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.

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

Piety and Pietism

Piety is an old word which means holiness. Pietism, on the other hand is a system which stratifies Christians into different classes, some being more spiritual than others. It produces elite Christians.

There are no extraordinary Christians; we are all ordinary. Pietism can be boiled down to a practice that is intended to lead to an experience that claims to make one an elite Christian, one with a special status compared to ordinary Christians. Pietism is such a slippery, multi-faced thing, that one must always be on one’s guard against it. 

Even during the days of the Apostles we find pietism rearing its ugly head in Colossae. Paul labors in his epistle to them to show that they are complete in Christ (Col. 2:10). If you are complete, then you have no need for some extra work to do to make you even more complete! There is no such thing as ‘more complete’.

Pietism virtually always comes off under the guise of a secret. Hence, thousands of Christian books contain the word “secret.” This also demonstrates that another frequent feature of pietism is mysticism. Pietism, like mysticism, comes in a million varieties. So how do you recognize it? If you are told that after trusting in Christ’s finished work, you still lack something: you are being taught pietism.

Church history is littered with pietism. There was the asceticism of the Desert Fathers, the mysticism of Boehme, the Methodism of Wesley, the Keswick movement, the Latter-Rain/Manifest Sons of God teaching, the Charismatic movement, and a host of others. What they all share in common is the assertion that there is something you can and should do after having trusted in Christ’s finished work, which will make you a deeper, more spiritual Christian.

Actual churches, as well as parachurch organizations, can be guilty of pietism. There is often the demand for strict and unquestioning submission to leaders who claim to have a special status with God, thus conveying an elevated spirituality upon those under his/her care. As one who spent many years in such an organization, I can personally attest to this fact. The leader does not even have to claim superior status for the group to be pietistic. It is a common phenomenon in parachurch organizations to see themselves as performing a duty or ministry that ordinary Christians can’t or won’t do. Leaving such a group is usually viewed as tantamount to backsliding. But, I digress.

Here is Paul’s response to pietism:

“Therefore suffer no one to sit in judgement on you as to eating or drinking or with regard to a festival, a new moon or a sabbath. These were a shadow of things that were soon to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Let no one defraud you of your prize, priding himself on his humility and on his worship of the angels, and taking his stand on the visions he has seen, and idly puffed up with his unspiritual thoughts. Such a one does not keep his hold upon Christ, the Head, from whom the Body, in all its parts nourished and strengthened by its points of contact and its connections, grows with a divine growth. If you have died with Christ and have escaped from the world's rudimentary notions, why, as though your life still belonged to the world, do you submit to such precepts as "Do not handle this;" "Do not taste that;" "Do not touch that other thing" — referring to things which are all intended to be used up and perish—in obedience to mere human injunctions and teachings? These rules have indeed an appearance of wisdom where self-imposed worship exists, and an affectation of humility and an ascetic severity. But not one of them is of any value in combating the indulgence of our lower natures. Col 2:16-23, Weymouth New Testament

These statements strike at the heart of everything that pietism entails in any of its incarnations: asceticism, legalism, and “spiritual disciplines.” You name it, it is here and Paul labels it all “self-made.” Notice also that he says that there is an appearance of wisdom. This is where it is important to differentiate between piety, which simply means holiness and pietism. There is such a thing as the progressive work of sanctification in the life of every believer. This growth in godliness is called piety. But when someone claims that there is a secret way to attain piety: that is pietism. Make no mistake: pietism is always dangerous – ALWAYS.

So let’s be clear. God does desire true piety in the lives of His children, but it is a bunch of papistical merit-earning to think that God is more pleased with you because you read 10 chapters a day. To say that Christians aren’t experiencing a higher degree of holiness because they don’t desire it enough is a lie. This leads one directly into the elitist pietism Paul rebuked in Colossae. “God is more pleased with me because I fast twice a week.” Is He? “I sold everything I own and joined a Christian commune, therefore I am not like the rest of these wimpy wuss Christians who don’t have what it takes to sacrifice for God.” Really? Paul says that these practices “are of no value in combating the indulgence of our lower natures.” 

God desires holiness and is committed to making us holy. But He doesn’t accomplish it through the use of secret disciplines. He uses His ordained means of grace. There is no secret to be discovered that ushers one instantly into the “higher life.” “For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.” (Hebrews 10:14) Pietism is dangerous because it is an attack on Christ’s finished work. If it is true that Christ has already done it all – then all Christians are all already complete in Him. God sanctifies all His children by the same means.

Mysticism Is Not Christian Spirituality

True biblical spirituality consists of having communion with God in Christ. Whenever people lose sight of this, they tend toward natural speculation, which they imagine to be extraordinarily lofty and spiritual. So-called Christians commit an especially grievous error when they walk this path. Removing Christ from the equation and looking inward to find God is the exact philosophy of Pantheism. It is not, nor ever will be, Christianity. Hinduism and other such Pantheistic religions busy themselves in such meditation and speculation.

The Dutch theologian Wilhelmus à Brakel, writes:

“The difference between the self-denial, love, beholding of God, etc., of the mystics and of the truly godly consists in this: The mystics comprehend, say, and do everything according to their natural intellect, fantasy, and imagination, doing so without the Spirit. They do not make use of the Lord Jesus (that is, as a ransom, and righteousness unto justification and peace), as being the only way of approach unto God, and unto true and genuine sanctification. Such exercises and this way are hidden from them. Those, however, who are truly godly, regenerate, and who truly believe, live by faith and not by sight. In all things they make use of the Lord Jesus. They come to the Father by Him, accustom themselves to behold God in the face of Jesus Christ, do everything as in the presence of God, and walk before God’s countenance in humility, fear, love, and obedience. These are the old paths. From this you can observe that the difference between the mystics and the truly godly is as the difference between imagination and truth; between being natural and without the Spirit and being led by the Spirit; between worldly and heavenly; between seeking an unknown God and serving the true God; and between being engaged without, and contrary to, the Holy Scriptures (dabbling with invisible things), and living according to the written Word of God. A truly godly person remains humble and serves God in Spirit and truth, and is thus kept from the temptation of entertaining high-minded and fabricated imaginations.” (1)

After reading that paragraph, one should easily see why mysticism has such an appeal for Charismatics. The whole Charismatic movement condones and practices spiritual behaviors, often called disciplines, never once recorded, let alone commanded in Scripture.

For instance, where in Scripture are we taught all the barking and laughing nonsense of the Toronto Blessing types? Where does Scripture teach mapping out cities and binding the spiritual ‘strong men’? Nowhere! But does this fact stop people from dreaming up this stuff? No it does not. I’ve recently heard of something called “third day prayer.” I haven’t the foggiest clue what that is supposed to be, but I can tell you this: It isn’t in the Bible. Where in the Bible are we told that evil spirits are causes of everything undesirable? I am not kidding when I say that I have heard people pray against the demon of post-nasal drip!

When I was young, I remember hearing some of the mothers at church talking about how they comforted their frightened children at night. The little impressionable children who were afraid of the dark, or perhaps afraid of the numerous evil spirits their parents constantly obsessed over, were told to hold their blanket as if they holding a hand and to pretend (read: visualize) that they were holding Jesus’ hand. Not only was this considered good Christian advice, despite that fact that Scripture nowhere teaches this, but it was strengthened by the supposed testimony of some of the children that they actually felt like they were holding a real hand! Any Christian who is not troubled by such behavior needs to have his head examined. Where do these people get the notion that it is permissible to make up spiritual exercises nowhere taught in Scripture?

1. The Christian’s Reasonable Service, Vol. 2, ch. 43

Where Do They Get This Stuff?

If you’ve spent much time around Charismatics or if you simply observe their methods, you’ll no doubt come away at times scratching your head and asking, “Where do they get this stuff?”.

I grew up in a Pentecostal church, so I know whereof I speak. I have seen and heard more than my fair share of oddities.

I can’t count the words of so-called prophecy I heard and was always amazed that no one else thought it strange that these words were invariably delivered in poorly imitated King James English. I’ve heard more “thee’s” and “thou’s,” “eth’s” and “est’s” than you can shake a stick at. My question is: Why? What on earth makes these people think that God speaks in this way. I’ve heard people who have never read a KJV snap off a word of prophecy chock-full of “Yea, I say unto thee’s” and “Lo, I wouldst that thou shouldst…” It wouldn’t be polite to say what I really think of this!

Then we’ve got these “spiritual warfare” and “spiritual mapping” knuckleheads. I defy anyone on earth to show me this in Scripture! It isn’t there! We don’t read of Paul coming into Athens and binding the spirit of idolatry and coming against the Apollo spirit that held Athens in its power. I don’t recall Paul casting out Zeus or Peter making war in the heavenlies against the unbelief of the Sanhedrin. Jesus never taught His disciples to win the world through “friendship evangelism” or by “being the gospel.”

Unfortunately, America is the largest purveyor of this hogwash to the rest of the world. We like our Burger-King “Have it your way” religion. And apparently Scripture has become little more than a figurehead to much of contemporary Evangelicalism. The Bible is to many churches what the queen is to England: a beloved symbol of some grand days of yesteryear, but virtually without any actual power to effect anything today.

“Slain in the Spirit,” “Spiritual mapping,” “War in the Heveanlies,” “Friendship Evangelism,” not to mention a host of spirits of this and spirits of that which rivals all the convoluted gods and titans of Greek mythology. - - Where do they get this stuff?

Scripture Trumps Experience

Question 3 of the Westminster Larger Catechism asks, “What is the Word of God?” To which it answers: “The holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the Word of God, 1 the only rule of faith and obedience.” 2

A lot of things can be said about this, but the point I wish to draw attention to is this: sola scriptura means that the Bible trumps everything, including experience.

I have known many people throughout my life that were at one point skeptical, even cynical, of Charismatic experiences, but who now believe in them – not because of explicit scriptural teaching and clear exegetical treatment of the relevant passages, but because they, or someone they know, has experienced something. I don’t know how to put this charitably, so I’ll say the only way I know how: this is pantheistic self-deifying mysticism. Harsh words? I think not.

First of all, all mysticism, regardless of its religious affiliation, is pantheistic in nature. It is a looking within oneself to find the divine spark or some other equally blasphemous term for the god within us all. The Reformers call this Enthusiasm. The word comes from the Greek words en and theos, meaning the “god within.” If your personal experience leads you to believe things contrary to Scripture then you have made your experience more authoritative than God. What else is this if not self-deification? Is it any wonder then that so many of the Word Faith heretics claim to be little gods running around on earth?

In Acts 3:21 Peter informs his audience, and us, that Christ must remain in heaven until the time of the restitution of all things. Along comes Benny Hinn claiming that Jesus appear bodily tp him and walked around the room leaving footprints in his carpet. I have every Scriptural reason to call him a liar. Peter’s statement precludes Jesus bodily appearing to anyone before His second advent. Therefore whatever left footprints in Benny Hinn’s carpet was NOT Jesus. End of story.

Actually calling Hinn a liar is the nicest thing that could be said about him, because it could be much worse. He could’ve had a real “spiritual” experience where a force masquerading as Christ walked around his room. The Charismatic world would be far better off if Hinn were simply a liar than if he were spiritually deceived and purveying this deception to millions of his viewers. I suspect the truth is somewhere in between.

Scripture gives us a pretty clear idea that the dead go to their respective destinations immediately. They do not roam the earth as disembodies souls searching for justice or looking after loved ones left behind. Yet I can’t tell you how many stupid ghost stories I’ve heard. Now either the ghost in the picture is real and therefore Scripture is wrong or the Bible is right and there was no ghost. Yet people routinely place more stock in their experiences, or imagined experiences, than in Scripture.

I used to be impressed to the old saying attributed to Leonard Ravenhill that “A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument.” With all due respect to the late Rev. Ravenhill, I have to state that that saying is hogwash. Truth must be objective or it is inconsequential. If my experience trumps the propositional truths of Scripture, then I might as well throw my Bible away and start attending the local Vineyard church!

1 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:19-21

2 Ephesians 2:20; Revelation 22:18-19; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29, 31; Galatians 1:8-9; 2 Timothy 3:15-16

Wisdom From Warfield

This statement needs no help from me. So without further ado:

“To ask us to set aside ‘external authority’ and throw ourselves back on what we can find within us alone - call it by whatever name you choose, ‘religious experience,’ ‘the Christian consciousness,’ ‘the inner light,’ ‘the immanent Divine’ - is to ask us to discard Christianity and revert to natural religion.” B.B. Warfield

This is why I am a cessationist. This is why I reject anything other than Scripture that claims to impart spiritual truth.

The Evils of Mysticism, Pt 4

We will now examine some biblical proofs that show the error and danger of mysticism.

1. There is no foundation for it in Scripture. Nowhere in Scripture is there any promise that the Spirit will indwell every believer as an immediate revealer of truth. The Old Testament revelation was revealed by God’s Spirit through a few prophets who were selected by God and authenticated as such. The New Testament was revealed through men Christ personally chose as His apostles. They were authenticated as His messengers. But NOWHERE is there Scriptural warrant to believe that every single believer is to be divinely inspired to convey or access revelation immediately from God’s Spirit. This is an implicit denial of the doctrine of Scripture!

2. Not only is there no Biblical support for mysticism, it is flatly contradictory to Scripture. Mysticism is not simply in contradiction to this or that isolated passage or teaching of Scripture; it is contrary to God's whole way of dealing with His people. The rule of faith has always been the teachings of God’s authenticated messengers. The appeal has always been, “To the Law and the testimony,“ (Isa. 8:20). The Church has always been held responsible to obey when the divinely appointed prophet said, “Thus saith the Lord.” Obedience was never required to what the Spirit revealed to each individual. Obedience was required to the outward Word, not the inner word. Christ extended this principle to the New Testament when He told the Twelve, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mar. 16:15, 16). What was the whole world to believe? They were to believe the gospel which they preached. Paul tells us that faith cometh by hearing. They he asks, “How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?” (Rom. 10:14). God has determined to save men by the foolishness of preaching (1 Cor. 1:21). Paul declares that the preaching of the cross that is the power of God (v. 18). The gospel is the external revelation of God’s plan of salvation through Jesus. This is what is called the “power of God unto salvation” (Rom 1:16). This idea runs through the whole New Testament.

3. Mysticism is contrary to fact just as is it contrary to Scripture. I am assuming a Christian worldview. I am a Christian and I believe that everyone outside of the Christian faith is doomed to hell. There is no salvation outside of belief in Jesus. This is simply the truth and I make no apologies for it. This being true, nothing is more obvious than that men are in complete darkness without the revelation of God’s written Word. No one anywhere has come to the same truths revealed in Scripture through inward revelation and experience. Period.

4. There is no criterion by which mystical experience can be tested. When Benny Hinn or Lady Julian of Norwich claims that Christ appeared to them, how do I authenticate it? More importantly, how do they? There just is no criterion available to test these inner impulses or revelations to determine whether they are from God, from the imagination, or from Satan acting as an angel of light. Even granting that the recipient of a true revelation knows it is from God (which, outside scripture, cannot be granted), how is the recipient of false revelation to know that it is not from God? Conviction is not enough. Sincerity is not enough. There are billions who believe false things to be true. And many hold as false things which are in fact, true. Therefore, to tell a man that he need only look within himself for authoritative spiritual guidance is to damn his soul to hell. Insanity and delusion appear very similar at this point. The recipient of the revelation may be satisfied, but he cannot expect anyone else to share his certainty. They have no way of verifying what he claims. Besides, this neglects one other important fact: It is possible for someone to say something true and not be from God.

In Acts 16:16 – 18, there is a slave girl with a “spirit of divination.” Luke writes, “And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.” She was telling the truth: Paul was a servant of God. So how do we know that her message wasn’t from God? We know because she obtained her revelation through means explicitly forbidden by Scripture. Techniques aren’t neutral. God has ordained Scripture as the one and only source of revelation. All other means are forbidden, therefore their content is to be rejected out of hand, regardless of how true it sounds.

Jesus said that we would know them by their fruits. This same rule applies to doctrines. When doctrines produce undesirable results they are wrong either in how they are taught or lived. Mysticism has always produced evil. Whenever it appears in Christian garb it inevitably lead to devaluing of the Church, the sacraments, the ministry, and the Scriptures.

The Evils of Mysticism, Pt 3

A mystic may inconsistently claim reliance on Scripture, which he may even claim to be infallible. But his actions, which speak louder, tell us that he deems Scripture to be insufficient. He needs a new revelation from God. He needs a new experience, etc.

The danger with mysticism is that the ideas sound true and almost Scriptural at times. Many people appeal to language like the “Spirit’s witness.” Appeals are made to gifts of the Spirit. And of course, we all understand the importance of having a living experiential knowledge of the truths we believe. But that is exactly where things get dicey.

We have all heard wonderful testimonies of God’s work in someone’s life. We know the stories of ex-gang members of former drug dealers who have been converted. These stories are wonderful. They glorify God and they certainly have a place in the life of the Church. But, that place is not evangelism. Putting your personal experience with Jesus into the center of your evangelism, and urging others to come to Christ based on the hope that they too may experience something similar, is no different than the Mormon missionaries who tout their “burning in the bosom.” That experience, whatever it may be, is absolutely unverifiable. The only thing I have to go on is the testimony of the person claiming it. In matters of eternal salvation or damnation, that simply isn’t good enough.

Notice that in the New Testament the Apostles NEVER use personal experiences or testimonies as part of their evangelism. They shared the historical facts of Christ’s birth, life, death and resurrection. They proclaimed the historicity of these events and their occurrence as fulfillments of Old Testament prophecies.

This is not to say that in the history of mankind God has never had direct access to a human soul to proclaim truth. The Bible itself is a result of such occurrences. But the Bible itself tells us that such occurrences were rare and were restricted to a handful of people – prophets and apostles. Hebrews 1:1-2 tells us, “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.” Christ is God’s final word.

Charles Hodge wrote, “The common doctrine of the Christian Church is, that God has at sundry times and in divers manners spoken to the children of men; that what eye hath not seen, or ear heard, what never could have entered into the heart of man, God has revealed by his Spirit to those whom He selected to be his spokesmen to their fellow-men; that these revelations were authenticated as divine, by their character, their effects, and by signs and wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost; that these holy men of old who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, communicated the revelations which they had received not only orally, but in writing, employing not the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; so that we have in the sacred Scriptures the things of the Spirit recorded in the words of the Spirit; which Scriptures, therefore, are the Word of God, — i.e., what God says to man; what He declares to be true and obligatory, — and constitute for his Church the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” Systematic Theology Volume 1, Chapter 4.

Regardless of the apparent innocence of the mystical experience or its apparent agreement with Scripture, it is to be distrusted and discarded because it claims to be another revelation from God, making Scripture insufficient. If Scripture is sufficient, what is the need of these other revelations? No amount of mental gymnastics can evade that question.

Scripture is the final and ONLY revelation God has given to the Church. Later in life when Peter recalls the incident on the Mount of Transfiguration, he remembers how Christ’s appearance was changed, how the cloud of God’s glory overshadowed them, and how God’s voice audibly spoke. Yet, he says concerning Scripture, “We have also a more sure word of prophecy,” (2 Peter 1:19). Let that sink in a moment.

The Evils of Mysticism, Pt 2

Our previous post made some rather bold statements about mysticism, I now aim to make good on those statements.

Mysticism comes in two popular varieties, one with ties to Christian beliefs, and one without such connections. My contention is that at bottom, both are really the same anti-Christian practice.

The common elements of all forms of mysticism are exalting of experience over reason for the attainment of knowledge and looking inward to one’s self for ‘spiritual enlightenment.’ The problem with these two ideas is that they are both wrong.

When someone places their personal experience over reason as an organ of truth, they are automatically demonstrating an inordinate and unjustifiable amount of confidence in oneself. Why is the mystic so certain about his experiences? How is he confident in the truthfulness of the apparent content of the experience? What is his frame of reference against which to test such an experience? The answer is simple. The mystic unjustifiably relies solely upon himself. He makes himself the final arbiter all truth. He may talk about an external set of beliefs, such as Christianity, but in reality, he has placed his own experience in a superior position to all the doctrinal content of his professed belief system.

That this is true can be shown in many ways. First of all, how is the mystic so certain of his own ability to scrutinize his experience objectively? The only way to do so is to deny that his senses and soul are unaffected by sin and are thus in tune to some external spiritual reality. This is a direct contradiction of Scripture. Paul goes so far as to call down a curse on anyone, including angels, if they promote anything other than what is revealed in Scripture (Gal. 1:8). It doesn’t get much more mystical than angelic visitations!

A second issue with the mystic’s assumptions about himself is that they are inherently pantheistic. Now, this is no problem for a Hindu. But this is a huge problem for one who professes Christianity. Pantheism is the belief that God is everything. He is the sum total of all existence. Everything and everyone that exists is somehow a mode or manifestation of God. It is a small baby step to declaring one’s own godhood at this point. Many so-called Christian mystics have openly done so e.g., Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, Morris Cerullo, etc.

Think about it, if all I need to do to get at ultimate spiritual truth is get in touch with my inner man (whatever that means!) – because there is within me (indeed within everyone) some inner light or ‘spark of the divine,’ - then I do not need an external God nor any external form of revelation. What is this but making oneself to be god? This is nothing else than the promise made to Eve by Satan – “You will be like gods” (Gen. 3:5) Only a pantheist can be self-consistent in the belief that there is some inner light or divine spark in all men. Since this is the plain underlying assumption behind all mystic experience, mysticism is, at core, pantheistic. A few Christian thinkers may try to deny this, but this contention is doubted by no serious student of mysticism.

Our next post will look at more reasons that plainly demonstrate the falsity of mysticism.

The Evils of Mysticism, Pt 1

Mysticism (from the Greek μυστικός) is the pursuit of communion with, identity with, or conscious awareness of an ultimate reality, divinity, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, instinct or insight. Mysticism usually centers on a practice or practices intended to nurture those experiences or awareness.

Mysticism exists in various religions. Mysticism can be found in Hassidic Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Neo-platonism, Sufism, Quakerism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Islam and Mormonism. It was present in all the ancient religions of Asia and the pre-Christian religions of Europe. In non-religious secular societies, mysticism appears as New Age belief.

I wish to contend that mysticism is a unifying factor in all false religion. Mysticism is a rejection of an external revelation from God and a substituting in its place of an internal experience. It is a replacing of “Thus saith the Lord,” with “I feel.” This is no exaggeration. Many mystics openly avow such teaching, claiming that reason is not the organ of truth and that it is through feelings that God make truth known.

Over the next couple of days we will be examining mysticism in more detail, showing why it is contrary to Scripture. It is pantheistic at heart and thus contrary to Christianity.

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.