The implication is that no one should listen to me if I haven’t followed the proper order — going to the teacher first, then going public. False teachers, themselves, often promote this idea to shield themselves from criticism.

But this is a misuse of the teaching on church discipline found in Matthew 18:15-17. Here’s an article I wrote about this subject three years ago.

Naming Names

There’s a common view among Christians that it’s wrong to publicly criticize the teachings of other professing Christians.

People who hold this view cite Matthew 18:15-17. They believe this Bible passage teaches that anyone who has concerns about someone else’s teachings should go to that person privately.

In fact, some people have recently warned me that my blog is a violation of this command because it identifies people who are bringing false teaching into the church.

But they don’t realize that this passage is being used out of context. It doesn’t refer to addressing false teaching. It refers to addressing someone’s private sin. This can be seen in the larger context, which includes a discussion — immediately following this passage — of forgiving those who sin against us. Also, this passages deals, specifically, with church discipline — the manner of dealing with those who sin in a local church.

Public vs. Private Rebukes

Here’s what the Bible teaches about confronting sin and false teaching in the church:

• A private rebuke is given for private sin. Matthew 18:15-17

• A public rebuke is given for public sin. (See the apostle Paul’s public rebuke of the apostle Peter’s false teaching in Galatians 2:11-14. Also, see the apostle Paul’s public rebuke of a man who was flagrantly sleeping with his stepmother with his church’s knowledge in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13. Paul didn’t confront this man privately. In fact, he had never even met this man, as shown in 1 Corinthians 5:1, when he refers to a report he heard about the man’s sin. Yet, Paul confronted this public sin publicly because the sin effected the whole Corinthian church.)

Teachers who bring false doctrines into the church must be confronted publicly because their teachings are public. They write books, speak at conferences and appear on television programs promoting their teachings to thousands of people. Because they have public influence, they must be held to public scrutiny. If people go to them privately, then — in the meantime — thousands of people can be misled by their harmful teachings.

Teachers should expect — and even welcome — criticism of their teachings. The Bible warns them in James 3:1 that they are held to high standards because of their influence and will face stricter judgment from God than other Christians. They should be open to correction.

But many times the false teachers, themselves, are the ones who teach their followers the misapplication of Matthew 18:15-17. They use this as a technique to silence criticism.

What the Bible Teaches About Dealing With False Teaching in the Church

Here are some more things the Bible teaches, specifically, about dealing with false teaching. (My professor, Kevin Lewis at Biola University, provided the list below.)

• Name Names: In 2 Timothy, the apostle Paul identifies false teachers in the church, by name, four times. 2 Tim. 1:15, 2:17, 3:8, 4:14

• Warn the church publicly what the false teachers are teaching. 2 Timothy 2:16-18

• Silence the false teachers. (This means that church leaders shouldn’t allow people to teach false teaching in their churches.) Titus 1:10-11

• Refute the false teachers. Titus 1:9

• Do not give false teachers a platform or otherwise support them in their ministries. 2 John 1:10-11

How can you get rich and build God’s kingdom at the same time?

By following the modern “apostles” and “prophets” — at least that’s what they claim. They say a “great transfer of wealth” is about to occur — from the wicked to the righteous.

If you want to be on the receiving end of the transfer, then you’d better get “properly aligned” with them. What that boils down to is submitting yourself to them.

More than 30 so-called apostolic leaders taught people how to take part in the wealth transfer at the Financial K.E.Y.S. conference held earlier this month in Denver, Colorado. Speakers included Bruce Cook, Lance Wallnau, Os Hillman, Cindy Jacobs, Rick Joyner and C. Peter Wagner. See the full list here. The name of the conference — Financial K.E.Y.S. — refers to their teaching that money is the key to global transformation and establishing God’s kingdom on earth. As Wagner says in his book Dominion!:

“If you check back through human history, you will find that three things, more than any others, have produced social transformation: violence, knowledge and wealth — and the greatest of these is wealth! (page 181)

To make the wealth transfer happen, Wagner claims that God is raising up a special group of apostles called workplace apostles. He says they will have the ability to make investments that will yield extraordinary returns:

“They will not be traditional financial planners who are satisfied with annual returns of 5 percent to 20 percent or so. … I have faith that we will see the biblical standard of 100 percent returns or more become the norm” (Dominion!, page 196).

Wagner and company claim that their prophecies about a “great transfer of wealth” have a biblical basis. Yet, the Scriptures they quote in support of this teaching are taken out of context. Let’s take a quick look at the two verses Wagner quotes in his book Dominion!.

Isaiah 60:11 and Proverbs 13:22

The first verse Wagner quotes is Isaiah 60:11:

“Therefore your gates shall be open continually; They shall not be shut day or night, That men may bring to you the wealth of the Gentiles, And their kings in procession.”

The chapter this verse is taken from, chapter 60, is about the restoration of the nation of Israel during the millennial reign of Christ. It’s not about the Church. The other verses in the chapter make this clear. Verse 14, for example, specifically names Israel’s capital city, Jerusalem, when it refers to “the city of the Lord” and “Zion” (these are two other names for Jerusalem).

In light of the rest of the chapter, it’s clear that verse 11 is saying that the wealth of the Gentile nations (non-Israelite nations) will be brought to Israel during the millennium, after Christ’s return to earth. It has nothing to do with wealth being transferred to the Church, today, through so-called workplace apostles.

The second verse Wagner quotes as support for a “great transfer of wealth” is Proverbs 13:22:

“But the wealth of the sinner is stored up for the righteous.”

Actually, Wagner only quotes part of verse 22. He completely leaves out the first half of the verse without telling his readers that’s what he’s done. But the full verse sheds more light on its meaning. Here it is:

^“A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children,
But the wealth of the sinner is stored up for the righteous.”

So, this proverb is about inheritances and the lasting legacy left by the righteous versus the fleeting prosperity of the wicked. I don’t know how Wagner — someone with multiple theological degrees — could take a simple proverb about inheritances and legacies and turn it into a teaching about the end times, workplace apostles and a wealthy Church.

Apostles and Wealth

Many of today’s apostles insist that they must possess vast sums of money to defeat the forces of darkness and advance God’s kingdom. Yet, Peter and John — two of the original apostles — didn’t have much money and God used them mightily. They relied on something even more powerful than money — the authority of Christ.

Once, when a crippled beggar asked them for money, Peter replied:

“I do not possess silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you: In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene–walk!” (Acts 3:6)

Never once did the original apostles say wealth was a key to the Church’s success. Yet today’s apostles claim it is indispensable.

]]> http://www.SpiritOfError.org/2010/02/the-great-wealth-transfer-100-percent-returns/622/feed 21 http://www.SpiritOfError.org/2010/01/brain-stoppers/317 http://www.SpiritOfError.org/2010/01/brain-stoppers/317#comments Sun, 10 Jan 2010 04:46:38 +0000 admin http://www.SpiritOfError.org/?p=317 What is one of Satan’s greatest tools?

Brain stoppers.

That’s the term I made up for a variety of tactics Satan uses to get people to shut off their minds so they don’t critically evaluate teachings. Leaders in the apostolic-prophetic movement use them all the time.

I’m not talking about brainwashing. The media often accuses cult leaders, like David Koresh, of “brainwashing” their followers so the leader can gain complete control over people. Yet, I don’t believe true brainwashing is possible because every person ultimately retains control of his or her own thoughts.

But I do believe religious leaders can discourage their followers from using their minds — which keeps them from detecting the error in what’s being taught.

Name Calling

One popular brain stopper is what I’ve labeled “name calling.” This happens when the teachings of an “apostle” or “prophet” are challenged. Instead of responding to the challenges, “apostles” or “prophets” often resort to calling their critics names.

The names they’ve given their critics are numerous: mean-spirited, judgmental, Jezebel, unspiritual, unanointed and old wineskins — to name a few.

This tactic is effective because their followers start to believe that everyone who questions an “apostle” or “prophet” is evil or unspiritual. So, the followers quickly dismiss any criticism of their leader, without ever determining if it is true or not.

“Prophet” Kim Clement often uses this tactic. In his book Call Me Crazy But I’m Hearing God (Destiny Image, 2007),  he calls his critics names that are associated with death — “undertakers” and “caretakers.” Clement says “undertakers are the ‘naysayers’ of this world who seek to bury what God is doing.” And he has an even harsher description of “caretakers”:

The caretakers are always poking their noses into your business. They are trying to take care of things that no one ever asked them to take care of. They are the judges who declare what they believe is wrong in the church and the world. They determine who the false prophets are and what is heretical. They don’t change the world; they criticize the world. They never take a risk. They live in the comfort of their own high towers (page 156).

Yet, he has a flattering name for his faithful followers — “risktakers.” He calls them the “pioneers” and the ones who “will make history.” He says, “God loves risktakers!”

Like Clement, “apostle” C. Peter Wagner calls his critics names. He says they’re the “unanointed leaders of the old wineskin,” and he claims they’re motivated by a high-ranking demon he calls the “corporate spirit of religion” [See his book Changing Church (Regal, 2004), pages 18-22].

I could give countless examples. Many followers of “apostles” and “prophets” have responded to my articles in this way. One comment I’ve often received is that I’m just “jealous” of the success of the ministries I’ve critiqued. This is classic name calling.

If someone’s favorite teacher is challenged, a better response is to show the critics where they are wrong — not to just call them names.

Steve Shultz

If you ever receive a forwarded e-mail from an organization called the Elijah List, beware. Steve Shultz — the founder of the Elijah List — is one of the most dangerous false teachers today.

This is a harsh statement. Why do I say it?

The Elijah List e-mails — which are sent to more than 134,000 subscribers everyday — have done more to promote the false prophets and false apostles of the New Apostolic Reformation than just about anything else. And they do this by twisting Scripture beyond recognition.

Take a recent example. Today Shultz sent out an e-mail containing a prophecy from Kim Clement. See it here. The prophecy was about California.

Shultz always introduces the prophecies he sends out with background information about the featured “prophet” or prophecy. In this case, Shultz introduced the prophecy by saying that when he first heard Clement give it live on streaming TV — before Clement even began to speak — Shultz somehow intuitively knew it would be about Los Angeles. Shultz concluded that — because he knew the prophecy would be about Los Angeles before Clement said what it was about — then the prophecy must be true. Then Schultz backed up his bizarre conclusion with a Scripture verse. Here are his exact words:

I am not exaggerating when I tell you I just KNEW he was about to prophesy about Los Angeles, and that was before he said it. The Bible says, “By the mouth of two or three witnesses.” So this is one of those words you can “take to the bank!”

The portion of the verse Shultz quoted — “by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established” — comes from Deuteronomy 19:15. Shultz used this verse to argue that — since two “prophets” (he and Clement) agreed with the prophecy — then it must be of God. So Shultz’s followers could trust the prophecy and, as Shultz said, take it “to the bank!”

Yet if Shultz had quoted the full verse — and not just the second half — then it would be obvious to everyone reading his e-mail that it had nothing to do with knowing whether or not a prophecy is from God. Here’s the full verse in the New King James Version (the version Shultz quoted it in):

One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established.

This verse comes from the Old Testament, and it says that a man cannot be given the death penalty based on the testimony of only one person. This law was given by God to the Jewish nation to protect someone from being falsely accused of murder.

We know the verse is talking, specifically, about the death penalty — even though it doesn’t use those words — because the surrounding verses talk about what to do when someone is accused of murder. This interpretation is backed up by other passages in the Old Testament that set forth the same principle in regard to someone who has been accused of murder (Numbers 35:30, Deuteronomy 17:6). We also see the same principle at work in the New Testament regarding Christians who are accused of committing some type of major sin (Matthew 18:16, 2 Corinthians 13:1, 1 Timothy 5:19).

So, the verse Shultz quoted has nothing to do with testing a prophecy. His misuse of Scripture to support Clement’s prophecy is irresponsible and dangerous. It teaches Christians that — any time two or more Christians agree that a prophecy is true — then it is true and they should believe it.

Yet, Scripture gives us at least three tests for knowing whether a prophecy is from God. And they have nothing to do with the number of people who agree.

1) Does the prophecy point people to worship of the one true God or to the worship of other false gods? See Deuteronomy 13:1-5 and 18:20. A close examination of the prophecies given by Shultz and Clement over the years show that the “God” they talk about bears little resemblance to the God of the Bible.

2) Does the prophecy come true? See Deuteronomy 18:21-22. Clement has become notorious for giving prophecies that never come to pass and then attempting to explain away their failure.

3) Does the prophecy line up with Scripture or does it contradict or otherwise undermine Scripture? See Acts 17:11, where the Bereans were praised for searching the Scripture to test new teaching. Shultz, on the other hand, contradicts Scripture by twisting verses such as Deuteronomy 19:15 and giving bogus methods for testing a prophecy.

Besides these three tests for a prophecy, the Bible also tells us we can know whether a prophet comes from God or not by examining the fruit of his or her life (Matthew 7:15-23). The frequent abuse of Scripture exhibited by Shultz is one example of bad fruit.

So, the bottom line is, Shultz and Clement can agree all they want — until they’re blue in the face. It still doesn’t make their prophecies true. Contrary to what Shultz says, by the mouth of 2 or 3 or even 123 witnesses a prophecy is not confirmed.

I’ve been told that some readers of this blog — members of apostolic-prophetic churches — have been really offended by things I’ve written. This has troubled me because my goal isn’t to offend my brothers and sisters in Christ.

I haven’t updated my blog in the past couple weeks because I wanted to take some time to pray and think about how I can more lovingly and clearly present my concerns about the apostolic-prophetic movement without turning people off. I thought the best way to do that might be to share my dream.

My Dream
I dreamt it was my wedding day. I was busy doing other things when, suddenly, I realized I hadn’t given myself enough time to get dressed for the ceremony.

The guests were gathered inside the church, and the groom was waiting for me at the front. Then, I could hear the piano music start to play. I panicked. I knew that after just a few songs, it would be my cue to walk down the aisle. But I wasn’t even in my wedding dress yet.

I looked down at the street clothes I had on and wondered if I could get by wearing them during the ceremony. But I knew I couldn’t do that: my groom was dressed in a tuxedo. So, I quickly put on my wedding dress. But, it was heavily wrinkled and looked shabby. I hadn’t bothered to have it steam cleaned beforehand.

Then, I looked down at my feet and realized I had forgotten to bring my fancy shoes. I would have to go barefoot. I hoped my long dress would cover my feet so no one would see them.

When I looked in the mirror, I saw my hair wasn’t fixed and my makeup wasn’t on. I had a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach. I knew my groom would be hurt to find out that I didn’t value our relationship enough to make myself look beautiful for him on our important day. I had put other things before him.

When I woke from the dream, I was sweating and my heart was racing. My own wedding, two years ago, made the dream seem even more personal and relevant to me. As I lay there thinking about the dream, I realized it had biblical symbolism.

Biblical Symbols of Marriage
We, the church, are called the “bride of Christ.” God’s intimate relationship to His people is described — in both the Old and New Testaments — in terms of a marriage (examples: Isaiah 54:5-7; Hosea 2:19; Matthew 22:2-14; Ephesians 5:25-27, 32; Revelation 19:6-9). When Jesus returns for His bride, we will celebrate a great wedding feast with Him (Revelation 19:9).

The Groom expects that His bride will be spiritually ready for Him when He returns. Being ready includes:

• Being dressed in bright, clean, fine linen (which represents good deeds) Revelations 19:6-8

• Having no blemishes or wrinkles (being without sin) Ephesians 5:25-27

• Being a pure virgin (being doctrinally pure) who is devoted to Christ 2 Corinthians 11:2-4. The Bible compares the teachings of false prophets to spiritual adultery (Jeremiah 23:13-14).

• Having oil (representing the Holy Spirit) in our lamps, like the five wise virgins who were waiting for the bridegroom in Matthew 25:1-14

Even though this gets away from bridal imagery, all Christians are supposed to put on the full armor of God that is listed in Ephesians 6, which — as in my dream — includes shoes (shoes represent sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ with others, according to this passage).

How The Dream Relates to My Blog
When Jesus returns for His bride, it’s going to be too late to get ready for Him — as it was for me in my dream. I can’t forget the panic I felt. Yet, that feeling will be much more intense if we Christians aren’t ready for our Divine Groom. We must get ready now.

This symbolism motivates my ministry. I have great love for the body of Christ and want all Christians to be ready when Christ returns for us. I have a special desire to see the church be spiritually pure when He returns for us, which, I believe, may be soon. (See fulfilledprophecy.com for more on this.)

But false teachings sneak into the church and, sadly, even good Christians can be seduced by them. Paul told the churches in Galatia that he was shocked to see that they were embracing false teachings (Galatians 1:6-7). And even the apostle Peter began promoting false teaching until he was confronted by the apostle Paul (Galatians 2:11-17). If Peter — Christ’s chosen leader of the early church — could be temporarily deceived by false teaching, then no Christian is immune from it — not you or me. So, all of us need to watch our doctrine closely, as Paul instructed his young disciple Timothy (1 Timothy 4:16). I frequently pray that God will keep me from believing wrong beliefs about Him and the world.

That’s the goal of my blog: to help Christians guard against serious doctrinal error that can hurt their relationships with Christ. Please don’t misunderstand me: I’m not saying that members of apostolic-prophetic churches aren’t Christians. Quite the opposite: many of them are sincere, committed, beautiful, loving Christians. I’m also not saying that apostolic-prophetic churches are the only ones with doctrinal error. Sadly, there are a lot of false teachings in the church.

The reasons I focus on this particular doctrinal error are because so few people are addressing it and because this movement is growing so quickly. It’s been embraced in many charismatic churches, which are the fastest-growing churches in the world, according to church growth researchers, like David Barrett.

Many of the Christians who attend apostolic-prophetic churches don’t know that some of the teachings are the same teachings of the Latter Rain Movement of the 1940s — a movement that the majority of Christians, back then, rejected as seriously errant. The “apostolic-prophetic movement” and “New Apostolic Reformation” are simply new names given to these old teachings. Don’t take my word for it: some of the most prominent leaders in the apostolic-prophetic movement, like C. Peter Wagner (pictured here), openly admit that their teachings are the same old Latter Rain teachings. (See Wagner’s 2004 book, Changing Church, published by Regal Books.)

One of these teachings is that all Christians must submit to modern apostles and prophets who have unquestioned authority and the ability to give new doctrine to the church that can’t be found in the Bible.

Of course, not all Christians who attend apostolic-prophetic churches accept this teaching. In fact, I believe that many members of apostolic-prophetic churches would strongly oppose it. But, some of the most prominent leaders in this movement, like Wagner, do promote this teaching. And Wagner’s teachings are entering many apostolic-prophetic churches — though the teachings aren’t always detected.

This is my concern. I hope my blog will raise awareness about such teachings so they won’t mislead people.

My Heart
Please — if I’ve offended you with my blog — I hope you’ll see that this isn’t my intention. Let’s discuss these issues together, and show me if I’m off base somewhere or if I’m ungracious. As Paul warns, I can have all knowledge in the world — including all doctrinal knowledge (which I certainly don’t have) — but, without love, I’m just making a lot noise. I don’t want to be a noisemaker.

I think my post called “Holly’s Top 7 Prophecies for 2007” was especially offensive to some readers. I meant to use humor to highlight some of the movement’s errors. Perhaps my poking fun was unkind and, if it was, I’m sorry.

Some of the comments posted by readers of my blog, sadly, have resorted to unkind personal attacks and judgments against people in apostolic-prophetic churches. I don’t support such comments and I’ve even deleted some that, I felt, crossed a line.

Yet, as long as the comments are civil, I rarely delete them — whether they’re made by people who oppose or support the apostolic-prophetic movement. That’s because I want this blog to be a place where people from all sides can come together and discuss these important issues.

I know that some people will perceive all criticism as unloving, no matter how gently it is given. But my prayer is that — in sharing my concerns about this movement — my love for Christ’s body will be apparent.

(* Photo of bride was taken by David Ball)