Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.You will recognize them by their fruits (Matthew 7/15-16)
Search This Blog
Showing posts with label Ecumenical Movement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ecumenical Movement. Show all posts
Joe Schimmel: "I have never heard this man being mean-spirited!"
Really? The black community does not agree!
Although it is vociferously denied that Kirk was a racist by his supporters, there are clear examples that corroborate this allegation and confirm his damaging, racist remarks against the black community.
Kirk frequently cast doubt on the qualifications of black professionals.. In 2024, he said, “If I see a black pilot, I’m gonna be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.”
On one occasion, he referred to “a moronic black woman” in customer service and questioned whether she was hired “because of her excellence, or … because of affirmative action.” Kirk attacked civil rights leader Martin Luther King: “Clarence Thomas was a far better black role model to celebrate than Martin Luther King. Period. End of story. This guy is not worthy of a national holiday.” At Turning Point USA’s America Fest in 2023, Kirk said, "MLK was awful. We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s."
Kirk referred to journalist Joy Reid, former First Lady Michelle Obama, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, and Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson as “affirmative action picks", and he claimed they did not “have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously.”1 Kirk blamed a Black fire chief in Austin, Texas, for flooding deaths that occurred a three-hour drive away from the city.2
Kirk denounced Juneteenth as a federal holiday commemorating the end of slavery. Kirk: “Juneteenth should not be a federal holiday.. This holiday is not about celebrating emancipation, regardless of the veneer they put on it.”2
These remarks make sense when the roots and history of the NAR and its ties to Brahnamism, British Israelism, and the Ku Klux Klan are understood.*
Schimmel: "Everyone has their faults, and I didn't agree with some of his theology for sure.. and he was on the front lines." Charlie Kirk was on the "front lines" of apostasy, ecumenism, racism, and error. It is one thing to have "faults", it is quite another to be apostate! If Joe Schimmel and Chad Davidson cannot see this, then they are blind and have lost the ability to discern.
Listen to the NAR heretics claim to be on the "front lines".
If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness! (Matthew 6:23).
According to Vatican News there is no theology behind King Charles' meeting with the Pope. Rather, the meeting focused upon the outward appearance of unity and the historical significance of the event being the first time since the Reformation that a British monarch has prayed publicly with a pontiff.
Father Martyn Brown:“I think on both sides it's about recognizing that, even though there are remaining divisions between our churches—very serious ones on all kinds of issues that we work on in our various theological dialogues—there is a huge amount of common ground, of shared faith, of shared spiritual tradition.."1
The 16th-century Reformation in Europe began as a result of corruption within the Roman Catholic Church, particularly the practice of indulgences, which are still practiced by the RCC today. Reformers like Luther and Calvin shifted from the RC doctrine of faith plus works to justification by faith alone (Sola fide) as the basis for salvation. However, instead of replacing error with truth, the Protestant Reformers retained certain RCC heresies, including baptismal regeneration and transubstantiation. Calvin introduced the highly controversial and problematic doctrine of limited atonement, aka Calvinism/Reformed theology, as represented by the acronym TULIP. The Reformers' skewed eschatology generally followed the Roman Catholic amillenial position.
Humberto R. Treiyer: "It has been stated that eschatology did not represent a main concern in the minds of the Reformers because soteriological and ecclesiological questions were the most pressing issues they had to face in the religious convulsions of the sixteenth century. However, this is not totally right. It is true that the basic question
underlying the theology of the Reformation was, 'How shall a sinner be justified
before God?' or more directly, 'What shall I do to be saved?' Nevertheless, this
crucial question cannot be fully answered apart from the eschatological hope.2
The Reformation came to England due to Pope Clement VII's refusal to grant King Henry VIII an anulment from his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. This resulted in Henry VIII declaring himself the Supreme Head of the Church of England. While this shifted the governance and structure of the Church of England, the actual doctrinal changes Henry VIII made were few. In effect, the CofE remained doctrinally Roman Catholic in all but name. From the outset, the CofE left the door wide open to ecumenism and error. We are now witnessing besetting sin and error within the CofE which many predict will ultimately destroy it.
Enter King Charles five hundred years post-Reformation. King Charles' beliefs are based on a philosophy of "harmony" rather than biblical truth.3King Charles embraces ecumenism, interfaith, and universalism and he is completely at odds with the scriptures.
As the so-called "Defender of the Faith", King Charles made an oath on the Bible at his Coronation, and he made a commitment to maintain "the true profession of the Gospel".
The Coronation Roll: "The King knelt on his Faldstool and placed both hands on the Holy Bible while the Archbishop asked: 'Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?' The King answered: 'All this I promise to do', and continued with both hands still on the Holy Bible: 'The things which I have here before promised, I will perform and keep. So help me God.' His Majesty kissed the Holy Bible."4
King Charles' understanding of the gospel and the requirements of God is sadly wanting. Nevertheless, it is every person's responsibility to rightly grasp the meaning of the scriptures and to repent.
The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” (Acts 17:30-31 cf. 2 Timothy 2:15).
..for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:23-26).
Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:11-15).
The Roman Catholic Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) provides a detailed explanation of the alleged infallibility of the Pope.5It states that the Pope, as the head of the Church, enjoys this infallibility when he speaks "ex cathedra", meaning from the chair of Peter, with the intent to define a doctrine for the universal Church. Scripture alone (Sola scriptura) is the foundational theological principle held by biblical Christians. Scripture alone is the supreme and final authority for doctrine and practice. The Lord Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life, the Son of God incarnate. (John 14:6). The Son of God alone has been given all power and authority in heaven and on earth. (Matthew 28:18). Christ alone (Solus Christus) has the authority to forgive sins. (Mark 2:10). Christ alone is the head of the church. (Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22-23; Ephesians 5:23). For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, (1 Timothy 2:5). Any man or institution claiming infallibility is heretical.
The martyr William Tyndale was found guilty by his own admission and condemned to be executed due to his translation of the Bible into English. He "was strangled to death while tied at the stake, and then his dead body was burned". His final words, spoken "at the stake with a fervent zeal, and a loud voice", were reported later as "Lord! Open the King of England's eyes."6 I don't know if Henry VIII ever did repent, but certainly the scriptures were widely distributed in English as a result of Tyndale's direct challenge to the CofE's position and the authority of the Catholic Church.
I am reminded of Isaiah's warning to King Ahab: If you are not firm in faith, you will not be firm at all. (Isaiah 7:9). May God open the King of England's eyes in our time.
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church (ἐκκλησίαν), and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18).
Charlie Kirk's interpretation of the above verse is a mandate for Christians to "build my church on this government structure". Kirk falsely claimed that the Greek noun ἐκκλησία (ekklesia) should be interpreted as "government structure". However, Jesus did not call Christians to build on existing government structures; He said I will build my church.Kirk's blatant misinterpretation of this verse accommodates the lethal seven mountain mandate. The lexical interpretation of ἐκκλησία is from a compound of ek (meaning 'from' or 'out of') and a derivative of kaleo (to call (forth). Strongs: "1577 ekklēsía(from 1537 /ek, 'out from and to' and 2564 /kaléō, 'to call') – properly, people called out from the world and to God, the outcome being the Church (the mystical body of Christ) – i.e. the universal (total) body of believers whom God calls out from the world and into His eternal kingdom. [The English word 'church' comes from the Greek word kyriakos, 'belonging to the Lord' (kyrios). 1577 /ekklēsía ('church') is the root of the terms 'ecclesiology' and 'ecclesiastical.']"1 People are called out of the worldinto the kingdom of God; It is Christ who builds His church, not Christians! Kirk's lethal strategy was to target the young and to shut down any objections without allowing anyone the time or opportunity to test his claims. (1 John 4:1).
Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” (John 18:36).
TPUSA, Dominion Theology, the NAR, and those who believe that secular government and Christians can work together to achieve Christian principles in the world are in serious error. (1 John 4:6). TPUSA is ostensibly a "Christian" organisation, and while they espouse some Christian values, there are red flags everywhere. Charlie Kirk gave his full support to the NAR seven mountain mandate. His divisive rhetoric against the black community was indefensible, and his ecumenism was demonstrated by his endorsement of the Roman Catholic Church and his validation of Mormonism. (2 Corinthians 11:14). On the 26th of September 2025, Vivek Ramaswamy, a Hindu and Republican candidate, faced questions about his faith at a Turning Point USA event.Ramaswamy is a veteran of Charlie Kirk’s “Prove me wrong” campus colloquies. Ramaswamy: “Every religion has its reconciling of the one and the many. And so, in my faith, I believe there’s one true God, he resides in all of us, and he appears in different forms, but it’s one true God. I’m an ethical monotheist.”2
Politics and Christianity are like oil and water; their source are completely different. Politics is based on worldly governance, which is under the dominion of Satan. Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” (John 18:36).
Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.” Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, “‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’” (Matthew 4:8-10).
When Christians seek to infiltrate and influence the political strongholds of the world, they disobey Christ and transfer their allegiance to Satan's dominion. Paul used the terms "powers and principalities" to describe spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. (Ephesians 6:12). The apostles were subversives; they were killed because they were opponents of the state. The Christian mandate is to rescue people from the world i.e. make disciples of all nations, and to preach the gospel to all creation. (Matthew 28:10; Mark 16:15). It is impossible for true Christians to gain political influence in the world without betraying the gospel. The world rejects and hates true Christians. (Matthew 10:22; John 17:14; 1 John 2:15; 2 Timothy 3:12-13).
If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. (John 5:19).
Worldly influence only becomes possible when collusion and compromise are involved. The world is perishing and will ultimately be destroyed. (1 John 2:17; Matthew 24:35). According to the seven mountain mandate, the aim is for Christians to ultimately rule the nations. There is no persecution or cost involved in their agenda. Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.. (2 Timothy 3:12).
But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed. Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. (2 Peter 3:10-13).
The Antichrist will arise from the political arena.
And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems on its horns and blasphemous names on its heads. And the beast that I saw was like a leopard; its feet were like a bear’s, and its mouth was like a lion’s mouth. And to it the dragon gave his power and his throne and great authority. (Revelation 13:1-2).
Revelation 13:1-2 draws from the four successive beast kingdoms in Daniel 7. Daniel's vision describes four distinct terrifying creatures placed in juxtaposition to the saints and the kingdom of God:‘These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise out of the earth. But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, forever and ever.’ (Daniel 7:17-18). The four beasts are described as the empires of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome, aligning with the vision of the statue in Daniel 2. In biblical literature, the sea often symbolizes chaos, evil, and the nations in turmoil. (Isaiah 17:12-13 cf. Revelation 17:15).
I will briefly refer to Caleb Corneloup's recent video and his argument for Christians to be involved in politics.3 Caleb refers exclusively to characters from the Old Testament. While these examples are interesting, they are not relevant to the global situation and the nations today. Ancient Israel was a theocracy that was established by God Himself as outlined in the Torah. As such, it was unavoidable that their leaders would be politically active. We cannot compare Old Testament passages about political involvement with today's political activism in His name. No nation today has a covenant with God. Jesus Christ will establish a global theocracy when He returns.
Those who profess Christianity and use politics as a vehicle to achieve their goals inevitably become persecutors. Following Constantine’s alleged conversion to Christianity in 321AD, Augustine of Hippo introduced many heresies and paved the way for Roman Catholicism. Augustine argued that coercion was justified as a method of persuasion and correction. The dark history of Charlemagne, who was crowned Holy Roman Emperor in 800, is beyond doubt. The Roman Catholic Crusades from the 11th to the 13th centuries were a mix of politics, religion, and violence, during which time many atrocities were committed. Both Luther and Calvin made wicked choices when they held political power. Luther compromised when he opposed the peasants' revolt and sided with "the princes". Luther sanctioned the death penalty for Anabaptists, resulting in some of them being "rebaptised" by drowning in the Danube with rocks tied to their feet. Luther's open hatred of the Jews is well known, as is his rejection of certain New Testament books and his attempt to ban them. Geneva became a repressive authoritarian police state under the abuser John Calvin. Michael Seretus was murdered in 1553 for daring to disagree with Calvin. The NAR seven mountain mandate belongs to the same category as its predecessors; the seeds are being sown, and the final result will be the beast empire of the Antichrist.
Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great prostitute who is seated on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed sexual immorality, and with the wine of whose sexual immorality the dwellers on earth have become drunk.”And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her sexual immorality. And on her forehead was written a name of mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of prostitutes and of earth’s abominations.” And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. (Revelation 17:1-6).
And the angel said to me, “The waters that you saw, where the prostitute is seated, are peoples and multitudes and nations and languages. And the ten horns that you saw, they and the beast will hate the prostitute. They will make her desolate and naked, and devour her flesh and burn her up with fire, for God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by being of one mind and handing over their royal power to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled. And the woman that you saw is the great city that has dominion over the kings of the earth.” (Revelation 17:15-18).
When we see Christian leaders like Joe Schimmel and Chad Davidson (Good Fight Ministries), Mike Winger, and Ray Comfort supporting TPUSA events, we should question their discernment and their true allegiance to Christ.
Further to my recent post regarding Chad Davidson's attendance shame at TPUSA Cal State Fullerton.1 Good Fight Ministries could hardly claim ignorance that TPUSA is ecumenical, and yet in their hypocrisy Chad Davidson and other "reliable" ministers attended this event, including Mike Winger and Ray Comfort. In a recent comment on GFM's livestream, the question was asked: "Is TPUSA ecumenical?", to which they replied "Yes". This completely contradicts their praise of Charlie Kirk after his death when they described him as a "defender of the faith" who "loved Jesus".
GFM have failed to respond to my concerns and also the concerns of others. This is not the first time I have failed to receive a response from the leadership of Blessed Hope Chapel/Good Fight Ministries. In previous posts I have highlighted Joe Schimmel's skewed eschatology.2
Given their numerous exposés of false teachers, I think GFM 's followers deserve an explanation. Otherwise should we assume that they are no better than the phonies who turn a blind eye when their true colours are revealed?
And Elijah came near to all the people and said, “How long will you go limping between two different opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.” And the people did not answer him a word. (1 Kings 18:21 cf. James 1:8).
..if the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do? (Psalm 11:3).
GFM: "The Good Fight Ministries team had boots on the ground at the Turning Point USA event, where Ray Comfort and the guys from Living Waters used the opportunity to share the gospel with the student body at Cal State Fullerton. While there in person we even had the chance to do some interviews with those who attended. Today will be telling you what we saw, heard and thought of the event after taking it all in firsthand. Also, Candace Owens recently claimed to have been visited by Charlie Kirk in a dream. A dream she says confirmed her own beliefs about what happened and that it would all be revealed very soon. Finally, we'll look at the broader reaction from Christians across the country, many of whom are calling what's happening a revival following Charlie's death, while others are urging caution."
I am assuming Chad Davidson's attendance at TPUSA at Cal State Fullerton was with the blessing of his mentor Joe Schimmel. Both these men should know better, having warned about false teachers for years via their numerous exposés.
Do we really have to ask the question: Is this a revival?
What are the foundations of TPUSA?
Charlie Kirk was a right-wing political activist, entrepreneur, and media personality. He co-founded the conservative student organization Turning Point USA (TPUSA) in 2012. Over time, he became aligned with the Christian right and began advocating for Christian nationalism. His more controversial views included criticism of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Martin Luther King Jr., COVID-19, claims of electoral fraud in 2020, and the white genocide conspiracy theory.
One of Kirk's favorite topics was skepticism about the value of college degrees. Wikipedia: "He had the advantage of having refined his debate performance against hundreds of people and used arguments likely to result in agitated and defensive responses by his less experienced opponents."1
Kirk's rhetoric has been described as divisive, racist, xenophobic, and extremist by groups that study hate speech, including the Southern Poverty Law Centre. Kirk's positions have been described as far-right by a variety of outlets and academics, and others state that these positions are now in the mainstream of American conservatism.
Tragically, the ecumenical agenda has been radically advanced by Kirk. In this respect, he actually damaged the true gospel and he was an enemy of Jesus Christ. Kirk's unwavering commitment to the seven mountain mandate, his association with the NAR, Roman Catholics, Mormons, false teachers like Mark Driscoll, and his derogatory remarks about the black community are anti-Christian indicators. It is patently obvious that TPUSA has never been about the true gospel of Jesus Christ.
Davidson discussed the problems encountered by Ray Comfort at TPUSA Cal State Fullerton. Comfort apparently received an invitation to speak at the event, and he accepted, claiming that he intended to preach the gospel. However, it all went badly wrong. Comfort had prepared two Charlie Kirk video clips and questions he would like to be asked. He told the associate producer how important it was that those two clips were played. After waiting all day for his slot and preparing what he was going to say, he discovered that "the powers that be" hadn't used those clips. After the event, Comfort admitted that he had messed up and he apologised to upset believers for being "rude, impatient, and unloving". This is what comes of validating false teachers and putting oneself under the authority of a pseudo-Christian organisation.2
Others who attended were Calvinist Jeff Durbin, who is continuing to speak at TPUSA events. Mike Winger, whose latest exposé of "cover up culture" was achieved with the corroboration of false teacher and demon slayer Torben Sonderbgaard.3
Gabe Hughes: "Now this movement may eventually be overrun by conspiracy theorists, by people trying to radicalize you to their agenda, and by liars and false teachers. But for now, we have this opportunity to share the gospel of Jesus Christ and speak the truth in love, and we should take it. It's dangerous, but eternal souls are at stake. The danger didn't stop Charlie Kirk, and it shouldn't stop us." 14:00 mark. > The real danger is that TPUSA is leading thousands of vulnerable young people to accept a false gospel! (2 Corinthians 11:4 cf. 1 John 4:1).
Davidson: "I was astounded by how many false things were being shared.."
Chad Davidson has chosen to ignore the elephant in the room. However, many of his viewers have not. The selection of comments below say it all.
The aim of this post is to examine Charlie Kirk's faith and to compare some of his attitudes and beliefs to those found in the Bible. This post does not concern the conspiracy theories surrounding Kirk's murder.
Kirk was a "professing Christian", i.e., he claimed to be a Christian, he proclaimed the gospel accurately on a number of occasions, and he was generally considered to be a champion of biblical values. Many naive people assumed that Kirk was an authentic Christian. However, there were significant issues contained within Kirk's theology that were incompatible with his profession.
Ecumenism
The essential criterion that marks out a true believer is that he/she keep God's word. If you love me, you will keep my commandments. (John 14:15 cf. John 14:23-24; 1 John 5:3,2:3-5,3:22-24; 2 John 1:6; John 15:10,14. Matthew 7:21 etc.)
Kirk attended Dream City Church in Phoenix, Arizona, where he worshiped and hosted political rallies. Dream City Church (formerly Phoenix First Assembly of God) is a multi-site Pentecostal megachurch affiliated with the Assemblies of God USA.
Kirk also occasionally attended Mass at St. Bernadette Catholic Church in Scottsdale, Arizona, and openly acknowledged that he was ecumenical. He spoke about his respect for Roman Catholicism and the possibility of his conversion. In an interview reported by Crisis Magazine, he said: “Some of my greatest friends in the world are Catholic…I go to Catholic Mass every once in a while. I don’t take the Eucharist…but I’m open-minded, but I’m not there yet.”1
In an interview with Church Militant, Kirk said, "The world is a better place because of the Catholic Church, and that needs to be said more. He went on to express that he has 'so much respect for the Catholic Tradition and Church.'" 1
Kirk was, in fact, steeped in Roman Catholicism. Kirk's wife, Erica, was raised a Roman Catholic and attended Notre Dame Preparatory, a private Catholic high school in Scottsdale, Arizona. She is a practicing Roman Catholic, and it is reported that she attends Mass daily.2
Online pictures show the Kirks visiting the National Basilica in Washington, D.C., along with photos of Charlie Kirk attending Mass. Erika raised a rosary to onlookers as her husband's body was transported home.3 On a recent episode of his podcast, Kirk spoke about the "Blessed Mother" and mentioned how he was close to Father Don Kline, pastor of St. Bernadette Catholic Church in Scottsdale, Arizona, and how his wife was baptized Catholic.
EWTN: "During a July 16 episode of 'The Charlie Kirk Show' on “Real America’s Voice,” Kirk explained that he believes Protestants do not venerate or talk about Mary enough. He said she “is the solution” to “toxic feminism in America.”
“Mary was clearly important to early Christians,” Kirk said. “Have more young ladies be pious, be reverent, be full of faith, slow to anger, slow to words at times. Mary is a phenomenal example, and I think a counter to so much of the toxicity of feminism in the modern era.”4
Many evangelicals voiced concerns that these remarks were tantamount to a slide toward Roman Catholic tradition.While bible believing Christians respect Mary, she is not the answer to toxic feminism or anything else. To cross the line into the kind of "veneration" that verges on Mariolatry is sinful. In my view, Kirk blurred the lines, or was in the process of blurring the lines, between true biblical Christianity and its antithesis, Roman Catholic tradition. (2 Corinthians 11:4). In essence, ecumenism is a violation of the first commandment to prioritize God above all else. You shall have no other Gods before me. (Exodus 20:3; Deuteronomy 5:7; Matthew 22:36-38 cf. 2 Corinthians 11:14).
In a recent statement, Kirk's pastor at Turning Point USA, Rob McCoy, said, "Many Protestants, mainly Baptists and evangelicals, do not believe Catholics are Christians. If we are to learn anything from Charlie, it's to know Charlie did not believe this. Even though we have no evidence to show Charlie was on his way to the CC, Charlie very well believed practicing Catholics were Christians. And my encouragement to Baptists and evangelicals alike is to take this position as well."5
Mormons
Kirk: 'I love how Mormons send missionaries around the world, I love how polite they are.. Half my team is Mormon.. Mormons are great people.. I'm an evangelical Christian, but I'm not one of those guys that hates on Mormons.. We need a strong Mormon church back in this country.."6
Kirk claimed that he did not endorse Mormonism. However, he actively sought to get Mormons on board with his political agenda. The fact that Mormons send missionaries around the world indicates that they are spreading a false gospel. Why would the US "need a strong Mormon church" spreading a different gospel? (2 Corinthians 11:4).
New Apostolic Reformation > Dominion Theology
Kirk was involved with the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR), an aberrant movement that seeks to influence society through Dominionist Theology. Kirk made public statements promoting the NAR agenda, particularly the "seven mountain mandate," at events such as the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Kirk collaborated with prominent leaders within the NAR, such as Lance Wallnau, and he participated in the strategy to turn religious congregations into active participants in political campaigns, especially for candidates aligned with the "America First" agenda.7
"Right Wing Watch reported last week that Kirk had endorsed California congressional candidate Sean Feucht, a worship leader at Bethel megachurch and a favorite of dominionist 'apostles' and 'prophets.' It turns out that endorsement was the tip of the iceberg of Kirk’s partnership with a group of California-based pastors connected to Christian nationalist political operative David Lane."
The implications of Kirk's association with NAR leaders raises the critical issue of ecclesiastic separation of church and state. When dominionists conflate the kingdom of God and earthly power, they compromise the gospel. Jesus made a critical distinction between the kingdom of God and earthly dominion. Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” (John 18:36).
For Kirk, MAGA (Make America Great Again), and the goal of winning/maintaining political power over the Democrats took precedence over the command of biblical separation. The biblical mandate for believers to separate themselves from sin and worldly influences and to maintain holiness was entirely absent from Kirk's theology. (2 Corinthians 6:17; Romans 12:2; 1 John 1:6-7; Galatians 5:16; Ephesians 5:11).
Shabbat
Kirk strictly observed the Jewish Sabbath, Shabbat. In an interview, he recommended that Christians follow Shabbat, and he was due to publish a book on the subject, 'Stop, in the Name of God: Why Honoring the Sabbath Will Change Your Life', which is now scheduled to be published posthumously in December.
Kirk's teaching and book on this subject will undoubtedly influence Bible believers to observe Shabbat. However, the New Testament does not require believers to observe Shabbat or any Jewish Festival. Shabbat observance was a specific commandment to the Israelites, not to Gentiles.
The Israelites must keep the Sabbath, celebrating it as a permanent covenant for the generations to come. It is a sign between Me and the Israelites forever; for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, but on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed.(Exodus 31:16-17).
Within Orthodox Judaism, any Gentile who observes Shabbat must be circumcised or be put to death. Circumcision was a practice that Paul vehemently opposed in New Testament churches. (Galatians 5:2).
"Rabbi Yose bar Hanina said: A gentile who keeps Shabbat before [i.e. without] accepting circumcision is liable for death. Why? Because they [gentiles] were not commanded in it. And why did you see fit to say that a gentile who keeps Shabbat is liable for death? R. Hiyya bar Abba said R. Yohanan said: in the normal way of the world, if a king and matron sit and converse with one another, one who comes and inserts himself between them – is he not liable for death? Similarly this Shabbat between Israel and the Holy One blessed be He, as it is said “between me and the Israelites [it is an eternal sign]” (Exod. 31:17). Therefore, any gentile who comes and inserts himself between them before accepting upon himself to be circumcised is liable for death."8
Kirk did not claim that it is obligatory to observe Shabbat. However, he extolled the benefits of doing so, and he presented persuasive arguments in favour of the practice. Paul is clear; if we want to observe days and years, then we are free to do so. However, we should not seek to influence others, and we should keep such matters between ourselves and God. Christians are not obliged to submit to Old Testament practices to gain particular blessings. Gentile believers alreadyhave every blessing in Christ. (Ephesians 1:3).
Interestingly, nine of the original ten commandments given in Exodus 20 are referenced in the New Testament. However, the fourth commandment regarding the Sabbath is not mentioned as a statute that Christians are obliged to keep. This is becauseJesus embodies the true rest and fulfillment of the Sabbath. So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, for whoever has entered God’s rest has also rested from his works as God did from his. (Hebrews 4:9-10).
Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods. But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain. (Galatians 4:8-10).
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. (Colossians 2:16-17).
One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. (Romans 14:5-9).
The black community > divisive rhetoric
Although it is vociferously denied that Kirk was a racist by his supporters, there are clear examples that corroborate this allegation and confirm his damaging, racist remarks against black people.
Kirk frequently cast doubt on the qualifications of black professionals.. In 2024, he said, “If I see a black pilot, I’m gonna be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.”
On one occasion, he referred to “a moronic black woman” in customer service and questioned whether she was hired “because of her excellence, or … because of affirmative action.” Kirk attacked civil rights leader Martin Luther King: “Clarence Thomas was a far better black role model to celebrate than Martin Luther King. Period. End of story. This guy is not worthy of a national holiday.” At Turning Point USA’s America Fest in 2023, Kirk said, "MLK was awful. We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s."
Kirk referred to journalist Joy Reid, former First Lady Michelle Obama, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, and Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson as “affirmative action picks", and he claimed they did not “have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously.”9 Kirk blamed a Black fire chief in Austin, Texas, for flooding deaths that occurred a three-hour drive away from the city.10
Kirk denounced Juneteenth as a federal holiday commemorating the end of slavery. Kirk: “Juneteenth should not be a federal holiday.. This holiday is not about celebrating emancipation, regardless of the veneer they put on it.”10
These remarks make sense when the roots and history of the NAR and its ties to Brahnamism, British Israelism, and the Ku Klux Klan are understood.
Collins: "William Branham's mentor was Roy E Davis.. the second in command of the 1915 KKK. Branham was working with not only Roy E Davis.. Davis was working with Caleb Ridley, who was the Klan's Supreme Religious Chaplain, and they were trying to establish, it was a short lived organization called the Supreme Kingdom, but they were trying to establish what today, you could almost say it was the prototype for today's Dominionism.They were trying to invade the government, the education system, the media, the entertainment industry.. Davis rose up to be the next Imperial Wizard of the Klan.. he is promoting Branham.." (40 minute mark)11
Appeasement to the Christian Right
This is not the time to capitulate under pressure from the powerful Christian right. Some surprising people have voiced their approval for Kirk.
If you have raced with men on foot, and they have wearied you, how will you compete with horses? And if in a safe land you are so trusting, what will you do in the thicket of the Jordan? (Jeremiah 12:5).
Below is a selection of viewer comments demonstrating that Good Fight's viewers have more courage and discernment than they do!
* I find this surprising to warn against his heresies that are so destructive. Can yall not see the eucumenical push to come from his death? I am very surprised yall hid the truth during such an important time. Its wild that this is a positive review of charlie and unlisting the video that pointed out the heresies he teaches that will lead many astray... Do yall not understand that many people are googling him and watching his stuff now and will fall into the seven mountain mandate?? Why not allow people to see the truth?
* Good fight: how devastating that you have deleted your vid confronting Charlie on his FALSE TEACHING about Co- redeemer Mary!!!!
How can we possibly TRUST YOU if you crumble under the pressure of Kirk suddenly becoming godhood in his martyrdom!!!
This new vid on Kirk is a GLOWING REPORT OF HOW GREAT HE IS!!!! it's DISAPPOINTING Seriously I'm so SURPRISED!!!
* Unsubscribed. I was very suspicious of you guys to begin with but now it’s confirmed. You do all of these videos on Freemasons yet you can’t see that Charlie Kirk is a Freemason and this was a club event to push propaganda and divide us further? Candace Owens said she’s a mason and one of her recent videos. She comes out and says it. They are all in the club. Maybe you are too.
Michael Grant is currently vacillating on the issue of Kirk's alleged faith. As a result, I have unsubscribed from his YouTube channel. The Faith of Charlie Kirk (1993-2025)
Watching Welby reap what he has sown is confirmation of God's ultimate sovereignty over every situation. (Proverbs 19:21). The old boy network did not save Welby, thank God. Thousands of members of the General Synod (the Church of England's parliament) signed a petition calling for Welby to step down following the damning report about the church's handling of John Smyth, who is believed to be the most prolific serial abuser associated with the CofE. I don't hold out much hope for the CofE, but perhaps this situation will cause some to truly repent. (2 Chronicles 7:14).
Welby was initially rejected for ordination by the Cof E and was told by John Hughes, the then Bishop of Kensington: “There is no place for you in the Church of England.”1Unfortunately, Welby persisted in his ill-conceived ambition and was supported by his ecumenical friends at Holy Trinity Brompton (HTB). Sandy Millar, Vicar of HTB, founder of the Alpha course, and his successor Nicky Gumbel are said to have profoundly influenced Welby’s ideas about Christianity and church growth.2 HTB introduced Charimania via the deadly "Toronto Blessing" to the UK in the 1990s.
Welby's misplaced support of women bishops has come back to bite him! Ironically, the most senior member of the CofE, Bishop of Newcastle Helen-Ann Hartley, called for Welby's resignation in the strongest terms, stating that he had “a complete lack of awareness of how power dynamics operate in the life of the church”. Hartley: “It is right that Archbishop Justin has resigned. This resignation does not solve the Church’s profound failure over safeguarding and the ongoing trauma caused to victims and survivors of church-related abuse nor does it excuse others whose neglect of their duties is exposed by the Makin report."3
Welby began his ill-fated role as Archbishop in 2013. Legislation allowing female bishops was passed by the General Synod of the CofE at the second attempt. The first attempt, in 2012, just before Welby took office, failed narrowly to meet the required supermajority. Welby hailed the achievement and oversees the appointments of the first swathe of female bishops in the coming years.
The insane state of affairs is that the head of the CofE denies his own denominational statement on marriage and sexual ethics. CofE doctrine states that "sexual intercourse, as an expression of faithful intimacy, properly belongs within marriage exclusively.” The doctrine of marriage, as set out in Canon B30 states that marriage is a lifelong union of “one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others on either side”. Welby believes that sexual intimacy is not reserved for marriage and that sexual intimacy in same-sex relationships is not sinful. This is a clear deviation from CofE doctrine on marriage and sexual ethics, the Global Anglican Communion, the historic position of every other Christian denomination worldwide, and the scriptures. (Galatians 6:7).In April 2023, Conservative Anglican leaders at a conference in Rwanda declared they no longer recognized Welby’s authority as the "first among equals" and de facto head of the Anglican Communion. Among other things, they were angered by his support for gay blessings in the CofE.4
Welby's resignation statement ends: “For above all else, my deepest commitment is to the person of Jesus Christ, my saviour and my God; the bearer of the sins and burdens of the world, and the hope of every person.”5
Welby leaves a legacy of unfaithfulness and shame. He has made a mockery of the scriptures and has brought the gospel into disrepute. (2 Peter 2:2-11). The obvious question: How can anyone who blatantly disregards the scriptures possibly claim to be a follower of Jesus Christ?
Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you? Everyone who comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show you what he is like: he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when a flood arose, the stream broke against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built. But the one who hears and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the stream broke against it, immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great.” (Luke 6:46-49).
Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ (Matthew 7:21-23).
The Chosen is an American Christian drama TV multi-season series about the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth and stars Roman Catholic actor Jonathan Roumie as Jesus. A total of seven seasons are planned. Four seasons of the series have been released to date with the fifth season currently in production and expected to be released in 2025.1
Dallas Jenkins is the creator and director of The Chosen, the most successfully crowdfunded series of all time. Dallas Jenkins is the son of the son of Jerry B Jenkins, Tim LaHaye's co-writer behind the bestselling fictional "Left Behind" franchise of the 1990s. Unfortunately, the Left Behind series sparked renewed interest in the pre-tribulation rapture, a false doctrine that has blighted a number of dispensational churches in the West. Dallas Jenkins follows in his father's footsteps with his questionable depiction of Jesus Christ in this series.
Filming of The Chosen began on rental sets in Texas. However, Jenkins later accepted the offer of using a Jerusalem film set in Utah created by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons). Although popular, the series has been widely criticized on many levels, due to its association with its Mormon distributors Angel Studios; hiring LGBT members to work on the film set; its use of artistic license; and concerns that Jenkins was injecting Mormon theology into the script. These criticisms have been countered by Jenkins and others, but LDS involvement is impossible to deny, and evidently, Jenkins regards Mormons as Christians "despite some theological differences". In fact, these "differences" are irreconcilable! Jenkins has a flawed understanding of the gospel and is biblically illiterate.
Jenkins: "..beautiful things about this project have been my growing brother and sisterhood with people of the LDS community that I never would have known otherwise. And learning so much about your faith tradition and realizing, gosh, for all the stuff maybe we don't see eye to eye on, that all happened.. after Jesus was here. The stories of Jesus we do agree on and we love the same Jesus.."2
Jesse T Jackson: "Angel Studios was co-founded by brothers Neal and Jeffrey Harmon, both whom belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS), which has caused confusion for some fans of the show. Angel Studios is strictly a distribution partner for the show and doesn’t fund the show, according to Jenkins. Rather, 'The Chosen' is 100 percent funded by viewers."3
Jeffrey Harmon: "I am a faithful member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (we don’t use 'Mormon' anymore). And I have devoted the last three years of my life to helping an Evangelical, Dallas Jenkins, create his vision of the hit TV Series, THE CHOSEN. I have no control over the content of the show."4
LDS Irreconcilable "theological differences"
A brief summary of LDS theology:
The Book of Mormon is the word of God (they actually have four sources of doctrine but the Book of Mormon takes precedence).
Salvation is only found through the Mormon church.
Jesus is a created being.
All people ever born, including Jesus Christ, lived with God as His spirit children before this life.
Jesus is the "spirit brother" of Lucifer.
Jesus was a married man.
"As man now is, God once was" God was once a man who existed on another planet, and through obedience he "progressed" into being the God of his own planet. You and I can also become gods of our own planet and progress through obedience.
God the Father and Jesus Christ are two distinct beings; each is a distinct personage with His own perfect glorified body.
Mormons believe that we "progress" into our godhood in the same way that God progressed and became God of planet Earth.
We are saved by grace after we have done all that we can.
"All denominations are an abomination." Mormons believe they are the only ones that have the truth, all other denominations are apostate.
Joseph Smith wrote himself into Genesis 50 and added a prophecy about himself.5
Jenkins' "theological differences" are far more critical than his allusion suggests. LDS theology fundamentally denies the scriptures and should be absolutely rejected by bible believing Christians. Similarly, those who promote LDS teachings should not be included in any project claiming to represent Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 5:11).
A different Jesus
Jenkins claims that his life goal is to portray the "authentic Jesus". However, the "Jesus" of The Chosen is inauthentic and is a lethal departure from the scriptures. The ecumenical appeal of The Chosen with its acceptance of multi-faith traditions including Mormons and Roman Catholics is extremely dangerous! Ecumenism always involves compromise! The Chosen has put many people at risk of accepting a different Jesus. (2 Corinthians 11:4).
Religion News Service: “The Chosen has a biblical advisory council, made up of representatives of various faith traditions.. YouTube videos show Jenkins hosting roundtables with a Protestant theologian, a Catholic priest and a Jewish rabbi, addressing 'the red flags' that might be raised by the show."6
The Catholic World Report: "The show also retains a sort of advisory board of ministers—a priest, a rabbi, and a Protestant minister—to help the creators with theological issues and other questions."7
Shane Cox, administrator of The Chosen: Do Not Be Deceived Facebook group and the Point2TheWord YouTube channel, has posted shockingly unbiblical clips from The Chosen, and interview clips with The Chosen’s director Dallas Jenkins and cast members.
Below are some clips representing unbiblical examples in The Chosen.
This information should raise major red flags amongst bible believing Christians.
But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
"Leighton Flowers VS James White: The John 6:44 Debate | Does John 6:44 Teach Unconditional Election?"
Got Questions definition of unconditional election: "God, before the foundation of the world, chose to make certain individuals the objects of His unmerited favor or special grace. These individuals from every tribe, tongue and nation were chosen by God for adoption, not because of anything they would do but because of His sovereign will. God could have chosen to save all men (He certainly has the power and authority to do so), and He could have chosen to save no one (He is under no obligation to save anyone). He instead chose to save some and leave others to the consequences of their sin."1
James White's theological debates include Calvinism, Roman Catholicism, Islam, Mormonism, infant baptism, the King James Only movement, Jehovah's Witnesses, and atheism. White has described Leighton Flowers as a "one-string banjo" referring to what he describes as his "obsessive" mission against Calvinism. Flowers attempted to make the debate more light-hearted by giving White a gift of a one-string banjo. However, at the end of the debate, White refused to accept it. White's "one string banjo" quip was doubtless thrown out as an insult, but Flowers apparent approval of other false doctrines is odd. For my part, I am unable to reconcile Flowers hyper-focused fight for truth in one aspect (Calvinism), and his apparent approval of error in another (ecumenism). (Acts 20:27). I was so troubled by this disconnect in 2018 that I have not paid him much attention since that time.
Below is an excerpt from my previous post in 2018:
"One would expect Flowers to have a bible verse on the 'Our Beliefs' page of his website, but his primary text is a quotation from AW Tozer! In fact there are many scripture references, but no actual bible quotations on this page at all.
I notice that Flowers also frequently quotes CS Lewis in his videos. Both CS Lewis and AW Tozer were ecumenists and closet mystics. As I look down the list of non-Calvinistic scholars Flowers lists as reading material, I am very troubled indeed. For example, he lists false teachers such as ecumenist Billy Graham, false deliverance teacher Derek Prince, ecumenist Greg Laurie, open theist and annihilationist Clark Pinnock, ecumenist Ravi Zacharias, ecumenist David Jeremiah.. I could go on.. and on... This tells me that Calvinism is not the only serious problem that needs to be addressed within the Southern Baptist denomination. The ecumenical movement is THE biggest threat to biblical Christianity in our time, and yet inexplicably, Flowers actively promotes ecumenical teachers and apostates on his website!"2
The Debate
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— (John 6:37-45).
White: "Has the historical understanding of John chapter 6 since the Reformation.. is that a proper reading of the text?" This opening question was very telling in that it indicates that White's presuppositions are inhibited by his Calvinistic tradition.
White opened by emphasizing that there is no break or contradiction in verse 44 i.e. the group drawn by the Father is the same group that is raised up on the last day, namely the Jews who had been drawn by the Father via the prophets. Based on his understanding of John 6:44, White's view is that no distinction exists between the (passive recipients ?) being drawn by the Father, those being taught, those hearing and those learning in verse 45.
Flowers opened by identifying God as the initiatorand the hearers as the responders. His position is that the Jewish crowd in John 5:43 rejected God due to their own fault because they were unwilling. (31:00 mark) In contrast, White's presupposition from Calvin (originally Augustine) is that sinful people reject God bydefault. Flowers also quoted Calvinist John MacArthur: "Sinful man is pre-programmed by God to believe lies." Flowers appealed to various proof texts as evidence that the Jewish crowd was responsible for responding to Jesus.
I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him. (John 5:43).
But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, John 1:12 .. cf. Ezekiel 18:32
For this people’s heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed; lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them.’ (Acts 28:27).
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! (Matthew 23:37 cf. Isaiah 30:15).
Flowers: "Notice this hardened condition of Israel is not a universal default condition of all humanity from birth. It is a purposeful divine judicial judgement upon a rebellious people at a particular place in time to bring about Calvary through their rebellion.." (Luke 19:41-42; John 12:39). This also explains why Jesus spoke in parables to the crowds. (Mark 4:34). Flowers also referred to Romans 11: ..as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day.” (Romans 11:8). As a result of their rebellion, the Jews were ..ever seeing but never perceiving. (Mark 4:12).
Flowers: "There is only one point of distinction..whydoes God give certain people to the Son?" He continued.. "those who believed in the Father are given to the Son". Calvinism reverses the stated order given in the text i.e. regeneration precedes belief. From the Calvinist perspective draw = regeneration, whereas draw is given a different definition in the text.. i.e. those drawn are those who have heard and learned = those who have responded.
Flowers position on John 6:44 ~ The Jewish crowd is not given to Christ because of their continued refusal to believe all that the Father has taught them (through Moses and the prophets).
White's position on John 6:44 ~ The Jewish crowd is unable to believe by default because they are not given to Christ.
Ex-Calvinist Bible Scholar Reviews James White Vs. Leighton Flowers Debate: John 6:44
The subsequent review of this debate by Biblical Studies expert Dr Joel Korytko,although rather technical, is significant. In it, he identifies various critical weaknesses in White's arguments. White's smoke and mirrors strategy i.e. his technical knowledge of Greek grammar was a tactic that ultimately backfired. It became apparent during Korytko's review that White's frequent references to Greek grammar were not only superfluous and misleading, but were even incorrect at times. Korytko asserted that White's detailed information about aorist present participles in John is not remotely related to the debate and was an unnecessary distraction. In addition, Korytko pointed out that John 6:44-45 does not give evidence of volition.
The Old Testament background to John 6:45 - the Prophets
It is written in the Prophets: ‘And they will allbe taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from Him comes to Me— (John 6:45).
Then all your sons will be taught by the LORD.. (Isaiah 54:13 cf. Joel 3:1-2; Jeremiah 31:4; John 2:20). Isaiah 54:13 is an eschatological prophecy referring to Israel's ultimate salvation in their post-conversion state. (Zechariah 12:10). John 6:45 omits "all your sons" and simultaneously refers to the eschatological prophecy as a present reality (inaugurated eschatology) via the new covenant. This verse presupposes the willingness of present believers, as well as the future inhabitants of the New Jerusalem, to be taught by the Lord. Biblia: "Essentially the same promise is given in Joel 3:1-2, and Jeremiah 31:34; and represented in 1 John 2:20 ('Ye have the anointing of the Holy One, and know all things') as already fulfilled."3
The LORD appeared to us in the past, saying: “I have loved you with an everlasting love; therefore I have drawn you with loving devotion. (Jeremiah 31:3 - Berean Standard Version).
The ESV does not convey the meaning of draw in Jeremiah 31:3. However, several other versions translate the equivalent of the NT word elkusō (draw) Hebrew mashak. Jeremiah 31 sets the stage for the new covenant and the ultimate regathering of Israel. Critically Jeremiah 31:3 powerfully illustrates that the sense of mashak/elkusō (draw) is to lovingly persuade. There is no indication of irresistible grace aka effectual calling in this verse.
Bengel's Gnomen: The same word occurs in the Septuag., Song of Solomon 1:4, εἵλκυσάν σε, [Engl. Vers.] “Draw me, we will run after Thee;”Jeremiah 31:3, “I have loved thee with an everlasting love, therefore with loving-kindness have I drawn thee” [in Septuag. ch. 38:3, εἵλκυσά σε εἰς οἰκτείρημα]. 4
pantes and pas
'And they will all (pantes) be taught by God.’ Everyone (pas) who has heard the Father and learned from Him comes to Me— (John 6:45).
Flowers seemed to get rather flustered by White's use of pantes (all) and pas (everyone) (1:38 mark). Flowers has now modified his view and he accepts that all and everyone are in fact the same group. Few teachers are humble enough to publicly admit their errors, and we should give Flowers credit for his subsequent U-turn. Korytko effectively simplified this misunderstanding by appealing to the eschatological reality of John, i.e. everyone taught by God is the same group who have heard and learned from the Father and come to Jesus.
heard and learned
Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from Him comes to Me. (John 6:45).
White's false assumption is that heard and learned are passive verbs i.e. those who have heard and learned are the passive recipients of the Father's instruction. In context, everyone is the subject of the sentence. Everyone actively performs the action of coming to Jesus after hearing and learning from the Father.
Other parts of the New Testament emphasize how we hear (active) indicating volition,or whether people haveears to hear. The formula "He who has ears to hear" (Matthew 13:9; Mark 4:9 etc.) suggests more than ordinary powers of thought to comprehend.5
Take care then how you hear (akouete), for to the one who has, more will be given, and from the one who has not, even what he thinks that he has will be taken away. (Luke 8:18).
And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, my Chosen One; listen (akouete) to him!” (Luke 9:35 cf. Luke 9:44; Deuteronomy 32:46-47; Proverbs 2:2-5).
For this people’s heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them. (Matthew 13:15).
Thayers Greek Lexicon: "The Johannean phrase ἀκούειν παρά τοῦ Θεοῦ, or τί παρά Θεοῦ, signifies a. to perceive in the soul the inward communication of God: John 6:45."6
Rightly handling the word of truth
White claims that taking verses 44 and 45 out of order in John 6 is inconsistent: "He (Flowers) begins at verse 45, assigns it a meaning, and then reads it back into the text, skipping over everything that comes previously".
Korytko: "Verse 45 is the support for the previous statement.. this phrase is almost parallel to the previous one, they're supposed to interpret each other. Reading backwards is fine here because they are mutually interpreting each other.7
White makes a similar argument regarding comparisons between John 6:44 and John 12:32.
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44).
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself. (John 12:32).
White's hermeneutic of John is based on a rigid chronological verse-by-verse interpretation of the book in its historical context. While linear methodologies are useful in interpreting other passages of scripture, John has profound layers of meaning that simply do not lend themselves to this strategy. So when White claims that it is inconsistent to "jump six chapters into the future to a completely different context" from Jesus' Jewish audience in chapter 6 to all (Jews and Greeks) in chapter 12, he ignores the circular nature of John's narrative and he misses the forest for the trees. (2 Timothy 2:15). Korytko: "In John, he is teaching a theology from the time of the present.. it is interacting with some of the things that Jesus said and also John's own spin on things." (48:00 mark).
White's comparison with John 6:39-40 does not prove irresistible grace (TULIP) and is equally problematic regarding volition: And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that I shall lose none of those He has given Me, but raise them up at the last day. For it is My Father's will that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Himshall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
The main focus for Calvinists is the verb "draw" (helkó) = I drag, draw, pull, persuade, unsheathe.8Clearly, no one can be saved unless the Father draws them, but as we have seen from the Old Testament background, White's view that believers are compelled to respond to God's drawing is to make the false assumption that helkó invariably means to irresistibly drag. White's removal of the necessity for a response eliminates free will and human cooperation. The other passage where helkó is used in a moral sense is in John 12:32, where all people are the object of the sentence. Since universalism is not an option, the context of helkó determines its meaning.
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw (elkusō) all people to myself. (John 6:44).
Cambridge Bible: "There are two Greek words for ‘draw’ in the N.T., one of which necessarily implies violence, the other does not: it is the latter that is used here and in John 6:44; the former (suró) is used Acts 14:19; Acts 17:6. Man’s will is free; he can refuse to be drawn: and there is no violence; the attraction is moral. We see from John 6:44 that before the ‘lifting up’ it is the Father who draws men to the Son."9
Ellicott: "The word 'draw' need not perplex us; and all the theories opposed to the width of divine love and influence, and to the freedom of human will and action, which have been built upon it, are at once seen to be without support, when we remember that the only other passage in the New Testament where it occurs in a moral sense is in the declaration: 'And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto Me'" (John 12:32).10
“That this ‘drawing’ is not irresistible grace, is confessed even by Augustine himself, the great upholder of the doctrines of grace. ‘If a man is drawn, says an objector, he comes against his will. (We answer) if he comes unwillingly, he does not believe: if he does not believe, he does not come. For we do not run to Christ on our feet, but by faith; not with the movement of the body, but with the free will of the heart…Think not that thou are drawn against thy will; the mind can be drawn by love.’” (Alford)
f. Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me: Those who have a revelation from God the Father will come to His Son and Perfect Representative. f. Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me: Those who have a revelation from God the Father will come to His Son and Perfect Representative. To hear and learn from the Son is to hear and learn from the Father.
Expositors Greek Testament: "But whether it is also true that everyone whom God teaches comes is not here stated; the καὶ μαθὼν introduces a doubtful element. [Wetstein quotes from Polybius διαφέρει τὸ μαθεῖν τοῦ μόνον ἀκοῦσαι.]"11
Both Flowers and White agreed that drawing is the teaching, or as White put it, "communicating facts and data". Flowers added, "the gospel is the power of God unto salvation". I would not isolate teaching as the single element required for salvation. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.. (Ephesians 2:8).
Matthew Poole: "..unless it be illuminated and drawn by the Spirit of God. No soul is able of itself to discern spiritual things.."12
One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. (Acts 16:14).
I am not implying that Lydia was compelled to respond, as Calvinists assert, but without the Lord's direct intervention in opening Lydia's heart, she would not have been converted.
