[google28b52e0868d1e307.html]

Search This Blog

Sunday, 26 May 2024

WARREN MCGREW (IDOL KILLER): PENAL SUBSTITUTIONARY ATONEMENT (2)

Penal Substitution's First 3 Claims - Augustinian Anthropology (youtube.com)

This is the second of a series of seven videos in which Warren McGrew and Paul Vendredi refute the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA). They attribute PSA primarily to Augustine of Hippo (AD354-430), followed by Anselm of Canterbury (AD 1033-1109), and the 16th-century Reformers.    

The first three PSA claims devised by Augustine of Hippo: Original Sin, Total Depravity, and Infant Depravity.

1. Original sin: Augustine taught a virulent version of original sin. He claimed that every individual is personally guilty of Adam's sin in the garden due to his position as the federal head of the human race. A modern version of original sin is the false doctrine of Identificational Repentance in which people identify with, and are held responsible for, the historic sins of a group they identify with e.g. family, church or nation. 

Bible verses that refute Augustine's version of original sin:

The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. (Ezekiel 18:20).

But everyone shall die for his own iniquity. Each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge. (Jeremiah 31:30).

Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin. (Deuteronomy 24:16).

The main bible verse that allegedly supports Augustine's version of original sin is Romans 5:12:

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 5:12-21).

This passage introduces a parallel between Jesus and Adam. Adam represents all people in the garden, and Jesus represents all people on the cross. There is no evidence in this passage to suggest that all people are personally guilty of Adam's sin. Paul specifically mentions "those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam" and "many trespasses". He asserts that many were made sinners as a result of Adam's sin i.e. everyone incurred the sentence of death in Adam. Augustine did not know the original languages, and tragically, his interpretation of Romans 5:12 in his book "On Merit" is based on the Latin Vulgate which mistranslates the Greek text ἐφ ᾧ (because). The resulting error that permeated the church is Jerome's rendering "in whom all sinned" which falsely suggests that all people sinned in Adam.

I am unable to accept Vendredi's view that Paul "became confused" when he wrote Romans 5:12-21. (2 Timothy 3:16). Paul's epistles contain some things that are "hard to understand" and prone to distortion. (2 Peter 3:16). When faced with these difficulties, it is all the more critical that we really do understand Paul's meaning. (2 Timothy 2:15).

2. Total Depravity. The unbiblical idea of total depravity is rooted in the Augustinian concept of original sin. It is the teaching that people are born totally corrupt and cannot receive God's grace by responding to the gospel message in repentance and faith. 

Psalm 51:5 is allegedly a proof text for the false doctrine of total depravity: 

Behold I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. (Psalm 51:5).

There is no concept of original sin in the Old Testament. David wrote this psalm following his sin with Bathsheba when Nathan the prophet confronted him and he was overcome with guilt. (2 Samuel 12-13). Augustine's idea that we are conceived in lust and born in sin is unscriptural. Those who cite this verse as a proof text that David was personally guilty of Adam's sin exceed what is written. (1 Corinthians 4:6).  If anything, this verse points to the sin of David's mother, not to David himself. There is a possible extra-biblical explanation of this verse. The Talmud refers to some issues within Jesse's family resulting in an accusation of illegitimacy concerning David. This story cannot be verified, but it explains the reason for David's apparent problematic relationship with his family. Jesse overlooked and disregarded David as a possible candidate for "the Lord's anointed", and he was denigrated by his eldest brother Eliab when he spoke against Goliath. (1 Samuel 16:11 cf. 1 Samuel 17:28-29). 

Romans 2 refutes the idea of total depravity since "the law of God", sometimes referred to as "natural law" is imprinted on our hearts. 

For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. (Romans 2:1,12-16). 

The only instance where people are described as totally depraved en masse is Genesis 8:21. This unique situation appears to be due to circumstances related to the Nephilim. (Genesis 8:21 cf. Genesis 6:2). There is the possibility of having one's conscience seared by devoting oneself to the demonic. (1 Timothy 4:1-2). Furthermore, God can give individuals over to a reprobate mind as an act of judgement. (Romans 1:28 cf 2 Timothy 3:8). The above scriptures confirm that under certain circumstances, God can cause individuals to become totally depraved/reprobate. Jesus Christ warned of spiritual deception and "the multiplication of wickedness" at the end of the age. (Matthew 24:2,37).

3. Infant Depravity

Vendredi sums up the false doctrine of infant depravity as follows: "Even infants, innocent of actual sin, are guilty of original sin and are therefore born totally depraved."  

Warren McGrew: "This time we hear from some of the leading Calvinist voices and their view of children. John MacArthur holds a gnostic view of sin wherein sin is a substance to be transferred and exchanged; thus he believes the greatest act of depravity is when a husband and wife become pregnant. RC Sproul takes issue with John Calvin's claim that children are as depraved as rats. In Sproul's opinion, this is far too insulting to the rat. Voddie Baucham calls an infants a "viper in a diaper". While Paul Washer claims infants are born evil, possessed of murderous intent and hating God."3  

Scriptures that refute infant depravity

Yet you are he who took me from the womb; you made me trust you at my mother’s breasts. On you was I cast from my birth, and from my mother’s womb you have been my God. (Psalm 22:9-10). 

For you, O Lord, are my hope, my trust, O LORD, from my youth. Upon you I have leaned from before my birth; you are he who took me from my mother’s womb. My praise is continually of you. (Psalm 71:5-6).

Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one’s youth. Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate. (Psalm 127:3-5).

For You created my innermost parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, because I am awesomely and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well. (Psalm 139:13&14). 

But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me. (2 Samuel 12:23).

Augustine incorrectly taught that baptism was necessary for salvation regardless of age. He presupposed that infants, although not guilty of personal sin, still needed to be cleansed from original sin inherited from Adam. Augustine claimed that the sacrament of infant baptism removed the stain of original sin through "the laver of regeneration."4 Augustine introduced the concept of fides aliena (faith of others) i.e. the parents words of faith and penitence were attributed to infants during baptism.

Augustine seems to have adopted the practice of infant baptism based on Origen's defective view. Infant baptism appears to have come into favor among church leaders around AD235, although there may have been earlier instances of the practice.5 

Origen: “Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous” (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248])."
The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit” (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]

When Adam sinned, the human race lost an inheritance and forfeited access to the tree of life. (Genesis 3:24). As a result all humanity became subject to death (mortality) and suffered a relational separation from God. Immortality has been restored to us through the gospel of Jesus Christ, but many reject the light due to their love of darkness: And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. (John 3:19 cf. John 1:5; Genesis 4:7). 

Ellicott: "All have sinned and come short.—Strictly, all sinned; the Apostle looking back upon an act done in past time under the old legal dispensation, without immediate reference to the present: he then goes on to say that the result of that act (as distinct from the act itself) continues on into the present. The result is that mankind, in a body, as he now sees them, and before they come within the range of the new Christian system, fall short of, miss, or fail to obtain, the glory of God."6

I have no argument with McGrew and Vendredi's critique of Augustine's teachings. However, the concept of PSA, distinct from Augustine's distorted version, is present both in the scriptures and the writings of the Church Fathers. Augustine formulated a false concept of PSA based on his own presuppositions, scriptural ignorance, and errors introduced by Jerome and Origen.

To be continued..

1. Latin Vulgate New Testament Bible - Epistle of Paul to the Romans 5
2. Nitzevet, Mother of David - The bold voice of silence - Chabad.org
3. Evil & Depraved - The Reformed View of Children (youtube.com)
4. Even the Children of the Regenerate Born in Sin. The Effect of Baptism. (biblehub.com)
5. Infant Baptism — Church Fathers
6. Romans 3 Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers (biblehub.com)

Sunday, 19 May 2024

WARREN MCGREW (IDOL KILLER): PENAL SUBSTITUTIONARY ATONEMENT (1)


In the above seven-part series, Warren McGrew (Idol Killer) reviews and attempts to debunk the seventeen claims of penal substitutionary atonement (PSA). McGrew is joined by former podcaster and radio producer Paul Vendredi who identifies as Eastern Orthodox. Vendredi is very well-informed and posted seventy-seven episodes on the atonement between 2011 and 2016 on his website.1 My goal is to work through all seven episodes and hopefully present a credible challenge to some of the views outlined in this series.

Idol Killer's self-description: "Idol Killer is committed to spreading the Gospel and making disciples of Christ. We are dedicated to promoting classic orthodox Christian doctrine (pre-Augustinian) and in doing so exposing extra-Biblical corrupt philosophies and presuppositions."

McGrew is a former Calvinist, and while I congratulate him for leaving that twisted system, I have a number of issues with the above critique of PSA. Aspects of PSA were developed, or should I say distorted, by Augustine of Hippo (AD354-430), Anselm of Canterbury (AD1033-1109), and finally by the 16th-century Reformers (Charles Hodge AD1797-1878?). In all, PSA boasts seventeen claims. However, some of those claims do not align with the source material i.e. the scriptures and the Church Fathers. Having viewed a number of McGrew's videos, I agree with much of what he says about total depravity, limited atonement, original sin, and infant damnation. Some have taken PSA to ugly extremes, and the repulsive rhetoric relished by some Calvinist (Reformed) teachers is unspeakably wicked and I make no apology for calling them out. For instance, Voddie Baucham: "Babies are vipers in diapers"; James White's affirmation of infant damnation, RC Sproul: "We will be glad to see our own mother in hell"; Paul Washer: "Babies are totally depraved"; Calvin: "Babies are as depraved as rats".2  

McGrew recounted that following his abandonment of Calvinism, he questioned many things, including the doctrine of PSA and the reason that Christ came and lived, died, and suffered. (22:00 mark) Worryingly, McGrew also subscribes to Open Theism aka Dynamic Omniscience. When I finally abandoned Pentecostalism, I began to reject all things charismatic and I questioned every aspect of their teaching. While I acknowledge that there are genuine believers within the charismatic movement, it is undeniable that a very high percentage of their teachers are dishonest and engage in fakery and lies as recently demonstrated by the exposures of Mike Bickle and Benny Hinn. I wonder whether McGrew has had a similar reaction following his departure from the Reformed camp?  If so, has his aversion to Calvinism gone too far and caused him to reject some core doctrines of the faith? 
 
PSA is ingrained within the Western Church and is regarded as a given. According to Mike Winger, to question PSA is to question the very foundation of Christianity itself: "(Penal substitutionary atonement) is the very meaning of the cross. It's how Jesus saves us.. It's a huge deal, it's the heart of Christianity."3 

Winger's definition of PSA: "The doctrine of penal substitution states that God gave Himself in the Person of His Son to suffer instead of us the death punishment and curse due to fallen humanity as the penalty for our sin."3 

Vendredi begins by defining two terms:     
atonement is reparation for a wrong or an injury.
propitiation is to take someone who is not well disposed toward you and make them well disposed towards you by means of atonement. 
While the above definitions are compatible with lexical definitions, the problem arises because Eastern Christianity does not view the death of Christ as an atonement, although confusingly it is referred to as such. Various non-western schools of thought refer to Christ's death in terms of restoration, cooperation (synergism), and "the restored icon model" which Vendredi goes on to explain. Essentially different groups use the same vocabulary but have a totally different understanding of the terms. The key to solving this dilemma is to understand what the scriptures mean by atonement and propitiation, and also how the Church Fathers understood the terms. The two occurrences of propitiation (ἱλασμός) in the New Testament are defined in Strong's Concordance as "a propitiation (of an angry god), atoning sacrifice. (1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10).. 2434 hilasmós – properly, propitiation; an offering to appease (satisfy) an angry, offended party. 2434 (hilasmós) is only used twice (1 Jn 2:2, 4:10) – both times of Christ's atoning blood that appeases God's wrath, on all confessed sin. By the sacrifice of Himself, Jesus Christ provided the ultimate 2434 /hilasmós ('propitiation')."4  Two occurrences of propitiary (ἱλαστήριον) are found in Romans 3:25 and Hebrews 9:5: "(a) a sin offering, by which the wrath of the deity shall be appeased; a means of propitiation, (b) the covering of the ark, which was sprinkled with the atoning blood on the Day of Atonement."5  

Among those who oppose PSA are Brian Zahnd and Steve Chalke, both of whom I regard as false teachers and do not intend to critique here. McGrew and Vendredi's challenge is based on the study of PSA based on their interpretation of the scriptures and the Church Fathers.    

The view espoused by Vendredi (and presumably Mcgrew?) is Christus Victor (Latin for“Christ the Conqueror”)Briefly defined: God conquers evil and liberates humanity from the bondage of sin, death and the devil. Theopedia: "Christus Victor is a motif of divine rescue and liberation from the bondage of sin, death and the devil." 

The term "Christus Victor" is taken from a groundbreaking book published by Lutheran theologian Gustaf Aulén in 1931. Rather than understanding the scriptures and the writings of the Church Fathers as a unified whole, Aulén deconstructed various aspects of the atonement of Christ into three primary interpretations in Christian history: Christus Victor, Satisfaction and Moral Influence. Aulén claimed that the Christus Victor model is the "classic idea of the atonement" articulated by the Church Fathers and the scriptures. The resulting disputations regarding the theology of the atonement rest primarily on Aulén's hypothesis. Aulén's critics describe his book as highly selective and unrepresentative of the source materials. Aulén's failure to appreciate the complimentary aspects of the crucifixion has resulted in the accusation that he created a false dichotomy with his either/or approach to the atonement.

Rekindle: "..his (Aulén's) handling of the Bible leaves much to be desired. It is selective to a fault, often overlooking key details that would broaden the atonement to include penal substitution (PSA). On the other hand, some of those passages that Aulén regularly cites make no mention of the devil (Romans 3; 1 Corinthians 15; 2 Corinthians 5). For example, Aulén appeals at length to 2 Corinthians 5, but he omits any reference to 5:21, “For our sake [God] made [Christ] to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God”.7 

The Church Fathers

Epistle to Diognetus (? AD130): He Himself took on Him the burden of our iniquities, He gave His own Son as a ransom for us, the holy One for transgressors, the blameless One for the wicked, the righteous One for the unrighteous, the incorruptible One for the corruptible, the immortal One for those who are mortal. For what other thing was capable of covering our sins than His righteousness? By what other one was it possible that we, the wicked and ungodly, could be justified, than by the only Son of God? O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation! O benefits surpassing all expectation! That the wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous One, and that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors! (Epistle to Diognetus, 9.2–5).8 

Justin Martyr (AD150-165): "For the whole human race will be found to be under a curse. For it is written in the law of Moses. Cursed is every one that continues not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them.' Deuteronomy 27:26 And no one has accurately done all, nor will you venture to deny this; but some more and some less than others have observed the ordinances enjoined. But if those who are under this law appear to be under a curse for not having observed all the requirements, how much more shall all the nations appear to be under a curse who practise idolatry, who seduce youths, and commit other crimes? If, then, the Father of all wished His Christ for the whole human family to take upon Him the curses of all, knowing that, after He had been crucified and was dead, He would raise Him up, why do you argue about Him, who submitted to suffer these things according to the Father's will, as if He were accursed, and do not rather bewail yourselves? For although His Father caused Him to suffer these things in behalf of the human family, yet you did not commit the deed as in obedience to the will of God." {Dialogue with Trypho Chapter 95}9  

Athanasius (AD300-375): "Thus, taking a body like our own, because all our bodies were liable to the corruption of death, He surrendered His body to death instead of all, and offered it to the Father. This He did out of sheer love for us, so that in His death all might die, and the law of death thereby be abolished because, having fulfilled in His body that for which it was appointed, it was thereafter voided of its power for men. This He did that He might turn again to incorruption men who had turned back to corruption, and make them alive through death by the appropriation of His body and by the grace of His resurrection. Thus He would make death to disappear from them as utterly as straw from fire.." (chapter 2)
He assumed a body capable of death, in order that it, through belonging to the Word Who is above all, might become in dying a sufficient exchange for all.. (chapter 2)
But beyond all this, there was a debt owing which must needs be paid; for, as I said before, all men were due to die. Here, then, is the second reason why the Word dwelt among us, namely that having proved His Godhead by His works, He might offer the sacrifice on behalf of all, surrendering His own temple to death in place of all, to settle man's account with death and free him from the primal transgression.. 
He died to ransom all... (chapter 4)10 

Gregory of Nazainzus (AD329-390): "For that which He has not assumed He has not healed; but that which is united to His Godhead is also saved." {Letters division 1)11 Vendredi links this sentence to what he refers to as "The Restored Icon Model" based Genesis 1:26 and The Wisdom of Solomon 2:23-24 in the Septuagint. This view affirms that man is an icon of God that has become damaged. To repair this damage, God Himself assumes human flesh, uniting the entirety of human nature to his divinity. The Greek word in question is εἰκών (eikón): an image, i.e. lit. statue, fig. representation.12 While I have no argument with this model as far as it goes, Gregory of Nazianzus had more to say about the atonement:  

"..as for my sake He was called a curse, Who destroyed my curse; and sin, who takes away the sin of the world; and became a new Adam to take the place of the old, just so He makes my disobedience His own as Head of the whole body. As long then as I am disobedient and rebellious, both by denial of God and by my passions, so long Christ also is called disobedient on my account. {Fourth Theological Oration (Oration 30)}13 

John Chrysostom (AD347-407): And what does He entreat? Be reconciled unto God. And he said not, 'Reconcile God to yourselves;' for it is not He that bears enmity, but you; for God never bears enmity. Urging moreover his cause, like an ambassador on his mission, he says, For Him who knew no sin He made to be sin on our account.
'I say nothing of what has gone before, that you have outraged Him, Him that had done you no wrong, Him that had done you good, that He exacted not justice, that He is first to beseech, though first outraged; let none of these things be set down at present. Ought ye not in justice to be reconciled for this one thing only that He has done to you now?' And what has He done? Him that knew no sin He made to be sin, for you. For had He achieved nothing but done only this, think how great a thing it were to give His Son for those that had outraged Him. But now He has both well achieved mighty things, and besides, has suffered Him that did no wrong to be punished for those who had done wrong. But he did not say this: but mentioned that which is far greater than this. What then is this? Him that knew no sin, he says, Him that was righteousness itself, He made sin, that is suffered as a sinner to be condemned, as one cursed to die. For cursed is he that hangs on a tree. Galatians 3:13 For to die thus was far greater than to die; and this he also elsewhere implying, says, Becoming obedient unto death, yea the death of the cross. Philippians 2:8 For this thing carried with it not only punishment, but also disgrace. Reflect therefore how great things He bestowed on you. For a great thing indeed it were for even a sinner to die for any one whatever; but when He who undergoes this both is righteous and dies for sinners; and not dies only, but even as one cursed; and not as cursed [dies] only, but thereby freely bestows upon us those great goods which we never looked for; (for he says, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him;) {Homily 11 on Second Corinthians}14 

In a separate video on Idol Killer, Vendredi latches onto John Chrysostom's claim that God never bears enmity as a sure-fire refutation of PSA.15  However, John Chrysostom continues to describe how the Corinthians first outraged God. I stand to be corrected, but I understand John Chrysostom to be saying that Paul is speaking into their repentant attitude following the problematic situation in 1 Corinthians 5:1-12 cf. 2 Corinthians 2:5-11. Alternatively, he may have been referring to their previous unbelieving state? One synonym for outrage is wrath. God's enmity towards them has subsided. In other words, God never continues to bear enmity (wrath) following repentance. 

Vendredi refers to John Chrysostom as a "blabbermouth" due to his voluminous writings. He continues: "I actually don't think that John Chrysostom's exegesis of 2 Corinthians 5:21 is all that bright." John Chrysostom's writings are wordy, voluminous and difficult to follow. Nevertheless, he does use unmistakable PSA language in this section of his writings. 

I could quote more of the Church Fathers, but the above selection demonstrates that their writings contain elements of Christ's substitutionary death using penal language. While they had no systemized formula for the atonement, their focus was multifaceted. Anyone can quote fragments of the Church Fathers selectively to suit their own interpretation, but it is vital to take account of the overall picture of their writings, and as far as I can discern, elements of PSA is very much part of that picture.  

To be continued.....

1. Paul Vendredi : The God that Answereth by Fire, Let Him Be God
2. Evil & Depraved - The Reformed View of Children (youtube.com)
3.The Real History of Penal Substitutionary Atonement (youtube.com)
4. Strong's Greek: 2434. ἱλασμός (hilasmos) -- propitiation (biblehub.com)
5. Strong's Greek: 2435. ἱλαστήριον (hilastérion) -- propitiatory (biblehub.com)
6. Gustaf Aulen | Theopedia
7. A Broad Critique of Christus Victor | Rekindle
8. CHURCH FATHERS: Epistle to Diognetus (Mathetes) (newadvent.org)
9. CHURCH FATHERS: Dialogue with Trypho, Chapters 89-108 (Justin Martyr) (newadvent.org)
10. Chapter 2: The Divine Dilemma and Its Solution in the Incarnation by Athanasius (blueletterbible.org)
11. CHURCH FATHERS: Letters, Division I (Gregory Nazianzen) (newadvent.org)
12. Strong's Greek: 1504. εἰκών (eikón) -- an image, i.e. lit. statue, fig. representation (biblehub.com)
13. CHURCH FATHERS: Fourth Theological Oration (Oration 30) (Gregory Nazianzen) (newadvent.org)
14. CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 11 on Second Corinthians (Chrysostom) (newadvent.org)
15. John Chrysostom & PSA - Answering Mike Winger E4 (youtube.com)

Saturday, 11 May 2024

BENNY HINN: THE "WE PROPHESY IN PART" EXCUSE


Above: Benny Hinn's interview with Steven Strang on the Strang Report: 

After fifty years of spiritual deception and abuse Hinn says that he has regrets.

Even in his "repentance" Hinn makes excuses and continues to teach false doctrine. 

Hinn: "I am a human being, I have made mistakes.. we all make mistakes. The two things I regret in ministry, I was not too wise a number of times with prophecy. Number one, I had guests come to other crusades that I think brought harm to not only people's lives, but also to my reputation because their prophesies were not really prophecy. They went outside the borders of redemption..  and then there were times when I thought that God had showed me something that he wasn't showing me and I spoke it out. But in 1 Corinthians 13 we see very clearly that we all prophesy in part. That means we don't see the full picture.. sadly there were some prophesies I gave that were not accurate or from the Lord.. For that of course I ask people to forgive me. I'm just human uh and made mistakes like that and I'll probably make him again I suppose down the road cuz I'm not perfect.. And then the other one is prosperity.. I was invited to go to praise-a-thons and I think that's when my troubles began.. I came to the conclusion in 2019 that I did not want to be part of the gimmickry of it.. but sadly I let pressure get to me.."      

Hinn's blame-shifting regarding his guests and his involvement in "praise-a-thons" is not credible. As a serial deceiver, Hinn is quite capable of being a false prophet all by himself without the help of other charlatans. (Romans 14:12). 

The "we prophesy in part" excuse

A common objection of false prophets is that "we prophesy in part".

Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. (1 Corinthians 13:8-12).

In context, the partial is contrasted to the perfect (complete) in 1 Corinthians 13.1 The perfect brings an end to the partial i.e. the partial or incomplete gives way to the perfect. Does Paul mean to tell us that since we have not entered into the perfect at the present time that prophesies may be inaccurate? If that is correct, then why does he make a distinction between true and false prophets, why does he give such dire warnings about false teachers/prophets, and why does he condemn false prophets?  Why did he commend the Bereans for testing his words against the scriptures? (Acts 17:11 cf. Acts 20:27); and why are we admonished to test the spirits? (1 John 4:1). Biblically there is no latitude given to prophets regarding accuracy. (Jeremiah 23:16; Ezekiel 13:1-23).
 
I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish every one with tears.. (Acts 20:29-31 cf. Matthew 7:15,24:11; 2 Peter 2:1; Jude 1:3-16).

Michael Brown's suggestion for Hinn to spend time with Mike Winger is based on the false premise that Hinn is an authentic Christian and not a wolf. Brown: "..lets clean house.. Why not spend a day with Mike Winger.. Spend a day together and say 'OK, I want you to know I want you to be able to talk to me plainly and raise your issues and questions' and just off the record the two of them behind the scenes 'I want to share my heart with you and I want you to understand who I am' and then whatever comes out of it comes out of it, but this is what we have to do, we have to have the private conversations and then we have to demonstrate public fruits of repentance.."
Believers are commanded to mark and avoid false teachers. (Romans 16:17). 

When I see Hinn close down his so-called "ministry" and give his ill-gotten gains to the poor I will accept his repentance as credible!    

1. Strong's Greek: 5046. τέλειος (teleios) -- having reached its end, i.e. complete, by ext. perfect (biblehub.com)
2. Accountability, Repentance and Legacy: Dr. Michael Brown Discusses Pastor Benny Hinn @LFTV (youtube.com)

Wednesday, 1 May 2024

LEE BRAINARD DEMOLISHING THE PREWRATH RAPTURE - NOT!

 (348) Demolishing The Prewrath Rapture - YouTube

Lee Brainard: "Many folks today are rejecting the pretrib rapture and flocking to the prewrath rapture. The main argument for the prewrath rapture claims that the wrath of God and the tribulation are not the same, but rather that the wrath of God arrives during the tribulation, being heralded with the opening of the sixth seal and arriving with the first trumpet. Is this theory correct?"

The reason Lee Brainard keeps banging on about the pretribulation rapture is that his favourite false doctrine is failing and discerning Christians are rejecting it. (1 John 4:1). The pretrib rapture theory has troubled the church since the mid-19th century, and it presents a considerable threat to believers, especially those who will be alive during the 70th week of Daniel. There is no evidence that the early Fathers taught pretribulationism despite Brainard's best efforts to prove otherwise.1 I find increasingly that there is little to choose between NAR false prophets and pretrib "prophecy experts" who speculate and fail to rightly divide the word of truth. (2 Timothy 2:15). The pretrib camp are not doing the church any favours with their continual misapplication of Old Testament prophecies such as Psalm 83, Isaiah 17, Ezekiel 38 and Jeremiah 49. Although believers are instructed to "keep watch" (Matthew 24:42), some are cashing in on the current world situation by promoting questionable theories about end-time events. The speculators would not take such delight in anticipating the day of the Lord if they knew they would face the Antichrist! (Amos 5:18). False prophets make great boasts and wonderful promises, but ultimately their words lead to false hope and tragedy! (Jeremiah 23:16).     

Defining "the day of the Lord" in the scriptures.  

To clarify the prewrath position: The rapture and the day of the Lord are back-to-back events i.e. the day of the Lord begins on the same day as the rapture after the sixth seal is broken. Brainard's skewed perception of the prewrath view of "the day of the Lord" is incorrect. He claims, it is wrong to view the day of the Lord as "a static chunk of time" separated from the first five seals. Brainard: "It doesn't start small and get big it starts full-blown wrath and it ends full blown wrath." The day of the Lord is distinguished from the previous 70th-week catastrophes during the first four seals (i.e. war famine and death). After the seventh seal is broken there is a pause (Revelation 8:1), and God begins to pour out His wrath directly from heaven via the seven angels' trumpet and bowl judgements. There is a progression as each trumpet judgement unfolds. (Revelation 8:6-13; 9:1-20, 16:1-20).    

Brainard: "Okay we got a three-and-a-half-year tribulation and immediately at the end of that tribulation these signs in the heavens happen. If they happen after the tribulation, they can't happen during the tribulation. They're going to happen at the second coming. there's zero room here to squeeze in one day much less 6 months or a year. This tribulation comes to an end, the Lord descends from Heaven he takes the Antichrist the false prophet throws those foul beings into the Lake of Fire.. " (29:00 mark)

If we accept Brainard's pretrib view, it is impossible to reconcile Matthew 24:29 and Revelation 6:12-17. Furthermore, Brainard fails to take into account that the tribulation will be cut short. (Matthew 24:21-22). We must therefore conclude that the great tribulation ends immediately before, or coincides with, the sixth seal cosmic disturbances if we are to harmonize the scriptures. (2 Timothy 2:15).

Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. (Matthew 24:29).

When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slaved and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?” (Revelation 6:12-17).

For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. (Matthew 24:21-22).

The biblical pattern

The symbolism of the plagues of Egypt foreshadows "the day of the Lord". The day of the Lord is not a literal 24-hour day, it will be a period of unknown duration, lasting at least five months. (Revelation 9:5,10), when the Lord will bring ultimate judgement upon the world.

Alan Kurschner: "There is a biblical pattern where God supernaturally rescues his people just before he executes divine judgment upon the wicked. For example, this is memorably portrayed in the story of God’s plagues against Egypt, culminating in the deliverance of Israel from the hands of Pharaoh’s army that was ultimately destroyed in the Red Sea.. The day of the Lord is not a mere literal twenty-four day. It is the unified complex-whole of events starting with deliverance of the saints and followed by an undetermined period of judgment.2  

The locust plague in Joel 1:1-15 is viewed by the prophet as prefiguring the far worse calamity i.e. the day of the Lord. 

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown:"5. day of the Lord—(Joe 2:1, 11); that is, the day of His anger (Isa 13:9; Ob 15; Zep 1:7, 15). It will be a foretaste of the coming day of the Lord as Judge of all men, whence it receives the same name. Here the transition begins from the plague of locusts to the worse calamities (Joe 2:1-11) from invading armies about to come on Judea, of which the locusts were the prelude."3  

Who are the 24 elders?

Around the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders, clothed in white garments, with golden crowns on their heads. (Revelation 4:4).

Brainard's attempt to place the rapture before the opening of the first seal and his argument that the twenty-four elders are representative of the church is based on a single verse of scripture. However, there is no mention of "a great multitude" in Revelation 4 and 5, whereas "a great multitude" (the redeemed) appears in Revelation 7. 

After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands.. Then one of the elders addressed me, saying, “Who are these, clothed in white robes, and from where have they come?” I said to him, “Sir, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. (Revelation 7:9,13-14).

Revelation 5:8-11 and different interpretations

And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song, saying,“Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.” (Revelation 5:8-11). 

The KJV differs from the majority of versions bible versions: ..And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. 

Alan Kurschner argues for the third person as the correct interpretation of the ransomed, as against the first person in Revelation 5: 8-11. Instead of "made us a kingdom" and "we shall reign on the earth", according to Kurschner, the best and oldest manuscripts use the third person "them" and "they". If this interpretation is correct, the twenty-four elders are not included in the ransomed people of God. 

Kurschner's argument is confirmed by various commentaries:

Pulpit Commentary: "And didst redeem unto God by thy blood out of every kindred, etc. Though the reading 'us' is supported by various manuscripts, and similarly the first person is used in ver. 10. yet, on the whole, it seems better to omit it, the phrase being taken in a partitve sense - 'Thou didst redeem unto God by thy blood some out of every kindred, etc., and hast made them, etc., and they shall reign.'"5

Cambridge Bible: "us] Should be omitted. The elders probably represent the whole multitude of the redeemed, but they are not here said to belong to their number, and the living creatures certainly do not. The true reading is, 'Thou wast slain, and hast purchased to God by Thy Blood out of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nations, and hast made them unto our God a kingdom and priests, and they [shall] reign upon the earth.'”5   

Brainard's argument that the twenty-four elders represent the church fails on a number of levels. As demonstrated above, the majority of bible versions differentiate between the twenty-four elders and the church. Furthermore the KJV describes the four living creatures as "redeemed". However, the four living creatures are angelic beings who are not part of the redeemed church. 

And when I saw the Lamb open the sixth seal, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black like sackcloth of goat hair, and the whole moon turned blood red, and the stars of the sky fell to the earth like unripe figs dropping from a tree shaken by a great wind. The sky receded like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved from its place. Then the kings of the earth, the nobles, the commanders, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and free man hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains. And they said to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the One seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb. For the great day of Their wrath has come, and who is able to withstand it?” (Revelation 6:12-17).

Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to Him, we ask you, brothers, not to be easily disconcerted or alarmed by any spirit or message or letter seeming to be from us, alleging that the Day of the Lord has already come. Let no one deceive you in any way, for it will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness—the son of destruction—is revealed. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-4).

     

1. WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: Lee Brainard (bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com)
2. The Day of the Lord Begins with the Rapture | ESCHATOS MINISTRIES (alankurschner.com)
3. Joel 1 Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary (biblehub.com)
4. Twenty Four Elders Archives | ESCHATOS MINISTRIES (alankurschner.com)
5. Revelation 5:9 Commentaries: And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. (biblehub.com)

Wednesday, 24 April 2024

MARK DRISCOLL: DOES THE JEZEBEL SPIRIT EXIST?

The recent histrionics enacted by Mark Driscoll at the Stronger Men's Conference at Assemblies of God NAR James River "Church" are, in my view, a publicity stunt staged to propel him into the spotlight. Driscoll's attention-seeking has had the desired effect, and many people are talking about his altercation with "pastor" John Lindell online. I will not expand on the altercation here except to say that yet another NAR "church" has been exposed as worldly and totally out of step with biblical Christianity. Driscoll's book "New Days, Old Demons" has recently been released and he has also released a number of YouTube videos on the subject of the so-called "Jezebel spirit"

Driscoll formed Trinity Church in Scottsdale, Arizona in 2016 two years after suddenly departing Mars Hill Church, leaving a trail of accusations and spiritual damage in his wake. He has now ditched Calvinism in support of the NAR and has labelled the five points of Calvinism "garbage".1 While Driscoll's assessment of Calvinism is not wrong, his teaching on the "Jezebel spirit" can equally be described as garbage. More accurately it is dangerous garbage!

The Jezebel Spirit

In an X post with a link to a sermon, Driscoll asks, “What is the Jezebel spirit, and how is she destroying the American church? Today we pull back the veil on the demonic."

Driscoll: “The Jezebel spirit is not a synonym for ‘tramp,’ and it's got nothing to do with racism. The Jezebel spirit is a demon that has worked through men and women for centuries, from Queen Jezebel in 1st Kings to Jesus's rebuke of the church in Thyatira in Revelation 2,” he wrote on X. "This demon seeks to control and dominate, most often through seductive women but oftentimes through overbearing, domineering men. I literally wrote the book on this. I want to give it away absolutely free. I get nothing out of it, I just want men and women to learn more about the spiritual war behind the war we see."3

As far as I am aware, biblical scholars have never entertained the possibility of a "Jezebel spirit". Once again, Mickey Mouse NAR pastors seem to be the only ones eisegeting Revelation 2:20. This interpretation is rife within charismatic NAR "demon slayer" circles e.g. Kathryn Krick, Bill Johnson, Isaiah Salvidar, Vlad Savchuck etc. The "Jezebel spirit" is often associated with manipulation, control, and division. Anyone daring to question church leadership or exercising critical thinking is at risk of being slurred with this label. (1 John 4:1; Acts 17:11). Blame-shifting often coincides with gaslighting and other forms of abuse. Psychology Today: "A blame-shift is meant to absolve the abuser of responsibility but it also effectively makes the target feel guilty or shamed."4 This is precisely what is taking place within the NAR and is not a new stratagem of the enemy. (1 Corinthians 2:11). The prophet Elijah was labelled "troubler of Israel". (1 Kings 18:17). NAR leaders infiltrate the true church with idolatry, manipulation and control, claiming to be apostles and prophets and generally causing havoc. Paradoxically NAR leaders themselves are the very epitome of Jezebel!

The scriptures do not describe a "spirit of Jezebel" Rather Jezebel is a byword and a symbol of all the wicked things she represents. Jezebel was a Phoenician princess, the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians whose family was devoted to the worship of Baal and Astarte. Israel's King Ahab, married Jezebel despite the Lord's explicit command not to intermarry with the Canaanites. (Deuteronomy 7:1-4).

However, Ahab son of Omri did evil in the sight of the LORD, more than all who were before him. And as if it were not enough for him to walk in the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, he even married Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and he then proceeded to serve and worship Baal. First, Ahab set up an altar for Baal in the temple of Baal that he had built in Samaria. Then he set up an Asherah pole. Thus Ahab did more to provoke the LORD, the God of Israel, to anger than all the kings of Israel before him. (1 Kings 16:30-33).

Jezebel killed the prophets of the Lord (1 Kings 18:4,13); she established 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Asherah (1 Kings 18:19); she threatened the life of Elijah (1 Kings 19:1-2); she contrived the murder of Naboth and illicitly obtained his vineyard for Ahab (1 Kings 21:1-16); she incited Ahab (1 Kings 21:25); she is described as a whore and a sorcerer (2 Kings 9:22); she is idolatrous, sexually immoral and unrepentant. (Revelation 2:20-21).

Jezebel is alluded to in the Book of Revelation:

But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. (Revelation 2:20-21).

Revelation 2:20 does not identify "that woman Jezebel" as a spirit. Evil spirits are specifically identified. e.g. the spirit of Antichrist.(1 John 4:3); the spirit of error (τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς πλάνης. (1 John 4:6); deceitful spirits (πνεύμασι πλάνοις) and teachings of demons. i.e. evil spirits animating false teachers.5 (1 Timothy 4:1); a spirit of divination (πνεῦμα Πύθωνα) a Python. (Acts 16:16); impure spirits/demonic spirits. (Revelation 16:13-14); various instances of unclean spirits. ( Mark 1:27); deaf and mute spirit. (Mark 9:25). 

ATS Bible Dictionary: "Her name has become a proverb, and is given by John, probably as a descriptive epithet, to a certain female at Thyatira in his day holding a like bad preeminence in station and profligacy, in malice and in ruin, Luke 20:18 Revelation 2:10"." 6

Easton's Bible Dictionary: "Her name afterwards came to be used as the synonym for a wicked woman (Revelation 2:20)."6 

Driscoll also refers to the "spirit of Ahab" and the "spirit of Elijah". Elijah is juxtaposed with Jezebel in the text of 1 and 2 Kings. There is no evidence of a "spirit of Elijah" in the scriptures. Malachi 4:5-6 warns about judgement and the appearance of Elijah before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. Jesus identified John the Baptist as Elijah. (Matthew 11:13-14). The appearance of Moses and Elijah with Jesus at His transfiguration is a significant event in the New Testament. (Matthew 17:1-3). It is further speculated that Elijah will be one of the two witnesses in Revelation 11:3-12. Believers have been given the Holy Spirit and have no business calling upon any other spirit. 
 
I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another. (1 Corinthians 4:6).

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. (2 Timothy 2:15).

I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. (Romans 16:17).

1. I know this happened ages ago but Driscoll thinks Calvinism is "garbage" : r/exReformed (reddit.com)
2. Pastor John Lindell Apologizes for Inviting Driscoll & Sword-Swallower to Stronger Men's Conference (julieroys.com)
3. Mark Driscoll slams Jezebel spirit at Stronger Men's Conference | Church & Ministries News (christianpost.com)
4. 5 Kinds of Blame-Shifting, and Why They Work | Psychology Today
5. 1 Timothy 4 Vincent's Word Studies (biblehub.com)
6. Topical Bible: Jezebel (biblehub.com)

Saturday, 20 April 2024

JOHN PIPER: EPHESIANS 2:8 THE DAMAGING CONSEQUENCES OF CALVINISM

What Do I Do If I've Tried to Believe In Jesus but Can't? (youtube.com)

The question addressed to John Piper: "I have concluded that I don't have saving faith. I have tried to believe in Jesus for two years, but I can't. I fear I am beyond saving. What can I do?" 

John Piper: "It may be that the Lord has withheld from you the kind of faith you are looking for in order to make you feel absolutely desperate.. We cannot produce faith. If we have genuine faith it is a gift.."  

Undoubtedly, faith plays a central role in salvation, but whether it is directly given by God or arises from hearing and responding to His Word is a matter of interpretation. Those who teach that faith is a gift misapply the phrase "and this is not your from yourselves" (Ephesians 2:8). The consensus amongst Greek scholars is that the phrase "and this is not from yourselves" refers to salvation itself, not faith. For an in-depth study of the Greek see the link at the end.

The definition of faith is to have complete trust or confidence in something. Biblically, faith needs to be applied in order to receive salvation. The scriptures never define faith as a work i.e. something we do in order to earn salvation. The scriptures make a clear distinction between faith and works. (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 3:28,4:2-5; Galatians 3:10-11; Philippians 3:9). The scriptures explicitly state that salvation is a gift from God that cannot be earned, rather salvation is received by faith. (John 3:16; Romans 5:15,6:23 cf. Galatians 2:16). The conundrum that Calvinism poses is that if faith is a work then our salvation would be earned, but that interpretation violates God's word. 

Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, (Romans 4:4-5).

It is by grace you have been saved! And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with Him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages He might display the surpassing riches of His grace, demonstrated by His kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not from yourselves; it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast. (Ephesians 2:5-9).

Piper's irresponsible response in defining saving faith as something God can withhold is false and effectively erects a barrier between God and the enquirer. The right response would be to give hope and assurance to the enquirer by clarifying that the invitation to believe is open to everyone. (Matthew 11:28). The damage that Calvinism does to those outside and inside the church is inestimable.

Pulpit Commentary: "Verse 8. - For by grace have ye been saved, through faith. He repeats what he had said parenthetically (ver. 5), in order to open the subject up more fully. On the part of God, salvation is by grace; on the part of man, it is through faith.. The apostle is so anxious to bring out the great distinguishing doctrine of grace that he puts it in all lights, affirms it positively, contrasts it with its opposite, and emphasizes it by repetition. It is a gift, not a purchase; a free gift, without money and without price; what would never have been yours, but for the generosity of God. It is very usual in the New Testament thus to represent salvation; cf. our Lord's words to Nicodemus (John 3:16); to the woman of Samaria (John 4:14); St. Paul's "Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift" (2 Corinthians 9:15); "The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 6:23); and 1 John 5:11, "God gave unto us eternal life, and the life is in his Son." This usage confirms the view that it is not merely faith, but the whole work and person of Christ which faith receives, that is meant here as the "gift of God."1


1. Ephesians 2 Pulpit Commentary (biblehub.com)

Thursday, 18 April 2024

BENNY HINN'S OPPOSITION TO MIKE WINGER

(303) The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception. - YouTube

Mike Winger is facing serious backlash following the release of his video exposing Benny Hinn's malpractice. 

Mike Winger: "Benny Hinn is actively trying to silence me and is abusing the copyright system.." The four-hour video above, although rather lengthy, is well worth watching to gain an understanding into Hinn's false ministry. 



Mike Winger: "This man is hurting people, leaving people destitute, abusing sick and ill people as props to bring glory to himself, and deceiving people, really bad stuff.. Benny Hinn is a very bad man." 

When I became a Christian a number of years ago, I joined the hyper-charismatic group of some neighbours who led me to the Lord. It was not until much later that I became aware of the many problems and dangers within the charismatic movement. During those early years, I was in turmoil and I struggled immensely. It was a very difficult time. However, I gradually began to put my entire trust in the Lord Himself rather than relying on various aberrant teachings allegedly from God. As a new Christian and knowing nothing about Christianity, I believed that I was the problem rather than the teachings, and that I needed some kind of deliverance or breakthrough to become free. This is a trap that many fall into and I encourage those who are struggling within the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) to seek the Lord directly and to abide in His word. 

So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:31-32).

Benny Hinn visited Leicester UK in 2014 "care of" Trinity Life Church Leicester (Assemblies of God). I posted a warning at that time as well as other warnings about the teachings being promoted by Trinity Life Church (now ONE Church).1 TLC illegally removed two of my posts during 2014 which I subsequently republished. ONE Church is still going strong and very sadly they are continuing with their NAR involvement and false teachings.