts for the numerous Protestant Denominations.

    12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. [1 Cor 13:12, NASB]

    We will ‘know fully’ on the other side of Glory.

  228. Carolyn says:

    Martin…yes, we probably all have been deluded to a degree at some point in our Christian walk. As a Christian, the question is: do we have an honest heart wanting Truth. If we ask for Truth, God will give it. If we resist His correction, we become self deluded.
    John 17:17 Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth.

  229. Arwen4CJ says:

    You’re right that we’ve all probably accepted non-biblical ideas and concepts, and that Christians have throughout time.

    However, if we cling to what we do know — that Jesus died on the cross for our sins, that He was raised bodily from the dead, and that He will return some day for us — then that is the most important thing, and what we should focus our lives on.

    If we always go back to the gospel — the real gospel — then I think we can avoid some of the errors. I’ve noticed that error seems to be coupled with valuing Scripture and the gospel less. If something becomes more important than salvation, then I think it is cause to examine ourselves and our doctrine.

  230. Martin says:

    There is no-one righteous, not even one. No one can boast before the living God. What we are is plain to God.
    Our righteousness is not from works, but from Faith alone. Faith in Jesus, the lamb of God.
    So often i do detect(in my own life too) self righteousness and a belief that somehow i am better than other so called Christians, who perhaps have been decieved or just don’t understand the error of what they are thinking. I don’t think this is at all correct at all,and i need to repent of this.
    I believe that in the same way that Jesus has shown incredible Patience with us, not wanting us to perish, we too should have that same attitude against other people. People are loved by God, decieved or not.

  231. Craig says:

    Martin,

    I agree with your statement and all of us should be vigilant about our own pride in how we may view ourselves as better than others – Christian or not. I find myself guilty at times.

    I’m not sure if you are directing your comments primarily or mostly towards Carolyn; however, if so, you may not realize that she was formerly in the ‘deception’. I myself was worse: I lived most of my life outside the Church as a non-Christian. I just didn’t ‘get’ it. But, by His grace, I’m saved. Hallelujah!

  232. Loyalbooks says:

    @Martin, agreed we must all be circumspect, humble, and willing to be corrected. No human being can completely, perfectly understand the ways of God.

    Saying that, I would say NOT really embracing that concept is a lot of what took me down a road of deception. The teaching I was listening to – a mixture of what people call Word of Faith and the Prophetic Movement – hinted at the possibility that we COULD understand it all if we just got all the rules right, if we just pulled down the right strongholds, if we just got the right word, if we just had enough time in ‘the anointing’….

    I think being content with how and how-much God has chosen to reveal Himself was something that escaped me. And I think scripture is clear, that even though we see in a mirror dimly, we must have a deep and constant love of the truth, or we can quickly begin to embrace things that lead us astray. There is a sloppy way of handling the Word of Truth that leads one astray (2 Tim2).

    I used to wrestle with the “is so and so who used to say all those crazy things saved?” question. Now, I leave that to God. I don’t have to have that figured out. It isn’t the question I should be asking.

    @Carolyn – you asked what opened my eyes. First, I must say the Holy Spirit provided many nudges, checks, moments of questioning, and warnings that I ignored. My own pride and desire for super-spiritual status is to blame for that. Thankfully, there were a few very simple instances in a row that I just could not ignore.

    #1 In the midst of all the prophetic words, songs, actions, destiny-speak, take the city for Jesus shouting, etc. I looked across the meeting room as some of our ‘prayer warriors’ were anointing soon to be filled chairs with oil (we thought that doing that would help people who sat in those chairs have ‘ears to hear’), I had this thought: “Why didn’t any of the apostles tell any of the people they wrote to in the scriptures about anointing chairs (or equivalent)? If it is effective, or how things in the Kingdom work, why didn’t they ever write about it?”

    You can imagine the domino effect that had if you are familiar with these kinds of teachings.

    #2 A crying, dejected friend was pouring her heart out to me about a struggle she had fought for years. She had been to all the spiritual counseling sessions and retreats, envisioned Jesus healing her, broken every generational curse she could think of- why was she still struggling?!?

    My mind quickly went through all the answers I had been taught, and I came up with a big, fat, zero. They sounded ridiculous and arrogant, and she was truly hurting. “I don’t know,” I said to her feebly. Something started in my head that day. All the questions I had ignored began to come up again.

    I would say that was the beginning of my leaving, if only in my own heart at that point, but I began to see how so much of what I had thought was ‘Kingdom’, had no basis in the Word. To say it is like having your eyes opened is very apt. Some have likened it to coming out of a stupor, or out of a dream, and I can relate to that also.

    Years earlier, when I received the gospel of Jesus it was truly like a light came on. I UNDERSTOOD I was a sinner. I UNDERSTOOD Jesus is the Savior. I UNDERSTOOD only the pure and divine Son of God could pay the price for my sin.

    Coming out of the false teaching was similar, but more gradual, like a light dawning on my mind, and then my heart was broken to understand how far I had wondered from my Lord’s true gospel.

    A long answer, I know. Thanks for bearing with me.

  233. Carolyn says:

    Loyalbooks…thanks for sharing your experience…your answer is not long at all, considering everything you had to leave out. It’s a good answer. So many things we can all relate with. Anointing the chairs. Ha. These are all things that pertain more to witchcraft than Christianity. Rituals being performed to make certain things happen, incantations being uttered correctly in order to bring the desired results. Using charms, icons, forming prayer circles, and carrying out the latest spiritual warfare techniques. And last, but not least, babbling as the heathen do.
    Contrast these “techniques” with Christ’s directions to his disciples:
    Matthew 6:6-8 (King James Version)
    6But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
    7But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
    8Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.

    Big difference!

  234. Craig says:

    I’ve been taking a bit of a break; but, I need to finish up this series. There will be one more part, a conclusion.

    As part of my ‘break’ I’ve been reading up on the ‘functionalist’ kenosis doctrine and how it compares to Chalcedon and Scripture. That will be the subject of a future post.

  235. Steve says:

    Hey Craig, have you seen this?

    Lupus Occultus:
    The Paganised Christianity of C. S. Lewis
    by Jeremy James

    Although former occultist James has focused his article on exposing the deception of C.S. Lewis, it struck me how the same masonic/occultist/new age anti-christian brand of “mere christianity” also describes the Bill Johnson/Bethel “phenomenon” as well as the general apostasy spreading throughout so much of what passes for, “the church”.

    You may remember that I wrote a critique of Lewis’ theology on my blog page (way back when), and, I might add, got nothing but grief from some pastor friends. The fact is, Lewis preached the exact same lies as Johnson. There’s really nothing new under the sun. Here’s a couple quotes from page 12 of James’ 23 page write up. (The page numbers in parenthesis reference Lewis’ work.)

    “Lewis sees this process of transmutation leading all the way to what the New Agers call god-realization, where Christ turns man himself into a god by “killing the old natural self in you and replacing it with the kind of self He has. At first, only for moments. Then for longer periods. Finally, if all goes well, turning you permanently into a different sort of thing; into a new little Christ, a being which, in its own small way, has the same kind of life as God; which shares in His power, joy, knowledge and eternity.’” (p.191-192)

    “Lest there be any doubt that he [Lewis] does actually mean we are turning into little gods and goddesses, he says: “’He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or goddess, a dazzling, radiant, immortal creature, pulsating all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects back to God perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and delight and goodness.’” (p.206)

    Steve (omots)

  236. Tim Bain says:

    Craig
    I agree with Bob Dewaay (Critical Issues Comentary/ issue # 63/ antichrists and the Antichrist) on the “functionalist ” position ….if the miracles Jesus preformed were really done by the Holy Spirit thus NOT confirming His (Jesus) Deity and uniqueness then we all can claim Divinity via “yieldedness ” to the anointing. I can’t help but think Bill Johnson got his “Christ anointing” from Kenneth Hagin,.. they sound identical to me and as such I think its clearly FALSE! …no “if ” “ands” or “buts” about it….in my humble opinion.

  237. Craig says:

    Steve,

    I’ve not seen this; and, I confess I’ve not read a single work by C.S. Lewis. However, I do have a copy of Athanasius’ On the Incarnation (De Incarnatione) with an introduction by Lewis. Athanasius’ work is squarely orthodox and Lewis praises it. Of course, that does not necessarily mean much.

    I’ll have to read over James’ article a bit later; but, on the surface, I’d say the first quote sure raises my eyebrows. The second one less so as it depends on the full context: If Lewis speaking of in eternity, it’s OK; however, if he’s speaking of Christians pre-resurrection bodies, then we have a problem.

  238. Craig says:

    Tim Bain,

    I’ve not read that particular DeWaay article; but, I’d agree that’s the logical implication (we become “Christs”) with John 10:37-38 in mind – something I was and am going to put in the forthcoming article.

  239. Tim Bain says:

    Craig
    here’s a quote from the Dewaay article I mentioned….see if this sounds familiar ( if not nearly verbatum) its Kenyon speaking….
    “Jesus in His earth walk, as the Incarnate Son of God, beginning with His baptism, lived exactly as every child of God should live today. God wasn’t anymore His Father then He is ours… He was the Son of God. You are a son of God. He was Deity. You are a partaker of the Divine Nature, that is Deity. …The difference is that Jesus gave the Holy Spirit right of way in a sense of which we have never learned. (E.W. Kenyon/In His Presence/page 22)
    Hagin regurgitates the same stuff in his book “Understanding the Anointing”

  240. Craig says:

    Johnson is much too careful to be this explicit. He likes to dance around it.

  241. Craig says:

    The top of page 9 in the James article:

    The ‘good infection’

    How does Lewis get away with this? Simple – he turns Christ into the match that sets you on fire: “He [Christ] came into this world and became a man in order to spread to other men the kind of life He has – by what I call ‘good infection’. Every Christian is to become a little Christ.” (p.177)

    And, THAT’S in Mere Christianity?! Yikes!

  242. timh says:

    @Craig

    I must ask this because it has come into my mind at times. Please know I am not in disagreement with any of the articles or statements made here by those who have posted. so….

    Is it possible that some of these statements such as “…Every Christian is to become a little Christ. is based on the thought that we are “being changed from glory to glory…” and that in the end we are tobecome more like Christ (Gods finished work in us when it is completed)?

    Obviously, the context in which these statements are made by the authors leads us to believe they are not thinking this way, but maybe that is where it started and then got twisted….

  243. Arwen4CJ says:

    Steve,

    I own a lot of C.S. Lewis’ works, but I haven’t had a chance to read them yet. All I’ve read is the Chronicles of Narnia. Unfortunately, my page numbers do not correspond to the page numbers that you use. Could you tell me the name of the chapter those quotes are taken from? Then I can read them in context. Thanks.

  244. Craig says:

    timh,

    From the context provided in the article Steve provided, it doesn’t appear that way. But, without having any C.S. Lewis myself, I don’t know the full contexts within Lewis’ works.

  245. Steve says:

    Sorry, I no longer have a copy of any of Lewis’ books.

    Berit Kjos posted an interesting article written by Jeremy James called, “Freemasonry and the British Monarchy- Why the Queen of England Pretends to be a Christian”. Is well worth a read. That led me to the James article on Lewis. Berit has a lot of excellent material chronicling the “evolving views” of C.S. Lewis. There are many fine articles archived on her website including:

    http://www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/lewis-chronology.htm

    http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/006/narnia-trouble.htm

    http://www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/lewis/hideous-strength.htm

    http://www.crossroad.to/News/narnia.htm

    There’s a strong argument to be made that Lewis’ brand of “Christian theosophy” was/is the foundation for the likes of the Emerging Church, the Brian McLarens, Rick Warrens, and yes, the Bill Johnsons. Makes perfect sense to me.

    The James article I linked to earlier contains a graph comparing the differences between Lewis’ core beliefs (as extrapolated from his writings) and basic biblical doctrine. There is really nothing new under the sun. All these “Christian theosophists”, start off with some inkling (pun intended) of gospel truth, then proceed to lead the listener/reader/follower step by step away from our redeemer, Jesus, down into that dark rabbit hole of “self realization”, “self actualization”, “self spiritualization” or “self as christ”.
    .
    Lewis was a brilliant theologian, at times able to explain and even defend biblical doctrines, and at other times masterfully debasing those same doctrines. Here’s an apt quote from one of the above linked articles on Berit’s website:

    “In other words, Lewis has a remarkable ability to bring Christian readers into new worlds and make them feel at home in the midst of pagan rituals, occult mysteries and magical forces. In so doing, he presents unbiblical versions of the most important gifts God has given us: His unchanging truth, His uncompromising righteousness, His peace in the midst of turmoil, His unwavering faith, and His eternal gift of salvation.”

    Sound familiar?

  246. Arwen4CJ says:

    That’s why I want to check the full context, and why I want to find the quotes. I have Mere Christianity. I haven’t read it, like I said. I want to check it with the version that I have. However, the one that I have is a 7 works in one book, and so the page numbers are different.

    I suppose I could read it right now and see what all is going on.

    Here is what I have in the index for the Mere Christianity part of the book:
    Preface

    Book 1. Right and Wrong as a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe
    1. The Law of Human Nature
    2. Some Objections
    3. The Reality of the Law
    4. What Lies Behind the Law
    5. We Have Cause to be Uneasy

    Book 2. What Christians Believe
    1. The Rival Conceptions of God
    2. The Invasion
    3. The Shocking Alternative
    4. The Perfect Penitent
    5. The Practical Conclusion

    Book 3. Christian Behavior
    1. The Three Parts of Morality
    2. The ‘Cardinal Virtues’
    3. Social Morality
    4. Morality and Psychoanalysis
    5. Sexual Morality
    6. Christian Marriage
    7. Forgiveness
    8. The Great Sin
    9. Charity
    10. Hope
    11. Faith
    12. Faith

    Book 4. Beyond Personality: Or First Steps in the Doctrine of the Trinity
    1. Making and Begetting
    2. The Three-Personal God
    3. Time and Beyond Time
    4. Good Infection
    5. The Obstinate Toy Soldiers
    6. Two Notes
    7. Let’s Pretend
    8. Is Christianity Hard or Easy?
    9. Counting the Cost
    10. Nice People or New Men
    11. The New Men

    It sounds like the one quote came from Book 4 part 4. I’ll see if I can find that quote, and when I do, I’ll try to provide the full context.

  247. Arwen4CJ says:

    Okay — I did find one of the quotes so far. I’m reading through the Good Infection part right now.

    Here is what Steve wrote above:
    How does Lewis get away with this? Simple – he turns Christ into the match that sets you on fire: “He [Christ] came into this world and became a man in order to spread to other men the kind of life He has – by what I call ‘good infection’. Every Christian is to become a little Christ.” (p.177)

    Okay, I read all of the Good Infection part. This is part of Lewis’ discussion of the Trinity. Earlier in this Good Infection part, he attempts to make a case for how the three Persons in the Trinity can be co-eternal. However, he focuses in on the love that God has as being evidence for God being more than one Person. Make of this what you will — here is the greater context of the quote….

    Let me quote him here:
    “So that after all, the New Testament picture of a Father and a Son turns out to be much more accurate than anything we try to substitute for it. That is what always happens when you go away from the words of the Bible. It is quite right to go away from them for a moment in order to make some special point clear. But you must always go back. Naturally God knows how to describe Himself much better than we know how to describe Him. He knows that Father and Son is more like the relation between the First and Second Persons than anything else we can think of. Much the most important thing to know is that it is a relation of love. The Father delights in His Son; the Son looks to the Father.

    Before going on, notice the practical importance of this. All sorts of people are found of repeating the Christian statement that ‘God is love.’ But they seem not to notice that the words ‘God is love’ have no real meaning unless God contains at least two Persons. Love is something that one person has for another person. If God was a single person, then before the world was made, He was not love. Of course, what these people mean when they say that God is love is often something quite different: they really mean ‘Love is God’. They really mean that our feelings of love, however and wherever they arise, and whatever the results they produce, are to be treated with great respect. Perhaps they are: but there is something quite different from what Christians mean by the statement ‘God is love.’ They believe that the living, dynamic activity of love has been going on in God forever and has created everything else.”

    I think these paragraphs are really important to see how Lewis is constructing his argument, and also to see the context in which the article that was quoted from relates to the rest of this Good Infection section.

    So — Lewis goes on, talking about the relationship of the three Persons in the Trinity — and he talks about their love as being a relational love.

    Finally, says this:
    “Perhaps some people might find it easier to begin with the third Person and work backwards. God is love, and that love works through men–especially through the whole community of Christians. But the spirit of love is, from all eternity, a love going on between the Father and the Son.

    And now, what does it all matter? It matters more than anything else in the world. The whole dance, or drama, or pattern of this three-Personal life is to be played out in each one of us: or (putting it the other way round) each one of us has got to enter that pattern, take his place in that dance. There is no other way to the happiness for which we were made. Good things as well as bad, you know, are caught by a kind of infection. If you want to get warm you must stand near the fire: if you want to be wet you must get into the water. If you want joy, power, peace, eternal life, you must get close to, or even into, the thing that has them. They are not a sort of prize which God could, if He chose, just hand out to anyone. They are a great fountain of energy and beauty spurting up at the very centre of reality. If you are close to it, the spray will wet you; if you are not, you will remain dry. Once a man is united to God, how could he not live forever? Once a man is separated from God, what can he do but wither and die?

    But how is he to be united to God? How is it possible for us to be taken into the three-Personal life?

    You remember what I said in Chapter 1 about begetting and making. We are not begotten by God, we are only made by Him: in our natural state we are not sons of God, only (so as to speak) statues. We have not got Zoe or spiritual life: only Bios or biological life which is presently going to run down and die. Now the whole offer which Christianity makes is this: that we can, if we let God have His way, come to share in the life of Christ. If we do, we shall then be sharing a life which was begotten, not made, which always has existed and always will exist. Christ is the Son of God. If we share in this kind of life we also shall be sons of God. We shall love the Father as He does and the Holy Ghost will arise in us. He came to this world and became a man in order to spread to other men the kind of life He has — by what I call ‘good infection.’ Every Christian is to become a little Christ. The whole purpose of becoming a Christian is simply nothing else.”

  248. Arwen4CJ says:

    Okay — I found this quote as well:

    “Lewis sees this process of transmutation leading all the way to what the New Agers call god-realization, where Christ turns man himself into a god by “killing the old natural self in you and replacing it with the kind of self He has. At first, only for moments. Then for longer periods. Finally, if all goes well, turning you permanently into a different sort of thing; into a new little Christ, a being which, in its own small way, has the same kind of life as God; which shares in His power, joy, knowledge and eternity.’” (p.191-192)

    It’s also located in Book (Beyond Personality: Or First Steps in the Doctrine of the Trinity)
    However, it’s in part 7, the Let’s Pretend section.

    I’m going to do what I did with the first quote. I’m going to read all of this Let’s Pretend section, and then provide a fuller context of the above quote so that we can better understand what Lewis is saying. Then we can evaluate whether or not this is accurate assessment of his quote.

    He starts out this section by talking about humans pretending to be sons of God. We know that we are not — we are human beings and we constantly sin. Lewis uses illustrations and talks a bit about this. Then he says the following:

    “Men are mirrors, or ‘carriers’ of Christs to other men. Sometimes unconscious carriers. This ‘good infection’ can be carried by those who have not got it themselves. People who were not Christians themselves helped me to Christianity. But usually it is those who know Him that bring Him to others. That is why the Church, the whole body of Christians showing Him to one another, is so important. You might say that when two Christians are following Christ together there is not twice as much Christianity as when they are apart, but sixteen times as much.

    But do not forget this. At first it is natural for a baby to take its mother’s milk without knowing its mother. It is equally natural for us to see the man who helps us without seeing Christ behind him. But we must not remain babies. We must go on to recongise the real Giver. It is madness not to. Because, if we do not, we shall be relying on human beings. And that is going to let us down. The best of them will make mistakes; all of them will die. We must be thankful to all the people who have helped us, we must honour them and love them. But never, never pin your whole faith on any human being: not if he is the best and wisest in the whole world. There are lots of nice things you can do with sand: but do not try building a house on it.

    And now we begin to see what it is that the New Testament is always talking about. It talks about Christians ‘being born again'; it talks about them ‘putting on Christ'; about Christ ‘being formed in us'; about our coming to ‘have the mind of Christ’.

    Put right out of your head the idea that these are only fancy ways of saying that Christians are to read what Christ said and try to carry it out — as a man may read what Plato or Marx said and try to carry it out. They mean something much more than that. The mean that a real Person, Christ, here and now, in that very room where you are saying your prayers, is doing things to you. It is not a question of a good man who died two thousand years ago. It is a living Man, still as much a man as you, and still as much God as He was when He created the world, really coming and interfering with your very self; killing the old natural self in you and replacing it with the kind of self He has. At first, only for moments. Then for longer periods. Finally, if all goes well, turning you permanently into a different sort of thing; into a new little Christ, a being which, in its own small way, has the same kind of life as God; which shares in His power, joy, knowledge and eternity. And soon we make two other discoveries.

    (1) We begin to notice, besides our particular sinful acts, our selfishness; begin to be alarmed not only about what we do, but about what we are. This may sound rather difficult, so I will try to make it clear from my own case. When I come to my evening prayers and try to reckon up the sins of the day, nine times out of ten the most obvious one is some sin against charity; I have sulked or snapped or sneered or snubbed or stormed. And the excuse that immediately springs to my mind is that the provocation was so sudden and unexpected; I was caught off my guard, I had not time to collect myself. Now that may be an extenuating circumstance as regards those particular acts; they would obviously be worse if they had been deliberate and premeditated. On the other hand, surely what a man does when he is taken off his guard is the best evidence for what sort of a man he is? Surely what pops out before the man has time to put on a disguise is the truth? If there are rats in a cellar you are most likely to see them if you go in very suddenly. But the suddenness does not create the rats: it only prevents them from hiding. In the same way the suddenness of the provocation does not make me an ill-tempered man I am; it only shows me what an ill-tempered man I am. The rats are always in the cellar, but if you go in shouting and noisily they will have taken cover before you switch on the light. Apparently the rats of resentment and vindictiveness are always there in the cellar of our soul. Now that cellar is out of reach of my conscious will. I can to some extent control my acts. I have no direct control over my temperament. And if (as I said before) what we are matters even more than what we do — if, indeed, what we do matters chiefly as evidence of what we are — then it follows that the change which I most need to undergo is a change that my own direct, voluntary efforts cannot bring about. And this applies to my good actions too. How many of them were done for the right motive? How many for fear of public opinion, or a desire to show off? How many from a sort of obstinacy or a sense of superiority which, in different circumstances, might equally have led to some very bad act? But I cannot, by direct moral effort, give myself new motives. After the first few steps in the Christian life we realise that everything which really needs to be done in our souls can be done only by God. And that brings us to something which has been very misleading in my language up to now.

    (2) I have been talking as if it were we who did everything. In reality, of course, it is God who does everything. We, at most, allow it to be done to us. In a sense you might even say it is God who does the pretending. The Three-Personal God, so to speak, sees before Him in fact a self-centered, greedy, grumbling, rebellious human animal. But He says, ‘Let us pretend that this is not a mere creature, but our Son. It is like Christ in so far as it is a Man, for He became Man. Let us pretend that it is also like Him in Spirit. Let us treat it as if it were what in fact it is not. Let us pretend in order to make the pretence into a reality.’ God looks at you as if you were a little Christ: Christ stands beside you to turn you into one. I daresay this idea of divine make-believe sounds rather strange at first. But, is it so strange really? Is it not that how the higher thing always raises the lower? A mother teaches her baby to talk by talking to it as if it understood long before it really does. We treat our dogs as if they were ‘almost human': that is why they really become ‘almost human’ in the end.”

  249. Craig says:

    OK, the way I see it, Lewis is espousing Social Trinitarianism. And, we can ‘share’ in that love by ‘uniting with the divine’. As a whole this passage could be read as panentheistic, Neoplatonic (preexisting souls separate from the body), basically New Age Theosophy – but with a ‘Christian’ veneer.

    As I recall, this is not too dissimilar from Cynthia Bourgeault’s The Wisdom Jesus: Transforming Heart and Mind – a New Perspective on Christ and His Message as she herself espouses a social Trinity (describing Their interrelationship as a ‘dance’ in her definition of perichoresis) as well as a kenotic Christ who provides the example we follow to our own ‘oneness’ with ‘god’.

    I’d have to read more of Lewis before I’d come to any sort of conclusion, however, in all fairness. I’ve not viewed the Berit Kjos’ articles Steve referenced; but, I have confidence in Kjos as I’ve referenced her work on here and the website in on my blog roll.

    [This comment is in response to the 9:16am comment.]

  250. Arwen4CJ says:

    And, lastly….I found this quote:
    “Lest there be any doubt that he [Lewis] does actually mean we are turning into little gods and goddesses, he says: “’He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or goddess, a dazzling, radiant, immortal creature, pulsating all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects back to God perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and delight and goodness.’” (p.206)

    It’s also located in Book 4 (Beyond Personality: Or First Steps in the Doctrine of the Trinity)
    It is found in Part 9 which is entitled Counting the Cost.

    In this section he starts out by talking about perfection — about us being made perfect in Him.

    Then he says this:
    “I think that many of us, when Christ has enabled us to overcome one or two sins that were an obvious nuisance, are inclined to feel (though we do not put it into words) that we are now good enough. He has done all we wanted Him to do, and we should be obliged if He would now leave us alone. As we say ‘I never expected to be a saint, I only wanted to be a decent ordinary chap.’ And we imagine when we say this that we are being humble.

    But this is the fatal mistake. Of course we never wanted, and never asked, to be made into the sort of creatures He is going to make us into. But the question is not what we intended ourselves to be, but what He intended us to be when He made us. He is the inventor, we are only the machine. He is the painter, we are only the picture. How should we know what He means us to be like? You see, He has already made us into something very different from what we were. Long ago, before we were born, when we were inside our mothers’ bodies, we passed through various stages. We were once rather like vegetables, and once rather like fish: it was only at a later stage that we became like human babies. And if we had been conscious at those earlier stages, I daresay we should have been quite contented to stay as vegetables or fish — should not have wanted to be made into babies. But all the time He knew His plan for us and was determined to carry it out. Something the same is now happening at a higher level. We may be content to remain what we call ‘ordinary people': but He is determined to carry out a quite different plan. To shrink back from that plan is not humility: it is laziness and cowardice. To submit to it is not conceit or megalomania; it is obedience.

    Here is another way of putting the two sides of the truth. On the one hand we must never imagine that our own unaided efforts can be relied on to carry us even through the next twenty-four hours as ‘decent’ people. If He does not support us, not one of us is safe from some gross sin. On the other hand, no possible degree of holiness or heroism which has ever been recorded of the greatest saints is beyond what He is determined to produce in every one of us in the end. The job will not be completed in this life; but He means to get us as far as possible before death.

    That is why we must not be surprised if we are in for a rough time. When a man turns to Christ and seems to be getting on pretty well (in the sense that some of his bad habits are now corrected) he often feel that it would now be natural if things went fairly smoothly. When troubles come along — illnesses, money troubles, new kinds of temptation — he is disappointed. These things, he feels, might have been necessary to rouse him and make him repent in his bad old days, but why now? Because God is forcing him on, or up, to a higher level: putting him into situations where he will have to be very much braver, or more patient, or more loving, than he ever dreamed of being before. It seems to us all unnecessary: but that is because we have not yet had the slightest notion of the tremendous thing He means to make of us.

    I find I must borrow yet another parable from George MacDonald. Imagine yourself as a living house. God comes in to rebuild that house. At first, perhaps, you can understand what He is doing. He is getting the drains right and stopping the leaks in the roof and so on: you knew that those jobs needed doing and so you are not surprised. But presently he starts knocking the house about in a way that hurts abominably and does not seem to make sense. What on earth is He up to? The explanation is that He is building quite a different house form the one you thought of — throwing out a new wing here, putting on an extra floor there, running up towers, making courtyards. You thought you were going to be made into a decent little cottage: but He is building a palace. He intends to come and live in it Himself.

    The command to Be ye perfect is not idealistic gas. Nor is it a command to do the impossible. He is going to make us into creatures that can obey that command. He said (in the Bible) that we were ‘gods’ and that He is going to make good His words. If we let Him — for we can prevent Him, if we choose — He will make the feeblest and filthiest of us into a god or goddess, a dazzling, radiant, immortal creature, pulsating all through with such energy and joy and wisdom and love as we cannot now imagine, a bright stainless mirror which reflects back to God perfectly (though, of course, on a smaller scale) His own boundless power and delight and goodness. The process will be long and in parts very painful, but that is what we are in for. Nothing less. He meant what He said.”

  251. Arwen4CJ says:

    Okay — Lewis seems to build on his argument from one chapter to the next….so I think we also need to see what he says at the beginning of the next chapter.

    10. Nice People or New Men

    This should help put the ending paragraph into better context — and give us a more fair way of evaluating it.

    “He meant what He said. Those who put themselves in His hand will become perfect, as He is perfect– perfect in love, wisdom, joy, beauty, and immortality. The change will not be completed in this life, for death is an important part of the treatment. How far the change will have gone before death in any particular Christian is uncertain.”

    He then takes that and builds the next chapter upon it.

  252. Steve says:

    Obviously Lewis had the intellectual capacity to understand and explain Christian doctrine, defend it, and even profess to believe at least parts of it at least some of the time. As far as Lewis was concerned it was all an evolutionary process. One can find plenty of quotes from Lewis to “prove” he was a true believer, as well as find more than enough to “prove” he was a real heretic. God will be the ultimate judge of any man. However, please note, that a few pages later, in “The Obstinate Toy Soldiers” (I found an online copy of Mere Christianity) Lewis shares his underlying universalist views…

    “What, then,is the difference which He has made to the whole human mass? It is just this; that the business of becoming a son of God, of being turned from a created thing into a begotten thing, of passing over from the temporary biological life into timeless “spiritual” life, has been done for us. Humanity is already “saved” in principle. We individuals have to appropriate that salvation. But the really tough work-the bit we could not have done for ourselves-has been done for us. We have not got to try to climb up into spiritual life by our own efforts; it has already come down into the human race. If we will only lay ourselves open to the one Man in whom it was fully present, and who, in spite of being God, is also a real man, He will do it in us and for us. Remember what I said about “good infection.” One of our own race has this new life: if we get close to Him we shall catch it from Him.”

    “Of course, you can express this in all sorts of different ways. You can
    say that Christ died for our sins. You may say that the Father has forgiven
    us because Christ has done for us what we ought to have done. You may say
    that we are washed in the blood of the Lamb. You may say that Christ has
    defeated death. They are all true. If any of them do not appeal to you,
    leave it alone and get on with the formula that does. And, whatever you do,
    do not start quarreling with other people because they use a different
    formula from yours.”

    Did you get that? If any of these “do not appeal to you, leave it alone and get on with the formula that does.”

    Do not overlook the fact that Lewis was NOT a creationist, did NOT believe that Jesus was the Word made flesh, did NOT believe the Bible was the literal Word of God, but promoted his own concept of theistic evolution, which gave him carte blanche to ridicule much of the OT including the book of Job, the Psalms, etc.

    When you read through the critiques I linked to previously, it is obvious Lewis created his own self comforting brand of Christianity. Same thing those other guys are doing.

    As one reviewer put it, “The concept of ‘mere Christianity’ means agreeing on a small common denominator of Christian truth, while tolerating great areas of disagreement.”

    http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/lewis/general.htm

  253. Arwen4CJ says:

    @Craig,

    I think that you are right that Lewis is espousing Social Trinitarianism — and that he is saying we can ‘share’ in that love by ‘uniting with the divine.’

    However, I’m not quite sure that Lewis meant a panentheistic, Neoplatonic (preexisting souls separate from the body), basically New Age Theosophy. I haven’t read enough of him to say for sure. (I’ve only read the chapters with the quotes, and I skimmed through some of the chapters in between when I was looking for the quotes.)

    I mean, I can see how someone reading his work might interpret him that way. However, I also can see people reading his work in a more orthodox way. I don’t know that he is thinking of ‘uniting with the divine’ in a New Age/Eastern spirituality sense.

    I haven’t read the articles that Steve referenced either — but I will.

    Anyway — thanks for giving your take on the quote. :)

  254. Craig says:

    Steve,

    I see that an article by Al Dager (Media Spotlight) was the basis for the “Occult Fantasy” section of the RapidNet url. Dager is someone I respect as a researcher/writer.

  255. Craig says:

    “…It is just this; that the business of becoming a son of God, of being turned from a created thing into a begotten thing, of passing over from the temporary biological life into timeless “spiritual” life, has been done for us. Humanity is already “saved” in principle. We individuals have to appropriate that salvation…”

    First, the created can never become the “begotten”; there’s only one begotten and He is the Son of God, 2nd Person of the Trinity. Second, Lewis is sounding awful Pelagian with the last sentence quoted.

  256. Arwen4CJ says:

    @ Steve,

    I looked at this link:

    http://www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/lewis-chronology.htm

    I do not own the last book that C. S. Lewis wrote, so I have no way to look at the full context of it.

    I then looked at this article:

    http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/006/narnia-trouble.htm

    Okay — I’ve read all the Narnia books, and the thought never crossed my mind to do real magic or to experiment with it. I was a teenager when I read the books. I do admit that there is an idea of universalism in ‘The Last Battle.’ Basically, a character was able to get into heaven even though he was ignorant of the true God. The person tried to faithfully serve a false god. The God character Alsan, tells the guy that even though he was serving a false god, the person didn’t realize it was a false god. Everything that the person did to serve the false god, Aslan took as serving him. I disagree with that kind of theology.

    Secondly, Lewis is just a human writer, however you think of his work. I disagree with some things that even my favorite authors write. All of us are fallible. Lewis is certainly only human and is fallible just like the rest of us.

    I’m not trying to defend Lewis, but I do want to be fair to him.

    There is no doubt about it that, assuming those articles quoted him faithfully in the books that I did not have, that he had some false theology. It does seem that he sort of leans towards universalism. In the chapters of Mere Christianity that I read, I didn’t see him specifically addressing or speaking to Christians, but I assumed that he was.

    Now….I do think it is somewhat unfair for the author of that article to criticize Lewis for having human temptations. From the quotes about him having occult struggles sometimes, I think Lewis is simply being honest here. He knows it is a weakness of his, and he has to fight against it. I haven’t read any of those quotes in context, but that is what I get from just reading the quotes themselves. If it is a requirement for a Christian author to never struggle against any temptation in order for them to write good books, I don’t think we’d have any published Christian’s writings.

  257. Arwen4CJ says:

    http://www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/lewis/hideous-strength.htm

    http://www.crossroad.to/News/narnia.htm

    I looked at these two links — but I found that they were made up of quotes. I don’t own the Hideous Strength, so I have no idea what it is about or what’s going on here.

    As for the other page — these were quotes taken from other people’s writings. We’d have to check the original source of all of them, which I’m not going to do right now. There are some serious concerns here — as with the Hideous Strength article. However, perhaps the authors of these articles may have misunderstood what Lewis was trying to say. I don’t know — I’m just saying…

  258. Arwen4CJ says:

    @ Steve,

    Since many Christians read Lewis, I wouldn’t be surprised if both orthodox Christians and non-orthodox/heretical “Christians” think highly of Lewis.

    I’m not yet convinced that Lewis really taught or believed in “Christian theosophy.” He could have, and he could have believed in some aspects of it. If so, Lewis is to be held accountable for the false teaching.

    I agree that false teaching starts off with a shred of gospel truth, then proceeds to lead the listener/reader/follower step by step away from Jesus. In some cases, this does lead down the dark rabbit hole of “self realization”, “self actualization”, “self spiritualization” or “self as christ.”

    I really do not think that Lewis was trying to lead people into an occult “Christianity.” Like I said, I haven’t read much of his non-fiction work (only the chapters of Mere Christianity that the earlier quotes were taken from). In those chapters, though, Lewis did not say that salvation is found within ourselves.

  259. Carolyn says:

    @ Steve: This is a strange coincidence because yesterday, as I was listening to a series on Church History, the senior pastor giving the lecture put C.S.Lewis and Francis Schaeaffer in the same sentence on a par as great Christian apologists. After I hacked up a hairball of surprise, I came over here to Crosswise, and there you were, Steve, talking about that very thing.

    I have read Mere Christianity and The Screwtape Letters 30 years ago so in rereading his theology at this point in life in the research paper you linked to Steve, I am once again shocked that anyone could see these doubtful disputings and evil surmisings cloaked in robes of Christian fantasy as some sort of orthodox Christianity.

    And here it is: his love affair with the occult.

    “And that started in me something with which, on and off, I have had plenty of trouble since – the desire for the preternatural, simply as such, the passion for the Occult. Not everyone has this disease; those who have will know what I mean…I once tried to describe it in a novel. It is a spiritual lust; and like the lust of the body it has the fatal power of making everything else in the world seem uninteresting while it lasts.”(Surprised by Joy, C S Lewis, Harcourt Brace, 1955, pages 58-60.)

    I found this paper extremely interesting…especially as it exposes his connections with other occultists. Also, the testimony of David Meyer is very telling:
    “David Meyer was also born into a family which practiced traditional witchcraft. According to his own testimony, while still in his teens he opened himself successfully to the demonic entities which operated through his deceased grandmother, who was also a witch. This gave him unusual occult powers which, no doubt, would have led him to a senior position in the American occult hierarchy. However, before this could happen, he was saved by the blood of Christ, became a born-again Christian and, later, a pastor. Here is how he described the dangers posed by the disguised occult writings of C SLewis: “As a former witch, astrologer, and occultist who has been saved by the grace of God, I know that the works of C.S. Lewis are required reading by neophyte witches, especially in the United States andEngland. This includes The Chronicles of Narnia, because [they] teach neophyte[s], or new witches, the basic mindset of the craft…”

    Today’s evangelicals that are extolling C.S.Lewis have not set his teachings up against Scripture. They have merely taken isolated, fine sounding arguments and filtered them through their own theological thought systems to arrive at a very different translation than the one intended by C.S. Lewis.

    He was indeed a wolf in sheep’s clothing. And today, as he stands before his maker, the fake sheep skin garment he wore on earth has be stripped from his frame. If he was not wearing the garments of salvation when he passed from this life, his philosophical and occult teachings will not save him. He will be banished from the presence of God into a wretched eternity where he and his occult god, the “light bearer” and all other false apostles will await the same fate.

  260. Steve says:

    I just searched the Bethel website to see if there was anything related to Lewis. Those who know me know I don’t believe in coincidence. Here’s what’s coming in 2 weeks:

    Bethel Church “NARNIA”- Children’s Tent Revival Camp
    Shingletown, CA Jun 18, 2012 – Jun 22, 2012

    This is the generation we’ve all been waiting for.
    The generation who will change everything.
    Those we’ve heard would someday come.
    That someday is now.
    The waiting is over.
    Considered to be children in this world, they’ve been discovered as kings and queens in His.
    Once they’ve seen who they truly are, they will alter here to look like There.
    These are the kings and queens who win battles without fighting.
    Welcome to Narnia.
    The tent we meet in is the wardrobe where children enter the realm where identity is restored, and destiny is released.

    Swimming, crafts, team-building games, kayaking, ping pong, volleyball and a super water slide will add to what will be an unforgettable week at camp.

    During the camp main sessions children will have an opportunity to receive teaching and impartation from our Guest Speakers as well as Bethel Church Children’s Ministries Staff. They will leave carrying God’s presence, partnering with Him to bring His Kingdom to the earth.

    http://www.ibethel.org/events/2012/01/childrens-tent-revival-camp-shingletown-ca

    Note: This is a CLOSED camp. Absolutely no parents or visitors allowed.

  261. Arwen4CJ says:

    @ Steve,

    All I was doing with the above quotations of Lewis was to provide a bigger context for the quotes that were provided earlier. I wasn’t trying to show that he was necessarily orthodox.

    I checked out the quote from ‘The Obstinate Toy Soldiers.’ It matches what I’ve found, and I don’t think you need a fuller context in front of it. However, we need to look at part 6 — Two Notes. Otherwise, we’re not fair to Lewis. I briefly glanced over this chapter, and Lewis is well aware that people may come to the wrong conclusion about what he said in ‘The Obstinate Toy Soldiers’ chapter. So, he’s trying to clear up those misunderstandings.

    You wrote:
    “Did you get that? If any of these “do not appeal to you, leave it alone and get on with the formula that does.”

    My response:
    Yep, I saw that – and it really troubles me about Lewis. He was in error there, I believe.

    You wrote:
    Do not overlook the fact that Lewis was NOT a creationist, did NOT believe that Jesus was the Word made flesh, did NOT believe the Bible was the literal Word of God, but promoted his own concept of theistic evolution, which gave him carte blanche to ridicule much of the OT including the book of Job, the Psalms, etc.

    When you read through the critiques I linked to previously, it is obvious Lewis created his own self comforting brand of Christianity. Same thing those other guys are doing.

    As one reviewer put it, “The concept of ‘mere Christianity’ means agreeing on a small common denominator of Christian truth, while tolerating great areas of disagreement.”

    My response:
    Wait — now I haven’t seen any evidence that Lewis is not a creationist. He’s made comments about us being creatures, and that God has made us in the chapters that I’ve read. I’ve also seen comments about evolution in some of the chapters I skimmed. I’m not sure that Lewis thought that creationism and evolution were necessarily opposed to one another. Perhaps he thought as some people do that although God created the world, it didn’t necessarily have to happen in 7 literal 24 hour days. Maybe he thought that God created everything, but used evolution as a sort of tool. I would consider a non-creationist to be someone who doesn’t believe that God created the world.

    Although I haven’t seen Lewis use the phrase, “Jesus was the Word made flesh,” I haven’t seen anything in his writings that denies this. From what I have seen, he believes that the preincarnate Jesus has eternally co-existed with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Jesus had no beginning. He has also stated that Jesus is and was God, and that He took on the human nature. He seems to believe that Jesus was both fully God and fully man.

    I haven’t seen any evidence in which Lewis doesn’t believe that the Bible is the Word of God. He may not be a strict literalist (24-hour creation, etc.), but that doesn’t mean he thinks that the whole Bible is a human product. I don’t know — I need to check his Psalms quote. I’ll do that in a bit. Right now, though, I don’t see any evidence for this.

  262. Craig says:

    Steve,

    Thanks for the heads up on this ‘closed camp’. This is just awful:

    …They will leave carrying God’s presence…

    This is the “baptism in the Holy Spirit/Ghost”, “Christ anointing”, or just simply “the anointing” – otherwise known as “the force”.

    Steve, I’m curious what you think of the analysis in this particular section of the article (under “The Word Becoming Spirit” sub-section), especially the ‘etheric realm’ as the panentheistic realm in order to effect the “linking up the two planes, the physical and the astral, via the etheric” as per Alice Bailey.

  263. Arwen4CJ says:

    @ Craig

    You wrote:
    “…It is just this; that the business of becoming a son of God, of being turned from a created thing into a begotten thing, of passing over from the temporary biological life into timeless “spiritual” life, has been done for us. Humanity is already “saved” in principle. We individuals have to appropriate that salvation…”

    First, the created can never become the “begotten”; there’s only one begotten and He is the Son of God, 2nd Person of the Trinity. Second, Lewis is sounding awful Pelagian with the last sentence quoted.”

    My response:
    In order to be fair to Lewis, we’re going to have to look at his chapter Two Notes.

    Here is what he says here:
    “In order to avoid misunderstanding I here add notes on two points arising out of the last chapter.

    (1) One sensible critic wrote asking me why, if God wanted sons instead of ‘toy soldiers’, He did not beget many sons at the outset instead of first making toy soldiers and then bringing them to life by such a difficult and painful process. One part of the answer to this question is fairly easy: the other part is probably beyond all human knowledge. The easy part is this. The process of being turned from a creature into a son would not have been difficult or painful if the human race had not turned away from God centuries ago. They were able to do this because He gave them free will because a world of mere automata could never love and therefore never know infinite happiness. The difficult part is this. All Christians are agreed that there is, in the full and original sense, only one ‘Son of God’. If we insist on asking ‘But could there have been many?” we find ourselves in deep water. Have the words ‘Could have been’ any sense applied to God? You can say that one particular finite thing ‘could have been’ different from what it is, because it would have been different if something else had been different, and the something else would have been different if some third thing had been different, and so on….But when you are talking about God — i.e. about the rock bottom, irreducible Fact on which all other facts depend — it is nonsensical to ask if it could have been otherwise. It is what it is, and there is an end of the matter. But quite apart from this, I find a difficulty about the very idea of the Father begetting many sons from all eternity. In order to be many they would have to be somehow different from one another. Two pennies have the same shape. How are they two? By occupying different places and containing different atoms. In other words, to think of them as different, we have had to bring in space and matter; in fact we have had to bring in ‘Nature’ or the created universe. I can understand the distinction between the Father and the Son without bringing in space or matter, because the one begets and the other is begotten. The Father’s relation to the Son is not the same as the Son’s relation to the Father. But if there were several sons they would all be related to one another and to the Father in the same way. How would they differ from one another? One does not notice the difficulty at first, of course. One thinks one can form the idea of several ‘sons’. But when I think closely, I find that the idea seemed possible only because I was vaguely imagining them as human forms standing about together in some kind of space. In other words, though I pretended to be thinking about something that exists before any universe was made, I was really smuggling in the picture of a universe and putting something inside it. When I stop doing that and still try to think of the Father begetting many sons ‘before all the worlds’ I find I am not really thinking of anything. The idea fades away into mere words. (Was Nature — space and time and matter — created precisely in order to make many-ness possible? Is there perhaps no other way of getting many eternal spirits except by first making many natural creatures, in a universe, and then spiritualising them? But of course all this is guesswork.)”

  264. Arwen4CJ says:

    Wow — I have to say that I don’t really like Lewis’ reasoning there. It seems like the only reason he doesn’t believe that we are all begotten in the same way as Jesus is because he can’t conceive of such a thing.

    The more I’m reading of him, the less impressed I am by him.

    Perhaps he does have more of an occult theology in his head. Maybe he does literally believe we can all become just like Jesus — we can all be God. I don’t know — I would need to read more of his work.

  265. Arwen4CJ says:

    I just looked over the rest of Mere Christianity — it seems to me that it is almost without any real orthodox doctrine (other than a little discussion about the Trinity). I’m disappointed. I thought that ‘Mere Christianity’ would talk about the essentials of our faith. Instead, it seems to be more of a social gospel.

    No wonder the theological liberals liked Lewis at my grad school campus.
    :(

    I agree with the assessment that ‘Mere Christianity’ is way too broad.

  266. Arwen4CJ says:

    Steve,

    Can you give us the online source of where you found Mere Christianity online?

    Thanks.

  267. Carolyn says:

    Here is a quote from C.S.Lewis on the idea of cosmic interconnectedness from the paper by Jeremy James:

    “The next New Age concept follows hot on the heels of these ‘cosmic’ images. A central idea in occult philosophy is that all is one, a grand unified ball of consciousness. Here is how Lewis defines it in his Christianized mythology: “If youcould see humanity spread out in time, as God sees it, it would not look like a lot of separate things dotted about. It would look like one single growing thing – rather like a very complicated tree. Every individual would appear connected with every other. And not only that. Individuals are not really separate from God any more than from one another.” (p.180) [See the Tree of Zoeon the next page]“

    As I was reading in Part 8 of A Quantum Cosmic Christ by Herescope on Fractal Spirituality I had a deja vu moment:

    “FRACTAL SPIRITUALITY
    Warren Smith details his journey as he discovered how the Quantum Physics concept of Fractals was being woven into popular bestselling books like The Shack. In his search he read an online article titled “Fractal Chaos Crashes the Wall Between Science and Religion” which stated:

    New discoveries in the science and mathematics of Chaos research are revolutionizing our world view. They reveal a hidden fractal order underlying all seemingly chaotic events. The fractals are intricate and beautiful. They repeat basic patterns, but with an infinity of variations and forms. The world-view emerging from this scientific research is new, and yet at the same time ancient. With a little thought, and the help of this web, you can better understand the significance of Chaos and Fractals. You can see how to use these insights in your life to create a bridge between Science and Spirituality.

    As the mystic sages of long ago put it, “as above, so below.”[xxv] [bold added]

    Smith then analyzed this fractal-inspired Quantum Spirituality:

    But what is being presented as “science” is actually an occult/New Age worldview, which presents the New Age belief that much of the “chaos” in the world is the result of people not properly perceiving the “interconnectedness” of all things. In other words, what appears to be “chaos” is often just “the observer” not seeing the “as above, so below”/God “in” everything/“fractal order” that defines all creation. This postulated fractal order is directly related to Teilhard de Chardin, Matthew Fox, and Leonard Sweet’s quantum spirituality/Creation Spirituality. The Shack’s references to fractals—references I had overlooked when I first read the book—immediately explain why author William Young capitalizes the letter “C” in the word “Creation” at least twenty times in The Shack. The capital “C” reflects what his “Jesus” is teaching—that God is “in” all things—including “Creation.”

    From the perspective of the New Age/New Spirituality, it makes perfect sense that The Shack’s “Jesus” states that God is “in” all things. Mack—the main character—is seeing his life as “a mess” rather than as a “fractal” part of “God.” This is because he is not seeing the “as above, so below” fractal order of “God in all things.” From this perspective, it also makes perfect sense that The Shack’s “Holy Spirit” told Mack that his life only seems chaotic and “a mess”—that in reality, he was actually “a living fractal.”

    From this “Fractal Wisdom” website, I could see the deceptive New Age ploy regarding the word fractal and its relationship to “as above, so below.” If all of capital “C” Creation is “God” and thus composed of “God” atoms and energy, then any fractal part of that “God” energy is therefore a part of God. Man is a fractal. Man is God. That is why Mack is told he is “a living fractal.” That is why Mack is told that God is “in” all things. The word fractal is being used as a pseudo-scientific synonym for the belief that God is “in” everything—everything being a fractal or a fractured part of the whole, a fractured part of God. Taken a step further, The Shack is indirectly presenting the notion that “chaos” is simply the result of people not seeing the “God in everything” fractal order in the world—“as above, so below.”

    Thus, The Shack—like Leonard Sweet’s quantum spirituality—subtly introduces the New Age/New Spirituality as a worldview that puts forth the notion that “chaos” can be significantly overcome when humanity stops seeing itself as “separate” but rather sees itself as “One”—as a part of the “God” who is “in” everyone and everything.[xxvi] [bold added]“

    The obvious question to me is, how did a whole generation of Christian readers miss the capital C for Creation in William Young’s Christianese form of New Age panentheism? Why does it take a former New Ager to pick out the capital C and the fractal spirituality paradigm shift that has taken the Christian world by storm? How can true ministers of the gospel be recommending false teaching to their sheep if they love the truth of God’s Word? The answer…they don’t love the truth…they want something new, something different, something that gives them an edge, more power, more prestige and so God has given them over to delusion, to believe a lie.

    Steve, to me, it’s a sad and terrifying day, when a children’s camp is closed to parents. Actually the whole thing is frightening…who knows…from Bethel’s teachings, it is highly possible that they will be opening a few portals, practicing some astral travel, dipping into some angel magic and speaking the language of “cosmic consciousness”.

    Genesis 11:
    5And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.
    6And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

  268. Steve says:

    Lewis had no problem asserting that Christ was divine. Neither did the leading theosophists of his day. Such an acknowledgment does not a Christian make.

    In an article entitled “Did C.S. Lewis Go to Heaven?”, John W. Robbins quotes from Lewis’ own writings to show the difference between head knowledge, (which Lewis had in abundance), and saving faith:

    “Lewis’ conversion to Christianity, by his own account, is tantamount to acceptance of the doctrine of the Incarnation. But is that saving faith? Is that Christianity? If it is, then everyone who believes the deity of Christ is saved. But we have, in Scripture itself, examples of those who accept the deity of Christ who are not saved. Even at the last judgment, there will be many who address Christ as Lord, acknowledge his deity, and yet are sent to Hell (see Matthew 7:21-23).”

    http://www.trinityfoundation.org/PDF/205a-DidCS.LewisGotoHeaven.pdf

    Similarly, Lewis does (on rare occasion) affirm that the Holy Scriptures are inspired by God, while also maintaining that they (the scriptures) are no more inspired than many other works… “If every good and perfect gift comes from the Father of Lights, then all true and edifying writings, whether in Scripture or not, must in some sense be inspired.” (Letters of C. S. Lewis)

    This view is a tacit validation of the writings of other religious traditions, the very thing promoted by the theosophists. (Hmm, maybe those who claim Jesus really did study in an Ashram before embarking on his ministry were right after all!)

    In “Reflections on the Psalms”, Lewis states that “all Holy Scripture is in some sense – though not all parts of it in the same sense – the word of God.” I guess maybe the Psalms aren’t quite as inspired as say, Romans. Or perhaps the book of Job was written by some spiritual novice, a wannabe prophet not fully inspired by the hand of God.

    The many volumes written by C.S. Lewis run the gamut from pure witchcraft to a well reasoned intellectual defense of the Christian faith. His wardrobe closet has a very wide doorway.

  269. Steve says:

    Carolyn, your concerns about Bethel’s Narnia camp are well founded. I would also postulate that C.S. Lewis would have loved “The Shack”. Fractals are a theosophist’s dream come true.

    Arwen, re Mere Christianity online, the first site I tried was blocked with a federal copyright warning. The one I used was from a Russian source. But this one l just found is much easier to read:

    http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.com/documents/apologetics/mere-christianity/cs-lewis-mere-christianity-toc.ph

    I just returned from the library where I checked out “A Reader’s Guide- Through the Wardrobe” and also “Planet Narnia” by Michael Ward. The back cover of the later states “Michael Ward has finally solved the mystery. In Planet Narnia, he shows that medieval cosmology, which fascinated Lewis throughout his life, is the key to the seven novels. Examining the whole range of Lewis’ writings (including previously unpublished drafts of The Chronicles) Ward reveals that the Narnia stories were designed to express the characteristics of the seven medieval planets- Jupiter, Mars, Sol, Luna, Mercury, Venus, and Saturn. Lewis constructed the Chronicles so that in each book the plot-line, the ornamental details, and the portrayal of the Christ-figure of Aslan, all serve to communicate the governing planetary personality. This cosmological theme is what Lewis called ‘the kappa element in romance, the atmospheric essence of a story, everywhere present but nowhere explicit’. Planet Narnia is a ground breaking study that will provide a major revaluation not only of the Chronicles, but of Lewis’ whole literary and theological outlook”.

    Personally, I don’t expect to find anything new.

  270. Arwen4CJ says:

    I see problems in Lewis’ theology and statements that he has made. However, I still do not think he actually intended to teach about the occult nor a theosophist viewpoint. However, he might have influenced by some of these groups. I don’t know. However, I do think we have to take him a little out of context to make him affirm New Age ideas.

    I’m not excusing Lewis for his errors, and there are statements he has made that I cannot defend him on at all. Some of his theology is extremely problematic. It is right for us to criticize Lewis for these things. I still am disappointed that he never laid out the gospel message in his book entitled ‘Mere Christianity,’ which I would have expected from such a title.

    I also want to say that we cannot really know his heart. It’s not my place to decide whether or not Lewis made it into heaven or had saving faith. Only Jesus knows this.

    So, yeah….let’s critique where his theology is false, but I think it would be best for us not to speculate about his salvation status. That’s just what I think. You guys are free to do what you want. I’m done talking about Lewis here.

  271. Carolyn says:

    Steve: This from Trinity Foundation pdf is that which to me spells Lewis’ ideas of Universal, Collective Salvation couched in the ambiguity of being able to catch it like some infection or to “lay ourselves open” as any other New Ager could define their open arms approach to subjective faith:
    If one looks for statements by Lewis on salvation or righteousness or faith, one finds several, none of which asserts justification by faith alone. Here is a sampling of Lewis:
    “Humanity is already ‘saved’ in principle. We individuals have to appropriate that salvation. But the really tough work – the bit we could not have done for ourselves – has been done for us. We have not got to try to climb up into spiritual life by our own efforts; it has already come down into the human race. If we will only lay ourselves open to the one Man in whom it is fully present, and who, in spite of being God, is also a real man, he will do it in us and for us. Remember what I said about ‘good infection.’ One of our own race has this new life: if we get close to Him we shall catch it from Him.
    “Of course, you can express this in all sorts of different ways. You can say that Christ died for our sins. You may say that the Father has forgiven us because Christ has done for us what we ought to have done. You may say that we are washed in the blood of the Lamb. You may say that Christ has defeated death. They are all true. If any of them do [sic] not appeal to you, leave it alone and get on with the formula that does. And, whatever you do, do not start quarrelling with other people because they use a different formula from yours.”20
    Now these paragraphs are an attack on Christianity, not a defense of it.
    Lewis’ first sentence is a denial of the Biblical doctrine that Christ died for certain individuals, whom he referred to as his people, his sheep, his friends, and those whom the Father had given him – not for humanity in general. Each of the individuals for whom Christ died will inexorably be saved, or Christ died in vain. Lewis’ first sentence is a denial of an effectual atonement, and an assertion of an atonement – if we can properly call it an atonement in Lewis’ theology – that makes it possible, but not actual, that anyone will be saved.
    Lewis was clear as to what salvation is: It is a subjective change in the sinner, which he called a “good infection.”
    Next, Lewis described the work of Christ as the “bit we could not have done for ourselves.” To be sure, he also described it as the “really tough work,” but by using the word “bit,” Lewis minimized the work of Christ and magnified the work of sinners in achieving salvation. Then Lewis used the phrase “lay ourselves open,” a metaphor for who knows what. Just when clarity was most needed, obscurity was most emphasized.
    But Lewis was clear as to what salvation is: It is a subjective change in the sinner, which he called a “good infection.” In Lewis’ theology, a sinner is not saved by a perfect righteousness outside of himself imputed to his account, but by a subjective infection, which he called “new life.” Jesus does it “in us and for us.” If we get “close enough” to him, whatever that means, we catch the new life, as one catches an infection.

  272. Carolyn says:

    This excerpt from Trinity Foundation is for me the greatest application of the words of Jesus in which by his own words Lewis denies the inerrancy of Christ and the Word with his own sinful logic and unless repented of, they would be the words that would seal his own condemnation.
    Matthew 12: (King James Version)
    36But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
    37For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

    Lewis: “Here is another thing that used to puzzle me. Is it not frightfully unfair that this new life should be confined to people who have heard of Christ and been able to believe in Him? But the truth is that God has not told us what His arrangements about the other people are. We do know that no man can be saved except through Christ; we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved through Him.”26
    The truth is, of course, that God has indeed told us what the “arrangements about the other people,” that is, those who do not believe in Christ, are. Christ said, “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18). The problem is that Lewis simply did not like this “arrangement.” So he asserted, falsely, that “God has not told us what His arrangements about the other people are.” Lewis rejected the God of Scripture who sovereignly decides who will go to Heaven and who will go to Hell. He found such an arrangement “frightfully unfair.” His last sentence – “we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved through Him” – directly contradicts Christ’s statements in John 3:14-18, for Christ repeatedly says that only those who know the Son can be saved, and that those who do not know the Son are condemned. Lewis denied that Christian faith is necessary for salvation.
    He wrote:
    “[H]ere are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ but who are so strongly attracted by Him that they are His in a much deeper sense than they themselves understand. There are people in other religions who are being led by God’s secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example, a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain other points. Many of the good Pagans long before Christ’s birth may have been in this position.”27
    And, echoing Kierkegaard,
    I think that every prayer which is sincerely made even to a false god or to a very imperfectly conceived true God, is accepted by the true God and that Christ saves many who do not think they know Him.28
    Sincerity, not truth or knowledge of the truth, is what makes a prayer saving, according to Lewis, and some Buddhists (“Buddhists of good will’) and Pagans (“good Pagans”) will also be saved.
    In these statements, Lewis was simply working out some of the implications of the universalism inherent in his un-
    26 Mere Christianity, 64-65.
    27 Mere Christianity, 176-177.
    Scriptural notions that Christ died for humanity and that, in principle, all of humanity is already “saved,” and that God sends “good dreams” to all people in the form of mythology.
    Despite his pious words about Christ being the true word of God, Lewis rejected the Biblical view of both Christ and the Bible. In fact, he asserted that Christ, as well as the Scriptures, erred. Lewis referred to Mark 13:30, “Assur-edly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place,” as “certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.” He continued: “The one exhibition of error and the one confession of ignorance [Mark 13:32] grow side by side. That they stood thus in the mouth of Jesus himself, and were not merely placed thus by the reporter, we surely need not doubt…. The facts, then, are these: that Jesus professed himself (in some sense) ignorant, and within a moment showed that he really was so.”29

    These statements demonstrate that Lewis not only denied the inerrancy of Scripture, but he also denied the inerrancy of Christ. Why then did he assert that Christ is the “true word of God”? Whatever the phrase “word of God” might have meant to Lewis, it did not mean completely true or reliable.

  273. Arwen4CJ says:

    I wonder where the quote is that some people attribute to Lewis — “that God doesn’t send anyone to hell. We send ourselves there when we reject God’s only offer in Jesus Christ,” or something like that.

    That quote seems to be at odds with the universalist comments that Lewis has made.

  274. Arwen4CJ says:

    Anyway — one thing that I do want to point out, not that it excuses any of Lewis’ false words within some of the quotes that we have seen is this. At least some of the criticism against Lewis seems to be by Calvinists. Lewis is clearly not a Calvinist (and neither are all Christians. Some Calvinists would disagree with me here and say that if you’re not a Calvinist, you’re not a Christian.)

    So a large part of these articles seem to say that because Lewis is not a Calvinist, he’s denying the Bible, is completely false, or is not a true believer.

    I understand why a Calvinist feels that since Lewis isn’t preaching their doctrine, he is a false teacher. But I do want to point out that many of these arguments against Lewis are simply from a Calvinist position arguing against arminianism.

    I don’t know — maybe I’m the only non-Calvinist making comments here. If so, that’s fine. I did want to point that out, though.

    On the other hand, there are still a lot of arguments that are against false concepts that Lewis has written about, including that those in other religions or those who faithfully serve other gods can be saved. Also, his comment about Jesus’ death that is quoted above — and him saying that we can dismiss any model we don’t like. Any comment that he made about something in the Bible not being true would also fit into this category. I’m not exactly sure what he meant about us being gods. He seems to be ambiguous there — I didn’t like the suggestion or wording that he used. I also did not like his organism comment about all humanity, etc. I do agree that he does not explain the gospel in the writing that I’ve seen. There are probably other things he has written that I would take issue with.

  275. Craig says:

    Arwen,

    I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that those who have criticized Lewis are doing so because he’s not a Calvinist as I’ve not seen that. And, for the record, I don’t identify with Calvinism nor Arminianism as I don’t think we have to adopt one stance as opposed to the other [I don't want this turned into a Calvinist/Arminian debate].

    I pointed out the Pelagian sounding comment below at 12:41pm yesterday, however: “We individuals have to appropriate that salvation.” In pointing this out, that doesn’t speak to a pro-Calvinist stance any more than it speaks to a pro-Arminian stance.

  276. Steve says:

    CRAIG,

    You wrote: “Steve, I’m curious what you think of the analysis in this particular section of the article (under “The Word Becoming Spirit” sub-section), especially the ‘etheric realm’ as the panentheistic realm in order to effect the “linking up the two planes, the physical and the astral, via the etheric” as per Alice Bailey.”

    Re: Jesus- THE word made flesh….Craig you’ve hit on the nail on the head and uncovered the main dividing point. The Theosophists, (and I would include Bill Johnson and C.S. Lewis among them), would say we (every one of us, all of humanity) are also becoming the Word made flesh, or “little Christs”, eventually destined to grow into bigger full-fledged Christs. It is an evolutionary thing as we achieve various stages, i.e. “the anointing”, etc., eventually attaining all the power, authority, and attributes of God.

    The Gospel of Jesus Christ, (all the scriptures for that matter), have been painfully twisted by these folks to fit the theosophical world view. “And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”

    Me thinks the purpose of BETHEL’S Camp Narnia is to share this forbidden fruit (yet again), merely repackaged and disguised as the “indwelling”, or as Bailey would put it, “the linking up of the two planes…etc.” We know our children are targets, and it’s enough to do just to keep them relatively safe in this world, but woe to those parents who willingly sacrifice their own flesh and blood on the alter of Molech. Is ignorance an excuse? Maybe. Okay, sure, I’ll say yes, remembering Jesus plea to “Forgive them, for they don’t know what they are doing!”. Obviously those deceived parents and vulnerable children can still be saved out of the fire. But at some point the door closes. Let’s pray for those kids who will be attending Bethel’s Camp Narnia, or as I would prefer to call it, “Camp Half Blood”.

  277. Craig says:

    Steve,

    Thanks for your comments. I’ve now (re)begun work on part IV/Conclusion and I will use an Alice Bailey quote in which she states, in essence, that Jesus of Nazareth worked His way into “the Word made flesh” culminating AT THE CROSS. This is the goal of every aspirant – dying to self through self effort (the “Great Renunciation”) in order to escape the “lower self” and actualize inherent divinity.

    Yes, we need to pray for those precious children who will be attending Bethel’s Camp Narnia. We need to pray for their parents as well.

  278. Arwen4CJ says:

    Craig,

    Well, there were some comments in the article that made me think that the articles were written by pro-Calvinist. However, I don’t want to get into that kind of debate either — as I really do not like such debates, because they usually go nowhere.

    So I’m not going to say what comments made me think that at least some authors were anti-Arminianism and pro-Calvinist. It was simply an observation I had when I kept reading the articles that were referenced about Lewis here.

    I agree with you that I don’t think that we as Christians need to adopt one stance or the other. I consider it a non-essential area of debate in which there are real Christians on both sides of the argument.

    I agree that your Pelagian comment does not speak out against either viewpoint, and I’m sorry if you took it that way.

    Yes, this is an area that I really don’t want to discuss further — like I said, it was an observation I kept seeing again and again in the articles. No one specifically said they were Calvinist or accused Lewis of not being one. It was just a subtle thing that I noted.

    But anyway, there are serious flaws in Lewis’ theology — and those should definitely be discussed.

  279. Craig says:

    I agree that your Pelagian comment does not speak out against either viewpoint, and I’m sorry if you took it that way.

    I was just offering that as a possible explanation (?) for your assertion – didn’t mean to make it sound accusative, or what-have-you.

    Anyway, yeah, there are some definite problems with C.S. Lewis’ theology – and what looks like some inconsistencies as well.

  280. peacebringer says:

    Regarding recent CS Lewis commentary.

    Let me start off by saying that he has plenty of questionable lines of thought. They are his thoughts and he develops logic for them. Again, it is his thoughts.

    Now that being said, there is a distinct twisting and distorting of what CS Lewis actually has said.
    There has been reference to universalism. Something not found in CS Lewis writings. What is found is the concept that those that do not hear may have a chance to be redeemed or saved based on how they did respond to the truth they know. The concept is played out in the novel that hideous strength. Now is that scripture? Nope? It is not universalism or UR either. That theologlical viewpoint has a name I cannot recall. It basically is a human mind trying to understand how God treats those who did not and don’t hear the gospel.

  281. Carolyn says:

    Point taken, Peacebringer. Smarter people than me have debated Universalism. Labels don’t always work especially when the subject is a slippery as an eel. My objective was and is only to defend the faith, not myself. If Universalism doesn’t fit the subject…then let’s use fanciful theology or faulty teaching, perverted disputing, departure from the faith or confusing unorthodoxy.

  282. Arwen4CJ says:

    peacebringer,

    I stand corrected. You’re right — C.S. Lewis doesn’t really teach universalism, but does teach that those who are faithful to the bit of truth that do believe will be saved. There is a difference. I should not have used the term universalism with Lewis. I didn’t think about the term when I applied it to him because at least some of the articles that were linked here used it.

  283. IWTT says:

    HEGELIAN DIALECTICS IS EMPLOYED BY ONE WORLDERS AND NEW AGERS to prepare the way for world harmony. It is employed to break down national sovereignty and create a globalist mindset, to tear down the old contradictory religious and political systems and replace them with a new syncretized one. Speaking at the UN Conference on Human Rights in 1993 in Vienna, UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali spoke of the “challenging dialectical conflict” that required people to “transcend ourselves” and “to find our common essence beyond our apparent divisions, our temporary differences, our ideological and cultural barriers” (Interview with Dean Gotcher, Women’s International Group Newsletter, Sept.-Oct. 1999).

    The late New Ager M. Scott Peck, whose books have sold by the millions, believed that man could become God through a process of spiritual evolution. He promoted the religion of scientific “skepticism,” of rejecting the religious faith of one’s parents, regardless of what that faith is, and building one’s own personal religion, of questioning everything.

    In his books The Different Drum (1987) and A World Awaiting to Be Born (1993), Peck applied this evolutionary process to world peace. He taught the concept that a new age has arrived in man’s evolutionary process and a spiritually evolved generation can create unity, solve the world’s problems, and bring in an age of peace. The front cover of The Different Drum describes the book’s objective as “the creation of true community, the first step to world peace.” The back cover says, “Dr. M. Scott Peck believes that if we are to prevent civilization destroying itself, we must urgently rebuild community on all levels, local, national and international, and that is the first step to spiritual survival.” The Different Drum has the following dedication: “To the people of all nations in the hope that within a century there will no longer be a Veteran’s Day Parade…” This refers, of course, to the hope of world peace.

    Peck described the process whereby the world can allegedly experience peace, and it is the Hegalian dialectic at work. It requires creating New Age communities all over the world in which differences can be resolved and the world transformed. In these communities there is no leader but all are leaders, decisions are reached by consensus, there are no “sides” and everyone is respected and heard (The Different Drum, pp. 71, 72). In these communities the individual is allowed to express any belief or doubt and to act out in his own individual way, to live as he pleases. The New Age community must be a “safe place.” He says the “healing” will only happen when “its members have learned to stop trying to heal and convert” (p. 68). He says true community means that “everyone is welcome” and there is “no pressure to conform” and that “all human differences are included” and “appreciated” and even “celebrated” (pp. 61, 62). True community must incorporate “the dark and the light, the sacred and the profane” (p. 65). Those who believe in homosexual marriage and abortion and evolution and human divinity are to live in harmonious community with those who don’t. He calls this process the politics of “transcendence” (p. 63).

    In the New Age community, the only real sin is the sin of exclusiveness and theological dogmatism.

    Peck says, “It is not only such ideological and theological rigidities that we need to discard, it is any idea that assumes the status of ‘the one and only right way’” (p. 96).

    He says that the greatest hindrance to world peace is “exclusivity” (The Different Drum, p. 61). He warns about “groups that exclude others” because they are “doubters” or “sinners” and that are “defensive bastions against community.” He says that even the refusal to join a group because you don’t agree with it is “destructive to community” (p. 62).

    Peck personally conducted scores of community-building workshops to further his objective, and he is only one of many who are involved in this process.

    It is easy to see how unacceptable the practice of dogmatic Bible preaching and exclusive evangelism is in such a context! It simply cannot be allowed, because it will disrupt the sense of world community!

    For a Bible-believing Christian to say that salvation is through regenerating faith in Jesus Christ alone and to separate his children from the public school system and to disagree with evolution and to refuse to “celebrate” homosexuality is considered a great evil by New Agers, because they think it is hindering the evolutionary progress of the entire world. Dogmatic biblical thinking is the chief obstacle to the establishment of the New Age.

  284. Craig says:

    IWTT,

    This is good info; but, where’s the url or source?

  285. peacebringer says:

    Carolyn and Arwen,

    I understand that, the point is that we need to be assurred we are rightly dividing and handling pointing things out there are in error. CS Lewis has things that can be problematic. He was at best a flawed theologian who lived a flawed life. He certainly had some obsessions and he did incorporate pagan symbolism into his Narnia books. This is one of the cases where we really cannot tell if CS Lewis was wheat or tare. His influence is significant. His writing are given a real lofty place in modern Christendom. He did write some thought provoking comments. His views about those that have not heard the gospel are within realm of orthodox thought and scripture can be interpreted that way. Yet, I believe it falls short of what is truth.

    Now what is entirely more concerning in context is the use of the Narnia Chronicles as a foundation of a childrens “camp” or teaching experience. The stories are ripe with things that can be significantly taken in harmful ways including “the sons of Adam” reigning in Narnia. There is a whole lot that can be twisted. Yet the books each do have sound theological concepts and teaching at their root, so as pervasiveness of sin and God’s grace and others. Yet, the symbolims and story can be handled in a disturbing way certainly. I am fanscinated by the statement that the Narnia Chronicles are used as primers by witches. Not sure fully what they draw from but it gives one pause. It should be noted that what ever is written, whatever is out there whether written purely or flawed, can be deviated and twisted. Or in some cases, the reality hidden and disguised as one thing where another darker part is not far off. It takes discernment and continued exposure to the light. That being said on reading CS Lewis’s works never had a reaction of pervading twisting or something off. Never gotten a headache reading his material. So from my perspective CS Lewis was a flawed man trying to understand God and caught up in his own stuff and thoughts.

  286. peacebringer says:

    Craig, looks like part of a greater article found here: http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/98be0bed00fa8a273ae1b2970f64cece-108.html
    Certainly is line of thinking that would be worthwhile posted at constance cumby’s blog.l

  287. YesNaSpanishTown says:

    Craig,

    Regarding your comment at June 6, 10:28 re: Social Trinitarianism and perichoresis:

    At the end of 2010, our pastor began a sermon series in which he used terminology regarding the trinity being in loving community. A waft of rotteness began passing by my spiritual sniffer. I tried to get a handle on where he was coming from. In my research I found a site called http://www.perichoresis.org. Although at that point he had not used the term perichoresis, I new in an instant that this is what he was talking about. Reading C Baxter Kruger will make you see red and spit nails. Grr… Since then, our pastor has begun a “Bible Institute” (that is his title for it. I doubt that much real Bible is taught.) The term perichoresis is in the syllabus.

    I am eager to read what you find on this topic. Honestly, I have difficulty reading all the heavier theological stuff. Thank God for the simplicity of the Gospel. But I also praise God for those who have the mind to read, sift through the junk and discern the truth.

    The way I look at it (simplistically I admit), I could try to sort through all the finer points and attempt to slog through the dialectical quagmire of their theological arguments. Such an analysis is valuable. But I am more concerned with the end product. So far, what I read of Kruger is fit for the theological sewer. What I am hearing from my “pastor” (I use that loosely) needs to be flushed down the toilet as well.

    We’ve been told for the past 3 Sundays that we need to remove the hindrances that block us from discovering our true selves and see ourselves as God sees us. Jesus died for all. It remains for us to understand who we already are in Christ.

    So my question for you, Craig, is in all your research, does the notion of perichoresis have any true value? Is there any application of it that is valid? From what little I can ascertain, it was put forth to the early church fathers and was quite controversial. Apparently it faded from the scene early on to be resurrected primarily by Moltmann and Kruger–both very liberal (apostate as far as I am concerned). (Wikipedia)

    Other than the fact it is espoused by M and K, who are liberal, what real solid Biblical charges can be brought against it? At this point, my main arguments have been that these ideologies cause us to look at ourselves and shift our focus off of the Lord Jesus Christ as preeminent. Kruger clearly denies the atonement. Our pastor’s theology has a strong gnostic acridness to it.

    Can you give me more solid ammo?

  288. Steve says:

    “O ZEU KAI ALLOI THEOI!”

    These are the words exclaimed by Grover, the Satyr, in Rick Riordan’s fantasy novel “The Lightning Thief” when he realizes that the full anger of Zeus, the most powerful and chief of all the “gods” on Olympus, is being directed towards his friend Percy (Perseus). The phrase is a form of cursing, and literally means, “Oh god, there are other gods.”

    Such words convey the idea that if an individual is unhappy with the rule of any particular “god”, (in this case Zeus), he/she can turn and worship other “gods” (or no god for that matter), if he/she so desires. In other words, it is a direct insult and/or challenge to the ruling authority and an assertion of the rights of man to exercise free will, which includes the right to disobey or follow after other gods. The significance of this phrase cannot be overstated. It is the heart and soul of “theosophy”, which I define as the intellectual study and whole hearted acceptance of the temptation of the serpent, Lucifer, as stated in Genesis 3.

    “The Lightning Thief” is currently being used as middle school reading curriculum in public schools all across the country. My daughter’s sixth grade class just spent twelve weeks on it. The book itself, as well as the Hollywood movie version, teach some of the purist theosophical concepts found in any work outside of Blavatsky’s “Secret Doctrine”. I have compiled a 40 page treatise on the subject which documents my research and the work my wife and I undertook to challenge this particular curriculum in our local school district.

    That said, the exact same theosophical concepts can be found in virtually any Hollywood action movie produced over the last fifty years, including all of those made which chronicle C.S. Lewis’ Narnia series. Exceptionally faithful to the book, the Hollywood version of “The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe” features a rebellion, led by the children, empowered and helped by Aslan, to overcome the ruling authority, which in this case is depicted as the “white witch”, an angry creature with enormous powers who has placed a curse over the entire earth (Narnia). Christians conveniently ignore the fact that it was God, not Satan, who placed a curse on the earth, and declared “permanent winter” by casting Adam and Eve out of the ever pleasant Eden (Narnia).

    The guiding force in Lewis’ work, Aslan, can be viewed as either Christ or Lucifer. That fact explains why the books are popular among both Christians and Wiccans. Likewise the White Witch can be viewed as the embodiment of evil, Lucifer, or as a representation of the ruling authority of the God of the Bible. These double meanings were fully intended by the author himself. They are a true demonstration of C.S. Lewis intellectual, theological, and literary brilliance. Yet the scriptures tell us that, “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways” (James 1:8).

    “The Chronicles of Narnia” is not unlike so many other Hollywood action films. There’s always some entity that threatens mankind, threatens earth….and it is man, sometimes just an ordinary man, as in “Independence Day”, “The Terminator”, “Armageddon”, etc. or sometimes it is the children, as in “The Chronicles of Narnia”, who rise up, band together, and always come through to save the earth from extinction, release some curse, or otherwise save mankind. We see the same narrative in film after film. I can list fifty recent Hollywood movies that follow this same formula, many more if we go back to the very earlies Disney flicks.

    In movies such as “The Lightning Thief”, “Star Wars”, “Batman Begins”, “The X-Men”, “Avatar”, “The Matrix”, etc., the heroes are ordinary men who are endowed with special abilities, or powers, either through the applied use of technology and weaponry, or merely by coming to fully realize their own innate supernatural power, or “gifts”. The exercise of such gifts usually requires practice, nurturing, or a period of training under some “guru” or “master”. The same formula goes for the non-fantasy film genre, i.e. “The Karate Kid”, “Gladiator”, etc. Greek mythology is clearly the most popular model, and perhaps the most influential method currently being used to promote the divinity of man, or justify rebellion against the “gods” (see the movie trailer for the upcoming “Prometheus” film).

    It is clear that the theosophists have been very busy preparing humanity to resist and stand against the coming judgment, to declare man’s freedom, to declare man’s authority, and reject the divinity and authority of the one true God as revealed in scripture. Theosophists have long known, just as the serpent knows, that if there really is a God (and there is) who has promised He is coming back to this earth in anger and judgment, to judge each man according to his works, to judge and punish that Serpent, that Dragon, the Devil….to put an end to evil and rebellion, to melt the elements and remake a new heaven and a new earth, then the defenders of the status quo must be made ready. This calls for unity of purpose, a shared mindset, and much preparation and training.

    “The Lightning Thief” book and movie describes the entrance to hell as being located directly under the famous Hollywood sign. At least they got that part right. Almost all Hollywood movies promote the idea that any God, any entity, any power, who has the audacity to judge the earth, threaten earth, put a curse on the earth, restrict mankind in any way, etc. is unjust and must be overcome, or at least resisted to the bitter end.

    Please excuse the length of this comment, but I think all this has a direct bearing on what Bill Johnson and Bethel Church are all about, as well as any discussion on theosophy, or the work of C.S. Lewis. Bethel’s Camp Narnia begins June 22, 2012. It is designed to train and empower children to “save the earth” to “save mankind”, “these are the ones we’ve been waiting for”, etc presumably to lead us as we stand against the One who is coming to judge the earth. They are following the same tried and true Hollywood script. There is no difference between Camp Half Blood (in “The Lightning Thief”) and Bethel’s Camp Narnia. The discerning Christian needs to know what’s going on, not make excuses. The theosophists are coming out of the closet, or the “wardrobe” as the case may be, to deceive the very elect, if that were possible.

    “Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.” (James 4:8)

  289. Craig says:

    YesNa,

    I’ll answer your question more fully a bit later when I have more time. For now, the short answer is “yes” perichoresis is a valid theological concept/construct. It was used in the early church to describe the interrelationship of the Trinity in which They “interpenetrate” each other since They are of the same essence although each Member has functions the others don’t. Some have pushed this too far and turned the interrelationship of the Trinity into tritheism (three Gods) rather than as monotheistic using this concept. Pushed too far, one can say that some or all Jesus’ attributes were ‘taken over’ by the other Members of the Trinity while He was incarnate.

  290. Craig says:

    Steve,

    The common thread here with respect to the movies and books you’ve referenced is that the ‘good guys’ win (using ‘white magick’) over the ‘bad guys’ (who are wielding ‘black magick’). Of course, there’s no ‘good’ magick.

  291. Arwen4CJ says:

    peacebringer,

    I’m not really against Lewis or and I’m not trying to show that he is a heretic. Rather, I’m trying to fairly evaluate his work, using the articles that were provided by Steve. In my personal opinion, the articles are going way too far in attacking his work. I think that the authors are drawing conclusions that are not necessarily warranted from Lewis’ intended meaning. There were some things in the articles that the authors pointed out, and that I agree are problematic.

    I do believe that people do often take someone’s words out of context, twist those words, and then make the comment that the said person is arguing something that they did not intend. We as Christians need to make sure that we do not do this, but too often we do. I think that’s a little of what is happening with these articles.

    Lewis has made some disturbing comments, and he didn’t really talk about the gospel in his book ‘Mere Christianity.’ I think that we can offer fair critiques on his writing, because, like you said — he is just a man trying to explain his understanding of theology.

    I don’t believe that Lewis is responsible for how some are interpreting or using his works — such as Pagans and wiccans using his stuff (I’ve never even heard of them reading his work, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t), or Bill Johnson and the other hyper-charismatics using his stuff for a basis of a heretical/occult kids camp.

    I thought that the authors in the articles were taking their arguments too far with some of the things that Lewis wrote. That’s why I checked for the greater context of the words they cited, and that’s why I posted them here. I wanted people to be able to make their own judgements based on Lewis’ own words. I personally felt that some of the claims against Lewis were shown to be in error when there was a more full context given for his words. Other claims against Lewis seemed to have at least some justification for.

    Also, I was very disturbed by some of the things that Lewis wrote. On the other hand, I also admired some of the things he said.

  292. Arwen4CJ says:

    @ Steve,

    Could you please tell me the source of the following information:
    “The guiding force in Lewis’ work, Aslan, can be viewed as either Christ or Lucifer. That fact explains why the books are popular among both Christians and Wiccans. Likewise the White Witch can be viewed as the embodiment of evil, Lucifer, or as a representation of the ruling authority of the God of the Bible. These double meanings were fully intended by the author himself. They are a true demonstration of C.S. Lewis intellectual, theological, and literary brilliance. Yet the scriptures tell us that, “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways” (James 1:8).”

    Honestly, I think someone really has to twist The Chronicles of Narnia to make Aslan into Lucifer, and the White Witch into God. I don’t doubt that it has been done by some. I also want to point out that Wiccans do not really think that they believe in Satan. Of course it is demonic and inspired by Satan. However, the point that I’m trying to make is that they don’t really give credit to Satan, as they don’t really think he exists. Rather, they consciously try to worship nature and their goddess. (They are not aware that this goddess is really Satan, or that the worship of nature is demonically inspired.)

    That’s why I don’t think that a traditional Wiccan would pick up the Narnia books and interpret Aslan to be Lucifer. They just don’t consciously worship Lucifer. They are not trying to follow Lucifer, and they give no credence to him. If they wanted to make Aslan their goddess, they might do this — but I don’t know how likely they would.

    Now, Satanists or people who go to the Church of Satan DO purposefully worship Lucifer.

    However, it still would take a lot of twisting to make this work. I have never seen any evidence that Lewis intended that Aslan could either be Jesus or Satan, however the reader wanted to interpret. Rather, all of the evidence I’ve seen is that Aslan is supposed to be Jesus.

    For example, Aslan talks about his father — the Emperor across the sea.

    In the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe — Edmond sells himself to the service of the White Witch, thus he rightfully belongs to her. In order to redeem him, Aslan takes all of the punishment that Edmond deserves upon himself and is tortured and punished in Edmond’s place. Ultimately, Aslan dies instead of Edmond. However, Aslan doesn’t stay dead. He is raised from the dead. Honestly, I’m not sure how this could be interpreted as anything Lucifier could or would do. It seems to me that it is a direct reference to what Jesus has done. I only wish that Lewis had talked about this in ‘Mere Christianity’ as well.

    And, actually it isn’t the children’s apparent magic that ultimately saves Narnia. Rather, Aslan is victorious and clearly defeats the White Witch. The children were trying their best to fight the White Witch and her evil army. However, they would were losing. It was only when Aslan came back to life and restored life to those that the White Witch had killed that the those on Aslan’s side won.

  293. Carolyn says:

    From: http://www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/lewis-chronology.htm

    Lewis ends his book with this prediction:

    “It is not impossible that our own Model [including the Biblical worldview] will die a violent death, ruthlessly smashed by an unprovoked assault of new facts — unprovoked as the nova of 1572. But I think it is more likely to change when, and because, far-reaching changes in the mental temper of our descendents demand that it should. The new Model will not be set up without evidence, but the evidence will turn up when the inner need for it becomes sufficiently great. It will be true evidence.’[5, pages 222-223]

    “What Lewis imagined to be ‘not impossible’ some generations away — the death of the modern model or worldview — turns out to be happening,” wrote the leading postmodern Pastor Brian McLaren, who illustrates Lewis’ prediction. He has indeed discarded absolute truth.

    From previous comments of Lewis, resourced from articles in the above posts, it is apparent that he does not regard the Word of God as an inerrant source of truth…neither does Brian McLaren. When you remove the heart of Christianity, the authority of the Word out of Christianity, you are left with a collections of morals and dogmas…exactly what the Liberals left us with. If we feed on C.S. Lewis rather than the Word of God, I predict we will end up with the very model Lewis describes…our own Model of the Word….a type of mythical, science fiction that fits our preferred worldview. You can argue the fact, but we’ve been warned.

    Also, from the same page:

    In other words, Lewis has a remarkable ability to bring Christian readers into new worlds and make them feel at home in the midst of pagan rituals, occult mysteries and magical forces. In so doing, he presents unbiblical versions of the most important gifts God has given us: His unchanging truth, His uncompromising righteousness, His peace in the midst of turmoil, His unwavering faith, and His eternal gift of salvation.

    1 Timothy 1:3-5 (New International Version)

    Timothy Charged to Oppose False Teachers

    3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith. 5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

    For those who devote themselves to the myths of Lewis, in trying to decipher them in terms of Christianity…I say Good Luck with that…I’ll stick within the confines of the Word of God where we have been promised a safe journey into eternity.

  294. Steve says:

    Carolyn, good advice. Knowing the authentic (the truth as revealed in the Word of God) enables one to identify the counterfeit.

    CRAIG said: “The common thread here with respect to the movies and books you’ve referenced is that the ‘good guys’ win (using ‘white magick’) over the ‘bad guys’ (who are wielding ‘black magick’). Of course, there’s no ‘good’ magick.”

    Thank you Craig, that is precisely the point.

    Arwen, I did not say that Wiccans worship Lucifer. Again, you seem to have missed the main point that Craig surmised so succinctly. Wiccans acknowledge duality, two sides of “the force”, the “Yin/Yang” concept. Practitioners of “the craft” accept the concept of both white and black “magic”. They define good and evil as a perpetual dance, a balancing act, that sometimes swings one way, sometimes another. They also acknowledge that both good and evil, darkness and light, are inherent in each individual. This is exemplified in the Narnia character you have used as an example, Edmund.

    Surely you realize that by no stretch of the imagination is Edmund saved by the blood of Aslan, but by his own efforts at rebalancing his own innate inner nature. Aslan merely confronts Edmund, then offers encouragement and advice, finally welcoming Edmund as he swings back to the “good” side of the force.

    While I certainly acknowledge the fact that you can see features of “Christlikeness” in Aslan, I am pointing out the danger of Christians who jump on the “sacrificial” aspects of the noble lion character while denying all the other aspects of Lewis’ allegory. Lewis’ depiction of Aslan is more like that of a master teacher than a savior. In this regard, Aslan exemplifies the exact same philosophical and spiritual leadership defined as the “good” side of the force, just as the Obiwankenobi character does in Star Wars or Percy Jackson’s teacher “Chiron”, does in “The Lightning Thief”.

    Just like Obiwan, Aslan is depicted as the spiritual leader of a rebellion against the ruling authority. I need cite no other source than this:

    Jer 28:16 – “Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will cast thee from off the face of the earth: this year thou shalt die, because thou hast taught rebellion against the LORD.”

    In my Bible, Satan leads the rebellion. What does it say in yours? Was Jesus the leader of a rebellion against the forces of darkness? Was His incarnation merely an attempt to restore some sort of cosmic balance? To restore Eden? Or is Jesus the Light that utterly destroys darkness? Fact: The White Witch is not destroyed in “The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe”, but lives on as a perpetual foil in the volumes which follow. The balance must be maintained.

    Again, you can pick out numerous examples from Narnia that support the White Witch as the one in rebellion, exemplifying the dark side of the force, actively working against all that is considered “good”. But you must be very careful of your definition of “good”. Hundreds of writers and reviewers have written countless books demonstrating that there are lots of ways to interpret Lewis’ work, including from a deeply occult viewpoint.

    The question remains, against whom is the rebellion in Lewis’ allegory targeted? Whom is the false god of this world, the White Witch or Aslan? Be very careful with you answer. Lewis was a genius at depicting two sides of the very same coin.

  295. Arwen4CJ says:

    Carolyn,

    I’m not sure if your comment here was directed at anyone commenting here, or whether it was just a general comment.

    I don’t think anyone here is devoting themselves to the myths of Lewis. I am certainly not. All I’m saying is that I have read The Chronicles of Narnia, and I do see Christian symbolism in the stories. I am not one to readily pick up on symbolism, or who enjoys looking for such things. However, what happened with Edgar, Aslan, and the White Witch is so blatant that I couldn’t help but pick up on it. I’m not reading into things that aren’t there.

    Also, I’m not replacing Lewis with the Bible at all. I haven’t even read most of his writings, and I said that he is flawed. I do NOT agree with everything that he says, nor do I look to him as my Christian teacher or the source of Christian theology or understanding.

    No one needs to read Lewis, and it is their right not to read him. However, if someone hasn’t read his Narnia books, then they really make the claim that Christian symbolism isn’t clearly in the book, or that Aslan and the White Witch can both be interpreted as either God or Satan.

    To all,
    If anyone wants to read the following chapters from The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and then argue that it isn’t Christian imagery, that would be fine by me.
    Chapter 12 Peter’s First Battle
    Chapter 13 Deep Magic From the Dawn of Time
    Chapter 14 The Triumph of the Witch
    Chapter 15 Deeper Magic From Before the Dawn of Time
    Chapter 16 What Happened About the Statues

    This is a children’s book, so the reading is very easy, and the chapters are short.

    All I want is a fair assessment of Lewis here. We aren’t being fair to him if we’re just taking the words of certain authors of articles, but don’t go back to the original source of Lewis’ writings. I wouldn’t want someone to take little quotes from things I have said and written, then twist them to make it sound like I support something that I don’t, and then be condemned for it by a group of Christians.

    Yes, we are supposed to use discernment. Yes, we are supposed to speak out against false teachers. Yes, we need to defend orthodox Christianity. Yes, we need to test all things with the Bible. Yes, the Bible is our final authority for all truth.

    However, we’re supposed to guard against bearing false witness. It isn’t wise to evaluate someone just on the writings of a few authors of some online articles. They might be right, but they also might be putting their own bias or spin on things.

  296. peacebringer says:

    Arwen,
    You clearly are engaging in appropriate evaluation and discernment imo. Others cited or maybe even some comments by others do more of a painting with a broad stroke and cementing other opionins making whatever point seeking to make. That being said, there is plenty of areas of concern r/t CS Lewis and the elevation of him to the status he is within modern evangelic thought is a concern. THe other person mentioned by the way, Francis Schaeffer is in part responsible for the 7 mountains thought process out there.

  297. YesNaSpanishTown says:

    Peacebringer:

    Francis Schaeffer is in part responsible for the 7 mountains thought process out there.

    Schaeffer is indeed claimed by the Dominionists. However, do you know of any documentation that proves such? According to the folks at Discernment Ministries/Herescope, this is a “reinvention”. In personal discussions with them, they doubt that there ever was any connection. In recent recountings of the Seven Mountains story, Schaeffer’s name is missing. I tend to agree with Herescope. He is not alive to tell us otherwise and no one seems to have any evidence such to back up the claim. In fact Schaeffer’s writings warn against the spirituality now promoted by the Dominionists.

  298. peacebringer says:

    No don’t have any documentation. Think I read about it somewhere, and it is stuck in my brain. So that may not be factual.

  299. peacebringer says:

    This is what I read somewhere: There are 7 Mountains of Influence in Culture…

    In 1975, Bill Bright, founder of Campus Crusade, and Loren Cunningham, founder of Youth With a Mission, had lunch together in Colorado. God simultaneously gave each of these change agents a message to give to the other. During that same time frame Francis Schaeffer was given a similar message. That message was that if we are to impact any nation for Jesus Christ, then we would have to affect the seven spheres, or mountains of society that are the pillars of any society.

    Found here: http://www.reclaim7mountains.com/
    So that is someone claiming he made reference to that. So they are claiming he referenced it but I have not seen a citation or know for fact that he did. Just that he is claimed to have done so. And it would not shock me. It does not shock me one bit r/t Bill Bright and Loren Cunningham given varied threads and interconnections. There is a lot of flawed theology within modern evangelicalism.

  300. Carolyn says:

    Arwen and Peacebringer…I was not referencing anyone in particular in my post. I’m sorry I was not clear on that. It was generally to the in-exhaustive supply of C.S.Lewis’ idolatrous groupies who hang on his words as if he was the greatest thing since sliced bread, those referenced by Steve: Hundreds of writers and reviewers have written countless books demonstrating that there are lots of ways to interpret Lewis’ work, including from a deeply occult viewpoint.

    I myself have ignored to some extent the admonition to avoid those who bring in damnable heresies…and have been awakened to my oversight by the Herescope Quantum series.
    2 Peter 2:1
    But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

    There are men who have slipped in among the end time prophecy teachers that I have listened to for years, who were once Biblically oriented and have gradually introduced mythology under the guise of research into the mix. Do we need the so called deep secrets of Satan and occult dogmas to figure out how to use these tools to overcome the enemy? I think not. We must be very careful in discerning the difference between research for the exposition of error and the introduction of science falsely so called, giving promotion and credibility to the likes of mythology.

    In the case of C.S. Lewis…do we need to see the teachings of Christ clarified to us through the medium of mythology? Is that a good foundation on which to build our Christian faith?

    1 Timothy 6:19-21 (King James Version)

    19Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.
    20O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely? so called:
    21Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

    As for suggesting that you are followers of C.S.Lewis…I have no idea.

    My defence has been to uphold the supreme authority of the Scriptures and I see in the writings of Lewis, a departure from that, as I have referenced above. If you disagree, you wouldn’t be the first. But as for my part:

    2 Corinthians 11:12-14 (New International Version)

    12 And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. 13 For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

    BTW – what is the best method of apologetics? I submit our own reasoning is no match for the genius of a demon. My brand of apologetics is to hold the teachings of men up to the light of Scripture. If it passes the test I will listen to them, I will acknowledge them. But if I hold their teachings up to Scripture and they do not pass the test then I will avoid them. C.S.Lewis does not pass the test as he continues to cast doubt on the Word, at times, in a very imaginative, playful and flippant way, much like, IMO, I would expect from a doctrine proffered by demon. Lewis, therefore, has nothing further to say to me.

    Isaiah 8:20
    Consult God’s instruction and the testimony of warning. If anyone does not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn.

  301. peacebringer says:

    Carolyn, All I was saying is we need to be careful. Call what is, what it is. There is much that is difficult to sift through. Take my recent comment r/t Schaeffer and 7 mountains. I do not know for a fact that he made such as statement. I do know he is claimed. There is much that is good and much that is ill. Even within one author. For example Oswald Chamber is considered largely orthodox. But in his book Christian Psychology make references to some things not biblical and states them as fact (r/t satan). Martin Luther is a noted anti-semetic. There is much that is broken and ill. The bible directs us to be sober minded and alert. We are to sort all and test all in accordance with the scripture and grasp hold of that which is good.

  302. Carolyn says:

    Peacebringer – And all I’m saying is that there are absolutes. I’ve talked to many non-Christians who can talk to me forever as long as I will agree that there are no absolutes when it comes to ANY religious faith. The conversation becomes ultra tense whenever it becomes apparent that I believe there is an absolute.

    Same thing with false teachers. As long as you are willing to give the false teacher some leeway in doubtful disputations, they will continue to spout their heresies. But the Scripture is full of “absolute” language that cuts the ground from under them. For example:
    Romans 16:17
    Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

    My sphere of teachers would be ever so great if I could only accept the good things they say and ignore the bad, but Scripture clearly tells us that once we have identified error, spoken to it and confronted it and the teacher still persists in it, we are to have nothing more to do with them.

  303. Steve says:

    I am well versed in the original source materials as well as numerous reviews, opinions and commentaries on the works in question. So, at the risk of being called a bogart, I’ll add this one last piece as my final offering on this subject. I do have other responsibilities which I have been neglecting so I won’t be back here for awhile. Lord willing, I will check back in down the road as I really want to read what others might have to say and am also very much looking forward to Craig’s next installment.

    In the original 1977 Star Wars debut film, (curiously titled Episode IV: “A New Hope”), the master teacher, Obi-Wan-Kenobi, willingly sacrifices himself so that LUKE (a christian name chosen NOT by coincidence) can escape from the clutches of the evil Darth Vader. And just like Aslan does, Obi-Wan is resurrected, appearing in numerous sequels, sometimes as a ghostly figure, mentoring and instructing, and other times as a younger man (due to the odd chronology of the series).

    Although all these works may contain numerous readily identifiable allusions to the gospel, as Craig pointed out none of these are on par with or promote sound Biblical doctrine. The whole purpose of any discernment ministry is to instruct and warn believers that just because someone labels something “Christian” or “good” doesn’t make it so. Kudos to those who take the time to study the original works or teachings of someone like BIll Johnson, or C.S. Lewis, in order to then share their insight and conclusions for the edification and protection of their brethren.

    The readers here are certainly justified and wise not to take my word for any of this. None here really know me. But when a Christian who has a long track record of demonstrating exceptional wisdom and discernment, i.e. Berit Kjos, publishes tons of info warning us about something, i.e. C.S. Lewis, we should consider their viewpoint very seriously. The “I have to see everything for myself before I believe” attitude was common even among the disciples. Thomas did not trust the discernment of his own brothers and sisters. Yet he was still loved by Jesus, who did not leave him in ignorance and doubt but bade him “touch me”.

    To wrap this up, I am certain that the Bethel ministry team will likely offer some delicious version of Turkish Delight to the kids at Camp Narnia. Will it taste good? Sure. Will they label it “God candy” or something equally spiritual sounding? Uh huh, yep. But they won’t be feeding those kids the flesh of Jesus Christ, of that I am absolutely positive. Call me harsh, call me judgmental, but that’s how I see it. And I’ll only change my mind if Jesus takes me to Camp Narnia himself and says, “eat, for this IS indeed my flesh”.

  304. peacebringer says:

    Carolyn,
    Absolutely there are absolutes. And there also areas we get messed up in due to our own thoughts or setting an absolute (calvanism/Armianism) that is not set that way. Even the approach to sacraments is of that nature. There are a couple of errors that can happen. One we know readily. Lacking discernment. It is the equivalent with AIDS in the body. No immune system. There is also an other error. THat error is where folks (not saying you just to be clear or anyone here) look at everything and treat it as a threat and attack parts of the body. Couple that with the Ephesus church where they examine for truth but miss out on the love portion. We need to treat as threat that which is a threat and examine. There is problematic stuff with CS Lewis. He did purposefully incorporate pagan thought into the Narnia Chronicles. It in all essence is double minded. CS Lewis should be approached with caution and is one of many that is heightened to high heights from the view of man. So of it his own doing or own flawed thinking. I cannot judge or determine if he was thorn or wheat. I can list others with positve impacts on many such as the already mentioned Oswald Chamber and Martin Luther. Everyone needs examination. All of us our flawed. Now that being said there are sure deceivers out there as well actively engaging in deception. The webs of deception in mordern evangelicalism is wide. It cast aspersions on the whole of the modern church. It has lead to many leaving the church as a whole as see the varied tentacles and webs of deceit. One such example is even the idolotary of USA and the political nature. IWTT posted a poignant quote on the dialectism that is prevelant which adequeately describes the iron/clay existence. We are all growing. I really appreciate Craig’s work and effort as he looks into the details when way to often (even on my end) it can be a quick decision without the established facts.
    Each us need to grow in our relationship with God. One concerning aspect that is sitting with me at the moment, is given all the twists and turns and the neo-gnostic stuff out there, any relating with God can be viewed as suspect. Some may hold the view of read the Bible only when the Holy Spirit does have a role. We worship in spirit and truth. They go together but it has been so twisted and ways of man embraced and those that elevate man and self pursued rather than surrender to the King of Kings. The lust of flesh, lust of eyes, and pride of life is pervasive. And yet, the state of church is either chasing after the titalating or engaging in the ongoing recycling of thoughts, songs and words meant for one time and place. It is amazing that anyone truely follows the King of Kings, and yet, each faction of the church has those that follow and repent when made aware of the errors (in time.) God is refining each of us. There is falsehood out there, but rest assured if you pursue God and love truth, you will find the truth.

    And yes, we are to expose that which is faulty. There are some that you know are teaching what is contray to sound doctrine and have nothing to do with them. I will have nothing to do with Bill Johnson. I have nothing to do with TBN Crowd and others. Now others, I cast aside. What do I do with Martin Luther, for example. He has written much that is sound. Since he was a sinful antisemite, have nothing to do with any of his words thoughts, or do I examine for what can teach. How about watchman nee? Oswald Chambers? And so on?

    It was good to take a closer look at Romans 16:17 even in this. Love the imagery being used there.
    1st direction is to make a through examination. We are to attend to those threats. We are to examine throughly (like at Craig is doing) and then attend those there engaging in specific actions. Well those that are causing two things. Leading you down a different path (division) and impeding growth down the right path. So in other words, those that point to a different way and impede growing in God, stay away from. Remember we also are to follow 1 Thessalonians 5:21 test everything, cling to what is good.

    My point is not that there is not error in CS Lewis. In fact I agree there is error. Rather, we need to examine throughly. It is to readily easy to accept something as stated. I love that there are those that do identify errors, even if they do so in ways I don’t agree, because there are things that exist on examination. Sadly, there have been many deviations and different paths taken and I believe the apostles would be horrified over what is considered “church” today. Those are my thoughts and they are not about any here, but rather talking truthfully about matters. It is all connected and the webs are vast. It is no wonder that many people retreat and live in isolation. It is no wonder folks go way off another path. And I think I have rambled far to long and perhaps getting a bit off track, but God has his intent and purpose in the discussion, so take from it what you will.

  305. peacebringer says:

    Steve, please do not take my posts and indicating a lack of value or a “Seeing it for myself.” I already know of the problems and dangers of CS Lewis and varied theological bents and what he has written and done. I have said that and given caution. I have commented on the danger of making broad statements that are twisting even of the persons position such as CS lewis teaches “universalism” when he comes from a whole different tact. Berit is good for some stuff, but a person who has flaws none the less. I agree totally of the danger of the Narnia camp and even the line of thinking that exists. And for Craig and Berit and others who do work giving details, great. I would also though give warning not to discourage anyone from examining for self, throughly, as we are all to do that. Each and every one. We all need to rightly divide word of truth. Even in this discussion the fact that Francis Schaeffer is attributed to the 7 mountains but there is no documenation indicating same.

    You refenence star wars and I remember at the time many books that point out “Christianity” in the force or star wars. I remember it at the time. Sacrifice is used in many stories of the world. You even find that element fleshed out more in the newer 3, as it is centered in the core world system with roots in the eastern and theosophic lines of thought. It is throughout the stories in the world at large. Certianly I appreciate the things you have pointed out and give much to examine and pray and sort out. Sadly, the more the webs of deception are pulled the more connected they are and the sad state of the modern church is laid bare. It brings pain and weeping over where things have stepped off. So please Steve do not take the comments as throwing water on what you have to say. Not the intent. Just a call for accuracy in examination and discussion of what is wrong. I wouldn’t even have known to point out certain differences if not aware of difficulities as well.

  306. peacebringer says:

    Also noteworthy that Berit Kjos does have a lot of useful information on the problematic stuff with CS Lewis and certainly stuff never run across in limited exposure. I think I have read Narnia, the Space Trilogy, Great Divorce, and Abolition of Pain. Interesting the lust for the occult described as well as the theosophy roots.

  307. peacebringer says:

    Okay some fascinating thoughts or things to examine as went back over to Berit sites and review so of her examination. And while I do not agree with some of Berit’s views on things (such as USA perspective) she does an excellent job of giving some details. One thing that caught my attention was that of the mention of Lillith. She referenced “George McDonald’s fiction” and CS Lewis praise for his writing. The white witch is reportd to be a descendent of “Lillith” and one of Jinn (Fyi Jinn are a very pronounced part of Muslim belief) in Lion, Witch, and Wardrobe. Well, besides the muslim connection, Lillith is a significant element of Kabbalah. She is described as demon who was adams 1st wife and Jinn are her children. Well, the female demon and the varied twists at some level point to some connection with Bethel in particular. I am not sure what exactly but there is something there. Also thinking and praying over things I do note that I never read the entirity of Narania as a child. I read space trilogy as a pre-teen. Not reread as an adult. I do remember when reading LWW and doing so as part of educaiton in private christian school as an elementary student. I didn’t understand why some of symbols were used like a witch, but since was part of Christian curriculum figured it “okay.” At any rate, I digress a bit. Just wonder if there is some deeper “Lilith connection” in the views of BJ, bethel and others… no idea why but hope something is triggered and more sorted out.

  308. Arwen4CJ says:

    Steve,

    I know you didn’t say that Wiccans worship Lucifer. I was referring to your comment here:

    “The guiding force in Lewis’ work, Aslan, can be viewed as either Christ or Lucifer. That fact explains why the books are popular among both Christians and Wiccans. Likewise the White Witch can be viewed as the embodiment of evil, Lucifer, or as a representation of the ruling authority of the God of the Bible. These double meanings were fully intended by the author himself. They are a true demonstration of C.S. Lewis intellectual, theological, and literary brilliance. Yet the scriptures tell us that, “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways” (James 1:8).”

    I was trying to say that since Wiccans didn’t intentionally worship Lucifer, it is hard for me to imagine how they would conceive of Aslan as Lucifer.

    Okay, you wrote:
    “Arwen, I did not say that Wiccans worship Lucifer. Again, you seem to have missed the main point that Craig surmised so succinctly. Wiccans acknowledge duality, two sides of “the force”, the “Yin/Yang” concept. Practitioners of “the craft” accept the concept of both white and black “magic”. They define good and evil as a perpetual dance, a balancing act, that sometimes swings one way, sometimes another. They also acknowledge that both good and evil, darkness and light, are inherent in each individual. This is exemplified in the Narnia character you have used as an example, Edmund.”

    My response:
    All right — I can see your point with this, but I don’t see Lewis as portraying good and evil in such a way here. When I read the Narnia books, it seems that good and evil is pretty clear cut. Aslan is always understood to be the final winner. It is never a question. I don’t see this as being a Star Wars force concept with Edmund.

    You wrote:
    “Surely you realize that by no stretch of the imagination is Edmund saved by the blood of Aslan, but by his own efforts at rebalancing his own innate inner nature. Aslan merely confronts Edmund, then offers encouragement and advice, finally welcoming Edmund as he swings back to the “good” side of the force.”

    My response:
    Actually, I do think that Lewis was trying to say that Edmund was saved by the blood of Aslan. Otherwise, why have Aslan suffer and die in Edmund’s place? Even the Disney version of it in the movie kept this part of the story. In the script, I’m pretty sure it is something like “life for a life.” Clearly, blood needed to be spilled in order to pay the price of what Edmund did in joining with the White Witch and for betraying his siblings. Aslan considered his behavior to be treason. Aslan died instead of Edmund. The law of Narnia demanded death for treason against Aslan.

    If all Edmund needed to do was “rebalance his own innate inner nature” then Aslan wouldn’t have needed to die in Edmund’s place. It is true that Aslan confronted Edmund, and seemed to offer encouragement and advice — but it is also true that Edmund felt truly sorry about what he had done and knew that it was wrong. He knew that he’d sinned against Aslan. Aslan did welcome Edmund back, but not without the price of Edmund’s sin needing to be paid in full. It was just that Aslan paid the price instead of Edmund.

    You wrote:
    “While I certainly acknowledge the fact that you can see features of “Christlikeness” in Aslan, I am pointing out the danger of Christians who jump on the “sacrificial” aspects of the noble lion character while denying all the other aspects of Lewis’ allegory. Lewis’ depiction of Aslan is more like that of a master teacher than a savior. In this regard, Aslan exemplifies the exact same philosophical and spiritual leadership defined as the “good” side of the force, just as the Obiwankenobi character does in Star Wars or Percy Jackson’s teacher “Chiron”, does in “The Lightning Thief”.

    Just like Obiwan, Aslan is depicted as the spiritual leader of a rebellion against the ruling authority. I need cite no other source than this:

    Jer 28:16 – “Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will cast thee from off the face of the earth: this year thou shalt die, because thou hast taught rebellion against the LORD.”

    My response:
    That is perfectly fine and right to point out dangers of Lewis’ work to Christians. I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to disagree with you that Aslan was simply meant to be a master teacher more than he was supposed to be a savior.

    To say that both Obi-Wan Kenobi and Aslan are meant to be spiritual leaders of a rebellion against the ruling authority is to over simplify both stories. The Empire in Star Wars was evil, and it was portrayed as an unjust government that oppressed individuals across the galaxy. The White Witch and her minions were also clearly an evil government, and hers was evil because she had rebelled against Aslan long ago. The government in both cases is evil and corrupt.

    You wrote:
    “In my Bible, Satan leads the rebellion. What does it say in yours? Was Jesus the leader of a rebellion against the forces of darkness? Was His incarnation merely an attempt to restore some sort of cosmic balance? To restore Eden? Or is Jesus the Light that utterly destroys darkness? Fact: The White Witch is not destroyed in “The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe”, but lives on as a perpetual foil in the volumes which follow. The balance must be maintained.”

    My response:
    This is over simplification. Yes, Satan led a rebellion in heaven and was kicked out. Yes, he opposes God now and still rebels against Him and incites others to do so as well. However, the Bible also portrays Jesus coming back in the end to defeat those who were opposed to Him.

    The White Witch is like Satan here because she rebelled long ago. She took possession of land that rightfully belonged to Aslan. So, in reality, she was acting in rebellion against him during her entire reign as queen of Narnia.

    I don’t think that Aslan was rebelling against the White Queen, but rather, that he was taking his rightful place. No, Jesus was not the leader of a rebellion against the forces of darkness. His incarnation was not merely an attempt to restore some sort of cosmic balance.

    I don’t see Narnia as being a story about restoring balance between good and evil. I’m going to have to finish responding to your comment later.

  309. Carolyn says:

    Peacebringer: I’m not wishing to offend you, but I can’t agree that we need to use so much “caution” in dealing with false apostles. They don’t use caution in their approach to the truth, so why should we deal so tenderly with their false views and whisper silently around their occult themes? It’s quite apparent to one who compares their teaching with Scripture and if it isn’t, then prove it not by your own actual analysis of what he’s saying.

    You are very vague and imprecise in your critique of us. We have given hard evidence of what he has actually said. And we have backed up and taken a second look. But in your “cautions”, there is little substantial evidence that you are making your point on his actual words. You seem to be cautioning us around the psychology of it more than talking about concrete and factual references to his teaching. And when you infer that “someone” is painting with broad strokes, please tell us the specifics so that we can also be informed.

    You said: “My point is not that there is not error in CS Lewis. In fact I agree there is error. Rather, we need to examine throroughly.”

    My answer: There is a time for testing and a time to make a decision. The time for testing C.S.Lewis is over for me, but it may not be for you. I don’t have to read everything that C.S.Lewis has ever written to make a decision on his error. My criteria has been explained.

    Now…your criteria seems to be more along cautionary lines…so that ball is in your court. For me personally, there is enough and plenty of reason for me not to be listening to C.S.Lewis, so, we should leave our discussion there, I think…

    On a different subject: I just went back and read IWTT’s comment on Hegelian Dialectic. Good post! As we see all things coming together in these end times, there is an obvious planned convergence of all religions, isolating true Christianity as the “odd ball out”. Consensus rules, collective thought imagines a vain thing and we are all of one mind…these are the things that Baphomet represents, the fusing together of opposites; the transformation where heaven and earth, light and darkness, male and female come together so there is no difference, there is no separation…bringing into focus the Satanic doctrines of compromise for the sake of unity.

    Interesting times.

  310. peacebringer says:

    Carolyn, I think you missed my point. The specific I referenced was referring to CS Lewis as a universalist and other ways of twisting. Personally I am always examining and re-examine. My criterion is right and righteous discernment. Period. It is not the “attacking” of everything like a immune system out of whack. FYI- the immune system analogy is an important one as the immune system does correspond to discernment. I am well aware of the impact in body of an out of what immune system that attacks things should not. It is not our elevating things to the point of our determining who is wheat and who is tare. CS Lewis is one of 2 things. An artful deceiver meaning to bring people into ways of falsehood and introducing that to them or he is a fallen and broken man of intellect who wrote and spoke the duality of his ways with one foot in each plain. He may well have been a man, fallible and broken. Not able to fully repent of the sins that beset him and having that color everything he said and did. Yet, a man who spoke of such knowledgeable sounding words and logic that appears to illustrate one thing when it does include the full duality that he lived. Not fully committed. This is fleshed out in his life as his “wife” was an adulterous relationship at the start. In my examination and prayer lean more to latter, but his history and influences certainly suggest the 1st could be true as well. That is up to God.
    Also just to let you know I am not nor ever been a person gifted at fleshing out the details. I see patterns and big pictures of things. I appreciate the folks like Craig who break down details. I follow patterns and connections and examine the truth. So While I can try and communicate in ways contrary to how my brain works it is not easy for me to do so and takes work. I have other gifts. It is always a shame if folks through not hearing and understanding fully one another, shut down over such as it cuts off the iron sharpen iron. My posts have apparently been taken as an attack, whereas, it is an encouragement to walk and communicate in that which is sound. Please do reread some of what I said and hear what I am saying without looking at an attack. Sorry my communication comes off the way it has. You are right to want to stay away from CS Lewis. Not saying anything different. As I have stated he has been wrongly elevated in modern Christendom. There is a blending that is also pervasive in church as whole. And ultimately, we are all at some level double minded as well and have areas we struggle to let go of and repent.

  311. Arwen4CJ says:

    Steve,

    You wrote:
    “Fact: The White Witch is not destroyed in “The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe”, but lives on as a perpetual foil in the volumes which follow. The balance must be maintained.”

    My response:
    Actually, it is true that she doesn’t die in “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.” However, the Witch does actually die in “The Silver Chair.”
    Read Chapter 12 The Queen of Underland

    You wrote:
    “Again, you can pick out numerous examples from Narnia that support the White Witch as the one in rebellion, exemplifying the dark side of the force, actively working against all that is considered “good”. But you must be very careful of your definition of “good”. Hundreds of writers and reviewers have written countless books demonstrating that there are lots of ways to interpret Lewis’ work, including from a deeply occult viewpoint.”

    My response:
    Just because a work of writing can be interpreted different ways does not necessarily mean that those views were what the writer intended. One of the ideas of post modernism is that nothing has any meaning in and of itself, and that any piece of writing can mean whatever the reader wants it to mean. There is no objective meaning — everything is subjective. However, that is, of course, a false viewpoint. Anyone can take the Bible and make it mean whatever they want it to. I’ve had conversations with people who were deeply into the occult, and they take the Bible completely out of context and read occult meanings into it. That doesn’t mean that they are being faithful to the text, or reading it how God intended it to be understood. Certainly if the Bible — the very book that contains the only inspired text by God and the only book without error can be twisted, then certainly any piece of fallible human writing can be twisted.

    You wrote:
    “The question remains, against whom is the rebellion in Lewis’ allegory targeted? Whom is the false god of this world, the White Witch or Aslan? Be very careful with you answer. Lewis was a genius at depicting two sides of the very same coin.”

    My response:
    Even though Lewis has serious flaws and theological errors, Aslan is clearly considered to be the creator of Narnia. The White Witch had initially destroyed the world that she came from, and had rebelled against Aslan back then. She was evil before she even set food in Narnia. (See “The Magician’s Nephew”). I believe there is enough evidence that Aslan is supposed to be Jesus in the series. Therefore, anyone rebelling against him or going against him would be in the wrong. Aslan is never portrayed as being evil or anything other than good.

  312. Arwen4CJ says:

    Carolyn,

    Thank you for your response and clarification :)

    It is true that some people do make C.S. Lewis into some kind of idol or someone that the depend far too much upon.

    There are indeed false prophets and teachers in the Christian world — both in the past and in the present. We must be careful to examine all speakers, pastors, and authors, and hold their words to Scripture.

    We certainly do not need any deep secrets of Satan and the occult dogmas to figure out how to use any sort of tool to overcome the enemy. Scripture itself is sufficient for this. If we stand in the truth of what Jesus has done for us, and what God says in His Word, we need nothing else.

    Now, I am of the opinion that mythology, in and of itself can be simply entertainment as long as we do not put any faith in it. All fiction is a kind of fantasy because it isn’t a real world. I like fiction — all sorts of fiction. As long as I can separate reality from fiction, I personally have no issue with it. Other Christians would disagree with me here – or would think that only certain kinds of fiction are okay. That is fine. I certainly don’t get my truth from any work of fiction. I do think that all fiction needs to be assessed theologically.

    You wrote:
    “In the case of C.S. Lewis…do we need to see the teachings of Christ clarified to us through the medium of mythology? Is that a good foundation on which to build our Christian faith?”

    My response:
    It isn’t that anyone needs to see the teachings of Christ clarified to us through fiction. Certainly, we have the Bible, and we know the truth from that. However, sometimes it is nice to have a story that reminds us of Christian concepts. For example, I really like the “Love Comes Softly” movies and books. I am not getting my theology from those stories, but I do enjoy them because they are nice clean stories that do speak of faith subjects.

    I will say this again — I do like a good story. I like adventures with good plots. I like to read creative stories. However, I certainly do not build my faith on any work of fiction or anything contained in the stories. That would be a horrible foundation.

    You wrote:
    “My defence has been to uphold the supreme authority of the Scriptures and I see in the writings of Lewis, a departure from that, as I have referenced above. If you disagree, you wouldn’t be the first.”

    My response:
    I know — that is what I want too, and that is what I seek to do as well. The only thing is that I want to make sure that I’m fairly representing the viewpoint of those that I critique. I don’t always succeed in this, but I do want to try.

    Yes, Lewis does depart in some areas, and those departures are serious. You have no argument from me on the contrary.

    At the same time, though, all of us are fallible, and there is not one writer that I agree with 100%. This does not excuse error. I certainly do not think of Lewis how I once did before I had read those chapters from Mere Christianity. I had always assumed him to be a great Christian apologist who clearly stated the Christian faith. Such is not the case. It is RIGHT to point out Lewis’ error where he does have it. I certainly will not be looking to Lewis for great theological wisdom. In fact, I probably won’t read much more of him.

    You wrote:
    “BTW – what is the best method of apologetics? I submit our own reasoning is no match for the genius of a demon. My brand of apologetics is to hold the teachings of men up to the light of Scripture. If it passes the test I will listen to them, I will acknowledge them. But if I hold their teachings up to Scripture and they do not pass the test then I will avoid them. C.S.Lewis does not pass the test as he continues to cast doubt on the Word, at times, in a very imaginative, playful and flippant way, much like, IMO, I would expect from a doctrine proffered by demon. Lewis, therefore, has nothing further to say to me.”

    My response:
    First, thing is that we compare their teachings with Scripture. If we see a piece of their writing or what they’ve said that doesn’t line up with Scripture, then we should definitely take some steps.

    Well, I think it is extremely important that when we do apologetics that we are careful to faithfully represent the author’s words in the context they were intended. Thus, if we suspect someone isn’t being faithful to Scripture, we need to go back to the original source of their writing and make sure that we have understood them clearly. This is only being fair to them. Perhaps someone misquoted them deliberately or by accident, or we misunderstood their intention.

    It isn’t right to criticize someone for a viewpoint they don’t hold, or to only quote part of what they’ve said in order to make it sound more like they hold to a view we want to criticize them for. We also need to be careful that we do not paint too broad a stroke.

    After we’re sure that what they are saying really is what we thought they were saying, we can then compare it with Scripture and make our case that their position clearly violates Scripture.

    I just have learned not to take what someone says of someone’s teachings at face value. I want to make sure that they really are guilty of what they are accused of, on all accounts.

  313. Arwen4CJ says:

    @ Steve,

    You wrote:
    “I am well versed in the original source materials as well as numerous reviews, opinions and commentaries on the works in question. So, at the risk of being called a bogart, I’ll add this one last piece as my final offering on this subject. I do have other responsibilities which I have been neglecting so I won’t be back here for awhile. Lord willing, I will check back in down the road as I really want to read what others might have to say and am also very much looking forward to Craig’s next installment.”

    All right then — I will take your word for it. I apologize for making the assumption that you had perhaps not looked into the original source material.

    You wrote:
    “In the original 1977 Star Wars debut film, (curiously titled Episode IV: “A New Hope”), the master teacher, Obi-Wan-Kenobi, willingly sacrifices himself so that LUKE (a christian name chosen NOT by coincidence) can escape from the clutches of the evil Darth Vader. And just like Aslan does, Obi-Wan is resurrected, appearing in numerous sequels, sometimes as a ghostly figure, mentoring and instructing, and other times as a younger man (due to the odd chronology of the series).”

    My response:
    I know the Star Wars fandom well. When I was in junior high and high school, the movies were my favorite. I even used to write Star Wars fanfiction, and I would talk to other Star Wars fans online. I wasn’t aware of what the New Age was or that there was any real belief system that was similar to what was going on in the Star Wars world. I didn’t realize that Lucas actually intended for an occult viewpoint until later, when I was reading some people’s fanfiction that disturbed me. I then started researching what was behind Star Wars, and I haven’t watched any Star Wars movie since, and I haven’t been involved in the fandom since then either.

    I stopped reading and writing fanfiction.

    Before that point, I hadn’t seen the force in a New Age way. I just thought of it as a plot device.

    I will say, though, that Lucas had always intended that Episode IV would have prequels to it. He had the whole story planned out before making the movie. He had the idea of Anakin falling to the Dark Side already there. With him turning, it seemed to Obi-Wan and Yoda that all hope was lost. Then, Luke comes into the picture, and there is once again hope for the universe — a new hope. I think that’s why it was titled that way. I could be wrong, though…as Lucas was heavily influenced by the occult, and there is no denying that. I know that now.

    Anyway, I have to say that even before I understood the occult nature of the films, I never saw Obi-Wan’s death as sacrificing himself for Luke. I’m pretty sure that Obi-Wan fully intended to be killed by Vader, and it wouldn’t have mattered if Luke had been there or not. Luke was not exactly in immediate danger. Sure, he happened to stop when he saw Obi-Wan and Vader fighting, but no one seemed to even notice that he was there until he yelled, “No” when Obi-Wan was killed. All of the stormtroopers had their attention on the fight. His death wasn’t a sacrifice. I don’t see it as a sacrifice now, either.

    Perhaps, it COULD be considered a sacrifice if Obi-Wan gave up his life in order to become part of the force and help Luke the way that he does. Maybe. But it certainly isn’t the kind of sacrifice that saves another person’s life or that takes the punishment that someone deserves upon themselves, and it certainly wasn’t dying in Luke’s place. There was no payment for sin.

    If I had to guess, I would say that Luke was probably named Luke because of George Lucas’ last name. I don’t know this for sure, but this is what I’ve always assumed.

    Actually, Obi-Wan doesn’t really resurrect from the dead. He just becomes a part of the force, and kind of lives on in a kind of spirit form. This isn’t a true resurrection. It’s simply the afterlife in Star Wars land. It’s very similar to the New Age idea of becoming one with the impersonal god, only it seems that Obi-Wan still maintains his self.

    Obi-Wan being younger has nothing to do with the death in Episode 4. The younger version of him is because those movies are prequels — they are Episodes 1, 2, and 3. They are supposed to take place before episode 4 — thus before Obi-Wan’s death. Lucas didn’t have enough money to make all the movies at first. He didn’t know if he’d make any besides Episode 4 because he didn’t know if it would work out — if it would be popular enough or not. He made the movies out of order.

    Aslan, actually has a real physical resurrection. Aslan was dead, totally dead. Afterwards, he is dead no more.

    You wrote:
    “Although all these works may contain numerous readily identifiable allusions to the gospel, as Craig pointed out none of these are on par with or promote sound Biblical doctrine. The whole purpose of any discernment ministry is to instruct and warn believers that just because someone labels something “Christian” or “good” doesn’t make it so. Kudos to those who take the time to study the original works or teachings of someone like BIll Johnson, or C.S. Lewis, in order to then share their insight and conclusions for the edification and protection of their brethren.

    The readers here are certainly justified and wise not to take my word for any of this. None here really know me. But when a Christian who has a long track record of demonstrating exceptional wisdom and discernment, i.e. Berit Kjos, publishes tons of info warning us about something, i.e. C.S. Lewis, we should consider their viewpoint very seriously. The “I have to see everything for myself before I believe” attitude was common even among the disciples. Thomas did not trust the discernment of his own brothers and sisters. Yet he was still loved by Jesus, who did not leave him in ignorance and doubt but bade him “touch me”.

    To wrap this up, I am certain that the Bethel ministry team will likely offer some delicious version of Turkish Delight to the kids at Camp Narnia. Will it taste good? Sure. Will they label it “God candy” or something equally spiritual sounding? Uh huh, yep. But they won’t be feeding those kids the flesh of Jesus Christ, of that I am absolutely positive. Call me harsh, call me judgmental, but that’s how I see it. And I’ll only change my mind if Jesus takes me to Camp Narnia himself and says, “eat, for this IS indeed my flesh”.

    My response:
    I’m sorry, but I don’t know Berit Kjos. I have never read any of that person’s work before. I have no reason to think that this person has exceptional wisdom and discernment. He/she may, but I haven’t come to that conclusion myself. The person has no credibility with me yet. If you find the works credible, that is great. However, you can’t assume that everyone else will. I need to be exposed to someone’s writings before I decide that they are credible.

    Sure, if someone warns me against Lewis, or anyone else, I will definitely take the time to read what they wrote and try to figure out whether or not I agree with their assessment. I may agree in part and disagree in other parts, or come to the conclusion that they have gone too far with a particular line of thought.

    I personally agree with your assessment in regard to Bethel’s Camp Narnia. The reason — well, anything coming out of Bethel is suspect, and is going to be riddled with error. I have no doubt that they will twist Lewis’ works in order to make it line up with their theology. The issue here is Bethel, not necessarily Lewis.

    I’m not calling you harsh or judgmental. You are doing what you’re supposed to do — you are evaluating Lewis’ works based on what you believe he is teaching. That is perfectly right.

    I do not think that Lewis is perfect. He is far from it — he has much error in his theology.

  314. Steve says:

    Arwen-

    This discussion on Lewis is certainly relevant to Bethel and the false gospel promoted by Bill Johnson. I found an interesting article here: http://www.seekgod.ca/narnia.htm that documents how the Narnia movie was marketed to and received by the “Christian community”. The article gets more interesting as you scroll down.

    Here are a few excerpts (in quotes) and my comments:

    “Lewis insisted the Narnia books were not allegory — where things are meant to represent something else — but were a supposal of how it might have gone if Christ had come to a world of talking animals and become one of them.”

    Indeed, the author has stated numerous times in interviews and letters that Narnia ia NOT allegory. Lewis himself writes, “I did not say to myself ‘Let us represent Jesus as He really is in our world by a Lion in Narnia’; I said, ‘Let us suppose that there were a land like Narnia and that the Son of God, as he became a Man in our world, became a Lion there, and then imagine what would happen.'”

    I remember when The Shack first came out that it was hailed as the “second coming of Pilgrim’s Progress”. It was termed, “a new allegory of Christ for the 21st Century”. The term “allegory” means that something fictional represents or reflects truth (reality) by use of symbolic characters, fictional events, etc. Obviously The Shack does not represent a retelling of gospel truth by any stretch of the imagination, yet people claimed it did.

    “In an interview with Christianity Today, Douglas Gresham [stepson of C.S. Lewis and co-producer of the movie version] stated the following when asked about the Christian content of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe:”

    “You have to bear in mind that Hinduism has a dying god who dies for his people, then comes back. Norse mythology has the dying god. Greek mythology has the dying god. This myth is not new and it’s not unique to Christianity. Yes, Christians who watch the movie or read the book will look for Christian symbolism. But I think that’s the wrong way to approach it. I think it’s far better to read the book or see the movie and try to find out where you fit into Narnia.”

    One of the things we have to remember is that Aslan is a mythological creature. The author himself tells us that Narnia is not an allegory, or retelling of the gospel, but something entirely new. It is all a figment of the imagination of a twentieth century writer heavily influenced by the occult. Aslan is not a faithful representation of the Jesus of the Bible, therefore he does not represent Christ any more than say Mithras, or Horus, or any of the other mythological pagan deities who were said to have died only to rise again. Nor does Narnia represent a fallen earth. Lewis imagined an entirely different world, with it’s own set of sentient beings, its own nature, its own rules, its own problem, and most importantly, its own solution.

    The story goes that Edmund betrayed Aslan and sold his siblings for a few pieces of Turkish Delight, to please the ruling authority, and to obtain a false promise of a position of honor and authority in Narnia. If Aslan died in order to save this traitor, Edmund, then you Christian reader who wish to say this is a reflection of Christ, must also accept that Jesus died to save his betrayer, Judas. Now perhaps Judas would indeed have been saved had he repented, (as the fictional Edmund did), of his treachery. We’ll never know because it didn’t happen that way.

    There are no parallels in the scriptures where two sons of Adam and two daughters of Eve must act to save the whole world. Nowhere in scripture is Jesus stabbed to death on a stone alter by Satan himself in order to satisfy the deep magic. Jesus does not raise himself up from death by the power of an incantation, or by the power of an even deeper magic. Only in Narnia do we see Satan parading around wearing the mane of the Lion of Judah. All these so-called “allusions” to the Gospel are an abomination to the God of the Bible. If we try to fit Christ into Lewis’ fictional created world, we are guilty of promoting a lie, creating an alternative reality, preaching another gospel, another Christ.

    Aslan saved no one. He couldn’t. He doesn’t exist. Lewis’ fictional Narnia was saved by a re-balancing of the force, nothing more. This is proved by the fact that Narnia goes out of balance again in subsequent works, and our heroes have to return and overcome new problems, sometimes thousands of years later, in order to continue the charade. Lewis created a purely occult worldview that cannot be Christianized.

  315. Carolyn says:

    Peacebringer: No what I don’t understand is why you are cautioning us to do what we are already doing and I was defecting your cautions back into your own court. I too relate to things more in conceptual terms than details. I don’t have a problem with that.

    BTW, I got your point the first time around…and “attack” never entered my mind. I’m not opting out of the iron sharpening iron, just the circular path always leading back to instructions on being cautious about pinpointing error. We have to end the circuit sometime…

    Arwen, it’s a blog. My comments are not that important that you need to dissect them all individually and feed them back to me. They were boring enough the first time around. Although I do appreciate the individual attention, my comments were not the subject of the debate…C.S.Lewis was the subject. Let’s stick to pulling his comments apart. And Arwen…please don’t be offended. I really like you, you have a lot of interesting things to say. It’s just something that I wanted to bring to your attention from my personal preference in blogging.

  316. peacebringer says:

    Okay, not meaning to keep circleing back and admittedly probably got off and running tangentially. I have tendencies to do both.

  317. YesNaSpanishTown says:

    I need your help. My pastor told us all today the definition of good. According to him, it is the “negation of evil”. Sure sounds gnostic to me. I have done some initial cursory internet research, but I don’t have a lot of my own source material.

    Can anyone here give me some quotes with verifiable sources as to where this idea is found? I’d like to compare it to what I’ve found.

    Also, how would you answer this Biblically? I have my thoughts–I would like to hear yours as well.

    And in case you’re wondering, I’ve known for some time now that our pastor is waaayyy off the deep end theologically. That is not in question. Believe me, I get an exercise in rightly dividing the word of truth every Sunday because I have to come home and study and refute him. But today, I thought I’d ask for your input.

    Blessings All!

  318. Craig says:

    Yes, it sounds both Gnostic and New Age. Gnostic for the duality; New Age for the implication of works-based effort to ‘negate the evil’ and actualize the internal ‘good’, or ‘god’.

    I’m not familiar with this phrase, but I found the following (which you may well have found by now):

    http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/levi/phs/phs00.htm

    The Paradoxes of the Highest Science by Eliphas Levi (not to be confused with Levi Dowling who is referenced in part IIIa & b here).

    The fourth ‘paradox’ references the “negation of evil” as the path to “good” via ‘knowledge’ (gnosis):

    http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/levi/phs/phs07.htm

    “Knowledge is the first power of the intelligent Universe. God is the master of infinite knowledge. He who knows is naturally the master of him who knows not. It is necessary to know, in order to be. He who does not know how to be rich, is not rich; he who does not know how to be good, is not good, Knowledge is proportional to being, and in philosophy, as Kant remarked, being is identical with knowing.”

  319. Craig says:

    Here are some Scriptures that may help:

    1 John 1:5-6, NIV 1984:

    5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth.

    1 Corinthians 4:4-5, NIV 1984:

    4 My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.

    John 1:5, NIV 1984:

    5 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

  320. YesNaSpanishTown says:

    Yes, I also found the references from Eliphas Levi (a French occultist who drew and made the symbol of Baphomet infamous). Additionally I found references from Nietzsche. And I thought about the yin/yang.

    The Scriptures that came to my mind–Luke 18:19, “So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.”

    I also thought of times that the Scriptures refer to God repenting of the evil that he had purposed on various people (ex. Jer. 26:13). Romans 9 is a particularly difficult passage in which we are told that God created Pharaoh for the very purpose of the Passover events to make His name great. Truly God’s ways are above our ways. Who are we, as created beings to question the Creator?

    My point is that we cannot say that “good” is the “negation of evil” because neither of those terms is clearly defined. Jeremiah 17 tells us that the heart is deceitful above all and desperately wicked. We are sinful to our very core, so how can we define “good” by our own standard. If I believe God has called me as a young 18 year old new graduate (–how I wish!LOL) to be a doctor and practice medicine among the lepers of India, but, I become pregnant out of wedlock, would it be “good” for me to abort the baby so that I can continue my schooling to achieve my lofty goals?

    God alone defines what is good and what is evil by His standards. My pastor never mentioned the Bible or God’s standards. In fact he never put anything into the context of salvation at all in any part of anything he said this morning. Surely outside of the righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ, all our righteousness is as filthy rags. Does that not make man’s supposed “good” evil in itself as it defines the basis of our standing before God?

    What my pastor has done is open the door for the sheep to define their own sense of righteousness. Woe to him who calls good evil and evil good.

    Thanks for your response. I’m eager to hear what some of the other post-ers have to say.

  321. IWTT says:

    Seems to me your pastor googled “good is the negation of evil” and got his answers from the different links. Catholic on down to atheist. Gen 2:17 tells us that we “ate of the fruit of the KNOWLEDGE of good AND evil…”. Matthew Henry has an good commentary on BlueLetterBible. I am sure there are other places to get a good explanation.

  322. Carolyn says:

    @ Yes Na: What is a corrupt tree?
    Gill’s Exposition Isaiah 5:19-21
    A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit,…. A man that is unprincipled with the grace of God, has an experimental acquaintance with the Gospel of Christ, and is guided by the Spirit of God into all truth, as it is in Jesus, cannot knowingly deliver, maintain, and abide by any doctrine that is contrary to the glory of God’s grace, and the person of Christ, the work of the Spirit, the fundamental doctrines of the Bible; or what is repugnant to the experiences of God’s people, and prejudicial to their souls.

    Neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. A corrupt preacher, one destitute of the truth of the Gospel, reprobate concerning the faith, who never had any experience of the doctrines of grace, and denies them in the theory of them, cannot, consistent with himself, and his own principles, deliver, or preach good doctrine; or that which tends to produce any good fruit, either in the experience or lives of men. It is true, a corrupt man, that is, an unregenerate man, may preach sound doctrine, it being what he believes, though he has no experience of it: but then this man is not a corrupt tree, that is, a corrupt preacher, though a corrupt man. As our Lord means by “a good tree”, not a good man, barely, or one that is made so by the grace of God; but a good minister, one that is furnished by the Spirit of God, and is well instructed in the kingdom of heaven: so by “a corrupt tree” he does not mean a corrupt man, a man that is in a state of nature, habitually and practically evil; but a corrupt preacher, a false prophet or teacher, that has sucked in corrupt principles, and has nothing else in him, and therefore can bring forth no other.

    Having said that, going back to your pastor’s original definition of good…which he said is the negation of evil. I’m thinking of a verse that says, Don’t be overcome by evil but overcome evil with good. So overcoming evil is prevailing and conquering by the Spirit and the Word.

    In reverse: Those corrupt teachers that try to conquer in the Spirit without the Word, will end up negating the “good” gospel and will be overcome by evil.

    Baphomet is Satan’s complex symbolism for what he has in mind for the elevation of himself into the temple of God. The Latin terms solve and coagula are written upon Baphomet’s arms, which translate to dissolve and coagulate, which are opposing alchemical processes. Through out the mystery religions and masonic teachings, Lucifer teaches that what is needed is to dissolve the present order of things so that he can rebuild, rebirth, restructure and reinvent. He continues to tear down old dogmas, creeds and paradigms so that the New Order can be set up. It is what we are watching today in religious alliances as well as global economic and political spheres.

    1 John 2:14
    I write to you, dear children, because you know the Father. I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God lives in you, and you have overcome the evil one.

    It’s the Christians who still carry a Bible and regard it as the authority for their lives over and above the speculations of men, those who will be found believing and trusting the Word when Christ returns. We may suffer as outcasts, but:
    John 16:33
    These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

  323. Mary Matthews (MaryM007) says:

    YesNa – one of the responses that is given whenever the prophetic/apostolic movement is questioned is ‘test all things and hold on to what is good’…(as if the movement is doing all good stuff) well, we truly need to define ‘good’ with the same definition as God does. We cannot judge something good merely by emotion, experience, opinion, etc.

    Jesus rebuked Satan when Peter tried to keep Jesus from going into the city (Peter thinking he was keeping Jesus safe, when in actuality, Jesus had to go to the cross – as that is why He came). Matthew 7:22 speaks of people who are prophesying, casting out demons, doing many wonders, etc., all in Jesus’ name – but Jesus tells them He never knew them.

    Churches rarely, if ever, mention man’s sin, the cross, salvation, etc., anymore – it’s all about expanding the kingdom – which in reality, they still are not doing because you have to realize you are a sinner in need of a savior and be born-again to get into the kingdom – those that haven’t done that remain dead in their sin.

    There are plenty of groups who do ‘good’ things and treat each other well, etc., but it IS more than that.

  324. Carolyn says:

    Yes Na…another thought. To say that the definition of good is the negation of evil is just plain silly. When you think about it…the definition of good is God and the definition of evil is everything that revolts God, everything that rebels against him and his creation. For instance, when we read more into what is in the Word than is actually said, we rebelling…That’s evil.

    In agreement with Craig’s theme of light and darkness….God has plainly spoken. That is light. And the darkness has not comprehended it. That is evil.

    Mary, I agree with you. simple ethical conduct and high standards of morality do not complete the essence of good. They are not the dividing line between good and evil. The gospel is the dividing line between good and evil. Salvation by any medium, be it works or wisdom, other than Christ is evil.

  325. TimBain says:

    YesNa…..based on your previous comments concerning your church and the`direction they’re headed it sounds to me like the Pastor may be laying the foundation for “Dominion” theology, it couldnt be described more succinctly then he put it…everything takes on an aggressive, even warfare like nature (even prayer and worship!) …..and when good becomes evil and evil is called good,our enemies may be those of our own “household”.

  326. Craig says:

    There are different thought systems of panentheism. Without going into the confusing array of panentheistic types (if even I could determine and explicate them all), the important one here is the one mentioned in this article:

    In panentheism, God is both transcendent (outside the cosmos) while simultaneously immanent, within all matter. This immanence is the ‘god within’ (or “Christ within”, seed, divine spark) which inter-connects with all others; i.e., the ‘god within’ one person or thing is of the same essence as the ‘god within’ another. This ‘divine immanence’ is the etheric realm, and omnipresence characterizes the nature of the entire etheric body. This then makes omniscience possible to all

    I can understand if some may not necessarily agree with this or comprehend this concept. However, just today at lunch I picked up Richard Smoley’s Inner Christianity [2002, Shambhalla, Boston] (endorsed by such as astrologist Jean Houston {who used to have a daily horoscope} and David Spangler {referenced in this CrossWise article}). Here’s a portion [pp 134-135]:

    The Father is the ineffable, transcendent aspect of God; the Son is God’s immanent aspect. This divine spark or Logos is the first sounding-forth of existence from the depths of infinity: “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men” (John 1:3-4). Christ is the embodiment of the immanent aspect of God.

    So are we. “Without him was not anything made that was made.” Nothing comes from existence unless this divine spark of consciousness, no matter how faint or dim, lies at the center. This was true of Jesus, it is true of me, and it is true of you…We may not be as exalted as Christ or the other great beings of the cosmos; we not be as good or as wise. But at the core we are the same.

    We are identical “at the core” but the outer shell, our bodies, and all matter, is not. I keep seeing reference to panentheism as a thought system incorporating pantheism (all is God), yet from what I read in Theosophy/New Age/New Spirituality, pantheism is not part of the ideology. Matter will eventually be destroyed. Green-earthers only care about the “core” of the earth as they are of the belief that it is a living, breathing organism which MUST be protected at all costs. That’s because our ‘inner cores’ will eventually unite – including the ‘inner cores’, or divine sparks, in all of creation.

    There ya have it!

  327. Steve says:

    Craig,

    “Nothing comes from existence unless this divine spark of consciousness, no matter how faint or dim, lies at the center. This was true of Jesus, it is true of me, and it is true of you…We may not be as exalted as Christ or the other great beings of the cosmos; we not be as good or as wise. But at the core we are the same.”

    Here’s another quote that conveys a similar idea:

    “The belief of the Incarnation of God in the human form of Christ is an acknowledgment and acceptance of the possibility of the highest (God) and the lowest (human) being united.”

    This second quote is from: “The Unfundamental C. S. Lewis- Key Components of Lewis’s View of Scripture” by Duncan Sprague.

    http://www.leaderu.com/marshill/mhr02/lewis1.html

    Depending on how they are interpreted, either of these quotes could be made to sound orthodox Christian, i.e. “we are created in the image of God”, or they could be made to sound as if they were taken directly from The Secret Doctrine.

    I don’t know anything about Duncan Sprague, but as I was reading his essay on Lewis, [originally published in the Mars Hill Review- 1995], I began picking out numerous theosophical themes. This is another quote that caught my attention:

    “Perhaps, never in the history of Christendom has one man bridged so many levels of understanding to the story of Christianity. As Garry Friesen, friend and former professor says, ‘C. S. Lewis became all things to all readers.’”

    Here’s another interesting quote from “The Christian Expositor” webpage……which I believe also ties in with the subject at hand….

    “The famous writer C.S. Lewis, while not noted for personal doctrinal orthodoxy, recognised that in the final conflict between religions, Hinduism and Christianity would be the only viable options because Hinduism absorbs all other religions and Christianity excludes all other religions because of the supremacy of the claims of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

    http://www.thechristianexpositor.org/page95.html

    Indeed, Lewis made no bones about the fact that his own conversion from an atheistic worldview to belief in God came down to a choice between adopting Hinduism or Christianity.

    A search of the Theosophical Society library database includes 18 entries for C.S. Lewis. The fact that Lewis is still highly esteemed among theosophists should set off alarm bells for the discerning Christian.

    http://magicdb.dupagels.lib.il.us/uhtbin/cgisirsi/?ps=J0QvtRuvnl/TO/221670236/123

    One can read Lewis with a view of supporting various doctrines of Christianity, or Theosophy, or even to support of the deistic (panentheistic/universalist) tenants of Freemasonry if one so chooses. Here’s the concluding two paragraphs from Chapter 12, Part 1 of “God in the Dock- Essays on Theology and Ehtics”, where Lewis attempts to answer the question “Can’t you lead a good life without believing in Christianity?”

    “Morality is indispensable: but the Divine Life, which gives itself to us and which calls us to be gods, intends for us something in which morality will be swallowed up. We are to be re-made. All the rabbit in us is to disappear—the worried, conscientious, ethical rabbit as well as the cowardly and sensual rabbit. We shall bleed and squeal as the handfuls of fur come out; and then, surprisingly, we shall find underneath it all a thing we have never yet imagined: a real Man, an ageless god, a son of God, strong, radiant, wise, beautiful, and drenched in joy.”

    “’When that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.’ The idea of reaching “a good life” without Christ is based on a double error. Firstly, we cannot do it; and secondly, in setting up ‘a good life’ as our final goal, we have missed the very point of our existence. Morality is a mountain which we cannot climb by our own efforts; and if we could we should only perish in the ice and unbreathable air of the summit, lacking those wings with which the rest of the journey has to be accomplished. For it is from there that the real ascent begins. The ropes and axes are ‘done away’ and the rest is a matter of flying.”

    [God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics by C.S. Lewis- Chapter 12]

    .

  328. Craig says:

    Steve,

    Yes, the C S Lewis quotes can be construed either way.

    The magicdb page needs to be refreshed, as a result your 18 entries are not showing up.

  329. Craig says:

    I’ve also thought of a (hopefully) helpful analogy with respect to panentheism:

    Imagine our universe as one large aquarium with all the space in between the created parts as the water in the aquarium. Taking just human beings for the moment: all humans are made up in large part of water. Now, imagine that all the rest of creation similarly has water inside. In this analogy, the water both outside and inside creation within the aquarium is the omnipresent and immanent god (say, ‘god1′) while god simultaneously is also transcendent, i.e. outside the aquarium (‘god2′). Therefore, god1 is interconnected within the universe/aquarium being both wholly outside and wholly inside creation; and, eventually, the created portion will be destroyed with god1 reuniting himself with god2. Then, god will be one and all will be god once again.

    There are varying theories on how god became ‘separated’, or ‘diffused’ within creation in the first place – Kabbalah and Gnosticism have differing accounts, for example.

  330. Craig says:

    OK, while the above analogy will work with at least one Hindu sect, it’s not really applicable here. So, scratch that and instead here’s another:

    Imagine our universe as one large aquarium with all the space in between the created parts as the water in the aquarium. Inside each and every aspect of creation within this aquarium is a divine spark/seed. The sparks/seeds collectively make up the immanent, knowable god, which we’ll deem ‘god1′. These sparks/seeds are all interconnected akin to an invisible string running from one part of creation to the next illustrating god1’s omnipresent characteristic. In addition, outside the aquarium is the transcendent, unknowable (ineffable) god, which we’ll call ‘god2′, enveloping the entire aquarium/universe. Thus we have god1 within all things and god2 outside of all. Eventually, all of god1 will come together once the created portion of the universe is annihilated (which will include the water/space), and god1 will reunite with god2 and return to the state of things prior to the advent of creation. Then, god will be one and all will be god once again.

  331. Steve says:

    The link timed out, which is probably a good thing. One can go to the Theosophical Society main page (one of many) and click on Library, catalog, and search same as in any library.

    http://www.theosophical.org/library

  332. Craig says:

    I tried briefly to navigate the site from where the link (yesterday) took me but I couldn’t get anywhere. I’m somewhat technologically challenged…

  333. Pingback: Bill Johnson’s Christology: A New Age Christ?, part IV (Conclusion) « CrossWise

  334. Steve B. (omots) says:

    As noted, Bill Johnson is certainly not alone in worshiping a “God of Forces” as described by Levi Dowling. Seemingly diverse and unconnected groups, i.e. New Agers, Hindus, Pagans, Wiccans, Freemasons, Theosophists, Mormons, etc…all worship this same false “god”.

    Individuals or groups of people who set out to experience the supernatural by engaging in practices and rituals designed to break the barrier between that “which is above” and that “which is below” will eventually succeed.

    Any shaman or wiccan worth the moniker understands that “ritual” or “ceremony”, is extremely important. While a typical Bethel service may seem relatively spontaneous, every moment is planned, staged and focused on obtaining favorable conditions for these so-called break through “manifestations”.

    Bill Johnson claims Bethel’s “glory clouds”, “gold dust”, and “gem” manifestations are a sign of the “presence”. How curious that this “presence” only manifests itself after the crowds have been mentally “prepared”, or spiritually “opened” by long sets of mesmerizing sensually pleasing music, repetitive incantations, and seemingly endless pleadings by the worship leaders.

    “When humans participate in ceremony [ritual], they enter a sacred space. Everything outside of that space shrivels in importance. Time takes on a different dimension. Emotions flow more freely. The bodies of participants become filled with the energy of life, and this energy reaches out and blesses the creation around them. All is made new everything becomes sacred.”
    ["Sun Bear", a.k.a. Vincent La Duke, Chippewa shaman]

    In Freemasonry, learning the “craft” (obtaining power) through the practice of ceremony and ritual is the highest goal. James Lloyd has published an excellent article on the Christian Media Research website:entititled “The God of Forces” in which he quotes Manly P. Hall:

    “The lost key…places the energy of the universe at their disposal. When the mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his Craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to properly apply [this] energy.”
    [Manly P. Hall, "The Lost Keys of Freemasonry", 1923, pg 47, 48]

    http://www.christianmediaresearch.com/cmc-65.html

    We cannot acquiesce to those who equate the God of the Bible with the “God of Forces”.

    This false “god”, whom may indeed manifest his presence through signs and wonders, was spoken of by the prophet Daniel. Worship of this false god is a sign of antichrist.

    “But in his estate shall he honour the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.” [Dan 11:38]

    “But the LORD shall endure forever: he hath prepared his throne for judgment.” [Ps 9:7]

  335. Craig says:

    Of course, there’s also “the Force” of Star Wars.

  336. Steve B. (omots) says:

    Star Wars for sure!

    Most Bible versions translate the Daniel passage as, “God of Fortresses”, meaning a “stronghold” or “place of refuge”. James Lloyd points out that the root word “mauzzim” can also be translated “munitions”, which has the same meaning as “armaments”, or “weapons”. I like how the KJV puts it, “God of Forces”, which implies both physical and spiritual might. Regardless of the word used to describe this “god”, it’s clear he is a powerful and very well armed enemy.

    According to the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge on my Blue Letter Bible page, worship of this “God of Forces” equates with the worship of “Saints and angels, who were invoked as intercessors and protectors, had miracles ascribed to them, their relics worshipped, and their shrines and images adorned with costly offerings.”

    Not only are they excited about “feathers”, “gold dust” and “precious gems” being manifested at Bethel and other hyper-charismatic “churches” around the world, but now they’re talking about “angel orbs”. They are begging the “God of Forces” to manifest his “presence”.

    As we enter these last days, followers of Jesus Christ are expected to “keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” We are supposed to wrestle against and resist the “God of Forces”, not let down our guard and invite him into our sanctuaries.

    It would seem to me that the “God of Forces” is inspiring all those misguided souls who are intent on creating the “kingdom” on earth through force of arms, or force of will, which would include BM Hubbard’s “One New Man” crowd. These folks are saber rattling and ready to fall in line when “the presence” manifests and gives them their marching orders.

  337. Craig says:

    I am inclined to think the “god of forces” to be a better translation in view of the context.

    This whole worship of icons seems to be the same problem Paul warns about to the church at Colossae – a dangerous syncretism, which is not, at root, Christian but pagan (specifically in Colossians asceticism, with a bit of Judaizing/Jewish mysticism including angel worship for good measure) adaptation of Christianity.

  338. Craig says:

    I’m copying the following comment by Steve B (omots) since it directly pertains to this post. The info in the video of Osteen should be compared to his friend Che Ahn’s words in the post. The second one is from Humanity Healing Network of which I quoted material in this post:

    _________________________

    I pulled the plug on my TV awhile ago, but there are several videos about “spiritual DNA” on Youtube- (Which means it must be true, right?)

    Even that paragon of love and righteousness, Joel Osteen, says we are endowed by our creator with a latent “spiritual” DNA sequence that lies dormant within our genetic code. Osteen preaches that this encoded spiritual cosmic burst resides in everyone just waiting for the right moment to be “released”:

    Another “proof” video informs us that there are several kinds of “spiritual” or “shadow DNA”. There’s “psychic DNA”, “esoteric DNA”, “anima DNA”, “cosmic DNA”, even DNA that contains information about our “past lives stored in holographic format”.

    Wow! Who knew?

    According to the intro quote attributed to Carl Jung, spiritual DNA is:

    “..that dark, unused part of our self that is, in fact, light that is unconscious of itself.”

    Now if Damon Thompson, Bob Jones, Joel Osteen, Carl Jung, and every new age nut on the planet are all in agreement about “spiritual DNA”, what more proof do we need? Maybe we should go find an “anointing”, or walk through a “fire tunnel” or do something really spiritual and powerful to activate our “born again” latent “god gene” so we can make the transition to a higher level of cosmic consciousness. Having the ability to get away with crime would just be an added bonus.

  339. Carolyn says:

    New AgerActivating your dormant DNA, which in time will also give you access to the secrets and mysteries of which you are and what your life-purpose is, will allow you to realize your full potential here on Earth.183

    Che Ahn“I no longer merely confess that I am the righteousness of Christ. I realize that with His DNA in me through His blood, I could be nothing else. I realize the attributes of His DNA reside in me—whether dormant or active.
    No longer do I see the fruit of the Spirit as something we “will” by self-effort or following the law. Rather, I see that in my DNA, God has already placed genes of love, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. They are waiting to be activated by the Holy Spirit.182

    Joel Osteen“Just like the physical, some genes lie dormant waiting to be activated. I believe everyone of us has potential that has not yet been released.”

    New Ager “All of our inner knowledge is stored in the DNA…When we become authentic, we no longer search outside ourselves for ‘true knowledge.’ It is within us.181″

    Notice that both New Agers and New Prophets are using the same words…activated, released, potential, dormant. They are becoming alive through a kundalini, inner awakening, birthing, activating process. This from a Gnostic Bishop…his definition of Gnosis is the knowledge of transcendence arrived at by way of interior, intuitive means.

    Contrast this Gnosis with the John 3
    3 Jesus answered him, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, that unless a person is born again (anew, from above), he cannot ever see (know, be acquainted with, and experience) the kingdom of God.

    The difference is…one birth is internal/earthly nature (releasing the coiled serpent within) and the other birth is from above/external (originating from the Spirit who is outside of man’s nature). Careful which one you activate or partake of….one brings death, one brings life…

  340. Craig says:

    The following article adds some depth to the introduction of this CrossWise article:

    http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/NTeSources/NTArticles/CTR-NT/Parker-IncarnationJohn-CTR.pdf

    …For whatever may have been the teachings about the Logos in the first Christian century, it is John’s first and distinctive teaching that Jesus, not another, is the divine hypostasis who had been with God from all eternity, who was God, and who took on human form by incarnation, appearing on earth for the saving revelation of the Father, and that the Logos, in spite of contemporary teaching and the philosophical speculations attaching to it, is only to be found in this historical personage and at this moment in history in which He made His person known [p 37 / 7 of pdf]

    Interestingly, the author notes that the Stoics, contemporaries of the Gospel writer, had a ‘sperma of God’ concept – like Bill Johnson and Bob Jones ["God-sperm seed"] – known as the logos spermatikos:

    Heraclitus’ successors–to the extent they understood fire as the primordial source of all things–were the Stoics. This creative fire was called the logos spermatikos (i.e., Seminal Reason). E. Bevan asserted that “the orderly working of nature was its operation: organic beings grew according to regular types, because the Divine Reason was in them as [Gr. transliterated] ‘logos spermatikos’, a formula of life developing from a germ.”4 This, in turn, led the Stoics into a warm “theoretical pantheism, “as seen in the Hymn to Zeus of Cleanthes of Epictetus’ Discourses.5 The Stoic logos is not parallel to the Logos of John, as Bevan observes: “It is sometimes said that the Stoic [translit.] ‘spermatikos logos’ was parallel to the cosmic Logos of Philo or the Fourth Gospel, but in the fragments of the old Stoic books the word is habitually used in the plural, [tr.] ‘spermatikoi logoi’, for the multitude of specific types reproduced by propagation. Stoicism knew of no cosmic Logos distinct from God or the Divine fire: where they speak of the [tr.] ‘logos’ of the world in the singular they generally mean the ‘scheme’ of the world.” [p 32 / 2 of pdf]

    This is not a “theoretical pantheism” as the author quotes Bevan above but, rather, more correctly, a theoretical panentheism. That is, instead of “all is god” (pantheism) it is “all is in god and god is in all” (panentheism).

  341. Carolyn says:

    Psalm 113:4-6
    King James Version (KJV)
    4 The Lord is high above all nations, and his glory ABOVE the heavens.
    5 Who is like unto the Lord our God, who dwelleth on high,
    6 Who humbleth himself to behold the things that are in heaven, and in the earth!

    The God of this New Breed of Apostles is not like our God…Their God is not ABOVE the heavens…he is only IN the heavens…
    a God of Fire Power, one like Akasha, the energy of the kundalini, the pure spirit or 5th element of the Wiccans
    or one like the Logos of the Stoics…the Creative fire called logos spermatikos,
    or one who promotes the “more fire” of Pensecola and Todd Bentley revivals
    or one who promotes “fire tunnels”….shiver…

    Fire in the Bible is judgement and the vengeance of God…not a good thing.

    In Pentecostal and Charismatic circles This is the passage of Scripture, I believe that leads charismatics to believe that “the baptism of the Holy Ghost and with fire” is a good thing but in context….it is not.

    Matthew 3:10-12 (KJV)
    10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
    11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
    12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

    Au contraire…Biblically speaking, fire is a judgement and not a blessing of power to be called down…as they are doing…

    Excerpt from Barnes notes on this passage:
    With fire – This expression has been variously understood. Some have supposed that John refers to the afflictions and persecutions with which men would be tried under the Gospel; others, that the word “fire” means judgment or wrath. According to this latter interpretation, the meaning is that he would baptize a portion of mankind – those who were willing to be his followers – with the Holy Spirit, but the rest of mankind – the wicked – with fire; that is, with judgment and wrath. Fire is a symbol of vengeance. See Isaiah 5:24; Isaiah 61:2; Isaiah 66:24. If this is the meaning, as seems to be probable, then John says that the ministry of the Messiah would be far more powerful than his was. It would be more searching and testing; and they who were not suited to abide the test would be cast into eternal fire. Others have supposed, however, that by fire, here, John intends to express the idea that the preaching of the Messiah would be refining, powerful, purifying, as fire is sometimes an emblem of purity, Malachi 3:2. It is difficult to ascertain the precise meaning further than that his ministry would be very trying, purifying, searching. Multitudes would be converted; and those who were not true penitents would not be able to abide the trial, and would be driven away.

  342. Carolyn says:

    Our God, the Logos, on the other hand, has incarnated to bring us Salvation. The fact that Satanic entities are trying to replicate the signs and wonders that Christ showed to disclose his deity while on the earth as in John 1:51 KJV
    51 And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.

    Does this sound like what is happening in the Bill Johnson books and meetings?
    Satan has counterfeited this today in that he has “opened the heavens and there really are angels ascending and descending”….which brings us BACK to the importance of the message of the Incarnation.

    1 John 4:1-3
    King James Version (KJV)
    4 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
    2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
    3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

    This is the test. The only test. How else could we know the difference between the real and the counterfeit. Anyone who does not say that God has come in the flesh is anti-christ.

    Bill Johnson and his counterfeiting spirits fail the test. As I read the Scriptures for myself, this truth is evident.

  343. just1ofhis says:

    Carolyn,
    That is how God kept me out of the Healing Room Ministries: the woman running the ministry couldn’t confess Jesus Christ as God or Jesus Christ having come in the flesh. She just stumbled around with a different answer, which is no answer at all.

    It is a good reminder to all Christian’s walking in this day: test those spirits. If you aren’t sure, ask them directly, “Did Jesus Christ come in the flesh?”

    If they stumble around, talk about “born again” or “received the anointing at baptism”, use the word “smeared”, or any response short of a resounding “YES!”; you have your answer. Have nothing to do with them. Do not be shy about asking this question. Any true born again believer in Jesus Christ will never be offended by it.

  344. Carolyn says:

    Just1ofhis

    I believe these workers of healings and miracles are very confused as to exactly what the Incarnation means…because they have had so much teaching on the “anointing” as the reason for Christ coming…(so that we could be anointed in the same way as he is and do the same works). This what the demons are up to…they want to promote the need and the opportunity for themselves to manifest their works and their doctrines. So when asked “is Christ, God come in the flesh?”…some are not even sure what that means…but interesting the way they stumble around for words…that’s the first clue…

    There are some wiser witches around who have been brought up in the church and they know the jargon. So believe it or not, they can say the words that “Jesus came in the flesh”. I had one come and stay with me for 3 months. She exhibited every New Apostolic Reformation sign and wonder, saw demons behind every thing that moved and everything that didn’t and her and her 3 boys had visions, dreams and occult manifestations in my house!!! And at one point, she said to me, “the test for knowing whether prophets are false or true is if they can say that “God is come in the flesh”.

    But there came a time when I gave God the glory for what he does for us apart from our works…and it was then that the spirit in her manifested. She was shaking visibly and screaming at me that I was undermining everything she said and stood for!

    I went to my room, fell to my knees and cried out to God, saying “what have I done?” The real Holy Spirit said…”test the spirits”.

    That may sound like a contradiction to what you have said, but it’s not. I’m just saying, some can actually say the words, but when it comes to the real meaning of the incarnation, that Christ came as God, worked miracles by the eternal power and nature that is inherent in his deity and that everyone that denies this is a liar, I’m silencing the spirits.

    The truth is that demonic spirits are trying to make the work of Christ trivial, inconsequential or negate it altogether. If we only have to ask God for what we need which was Christ’s instruction to us, then the spirits don’t get to manifest any more works, exalt flesh and draw attention to themselves.

    And just as Bill Johnson dances around the subject saying out of one side of his mouth that Jesus is eternally God, out of the other side of his mouth he is saying that Christ left his deity behind when he was incarnated. You can’t have it both ways. That’s the bottom line.

  345. Craig says:

    I recall reading in a book by Earl Paulk (don’t recall the title, but I have it) in which he claims that he and his ilk are all “Christs” and, as such, they are all ‘Jesus in the flesh'; and, if anyone denies this they are antichrist!

    The witch that made the claim that the test is “God is come in the flesh” may be using a semantic play similar to Paulk’s. However, the test is two-fold and more exacting. One must confess 1) that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22-23), i.e, the one unique Messiah; and, 2) that Jesus Christ (as opposed to ‘God’) has come in the flesh (1 John 4:2).

    Judith M. Lieu [I, II & III John: A Commentary. 2008, Westminster John Knox, Louisville, KY] expounds on 1 John 2:22-23:

    It appears that what sounds like the traditional formula of belief in Jesus as Messiah has taken on a new dimension of sonship…This confirms that the force of the correct confession is ‘that Jesus is the Christ,’ and not, as is grammatically possible, ‘that the Christ [about whom we know] is Jesus [rather than someone else or as not yet appeared]’…The author’s logic is simple and can be understood within its immediate context. His strategy is to start from what matters: the real charge is not about ‘the Christ,’…Rather, it is that the antichrist denies the Father and the Son: this is no longer denial of belief about (‘that’) but a refusal to acknowledge…it is ultimately a question of acknowledging, or denying the Son…the Son is Son only in relation to the Father, and the Father is Father only in relation to the Son; to reject the Son is to reject both, even if this was not the intention [p 106].

    For more, see “Orthodox Definition of the Antichrist Spirit” here:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/03/17/the-christ-anointing-and-the-antichrist-spirit/

  346. just1ofhis says:

    Awesome clarification (Carolyn and Craig)…

    I would also add that there are many church websites that will claim “Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” and present a very orthodox sounding doctrine, but the actual confessions of the pastors and others in the church will be “off” (as will other doctrines of the church). I think Craig’s point about a semantic play on words is also really telling. satan has been playing this game for a long time, we need to depend on the Holy Spirit to guide us into the truth (as He did for Carolyn!).

    satan is the ultimate twister of scripture and always has been. If an answer to the question is twisted in any way, one can be certain that he is behind it.

  347. Carolyn says:

    Craig:

    So what you are saying is that to test the spirits, there must be acknowledgement of the Father and Son together in relationship…the only begotten Son, coming from the Father and with the Father even while on earth…proving his eternal divinity…
    John 3:13
    King James Version (KJV)
    13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

    If the “spirit” in a person cannot acknowledge Christ’s unity with the Father, it is an anti-christ spirit.

    I’m thinking of New Age Christs which are many and have no need to be related to the Father. This is definitely an example of a anti-christ spirit. That would include spirit behind the witch…that didn’t like me bringing glory to God and thereby connecting the Son with the Father. Her Christ spirit is separate or divorced from the Father…it works on it’s own without having to acknowledge the One True Christ.

    That’s interesting because when you think of it, the biggest arguments between the Pharisees and Jesus were about his relationship with the Father. Their acknowledgement of Christ coming down from the Father would have demonstrated their acceptance of the Messiah foretold in the OT.

    John 5:43
    I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

  348. Craig says:

    Carolyn,

    Yes, it boils down to affirming that Jesus is the Son of Father God. By asserting that Jesus is the Christ who came in the flesh, one is: 1) affirming that Jesus is God (Jesus is the Christ) and, hence, the Son of the Father; and, 2) acknowledging that Jesus is/was the unique theanthropos, the God-man, God in the flesh from the Incarnation and forward. At the miraculous conception in the womb of the virgin Mary, the Word takes on a new mode of existence from that point forward (from our temporal perspective). He is still the Word, the Son of God; but, now He is Word made flesh and is yet so at the Father’s right hand.

    This then precludes anyone from claiming that “the Christ anointing” came upon the human Jesus and/or “the Christ anointing” is available to mankind in general.

  349. Carolyn says:

    Craig, I know that I’ve read your post on the anti-christ spirit a while back…but now that I go back I find new information that is relevant to what we are discussing at the moment.

    Such as…from Bill Johnson’s “When Heaven Invades Earth”

    The antichrist spirit has a goal for the Church – embrace Jesus apart from the anointing. Without the anointing, He becomes a safe religious figure who is sure not to offend us…How can people who love God be offended by the anointing of the Holy Spirit?19

    Ha! Speaking of twisting things, Just1ofhis……. Bill J’s definition is exactly the opposite of the definition given in Scripture. He replaces the Father with the false anointing spirit. What an obvious perversion of truth!

    From http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/03/17/the-christ-anointing-and-the-antichrist-spirit/
    Orthodox Definition of the Antichrist Spirit
    Here are the Apostle John’s words in his first epistle defining the antichrist spirit:
    22Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. 23Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also. [1 John 2:22-23, NASB]

  350. just1ofhis says:

    Bill Johnson is the ultimate scripture twister, isn’t he?

    If Jesus “laid aside his divinity” and walked on earth as a man “smeared with the Holy Spirit” at his baptism; how does BJ explain 12 year old Jesus sitting in the temple?

    “After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking questions. EVERYONE WHO HEARD HIM WAS AMAZED AT HIS UNDERSTANDING AND HIS ANSWERS.” (Luke 2:46-47, my emphasis)

    How did Jesus respond when His mother asked Him why He had treated them so?

    “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “DIDN’T YOU KNOW I HAD TO BE IN MY FATHER’S HOUSE?” (Luke 2:49)

    Jesus, at 12, declared God to be His Father and amazed everyone with His understanding and answers in the temple. This occurs almost 2 decades BEFORE His baptism and public ministry, at which time BJ believes he was “smeared with the Holy Spirit” like peanut butter.

    No wonder BJ teaches his followers not to study scripture too much or they might become bound by a “religious spirit”. BJ is a worshiper of “the anointing”, which is the antichrist spirit.

  351. Craig says:

    just1ofhis,

    You bring out something I mentioned in a footnote in part one of the “New Age Christ?” article:

    http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2012/03/11/bill-johnsons-christology-a-new-age-christ/

    At footnote 27:

    This creates a logical fallacy within the Johnson theology: if Jesus could only see/hear the Father by virtue of the “Christ anointing” He received at John’s baptism, how could He know to ‘be about His Father’s business’ [Luke 2:49] as a 12 year old?

  352. Craig says:

    I must say that I’m delighted that there are individuals reading through the series, including even clicking on the urls in the footnotes. I myself have been rereading this series recently; and, since I’m self-critical I noticed some things I would have done differently including rephrasing, perhaps moving some things around a bit, etc. One of the things I noticed was that I didn’t go into enough detail about panentheism in “The Word Becoming Spirit” section, including not providing any footnotes. This got me on a search to double-check my work. In reviewing my sources, I have confirmed the position expressed in the article is correct, i.e. this IS what Bailey teaches.

    I’m referring to the paragraph which begins “In panentheism, God is both transcendent (outside the cosmos) while simultaneously immanent, within all matter.” This is very important as there are a number of different varieties of panentheism, some which speak only of a ‘god within’, or ‘god’ immanent, to the exclusion of a ‘god’ transcendent. That would not work well as a quasi-/pseudo-Christian doctrine. Therefore, it’s important to couple immanence with transcendence in order to appear more ‘Christian’.

    Unfortunately, the critiques I’ve read by Christian apologists of individuals who seem to be promoting panentheism discuss only the immanent aspect. I’m not sure if this is because the individual/s being critiqued DO in fact present an immanent but not transcendent ‘god’, or if the apologist didn’t specifically look for transcendence. Let me use the words of Alice Bailey in order to explain the importance of both aspects:

    The Eastern faiths have ever emphasised God Immanent, deep within the human heart, “nearer than hands and feet,” the Self, the One, the Atma, smaller than the small, yet all-comprehensive. The Western faiths have presented God Transcendent, outside His universe, an Onlooker. God transcendent, first of all, conditioned men’s concept of Deity, for the action of this transcendent God appeared in the processes of nature; later in Jewish dispensation, God appeared as the tribal Jehovah, as the soul (a rather unpleasant soul) of a nation… [Bailey The Reappearance of the Christ. (c) 1948 by Lucis Trust; renewed 1976 by Lucis Trust (9th prtg 1979 (4th pprbk)), Fort Orange Press, Albany, NY; p 144-45]

    Obviously Bailey is referring to ‘the God of the OT’, and next you’ll see that she contrasts Him with the ‘God of the NT’, as if they are different ‘gods’. This is exactly what 1st/2nd century Gnosticism had done. As we continue with Bailey, we’ll see that she (actually the demon which channeled through her) wishes to combine the two by describing Jesus as a ‘perfected man’, i.e. a man who worked His way to perfection by the “Christ within”:

    …Next, God was seen as a perfected man, and the divine God-man walked the Earth in the Person of Christ. Today we have a rapidly growing emphasis upon God immanent in every human being and in every created form [ED: the immanence portion of panentheism]. Today, these two ideas which have been summed up for us in The Bhagavad Gita: “Having pervaded this whole Universe with a fragment of Myself, I remain”…. [p 145]

    This quote in The Bhagavad Gita very closely approximates the doctrine found in most forms of the Kabbalah, which is a form of Jewish mysticism. To put simply, the transcendent ‘god’ (in the Kabbalah of Isaac Luria, the Ein Sof) diffused a part of Himself throughout all of creation leaving divine sparks, thus making a ‘god immanent’ in creation. The end goal is to reunite these divine sparks into one by shedding and destroying the unnecessary ‘shells’ which house the sparks, and, in turn reunite this resulting large formerly ‘immanent god’ with the transcendent god so that all is One once again. This is the same end goal of Alice Bailey’s Theosophy. This is the “plan for our world”:

    …God, greater than the created whole, yet God present also in the part; God Transcendent guarantees the plan for our world and is the Purpose, conditioning all lives from the minutest atoms, up through all the kingdoms of nature, to man. [p 145]

  353. Craig says:

    Also, according to Bailey’s Theosophy, the ‘transcendent god’ is referred to as ‘The Ineffable One’ (Unknowable One) and ‘THE ONE ABOUT WHOM NAUGHT CAN BE SAID’.

    Here’s more:

    …The divinity of man cannot be explained away. It is either a fact or it is not. God can be known in the flesh through the medium of His children or He cannot. All rests back on God, the Father, the Creator, the One in Whom we live and move and have our being. God is immanent in all His creatures, or He is not. God is transcendent and beyond manifestation, or else there is no basic reality, purpose or origin. Probably the growing recognition in men’s minds that He is both immanent and transcendent is true, and we can take our stand upon His Fatherhood, knowing ourselves to be divine because Christ and the Church of all ages have borne testimony to it. [Bailey, From Bethlehem to Calvary: The Initations of Jesus. © 1937 by Alice A. Bailey, renewed 1957 by Foster Bailey; Lucis Trust, 4th paperback ed., 1989; Fort Orange Press, Albany, NY; p 159]

  354. Leigha says:

    Lewis Part 1

  355. Leigha says:

    Lewis Part 2

  356. Craig says:

    Leigha,

    I released your C.S. Lewis videos; however, please note that in the Before You Comment tab at the top of the site, the commenter is (implicitly) asked to provide some sort of reason as to why the link, video, etc. is posted. I presume you’ve posted this in response to the earlier discussion on C.S. Lewis?

  357. Leigha says:

    Yes Craig, thats the reason. I am sorry that I didnt read the “before you comment” section first.

  358. Craig says:

    No problem. Did you want to make a specific comment about the video?

  359. Leigha says:

    No, just that the videos are very self explanatory. There is also a link to a PDF on the description of the videos, and it documents a lot of these claims against Lewis. My only comment is that a lot of people have a hard time accepting Lewis and Tolkien being deceivers, because 1. they’re both dead and unable to defend themselves and 2. they’re writings and stories are so accepted as “christian”. But what people seem to forget is Billy Graham, who has been seemingly “Christian” has been proven to be a compromiser and ecumenist. Rick Warren too. What makes Lewis or Tolkien, or any other christian writer of past, any less in error. Anything “christian” that is so heavily embraced by the world is a red flag with some sort of error. Narnia tales and comparisons are real big in a lot of these “christian” movements, cant help but smell a bad stench of error accompanying that, again, if the world accepts it, theres something wrong. I digress. God bless you Craig and thank you so much for your research and exposing these false doctrines. Take care.

  360. Craig says:

    Thanks for your comment.

    As to #1: that notion is refutable. Whether alive or dead, we have their material as reference. Assuming it’s viewed in proper context, if the material goes outside Scripture, then it must be called into question.

    … if the world accepts it, theres something wrong. Absolutely!

    I’m not sure when I’ll find the time to view the videos. Hopefully, OMOTS is still reading here and will comment.

  361. Arwen4CJ says:

    I’m 52:42 into the first video right now, and I need to go do something else. I’ll finish listening to it later. Below are my thoughts so far.

    I’m listening to the first video right now. I’ve read all of The Chronicles of Narnia (Lewis) and all of The Lord Of The Rings, the Hobbit, and The Silmarillion (Tolkien).

    I do appreciate the fact that someone has brought these videos forward, and as Christians we do need to talk about popular shows and stories and whatnot. We should have discussions.

    I’d like to clear up a few things here:

    Neither of these series’ were supposed to be a substitute for the gospel. These are stories — fantasy. They are not real, nor are they meant to explain reality. However, both stories do have sort of a retelling of the gospel in them (again, not a replacement for, but more of an allegory).

    Furthermore, the Hobbits are not portrayed as evil beings. Frodo is not an evil character. There are good and evil characters in Lord of the Rings for sure, but there are good and evil characters in every story. Even true stories have this.

    So what I’m saying is that some of the “connections” that are made in this video are over done.

    Tolkien never saw himself as a savior for mankind.

    The speaker in the video is correct about witchcraft being evil, etc. So I do appreciate what he says about that.

    True, Tolkien was Roman Catholic.

    In Tolkien’s world, the elves are more like humans. They are not supposed to be evil beings. I say they are like humans is because they are the loved creatures that were created sort of in the image of the God in their world. They were the things that the evil angel type being in the series tempted and corrupted in order to make the orcs/goblins.

    I think that the guy doing this video took some of Tolkien’s words out of context to say that he channeled the stories. That can’t really be because there were a lot of other writings that he wrote when he was putting together this story. I mean he had drafts and edited stories, etc. These are available in other books that his son helped put out.

    There is no instruction in doing witchcraft in the books. There are wizards as characters, but these are clearly fantasy wizards.
    ___________________________________________
    As for The Lion, The Witch, And the Wardrobe………has this person doing the video ever read it?

    I’d never use either of these stories as Sunday School material for teaching kids because they are not the biblical stories. It shouldn’t be part of church or the church service. So, it is too bad that churches preached on Narnia rather than the Bible. (assuming the sources used were correct).

    I don’t remember a mirror playing a huge role in the story at all.

    Aslan is supposed to be a Jesus type figure, yes. But again, this is allegory…not a substitute for Jesus or the gospel.

    I don’t agree with the speaker’s KJV only stance.

    C.S. Lewis was an atheist to start out with. I don’t know about whether or not his stuff is required reading for witches, but if it is, then these witches don’t understand the Christian allegory. That’s too bad, but it doesn’t make Lewis’ writings occult.

    I don’t know when C.S. Lewis made the comment that he supposedly said about there being an embarrassing verse in the Bible was before or after Lewis came to Christ, or where he was in his walk with Christ when he made it.

  362. Leigha says:

    @Arwen4CJ I think Lewis made the comment on the embarrassment part in Reflections from the Psalms book. If you look at the videos description, it gives a link to a couple more links to Lewis. One I did listen to that is way shorter (by a Lawrence Justice -its a youtube video) and he gives reference to each quote.

    I agree with you on the KJO stance! :-)

    From what I gather of this expose, is their (Lewis’ and Tolkien’s) occult affiliations and connections. As far as the stories, I think the main point is that as alleged christians, them using occult symbolism (wizards etc.) that God clearly forbids in scripture is an oxymoron.

    Anyway, thats my take on it, there are other sources that expose Lewis and Tolkien, this video is just simpler -in my opinion than a bunch of links.

    Take care and God bless you!

  363. linda62 says:

    Arwen4CJ, thank you for your clarifications and observations. I agree.

  364. Craig says:

    I skimmed through this article here:

    http://www.seekgod.ca/narnia.htm

    …on Narnia, and, while I don’t agree with all the author’s conclusions, I see enough to have my eyebrows raised. I’ve never read any C.S. Lewis before, nor did I see the movie; so, it’s all new to me. It seems that the things attributed to Aslan could well be attributed to the coming Antichrist (a connection the author does not make).

    In Lewis’ work, Aslan the lion is a Jesus Christ figure (of course, Jesus is seen as the “Lion of the tribe of Judah” [Rev 5:5] post-Ascension); in Scripture Satan “prowls around like a roaring lion” and “masquerades as an angel of light” [2 Cor 11:14]. And, the beast has the mouth of a lion [Rev 13:2] which gets its power from the dragon (Satan).

    The author states Aslan is described as “King of the wood and the son of the great Emperor-beyond-the-Sea.” Certainly, we can view the Antichrist as the ‘son’ of Satan, “the Emperor-beyond-the-Sea”, or perhaps the “beast coming out of the sea” [Rev 13:1].

    In addition, Aslan died but was raised from the dead. In Scripture we have: “3 One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed” [Rev 13:3].

  365. Carolyn says:

    I didn’t really want to discuss this again, but I was interested to see what the seekgod website said about it. So I’m not getting drawn into a discussion, but I’ll made a comment.

    From http://www.seekgod.ca/narnia.htm posted by Craig:

    “According to a report in USA Today, the author of The Narnian: The Life and Imagination of C.S. Lewis, stated there was no intent of a Gospel message or intent to win anyone to Christ by Lewis, which incidentally, goes against what we are called to do when we receive Jesus Christ as Savior:

    “…He [Lewis] set out to write a children’s book that would be exciting and adventurous.

    “He was not trying to win anyone to Christianity with this story. And I think you can tell that by the way so many people can read it and love it without having any idea of the biblical connection.” 10

    That report also noted, “Lewis, who was Anglican, is an unlikely hero for evangelicals in some respects. He smoked and drank and lived for 30 years with an older woman who was not his wife.” That in spite of his writings being embraced and taught in seminaries and Lewis viewed as one of the greatest Christian apologists by many advocates. J.I. Packer called him “our patron saint.”, in an article observing the 100th anniversary of Lewis’s birth in Christianity Today and also stated that Lewis ”has come to be the Aquinas, the Augustine, and the Aesop of contemporary Evangelicalism” 10b”

    At best, it’s not the gospel, at worst, It’s another gospel.

    Is Aslan a New Age Christ? According to Lewis, he was a imaginative figure. According to many Evangelicals, he represents Christ. Who do you believe? When added together, I get New Age Christ.

  366. Arwen4CJ says:

    Leigha,

    I haven’t finished the videos yet, so I haven’t listened to all the connections that the person who wrote the video made.

    Am I against real life wizards? Of course. Real life witchcraft is evil, etc.

    However, I am willing to give a little leeway for fiction & fantasy, as long as the wizards and such are clearly portrayed as fantasy. I don’t see wizards and magical creatures and the like as being necessarily occult. I see it simply as part of the world of fantasy and fiction. In these stories, there is no instruction of the characters into magic, no encouragement for people to participate in them, etc.. In Lord of the Rings, a wizard is simply a race of beings. A person in LOTR can’t become a wizard unless the person was born into the wizard race. It’s like wizards are a species in the series.

    As far as Aslan in Narnia, I haven’t looked at the seekgod article yet, but I will. What I will say here, though, is that “the Emperor across the sea” can be understood as God the Father. Also, Edmund betraying his brothers and sisters is portrayed in the book as a sin against Aslan, and his very act gives the White Witch (who can be seen as Satan) the right to him. Thus, Edmund must die. Except that Aslan chooses to die in Edmund’s place, and take the punishment upon himself, and then is raised from the dead.

    I’m not sure about the sources that say Lewis never meant for it to be a Christian story, as it is pretty clear to me that there was an intention to make some kind of Christian theological statements.

    I personally do not see any occult or New Age ideas being promoted in either of these stories.

    However, I can say that there is another series that does have clear connections with the occult — and that is Star Wars. I was a huge fan of Star Wars for a long time, before I learned about the existence of the New Age, and the like. However, when I started reading aplogetics and learned about the New Age, I saw how deeply steeped Star Wars was in this stuff.

    A person can still enjoy watching the story itself — but if a Christian watches SW, that person must confront the occult elements in the movies, and must be firmly against the spirituality presented in the movies. This takes maturity, and I do not think that all Christians should watch SW, especially children, or those who have been involved in the occult before.

    Now, as to Narnia and LOTR, if an individual was involved in the occult, or was into something else that had wizards, elves, etc. in it, and these things were portrayed as being occult in the fandom the person was into…..then seeing other fantasy/fiction movies or shows might cause a stumbling block to them. Those Christians shouldn’t see the movies.

    Fantasy/fiction/science fiction isn’t for everyone. For some Christians, they clearly cannot get passed the fact that some of these races/species/whatever you want to call them are present in some occult literature too. I would say that these Christians shouldn’t watch or read these types of things then.

    For other Christians, I think it is okay for them to watch or read these things.

    As Carolyn said, I don’t want to debate this whole thing again, however, I did want to address what was in the videos posted. The guy has made some good points so far, but I also felt that he has gone a little far with what he said about Tolkien/Lewis.

    I will say that I do enjoy a good story, and I do tend to like fiction. I like all kinds — historical, Christian, fantasy, science fiction, romance (as long as the characters in it are moral) etc. The only kind I don’t like is horror.

    I will refuse to watch horror because I personally see it as glorifying the demonic. Now, I can understand if other people see fantasy doing the same thing. That’s fine. It’s perfectly reasonable. For some Christians, they would have no problem watching horror movies. So it all comes down to our individual convictions about the things that we read or watch.

  367. Leigha says:

    I realize now why Craig suggested I further coment on why I posted the videos.

    I really am not trying to reconjure up a debate, my motive for posting these videos was just to shed light on the topic of Lewis, nothing more.

    My health is quite bad, so even if I wanted to, I really wouldnt’t have the energy to debate anyway.

    God bless you!

  368. Arwen4CJ says:

    Let me take a look at the http://www.seekgod.ca/narnia.htm article.

    As Christians, I think we need to practice critical thinking when we read apologetic articles that make claims about something. Yes, take the claims seriously, but also use critical thinking. God gave us brains, and we can’t just accept all information just because it comes from a Christian source. Of course this isn’t just true when it comes to reading apologetic articles, but also holds true when we read or hear anything.

    I do generally like the articles on seekgod.ca, but I take issue with some of the statements made in this article.

    First, a reader must understand the genre from which Lewis wrote from — and this was fantasy. Again, I contend that the Narnia stories he wrote were meant to be allegory, not a replacement for the gospel. Aslan is supposed to represent Jesus in the story, not be a replacement for Jesus for us. Fantasy is clearly fiction, so we shouldn’t read it in the same way that we read non-fiction.

    Now, perhaps Lewis denied that Narnia is meant to be an allegory, as the article suggests. If that is the case, then I think Lewis was in error here by saying that it wasn’t allegory, but was meant to be Jesus in this other world. I would take issue with his statement and his intention here, but it wouldn’t make it an occult story.

    I think it is good to point out possible theological problems with it, including the idea that some things could be seen in an occult way. That’s great. As Christians, we should always be alert, and we should discuss these possible problems. If we dialogued more with one another on theological issues, maybe more people would see theology as being relevant.

    Anyway, so the notion that anything that is magical in a fantasy story is necessarily occult isn’t always true. Fantasy magic is more like a literary device used in the story, rather than making the claim that it is like the magic that people use in real life. The way that Lewis used it in the story isn’t really occult — things just happen. No one is conjuring up any magic or tap into some unseen power source, etc. Lucy simply walks into a wardrobe and discovers another world.

    I can’t remember any actual spirits in the Narnia world. All I remember is talking animals — something that is clearly fictional. We know that animals don’t talk, but they can in fiction/fantasy stories. In fiction/fantasy anything is possible.

    Yes, I admit that some of the creatures are mythological, and are creatures that are used in pagan stories, etc. But at the same time, fantasy is fantasy. Not all stories that have mythological creatures in them are occult in nature, nor are the creatures themselves necessarily occult. They are simply characters in the story.

    Now, I just looked at my copy of The Lion, “The Witch, and the Wardrobe,” and in the actual book, there are no words said at the coronation. It just says, “Aslan solemnly crowned them and led them to the four thrones amid deafening shouts of “Long live King Peter! Long live Queen Susan! Long Live King Edmund! Long Live Queen Lucy!”

    So the bit about them being crowned in the names of the four winds is actually incorrect, at least as far as Lewis is concerned. Perhaps the movie script originally added that in, and then decided to delete it before writing the final script.

    I’m certainly not one to defend Disney, so they certainly could have changed the story or script any number of times to include whatever content they wanted to. We all know that they tend to do that with stories when they make movies. So those issues would be with the movie itself, and not with Lewis’ original work.

    And I’m sure that they did try to purposely target faith groups, especially Christian ones, before the movie came out.

    In the same way that I can’t defend Disney here, I also can’t defend those who were responsible for marketing the movie. From the article, it seems that they had a business model in mind — make as much money as they could. So what these people said or didn’t say doesn’t really have to do with Lewis itself, but rather with the motives of those who did the movie.

    I first read the book “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” when I was in 4th or 5th grade, in school. I think it was 4th grade. Anyway….I remember my teacher talking about Turkish Delights as being an English kind of treat. We’d have to ask someone from the UK for clarification, but I’m pretty sure it’s just a dessert. Since Lewis was from England, he would have been familiar with this. I really don’t think that Lewis purposely wrote about a drug called Turkish Delight. Now, I don’t know anything about this hashish ingredient, so I would have to research that information. But if we are calling desserts drugs because of ingredients they contain, then we’d have to raise an alarm about chocolate, as it contains a drug.

    Obviously, if anyone actually worshiped or worships Aslan, then that is a huge problem — as he isn’t the real Jesus. I’m guessing, though, that it is people who are way out on the fringes who are doing this — not the majority of the readers of the books or the viewers of the films.

    “Deeper magic” in the book referred to the sacrificial death and resurrection of Aslan, not real magic. However, instead of using the language of the book, those telling people to focus on the “deeper magic” should have told the people to focus on Jesus’ death and resurrection, not Aslan’s. They shouldn’t have used the phrase “deeper magic,” as it is confusing to people not familiar with the story, and could be confusing to those who are familiar with it, too.

    As I said before, no church service, no sermon, no Sunday School, etc should be teaching about Aslan or Narnia. Rather, they should be teach people about Jesus Christ, and they need to teach people from the Scriptures. Fantasy/fiction does not belong in church. Now, I could see someone mentioning (but not focusing on) Narnia being allegory for the gospel. Fine, mention that once and move on. So, I think these churches that focused on Narnia or Aslan were wrong.

    Now as for the intent by C.S. Lewis — a person would need to read the actual words of Lewis to see what he himself said about his work. I think my parents have a copy of some of his statements somewhere in their house. We need to see what Lewis himself said, not what someone else thinks Lewis’ intentions were. It makes sense for secular newspapers would deny any Christian content or intention behind Lewis’ work. So, again, we need to read what Lewis himself wrote about his work. We need to go to the source of it.

    It is true that in The Last Battle, Lewis suggests that for people who are part of another faith, and never had the opportunity to hear the gospel (in Narnia world, this would be Aslan) were still allowed to enter into heaven because they were faithful to what they thought they knew. They honored Aslan even though they didn’t know his name. They were faithful to how they knew it, and Aslan accepted them. That’s basically the gist of that.

    However, this isn’t quite the same thing as universalism, as not everyone gets into heaven. Those who knew Aslan at one time, and drifted away from him, or who didn’t remain faithful to him, or heard of him and rejected him, etc. do not get in. Susan doesn’t make it into heaven because she lost faith and drifted away.

    So, yes, Lewis apparently believed that those in other faiths could get into heaven, if they were ignorant of the gospel and had never heard of Jesus, and yet were faithful to who they believed was God. I agree and acknowledge that this view is not supported by Scripture. However, holding to this view doesn’t mean someone is not a Christian, or that someone is into the occult.

    Once again, the author of the article is incorrect. Aslan, in the story, was not raised back to life by incantations. It simply just happened. And anyone who uses the name Aslan instead of Jesus is in error.

    As for other movie versions of the story, I have nothing to say about those. These were other companies, writing their own scripts, etc. Again, not really Lewis, but rather the way that the people behind these movies wanted to portray things.

    It is right to talk about the creatures and whatnot and share concerns about these things. So I’m glad that the article brings those up. However, I don’t believe that Lewis used these beings in an occult way.

    We should be critical of stories that claim to be Christian, and check them carefully. At the same time, I think that the author of the article has gone too far.

    But, if fantasy/fictional characters bother a particular Christian, then that person shouldn’t be reading or watch stories involving these themes. I would have respect for a Christian who chose not to have anything to do with these stories because of how it affected his or her conscious. At the same time, I would hope that this person would not condemn me for choosing to watch fiction/fantasy, for the reason that it doesn’t affect my conscious.

    That’s all I’m saying about this article.

  369. Craig says:

    Leigha,

    Sorry about your health issues. I’m thankful to remain, at present, in very good health; but, this past viral infection from a couple weeks ago really threw me for a loop. I couldn’t imagine the resulting symptoms (extreme fatigue, no endurance, sleeping more than usual, brain foggy) to have continued on. You have my empathy and prayers.

  370. Arwen4CJ says:

    Leigha says,

    No problem. I’m glad that you did bring up the videos, and they are good discussion points.

    Again, I think as Christians we need to discuss things like this. Not all of us will be in agreement, especially when we start talking about things within culture. But it is good for people in the church to talk about various topics and positions. That’s how we learn from one another, and it helps us understand other points of view.

    If we aren’t discussing these things, then Christian discussion doesn’t happen. I really wish that more Christians dared to bring up things that they thought about or ideas that they had, especially theological topics. I like good discussions.

    The videos are thought provoking, even if I disagree with the conclusions of the authors :)

    I’m sorry that you are not feeling well. You will be in my prayers. I hope that you start feeling better soon.

    In any event, I agree — no more debate on the topic. I won’t post my additional thoughts on the rest of the videos (when I do watch them), as I’ve stated my position thus far fairly clearly.

    I wish you well.

  371. Craig says:

    Readers, please check out Ray Yungen’s article/pamphlet on esoteric healing in which he describes the etheric body, and then compare to The Word Becomes Spirit section above.

    http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=12017

  372. Carolyn says:

    Just skimmed Ray Yungen’s article on the lighthousetrailsresearch blog. It’s interesting to read it but as Christians, the power behind this has no power over us, so we do not have to acknowledge, with any degree of fear, the power behind such things as teddy bears that have been infused with Reiki Energy – that is, if we have the Spirit of Christ living in us.

    Since I seem to be on the cutting edge of critical thinking these days, I’ll just go ahead and get myself involved in a little bit more of it.

    I was thinking as I once again read through the kundalini spirit teaching from RYungen’s article that if we take our knowledge from the occult teaching, we almost start to believe that it has some truth to it. Like, this for instance:…“Basically, what all energy healing entails is opening up the chakras through meditation or transferring the kundalini power from someone already attuned to it:
    At the sixth chakra, a person opens to a higher level of intuition and inner guidance. At the seventh, the person feels a sense of merging with Spirit.2″

    Is there any real truth to that? According to Scripture, all these New Age teachings are just the same Satanic energy for those who are under the power of the evil one (all the world is under the power of the evil one) and for those in Christ, we are, simply, now under the power of Christ.

    So then, my point is…we can read this material, but take it with a grain of salt. It’s not true, not really. The New Age teaching is a lure…imparting false knowledge to make the devotees think they are learning “techniques” with power….lies….

    Same with the healing hands…we can try and understand how all these techniques work…like Oral Roberts and many other “so called Christian healers”, have experienced some kind of heat in their hands as they were healing. So we can compare…and say that they are both similar…in fact so similar as to be the same.

    As IWTT said, the charismatics would insist that as long as they are invoking the name of Jesus they COULD NOT be using the wrong power. But Christ said that many will say to me on that day, did we not do miracles IN YOUR NAME??? and he will tell them to depart from him, because they were indeed “workers of iniquity”.

    Solution? Don’t follow Christ for the bread and the miracles…follow HIM.
    Matthew 6:31 So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

  373. Craig says:

    Carolyn,

    I wonder if you’re not quite understanding my point in posting Yungen’s article/pamphlet? My point was to see how this etheric body compares to what Johnson states in the following, using Yungen’s material to help bring clarity, as I feel this section was probably one of the hardest for the reader to grasp (and the hardest for me to put adequately into words):

    …When words become Spirit, the realms of God’s dominion are released over humanity. When we say what the Father is saying then we literally impart Presence through speech…If we tap the heart of the Father and we speak, then something is released and it is the person of the Holy Spirit who Himself contains the realm of the King-dom – King’s domain. The realm of God is contained in the realm of the Spirit…When we say what the Father is saying, we change the options of every hearer…

    When Jesus said, “Repent for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand” He was letting them know ‘when I talk to you, a reality is released over you that changed your options’. And your answer is within reach. It’s at HAND.

    …It’s my conviction that all ministry can be summed up…can be boiled down to one thing: All ministry is actually imparting the Person of the Spirit of Christ into the atmosphere, into a situation. It’s actually imparting [ED: Johnson here points to his mouth] the person. “Freely you have received, freely give.” What have you received? Him.

    Here Johnson’s “Spirit” seems to be using that same ‘force’ which Yungen is talking about. Johnson: “We literally impart Presence through speech…” Presence of what exactly? Logically, from an orthodox Christian view, we do not “impart” the Holy Spirit’s Presence. Johnson, and others like him, are “imparting” a power for sure, but is it good or evil? I think we know the answer.

    Note also here Johnson is speaking of this “spirit” or “realm of God” as if all spirit is good. This goes back to the newest article (and part of the “Learning Etymology” article) in which there’s the Gnostic false dichotomy that the spiritual is reality, while the material is illusion (or evil).

    Also, it’s clear that Johnson’s references such as “when we say what the Father is saying…” and “‘when I [the Father] talk to you, a reality is released…'” are really about ‘new revelation’ from “the Father”. Yet, this new revelation is NOT coming from God, but from the enemy. In addition, recall from the Learning Etymology post that “repent”, as used above, is the same as the New Age / New Spirituality meaning of contemplative/centering prayer (“soaking”, “intimacy with the Father”, etc.), that is, as one “repents”, or ‘meditates’ this ‘new revelation’ is heard (at least ‘heard’ in the mind, if not audible).

    Essentially, what I’m getting at is that the reader must have the correct dictionary in order to understand what is REALLY being said here. I’m necessarily going to jump around and reiterate a bit, with the intention to try to interpret for the reader just what Johnson is saying here.

    “Words becoming spirit” means the ‘new revelation’ being manifested as power. So, when the ‘believer’ speaks forth these ‘words’ (the “rhema” word in Word/Faith), the believer is using these words as supernatural power, but from the enemy and not God. These ‘words’ “impart Presence”, i.e. demonic power. Contrary to Johnson’s claim that it’s “the Person of the Holy Spirit” who is released, this power is more akin to the power Yungen refers.

    And, this is pretty much Johnson’s “gospel” as he concludes: “All ministry is actually imparting the Person of the Spirit of Christ into the atmosphere, into a situation. It’s actually imparting [ED: Johnson here points to his mouth] the person.” That is, according to Johnson, all ministry is using this ‘force’, imparting this power any and everywhere through speaking the ‘new revelation’ “word”.

    Now look at what Johnson states a bit before the above: Jesus said the Kingdom is within you. Now that Kingdom is released in many different ways. It is released through touch, it is released through the prophetic act, it is released through word. In John chapter 6, Jesus said, “My words to you are spirit and they are life.”

    The “Kingdom is within you”: the power is within you and “that Kingdom is released in many different ways”. These ways include “touch” and the “prophetic act”. Note Yungen’s words from the pamphlet, “In energy-healing, the power [from the 'healer'] is channeled into the patient, thus bringing about the desired wellness and wholeness of the person receiving it.”

    Note from the article (part IIIb above) that Bailey well describes the etheric realm. Sure some of the specific claims, e.g., of chakras, the power being centered in a certain specific place in a person’s body is bogus, a ruse of the enemy, which Christians (and of course Yungen) do not actually buy into; BUT, there’s no doubt the power itself is absolutely real. And, this power CAN be manipulated. This is the kind of power wielded in hyper-charismaticism.

    Now, I’m not stating unequivocally that God cannot act in any given situation, even in the presence of demonic activity. But, we also know that God WILL NOT be mocked; and, it’s clear to me that hyper-charismatic leaders are making a mockery of God, while manipulating many unsuspecting sheep, not-quite-sheep, and even goats.

  374. YesNaSpanishTown says:

    Over the years in my Charismatic circles I have had a lot of people rebuking me and others “in the name of Jesus” for certain statements, “negative confessions” even silly phrases such as “I died laughing”.

    But I now have found two Scriptures to counter their silliness. Psalm 139:11, “If I say, ‘Surely the darkness shall fall on me, even the night shall be light about me…'” And also, Matthew 6:27, “Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?” I’m sure there are others, however, these have popped out at me.

    Our words do not have power as these teachers describe. However, Jesus did tell us that we would be held accountable for every idle word. That is a different matter all together. And since these teachers are teaching falsely, I would say that their words are quite powerless and therefore idle.

  375. Carolyn says:

    Thanks for clarification, Craig. There’s no end to the techniques, new thought and channels of deception.

    Quote from your comment: “And, this is pretty much Johnson’s “gospel” as he concludes: “All ministry is actually imparting the Person of the Spirit of Christ into the atmosphere, into a situation. It’s actually imparting [ED: Johnson here points to his mouth] the person.” That is, according to Johnson, all ministry is using this ‘force’, imparting this power any and everywhere through speaking the ‘new revelation’ “word”.”

    I was considering this morning, HOW Satan actually thought that he would ascend to the throne of God. In Johnson’s case, by saying the same words as God…he proposes that he can effect the same power….he imparts the Christ power.

    Here’s Lucifer:

    Isaiah 14:12 How you have fallen from heaven,
    morning star, son of the dawn!
    You have been cast down to the earth,
    you who once laid low the nations!
    13 You said in your heart,
    “I will ascend to the heavens;
    I will raise my throne
    above the stars of God;
    I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
    on the utmost heights of Mount Zaphon.

    14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
    I will make myself like the Most High.

    Same lie Bill Johnson seems to be propagating, slightly altered, but recognizable.

    And of course, there was the deception that he peddled to Eve…”you shall be as gods”…which ended up being instead, “if you believe me, you shall worship/serve other gods”. These gods/spirits/lying deceiving angels continue to “speak” the Christ power as though it is some new revelation and manipulate the unsuspecting…always something more impressive and grandiose.

    Unfortunately for those who follow other gods, they will receive the same fate as the gods they imitate.

    Isaiah 14:9 The realm of the dead below is all astir
    to meet you at your coming;
    it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you—
    all those who were leaders in the world;
    it makes them rise from their thrones—
    all those who were kings over the nations.
    10 They will all respond,
    they will say to you,
    “You also have become weak, as we are;
    you have become like us.”
    11 All your pomp has been brought down to the grave,

    They just end up being created beings…after all….

    Jeremiah 2:11 where Israel Forsakes God
    Has a nation ever changed its gods?
    (Yet they are not gods at all.)
    But my people have exchanged their glorious God
    for worthless idols.

    The New Age impartations that Bill Johnson presents are thoughts from worthless idols/gods that offer a contradictory gospel. Indeed, God will not be mocked!

  376. Carolyn says:

    YesNa…yes, you are right. Words do have power…but not for ascending to God’s throne:
    Matthew 12:37
    For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.”

  377. Craig says:

    For those who watch Alex Jones and infowars, here’s a video showing Jones with David Icke – who has written books promoting occult / new age ideas, while also exposing same. Jones himself is sold on the idea of ‘planetary energy’, in other words the ‘etheric realm’ (see Word Becomes Spirit section above) in a positive way, rather than negative.

    Jones has been spreading information and disinformation for quite a while now.

    Here’s wiki on esoteric energy:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_(esotericism)

    And here’s a Lucis Trust site the video maker refers to (13:50):

    http://www.lucistrust.org/en/arcane_school/the_electric_bridge/general_articles/science_alchemy_and_psychological_transmutation

    Listen to Icke’s words and compare to some of the things Johnson states in the Word Becoming Spirit section.

  378. Pingback: Heresy!! Bill Johnson’s Christology | The Shepherd/Guardian

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 254 other followers

%d bloggers like this: