Holy Heresy! Pt 3

Today we conclude our look at the heretical nature of the Charismatic movement. You may have noticed that we have dealt only with the marks, as I have termed them, of a heresy. My objective was to demonstrate that the characteristics which have always distinguished heresies, are indeed extremely characteristic of the Charismatic movement.

We now move on to the last two marks (5) Unverifiable claims, and (6) Intimidation of those with opposing views.

• Unverifiable claims.

I have already mentioned some of the claims made by some of the leaders of the modern Charismatic Movement. The burning question in regard to their claims is: “How can I verify them?” I mean, how can any of us really know that these people are telling the truth? It is not as if I could place a video camera on Mrs. Walters and tape her angelic visitors. We all know that this is impossible. These experiences are either lies, self-induced delusions or undisciplined imaginations run amuck, but whatever they are, they cannot be allowed to be sources of doctrine. The Bible explicitly forbids it. 1 The Holy Spirit plainly forbids us to give heed even to angels if what they say runs counter to Scripture. We don’t stone false prophets anymore, but their sin is no less serious. These men (and women) have the gall to label doctrine “opinion” yet they pass off their unverifiable extra-biblical revelations as beyond questioning. The second you question the biblicality of barking like a dog or laughing insanely they label you a “Pharisee” who cares more for tradition than for God.

Charismatics are notorious for saying things that are intended to sound fresh or insightful, while being completely ignorant of the downright heretical ramifications of what they say. After the recording of their big hit worship album, Hillsong music directress, Darlene Zschech, did an interview with Josh Bonnett in which she said, “God has been moving on the hearts of His people, right around the world, and He’s causing just incredible things to happen, in the Spirit and in people’s lives.” 2 The phrase, “in the Spirit,” is blatantly heretical. It reveals a belief that the Spirit is an influence rather than a Person. The preposition “in” is used in regard to places; the Holy Spirit is not a place or a realm of experience.

The late John Wimber used to say, “God is bigger than His Word.” This seems to be saying something true at first blush. But a moment’s reflection is enough to show its true colors. This statement was used by Wimber as a defense against those who questioned the heterodox teaching within the Vineyard. The Vineyard teachers supposedly got fresh revelations from God, who is bigger than His word. In other words, Scripture cannot be used as a standard by which to test any teaching. Yet the Psalmist tells us that God has exalted His Word above His name. 3

• Intimidation of those with opposing views

This is perhaps the greatest weapon of the Charismatic heresy. They revel in mocking any and every opposing view. And they do it with such panache - such vehemence and acerbity. Benny Hinn has repeatedly claimed that God has shown him, by divine revelation that He is going to kill those who oppose Hinn’s ministry. What are we supposed to say to such asininities? Hinn is not the only one to resort to such ludicrous tactics. Countless of these self-proclaimed “prophets” torture 1 Chronicles 16:22 (Touch not my anointed…) into an umbrella to shield themselves from all scrutiny. Despite the fact that 1 Chronicles 16:22 has no possible application to their cause, they do not extend the same leeway to their opponents. They speak in the most brutal terms against any who do not subscribe to their “manifestations.” Perhaps not many have gone as far as Hinn in claiming that God is going to kill his critics, but every single one of his ilk is guilty by association.

Another tactic is to discount the right of those outside their circles to judge their orthodoxy. One of the arch-heretics of the Third Wave, Roberts Liardon says, “Spectators do not have the qualifications to comment on participators.” 4 This line of reasoning is patently false. It is begging the question to say that I cannot judge the orthodoxy of their doctrine or practice because I haven’t experienced these things. Do I have to commit murder or adultery in order to know that they are wrong? Should I have to experience Buddha worship to analyze its falsity? If I asked Benny Hinn if he believed that homosexuality is sin, I would like to believe that he would answer in the affirmative. What we he think if I asserted that he had no right to judge the validity of the gay lifestyle because he had never tried it? This is pure question begging, but he would use the same line of reasoning against me if I called into question his bizarre practices.

I would affirm that meaningful dialogue with heretics is impossible and that all dialogue in hopes of recovering them to the truth is almost pointless. Matthew Henry wrote, “Real heretics have seldom been recovered to the true faith: not so much defect of judgment, as perverseness of the will, being in the case, through pride, or ambition, or self-willedness, or covetousness, or such like corruption, which therefore must be taken heed of: ‘Be humble, love the truth and practise it, and damning heresy will be escaped.’" 5 The marginal notes to the famous Puritan Geneva Bible of 1557 remark, “The ministers of the word must at once cast off heretics, that is, those who stubbornly and seditiously disquiet the Church, and will pay no attention to ecclesiastical admonitions.” 6

Surely this must be the reason for the harshness of the Church’s polemic against heresies. Irenaeus calls the heretical teaching such things as “imposture,” and “buffoonery.” The followers of the false teaching he calls, “cracked-brained,” and “senseless.” 7 Tertullian says the heretic, Marcion, has a melon for a heart! 8 Terms such as, “abominable blindness and heresy,” 9 are commonplace in Luther’s works. John the Baptist spoke with vehement fury against the hypocritical Pharisees who came to see him preach. 10 And no one can hold a candle to Jesus’ diatribe in Matthew 23! It is not that we do not care for men’s souls, but rather, “contending for the faith,” 11 outweighs all other considerations, including the hurt feelings of those who cross the line theologically.

In conclusion, we ask, “What should we do?” This is an incredibly difficult question. If all the denominations and/or congregations that are not reeling in Rodney Howard-Browne’s drunken stupor and all those who have not been “slain” through Benny Hinn’s mesmerism called an assembly similar to the ancient Councils and excommunicated the entire Charismatic Movement, this would probably be of no effect. Charismatics recognize no authority outside their own circles because they see themselves as superior to the Body of Christ. Such a move would probably serve to strengthen them. They would see themselves as martyrs being persecuted by the spiritually blind. Perhaps persistent expository preaching and persistent polemic are the only tools we have. We can preach the word in truth and expose error when the opportunity presents itself. May God help us!

1. Galatians 1:8, 9
2. Hillsong Magazine, cited in Praise Music’s Power Pack
3. Psalm 138:2
4. Cited in Walters’ Spirit of False Judgment
5. Matthew Henry on Titus 3:10
6. Geneva Bible Notes on Titus 3:10
7. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1.13.1
8. Tertullian, Against Marcion, 4.40
9. Martin Luther, Table Talk CLXXVIII
10. Matthew 3:7
11. Jude 3

Are You Ready For Some Revelation? (Part 4)

Having dealt with Benny Hinn’s ridiculous hermeneutics and his refusal to submit his teaching to the Analogy of Faith, I wish to now show an example or more of his absolute ignorance of church history as it relates to doctrine. Specifically, I want to show how Hinn and heretics like him frequently appeal to authors with whom they have nothing in common, as a way of lending an air of respectability to their teaching. This ploy only works with people who are equally ignorant of Church History.

I remember reading a ministry handbook by a Pentecostal who claimed that Augustine and Calvin spoke in tongues! The average person sitting in his audience or reading his book is likely to be completely unaware that a statement such as that is a lie – a bold-faced lie.

So here’s what Hinn says, “Now the Lord said to Nicodemus, ‘As Moses lifted up the serpent, so shall the Son of Man be lifted up.’ You know, that verse…years ago used to bother me… I thought, ‘Why the Lord comparing Himself to a snake?’ Well – I – someone put in my hand a book by Martin Luther, the great reformer. And I’m riding on a bus…reading this book called Justification by Faith by Martin Luther. … In this book he says, ‘There is a verse in the Bible that used to bother me.’ I was so amazed, I spoke out and said, ‘You too?’ [At which point the audience erupts in laughter.] God used this book to give me an incredible truth. Martin Luther says in his book, he says, ‘The Holy Spirit showed me what Jesus meant in this….”

I won’t finish the quote, since it is long and the remainder of it doesn’t matter to demonstrate what we need to see. Suffice it to say (A) Luther never wrote a book called Justification by Faith. (B) Luther never taught the spiritual death of Jesus. (C) Luther never claimed direct revelation from the Holy Spirit for any of his teachings. Luther vilified the Pope for making such claims!

Luther’s words are exactly the opposite, actually. He writes, “He is not a serpent; He is the lamb of God… Christ is not a serpent, a vile worm, a dragon or a demoniac as His slanderers claim. …Let them perish!” Luther’s Works 22:341-344

Now what are we to think of a man who cites authors who would curse him to his face under the pretext of doctrinal agreement?

Are You Ready For Some Revelation? (Part3)

In our first two posts, we looked at the Gnostic behavior of Benny Hinn with regard to interpreting Scripture and his appeal to direct divine revelation as the source of his teachings. Finally, we will look at his appeal to Novelty.

(3) Hinn’s hermeneutics are driven by an obsession with Novelty.

In one lecture, Hinn has God teaching Adam the Prosperity “Gospel” at the beginning of creation. Hinn declares, “Because the Bible declares, ‘In that garden was gold, the most precious gold found on the planet.’… Do you think God put it there just to tell Adam, ‘Here it is, just look at it and enjoy it?’ No, no, no. God put it there to let him know that He’s the God of abundance. Our God is not a poor God. He’s the God of abundance, saints.” (TBN’s Praise-a-thon April 1994)

Surely this interpretation is unique to Hinn.

Actually, nearly everything Hinn teaches is novel in this sense. While the spiritual death of Jesus is merely retreaded E.W. Kenyon heresy, much of Hinn’s teaching is unique to himself. Surely this is cause for alarm.

When one looks back over the centuries and finds no one who has held your views, this is noteworthy. No reputable Christian theologian ever taught that Adam could fly. I can’t imagine how brutally Hinn would have been castigated by Basil and the two Gregories for his tri-trinity of nine Persons in the Trinity! Athanasius would surely inveigh against him for his corrupt and degenerate views on the nature of Christ.

The Reformers always strove to show that their doctrine was consonant with the Church’s best teaching. They knew that innovation was another word for heresy. “Ours is the ancient tradition,” they said. “The innovations were introduced in the Middle Ages!” They issued anthologies of the Fathers to show the Fathers had taught what they were teaching.

Benny Hinn, on the other hand, boasts of innovation and novelty. “Well, let me tell ya – we’re not here to tell ya things you’ve heard for the last fifty years.” Again he says, “Please, please, please don’t think OCC is here to repeat something you’ve heard for the last fifty years…if we quit giving you new revelations we’re dead.”

Innovation is another word for heresy. The canon of Scripture is closed. Benny Hinn talks out of both sides of his mouth when he professes belief in the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture and then proceeds to brush Scripture under the carpet in favor of some “new revelation.” That is was in layman’s terms is called a lie. And we who the father of lies is!

Are You Ready For Some Revelation? (Part 2)

In the previous post, we examined Benny Hinn’s claim to some sort of Gnostic secret insider knowledge. He seems to assume that because he has lived in Israel, this somehow makes him, by osmosis, an expert on the biblical world. He boldly asserts familiarity with Hebrew. And flat-out claims knowledge that is beyond the grasp of Westerners.

The second trait of Hinn’s convoluted hermeneutics is his constant appeal to direct revelation from God, or a Divine origin for his teachings. We will now examine this.

(2) Divine origins of his teachings.

Commenting on the story of the blind man in John 9, Hinn claims that Jesus created new eyes for this man. “Where did he get such a farfetched idea?” you ask. “And the Holy Spirit gave me a marvelous answer.”

Trying to narrow down to few the claims of divine inspiration Hinn had made over the course of his career is impossible. This man has received more direct revelations from God than you can shake a stick at. “The Lord spoke so clearly to me… here’s what God said.” “And God really gave me a revelation that night.”

Hinn has taught the abominable word-faith message, the heretical spiritual death of Jesus message, the blasphemous 9-person tri-trinity and a host of other hell-spawned doctrines. He could perhaps be forgiven if he had simply taught these things as a result of ignorance and bad mentors within the Charismatic community. But, evil as that is, this is simply not the case with Hinn. He has appealed over and over to direct revelation from God. Revelations from God are the supposed source of his heretical and blasphemous teachings. So it is not enough to say, “I’m sorry.” Hinn cannot plead ignorance or lack of formal education, immaturity or bad ministerial training. He taught heresy all the while claiming that these doctrines were directly revealed to him by God. We don’t stone false prophets nowadays, but their sin is no less serious.

As a result of Hinn’s divine inspiration, he has taught that women originally gave birth out of their sides, that Adam could fly and breathe under water, that Adam was capable of interplanetary travel, that God has a physical body, and that the communion elements at the Lord’s Table actually turn into the true flesh and blood of Jesus.

Are You Ready For Some Revelation? (Part 1)

The way a person handles the Scriptures tells us a lot about their view and opinion of the Bible, himself, and his audience. Case in point: Benny Hinn and his bizarre hermeneutics.

Usually, the authority of the interpreter of Scripture is established by his training, his ecclesiastical investiture and proven accuracy over time. In other words, he’s gone to seminary, been ordained, and his track record has been accurate. Benny Hinn possesses none of these, so he relies on other things, namely (1) Insider’s knowledge, (2) Divine origins of his teachings, and (3) Novelty.

We will look at each.

(1). Insider’s knowledge. This is what has historically been called Gnosticism. It is the claim to some secret knowledge that only the initiated are attune to. In many of his writings, Hinn has stratified Christians into four levels, the fourth being those, who like him, have the “anointing.” Worse than that though, he appeals to his Middle Eastern heritage as if it somehow, by osmosis, gave him inside knowledge of the biblical world that is unavailable to us poor Westerners.

Here are his own words referring to Malachi 3:10: “Listen! Every time you give, God promises revival. ‘Windows of heaven’ deal with revival. And believe me when I tell you, I am an Israelite, from Israel, and I can read this thing in Hebrew and tell ya. And I know the culture and the tradition and the mentality… He says, ‘And ye shall be a delightsome land.’ And the word ‘delightsome,’ I looked it up – remember I am from that part of the world. The word ‘delightsome’ means in Hebrew ‘highly desired.’ 1990 Praise-a-thon.

So much could be said in response to this short excerpt, but notice these few things: First, he is NOT an Israelite. Hinn is an Arab. That has been firmly established by dozens of investigations into his past. He is not Jewish. Secondly, if he knows Hebrew so well, why does he have to, as he says, “look it up?” Thirdly, there is no Scriptural evidence that the word ‘windows’ always means ‘revival.’ Usually it means the same thing we mean when we say ‘window.’

In his sermon, “Who is this Jesus,” from March of 1994, he again asserts, “I am an Israelite. I know something that most Westerners don’t know.”

Here is where the accusation of Gnosticism I made earlier rears its ugly head. Since when is knowledge of Scripture dependant on where one was born? Never mind the fact that Hinn is a liar. He isn’t an Israelite. Besides, the Jews of Jesus’ day were both Israelites and true Jews. They spoke, read and understood the Hebrew Scriptures. Yet when the Messiah their Scriptures had foretold came, they failed to recognize Him.

Without fail, whenever Hinn appeals to his imaginary Jewish roots, his interpretation of the passage is always out in left field. His insider’s knowledge never leads him to a correct exegesis of the passage he boasts of understanding.

Pelagius' Clones

The heresiarch Pelagius wrote, “We distinguish three things, arranging them in a certain graduated order. We put in the first place ‘ability;’ in the second, ‘volition;’ and in the third, ‘actuality.’ The ‘ability’ we place in our nature, the ‘volition’ in our will, and the ‘actuality’ in the effect. The first, that is, the ‘ability,’ properly belongs to God, who has bestowed it on His creature; the other two, that is, the ‘volition’ and the ‘actuality,’ must be referred to man, because they flow forth from the fountain of the will. For his willing, therefore, and doing a good work, the praise belongs to man; or rather both to man, and to God who has bestowed on him the ‘capacity’ for his will and work, and who evermore by the help of His grace assists even this capacity.” (NPNF 5:219)

Pelagius taught that man has the capacity of willing and doing good without God’s special aid. But so that it would be easier, God gave the Law and Christ’s good example. Pelagius’ version of grace was merely a gracious influence that God gives to those who deserve it because they have faithfully used their own powers. Hence “grace” can be resisted. So as to not sound completely Satanic, Pelagius smuggled God in through the back door by hastening to add that freewill is a gift from God.

This is a verbose way of saying, like Finney said, that God will not command what man cannot do. Finney draws an image of a father who commands a small child something that is clearly beyond the child’s ability and threatens to whip the child if he doesn’t obey. This is his despicable, vile, evil caricature of Gospel truth! The commands of Scripture are not only outside man’s ability to obey, they actually serve to demonstrate man’s inability, depravity and hatred of all that is holy. This unregenerate hatred of imputed righteousness is why Pelagius protested when Augustine said, “Grant what You command and command what You will.”

One need not search for more than a minute the writings or recordings of men like John Wesley, Charles Finney, Chuck Smith, Norman Geisler, Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Robert Schuller and Rick Warren to find Pelagian statements bolder than those of Pelagius himself. The same could be said for men like Max Lucado, Chuck Swindoll, Charles Stanley, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Louis Palau, and anyone else who appears on the Trinity Broadcast Network.

John Owen wrote, “The church of Jesus Christ cannot wrap in her communion Austin (Augustine) and Pelagius, Calvin and Arminius.” Owen also wrote, “Many at this day will condemn both Pelagius and the doctrine that he taught, in the words wherein he taught it, and yet embrace and approve of the things themselves which he intended.” The sad thing today is that many ministers have no idea what Pelagianism even is. They simply believe Pelagian or Arminian tenets and unabashedly proclaim this hogwash from the pulpit week after week without a clue to which side of the fence they are on.

Relics for the 21st Century

We are all probably aware of the insane relic trade of the Middle Ages. The worship of relics was based by Thomas Aquinas upon the regard nature prompts us to pay to the bodies of our deceased friends and the things they held most sacred. Following the Seventh Ecumenical Council, the Scholastics denied that when adoration is paid to images, worship is given to the image itself. They claimed that it is rendered to that for which the image stands. Since we treasure the belongings of our deceased loved ones, how much more should we venerate the belongings or remains of the saints? So the logic goes.

Among the objects transmitted to Western Europe from the East were Noah’s beard, the stone on which Jacob slept at Bethel, the branch from which Absalom hung, our Lord’s foreskin, his navel cord, his coat, tears he shed at the grave of Lazarus, milk from Mary’s breasts, the table on which the Last Supper was eaten, the stone of Christ’s grave, Paul’s thorn in the flesh and a tooth belonging to St. Lawrence. Christ’s tooth was only debunked because Guibert of Nogent argued that when Christ rose from the dead he was in possession of all the parts of his body. He also attacked the genuineness of the umbilical cord. The true cross was found more than once and fragments of it were so numerous that one could build an entire forest from the pieces.

Initially, images and relics were claimed to be books for the illiterate. This was certainly not the practice in the early ages of the Church. John Chrysostom preached these words, “To become adult Christians you must learn familiarity with the scriptures.” He routinely told his congregation to check what he had preached against the Scriptures to see if it was correct. This presupposes that they had access to the Bible and were literate.

It is important to remember that in giving His instructions for worship, God forbade all use of images. The human heart is too prone to idolatry to be trusted with anything else but God’s word. In fact, images by their very nature are deceptive (Hab 2:18). The early Church knew this. Clement of Alexandria wrote, “But we have no sensible image of sensible matter, but an image that is perceived by the mind alone,—God, who alone is truly God.” (Exhortation to the Heathen, Chapter 4.) Religious images and relics are not like museum pieces. The religious significance inevitably leads to idolatry. Israel had a relic once, and later they were found to be worshipping it. (Num. 21:8; 2 Kings 18:4).

You’d think that we had learned our lesson. But alas, relic making and worshipping is alive and well – outside of Romish circles. For $25.00 you can buy your very own Sword of the Word Letter Opener from Benny Hinn “Ministries.” That this is an image or relic in the most degenerate Romish way is clear from the product description: “This beautifully-crafted Sword of the Spirit Letter Opener, exclusively available to Benny Hinn Ministries partners and friends, serves as a useful reminder in so many ways—the Scriptures can enter where no other sword can, piercing through all barriers to penetrate with our Lord’s life-giving Word, and the Bible is effective and powerful wherever it is read or spoken. Hebrews 4:12, comparing the Word of God to a double-edged sword, provides stunning visual imagery for this practical 8-inch gold metallic and black-handle letter opener.” (emphasis mine)

Other ministries offer similar idiotic gifts: Torah Prayer Shawls, Ark of the Covenant replicas (complete with special blessings), vials of water from the Sea of Galilee, dirt from Jesus’ tomb, mustard seeds from the Holy Land, etc. This is popish idolatry at its vilest! Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Give me an old-fashioned thigh bone of a saint anyday!

Holy Heresy pt 2

Today we will begin assessing the Charismatic movement in more theological detail, giving attention to the marks of all heretical movements that are characteristic of the Charismatics. Today we will looks at the first two (1) Novelty, and (2) Mystical experience

Marks of Heresy Within the Charismatic Movement

• Novelty

New ideas are the part and parcel of heresy. In theological matters novelty is another name for heresy. Even a cursory reading of the Reformers will reveal how deeply they believed that they were standing in the stream of historic Christianity. The sheer number of citations made by Luther, Calvin and Zwingli of Augustine and the other Fathers is proof of this assertion. They knew that novelty was just another name for heresy.

Many a Charismatic preacher is guilty of using lines like: “Are you ready for something new?” They love to entice their audiences with bits of new revelations from God that only they have. When Benny Hinn taught his now infamous nine-person Trinity, he told his audience that he was going to shock them. Little did he know! The comic book theology of Creflo Dollar, Morris Cerulo, Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, ad nauseum, is usually presented in a way intended to shock their audience, but it is always presented with quasi-divine authority.

The real problem that seems to be under this claim to obtain novel revelations is that it seems like a very thinly masked power trip. If a preacher has an inside track to secret information from God, then we need him/her for the well-being of our own relationship with God. This is Gnosticism. Once this dependence is created, anything can be pawned off on the followers, and usually is.

When one reads the great polemical works of the Church, such as Irenaeus’ Against Heresies, one is struck with how common this feature rears its ugly head. Contemporary cults, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons depend on this very feature of novelty for their existence. The line of reasoning frequently goes like this: “During the early centuries of the Church, she went off course and stayed off course, so that the “Christianity” that we know today is utterly wrong. We alone have the true teaching as it was passed on by Jesus to His Apostles.” Many Charismatic preachers use a similar logic. They assert that their version of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, or Tongues, or Prophecy, or some other such thing was lost by the Church for centuries. Only recently has it been rediscovered and they have the inside track on and the means of dispensing such knowledge. Again, this is pure, unadulterated Gnosticism.

Just for the record, Gnosticism must always be false because Christ Himself said, “I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.” John 18:20 (Emphasis mine)

• Mystical experiences as a source of post-biblical revelation

Another common feature of heresy, and especially the Charismatic movement, is its appeal to unverifiable spiritual experiences which, in turn, serve as sources for extra-biblical revelation. Charismatics pay lip-service to the authority and inerrancy of Scripture, but it is no secret that they rely much more on “words of prophecy,” or words in supposed “tongues.” And if a “word of prophecy“ ever runs counter to the revealed word of God, the “new” always takes the place of the old. Tommy Tenney sold millions of copies of his God Chasers, wherein he refers to Scripture as old worn-out love letters. 1 He tells of a mystical experience where the church’s Plexiglas pulpit split in two, throwing the speaker to the ground. He then appeals to this as proof of all the erroneous things he says throughout the book. Tenney interprets Hebrew 1:3 (upholding all things by the word of his power) by saying that God not only holds all things together, but that He is the sum of all things! 2 Even the untrained eye can see that this is heresy! It is not Christianity; it is pantheism – the same pantheism taught by Hindus for centuries. It would be easy to question the reality of the “split pulpit” story, but that is beside the point. Even if it were true, it is still not a verification of doctrine.

I’m going to rabbit trail on this habit of using experience to validate doctrine for a minute. When Paul says that he doesn’t care if even an angel appears preaching something else, that has to be the definitive rebuttal to this nonsense. I run into people all the time who place their own experience over Scripture. Recently I was at a birthday party for a friend’s 2 year-old. Friends and family were gathered around the table engaged in half a dozen different conversations. I wasn’t feeling well so I was sitting alone in the corner, but I was listening. I heard a man remark that although he didn’t believe in ghosts, he has been in places that gave him that “spooky feeling,” as he put it. The person he was speaking to replied immediately that she had taken some pictures recently on a family trip and there were ghosts in the picture. We’ve all heard the same type of stories. But what struck me is that she seemed to think that her, “I have pictures,” forever solved the question of whether or not ghosts are real. What instantly came to mind were Scriptures like Hebrews 9:27; 2 Corinthians 5:8; Luke 16:19-31 and Luke 23:43, that tell us that the souls of the dead go immediately, either to heaven or hell: they do not wander the earth for any reason whatsoever. Yet people are willing to throw these declarations right down the toilet because they have pictures. For a true Christian there is never a battle between experience and Scripture – Scripture is always superior!

Back to the subject at hand. Kathie Walters has a book entitled The False Spirit of Judgment. It is the usual Charismatic drivel: a refusal to submit their theology, rather mythology, to the bar of Scripture. (Let me just insert another quick observation here. The title of her book is a dead give-away. Everyone she fingers as having the "false spirit of judgment," is someone who has questioned her veracity or critiqued her theology. Charismatics are notorious for crying, "Judge not!" when someone points out theological heresy.) In the book, Walters, who by her own estimation, knows how to live in the supernatural realm of the Holy Spirit, recounts how her four year old daughter was taken up to heaven. The 4 year-old saw and talked to Jesus. She came back down saved and speaking in tongues. The little girl can give you a description of what she saw and heard.

Of course, the acorn (or should I say ‘nut’) doesn’t fall far from the tree. Walters has had “several dynamic angelic visitations.” 3 Plus she has had two very special visitations with the Lord. On the first one, she was “taken up into heaven every day from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m.” On another occasion, she was taken to heaven every day for three and a half weeks. She promises us that she can describe it all and she is writing a book about it. The book, she says, will probably surprise many of her evangelical friends. Of course, none of us can compete with this, so she is above the law. But what never seems to strike any of these people is that in Scripture there is not a single description of heaven or hell by any of the people who died and came back to life.

Tertullian refuted this tomfoolery nearly 2000 years ago. He wrote, “Now, although Paul was carried away even to the third heaven, and was caught up to paradise, and heard certain revelations there, yet these cannot possibly seem to have qualified him for (teaching) another doctrine, seeing that their very nature was such as to render them communicable to no human being.” 4 If Paul was not permitted to communicate what he saw and heard in heaven, what makes these people believe they are allowed to do so? Walters explicitly tells us in her book that she has had visions which she believes are prophetic “for the entire Church.” 5 If that is not a claim to inspiration on the level of the Biblical Prophets, nothing is!

The upshot of all these extra-biblical experiences is the professors are thereby impervious to correction. The unspoken assumption is that if God deemd a person worthy of receiving such experiences or revelations, that puts them above criticism.. This is plainly false. Someone once said, “A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument.” Granted, this saying has a legitimate use; it is unfortunately true regarding adherents of heretical experiences. When people like Kathie Walters, Benny Hinn or Oral Roberts claims to have had angelic visitations or personal meetings with the Incarnate Christ, how are ordinary Christians like you and me supposed to compete?

1. Tommy Tenney, God Chasers

2. ibid.

3. Kathy Walters, The False Spirit of Judgment

4. Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics, Chapter 24

5. Kathy Walters, The False Spirit of Judgment

Tomorrow we will analyze the Charismatics' bizarre methods of expounding Scripture and their often blatant diregard of it.