Back in 2007, I documented an alarming trend that continues today — the growing use of magic charms and other occult practices in the apostolic-prophetic movement. Read the article, published by the Christian Research Journal, here.

What do I mean by saying they’re “unfalsifiable”?

There’s no way that you would ever be able to prove that they’re false or true. The predictions contained in them are highly vague — like the jibberish words found in fortune cookies. They’re the polar opposite of the Bible’s prophecies, which are highly specific.

To show you what I’m talking about I’ll compare one of the prophecies given by “prophetess” Erica Greve — of Bethel Church, in Redding, California — to another prophecy given by the prophet Elisha of Scripture.

Erica Greve’s Unfalsifiable Prophecy

On  January 22, Greve released a list of prophecies for the year 2010. All the prophecies are vague, but let’s look at just the first one.

Greve says 2010 will be the year that the body of Christ will “win together.” The victory will be achieved, in part, by more churches partnering together, according to her. She said:

I believe the new revelation coming forth from the Father’s heart will result in [denominational] streams coming closer together, churches partnering more frequently, and significant outpourings of His presence touching multiple places at the same time.  (See her full prophecy here.)

But how could it possibly ever be determined if more churches partnered together in 2010 than in 2009? The answer is — it couldn’t be determined. There would be no way of knowing whether or not more churches worked together this year.

This prophecy is unfalsifiable. It would be akin to saying that this year children will experience more joy. Or that this year God will smile upon school teachers. These prophecies sound nice and inspiring, but how would you ever know if they were fulfilled or not? You wouldn’t know. You couldn’t know.

Elisha’s Falsifiable Prophecy

Now let’s look at a falsifiable prophecy given by Elisha in  2 Kings chapter 7. His prophecy is so specific — unlike Greve’s prophecy — that no one is left scratching their head and wondering whether or not it was accurate.

The background to Elisha’s prophecy is given in 6:24-31 where we learn that the Israelites living in Samaria were under siege by the Arameans. Severe famine  resulted. The people were so hungry they resorted to cannibalism.

The terrible state of affairs was God’s punishment for the Israelites’ sin. Yet instead of repenting of the sin, the king of Israel became angry at God and sent someone to kill the prophet Elisha.

In response, Elisha told the king that the horrific situation in the city would improve the very next day, with food becoming affordable. Elisha’s prophecy was so specific that it not only included the exact day of its fulfillment, but also the exact price that wheat and barley would be sold for on that specific day:

Elisha said, “Hear the word of the LORD. This is what the LORD says: About this time tomorrow, a seah of flour will sell for a shekel and two seahs of barley for a shekel at the gate of Samaria.” (2 Kings 7:1)

Yet Elisha’s specific predictions didn’t stop there. When the king’s royal officer mocked Elisha’s prophecy — saying it was impossible for the famine to be ended in a single day — Elisha gave another prophecy directed at the officer. Elisha said the officer would live to see the reversal of the famine the next day, but he would not live long enough to enjoy any of the newly acquired food. (2 Kings 7:2)

Elisha’s prophecies came true exactly as he gave them (see the rest of 2 Kings chapter 7). God miraculously provided enough food for the entire city, so that wheat and barley were sold for the prices Elisha had predicted. And the official who mocked Elisha was trampled to death at the city gate by a stampede of people buying food — before he could partake of any of the food himself.

Elisha’s specific prophecy passed one of the key tests for a prophet given in the Bible in Deuteronomy 18:21-22 — the accuracy test. According to this passage, if a a prophecy does not come true, then the so-called prophet is a false prophet.

Ironically, the accuracy test can’t even be applied to the unfalsifiable prophecies given by Greve and many other so-called prophets today.

If you doubt this, do a Google search using the terms “modern apostles” and “modern prophets.” You’ll see what I mean.

It’s not just Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses or other cult groups who claim that their leaders speak directly for God. A growing number of charismatic Christians are following so-called apostles and prophets. In fact, you would be hard pressed to find a town in America that doesn’t have at least one “apostolic-prophetic” church (though they might not identify themselves with that label).

Yet with all their talk about “apostles” and “prophets,” the churches generally place very little emphasis — if any –  on testing the claims of these individuals to see if they’re true. On the contrary, they often teach that questioning an “apostle” or “prophet” is sin.

This teaching is in stark contrast to the teachings of Jesus, which stressed the importance of testing so-called apostles and prophets. In His message to the first-century church of Ephesus — delivered by an angel to the prophet John — Jesus praised the church members for ferreting out false apostles. He said:

I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot tolerate evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false. (Revelation 2:2)

But He rebuked another first-century church — the church in Thyatira — for tolerating a false prophetess (Revelation 2:20-23). By her teachings, this woman was leading the church members into sin. He gave them a stern warning: those people who continued to follow this so-called prophetess would face His judgment.

Jesus’ messages of praise and rebuke to these two churches would be well heeded by today’s churches. Don’t simply embrace the new “apostles” and “prophets.” Put them to the test.

Kim Clement

Is being crazy the mark of a true prophet?

That’s what Kim Clement — one of today’s so-called prophets — would have you think. When he and his fellow “prophets” come under fire for their bizarre prophecies, they defend themselves by saying that the Bible prophets were also viewed as crazy.

In his book Call Me Crazy But I’m Hearing God, Clement says:

You may call me crazy, my own family and friends may call me crazy, and I may even call myself crazy at times. … It’s all crazy; hearing from God has been crazy for thousands of years.

Those ‘Crazy’ Bible Prophets

He’s got a point: the Old Testament prophets did some unusual things. Just look at Ezekiel. Lying on one’s side for 390 days, as he did, is definitely odd. And don’t forget Isaiah who prophesied naked.

That’s weird.

But just because the Bible prophets did some crazy things doesn’t mean that all crazy people are prophets. Said another way: All apples are fruits, but not all fruits are apples.

Yet — taking inspiration from the strange behaviors of these Bible prophets — Clement wears his wackiness as a badge of honor. In his book, he says that many people who are honored today were once viewed as “off their rocker” because they attempted seemingly impossible feats — people like Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr., and Joan of Arc. He, apparently, includes himself among this distinguished crowd of “crazy” people.

But now let’s think about a different type of “crazies” — people who are are truly off kilter — like Octomom, the late Wacko Jacko, and the parents of the “Balloon Boy.” These people are crazy, too.

So, what’s the difference between prophets who do crazy things and run-of-the-mill crazy people?

The difference is in their message. Throughout the Bible, we see real prophets making predictions that are specific, come true and are consistent with other Scripture. Run-of-the-mill crazy people who pose as prophets, on the other hand, give prophecies that are vague, don’t come true and contradict Scripture. Let’s look at a few examples of truly crazy prophecies from Clement.

The ‘Big E’

An example of a vague prediction is his well-known “Big E” prophecy. For a number of years, Clement has prophesied that a new form of energy is about to be discovered, which he calls the “Big E.” He claims it will end America’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil. Back on May 22, 2005, he told a church in Whittier, California:

“But He [God] tells me there’s something other than petroleum or gas or whatever you call it, oil, that’s coming forth that’s going to be used. ‘Invest in it for it will bring some of you millions of dollars within a 14 month period’ says the Lord. It begins with an ‘e’” … (Read the full prophecy here.)

This prophecy is so nebulous that the “Big E” could refer to almost anything and everything that starts with the letter E. Indeed, his followers have interpreted it numerous different ways, as you can see from a discussion of his prophecy here. The kicker is that some of them — based solely on Clement’s vague prophecy — have invested money into companies that are experimenting with new energy forms that start with the letter E.

Five years have passed since that “Big E” prophecy was given and his followers are still waiting for the new energy to materialize. Earlier this month, Clement gave another prophecy about it. See it here.

Bin Laden, Aborted Babies and Other Bizarre Prophecies

An example of an inaccurate prediction is Clement’s infamous prophecy about Osama Bin Laden. In short, he prophesied that Bin Laden would be captured within a specific number of days. Yet, when it didn’t happen by that date, he offered a series of ridiculous explanations to hide his mistake. To learn more about his attempted cover up, check out the link here.

An example of a prophecy that contradicts Scripture was given on the same night as his “Big E” prophecy in Whittier, California. Clement claimed God told him that babies who had been aborted would get a second chance at life — they would be reborn in the wombs of other women. See it here. Yet the Bible teaches that it is appointed for people to die just once (Hebrews 9:27).

The bottom line: crazy does not necessarily equal prophet. Sometimes it just equals crazy.

The result: These “apostles” and “prophets” are gaining credibility in the eyes of evangelicals. And their dominionist teachings — long viewed as heretical — are being embraced by a growing number of Christians.

May Day 2010 — to be held on May 1st at Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. — will feature so-called apostles and prophets like Cindy Jacobs and Chuck Pierce praying for a spiritual revival alongside big-name evangelicals like Dr. James Dobson (founder of Focus on the Family), Tony Perkins (Family Research Council) and Wendy Wright (Concerned Women for America). See the full list of participants here.

May Day 2010 was the brainchild of Cindy Jacobs. The event’s promotional materials speak of “reformation” — a buzzword in the New Apostolic Reformation — and the day’s schedule is carved into seven time blocks of prayer for the “Seven Mountains of Culture” — another loaded term for those in the know. The “Seven Mountains of Culture” refers to the sectors of cultural influence that “apostles” are seeking to take over, including media, business and entertainment.

Another event featuring strange bedfellows was held last weekend at Liberty University — The Awakening 2010, sponsored by the Freedom Federation. The Freedom Federation is a hodge podge of faith-based organizations, including many from the Religious Right (like the Family Research Council) and several apostolic-prophetic organizations (like Harvest International Ministry).

This unlikely alliance got its start with TheCall events organized by “prophet” Lou Engle. Recently Engle has, unconvincingly, tried to distance himself from the apostolic-prophetic movement. The next Call event is set for Labor Day Weekend in Sacramento, California.

Keep your eyes on the growing partnership between the Religious Right and the apostolic-prophetic movement. And keep them on the increasing acceptance of these “apostles” and “prophets” by mainstream evangelicals.

Like wild animals – whose colors and physical features blend in with their natural surroundings – they try to conform to their Christian environments. Their No. 1 method of blending in with Christians is to quote from the Bible.

If they quoted from the Koran or the Book of Mormon, then they’d be easy to detect. But they’re much trickier than that. They quote Bible verses to back up their non-biblical teachings. This practice is what I call “Christian camouflage.”

But even though they try to hide behind the Bible, they can still be found out. The key is to see if they are quoting the Bible correctly. And you don’t have to be a pastor or Bible scholar to do that. You just have to learn a few basic rules of Bible interpretation.

The first rule is simple to grasp if you can just remember a childhood nursery rhyme.

Mary Had a Little Lamb

To know if a Bible verse has been quoted correctly, you must look at the verse in context. What do I mean by “in context”?

Think of the line from a nursery rhyme: “Mary had a little lamb.” What does it mean?

Well, if you know the rest of the rhyme, then you know it means that a girl named Mary owned a young sheep.

But if you don’t know the rest of the rhyme — and you just read the line by itself — then you might think it’s about a woman named Mary who ate a lamb chop for dinner. Or if you’re a Christian, you might interpret it another way — you might think it’s a symbolic statement about Mary, the mother of God, who gave birth to Jesus, the “lamb” of God.

But these other interpretations are ruled out by the rest of the rhyme, which reveals that the lamb was a real lamb and it followed Mary around wherever she went. The other lines provide the context that helps interpret the first line.

In the same way, one Bible verse quoted in isolation of the surrounding verses can often be understood in different ways.  To get at its correct meaning, it must be read in context of the surrounding verses and chapters. The importance of context in biblical interpretation is expressed in the saying, “Context is king.”

‘Foolish’ Interpretations

Now, instead of a nursery rhyme, let’s apply the context rule to a line from Scripture: “There is no God.”

If that’s the only part of the Bible someone read, then they might think it teaches that God doesn’t exist. But if they read the full verse, Psalm 14:1 – which says, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” – then they would see that it teaches the exact opposite of the first interpretation. It teaches that only a fool would deny God’s existence. The context helps provide the correct interpretation.

Yet none of today’s “apostles” or “prophets” would deny God’s existence. So let’s apply the context rule to a verse they do often quote out of context – Psalm 105:15. They say this verse forbids Christians from criticizing so-called prophets.

“Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm.”

Yet, by reading the entire Psalm – not just verse 15 – it becomes clear that it’s about God’s protection of the nation of Israel, including its prophets. The people of Israel are the “anointed ones” referred to in the verse. It’s a warning to the nations that they’d better not attack Israel. It’s not a warning against criticizing any self-declared prophet.

So remember: Whenever a “Christian” teacher quotes Bible verses, always check to see if they’re quoting them in context.

Is being logical unspiritual? That’s what modern “apostles” and “prophets” want you to think.

In fact, it’s not just unspiritual — it’s a sin to be repented of, according to Paul Cox, founder of Aslan’s Place in Hesperia, Calif. His suggested prayer urges Christians to repent of “all intellectualism, ungodly reasoning, logic and humanism.”

Huh? When did logic become an evil comparable to “ungodly reasoning” and “humanism”?

I want to show that logic isn’t bad — it’s a gift from God, and it protects us from harmful beliefs.

Human Logic vs. Heavenly Logic

“Apostles” and “prophets,” like Cox, often claim that there are two types of logic: “human logic” and “heavenly logic.” Human logic — they say — is unspiritual, evil, bad. Another example of the “human logic is bad” teaching can be found in “apostle/prophet” Rick Joyner’s prophecy titled Civil War in the Church.

Back in 1996, Joyner prophesied that an end-time battle will be fought in the church between two types of Christians — the “grey coats” and the “blue coats.” The grey coats — who represent the bad guys in Joyner’s prophecy — are Christians who use their “natural minds” and “human wisdom” to evaluate teachings in the church. The grey color of their coats represents “grey matter” — which, Joyner points out, is a slang expression for “the brain.”

But the blue coats — the good guys — don’t rely on their brains to evaluate teachings. They’re “heavenly minded” and “follow the Holy Spirit,” according to Joyner.

See other recent examples of the “human logic is bad” teaching by Kathi Pelton and John Mark Pool.

The problem with their statements is that the Bible doesn’t teach that there are two types of logic, and it doesn’t teach that human logic is bad. Let’s look at two Bible verses that have been misused by “apostles” and “prophets” to support these teachings.

1 Corinthians 1:21 and 3:19

In his first letter to the Corinthian church, the Apostle Paul says that the “wisdom of this world” is foolishness to God (1 Corinthians 3:19), and that God’s plan of salvation seems like “foolishness” to humankind (1 Corinthians 1:21).

So, the Apostle Paul believed that “human logic”  is bad, right?

Wrong. Confusion occurs because so-called prophets like Joyner teach that “worldly wisdom” and “human logic” are the same thing. They’re not. They’re very different.

When Paul talked about worldly wisdom, he was talking about the things that are valued by people who are separated from God — things like power, fame and money.  These things are the opposite of the things God values. That’s why Paul says that God’s plan of salvation — through a crucified Christ — appears like “foolishness” to worldly people.

Paul’s description of “worldly” wisdom matches James’ description of “earthly” wisdom in James chapter 3 — it’s jealous, covetous and self-seeking (James 3:3-18).

So, it’s selfish ambition that Paul and James are bashing — not “human logic,” as Joyner asserts.

Human Logic

Logic is the science of correct thinking. We use it to determine if our beliefs are sound or not. We use it everyday.

Not sure of this? Let me show you.

One of the rules of logic is called the “law of non-contradiction.” This rule may sound complicated, but bear with me.  In simple terms, it means that if two things contradict each other, then they can’t both be true. For example, a moving car can’t be both in the street and not in the street at the same time. It’s either in the street or not in the street.

We use the law of non-contradiction when we decide if it’s safe to cross the street. We use other laws of logic, too — whether we know their names or not. And we have places for people who don’t use them — they’re called mental hospitals.

That’s because the opposite of being logical is being illogical. And being illogical isn’t being spiritual — no matter what teachers like Joyner or Cox want us to think.

Logic Glorifies God

God made our minds, and it glorifies Him when we use them. We were created in His image and that includes our ability to reason.

In fact, Jesus, Himself, is called “the Logic” in Scripture. Where? In John 1:1 — where He’s called “the Word.” The Greek word for “Word” is logos — which is where we get our English word for “logic.”

In other words, Jesus is the Supreme Rational Being who governs all things. It shouldn’t be surprising, then, that the Greatest Commandment includes an admonition for us to love God with all of our minds (Matthew 22:36-38).

Likewise, the original apostles never discouraged people from using their minds. In fact, they had harsh words for false teachers who didn’t base their teachings on sound beliefs, but instead promoted a secret knowledge — or  “heavenly” knowledge, as Joyner would prefer to call it. Peter called these false teachers “unreasoning animals” (2 Peter 2:12).

So by not using their God-given abilities to reason — through applying the rules of logic — these false teachers are being unspiritual.

Why would they go to so much trouble to urge people to shut off their brains? So their followers won’t scrutinize the teachings of these so-called prophets and apostles. If they did, they’d detect the error.

Think about it.

***Read the first post in my Brain Stoppers series here.

Each January, this group of “prophets” — led by C. Peter Wagner and Cindy Jacobs — meets to determine what God has shown them about the new year.

This year’s prophecies — like previous years — are so vague that there would be no way of knowing if they were actually fulfilled. I call them “fortune cookie” prophecies.

But even if they weren’t vague, the ACPE includes so many disclaimers before their prophecies that not one of them would ever have to come to pass — and they could still call themselves “prophets.”

One of their favorite disclaimers is the one I call the “moving calendar” disclaimer. Just because they call it the “Word of the Lord for 2010″ doesn’t necessarily mean the prophecies will be fulfilled in 2010, according to the ACPE prophets. Maybe it will be in 2011. Or maybe 2012. Hey, why limit themselves to a single decade?

But this year they have another disclaimer they call “conditional prophecies.”

Conditional Prophecies

Their first disclaimer states this:

“All prophecy not contained in Scripture is conditional.”

What do they mean by saying that the prophecies they give are “conditional”? Their statement is clarified by another one of their disclaimers, which states:

“It is possible that prophetic warnings will cause either the person or nation to repent and so turn away the judgment prophesied. Biblically, this happened when Jonah prophesied to Nineveh and the city repented, causing God to relent.”

So, what they mean by saying that their prophecies are “conditional” is that they may or may not happen — based on whether their listeners choose to act on them or not. Just like the prophecy about Ninevah, God could change His mind.

In other words, their prophecy about a Holy Spirit revival occurring in Indonesia — well, that one might or might not happen. It depends on a number of factors, such as whether their followers prayed and worked hard enough to stir up a revival. And then there’s the prophecy about  the eradication of poverty. Again, it may or may not happen — depending on what things churches do to help the poor.

And, oh yes, don’t forget their prophecy about the rise of a third political party in America. Maybe a new party will rise. And if it does, the ACPE will be sure to take credit. But if it doesn’t, it’s not their fault. It’s the fault of the American people — or somebody, anybody else. And on it goes.

Are you getting the picture?

But there’s one gaping hole in this “conditional prophecy” theory. The Bible doesn’t teach it. Which Scripture passages say that all prophecies — other than those found in Scripture — are conditional? Show them to me.

What the Bible does teach is that prophets must be tested for their accuracy (Deuteronomy 18:20-22). The apostle Paul told the Thessalonians to examine every prophecy carefully (1 Thessalonians 5:19-22).

By saying that their prophecies don’t have to come to pass, the ACPE has thrown out the most basic test for knowing if a prophet is true or false — the accuracy test.

But that — maybe, possibly, could be — the point.

The ACPE members this year include Bill Hamon, Sam Brassfield, Harry Jackson, Rick Ridings, Greg Black, Will Ford, Mike Jacobs, Peter Wagner, Mary Glazier, Sharon Stone, Cindy Jacobs, John Sanford, Beth Alves, Gwen Shaw and Doris Wagner (pictured below).

Photo credit: CIA World Factbook

Steve Shultz, the publisher of the Elijah List, sent out an e-mail Tuesday claiming that “prophets” Kim Clement, Cindy Jacobs and Chuck Pierce predicted the recent earthquake in Haiti. See his e-mail here. But did they really predict it?

This is a perfect example of how “prophets” in the apostolic-prophetic movement falsely claim credit for predicting events. Yet, if you look at their actual prophecies, you will see how vague — or inaccurate — they were. Let’s look at them quickly.

Kim Clement’s Prophecy

Kim Clement’s prophecy, given last July, makes a quick reference to Haiti, along with South Africa, New Guinea and China. The only thing he says about Haiti is that “a spirit if unity is being released” in the nation (nothing about an earthquake). He says the same thing about unity coming to South Africa and New Guinea. And regarding China, he says that the “wicked regime” and communism are being defeated there.

I would hardly call Clement’s prophecy a prediction of the earthquake that occurred in Haiti.

Chuck Pierce’s Prophecy

Back in December, Chuck Pierce prophesied about “buckling highways throughout the earth.” Watch a video of it here. His prophecy — about “buckling highways” — predicted the damage that was caused to roadways during the Haiti quake, according to Shultz. Never mind the fact that Pierce’s prophecy didn’t mention either an earthquake or Haiti.

Shultz also claims that Pierce’s prophecy predicted the recent “buckling” of sections of roads in Israel, California and Florida. But his prophecy about “buckling” roads is laughable. There  are always roads that collapse or need repaired. The minor incident that occurred in Israel involved a bus wheel that broke through the pavement. It only merited a small news story that was related to Shultz second hand. A fulfillment of prophecy? Give me a break!

Cindy Jacob’s Prophecy

At the same event where Pierce spoke in December, Cindy Jacobs said there would be earthquakes in regions of the world where they normally don’t occur. She said the media would be shocked because they would happen in places that aren’t situated on top of fault lines.

Well, Jacobs’ prophecy definitely couldn’t have referred to the Haiti quake since two major fault lines run right through the island nation, and it has a history of devastating earthquakes. Read about them here.

When it comes to predicting the Haiti quake, it appears that Shultz’s “prophets” are 0-3.

Paul Keith and Wanda Davis, founders of WhiteDove Ministries

“God is doing a new thing!”

Have you ever heard a Christian teacher make this statement? Chances are, you have. It’s become a catch phrase to promote all kinds of dangerous teachings, like this recent one from “Prophet” Paul Keith Davis of WhiteDove Ministries. See it here.

In his teaching — sent out by the Elijah List on Dec. 12 — Davis said God is doing a “new thing” today by giving new revelation to the Church through modern “apostles” and “prophets.” The purpose of this revelation, according to Davis, is to help the  Church set up God’s kingdom on earth. The Scripture he quotes to support this teaching is Isaiah 48:6-7.

What is the new revelation God is giving the Church, according to Davis? It contains insights into the heavenly realm, including the discovery of new laws of “physics, light, sound and spiritual colors,” he said. It also contains new revelation into the Scriptures. Christians will suddenly understand verses they never understood before. Their new understandings will have as great an impact on the Church as the Protestant Reformation, according to Davis.

But does Isaiah 48:6-7 support Davis’ teaching? No, an examination of the passage in its biblical context shows that it can’t be used to promote new revelations from “apostles” and “prophets.”

First, let’s look at the passage. I will quote from the Amplified Bible since it’s the translation Davis quotes from, even though it’s not the best translation to use. (I’ll explain why it’s not the best translation in a future post.) Here’s the passage:

⁶You have heard [these things foretold], now you see this fulfillment. And will you not bear witness to it? I show you specified new things from this time forth, even hidden things [kept in reserve] which you have not known.

⁷They are created now [called into being by the prophetic word], and not long ago; and before today you have never heard of them, lest you should say, Behold, I knew them!

In this passage, God — speaking through the Prophet Isaiah — says He will reveal “new things” that He hadn’t revealed before. What are the “new things”?  They had to do specifically with the nation of Israel and its restoration after going into captivity.

How do we know this? By reading the chapters surrounding Isaiah 48. In Isaiah 39, God reveals that He will punish the Israelites by sending the Babylonians to conquer them. Undoubtedly, this experience will leave them wondering if God has abandoned their nation. So, in chapters 40-48, God calms their fears by promising that — after a time of captivity in Babylon — He will forgive them, return the exiles to their land, and restore their nation.

Thus, the restoration of Israel is the topic of chapters 40-48 and also the subject of the “new thing” God promised to do in Isaiah 48:6-7. This same “new thing” is promised in two other places: Isaiah 42:8-9 and 43:18-19.

So, Isaiah 48:6-7 is a specific promise God made to the nation of Israel — not a green light for every new revelation given by a teacher. Yet, a “green light” is exactly how this passage was treated by Rev. V. Gene Robinson when he was elected as the Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop. In an interview with Beliefnet, Robinson said that the election results showed that “God is doing a new thing in the world.”

Robinson’s use of this passage contradicts other teachings in Scripture that say homosexuality is a sin. In the same way, many modern “apostles” and “prophets” are giving teachings that don’t mesh with Scripture, like Davis’ teaching that we must learn new laws of physics in order to establish God’s kingdom on earth.

God makes it clear that we must test all new revelations by seeing if they line up with Scripture. That’s what the first Christians did when they were presented with new teachings from the original apostles — they examined the Scriptures daily to see if they matched up (Acts 17:11).

But can God ever do something new — assuming that it lines up with the revelation He’s already given? He certainly can — He’s God! He can do whatever He wants to do. This is the very reason He promised to do a “new thing” for Israel in the first place. He wanted to show them that only He — and not their worthless idols — was capable of fulfilling prophecy (see Isaiah 48:5 and 7-8).