Religious Spirits

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Originally Posted by Oscarr

I wonder what local church's authority you are working under?

And are they aware of your remarks about Dr Wagner. Would they approve of your criticism of one of the leading ministries in church growth, healing, and spiritual warfare...
​

Then why do you ask:


1. What local church authority am I working under?

2. Is my local church aware of my remarks about Doctor Wagner?

3. Would my local church approve of my criticism of "one of the leading ministries in church growth, healing, and spiritual warfare..."


Are you seriously kidding me?

You think I need permission and oversight from my local church to post an opinion on a forum, or to criticize false teaching?

If that is where Wagner, sorry...Doctor Wagner, wants to take the church, 'be afraid, be very afraid!'

peace,
Simon

The problem is that you are taking it upon yourself to publicly criticise a ministry that is respected world wide. If Dr Wagner decided to sue you for libel, which he would have every right to do, this would not only affect your credibility, but put your church and its leadership into disrepute. Because, like it or not, you are being a representative of your church and what you say or do public reflects on your church.

When I wanted to know more about Dr Wagner and what he stands for, I have bought quite a number of his books. If I had the opportunity to travel to the USA, I would go and hear him preach, look at the way his church functions, and ask for an appointment to meet and talk with him personally. That's what a "Berean" Christian would do.

That is why I asked those questions about your church. But from what you are saying, you are not too concerned about the leadership of your church and how your criticisms would affect them.

It is very easy to form opinions from second hand reports, without taking the time and trouble to find out first hand. If you have not read the widest range of his books on different topics, and have not listened to any of his sermons to see if his teaching is consistent with the Word of God, then you are slandering the man, and you open yourself up to being corrected by the Holy Spirit, as well as litigation from Dr Wagner. Furthermore, you could receive a lawyer's letter from the Fuller Theological Seminary of which he is a representative and a professor, because you are demeaning that institution as well.

Think of the thousands of students who have gone through the Fuller Seminary, and who are now ministering for the Lord all over the world. Your criticism of Dr Wagner has the potential of causing doubts and degrading of confidence in their qualifications and their ministries. Is this love as described in 1Corinthians 13? I doubt it.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Oscarr, somewhat of a late response.

Even though I would be reticent with saying that he is a false believer, his teachings that support his erroneous New Apostolic Renewal were certainly not birthed from within the Scriptures nor from the Spirit of God. Leaving aside any question regarding his salvation, his teachings have heavily and negatively affected the broader Church and I would place him high on my list of recent ministries who have promoted heretical and humanistic teachings along with Schuler and Hybels and with Wagners predecessors from the Latter-Rain movement.

The question is, do his doctrines violate the Scripture? From what I have read about his views about the Apostolic, all I see is that he is promoting the restoration of the apostolic ministry into the body of Christ after it was lost through the formalism that engulfed the church after the 3rd Century.

His view of a present day apostle is that he has established and has oversight over a number of churches. This seems consistent with Paul's apostolic ministry. Paul did not establish every fellowship within the early church, in fact, the churches he established were relatively few in comparison with the number of fellowships that existed at the time. He certainly was not an apostle to the church at Jerusalem.

You must also remember that he has been a professor at the Fuller Theological Seminary, and implying that he is false, you are discrediting that institution. Therefore, you had better have some very reliable evidence!

Have you taken the time and trouble to email Dr Wagner and ask him to clarify his views? Have you given him your questions and asked him to explain the aspects of his doctrine that you have doubts about? You might be surprised.

It is a very risky thing to depend on second hand evidence, because you could end up with egg on your face if you are not careful.

I have no real knowledge of the number of salvations that have occurred directly under his ministry but undoubtedly it can be easy for any ‘celebrity’ to at least convince enough people to give some nominal acknowledgement of Jesus as someone who is a good teacher; though I will admit I could be a bit harsh on him at this point but as an individual I am of the opinion that his ministry has produced more harm than good and that he is best kept at arms length.

Again. what evidence are you depending on? I have read a wide range of his books, and the books of other soul-winning ministries who respect Dr Wagner as a mentor and an effective Bible teacher. They certainly do not view Dr Wagner as preaching a superficial Gospel and presenting Jesus as a "good teacher". Your comment about his ministry "doing more harm than good" had better have a foundation of good first-hand evidence to avoid possible litigation for libel from both Dr Wagner and the Fuller Theological Seminary.

We should remember that much the same arguments were given to support Todd Bentley when his lifestyle began to become known to us and look how his life turned out. Much the same can be said for Marjoe Gortner who was a self confessed and willing charlatan from day one. And as for Bentley’s supposed numerous healings – can anyone provide an example of any real healings or were they all a concoction between Bentley and a rather gullible God TV Channel?

I have yet to study Tood Bentley to see what he is made of, so I won't make any generalised speculations about him at this stage. But remember that Dr Wagner would have supported him while Mr Bentley appeared to be kosher. Dr Wagner is not a mind reader, and the Holy Spirit doesn't always reveal a person's secret sins to all and sundry until the right time of revealing. Concerning the healings, instead of sitting back and demanding evidence from others, why don't you do your own research to see if the healings were actually genuine. Isn't it best to get reliable evidence before accusing someone of being fake?

With regard to Wagner, I recognise that he and his associates were a bit quick to try and add this celebrity to their ranks which only shows how a group of boys who are so full of their own self importance can be very easily be made to look silly in front of the whole world. Sadly, there are still many NAR proponents who are trying to impose Bentley upon us and to their shame!

I guess that you might have some actual knowledge of the inner workings of Dr Wagner's ministry and his work to be able to make comments like that. How do you know for sure that Dr Wagner was quick to add celebrities to their ranks? How do you know for sure that Dr Wagner and his associates were full of their own self importance.

After reading quite a number of his books, I don't see that he is full of his own self importance at all.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

LOL

I vote this as the most ironic statement on the thread.


Seriously K2K, if you want to discuss whether the angels of the seven churches were demons, start a new thread.

peace,
Simon

I agree. Because I am the OP of this thread, these long posts are off topic and do not contribute to the very meaningful and stimulating debates that are going on here. If you want to write extended stuff of what I view as complicated and hard to read opinion, then start your own thread, maybe on the Theology Forum so you guys who get off on that sort of thing can immerse yourselves to your heart's content without boring the rest of us.

Hey Simon, I am weakening! I am agreeing with you about something. Can't have that. I am now off to check out Todd Bentley....

 

[Tenebrae]

That is the problem with some (note I said some) of these modern movements: they are all too willing to claim the victories, but they shuffle the defeats under the carpet.

The problem I've observed is that christians in general just seem to want to keep shoveling those failures/defeats under the carpet, the problem being is that the mountain of dust bunnys under the carpet can only get so big before it falls over and hurts someone

also, what is wrong with examining a defeat, seeing what went wrong, and how to make sure that it is a victory next time?

 

[Simon Peter]

While, as a "pagan" and "heathen" you can have a certain amount of mental understanding of some Christian principles, the reality is that the Scripture says that the god of this world has blinded the minds of those who believe not, lest they should fully understand the Gospel of Christ and be saved. A person cannot understand the Gospel and what it is all about unless the Holy Spirit reveals it to him. The fact that you are an unbeliever, you cannot understand the central purpose of why Jesus came to earth, died on the cross, rose from the dead, and how He works through the lives of those who trust in Him.

...

So, if you remain an unbeliever, there is no way you can have the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the things of God to be able to understand the Gospel enough to be able to be saved.

So, sadly, all you can do is to, according to the Scripture, wait in fear as the day of God's judgment gets closer.

I won't comment on the state of Tenebrae's salvation, but it's my observation that she has more wisdom and insight into spiritual matters than many of the Christians on this forum.

peace,
Simon

 

[mrmccormo]

If you open the Bible you will find a place where thousands of the disciples of Jesus walked away from Him when He started teaching things they did not agree with. This happened to such an extent that Jesus asked His inner Twelve whether they were going to leave Him too. Now, if you apply the same judgment you applied to Dr Wagner, you would have to say that Jesus was a fake as well.

I see that your icon is "pagan". Does this mean that you are not Christian?

That's...quite a leap, because the difference here is that Jesus Christ was the Word and He came with the authority of God.

Dr Wagner is simply re-telling the lessons that Jesus taught and Dr Wagner has no authority. If Wagner taught things that Jesus taught and non-Christians walked away (which - in context - is who walked away from Jesus), that'd be one thing.

But when seasoned Christians are coming out of the modern "Apostolic" movement damaged and confused, it is another thing entirely.

Why are charismatics so eager, so willing, so obsessed even with trumpeting the successes of their denomination, yet when bad things happen, it is denied, swept under the carpet, or ignored? Why defend Dr Wagner at all? If his message is sound and his character is sound, we'd easily be able to see that play out.

But reality comes a knockin', and we see that there are some issues with a man who teaches spiritual discerment, yet so clearly lacked spiritual discernment. The blind leading the blind, as the saying goes. And no, I'm not requiring that Dr Wagner be a mind-reader and intimately know the sins of everyone around him. HOWEVER, for a man who claims to understand how to discern spirits of religion, he missed dozens of red flags in Todd Bentley's ministry that have nothing to do with Bentley's personal life but rather are related to the messages that Bentley taught. Not only did he miss these red flags, Wagner actively promoted and approved of Bentley's ministry and teachings, again, calling into question Wagner's own validity.

 

[Simon Peter]

The problem is that you are taking it upon yourself to publicly criticise a ministry that is respected world wide. If Dr Wagner decided to sue you for libel, which he would have every right to do, this would not only affect your credibility, but put your church and its leadership into disrepute.

Respect, is in the eye of the beholder. The NAR is also despised world wide.

Exactly what is it that I've written that you believe is libelous and Wagner could sue me for?

Remember, it's only libel if it's not true.

Perhaps I should sue you for wrongfully claiming I've committed libel

Don't you realise that your false claims could bring your church and leadership into disrepute?

When I wanted to know more about Dr Wagner and what he stands for, I have bought quite a number of his books. If I had the opportunity to travel to the USA, I would go and hear him preach, look at the way his church functions, and ask for an appointment to meet and talk with him personally. That's what a "Berean" Christian would do.

I was very specific about my criticism of Wagner and his endorsement of Todd Bentley.

No one is disputing that Wagner endorsed Bentley, are you?

That is why I asked those questions about your church. But from what you are saying, you are not too concerned about the leadership of your church and how your criticisms would affect them.

I take the positions that I believe are right, and then try to stand by them in word and deed, regardless of consequences.

Are you concerned that your crticism of me, and your defence of Wagner may negatively affect your church and leadership?

It is very easy to form opinions from second hand reports, without taking the time and trouble to find out first hand. If you have not read the widest range of his books on different topics, and have not listened to any of his sermons to see if his teaching is consistent with the Word of God...

I've already said on this thread that my information is from actual teachings, letters, videos and statements of the people involved. Second hand would be someone else claiming someone said something (hearsay).

...then you are slandering the man, and you open yourself up to being corrected by the Holy Spirit, as well as litigation from Dr Wagner.

As I've already said, 'for it to be slander, it has to be untrue'. What have I said that's untrue, or are you slandering me

Furthermore, you could receive a lawyer's letter from the Fuller Theological Seminary of which he is a representative and a professor, because you are demeaning that institution as well.

Think of the thousands of students who have gone through the Fuller Seminary...

Even though I wasn't aware that Wagner is an alumnus of Fuller Theological Seminary, nor have I even mentioned FTS, I would very much love to receive a lawyer's letter from them, seriously. I would post it online, mail it to a few newspapers, and frame it.


Let me get this staight, you're actually saying my criticism of Wagner could result in a lawsuit from FTS? Well with all my criticism of Obama I'm disapointed that I haven't got a letter from Harvard yet.


And again I ask you:
By what authority did Martin Luther criticise the Pope and the Roman Cathloic church?



peace,
Simon

 

[tturt]

In relationship to the term "Jezebel spirit" not being stated in Scripture, there are terms that we use that aren't specifically stated in The Word.

As far as criticizing Wagner for not discerning about Todd Bentley:
Matthew 16:15-17 15"He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."

YET

Matt 26:21 "And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.
22And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I?"

So even though Peter knew who Jesus really was, he nor any of the other disciples didn’t recognize Judas Iscariot for who he was.

 

[Ajax 777]

In relationship to the term "Jezebel spirit" not being stated in Scripture, there are terms that we use that aren't specifically stated in The Word.

Swell, but that's no excuse.

This is how false doctrines start...adding to the truth a little here, and a little there.

While the term "Jezebel spirit" may not in and of itself be sinful, when it begins to dilute the Lord's own words to us and sets us down the strange and crooked bunny trails of human understanding, then we end up with mere words instead of the Word...strange fire on God's altar. Next thing, we have whole congregations praying to God about things He never said...even televising it. I myself have seen the mention of "Jezebel spirits" on more than one of the television ministries, and it had absolutely nothing to do with the word of truth. It certainly does not do much for these TV preachers' image... Ever wonder why we have so many different "interpretations" of the Book of Revelation?

Even on something as seemingly small as this, we need to seek the pure meaning of the eternal word...let our hearts be pure places of the pure instruction of the Lord! We act like "it's no big deal," but the way is narrow, and it is far simpler! Why do we need to start believing in bizarre imaginations like "Jezebel spirits," anyway? Is not the enemy already clever enough without adding to his allure?

By adopting the idea of Jezebel spirits, are people still understanding that passage correctly, or do they begin forming different ideas? That passage has nothing to do with controlling or manipulative people. It refers to things Jezebel did, subtly leading the children of Israel away from the true worship of the Father into idolatry, and all the evil teachings which went along with it in regards to immoral thinking and immoral practices.

But instead, people talk about "Jezebel spirits" like it's some kind of evil spirit which turns people into backbiting control freaks...like it is something which can be cast out. Only Scripture does not say that, or anything like it. How many might miss the true warning concerning Jezebel in that passage because they have now devised "Jezebel spirits" to address something else altogether entirely different from what the Lord was warning us?

If you wish to use the term "Jezebel spirit" then make sure you do not present it as being God's word when using it. 'Cause it ain't.

 

[Simon Peter]

As far as criticizing Wagner for not discerning about Todd Bentley:

Matthew 16:15-17 15"He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."

YET

Matt 26:21 "And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.
22And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I?"

So even though Peter knew who Jesus really was, he nor any of the other disciples didn’t recognize Judas Iscariot for who he was.

I don't see that this is relevent.
The disciples hadn't even received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit at that point.

Besides, I don't expect perfection from Wagner or anyone else. But I don't trust Wagner when it comes to discernment. He couldn't even discern problems with Bentley, which were blatantly obvious!

And then to write a book on discernment

peace,
Simon

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Come on Oscarr, C. Peter Wagner...really?

This is the same guy who failed to recognise a wolf in a child's sheep costume, namely Todd Bentley!

Wagner commissioned Bentley on stage at the height of the 'Lakeland revival', showering him with praise and prophecy, meanwhile Bentley was in adulterous relationship, getting drunk, and lying about a lot of things. Within a week or so, it all fell apart and Bentley was exposed as a sham.

If Wagner failed to even see through Bentley - that anyone with a fleas worth of discernment could see through - why on earth should I trust him with a book on discernment?

peace,
Simon

Now, you will agree that Jesus is our model of discernment. He had the closest walk with the Father than all of us put together. If anything could be discerned, then He would have discerned it.

Now, to apply your reasoning about Dr Wagner to Jesus Himself concerning association with false disciples and prophets. Do you realise that Jesus made Judas Iscariot one of the top twelve apostles and yet the man turned out to be a rogue. Now, according to your reasoning, you would have to take Jesus off your Christmas card list because He had someone who was a thief and a betrayer as one of His inner circle.

Now, if Jesus, the master discerner, allowed a thief and a betrayer as part of his inner circle, how can you condemn Dr Wagner for doing the same? Either you acquit Dr Wagner, or you criticise Jesus.

Do you see your dilemma? It is good to actually open the Bible sometimes and read it closely...

 

[Faulty]

Now, you will agree that Jesus is our model of discernment. He had the closest walk with the Father than all of us put together. If anything could be discerned, then He would have discerned it.

Now, to apply your reasoning about Dr Wagner to Jesus Himself concerning association with false disciples and prophets. Do you realise that Jesus made Judas Iscariot one of the top twelve apostles and yet the man turned out to be a rogue. Now, according to your reasoning, you would have to take Jesus off your Christmas card list because He had someone who was a thief and a betrayer as one of His inner circle.

Now, if Jesus, the master discerner, allowed a thief and a betrayer as part of his inner circle, how can you condemn Dr Wagner for doing the same? Either you acquit Dr Wagner, or you criticise Jesus.

Do you see your dilemma? It is good to actually open the Bible sometimes and read it closely...

Jesus was fulfilling scrupture with Judas, and was not taken by surprise. He knew exactly who Judas was when He chose him:

Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was going to betray him.
John 6:70-71
​

And He chose Judas to fulfill prophecy:

While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.
John 17:12
​

Are you implying that either Wagner knew of Bentley as a 'Judas' and was fulfilling scripture, or that Jesus was initially duped? Because that's the only way the comparison can be made in your either/or idea of having to criticize or acquit both Jesus and Wagner at the same time.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Respect, is in the eye of the beholder. The NAR is also despised world wide.

peace,
Simon

You now have a clue as to why it was prophesied over me that I am a wooden spoon in my church. The problem when anyone sets themselves up as a critic of ministries is that they give the appearance that they are more spiritual and closer to God than them.

Did you know that your love for God is measured by how much you love Todd Bentley right now?

 

[Faulty]

Did you know that your love for God is measured by how much you love Todd Bentley right now?

Did you know that when John gave that measurement he was speaking of love for one's brothers? (1Jo 2:9-11)

Unless, of course, you have Deuteronomy 13:1-4 in mind, then I agree.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Did you know that when John gave that measurement he was speaking of love for one's brothers? (1Jo 2:9-11)

Unless, of course, you have Deuteronomy 13:1-4 in mind, then I agree.

It would be a dilemma for you if you didn't believe that Todd was a believer, because then you would have to say that all those who got converted through his ministry were false conversions.

Of course, if he is an unbeliever, the Scripture says that even while we were yet sinners Christ loved us and gave Himself for us. Therefore if Jesus allowed Himself to be separated from the Father's fellowship for the first time in eternity, then His love for sinners was much greater than what we could ever imagine.

So, do you think you could reflect the love of Christ to that extent for Todd even if he could be a sinner and a heretic?

 

[Biblicist]

Oscarr,

Now, to apply your reasoning about Dr Wagner to Jesus Himself concerning association with false disciples and prophets. Do you realise that Jesus made Judas Iscariot one of the top twelve apostles and yet the man turned out to be a rogue. Now, according to your reasoning, you would have to take Jesus off your Christmas card list because He had someone who was a thief and a betrayer as one of His inner circle.

Now, if Jesus, the master discerner, allowed a thief and a betrayer as part of his inner circle, how can you condemn Dr Wagner for doing the same? Either you acquit Dr Wagner, or you criticise Jesus.

Do you see your dilemma? It is good to actually open the Bible sometimes and read it closely...

This pathway is really a bit of a slippery slope in that it presumes that Jesus did not know that Judas would betray him. It is a far different scenario for someone as Jesus (actually the Father) to appoint someone who was prophesied that he would betray the Son of God and with Wagner and his cohorts who were so giddy with Bentley’s rise to fame that they wanted him under their banner – God’s timing was impeccable in that it seems that he used Bentley to let us know that Wagner and his mob were far from being a discerning group – and that’s being generous.

So there is no dilemma at all; how can the Father be compared to Wagner when the Father chose Judas knowing full well what he would do whereas Wagner and his mates had the wool pulled over their eyes – now that’s good Bible 101!

So, do you think you could reflect the love of Christ to that extent for Todd even if he could be a sinner and a heretic?

It does seem that those who failed to listen and scorned the criticism that many gave toward Bentley in his early days that they may indeed be sharing in some of the blood that this man has spilt. The type of love that would have helped Bentley and the many whose lives he soon destroyed was certainly given but it was rejected.

What is true love, one that allows someone to enter in as a sheep in wolves clothing and who destroyed or harmed many lives, besides heaping shame on the name of Christ or a love that involves stern criticism and rebuke when it is needed.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Jesus was fulfilling scrupture with Judas, and was not taken by surprise. He knew exactly who Judas was when He chose him:

Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was going to betray him.
John 6:70-71
​

And He chose Judas to fulfill prophecy:

While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.
John 17:12
​

Are you implying that either Wagner knew of Bentley as a 'Judas' and was fulfilling scripture, or that Jesus was initially duped? Because that's the only way the comparison can be made in your either/or idea of having to criticize or acquit both Jesus and Wagner at the same time.

What is coming out in the criticisms of Dr Wagner in this thread is mainly guilt by association. It is the idea that Todd Bentley is associated in some way with Dr Wagner.

Would it not be the same with Jesus and Judas? It is the association. Even though Jesus knew that Judas was a thief and His eventual betrayer, why didn't the disciples criticise Jesus over His association with a crook?

Do you have lunatic fringe people in your church? How do you know if there are people in your leadership team that are living double lives? This happened in a church I was in years ago. One of the senior elders was caught in a homosexual encounter in a public toilet and arrested by the police. Does that mean that the other elders were false because they had a cuckoo in the nest?

I preached in last Sunday's church service, and I testified about how I encountered the Lord on a personal level. I didn't have any fancy visions or anything like that. What happened was that I got the revelation of the reality of Christ in the middle of a golf course at 11pm on a cold starry night in April 1969. One minute I didn't know the Lord, and the next minute I did. I get choked up every time I describe it.

That night on the golf course I asked the Lord about dreams, visions and angelic visitations. He told me that I didn't need any of it, because I had His presence and reality with me and a open heaven for me to have close, personal fellowship with Him at any time. He said that I didn't have to go up into the seventh heaven because in His presence (though the Holy Spirit), heaven had come down to me. He said that I didn't need angels to speak to me because He was with me and would never leave me nor forsake me.

He also told me that those who have angelic visitations and trance-like visions are those who still need to come into fellowship with Him. He said that He sometimes has to give extra manifestations to those who need a jolt to bring them into close fellowship with Him in the Spirit. He said that I didn't need those because I came to him freely and sought Him with all my heart. He said that if He hears my voice in prayer a lot, I will hear His voice clearly without having to have any other sensory manifestation.

I know that He sends angels at times to strengthen and encourage believers, but not to teach or guide them. We have the Holy Spirit to do that. Angels will not usurp the guiding and teaching role of the Holy Spirit. If there is an angelic manifestation trying to do that, it is not a holy angel but a demon masquerading as an angel in order to deceive and draw the person away from pure fellowship with Christ.

As I walked in that golf course night after night for three weeks (while I was on vacation in my home town), I would not have been surprised if Jesus had stepped out from the shadows. That was how real Jesus was to me at that time. That reality has never left me.

So, I test the prophetic by the same sense of the reality of Jesus in it. If a prophetic word or manifestation does not have that reality in it for me, I am suspicious of it and I poke it with a very long barge pole and be prepared to run away. "Prophets" giving national predictions, and speak of going up into heaven and speaking with the Apostle Paul, and having angelic visitations informing of wonderful ministries etc., don't equate with the reality of Christ in me, therefore I doubt the genuiness of them. I guess my sense of the reality of Christ is part of my discernment.

 

[Biblicist]

Oscarr,

What is coming out in the criticisms of Dr Wagner in this thread is mainly guilt by association. It is the idea that Todd Bentley is associated in some way with Dr Wagner.

The only real connection between the two (at least initially) was when Wagner and his cohorts decided that they needed to bring this ‘newest and greatest man of God’ into their web. If Wagner had of been able to show some discernment and insight he would have kept well clear of this charlatan.

Would it not be the same with Jesus and Judas? It is the association. Even though Jesus knew that Judas was a thief and His eventual betrayer, why didn't the disciples criticise Jesus over His association with a crook?

Undoubtedly they would have been in shock over what happened and they certainly would have asked Jesus why it happened. Once he told them about the prophecy regarding Judas the penny would then have then dropped though it probably wouldn’t have initially removed their pain. It’s one thing to have the Father appoint Judas knowing full well what was about to happen but it is certainly another thing for someone like Wagner who promotes so much heresy to show the world how he can be easily duped. I have little doubt that Wagner had wished that Bentley had never been born.

This point does seem to be becoming a bit drawn out.

I know that He sends angels at times to strengthen and encourage believers, but not to teach or guide them. We have the Holy Spirit to do that. Angels will not usurp the guiding and teaching role of the Holy Spirit. If there is an angelic manifestation trying to do that, it is not a holy angel but a demon masquerading as an angel in order to deceive and draw the person away from pure fellowship with Christ.

Oscarr, does the connection between Bentley and his supposed visitations from ‘Emma’ ring a bell?

 

[mrmccormo]

You now have a clue as to why it was prophesied over me that I am a wooden spoon in my church. The problem when anyone sets themselves up as a critic of ministries is that they give the appearance that they are more spiritual and closer to God than them.

Did you know that your love for God is measured by how much you love Todd Bentley right now?

It would be a dilemma for you if you didn't believe that Todd was a believer, because then you would have to say that all those who got converted through his ministry were false conversions.

Of course, if he is an unbeliever, the Scripture says that even while we were yet sinners Christ loved us and gave Himself for us. Therefore if Jesus allowed Himself to be separated from the Father's fellowship for the first time in eternity, then His love for sinners was much greater than what we could ever imagine.

So, do you think you could reflect the love of Christ to that extent for Todd even if he could be a sinner and a heretic?

These are total strawman arguments. In the light of the New Testament, we are NEVER, EVER encouraged to "love" (a.k.a accept, spare them any discernment or exhortation or rebuke) false teachers. Every single time the topic of false teachers/teachings is brought up, we are told to avoid, cast out, reject, have nothing to do with, etc.

It is a strawman to say "You're criticizing him, therefore you are trying to make yourself higher than him". What a wash. For starters, we are all equal in Christ. So, rebuking, exhorting, discerning, and yes, even casting out one another has absolutely nothing to do with trying to make ourselves seem "more godly" than other ministries.

I'm not sure if anyone here is definitively saying "Bentley is not a believer". Strawman argument, once again, Oscarr.

Do you know what Paul did to show the love of Chist? He commanded the Corinthians to turn an adulterer over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh? 1 Corinthians 5. C'mon, Oscarr, let's not hide behind the wishy-washy "we're supposed to looooove one another" defense here. Bentley was/is a false teacher who openly promoted false doctrine. And his adultery (which I think is the lesser issue in this situation, even though some put it center-stage) was simply a product of his deceptive heart. Maybe we should examine what 1 Cor 5:11 says.

Of course, some might look at this and say "by the measure you judge, so you will be judged". Actually, no. I'm not a teacher. Scripture says that teachers will be under a stricter judgment, and this is precisely why Bentley is being examined so closely by those with - ironic, considering the topic - discernment.

 

[Biblicist]

mrmccormo,

A good post.