Why Trichotomy is Wrong 3 E, The Errors It Spawns

3E. Gnosticism

I have restrained myself thus far from equating Trichotomy with Gnosticism, but now I must restrain myself no longer. For those who are unfamiliar with Church history, Trichotomy was toyed with by thinkers around the fringes of Christianity in the 2^nd and 3^rd Centuries. It was basically rejected monolithically by orthodox theologians as a speculative Greek philosophical notion rather than a biblical teaching. It was the Gnostics who adhered to this tri-partite division of man into body, soul and spirit. Just to clarify what we’re saying, Gnostics were heretics who claimed to have access to secret knowledge that only those who were initiated into their “mysteries” could learn. Gnosticism is generally defined as the belief and/or practice of attaining 'secret knowledge.' The word derives from the Greek 'gnosis' which means knowledge. More specifically Gnosticism is communion with God without means. Many of the screwball teachings I described in the previous post are Gnostic. How so? They do not derive from Scripture. So how did their purveyors come by them? By an appeal to a personal, private, secret revelation from God. This is what I meant by "communion with God without means." It is an attempt to deal directly with God without Christ the Mediator and without Word and Sacrament.

Now you may say to me, "People in the Bible communed with God without means, didn't they?" On the whole, no they didn't.  Yes, there were instances of this, but they were few and far between. Moreover these people were called Prophets and Apostles. The direct unmediated revelation they received was intended by God to be added to the canon of Scripture. God never dealt with anyone in this way except to expand the canon of Scripture. God alone can do this. And once Revelation was completed, this is no longer a live option since God Himself places a curse on anyone who would dare add to the canon. Gnosticism places one above the Prophets and Apostle since their revelations are intended, not to be added to the canon, but for personal, private edification. Gnosticism claims to receive revelations intended only for the recipient. This make the Gnostic greater than Apostles and Prophets. And it makes Scripture superfluous.

Benny Hinn, as well as many other Charismatics, teaches (or at least he taught this at one time) that Christ underwent spiritual death. Kenneth Copeland amplifies this further by saying that when Christ bore our sins, He died spiritually and was born again in hell. Now I am not going to refute this idiocy here. But let me note something important relating to our subject. Hinn did not come by this teaching through serious study of Scripture. Nobody could. Nor did he arrive at his 9-person trinity from meditating on the Scriptures. Nobody could. No, these were direct revelations to him from God, so he claims. He has since backpedaled on some of his more egregious heretical teachings. But that is not enough. If I once believed something because I misunderstood Scripture and now I no longer believe it, well and good. This is growth. But this is not true in Hinn's case. He did not, according to his own claims, misunderstand Scripture. No, he claims to have received these blasphemous teachings directly by divine revelation. So a mea culpa is not really an option for him, especially since he still claims to receive doctrine in this manner.

Hinn, of course, is an extreme example. But that is precisely my point. We now have 'Evangelicals' like Richard Foster, Dallas Willard and Scott Hodge advocating the unscriptural, mystic, pantheist 'contemplative prayer' of the medieval Roman Catholic mystics. The numbers of men advocating, or at least courting these practices, is steadily growing. At its core, it is Eastern mysticism - which as I have repeatedly asserted, is inherently pantheistic. It has more in common with Jedi religion than Christianity. One is encouraged to quiet the soul and clear the mind of all thought. This is Satanic. Nowhere in Scripture are we taught to empty our minds of all thought so that we can commune with God. This is more Hinduism than Christianity.

Tripartite Tripe

Many of us were reared in or introduced to a form of Christianity which taught what is referred to as "trichotomy," which means that man is composed of three parts: body, soul and spirit. Imagine my surprise when I discovered that this was never the orthodox position of the Church! I have heard similar expressions of shock from others who came from the same Pentecostal background that I came from. Traditionally, Christianity has always maintained that man is made of two parts: body and soul - and that soul and spirit are terms which are used interchangeably in Scripture.

A cynic might just ask, "So what?" After all isn't this obscurantist speculation? But upon further reflection, we should at least admit that ideas do have consequences.

Historically trichotomy has either contributed to or directly led to heresies. Apollinarius was the first prominent purveyor of trichotomy in Christian circles. He was quickly labeled a heretic. Because of its origins in Greek philosophy, trichotomy leads to the various forms of Gnosticism in the early Church. At its core Gnosticism almost always viewed matter as evil. Our spirits animate our bodies, they reasoned, thus they are bad too. But our souls, which are not corporeal, are pure and they are our tool to tap into true knowledge, secret knowledge, of God. Trichotomy, in every case in the early Church led to some form of Gnosticism. Among modern-day purveyors of this teaching (Pentecostals), it has led to Gnosticism as well, and frequently to Pelagianism. If nothing else, there is a historical warning for us. 

Gnostic views have always led to either antinomianism or ascetic legalism. Created matter is either as an insufferable evil that must be put down at all costs. Thus it leads to asceticism. The monk vilifies his flesh and seeks to deprive it of all nourishment and comfort in order to promote the life of the soul. This works on the assumed premise that soul and flesh are at enmity with each other. At the other end of the spectrum, people have thought that since the immaterial realities of the soul are that which are truly important, then the body and spirit are irrelevant. Hence once one's soul is converted to God, it doesn't matter what the body does. This leads to all sorts of debauchery and vice under the guise of grace.

Scripture consistently present two natures in the universe corporeal and incorporeal - material and nonmaterial. Anyone who has done a word study on the terms soul and spirit can attest to the fact that these words are used interchangeably all throughout Scripture. Someone might rush in with Hebrews 4:12, which mentions dividing "soul and spirit." This proves nothing for the trichotomists case however. For the same verse mentions "joints and marrow," yet no one asserts from this wording that man is composed of four parts, two immaterial parts and two material parts. If the blade cuts one way, it cuts two ways - no pun intended.

When Charles Hodge deals with this in his Systematic Theology, he makes what I take to be a very powerful observation. Our own consciousness of ourselves testifies to our dichotomous nature. We are all consciously aware of our bodies as the material part of our being, but who, except for a schizophrenic, is consciously aware of TWO internal immaterial parts of his being?

Is this just obscurantist speculation? Think of the trichotomist impact on the person of Christ. Orthodox Christianity has always affirmed the Hypostatic Union of Christ. This means that Christ is fully God and fully man - two distinct natures, not intermingled - by a mystery of divine wisdom hypostatically united in One Person. Try to square this with trichotomy and you rush headlong into blasphemous heresy. You will end up trying to divide Christ in an Apollonarian way. This will make Christ a human body that had the Second Person of the Trinity, the Logos, in the place of a normal human soul. You must postulate two spiritual natures in Christ. You don't want to know where that will lead you.

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

Holy Heresy Pt 2

We now come to our third installment in this series. We will be looking at the next two marks of heresies - ones that are clearly displayed by the Charismatic movement, i.e., (3), Mystical Interpretations of Scripture, and (4) Disregard for the Bible


• Mystical Interpretations of Scripture

Charismatics are infamous for bizarre and far-fetched interpretations of Scripture. They love to downplay theological education in favor of their being “led by the Spirit.” We’ve all heard the “cemetery, I mean seminary” joke. Despite the fact that Christ commands us to love God with our mind (Mt 22:37), Charismatics insist that we check our brains at the door. Many of their preachers glory, indeed revel, in the fact that they have no formal theological training. They will nonetheless make weird displays of knowledge for the purpose of making their audiences feel that they are not completely ignorant.

Several years ago, I heard a message by Rich Wilkerson, brother of the famous (and equally weird) David Wilkerson. His sermon on was on Acts 9:31-34 and was entitled, “What To Do When You Lose Your Nerve.” In his message he explained that after the church was in a time of peace, Peter went to Lydda, which Wilkerson said in the Greek meant “place of conflict.” Wilkerson asserted from this that when the Church experienced peace, Peter went looking for a fight. He then went on to explain that Aeneas in Greek means noble and Aeneas’ disease, palsy, in the Greek meant “loss of nerves.” The only reason why he was able to get away with such stupidity is that Charismatics are naïve.

First of all, Lydda does not mean place of conflict. Strong’s Concordance tells us that the word is of Hebrew origin and its exact meaning is uncertain. In other words Lydda does not mean anything in the Greek, because it is Hebrew. But not only does it not mean anything in Greek; it doesn’t mean anything, period!

Secondly, saying that Peter went to the Lydda looking for a fight because the name means place of conflict is like saying that to find angels we need to go to Los Angeles! This is not interpretation; it is an undisciplined imagination run amuck! No doubt, there are people in the world named Philip who do not like horses, despite the fact that Philip in the Greek means lover of horses. Likewise, just because Aeneas means noble, this does not imply anything about his character.

And on top of it all, whether or not palsy means loss of nerves in the Greek this is not a reliable medical explanation. I doubt very seriously that Mr. Wilkerson would be satisfied if his doctor still practiced medicine at the level of Hippocrates or Galen. And never mind ancient medicine. Neither would he like it if his doctor used leeches or practiced blood-letting like medieval physicians. Besides, “losing one’s nerve” is an English idiom and everyone knows that idioms do not mean what the individual words mean literally.

I have a very hard time finding anything nice or charitable about a man who will stand in the Lord's name in the pulpit and spew forth that sort of idiocy! My suspicion is that Jesus would have driven him from the temple with a whip had he tried to preach like this during Jesus' ministry.

• Disregard for the Bible (or at least, belittling Scripture)

With all their lip service to Scripture, Charismatics are no different that the Hegelian relativists outside the Church who deny the existence of objective truth. A little over 100 years ago, G.K. Chesterton wrote, “At any innocent tea-table we may easily hear a man say, ‘Life is not worth living.’ We regard it as we regard the statement that it is a fine day; nobody thinks that it can possibly have any serious effect on the man or on the world. And yet if that utterance were really believed, the world would stand on its head. Murderers would be given medals for saving men from life; firemen would be denounced for keeping men from death; poisons would be used as medicines; doctors would be called in when people were well; the Royal Humane Society would be rooted out like a horde of assassins. Yet we never speculate as to whether the conversational pessimist will strengthen or disorganize society; for we are convinced that theories do not matter.” 1 How are we supposed to reason with these people meaningfully regarding the truth of Scripture, when “the truth” is interpreted on the basis of their latest vision or angelic visitation?

On TBN, that worldwide source for “Charismatic chaos,” I heard a young preacher interpret Habakkuk 2:2 2 as saying that when God gives us a “vision,” (which word was left completely unexplained) we have to write it down so we can go back to it and read it and study it. What is this but creating one’s own Scriptures? Yet as he spoke, he was greeted with a continual stream of “Amens.” This shows the level of ignorance that is prevalent through the entire Charismatic movement: A man can get on TV and blaspheme the Holy Scriptures and have the complete assent of the audience.

There was a medieval heretic named Joachim of Fiore, who lived and wrote in the 12th Century. He was an esoterist and mystic. He had a teaching – which earned him his excommunication, by the way – that there were three eras of the world: The era of the Father (for which we have the Old Testament), the era of the Son (for which we have the New Testament) and the era of the Spirit, which was yet to come in 1202 when Joachim died. His logic implies that when the era of the Spirit dawns, we will have revelatory additions to God’s Word. The Father has His Testament and the Son has His, so the Spirit will get His too. The heresy of such a position is explicitly apparent. Yet anyone familiar with Charismatic literature will tell you that this sounds like something right out of the Vineyard.

At the invitation of a friend, I visited a church which, it turns out, actually practiced what this man advocated. During his sermon, the minister kept quoting lines from a “prophetic word” given by Brother “Jones” a few years back. The minister did not quote the Bible, mind you, but acted as confident when he quoted Brother Jones, as if he were quoting the Bible! Then to make matters worse, right in the middle of his message, the minister pulled out a mini-cassette player from his coat pocket and played an actual recording of the “prophecy!” In the foyer were printed copies of the prophecies given on the previous few Sundays. So say what they want about the superiority of Scripture, when people believe in continuous revelation, the Bible gets the heave-ho!

The famous Charismatic preacher, T.L. Osborne, came to the Philippines with his wife in the early 1990’s to conduct a seminar. What he really did was promote his and his wife’s literature by the outrageous claim that using their material would “win the world.” One got the impression that what he really wanted to say was that it was better if everyone used his material rather than their own – or even the Bible. In the course of his lecture he commented on St. Paul’s prohibition against women preachers 3 by calling Paul a “male chauvinist.” His exact words were, to the best of my memory, “How dare Paul tell me what my wife can or cannot do!” John MacArthur was correct when he said that although the Liberal theologians and the neo-orthodox were unable to sell their theology to the Pentecostals, they succeeded in selling them their exegesis.

Tomorrow, God permitting, we will wrap up this series of posts wherein we will look at the last two heretical marks of the Charismatic movement.


1. G.K. Chesterton, Heretics, Introduction
2. And the Lord answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.
3. 1 Timothy 2:12

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.