Victory Outreach Manchester have been involved with interfaith/ecumenical groups, such as:
Hope Together (AKA Hope 2008)
Manchester’s sister branch of Victory Outreach in London is were Victory Outreach Manchester’s Paul Lloyd is a speaker, are also known to have supported More than Gold (In part run and organised by the RCC, as seen by the photos of the Catholic Bishops Conference), CNI reported on Victory Outreach who were one of the bodies that were part of supporting More Than Gold (who are ecumenical).
Victory Outreach Manchester has contact with Churches together, (The document in the churches together link shows Victory Outreach have involvement with Churches Together for Greater Manchester Since 2009) CTIB collaborate with other Churches, this includes the RCC. Churches Together are also sister to the World Council of Churches.
This means weather in London or Manchester, Victory Outreach are counter-reformation, by action they do not support any separation from the Roman Catholic Church, but is strongly emphasising unity with the Papacy, it was interesting that VO emphasised evangelisation and not evangelism, this shows they have rejected historical biblical conservative evangelical practices, as evangelisation is a term used by the Catholic Church to remove any distinctive from historical conservative Protestantism. They were quite dishonest and the group leader was excessively controlling over VO church members, as they were expressly forbidden from speaking to me and were told that I had an evil spirit in me and the devil takes many forms. The individual was not only very controlling but he was ignoring anything that I was trying to explain to him, as to why what they are doing is dangerous and can only mean one thing; that all roads lead to the Roman Catholic Church.
One of their leaders stated that “I will never become a Catholic!”. I have known one of the members of this church for some time and recently he was present during a Roman Catholic Mass, inside a Roman Catholic Church, praying with them and claiming that he believed Roman Catholics inside the Roman Catholic Church are his brothers in the Lord and are saved. He even believes that of the Catholic Priests and the response given by one of their group, “Touch not the Lord’s anointed”, shows a deep lack of knowledge of the scriptures. They also quote Ps 105:11-15 totally misrepresenting the context.
Loyalty is a good thing if it is for the right purpose and for truth. One certainly does not want to be loyal and find they have pledged their allegiance to something that is false.
“He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the just, both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD” (Proverbs 17:150
But for one to find out what is true or false they must look into matter and hear both sides before they make a final judgment. “The heart of the prudent acquires knowledge, and the ear of the wise seeks knowledge” (Proverbs 18:15).
In a time of catchy phrases and clichés’, Christians can be no different. What does the Bible mean when it says not to touch God’s anointed? It’s not my opinion or yours that matters; but what God’s Word have to say about this that really counts? I certainly wish the people who repeat this phrase would read it in its context, ‘the Lord’s anointed’, is a reference to the kings of the nation of Israel (1Sam. 12:3,5; 24:6,10; 26:9,11, 16,23; 2 Sam. 1:14,16; 19:21; Psalm 20:6; Lam. 4:20). The mention of prophets, is a reference to the patriarchs (Psalm 105:8-15; 1Chron. 16:15-22). It is used exclusively in the Old Testament.
Ps 105:11-15 Saying, “To you I will give the land of Canaan as the allotment of your inheritance,” When they were few in number, indeed very few, and strangers in it. When they went from one nation to another, from one kingdom to another people, “He permitted no one to do them wrong; yes, He rebuked kings for their sakes, Saying, “Do not touch My anointed ones, and do My prophets no harm.” Notice in this Scripture that God protected His anointed (who was Israel) and His prophets from the enemies of Israel to bring physical harm.
The first thing one should notice is that the word touch actually means physical harm. What it does not mean is saying something about another person publicly that is true. How do we know this? Because that’s exactly what David did about Saul. It was David who said he would not harm God’s anointed, who was King Saul at the time but He spoke out publicly about him.
Not only David, but Samuel “touched God’s anointed,” as he spoke out against the kings disobedience. God told Saul to “Smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not…” (1 Sam. 15:3). But instead, he spoke a half truth and “spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the Lord…” (v.15). Samuel said it was rebellion like witchcraft and idolatry (v.24). Because he did not obey the Word of the Lord he would be removed being king. Saul admitted he feared the people and obeyed their voice. What a crucial thing to learn of Saul who was God’s anointed.
In1 Sam.16:13-16 we find David who was shepherd boy was anointed before God took away Saul’s position. David refused to touch Saul physically but it didn’t stop him from telling everyone the truth about him publicly.
David not raising his hand to touch (harm physically) God’s anointed is used in 1 Sam.26:9,11,23. Look at 1 Sam.26:11: tells us that David would not stretch his hand out to touch him (harm him); instead he sneaked up and took Saul’s spear and water jug. In verse 15 David rebukes Abner for not guarding Saul and says he deserved to die. Saul hears the commotion and comes out, and David rebukes Saul before all his troops, asking why he is pursuing David’s life since he is innocent — that the king has come out to seek a flea. Saul then repented for his rash behavior and called himself a fool. David returned Saul’s possessions and said, “For the Lord delivered you into my hand but I would not stretch out my hand against the Lord’s anointed.” Notice what this means, not to bring physical harm.
1 Samuel 24:10 “Look, this day your eyes have seen that the LORD delivered you today into my hand in the cave, and someone urged me to kill you. But my eye spared you, and I said, ‘I will not stretch out my hand against my lord, for he is the Lord’s anointed.” “And David said to Abishai, “Do not destroy him; for who can stretch out his hand against the Lord’s anointed, and be guiltless?”(1 Sam. 26:9)
Saul was anointed as King over Israel he had a position of rulership that was soon to be over. Knowing he was next in line David refused to physically touch the king as God’s anointed and remove him from his position prematurely. It was God, not David who would remove Saul from his position (26:8-10).
We should notice an important part in this story, it was Saul who was pursuing David, hunting him down and trying to kill him. The Bible story has Saul whose position was threatened, pursuing to kill David who was innocent. Isn’t this what we see today? Those who are in a greater position of leadership going after people who are anointed that are challenging them in what they are saying and doing as wrong. From their position they have trained people to listen to them and willing to silence their challengers. They do this by going after them with Bible threats such as “don’t touch God’s anointed” or you are committing the “blasphemy the Holy Spirit” when you speak against another “man of God.” Ignoring the fact that blasphemy meant one is saying that Jesus’ miracles were done by an unclean spirit, not about questioning another mans alleged miracles. Those of the flesh are pursuing those who are of the Spirit, just as Saul did to David. Those who are following the Spirit of the Lord go to His Word to keep themselves in the truth no matter what the opposition may say.
It’s interesting that in Rev. 6:9 John writes “When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held.” They were killed because they held to the Word against the opposition and so they became martyrs. Those who apostatize from the Word always hate those who keep it.
We find the story of Saul ends with David kept from the Battle that Saul and Jonathan lost their lives in, instead he fought the Amalakites. An Amalakite messenger came back with torn clothes and dust on his head showing he was in mourning, David inquired of him and he told David he killed Saul. “So David said to him, “How was it you were not afraid to put forth your hand to destroy the LORD’s anointed?” Then David called one of the young men and said, “Go near, and execute him!” And he struck him so that he died. So David said to him, “Your blood is on your own head, for your own mouth has testified against you, saying, ‘I have killed the LORD’s anointed.’”(2 Sam 1:13-16) Again it is clear, to touch the anointed means to bring physical harm, most often death. But if you spiritualize it, it can mean anything you want. 2 Sam 1:17-19 David took up this lament concerning Saul and his son Jonathan, and ordered that the men of Judah be taught this lament of the bow (it is written in the Book of Jashar): “Your glory, O Israel, lies slain on your heights. How the mighty have fallen!” Each time is about those who were killed. David did not relish the fact that God’s anointed was apostate and met his end, he wept.
Since most of these so called anointed teachers that come under their follower’s protection teach the Word out of context, it’s not surprising that they would quote a verse of Scripture removed from its correct meaning for their own self- protection. Those who shout don’t touch God’s anointed think they are doing God’s work, but they rarely ever look at the facts presented. They listen to their teachers and do not want to hear the other side of the story. They cut themselves off from hearing the truth. And some, even when they are shown false teachings and prophecies do not care, but look to some personality who captured their loyalty. They become enemies of all reason, their own worst enemy. They do not realize they have been trained well, and like Pavlov’s dogs, react the same way each time. It’s time to break free!
The dilemma that VO face is that the Roman Catholic Church rejects the sole authority of the Bible and the attitude shown by them reveals that they do not seem to be very concerned about this.
This means that VO is either acting out of ignorance of core fundamental Roman Catholic teachings or they do know but don’t care that many are being deceived by Roman Catholicism. VO is deliberately seeking unity with those who defend another gospel, Rome’s false Gospel.
During the Olympics I was in London outside its partner event for 2012 Ultimate Gold/More Than Gold in Stratford London. Ultimate Gold was encouraging gross idolatry in promoting the Roman Catholic Eucharist by 19 evangelical pastors.
Victory Outreach had given their seal of approval to these ecumenical and catholic groups, this is the nature of wholesale apostasy with in these movements as seen in CHURCHES TOGETHER 2009
Victory Outreach Manchester’s “christian alternative” to Halloween.
Victory Outreach is a danger to individuals through its ministry and to the spiritual well being of and to the resilience of the wider church towards a popular cultural mandate – in this instance progressive ( i.e. modernising and therefore by implication – ever changing) cultural contextualisation.
V.O. displays doctrinal errancy in its practices and ecumenism, this pastor shows a prime example of the preoccupation and emphasis for “entertainment” in the modern Christian churches.
Whilst most believe what the Apostle Paul says in 1 Corinthians 9:22 “I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some” they misrepresent the Apostle Paul, I don’t believe the Apostle Paul had in mind anything which ‘progressive evangelicals’ such as Victory Outreach (who are not biblical conservative evangelicals) pursue in what is called “Progressive Cultural Contextualisation” (PCC).
If Victory Outreach were historic (conservative) evangelical literalists, they would see that this ‘PCC’ is a movement towards spiritual declension and would never have promoted nor even considered any sycretising of the pagan and satanic activities of Halloween by holding an entertaining alternative.
This is an intellectualised seeker-sensitive endeavour where pre-ministry conditioning has a mandatory period of contemporary worship to render the recipient more malleable to spiritual manipulation.
It is within Victory Outreach methodology of Cultural contextualisation, which is rendering of people into a spiritually receptive condition through its programs must always be accurately described as ‘progressive cultural contextualisation’ because that is what it is and must always be in order to remain new / fresh / vibrant / relevant and acceptable to the contemporary audience which is clear that Victory Outreach practice.
The practices that are being applied to this popular cultural contextualisation by historic, conservative evangelicals is called Christian Downgrade; which now plays a well recorded part in church history that goes back 130 years to the ‘defeat’ of a small contingent of Godly men by ‘progressive evangelicals’ – to understand these points you would have to study up on The Downgrade Controversy.
Victory Outreach as a whole is an example where the spiritual progeny of these ‘Progressive Evangelicals’ now inhabits the vast majority of so called evangelical churches. But those who are bringing the influences into the evangelical camp are the backbone to groups like the Gospel Coalition / Evangelicals and Catholics Together / Evangelical Alliance / The great unifying gatherings like Promise Keepers, Soul Survivor, Global Day of Prayer / The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (with 3 generations of compromising Neo-evangelical leaders / UK’s Spring Harvest / New Wine / Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship / The Lausanne Movement / WCC / Willlowbank Consultation 1978 / Churches Together etc etc.
Where we stand is that as a ministry, we do not follow their teachings this is nothing more then calling “The Cross cultural mission: recontextualising, not redefining the gospel.” There has already been documents written up on contextualisation but that is more akin to redefining the gospel to fit in with the culture, this is what I believe where Victory Outreach is guilty, even going so far as to treat indigenous culture as a type of Old Testament revelation (natural revelation). Adherents of this false view would equal to that of Don Richardson (eternity in their hearts) and CS Lewis theory of mythopoeia and from resulting in global liberation theologies.
Bear in mind – man’s genius at masking his inner nature as I had witnessed in Manchester by Victory Outreach members.
Just as those that walk apart from the God of the Bible are adept at wearing ‘fig leaves’ so is the modern Christian; we are prone to ‘wander’ (not perhaps in rampant and open rebellion) but many Christians equally practiced at ‘wearing their mask’ and Victory Outreach is no exception to this.
It is through groups like Victory Outreach that manifests itself with large, jubilant worshipping gatherings of ‘Christian believers’ all one in praising God with arms raised and swaying bodies in the ecstasy of true worship. The one point (and we only need ONE point) to display is the dire lack of true spiritual maturity and piety of lifestyle.
We don’t experience that where we are. Not one meeting has that kind of vibe of ecstasy. Although ecstatic worship was practiced by people like David in the bible (Psalm 7 whether With or purely vocal) we certainly don’t experience that.
We have huge congregations that could well show us historic evangelicals a thing or two about the worship of God. Particularly those evangelicals (and in truth and reality, there is a oneness in that word that encompasses all – not in a broadness of unity but always in narrowness with no exception. (In other words, there are evangelicals and evangelicals that are non-evangelical – some call them New or Neo-evangelicals).
Victory Outreach rejects literal biblical Orthodoxy in doing so they lead many astray.
Our standard must be scripture and not neo-evangelical, nor traditional Christianity. Both have been affected by culture. It is scripture that is our standard.
True problems and nature of Victory Outreach.
It is the Godless man in the world that is self-deluded with his desire to satisfy ‘self’ (his own innate, intuitive needs or even those needs that are consciously felt and inwardly ‘acknowledged’ even though godless man is loathed to admit to his nature and its power on his life.
Among many Christian groups they most clearly operate in deceit and the power of the flesh. They are prompted and governed by the flesh; most certainly not by God. Where did this impetus come from?….. Only from a very slight deviation of evangelical orthodoxy – the Bible.
It is said today that a new type of evangelism through the radio/tv and correspondence lessons are undoubtedly just as effective in reaching many. They also claim they are proving the efficacy of visual aids as an evangelistic aid and this is partly using music. And they add also the evangelistic influence of our schools, sanatoriums, colporteurs, and others, they call this mission.
A quote from a Christian Source that promotes the idea that they stated that music is used as an aid in leading many into listening to the gospel preached, relevant magazine they stated:
It is Over the last 20 or 30 years, the idea of churches being culturally relevant has dominated Christian culture and has been one of the most important issues in philosophies on evangelism and outreach. As churches seek to communicate the Gospel, they often look to Jesus as having been culturally relevant and base evangelistic programs and practices on this idea.
However, if we were truly following the lead of Jesus, there would not be people like Julia Duin, author of Quitting Church, predicting that, “in 15 years, present trends continuing, the church in America will be half of what it is.”
Could our methods of culturally relevant evangelism actually be missing their mark?
It’s odd that most of the conversations on relevant evangelism seem to be focused on church programs and gatherings and that many of our efforts are an attempt to make church into a place that people will come and feel comfortable. But isn’t the whole point of evangelism that the Church gets out of its comfort zone and goes to the people?
This is how Jesus starts the Great Commission found in Matthew 28:18-20. “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go …”
This issue reveals the bad ecclesiology—the theology of what groups like Victory Outreach is—that many Christ followers have. We often distort the idea of what a biblical church is. Jesus never wanted us to attract a bunch of non-Christians to some building or meeting. He wanted us to be an attraction outside of the church walls. And He wanted Himself to shine through us where we all work, live, play, shop and do life together.
This issue also reveals misplaced theology of the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:5). The way we do evangelism today in many churches, consciously or unconsciously, communicates that sharing the Gospel should be left for the professionals. “You want your friend to know Jesus? Why don’t you bring them to our next outreach where he can hear it straight from our amazing, seminary-trained pastor!”
An example was that Biblical Gospel preachers were traveling preachers, just as the apostles were, when they purposed to do evangelistic endeavors. This is not only the example shown in scripture, but also in the Didache, an early document of the New Testament era which is alleged to be the teaching of the 12 apostles to gentile readers. It contains nothing other than what is clearly taught in the New Testament, but shows how those teachings should be applied in the Gentile context.
This write-up confirms that, not only would these evangelists be itinerant and that they would rely on the hospitality of other people, but also it shows that they would not stay long in one town. Are we unbiblical for not following the apostolic pattern in its entirety? Or do you think we should pick and choose what we believe we should do? Do we dismiss the apostolic example and remain in the same city year after year and preach the same message there? The longest Paul stayed in a city was three years at Ephesus and that was primarily to build up the brethren and not to share the gospel with unbelievers.
In the Bible we are instructed and commanded to preach, the description of where they went from town to town is not instructed or commanded but what they did was written down and did not exceed what we are instructed, as demonstrated scripture, we take the primary principle what is sacred should be kept sacred and not to lead the unbelievers into any fellowship with any church, Victory Outreach by its nature does none of these things, other then adopt methods that are created and influenced by Romanism in its teachings and practices such as the christianising of Halloween.
Victory Outreach London and Manchester.
Victory Outreach in London and Manchester is part of global ministry Victory Outreach International, Victory Outreach London, Manchester and Victory Outreach International have been known to support ministries that are responsible for leading so many astray.
In a statement made by Victory Outreach Manchester on the TBN website, January 5th 2015 the Launch of TBN UK on freeview terrestrial tv.
Pastor Colin Ruddock of Victory Outreach in Manchester said that “to know TBN UK is going to be broadcasting here is really exciting. This is going to change the whole way people see Christianity and what the gospel actually means. Having TBN here is one of the biggest, most powerful moves for reaching so many people at one time.
TBN is a tool that is used by the Roman Catholic Church’s agenda to promote another gospel that leads to another Christ, this is the very tool that is being endorsed and promoted with enthusiasm by Victory Outreach in Manchester, some of the programming and practices aired by TBN were Roman Catholic, Victory Outreach is not concerned about the false teachings promoted by the Roman Catholic Church.
I have seen that this form of acceptance of Catholics from members of Victory Outreach saying they are Christians, the problem is this leads evangelicals confused resulting in some of the members of victory outreach viewing that if Catholics are our brothers and sisters in Christ then it is ok to go and attend an adoration of the Eucharist Service (The Roman Catholic Mass) the problem with Victory Outreach is you have vulnerable people and its members look to people like Paul Lloyd and for leadership, they are also spiritually lethal in that their leaders have the potential to mislead people into believing they are Christians when according to the Scriptures they are not, this means that they believe it acceptable that Catholics have a false Christ who’s death on the cross was not sufficient for the forgiveness of sins through the acceptance of ecumenical unity.
This is part of the “New Evangelization” program implemented by the Roman Catholic Church, it emphasised by Catholic Books and documents on ecumenism that the Vatican’s agenda to win the world to the Eucharistic Jesus, this is an offense to those who were murdered by the RCC for showing difference to the Eucharist and were willing to die for their faith in Jesus Christ alone.
It is unfortunate that in my experiance there are many “Protestant” evangelical Christians, some of who Victory Outreach promote this includes TBN, also have a plan to establish the Kingdom of God here on earth. It would seem this “Kingdom Now” plan has the potential of merging with the Roman Catholic plan.
A few examples of this is found on TBN’s website:
Paul Crouch Jr., Vice President of Administration for TBN, noted that Father Manning’s broadcast ministry crosses all denominational and cultural lines, making it a perfect fit for TBN. “His relevant and heartfelt teachings have clearly illustrated that ‘Christ crucified and then resurrected is the center of what all Christians believe … the rest is just window dressing.’ On behalf of everyone at TBN, I congratulate Father Manning on receiving this prestigious and much deserved award from Pope Benedict XVI.”
Pastor Colin Ruddock of Victory Outreach in Manchester expects us to believe that the RCC represents the real face of Christianity that promotes the gospel through TBN, in this TBN broadcasts Roman Catholic teaching that the Roman Catholic Priests holds to an unbiblical perspective in the Catholic Teaching of the Crucifixion etc, this is what TBN represents this should never bring any true Bible believing christian to support Victory Outreach.
TBN broadcast shows from Benny Hinn Ministries, Kenneth Copeland, Rick Warren, etc and these very people are also promoted as endorsements for Victory Outreach International who’s founder is friends with Rick Warren, and is promoted by Victory Outreach, personally acknowledged and endorsed by Rick Warren who is a proven deceiver.
It maybe about time that Rick Warren comes out of the closet for his support for gay rights campaigner such as that Rick Warren shown his support for homosexuality and Gay Marriage but had lied about his support against Gay Marriage interesting when even the world who hates the Bible and God would catch Rick Warren out for being a liar and a hypocrite.
On Wednesday, conservative Evangelical Pastor Rick Warren expressed regret for instructing his congregation to support Proposition 8, California’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. During an interview with Huff Post Live’s Marc Lamont Hill, Warren attempted to downplay his endorsement of the provision, claiming that he intended to communicate his private support to church members and was not trying to take a “public” position on the issue. Warren expressed regret for ever backing the measure:
WARREN: I never made a single statement on Prop 8 until the week before. In my own church, some members say, “Where do we stand on this?” I released a video to my own members. It was posted all over like it was an advertisement. […]
HILL: When you have a church of 20,000 people and you have a book that 32 million people have read and that 60 million people have accessed, to say, “I was just giving a message”—
WARREN: You’re exactly right, Marc, and I learned a lesson from that. What I learned from that is that anything I say privately is now public. And I actually learned from that mistake… Everyone took that to mean I was pontificating to the whole world.
A recent article criticised for making joke about kissing Elton John.
|Elton John and Drag Queen RUPAUL
Rick Warren and Elton John joked together before the Senate appropriations subcommittee on funding global health initiatives
Some people will not see it a problem having Kenneth Copeland at Victory Outreach, perhaps Victory Outreach are spreading the same reconciliation with Rome message we have all been hearing about lately, but the problem is they do not consider what Kenneth Copeland is doing, he leading so many astray we know that Kenneth Copeland has given false teachings, false prophecies, promoted and lead the Toronto Blessing etc, On Jan. 21, 2014, Kenneth Copeland Ministries was blessed to receive a personal video message from Pope Francis. The attendees of KCM’s annual Ministers’ Conference were greatly inspired when presented the Pope’s greeting and a message he prepared video is below.
Victory Outreach is very much involved with Kenneth Copeland Ministries in 2012 Victory Outreach hosted a Kenneth Copeland event called The 21st Annual Eurospirit Convention.
Benny Hinn and Victory Outreach.
Sonny Arguinzoni the founder of Victory Outreach International has recieved an official endorsement from Benny Hinn, this is not surprising as Sonny Arguinzoni has had for a long time been apearing and supporting TBN, TBN is ecumenical as has had allot of controversy, Benny Hinn is a proven false prophet and a false teacher, VO does not mind giving the Vatican Council II their seal of aproval.
Benny Hinn “Oh, bless your heart! Well, it’s because of you ladies that I am what I am. See, you taught me about Jesus. You taught me the Bible. You taught about the Holy Spirit.
Thank God for Catholic sisters.”
Click on images to enlarge images.
Victory Outreach are doing exactly what Ed Silverso created this article by Mike Oppenhiemer is exactly what groups like Victory Outreach aims to achieve.
The basis of the gospel message is about sin and man being reconciled to God through a savior that came through the Jewish people. Our commission by Jesus is to preach the gospel whenever we can to all people…Today we have various new concepts that neglect this and instead want to transform the culture like Ed Silvoso or the NAR (New Apostolic Reformation) is promoting.
“A Church Growth Expert’s Observation s Observation” “We have attempted to transform our cities for years without success. I now believe the reason is because pastors and church leaders do not have the authority to do so. That authority lies within those leaders in the marketplace. When we recognize and affirm the apostles in the marketplace we will begin to see the transformation of cities.”
((quote of Peter Wagner,(Source: International coalition of workplace ministries)
All we have heard for years is that it is working! Now they blame it being unsuccessful because our leadership does not have the authority. This is the mixture of oil and water. Once again the trail leads back to them, without their new apostolic leadership the cities will not be transformed.
Silvoso is on a mission which takes him to different continents with the method of market transformation.
Within the new evangelistic package of making marketplace pastors, he is training people to move from the concept of pastoring the Local Church to pastoring a city. There is a clear theme of Dominionism running through this program, with kingdom authority and the use of “territorial spiritual warfare” employed. By uniting together using the various methods he presents Satan can be bound and the Christian forces triumph.
Silvosos’ paradigm is no different from many others that have come into the church before, it’s basically “rethinking everything into a new strategy.” Using the magic word of “transformation’ (a word originally found in theosophy of the New Age Movement) it has found itself as one of the many new platforms for “mission” strategies” now being employed by the New Apostolic Reformation.
Silvoso says: “Government and politics are areas where we are more reluctant to believe that transformation can really happen.”
Ed Silvoso’s books – Anointed For Business and Women: God’s Secret Weapon.
On November 29, two mayors and one congresswoman in three cities expressed before a crowd of 300 believers their appreciation for what our prayers did for their localities and for them personally. I firmly believe as we persevere in applying the principles outlined in Luke 10 to the marketplace (government, business and education) we will see the Philippines transformed in our lifetime.”
What principle? This was training for his disciples in Israel which occurred before Israel rejected him as their Messiah, it was never applied for the church in the book of Acts or taught in the epistles. But this is the main Scripture for their program to influence the business and government.
“In 1990 we prayed for young people to be protected as they ventured into the world to develop a career… Now we commission them to become politicians, CEOs, scientists and broadcasters, and the first fruits are evident. When asked about the future, a teenager stated confidently, “I will be the President of Argentina.” Another said, “I will change the economy of the nation to make it more fair.”
How is your spiritual stock today? Reap eternal dividends by taking the power and presence of God to the marketplace…
According to Romans 8:19 the entire creation is eagerly awaiting the manifestation of the children
of God. They are waiting for us and they want to know who we are. It is about time that we come out of our spiritual closet. The next time you go to work, declare “The Kingdom of God has arrived and the gates of Hades shall not prevail,” and begin to pray for and minister to everyone in your circle of influence until the place experiences transformation” (2004 Year-end Report Harvest Evangelism Ed & Ruth Silvoso).
Rom.8:19 is often used this way by those who hold to the Latter Rain teaching. But Silvoso takes this into a further misinterpretation, as if we reveal ourselves. But all one needs to do is read further for the Bible interpretation on this passage- it’s about the resurrection when we will be changed to immortality, not something we can do today, on your own.
Vv. 23-24: “Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees?”
The gates shall not prevail against the church (Mt.16:18)- NOT the kingdom of God in the workplace. Yet he teaches that we are to take the Kingdom of God (the church?) to the gates of Hell (whatever that means). Silvoso like so many others who espouse Latter Rain teaching can’t seem to leave the Scripture in its context and change its meaning to fit their own personal made up doctrine to influence the masses. Its business as usual.
The error of the Latter Rain clearly being promoted by Silvoso is a figment of his own imaginary agenda of changing the landscape with his workplace program – starting with pastors in the workplaces of the communities. Rom. 8:19: “For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.” When do the sons get revealed? When Jesus comes back not before, so how can this mean we subject the creation by our authority as Silvoso claims. What we are seeing is a new spiritual militant movement that wants to use their supposed kingdom authority on this earth before the King actually arrives.
Not everyone is involved in the Latter Rain belief of putting the culture under the authority of the church. Chuck Colson holds to a modified teaching of Reconstructionism and modern day dominionism to reform the culture, by taking the culture back: “Redeeming the culture is the never ending mission of the church (Chuck Colson Breakpoint Jan.2, 05, KLHT)’
“I was deepening my understanding of what we call the cultural commission, the command to the Church to take dominion and bring righteousness to our culture”
(Chuck Colson, God’s Inseparable Commissions, Prison Fellowship, 01/05/2005, http://www.pfm.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=PFM_Site&temnlate=/CM/
“Today-some 30 years into my ministry-I have come to believe passionately that all Christians need to take their faith out of the pews and into the trenches. We’ve got to be faithful to the cultural commission to have dominion, to work for Christian values to arrest our worldview slide” (Chuck Colson, Prison Ministry and Worldview: A Match Made in Heaven, Prison Fellowship, 08/29/2004,
One of Colson’s ministries objective is to institute Christian laws into our government to shape America into a godly nation. But you can’t find these ideas of culture, or society in the Bible. In fact if one looks at how the early church handled their relationship with Rome it is nothing like what is being promoted today.
Jesus gave the great commission as His last words to the Church. He expects us to be doing this when He returns for the Church, not something else. Nowhere does the Bible teach the church is sent to reform or redeem the culture or make the world a better place for mankind. Why? Because that is what HE WILL DO when He returns. Why? Because He is the “only one” with the ability to do it correctly. Until then we have a mandate of preaching the gospel, and discipleship. Teaching people what He taught, not something he did not teach.
One of the new strategies to evangelize the nations, and crush Satan under your feet (referring to Rom. 16:20) is called Redeeming cultures. It goes by a number of different titles First Nations cultural evangelism cultural identification indigenous people movement-cultural redemption etc.
The belief that in every culture-God has left treasures and worthy traditions within the indigenous cultures to be used. We are told that redeeming the cultures reestablished people’s identity of who they are as nations and who God created them to be.
Terry Leblanc: referring to David Garrett from Scripture and Songs said it this way:
“God is now calling forth from among the indigenous communities of the world that good deposit which He has made in them of their cultures, their languages, their musical expressions and all that sort of thing … as an expression of praise and worship unto Himself.” (Word to the World – host Danny Lehmann, KLHT, 2001)
To say God created these cultures, influenced them or deposited anything in them is the same as saying that these other religions had truth from God and worshipped Him (or her, or it) correctly.
The cultural redemption movement began mainly through Don Richardson books “The Peace Child” and “Eternity in Their Hearts” who proposed using redemptive analogies that are already found in cultures. Some of the ideas he presented were valid, some were not. Certainly there is advantage to indigenous people carrying the gospel to their own people but there is a disadvantage when one tries to make a connection to them by their own religion that is clearly not there in the first place. And instead of giving them the straightforward gospel it becomes a blend of their religion and the Bible to appease both parties. In the end the Christian gospel will be covered up with cultural traditions. The reason is because you cannot make a mixture like this have the gospel uncorrupted.
Is it appropriate to bring to people Jesus Christ through their own culture, and then leave them to worship God in their own cultures way. Did the apostles do this? The answer is No, but that is what is taking place today.
Richard Twiss one of the main promoters of “cultural redemption” states:
“…We’re introducing native leaders and native ministry organizations to the greater body of Christ by partnering with people like Don Richardson, John Dawson and George Otis …” (Interview- Richard Twiss, Word to the World with host Danny Lehmann, KLHT, 2001, show #547) this should settle any questions on whom these people are learning from and associating with. The majority are associates of YWAM and Dawson and Otis are involved in the NAR program of Transformation (i.e George Otis produced 2 films on global Transformation by spiritual warfare that are exaggerated and filled with proven inaccuracies. Otis jr. is part of Peter Wagners false apostolic reformation that is trying to change the way churches do things.)
“As disciples of Jesus Christ we are also called to redeem our culture as we grow in God” (YWAM DTS, Island Breeze, http://www.islandbreeze.com.au/training.htm)
Are we called to do this? If one thinks this is evangelism they a very much mistaken, this is far different from the evangelism done from the first century on down to our day.
One of the main promoters of this evangelism through YWAM is Daniel Kikawa who took Richardsons concepts to their extreme. He is telling the Church “The Creator God of the Bible is not a foreign God. He loves indigenous people and has been a part of their history and culture from the beginning.”
Leon Siu: “The misconceptions that, as was expressed earlier, was that God didn’t arrive until the missionaries arrived. You know, and so when we started to look at this we started to look into our culture and see what things within our culture what God had originally intended for this particular group of people, Hawaiians.” (Interview with three of the leaders from the indigenous people’s movements around the world, Word to the World, 2001)
Sui works with Kikawa and both share the same viewpoint. On Kikawa’s video “God’s Fingerprints in Japan” Kikawa states Japan was worshipping the true God in the past accurately: “It makes perfect sense that the Japanese people would have this revelation of God.” Why? Because these men have a “world culture view,” that believes all is one, theirs is not a “Christian worldview.” In other words,this can also be applied to any culture since they interpret Rom.1 as all cultures in the past knowing the true God.
Here is how they represent what they are doing “The Lord God of Israel created all mankind in His own image. He separated us into different languages and dispersed us throughout the world. Our God gave to each people the knowledge and wisdom needed to survive in each place. His hand has always been present in each of our histories…. (Indigenous Expressions of Biblical Faith http://wcgip.org/)
It has? Where does the Bible say this? It is matter of opinion of a few that are promoting this to the church. In fact, the Bible says the opposite, all one has to do is look up in bible history to see how God related to the cultures of the world. Acts 14:16: “who in bygone generations allowed all nations to walk in their own ways.” He gave the world their basic needs but was not involved in any of the cultures development or ways. To one nation only did he say, “And who is like Your people, like Israel, the one nation on the earth whom God went to redeem for Himself as a people, to make for Himself a name– and to do for Yourself great and awesome deeds for Your land– before Your people whom You redeemed for Yourself from Egypt, the nations, and their gods?”
There is no other nation that God chose to deliver and give his commands and Scripture to.This claim of God being involved in everyone’s history completely opposes the Bibles teaching on mankind’s true history. Though there may be good intentions behind these ideas, many “Christians” are becoming involved in this new philosophical view that affects their Biblical worldview. This does not excuse the fact that they are wrong on their main premise. The assumption is that God formed ALL the nations, cultures (specifically) and purposely put things in their culture that are equal to what He did with Israel. This is simply is not so. There are enough Bible examples contrary to this to explain that God did not approve of these cultures in ancient Bible times and does not today. What is ironic is that they call him the Lord God of Israel. But then what they teach changes Him to the Lord God of all nation’s cultures and people who were defiant and did not know him.
There is not one nation, before Christ, other than Israel where God speaks of their culture or priesthood as worshipping Him correctly. The one nation he gave the instructions to, otherwise they were making it all up. Even Israel, with all the commandments given directly and supernaturally, being instructed by God, often fell into idolatry which was influenced by the other cultures around them. God had written in Deut: 18:9: “When you come into the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominations of those nations.”
Deut.12:30-32: “take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.’ “You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods.”
Some take the position that He revealed Himself at some point to nearly all indigenous people groups prior to the Gospel being brought to them. They believe that in every culture God has left treasures and worthy traditions within their cultures to be used. Thus when we bring Jesus Christ to people we can then leave them to worship God in their own cultural and religious ways as they did in the past. They Mix up concepts of God by using cultural history or methods to worship him.
“God loves the cultural expressions that flow from them. They are finding many things within that flow from their cultural identity that were ordained by God.” (Video God’s Fingerprints in Japan by aloha Ke Akua)
The idea that God put his truth in every culture through history, even with contradictory values and practices seems to be overlooked by these people.
Paul went through Asia – nation after nation was affected with his message and they gave up their gods and idols. But we are now being told to allow them to keep parts of their religion and the culture that is saturated by this false worship and turn into true worship, thus redeeming the culture.
Daniel Kikawa who was heavily influenced by Richardson states, we have “Startling Evidence of Belief in the One True God in Hundreds of Cultures Throughout the World,” claiming that hundreds of cultures in the world were already worshipping YHWH. Again this is revisioning actual history. Archeologists and historians know different.
Mankind’s history is not one of submission but rebellion. Not long after man was judged for his lawlessness he united together to build a tower of his own way to worship the creation, not God. God destroyed the world of Noah’s time except for his family; God did not redeem any culture. God scattered the people at the tower of Babel for their disobedience. And they did not take the truth with them but took their false worship with them to cover the whole earth. They left Babel worshipping their false gods, they left looking to the stars, and developed further their false religions.
God did not give people their cultural “identities” or form their cultures. He confused their tongues at Babel as a judgment upon their trying to unify themselves without him. They were sent them away to populate the earth and the people of each separate language group began to develop their own culture Romans 1 tells us that men did not seek God, they instead traded the general revelation they had of God for worship of created things (Rom. 1:25) and from that they formed their cultures religions.
Can anyone find where the Bible teaches to redeem a culture? Before one accepts and implements this new methodology they need to think this through BIBLICALLY. Do they have to abandon their cultural identity in order to come to Christ or use it express their faith in Christ. Their culture needs to be reevaluated through God’s viewpoint and not mans reasoning.
We have only one example of a massive revival of a people, Jonah. Jonah’s message changed a whole city and turned a vicious culture away from its own destructive tendencies but it did not redeem the culture. There was nothing to draw from it. Instead they forsook their gods to worship the true and living god of Israel.
God did not send angles to Lot in Sodom and Gomorrah and teach him how to improve living among the aggressive homosexual culture he was in, they took him out. God did not keep Israel in Egypt to restructure their worship or bring them under Israel’s blessings. God had no intention of sending Moses into Egypt to try to reform Egyptian society but to rescue Israel. God took Israel OUT from Egypt and destroyed their cultural identity with all their god’s. God destroyed many of the cultures surrounding Israel as He brought them into the Promised Land, he approved of NONE of them. We do not see a redeemed culture at any time in history and neither is He doing this today. So this whole concept cannot be validated by the Bible. This is made up theology and practice.
God was destroying cultures before Christ came, not redeeming them. In the flood he destroyed everything that had breath that did not enter the ark because of how far man went in his idolatry and disobedience to God.
And, He will do it again in the end as sin and lawlessness becomes like a flood- he will deal harshly with the wickedness of world in every culture and society.
Using redemptive analogy is justified as a valid method of evangelism. We are told the prophets and even Jesus used the technique in his story-telling by saying “The kingdom of God is like.” Jesus’ method of communication was story telling (orality), and he used redemptive analogy within story-telling. Thus presenting the Gospel in terms which relate to the particular culture it is valid to use that culture to .
This is where we get to the basement and foundation of this whole mater. These are Grand Canyon leaps performed by those involved in this type of evangelizing. What they completely miss is that Jesus was communicating to the culture he formed by giving the Oracles of God to over millennia, the types and shadows , of everything their religious life (and secular which was not separate) were used to explain the true teaching of the law and the Scriptures
They change the meanings of their own religion and synthesize it to Christianity. Wiconi International endorses Eagles Wings (Randy and Edith Woodley) that claims the Great Spirit’s son is Jesus Christ:
“Both Native Americans, their mission is “to present the Great Spirit’s Son, Jesus Christ and His Words, the Bible to Native Americans in culturally relevant ways.” (http://www.ethnicharvest.org/peoples/nativeamer.htm)
The Great Spirit who they claim created the earth, pervaded everything, this is not the Holy Spirit who is separate from the creation he produced.
We welcome Native Americans into the body of Christ like we should do to all people from everywhere people and every nation, but they need to know to leave their spiritual traditions behind and follow Jesus Christ as the Bible teaches, so they do not blend it with their ancient ways.
There is always a portion of the truth with error when these men promote their indigenous agenda. speaking of the apostles Richard Twiss says- Their worldview was too small they could not recognize the new thing that God was doing outside the box of their own cultural understanding so rather than rejoice that people were delivered out of the clutches of hell and sent into the kingdom they criticized Peter because he broke their religious and social and cultural traditions So God had to dismantle their old covenant orientation toward the kingdom, but here’s the problem for us. … yet because their worldview was too small they were born-again bigots. For Jesus, filled with power absolutely, anointing, completely but their worldview was too small.. He then tells the audience he will be with emergent church leader “Brian McLaren, equipping today’s church for tomorrows challenges…” (TBN Sept.27, 2005 Interview by Dwight Thomson).
I don’ think it is right to call the apostles bigots even if it is tongue in cheek. Besides ignoring the fact that it was God who led Peter to open the door for the Gentiles to be part of the Body of Christ (Acts 10). Who criticized Peter because he broke their religious and social and cultural traditions. Twiss has misrepresented the actual history making it seem that it was It the church
Acts 10:45 “And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.”
Acts 11:2 “And when Peter came up to Jerusalem, those of the circumcision contended with him”
We find out whom those of the circumcision are, the same ones that tried to ruin the Galatian church the Judaizers.
Acts 15:5 “But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” In vv.11-12 the apostles gave testimony of God’s work among the gentiles.Acts 15:22: “Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas”
So we can see by the Scripture that a slight twist or wrong interpretation and one can make the apostles prejudice when they were not, it was the religious sect of the Pharisees that were. No doubt the church had to reconcile these matters and that is exactly why the council in Jerusalem in Acts 15 was for.
Many misuse Rev.7 “After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb.”
They have taken this out of its context and made it a pretext to their own presuppositions. It’s talking about people taken FROM NATIONS-TRIBES, THOSE OF DIFFERENT LANGUAGES. It does not say whole cultures, societies or nations. They are individuals from these various groups who have believed in Jesus Christ as their personal Savior.
To redeem, (redemption) in the biblical sense means to be brought back from a slaves marketplace. What we find is that God redeems individual people. Each person is spiritually born by making a personal choice in the gospel.
The Biblical concept of redeeming does not mean what these movements say it does. Nowhere does this imply that a culture had portions of true worship God put there and He was no going to bring them into a fuller understanding of what they already had. They did not have anything.
They use the word reconciling in a secular sense and remove it from its biblical definition. Reconciliation comes one way only
Rom. 5:10: “For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son,
Now that we are reconciled by the crucifixion the gospel, we are to bring it to others.
2 Cor. 5:18-20: “Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God.”
What is that word? The gospel which has to do with men’s trespasses- their sins. Not with a nation, a belief system, political or religious.
Reconciliation is in Greek katallage-exchange (figuratively, adjustment), i.e. restoration to (the divine) favor:
KJV– atonement, reconciliation (-ing).
The same thing is for the word redemption Greek- exagorazo-1) to redeem a) by payment of a price to recover from the power of another, to ransom, to buy off b) metaphorically, used of Christ freeing the elect from the dominion of the Mosaic Law at the price of his vicarious death 2) to buy up, to buy up for oneself, for one’s use to make wise and sacred use of every opportunity for doing good, so that zeal and well-doing are as it were the purchase money by which we make the time our own.
redemption -lutroo- 1) to release on receipt of ransom 2) to redeem, to liberate by payment of ransom a) to liberate b) to cause to be released to oneself by payment of a ransom c) to redeem d) to deliver: from evils of every kind, internal and external.
Rom. 3:24: “the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,” How, by the blood shed by the sinless son of God. As it says in Eph 1:7: “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, (also Col.1:14)
In the New Testament only people who believe the gospel are redeemed, there are no whole nations redeemed.
Mark 16:15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.” If you as a missionary go to a tribal group anywhere in the world and find that they are worshipping a god, you would not say, “I’m going to tell you who YOUR god is”—or the “good things that he has left you in your culture”–that’s not a biblical approach to evangelism. This completely different from saying, “Let me tell you who the true God is” showing them the difference and encouraging them to abandon the false gods and ways that they’ve been worshipping. Working with them patiently as they discover what they are doing is wrong. This was the approach of the apostles, i.e. Paul to the Gentiles. This was the approach of missionaries. I agree that sometimes the culture of the missionaries was sometimes brought into the conversion. Sometimes it was for good reason, (i.e. dressing up in western clothes than to continue walking around naked) other times it was mistakenly part of the package. We are to make a distinction between the religious and social aspects of a culture. One is neutral the other is not.
Deut 12:2-5: “You shall utterly destroy all the places where the nations which you shall dispossess served their gods, on the high mountains and on the hills and under every green tree. “And you shall destroy their altars, break their sacred pillars, and burn their wooden images with fire; you shall cut down the carved images of their gods and destroy their names from that place. “You shall not worship the LORD your God with such things.” The Bible principle is made clear, do not use the former religious practices or items for worship to the true God.
In Joshua 7:10-12 Israel sinned, by taking the accursed things and put it among their own. V.12: “Therefore the children of Israel could not stand before their enemies, but turned their backs before their enemies, because they have become doomed to destruction. Neither will I be with you anymore, unless you destroy the accursed from among you.” Joshua 7:21 tells us it was “a beautiful Babylonian garment, two hundred shekels of silver, and a wedge of gold weighing fifty shekels”
Israel would be ensnared with pagan items and practices. Many purposely ignore this fact because it goes contrary to the new syncretistic evangelism that is being used. God did not give Israel one way and various other ways to the nations. In fact the bible is clear, he only picked Israel as the nation to be the recipient of his laws and ways.
Deut. 18:9-14: “When you come into the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominations of those nations.” Deut. 12:2-4 Israel was to destroy all the places where the nations served their gods, v.4 “You shall not worship the LORD your God with such things.”
We do not see God’s approval of adopting any nation’s customs into Judaism or Judaism into their customs and we should not adopt this idea into the church. There was to be no syncretism for Israel or the church.
When a false religious belief becomes ingrained in a culture, that culture cannot be redeemed, it needs to be abandoned for the truth.
If these things of other cultures were incorporated in their religious practices they were not to be carried into the worship of Yahweh, the people were to be holy. Judgment was severe Josh. 7:15: ‘Then it shall be that he who is taken with the accursed thing shall be burned with fire.” Just like they burned their magic books in Act 19 when they were saved, they abandoned what was not of God. But today the line is blurred and the indigenous people are being told that what they have is of God. Hardly the truth.
Terry Lebanc says,”There’s a myth that we have labored under for centuries in indigenous communities and the myth is that we are a godless heathen people” (Word to the World Interview by Danny Lehmann 2001).
Actually the ancient people practiced myths and did not have the truth. Who said so? God did. 1 Cor. 1:21: “For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom DID NOT KNOW GOD, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.” The message the gospel needs to be heard in its pure form, not tainted with a cultural genre or ancient traditions.
John 1:9-11: “That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.”
Notice how this is worded, the world did not know him, and Israel did not receive him.
A Bible Smorgasbord
Ps 119:104-105: “Through Your precepts I get understanding; therefore I hate every false way. Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.”
To make inroads to a culture there are those who have taken the liberty to change the word of God by adding that cultures (or religion or countries) gods name. Or they ignore the word for word translation and substitute a culturized version of their language and customs, this is not a biblical way to do evangelism. Now we have bibles that tell stories more than give us what God spoke as our instruction for living a spiritual life pleasing unto him.
Consider what they did here in Hawaii with a new translation of the Bible by Wycliffe Bible Translators.
Gospel of John Tell bout Jesus
1:1 Da time everyting had start, had one Guy. “God’s Talk,” dass who him. Dat Guy an God, dey stay togedda, an da Guy stay God fo real kine. 2 Dass da Guy, da time everyting had start, him an God stay togedda. 3 God wen make everyting, but da way he do um, he tell dis Guy fo do um. No mo notting dis Guy neva make.
14 Dat “God’s Talk” Guy, he wen come one guy jalike us guys. He wen stay wit us. We wen see how awesome he stay awesome, cuz he da one an ony Boy dat come from dadda. He like do plenny good stuff fo us, cuz dass how he stay. Everyting he say bout God, stay fo real. (Da Jesus Book p244 pidgin Bible- year 2000)
Can you see the reverence in one of the most important passages on his deity and incarnation diminished and belittled.
Gal.1:6-9 You guys blow my mind! Quick time you guys pau trus God an go trus odder kine stuff. God wen pick you guys cuz he like Christ fo do plenny good kine stuff fo you guys. But you guys go trus odder kine stuff awready. 7 Da kine odder stuff dey teach, dass not da Good Kine Stuff Bout Christ. Dem guys like change da Good Kine Stuff Bout Christ. Dey ony stay jam up you guys. 8 Listen! Even if us guys o one angel guy from da sky tell you guys odder kine stuff, diffren from da Good Kine Stuff From God dat we wen teach you guys befo, God goin punish um foeva. 9 Jalike we wen tell you guys befo, I goin say urn one mo time: Whoever teach you guys diffren kine stuff den da Good Kine Stuff From God dat you guys wen take from us, God goin punish um foeva. (Pidgin Bible p. 500)
Somehow the meaning and seriousness of the passage is lost.
I also looked at key passages of his deity
Phil.2:5 All you guys, tink lidis, jalike Jesus Christ: 6 Jesus, he everytime stay jalike God. But no matta,
He neva tink he gotta go hang on to dat. 7 He let um all go, So he can make himself one poor worka guy, An come jalike peopo. Wen da peopo see him, Dey figga he jus one guy.
8 He wen make himself jalike he no stay importan. He wen do everyting God say, Even if he gotta go mahke. An not jus regula kine mahke, you know. Was mo worse, on top one cross.
9 Dass why God make Jesus da main Guy. He wen give him one spesho name, Fo tell wat kine guy him. Cuz he mo importan den all da big name guys!
10 So everybody, wen dey find out wat kine guy Jestis, Dey goin go down on dea knees in front him. Everybody up dea inside da sky, An all ova da world, An undaneat da groun!
11 Wit dea mout, everybody goin tell, “Jesus Christ, da Spesho Guy God Wen Send, He da Boss!” Cuz a dat, peopo goin say,”God da Fadda, he awesome fo shua!”
We are to become more educated when we are believers; this is perpetuating a slang language which does not help one understand the HOLY WORD of GOD. If this is where the Bible translations are headed, we need to speak up before this becomes a normal use in our evangelistic efforts.
Here is another example that is disheartening. David Marshall gives a story of his way (tao)
“I was coming into contact with another religious culture in its most traditional and ancient form, one that had nothing to do with the Western God, and wanted to have nothing to do with Him. It was a revival of Chinese worship of Heaven that went back thousands of years, and had been enacted in a grand way upon an altar on Mount Tai in Shandong Province, long before the time of Confucius, and the great Jewish prophets.
The building should have been as alien to me as anything on earth. (Apart from the Douglas firs.) Yet it shocked me with its familiarity. The four gold and red inside pillars reminded me of four gold-leafed, red-letter-edition Gospels. The twelve red outside pillars seemed to suggest the twelve patriarchs and twelve apostles of the Bible — symbolized in Christian writings by pillars sprinkled with blood. The twelve tribes of Israel, too, had been arranged in four groups around the Tabernacle and the Holy of Holies.”
“the more I have studied non-Christian cultures and beliefs of various cultures and periods, the more I have become persuaded that the truth is just the opposite. Jesus is the Tao that Confucius and Lao Zi were looking for, the Rta of Indian philosophers or Purusa of the Rig Veda, the Divine Logos of St. the Apostle John. John’s famous words about that Logos are correctly translated as follows in Chinese: “In the beginning was the Tao. And the Tao was with God, and the Tao was God. . . All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. .”
And then, as if to wake all the philosophers and day-dreamers among us up:
“And the Tao became flesh and dwelt among us.”
(How I Learned Jesus Is the Tao By David Marshall http://www.homestead.com/christthetao/learned.html)
Much of what Marshall says is interpreted as subjective and personal and finds a correlation when there really is none and has no basis in history or reality. The fact that many of these emergent writers have a whole different angle in seeing the Bible and culture and reinterpret it in whatever way they think is best for those they want to connect with. This concept makes Jesus the everything for everyone.
Consider this found in Chinese Bibles, the “Logos” is translated to “Tao. in John 1:1-2: “In the beginning was the Tao. and the Tao was with God, and the Tao was God… The Tao became flesh and dwelt among us”
To quote the passage on the deity of Christ and his eternal relationship with the Father as the Tao tells me that this person neither knows about the Tao and even less about the Scriptures meaning. To do such a rendition of the Bible is absurd. But nothing is off-limits to these “cultural change agents.” This is merging to belief systems to make them sympathetic to each other. They relate it to the Greek philosophers Heraclitus, Socrates that held to the logos being abstract and impersonal. John is using a Hebraism. John wrote his gospel in Greek used Greek words for Jewish concepts not Hellenistic. This Word is a title for the Son of God who possesses the very same nature as the Father. What John was doing was explaining the true meaning of logos compared to the Greek writers. The common term in the Old Testament for “word” is dabhar (used in the Septuagint). “In Hebrew thought, the dabar was dynamic and filled with a power that was transmitted to those who received it. The term was often used to designate God’s communication to his people, as at the beginning of many of the writings of the prophets: “The word of the Lord came.” The whole of the Law, or all of Scripture, could then be referred to as God’s Word. (Holman Bible Dictionary LOGOS)
Clearly if they do not have the same words of the Bible delivered from God then the Tao is not the same Word who was made flesh. If the god of the nations is the same God then certainly this would be evident by more than a few similarities (As Romans 1 says they have corrupted portions left).
Tao means Way, and it is left for the seeker to discover within. Lao Tzu wrote “The Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao.” The Tao is an impersonal Supreme — there exist lesser divinities, it is the oneness of all creation, in the spirituality of the material realms and in the brotherhood of all men.
Taoism is concerned with man’s spiritual being, and in the Tao, te-Ching the awakened man is compared to bamboo: upright, simple and useful outside-and hollow inside. The knowable universe is composed of opposite components, physical (hard/soft; dark/light), moral (good/bad), or biological (male/female), which are classed as either YANG or YIN. Thus two opposing forces make up the whole.
To say the word –is the Son, which the Bible says has no darkness is the Tao, should be repulsive to Bible believers who want to do real evangelism, but this kind of new Christianity is being embraced and taught through numerous missionary organizations. I was told once in a correspondence with someone using Tarot cards to evangelize that what we are doing is old and passe’ and is being replaced. Replaced by what?
Christ never attempted to reform the culture of His day neither did he instruct the Apostles to do so. They “turned the world upside down” (Acts 17:6) by preaching the gospel to people of many different cultures. Redeem a culture? Why do something the Bible says nothing about and think you are doing evangelism.
In the endeavor to redeem cultures the work of the Holy Spirit is put aside and a reliance on human ingenuity and methods is instead used. This essentially compromises the Spirit of truths’ work. God is not unable to save the same way He did from the beginning, he does not need us to improve on his methods or ways – we only need to speak what he has told us. If we exercise faith and allow the Spirit of truth to work we will see the results we desire and will not have to opt for these made up methods of man.
This very idea is promoted through the themes of Victory Outreach aims to achieve this, according to Ed Silverso’s website:
[quote] “In the first part of this decade, people were moved, they believe by God, to stand up and be a part of the solution in the Salinas community, but before they could do that their hearts had to be changed. Most people, including Christians, see themselves as powerless in the face of the negative social and economic trends that were overwhelming the city of Salinas. As Ed Silvoso articulates so well in his books Anointed for Business and Transformation, if believers will step out of the walls of their churches and homes and into every facet of the city, including government, education, the arts, business and agriculture knowing they are empowered by the Holy Spirit to effect lasting change, significant things can happen. Sparked by a variety of events, pastors and marketplace leaders in the city of Salinas came together and realized for the first time their collective role as spiritual leaders in the community. The old paradigm of powerlessness began to pass away and a new message of community transformation took root in its place. One of the marketplace leaders who has been used significantly to spark the current flame of reformation was Dick Renard. In autumn of 2004, at the invitation of Mr. Renard several community leaders such as the mayor, chief of police, local business people and educators came together to pray for the city. They agreed to meet regularly to lift the city up spiritually, something they had been negligent in doing for so long. After coming together and believing for change in the city, they began to connect with local pastors and vocational ministers who welcomed their efforts with open arms.
The unity felt among those who wanted to bring positive change to the city spread to other individuals and institutions. For example, in the spring of 2007, two ministries with similar names and locations were brought together for the first time. Victory Mission and Victory Outreach sit a mere three blocks away from each other, and yet until Christians in Salinas came together and adopted a vision for transformation and unity, the agencies’ resources had not been fully utilized. What took place was a networking of 16 at-risk/transition agencies that could now share strength and resources, giving them a greater ability to serve the community of Salinas so that no one would fall through the cracks.”
These very themes in Victory Outreach is clearly outlined in an Evangelical Alliance Magazine it states:
“unity is often hard, but demonstrates something of the character of Christ. “Unity is really important because we’re one body. Jesus said that by this people will know that we are his disciples. When people don’t love one another or we don’t accept each other or we don’t live it, people won’t believe it. There are some core things that we all believe.”
The themes of the New Apostolic reformation resented in Paul Lloyd’s contribution to this theme as stated:
“But this is a city in transition. It’s a very interesting place to be right now. We’re seeing people become Christians all the time, every week. The good thing is that the churches are co-operating with each other.”
The unity resulted in the churches coming together in 2011 to host Party in the Park – an outreach event at Buile Hill Park. “If you change the spiritual atmosphere in the city, the church will grow. That’s God’s economy. Jesus hasn’t got many churches. We are one church.”
Victory Outreach is one of the groups connected to Gather Global, Gather Global Conference report was featured in the Evangelical Alliance magazine, Paul Lloyd was one of featured Pastors promoting the same idea of Social transformations and ecumenical unity.
The whole teaching of Transformation runs though Gather’s website:
We offer teaching through articles and seminars that encourage best practice and innovative ways of building unity, mission and social and cultural transformation together.
- We encourage shared practice and the telling of stories from across the nation as an encouragement and stimulus for other cities and towns to follow.
- We host a website that shows where unity movements have been formed and offer links to contacts for churches wanting to join them.
- We offer links to partnership organisations that work with churches in towns and cities in missional contexts.
- We encourage new and innovative ways for working together for the transformation of our towns and cities through civic gospel initiatives with borough councils, business, media, health, arts as well as through the local church.
GATHER is a collaboration of unity movements across the UK, served and enabled by the Evangelical Alliance.
The Answer to this is simply not Scriptural the Victory Outreach is well on board with the belief in the Global Transformation of Redeeming Cultures that it agrees upon recognition that the Roman Catholic Church along with any one who join in agreement to Rome’s plan to bring us back into full communion with Peter is to an accepted practice with in the evangelical churches is what the body of Christ is made up of.
That the doctrines, dogma’s, practices and teachings with in the catholic context is to be accepted on the bases of deep mutual respect for our differences that we can move forward together with the Vatican to represent the gospel, it is the reason for all this is simply apart from strong feelings on the part of both Protestant and Catholics, the agenda on the part of the Pontiff is that the Roman Catholic Church seeks unity of all Christians during 2012 in other words all Christians must be Catholic.
Pope Benedict XVI released an “apostolic” letter, Porta Fidei, proclaiming the Year of Faith for 2012.
Starting Oct. 11, 2012 through Nov. 24,2012, the church will focus of world-wide Christian unity. The dates are signifigant. Oct. 11th is the 50th anniversary of Vatican II. Nov. 24th the Roman Catholic church celebrates the feast of Christ the King.
2012 will include the following initiatives:
-  At the worldwide level, Pope Benedict will preside at a solemn opening celebration for the “Year of Faith”. The Vatican plans special ecumenical efforts, pushing toward Christian unity, including “a solemn ecumenical celebration in which all of the baptized will reaffirm their faith in Christ.”
- At the national level, episcopal conferences will be encouraged to focus on “the quality of catechesis,” and to ensure that the teaching of the faith is in “complete conformity with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The bishops’ conferences will be strongly encouraged to use all available media outlets to promote that goal.
At the diocesan level, the CDF calls for “renewed creative dialogue between faith and reason in the academic and artistic communities,” and for penitential celebrations, with a particular emphasis on asking God’s forgiveness for sins against the faith. At the parish level, the Year of Faith should be centered on the community liturgy, and specially the Eucharist, the CDF says. All other initiatives should be based on that foundation.
It looks like they have boots on the ground.
Has the Roman Catholic church changed in it’s desire to make the world Catholic? No. The Office of Inquisition continues it’s PR push for world domination. The Vatican will be pushing hard for ecumenical unity this year. She will attempt more dialogue with the artistic and intellectual communities but especially non-Catholic Christians. The church will conduct penance services that ask God to forgive those against the Catholic faith.
Many denominations and churches will participate in these ecumenical services, blurring the lines of truth and putting a veil over the Gospel.
Nothing the Vatican or world leaders attempt has not first passed through the hands of our Sovereign God, who works all thing for good for those who love Him. These things must take place before He returns.”
Next will explain why the RCC is so keen on working alongside non-Catholic churches and the separated brethren for the purpose of achieving the Counter Reformation bringing in the separated brethren back into the RCC as full members.
Rome’s objective is very clear quote Vatican Council II Volume 1 THE CONCILIAR AND POST CONCILIAR DOCUMENTS published by the Vatican Press
Decree on Ecumenism it all starts on co-belligerency and the post-modernist way of a common ground with respect to the RCC.
[p468] “…..one should recognize that between these churches and ecclesial communities, on the one hand, and the Catholic Church on the other, there are very weighty differences not only of a historical, sociological, psychological and cultural character, but especially in the interpretation of revealed truth.
To Facilitate entering into the ecumenical dialogue in spite of those differences, we wish to set down in what follows some considerations which can, and indeed should serve as a bases and encouragement for such a dialogue. (This is to achieve unity)
A use of a twisting of scriptures on moral issues concerning issues of Marriage etc…..
[p470] And if in moral matters there are many Christians who do not always understand the Gospel in the same way as Catholics, and do not admit the same solutions for the more difficult problems of modern society, the nevertheless want to cling to Christ’s word as the source of Christian virtue and to obey the command of the Apostle: Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, [do] all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. Hence the Ecumenical dialogue could start with the moral application of the gospel.
Rome’s position of the gospel is papal supremacy is over biblical supremacy the Catholic Sacrament’s are a rejection of the Gospel according to their own doctrines.
Catholic Catechism, par. 1030 All who die in God’s grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification [burning in Purgatory, perhaps for millions of years], so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
Catholic Catechism, par. 1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture [actually, the Apocrypha]: ‘Therefore Judas Maccabeus made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.‘ [2 Maccabees 12:46] From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God. [Cf. Council of Lyons II (1274): DS 856.] The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead: Let us help and commemorate them. If Job’s sons were purified by their father’s sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them. [St. John Chrysostom, Hom. in 1 Cor. 41, 5: PG 61, 361; cf. Job 1:5.]
Catholic Catechism, par. 1129 claims that the work of participating in the Catholic sacraments is necessary for salvation.
The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation.51 “Sacramental grace” is the grace of the Holy Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament. The Spirit heals and transforms those who receive him by conforming them to the Son of God. The fruit of the sacramental life is that the Spirit of adoption makes the faithful partakers in the divine nature52 by uniting them in a living union with the only Son, the Savior
Catholic Catechism, par. 1471 The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance. ‘An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.’ [Paul VI, apostolic constitution, Indulgentiarum doctrina, Norm 1.] ‘An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin.’ [Indulgentiarum doctrina, Norm 2; Cf. Norm 3.] Indulgences may be applied to the living or the dead.
Contrary to John 19:30 and Hebrews 10:11-12 Catholic teaching rejects the all sufficient of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross.
In this the ecumenists would have us over look these teachings in favour of common ground and not taking into consideration that the Church of Rome has damming doctrines cannot be considered Christian as it does not represent nor recognise Biblical teaching and Rome’s its very subtle agenda to get us to weaken our stance on these issues Rome would have us dialogue away this offence and come under ecumenical unity bringing non-Catholic Christians back into the Church of Rome.
Rome’s Decree on Ecumenism continues quote from Vatican Council II Volume 1 THE CONCILIAR AND POST CONCILIAR DOCUMENTS published by the Vatican Press
My Critique of the following as the statements made are based on my own opinion.
[p470] This sacred Council firmly hopes that the initiatives of the sons of the Catholic Church, joined with those of the separated brethren, will go forward, without obstructing the ways of divine Providence, without prejudging the future inspirations of the Holy Spirit. Further, this Council declares that it realizes that this holy objective—the reconciliation of all Christians in the unity of the one and only Church of Christ (RCC)—transcends human powers and gifts. It therefore places its hope entirely in the prayer of Christ for the Church, in the love of the Father for us, and in the power of the Holy Spirit. “And hope it does not disappoint, because God’s love has been poured forth in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” (Rom 5:5).
[p470] 21. “This change of heart and holiness of life, along with public and private prayer for the unity of Christians, should be regarded as the soul of the whole ecumenical movement, and merits the name, ‘Spiritual Ecumenism’ “ (Decree on Ecumenism, n. 8)
In these few words the decree deflines spiritual ecumenism and stresses its importance in order that Christians may, both in prayer and in celebration of the Eucharist and indeed in their entire daily life, through restoring whole Christian life according to the spirit of the Gospel, as has been taught by the Second Vatican Council–leaving out nothing of the common Christian heritage. (Cf. Decree Activity, n. 36).
22. It is fitting that prayers for unity be offered regularly at fixed times, for example:
(d) Easter, when all Christians (inc, RC’s) share with one another the joy of Our Lord’s resurrection;
(e) on the occasion of meetings or other important events of ecumenical origin or specially likely to serve ecumenical purposes.
[p492] Directory On Ecumenism
“It is a recognized custom for Catholics to meet for frequent recourse to prayer for the unity of the Church with which the Savior himself on the eve of his death so fervently appealed to his Father ‘That they may all be one’” (Decree on Ecumenism, n. 8). Therefore, let all pray for unity in a way constant with Christ’s prayer at the Last Supper: that all Christians may achieve “that fullness of unity which Jesus Christ wishes.”
This is gross blasphemy and an abomination statements made by the Vatican to even side with enemies of the cross and those who hold to another gospel, as true evangelical Christians of the cross we need to stand strong against any unity with Rome and remain separate even from those who call us their brothers in Christ and would encourage us to weaken our position as this will get us to deviate from the scriptures, this is a trap.
1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
This is exactly what is going on here we must be aware that the Spirit of Anti-Christ is not only at work in the world but it also at work through the Roman Catholic Church the following below will show how the spirit of anti-Christ is more so at work in the churches and leading many into the great apostasy of
2 Thessalonians 2.
[p494] Vatican statement B. Prayer in Common
- “In certain special circumstances, such as prayer services ‘for unity’ and during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren. Such prayers in common are certainly a very effective means of petitioning for the grace of unity, and they are a genuine expression of the ties which still bind Catholics to their separated brethren” (Decree on Ecumenism, n. 8).
- It is to be hoped that Catholics and their other brethren will join in prayer for any common concern in which they can and should cooperate—e.g., peace, social justice, mutual charity among men, the dignity of the family, and so on. The same maybe said of occasions when according to circumstances a nation or community wishes to make a common act of thanksgiving or petition to God, as on a national feast day, at a time of public disaster or morning, on a day set aside for remembrance of those who have died for their country. This kind of prayer is also recommended so far as is possible at times when Christians hold meetings for study or common action.
(a) Representatives of the churches or communities concerned should agree and cooperate in arranging such prayer—in deciding who should take part, what themes, hymns, scripture readings, prayers and the like should be used.
[p1000] Church in the Modern World
Such a mission requires us first of all to create in the Church itself mutual esteem, reverence and harmony, and acknowledgement all legitimate diversity; in this way all who constitute the one people of God will be able to engage in ever more fruitful dialogue, whether they are pastors or other members of the faithful. For the ties in which unite the faithful together are stronger than those which separate them:
At the same time our thoughts go out to those brothers and communities not yet living in full communion with us; yet we are united by the worship of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit and the bonds of love. We are also mindful that the unity of Christians is today awaited and longed for by many non-believers. For the more this unity is realised in truth and charity under the powerful impulse of the Holy Spirit, the more it will be a harbinger of unity and peace throughout the whole world. Let us, then, join our forces and modify our methods in a way suitable and effective today for achieving this lofty goal, and let us pattern ourselves daily more and more after the spirit of the Gospel and work together in the spirit of brotherhood to serve the human family with has been called to Christ Jesus the family of the sons of God.
We can see from the statements that the non-Catholics by the masses who claim to be evangelical but are ecumenical are dragging hoards of Christian into the Roman Catholic Church.
[p1004] The Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam suam speaks of three kinds of groups in dialogue in terms of three concentric circles, of varying sizes: first, all mankind, many of whom profess no religion, then those who profess non-Christian religions and lastly our brothers and sisters who are not Catholics. In order to institute dialogue with these three categories of people, Paul VI set up three secretariats: one for the promotion of Christian unity, another for non-Christians and third for unbelievers.
[p1005] I. ON THE NATURE AND CONDITIONS OF DIALOGUE
Dialogue is of greater importance and is more difficult when it takes place between people of different and even sometimes opposing opinions. They try to dispel each other’s prejudiced opinions and to increase, as much as they are able, consensus between themselves.
Their objective maybe simply interrelationships between men, the search for truth, or cooperation in some activity.
[p1012] (f) It is to be hoped that true ecumenical cooperation between Catholics and other Christians would be instituted both nationally and internationally.
(g) It would be hoped that such cooperation would be forthcoming between Christians and members of non-Christian religions, especially Jews and Muslims.
Vatican Council II
Volume 2 More Post Conciliar Documents.
[p156] The Ecumenical movement is a movement of the Spirit wider than any of the particular initiatives through which it is manifested. This ecumenical impulse, which for the Catholic Church is necessarily guided by the principles set forth in the Decree on Ecumenism and the Ecumenical Directory, seeks a great variety of expressions and structural forms and the purpose of this document is to look at some of the more prominent of these. As the Catholic Church in each country becomes more aware of the manifestations of ecumenism in various parts of the world, it has to avoid isolationism and slavish imitation of other places. Ecumenism initiatives must be adapted to local needs and will therefore differ from region to region, while always remaining in harmony with the bonds of Catholic communion. Further, the quest for a structural local unity is a challenge, but so is equality is for a qualitative unity in the confession of a sound and complete faith. Ecumenical initiatives should be a true expressions of the life of the local church, and not simply the work of individuals. It is important that ecumenical commissions should consider such local initiatives with discernment and sympathy and where appropriate offer encouragement and support.
[p157] The Catholic Understanding of the Local Church and Its Relation To The Ecumenical Movement.
Not only do the local churches direct and assume responsibility for the work of local ecumenism in communion with the Holy See but in the local churches the mysteries of ecclesial communion (baptism, faith in Christ, the proclamation of the Gospel, etc.) are celebrated and thus constantly renewed, and they are the basis of ecumenical collaboration. This collaboration is served by a number of organized bodies some of which will be served by a number of organized bodies some of which will be mentioned later. It much also be borne in mind that at the present time a good number of Christians prefer to work locally in “informal” groups of a more spontaneous nature than in institutional or “formal” Groups.
Individual bishops are the visible, fundamental principle of unity in their particular churches. These churches are moulded to the likeness of the universal Church; in them, and of them, consists the one, sole Catholic Church. For this reason individual bishops represent their own church; all, together with the Pope, represent the whole Church linked by peace, love and unity (Lumen Gentium, 23).
[p158] Within these regions the other Christian churches and ecclesial communities often have the highest level of the churchly authority whereby they make those decisions which direct their life and shape their future. Therefore, the local church or several local churches in the territory of an episcopal conference or a synod can be in a very favourable position to make contact and establish fraternal relations with other Christian churches and communities at these levels.
In other words by this statement they want us all to be brought to Rome and for the masses to be Roman Catholic.
[p165] As the Catholic Church engages its full energies in the serious effort for integral human development it works with all men of good will and especially with other Christian churches and ecclesial communities. Hence in particular situations it has been found appropriate to set up joint organizations to study and promote understanding of true human rights, to question those things which frustrate them and to promote initiatives which will secure them. There are organizations which enable Christians of various confessions to work with people of other faiths for common goals of social justice.
[p167] In certain places the heads of local churches or ecclesial communities meet regularly, sometimes having a permanent “continuation committee”. Through their meetings they exchange information about their activities and concerns, share insights and explore areas of possible collaboration and even set on foot appropriate action. It is understood that the heads of communions have to agree on each occasion of collaboration about the extent to which they can commit the members of their particular body. The usefulness of such groups in certain circumstances has been proved beyond dispute.
COUNCILS OF CHURCHES AND CHRISTIAN COUNCILS
These organizations date in some form from the beginning of the 20th century as a means of ensuring cooperation. As they have developed they have come to promote the collaboration of various churches or groups in social projects and now see themselves as servants of the ecumenical movement in its search for a greater measure of unity.
Because of their importance we are going to consider them at a greater length in the next Chapter.
We have seen what the RCC clear agenda is; when the majority in the evangelical world are very evasive in this area we simply cannot encourage anyone who would promote ecumenical initiatives of any sort.
Consider this scripture “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them” (Romans 16:17).
Victory Outreach, Gather Global and the Emergent Church.
The Term Missional is emergent this term has been promoted by Victory Outreach and also by Gather Global:
GATHER is a national network of vibrant missional unity movements in villages, towns, cities and boroughs
The question is can bible believing Christians pray together with Roman Catholics, Methodists, Greek Orthodox etc…. for unity the answer is in the scriptures can truth and error mix if the answer is yes then you will have to totally be unfaithful to God.
Galations 5 teaches us all about ‘A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.’ some one put it across really well on the sermon index site:
“Truth mixed with error is equivalent to all error, except that it is more innocent looking and, therefore, more dangerous. God hates such a mixture! Any error, or any truth-and-error mixture, calls for definite exposure and repudiation. To condone such is to be unfaithful to God and His Word and treacherous to imperiled souls for whom Christ died. Exposing error is most unpopular work, but from every true standpoint it is worthwhile work. To our Savior, it means that He receives from us, His blood-bought ones, the loyalty that is His due. To ourselves, if we consider ‘the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt,’ it ensures future reward, a thousand fold. And to souls ‘caught in the snare of the fowler’–how many of them God only knows–it may mean light and life, abundant and everlasting.”
It is scriptural to state that the mixture between Ecumenism, its organisation and liberal leaders is a deadly mix to the body of Christ.
The term missional is around 10 years old it has been a term rooted in the emergent church according to Patheos
“I’ve written before about the term “missional.” It bends a lot of ways. It’s a term that basically anyone can use for whatever purpose they want — from a stalwart Southern Baptist neocon like Ed Stetzer to an Anabaptist pacifist like David Fitch. And then you’ve got the neo-con Barthian camp like Darrell Guder and John Franke. They’re all “missional,” and so are a dozen churches planting networks like TransForm, Forge, and the Parish Collective.”
So here’s a test. Imagine a Christian leader saying this: “I’m not missional.”
No one’s going to say that. Not a PC (USA) pastor, and not a PCA pastor. Not a just-war Augustinian, and not an Anabaptist pacifist. Scot McKnight will say he’s missional, and so will Brian McLaren. So will the pope. So will I.
You might say you’re not Presbyterian or you’re not emergent. But you’re not going to say that you’re not missional.
Meanwhile, we all know that the term “emergent” has been redefined by conservatives. As hard as we tried to use it as an open-ended term for an ongoing theological conversation, the theological police jumped up and down screaming that “emergent = liberal” that people started to believe it. Publishers, for instance, once loved the term; they now want nothing to do with it.
So my prediction is that people will keep using the term “missional” and defining it in their own ways. And I think that’s fine. But let’s all remember that with such a broad term that “missional” — like “evangelical,” or even “Christian” — what it really means lies in the definition of the speaker, and the interpretation of the hearer.
Bob DeWaay’s book The Emergent Church – Undefining Christianity. We publish it here because the terminology and concept of missional have spread throughout evangelicalism. Christians need to be warned that being “missional” has nothing to do with the fulfilment of the Great Commission.
Almost universally, people involved with the Emergent “conversation” espouse one theme: they consider themselves to be missional. Being “missional” is not what traditional Christians have known as “missions.” We have believed that the Christian mission was to send people with the message of the gospel to places where the gospel had not been heard—to preach it and establish churches. As Christianity became established in various cultures, other Christian workers usually came to establish schools, hospitals, and perform other practical expressions of Christian love and mercy. This is not what Emergent thinkers have in mind when they describe themselves as “missional.”
For one thing, the description above started with the idea of the gospel as defined in the Bible. The Emergent mission does not begin with any theological idea. It is not gleaned from Biblical texts such as this one: “and that repentance for forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem” (Luke 24:47). In fact the Emergent mission does not even start from a set of theological beliefs. I say this because their use of “missional” describes the idea that any works that make the world a better place to bring us toward the ideal future.
As we saw in the previous chapter, the Hegelian synthesis is ever lurking in the background of Emergent thinking; and this is the case with the idea of “missional.” For example, Brian McLaren writes concerning his idea of “missional:” “The term, as I understand it, attempts to find a generous third way beyond the conservative and liberal versions of Christianity so dominant in the Western world.”1 McLaren’s idea is that one does not begin with a set of theological beliefs that determine one’s mission, but rather begins with a mission and some sort of theology emerges in the process: “Theology is the church on a mission reflecting on its message, its identity, its meaning.”2 So in his thinking we can know our mission before we know theological truth.
Gaining Theology by Observing Pagans
Brian McLaren credits Vincent Donavan, a Roman Catholic missionary, as a key figure who inspired him to change his ideas about the meaning of salvation and the Christian mission. 9 He cites Donovan to support his claim that one’s mission is not to be found in a prior theological understanding:
I was to learn that any theology or theory that makes no reference to previous missionary experience, which does not take that experience into account, is a dead and useless thing . . . praxis must be prior to theology. . . In my work [theology would have to proceed] from practice to theory. If a theology did emerge from my work, it would have to be a theology growing out of the life and experience of the pagan peoples of the savannahs of East Africa.10
This means that apparently having been given no clear instructions from Jesus Christ, the true Head of the Church, about what He wants us to do and teach, we gain a theology by observing the pagans. Furthermore, we have to allow practice to hold priority over belief.
Let us consider several ramifications of this “missional” thinking of the Emergent Church. First, rather than learning about God and His will from special revelation (the Bible) we must learn about Him from general revelation (observation of creation). The term “theology” means the study of God. General revelation shows us that there is a Creator (see Romans 1 and Psalm 19), but the knowledge gained through general revelation is not a saving knowledge—it is a condemning knowledge, according to Paul’s teaching in Romans 1. Saving knowledge comes through special revelation:
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. . . . How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, (Hebrews 1:1, 2 and 2:3)
With terms like missional used, I would be concerned with mixing in with anyone who would use such a term, as well as the type of people that are involved in any way shape of form in supporting Victory Outreach.
Here are some following images from Gather Global leading many into total apostasy, Gather Global promotes new agers, the pope, ecumenical and interfaith groups and organisations.
Victory Outreach Manchester is in full support of Gather Global that it does not matter to them about truth, they have constantly rejected the gospel that separates from all false hood, that we can not join hands with those who do not worship God in Spirit and in Truth John 4:24 speaks of when we have names like Thomas Merton, Henry Nouwen, Pope Francis, Nicky Gumbel, Hope Together, Global Day of Prayer and Redeeming Our Communities (ROC).
Statement of beliefs Headings of Each section are in bold text regarding the statement beliefs and teachings of V.O.
Under The Forgiveness of Sins
The Full Gospel is not proclaimed, there is mention of sin, repentance and forgiveness, hell is mentioned and regeneration. There is no teaching on why men are going to hell under the condition that without Christ men are already under the condemnation of Gods laws and the offence of the law is not taught, Rom 3:20 is omitted there is no teaching that Gods salvation being conditional upon sin, in that believing in Christ through the act of obedience to him the condition is here
- “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”[Jn. 3:16]
- “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name given under heaven by which we must be saved.”[Ac. 4:12]
.and also can be found in Romans 8 the law of moses gives knowledge to sin, this again is not fully explained in the statement beliefs of VO thus the gospel that VO teach is inclusive this is a post modern gospel.
This is one of the reasons why VO can be involved with CTE and to a greater extent associate with Catholic People as our “brothers in Christ” because there is no issue for them with VO statement of believes and can aligned to be like minded to yourselves because there is no conflict between the stated beliefs stated in the document and the Catholic Catechism.
Laying on of Hands and Divine Healing out of context and unscriptual.
The examples given in the Bible by VO were seen as the leaders in the Bible were doing this and it is not by everyone.
This role is for the elders of the church not for anyone else.
Moses ordained Joshua through semikhah – ie. by the laying on of hands: Num 27:15-23, Deut 34:9. The Bible adds that Joshua was thereby “filled with the spirit of wisdom”. Moses also ordained the 70 elders (Num 11:16-25). The elders later ordained their successors in this way. Their successors in turn ordained others. This chain of hands-on semikhah continued through the time of the Second Temple, to an undetermined time. The exact date that the original semikhah succession ended is not certain. Many medieval authorities believed that this occurred during the reign of Hillel II, around the year 360 CE. However, it seems to have continued at least until 425, when Theodosius II executed Gamaliel VI and suppressed the Patriarchate and Sanhedrin.
1 Timothy 4:14 shows this in practice, Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery (Elders).
Were as 1 Timothy 5:22 says Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men’s sins: keep thyself pure. – this is talking about ordination It was usual to lay the hands on the heads of those who were ordained to a sacred office, or appointed to perform an important duty; notes, 1 Timothy 4:14; compare Acts 6:6; Acts 8:17. The idea here is, that Timothy should not be hasty in an act so important as that of introducing people to the ministry. neither be partaker of other men’s sins; of any of the members of the church; by doing the same, joining with them therein, or by consenting to them and taking pleasure in them, as done by others; by conniving at them, and not restraining them, nor reproving for them: or rather this refers to rash and hasty ordinations of ministers; and either regards the sins of those who lay hands suddenly on men, and with whom the apostle would not have Timothy join, that he might not be a partner in their sins; or else the sins of those that are ordained, and these, whether before or after their ordination; which such involve themselves in, who either rashly and ignorantly ordain such persons; and much more if they do it, knowing them to be such: and these sins may include both immorality and error;.
Heaven and Hell
Inconsistent to Biblical Teaching
Hell is hades (adēs) or tartarōsas are the names for hell is not associated with the lake of fire, the word for the Lake of Fire is Gehenna, Gehanna referring to hell can be found in the Quran, whereas the Jews loosely analogous to the concept of “Hell“. This is simply a bad translation on the KJV part as the KJV translators kept that one out,
God’s Sovereignty and Foreknowledge, Human Free Will, and the Problem of Evil
The Bible teaches that there is no free will. Examining Exodus, Ecclesiastes 7, Ephesians 1, Ephesians 2, Acts 13, Romans 8, Roman 9, 2 Timothy, 2 Thessalonians, Titus 3:4-5 The Arminian/Gnostic heresy is the teaching that man has some good in him, and this is what Jesus Christ loves in us and is trying to reach. The spirit is seen as good, while the flesh and soul are evil. Thus we simply need to see that Jesus Christ wants us to realize this potential in us, enabling us to make a decision to allow God to multiply that good. Combine this false idea with the Calvinist teaching that men do not need to exercise faith to believe in Jesus Christ for salvation, and you have what is being preached today all over the world. You end up with a “gospel” that sounds like this:
“Jesus Christ loves you even as you are. He sees great potential in you. You just need to accept the free gift of faith from God and you will have His forgiveness for any mistakes of the past, present and future. Raise your hand if you want Jesus Christ in your life right now.”
Notice that this “gospel” is not the biblical Gospel. It mentions nothing about man’s sin nature or his eternal destiny in hell unless he repents and believes in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation by grace alone through faith alone. They claim that the “gift of faith” is from God, so therefore men need not even believe. They just have to raise their hand, say a simple prayer, and Wala!, they’re in. They can now be counted as “saved” and be among statistics used to raise money for unscrupulous hucksters with a lack of integrity. But little or nothing has been taught about man’s condition before God, about why Jesus Christ had to come and atone for our sins, what we must believe about Him, why we must share in His death and resurrection, or what God expects of us. (Sandy Simpson) DITC
This is what I believe; God will never circumvent our free will to save us. Interestingly the Bible also teaches us that we must also build ourselves up in the Faith.
Jude 1:20 But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit.
This is because faith is an act of the will, a very human decision made using our God-created will whereby we can decide to submit to the will of God and place all our hope of salvation in the grace of Jesus Christ alone. As God builds our faith, our faith grows. If we shrink back, our faith may be destroyed.
Heb. 10:38-39 – 11:1 But my righteous one will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him.” But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved. Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
The matter is that if there is no Law, there is no penalty and no repentance is needed. The Gospel of Free will that there is some good in us is false and humanistic.
Government and Political Parties
We believe that civil government is ordained by God and is better than anarchy. Yet at the same time we endorse the efforts of political leaders of the past, such as Martin Luther King (Adulterer according to the FBI) and Mahatma Gandhi (Hindu), who had the courage to stand up against civil injustice by peacefully protesting.
What VO is doing endorsing these men is unrighteous and contrary to Romans 3 and a very humanistic approach to their is an element of Good in all men.
Gandhi was the man who brought the Teaching into the evangelical camp that “God loves the sinner hates the sin”, this Love the sinner hate the sin is not Christian, this is a Hindu Ideology because in Hinduism the same is taught that their is Good in all men, this is called Karma, thus love the sinner hate the sin, Ying and Yang, Good and Evil
Counselling and Psychology
The Roots of modern psychology are contrary to scripture, the Advice “Victory Outreach acknowledges that people often need healing on all levels including spiritual, physical, mental, and emotional. We believe that God not only uses ministers as agents of healing, but also doctors, physicians, counselors, and therapists. We affirm that all truth is God’s truth, and sometimes God uses medicine, therapy, and other means to bring about healing.”
These are contrary to scripture, this is mixing in secular psychology in Christian Language (Syncretism), having working in the area of the PHD, Doctorate course in Psychology as even teaching and training in this area currently, I have firsthand experience and in the area of clinical psychology and I can say that psychology is not suitable for any Bible believing Christian no matter how much VO may use it and wrap it in Christian Language, Roots of psychology are found in Occultism, Eastern Religion such as Buddhism and Eastern Spirituality such as yoga etc, all pins to undermine scripture, at the heart it is self seeking.
Christian counselling is no different as it about manipulating our cognitive behavioural functions in living life differently, because the belief is God has failed and man is better at it.
Leadership in the Home
What does Victory Outreach believe about leadership in relation to the roles of husband and wife in the home?
“While the wife is instructed to submit to the husband (Eph. 5:23), both partners seem to share a mutual submission (Eph. 5:22). While the husband is to love his wife (Eph. 5:25), the wife is also to love her husband (Tit. 2:4). We suggest the ideal relationship in the home is that husbands and wives work together in mutual love, submission, and respect. There is no justification for a Christian husband to “rule” over his wife on the ground of biblical submission, but there is also no ground for a Christian wife to disrespect her husband. Decisions in the home should be done together through prayer and biblical guidance, having the family’s best interest in mind rather than one spouse claiming authority over the other.”
This is contrary to Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. This is the curse a commandment that God has placed over woman, VO in this case are teaching feminism women are equil to men on the bases of 1 Cor. 10:23-33 take out of context this is our common salvation that their is neither male nor female, does not say men and women are equal in roles. If your interested I have a 20 page theses on this subject this point does not legitimise husbands abusing their wives as husbands we are to love our wives as Christ laid down his life for the Church.
Appropriate Roles for Women in Ministry
Contrary to scripture and out of context.
What position does Victory Outreach take concerning the role of women in the church?
The Bible affirms many different roles for women in ministry. Miriam, together with her brothers Moses and Aaron, lead Israel and was considered a prophet (Exod. 15:20; Mic. 6:4). Deborah was a leader and prophet during the time of the Judges. Together with Barak, she led Israel to a great victory over the enemy (Judges 4). She also wrote a song that is recorded in Judges 5. Huldah was another female prophet who led Judah to revitalize their commitment to God (2 Kings. 22). Esther was a queen whom God used to deliver Israel from destruction during their captivity under the Persian Empire (Esth. 1-10).
In the New Testament we read that Mary, the mother of Jesus, wrote a song of praise to God (Luke 1:46-55). The women who followed Jesus were the first witnesses and evangelists of the good news that Jesus had been raised from the dead (Matt. 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-11; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:10-18). Among the early Christians, Philip’s daughters prophesied (Acts 21:8-9), Pricilla taught the Christian faith (Acts 18:24-26), Lydia was a businesswoman and leader in the early Philippian congregation (Acts 16:13-15), Phoebe was a minister (diakonos – Rom. 16:1-2), and Chloe, Eudias, and Syntache each seemed to have prominent roles in their respective churches (1 Cor. 1:11; Phil. 4:2-3).
These and other biblical examples demonstrate that God uses women to perform various functions within His community, including teaching and prophesying. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter proclaimed that God was fulfilling a prophecy in which He would pour out his Spirit on both men and women, and that both sons and daughters would prophesy (Acts 2:14-21).
Paul believed that those who committed themselves to Christ became a new creation in which “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28). In Christ, just as there is equality among ethnicities and social statuses, so also there is equality among the sexes. This conclusion leads us to believe that other Pauline passages suggesting that women “remain silent” in the church must be interpreted in light of their unique situations. The two passages referring to this are 1 Timothy 2:9-13 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-36.
1 Timothy 2:9-13
Does this text teach that women are not to speak in church; hence, they are not allowed to teach at church? If this were the case, the passage would seem to contradict Acts 18:24-26 where Priscilla (with Aquila), Paul’s friend and companion, taught a man named Apollos the way of the Christian faith more thoroughly. It is also evident that females were able to teach males because Timothy learned the Scriptures from his mother and grandmother (2 Tim. 3:14-16 cf. 1:5); Timothy’s father was not a believer (cf. Acts 16:1).
What, then, was the occasion for Paul recommending that women keep silent in 1 Timothy 2:9-13? Timothy was the pastor of a church in Ephesus (1 Timothy 1:3), which was being threatened by teachers who promoted false doctrine and hoped to gain monetary wealth (cf. 1 Tim. 1:4-7, 19-20; 4:1-7; 6:2-10, 17; 2 Tim. 2:17). With this situation in mind, Paul’s exhortation for the women to stay silent seems directed at the rich widows in the congregation who went about from house to house creating problems (1 Tim. 5:3-16; esp. v. 15). The false teachers naturally targeted these wealthy women and influenced them in such a way that the women began to influence others in the congregation (cf. 2 Tim. 2:16-3:7; 1 Tim. 2:12-14; 4:7).
Hence, to prevent false teaching from spreading in the church, Paul gives his solution in 1 Timothy 2:9-13 – he does not want women teachers in Ephesus. Paul brings out how in Genesis, Eve was deceived and transgressed. In a similar way, these false teachers were deceiving the women in the congregation. Paul could support his point by using a universal message (i.e., the deception of Eve) and an absolute principle (i.e., the created order of humans) without making his application absolute or binding on all congregations and all eras. For example, Paul adopts the Adam and Eve story also in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, where the created order seems to be an absolute principle, but the application (i.e., women wearing head coverings) is associated with the nature and custom of that particular time and culture (1 Cor. 11:6, 13-14, 16).
What seems to be at stake, then, is not some universal ban on all women teachers or ministers for all ages to come. Rather, Paul’s temporary solution to the problem in Ephesus was to prevent the women in Ephesus – who had been deceived by false teachers – from spreading false doctrine. His long-range solution appears to be that the women should learn (cf. 1 Tim. 2:11) or be instructed with correct teachings.
1 Corinthians 14:34-36
In 1 Corinthians 14:34-36, Paul again suggests that women are supposed to keep silent in church. Some have argued that if he is banning all women from speaking in any church, this would contradict 1 Corinthians 11:5, where he permits women to prophesy. Paul cannot be making some universal statement about silencing women if he gives them the freedom to prophesy in congregational settings.
The context of this passage is related to orderly worship. Paul does not prohibit women from teaching or prophesying; the only thing he restricts is speaking in relation to questions they wish to “ask” (1 Cor. 14:35). This may reflect the notion of unlearned listeners interrupting the teacher’s message in order to ask questions (a common practice in the ancient world). Perhaps some of the women in Corinthian congregation were interrupting the teacher or otherwise speaking in a disorderly manner. Paul did not want worship services to devolve into chaos or go off on tangents related to irrelevant questions. He therefore suggests that the women ask their questions to their husbands at home. Many times women in the Greco-Roman world were uneducated, and so their husbands were often a helpful source of information. This passage does not claim that women can never teach or prophesy; the context has to do with maintaining orderly conduct.
We believe the biblical texts involving women’s silence in the church are unique. They engage specific first-century problems relative to the particular congregation Paul is addressing. His solution seems to be temporary and specifically related to the congregation’s situation. Paul’s ideal or universal perspective seems to be that males and females are equal in Christ (Gal. 3:28). Paul worked with women and permitted women in ministry (Rom. 16:1-3; 1 Cor. 1:11; Phil. 4:2-3), and under normal circumstances, the early Christians allowed women to speak and teach others in the church (Acts 2:17; 18:26; 21:9; 1 Cor. 11:5). We therefore conclude that women are allowed to speak, teach, and minister in multiple capacities within Christian congregations.
What Victory Outreach is doing is missrepresenting scripture, this makes V.O. teaching wrong.
There is one response I have given is to a woman called Monica Dennington on this very subject.
In her video “Women in the church the contradiction” she quotes from the new age Gnostic’s, Westcott and Hort, NIV version of the Bible  quoting 1 Tim 2:11 – 5 and 1 Cor 14:33 Monica says “if you’re a woman minister of the Gospel these are the 2 verses you wish you did not have to deal with”.
Monica is wrong, there are actually a number of references, such as (KJV) 1 Corinthians 1:18 – 9, Genesis 3:16, Gods order and headship Romans 9:20, Revelation 2:20 in 2 Timothy 2:1-3 the command was given to men not women, 1 Peter 3 is another Chapter in the Bible that gives clear instruction and a commandment concerning the role of women in marriage, the wife is always told to be giving in marriage and refuse not your husbands, to be above all obedient to them, as men are under subjection to Christ and 1 Cor. 11:2-3 “Keep the teachings just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God” (means a rule authority or source, there is no mention of church offices of pastor, or even elders here).
In the video (8:24 on youtube) Monica misquotes the account concerning Miriam in Exodus 15:20, Micah 6:4. In Micah it states that Miriam was in fact leading the women not the men. In Exodus 15:20 it says that “Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and and with dances.” There is no mention of men in being led by Miriam it was the women. Micah 6:4 does not say that Miriam had led the whole of Israel, Miriam was with her brothers Moses and Aaron.
Exodus 15:20 makes it very clear that the prophetess Miriam had only led the women of Israel who sang the song of Moses this was her only function as well as being the example to the women in the nation of Israel, God had used Moses as the law giver and had Authority over Israel, Aaron was appointed to pray and watch over the people of Israel.
It is very clear by Monica’s interpretation of this story, that not only is Monica Dennington Biblically ignorant but she is also misusing and twisting the scriptures. The scripture concerning Miriam does not teach, neither does it suggest that Miriam had any authority over any man much less the entire nation. Scripture does not even suggest that women can be in positions of authority over men on spiritual matters, this is purely deceitful and it would appear that Monica Dennington is adding her own words to scripture.
In the video (at 9:14) Monica makes mention of the name Huldah (2 Kings 22:14-20 and 2 Chronicles 34:22 – 28) which are quoted out of context. 2 Kings 22:13 says that they went to her, Huldah had just communicated what God had spoken to her she did not expound on the scriptures, which was the duty of the high priest. Huldah did not teach, Huldah simply did not have such authority over the King. The King did not seek Huldah to see what Huldah had to say about any scriptures, in the text it talks about the events that had occurred. The King had recognised that what Huldah said was from God, the king submitted himself to God’s commands, this did not show any indication that the King was in submission to Huldah, Huldah was simply a prophetess, she was there to give messages.
In the Video (10:48) Monica makes mention of Deborah in Judges 4:4 – 10 and Judges 5: 31. She reads Judges 4:4 – 10 and mentions that Deborah was the Leader of Israel. She then refers to Judges 5:31, stating that Deborah had authority over men. Thus she totally tears apart the references in the Bible mentioned earlier on (see: Judges 4:4 and 5:31 in Judges 4:4) this was a governmental issue, if you read the scripture it also says “the wife of Lapidoth;” this reference was not designed to justify women in positions of authority over men to the point where in Judges women expounded the scriptures in order to instruct the men in spiritual matters.
The reason why God raised up this woman was because the men did not obey God and it was a judgement on Israel. God’s raising up of this woman in governmental authority was to show his displeasure of their idolatry. It was not simply that Deborah had authority over them it was given to her as judge over Israel.
Deborah received instruction directly from God, she did not get this from reading scrolls to a congregation and expounding them, was Deborah in a synagogue when she gave instruction? Nope she simply judged Israel.
Judges 5:31 does not say that prophetesses are interpreters of the written word, this was the issue Paul had in the New Testament.
Monica here is seeking to use this as a proof text for her own personal agenda; the passage teaches us the opposite to what Monica is saying. Just because Deborah is a prophetess does not mean to say that the rules have changed in respect to women in the position of pastor, elder or deacon. If you read in Judges 17 it says “In those days there was no King in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6; cf. also 18:1; 19:1; 21:25). This is not a statement of doctrine it is teaching us a lesson that we should not disobey a Holy God. Monica is using Deborah’s account as the ideal situation for women to have positions of authority in the churches. If this was the case then would this mean that Sampson in the Bible was a excellent example that men should become like him? In the book of Judges these are very real people that God had serious issues with, God at this point used Deborah simply because Deborah listened to God.
Let us not forget example and a warning concerning the account of Eve in the Book of Genesis chapter 3, Paul stated that this shows that women can be more easily deceived than men. The story of Deborah, in Judges, does not set the principle that women should be leaders over men and have spiritual authority over them. Nowhere in the passage did Debora ever seek to put herself in the position of being a leader. God appointed her to be judge simply because the men were effeminate; and because of this God would bring shame on the men. “[As for] my people, children [are] their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause [thee] to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.” (Isaiah 3:12). The problem in today’s churches is that men have been feminised so much they have become weak; more so having their senses seared with a hot iron they no-longer feel ashamed or guilty of their lack of piety. In both the Old Testament and the New Testament, headship of women was not seen as common practice.
People often make mention of Anna (14:03) in the video giving reference to Luke 2:36 – 38. Where in Luke 2:36 – 38 does it say that Anna was a priest? Paul the Apostle has no quarrels and says women can even prophecy but with head coverings, it makes mention of this in 1 Corinthians 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. Whereas men are not to cover their heads, in 1 Corinthians 11:7, in Anna’s case this was a gift that God gave specifically to her this was not applicable in every circumstance, we cannot make a doctrine out of it in order to justify women in positions of being a pastor etc.
Matthew Henry writes “The account here given of this Anna, who she was. She was, (1.) A prophetess; the Spirit of prophecy now began to revive, which had ceased in Israel above three hundred years. Perhaps no more is meant than that she was one who had understanding in the scriptures above other women, and made it her business to instruct the younger women in the things of God.”
Nowhere does it say that Anna taught from the Torah and the Pentateuch to men, nor did she ever expound the scriptures or teach the followers of the way even though Anna declared to the unbelieving Jews who did not know about Yeshu’a, she did declare to the people about the need for a saviour, this again has nothing to with Anna having authority in the church, the Jewish Temple is not the church, the Jewish Temple was a solitary place for worship in the day of Anna
Monica Denington’s definition of Anna proclaiming the gospel is her having authority over believers?????
In the scriptures men and women are told that, in Christ, we are all priests, again this has nothing to do with the roles and positions of women in the office of the church. In the case of evangelism this again has nothing to do with exercising authority over the body of Christ, the position again was always given to men never to women.
In the video (15:19) Monica Dennington makes reference to Philip’s daughters (Acts 21:8-9). Again this does correspond with 1 Corinthians 11:7. You do not find Philip’s daughters teaching or expounding scriptures to men, nor is it recorded that they were in a corporate meeting they just entered into the home of Philip. In a meeting women again can prophecy but should have had their head covered, Monica makes mention that the account in the book of Acts was the Acts church, it was not the Acts church but the house of Philip.
At 15:40 Monica makes mention of Priscilla. In the KJ Bible it speaks of Paul’s fellow helpers. Again women can assist, but cannot teach or have authority over men, this prohibition still stands God has not removed this. Monica mentions Acts 18:24 – 26 from a paraphrase called the New Living Translation (NLT). Her lack of understanding about what had happened really shows, when we look at the passage they did not look down on Apollos. Priscilla was with her husband Aquila when they were with Apollos to encourage him in what Paul had told them, as Priscilla and Aquila (who were tent makers) had spent a long time with Paul, it does not say that she had been teaching the word of God to Apollos in the way of interpreting or exhorting the scriptures, nor was Priscilla exercising authority over Apollos. Pricilla was under the authority of her husband, they simply witnessed the gospel to Apollos–this is not teaching.
At 17:29 in the video Monica Dennington makes mention of Phoebe in Romans 16:1 – 2. Here Monica states “Phoebe is merely a servant of the Church she is given a title of deacon, diakonos in the Greek, Phoebe is a member of the church at Cenchrea, in the position mentioned in Romans she was there to assist the Apostle Paul as mentioned in the text in verse 2 “she hath need of you.” Phoebe was there to serve the church there are examples in the New Testament were you find the word servant being used instead of deacon, the first example is in John 12:26, when we look at John 12:26 it states “If any man serve me, let him follow me, and where I am there shall also my servant be.” You can find the word “servant” in Romans 16:1 we know through reading this it would not be proper to use the word deacon as this would not make any sense, would you interpret it this way “And where I am there shall also my deacon be.” It is more proper to just call Phoebe by her title “servant.” And not deaconess we know from I Corinthians 14 women cannot be referred to as someone who had authority in the Church to a position of teaching or exercising authority over men. Paul addresses the need for worship to be orderly and decent, simply because God always keeps His law this is God’s expression of His will every single time.
It would seem to me that Monica has a superiority complex as she is eager to either get into office of the Church or see other women in this position, this is about what God says, this is not about degrading women or making them inferior to men, this is about God’s rule and his order.
Monica Dennington refutes the Apostle Paul. When Paul spoke it was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The reason why Paul stated such is that it was to protect the Body of Christ against any other influences that did not come from the Holy Spirit. The Bible teaches us to test all things. 1 Thessalonians 5:21 “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”
Modesty in Physical Appearance – Contradiction not encouraged in deed and action concerning VO involvement with Hope 08 and Jesus Manchester.
Observing the Sabbath – a deviation on scripture Sabbath is not about keeping Saturday or Sunday, it a shadow of the reality that is in Christ. Christ being our Sabbath rest, not the church you go to any other than this is legalism
Reverence and Respect
Respect for People Of course, no matter how important they may be, people are to be respected, not worshipped. When we obey parents and authority, we show them respect, not just verbally but by acting in such a way that avoids insult and injury. In fact, we should be respectful to everyone, regardless of their station, age, or religious beliefs: “Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves” (Rom. 12:10). Men and women must respect one another if they want healthy, holy marriages. Youth should respect the wisdom and experience of the elderly, as the elderly should appreciate the enthusiasm, vitality, and abilities of youth. As Peter advises: “Young men, in the same way be submissive to those who are older….All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, ‘God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble’” (I Peter 5:5). Although believers can generally expect no reciprocation, we should extend our Christian respect to non-believers. Showing respect, even to those who deny the Lord, is the first step toward leading such sinners to the path of salvation.
Rom. 12:10 is out of context, it is the nature of our Brothers in Christ we are to respect, it does not say show respect to any unbeliever we are to take on the Character of Christ respect is not in the contrast of love this is purely a worldly term the scripture say this,
Acts 10:34 (“God is no respecter of persons”) KJV and so we should take on Gods likeness, 2 Chronicles 19:7: “Now therefore, let the fear of the Lord be upon you; take care and do it, for there is no iniquity with the Lord our God, no partiality, nor taking of bribes.”
Job 34:19: “Yet He is not partial to princes, nor does He regard the rich more than the poor; for they are all the work of His hands.”
Romans 2:10-11: “[B]ut glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.”
Galatians 5:6: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision or uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love.”
1 Peter 1:17: “And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves throughout the time of your stay here in fear.”
The way man is defined is by his own culture or belief but definition not to accept what they believe is by virtue not to accept them.
Respect for the House of the Lord
Respect for the House of the Lord The Old Testament reminded the Israelites to “Observe my Sabbaths and have reverence for my sanctuary. I am the LORD” (Lev. 19:30, 26:2). At that time, the sanctuary was a tent, not a great temple. Clearly, the presence of the Lord transforms even a simple tent into a place deserving our reverence. Therefore, church sanctuaries and facilities must be respected and cared for, as they are the dwelling places of the Lord. Any deterioration, or wear and tear must be addressed as quickly and effectively as means allow. Visitors associate a church’s reverence for God with the appearance of the place where He meets with His people. The facility need not be luxurious, just well cared for, to show reverence.
Behavior in the sanctuary should always be respectful and reverent towards God. Playing, running, shouting, and idle socializing are inappropriate, not only during worship services and altar prayer time, but also when the sanctuary is empty. The way we dress should also reflect our respect for God while we are guests in His house. Of course, if a sinner, stranger, or any visitor comes in off the street, we should welcome them no matter how they are dressed.
Informality, variety, and spontaneity in worship have been God’s special gift to Pentecostals, who have no formal liturgy. Let us guard, however, against that informality sliding into unintended irreverence and disrespect for the things of God, His people, and His places of corporate worship. Humor and casualness must be tempered and watched they can be inappropriate if they interfere with community edification or our relationship with God and others. Music could also interfere if we fail to patiently bear (Eph. 4:1-3) and respect music that we may not care for. As long the service and the music are drawing others closer to the Lord, we should be unselfish and glad for them; however, never at the expense of reverence and respect. In all our differences, let us respect one another, celebrating our union as a congregation of God’s people, one body in Christ.
Out of context Contrary to Matthew 27:50-51 God have removed the vial, the sanctuary is not the building it is the human body that is Gods dwelling place referring to his children as his body. Worshiping God corporately is not about the music as VO says.
Regular Church Attendance
Why is regular weekly church attendance so important? Why can’t a believer stay at home and develop spiritually just through Bible reading and prayer?
This is not consistent with scripture:
VO: The necessity of setting aside one day a week to worship God is stressed and commanded throughout the Old and New Testaments (Ex. 20:8). Hebrews 10:25 issues the command in no uncertain terms: “Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.” The Lord of the Sabbath, Jesus (Mark 2:28) was faithful to the Sabbath law, regularly frequenting the House of God (Luke 4:16). If Jesus felt compelled to regularly attend a house of worship, we, His followers, should do no less.
Nowhere in the Bible does it teach Going to church is a necessity, Ex. 20:8 does not say God commanded through the OT and NT that you must go to church this is a false idea, Hebrews 10:25 again does not say do not forsake your commitment to VO, Hebrews 10:25 does say do not forsake the gathering of Believers this does not refer to the keeping of Sabbath Mark 2:28 is out of context if you place it in context you read in verse 27 And he said unto them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: VO are saying Sabbath was made for man by God for us to keep Sunday this is contrary to verse 28 in Mark 2.
Luke 4:16 Jesus felt compelled to go to his father’s house because while he was in the world the Spirit of God was not in the world until the Son departed the vial of the temple had not been removed at that point, meaning God will still present in the holy of Holies, and the spirit had not departed because the Spirit was still present in the Son, John 7:39 accounts the spirit had not departed because he was not in heaven.
The Statement ”If Jesus felt compelled to regularly attend a house of worship, we His followers, should do no less.“ is simply untrue, if the body is the temple and Christ dwells in us, as Jesus did not say Gods house is manmade, and since the veil had been removed God does not dwell in buildings but in the lives of his people. Acts 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet.
God did not create people to live isolated lives. Christians need relationships with other Christians. Although some hermits live solitary lives of meditation, Scripture nowhere teaches permanent solitude as a lifestyle. As a Pentecostal church, Victory Outreach believes in the presence of the Holy Spirit in public worship. When believers gather together, the Holy Spirit edifies all those assembled: “All these [Gifts] are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines. The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body” (1 Cor. 12:11,12).
The teaching that Victory Outreach believes in the presence of the Holy Spirit in public worship.
The presence of the Holy Spirit is in every believer not just in one place, this is also not an emotional reaction such as swaying our hands in the air and speaking in tongues they call the move of the spirit, this is simply something I do not accept, but is mere charismaticism that is based on experiential theology and a deviation from scriptures that has spirit but no bases for truth. As taught by VO
What Can We Do? Local church leaders must plan and conduct inspiring services through which God can manifest His presence to everyone in attendance. Each worshiper should experience the Holy Spirit’s call to a complete commitment to the kingdom of God.
I do not also accept speaking in tongues and the necessity for spiritual experience as is evident on the aspect that a person has been baptised in the spirit.
In this case this is not what James 5:16 refers to as stated
If your church falls short of offering inspiring services, rather than leaving the church and having no fellowship with believers, you should accept the spiritual challenge of interceding on behalf of the church. Get involved any way you can. See if you can make a difference in your church. Remember that God answers the persistent prayer of a righteous person (James 5:16). We are all part of the body of Christ. We all have a responsibility to edify the group in which He has placed us. By faithfully attending services and praying for the Holy Spirit’s presence, we can outreach and interact with others who may very well be looking for someone like us to encourage and support them in their journey toward the Kingdom of God..
There are no scriptural bases for this statement.
There is no scriptural bases for this argument Vo teaches that 10 percent is obligatory under Financial Practices & Credit.
It is taught that The Necessity of Tithing Sadly, many believers acquire whatever they want, and even go into credit card debt if they feel like it, yet still cannot manage to tithe their obligatory 10% to the Lord. They justify their short-changing of God by saying they can’t afford it and they’ll contribute when they can. Or they ask where in the New Testament it says that Christians are required to tithe. The Old Testament acknowledgment that everything we have comes from God also applies in the New Testament. Jesus praised the Pharisees for their tithing even as He chastised them for not being just, merciful, and faithful (Matt. 23:23).
The road to good financial health is longer without tithing than it is with tithing. God graces those who make His money the first priority in their budgeting and spending.
The Bible does not teach on the necessity of tithing: in the New Testament, it says the opposite, the Bible says tithing should be voluntary, Matt 23: 23 is out of context if you read its context 23Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
24Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
25Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
Jesus did not praise them for tithing because of Jesus’ specific mention of the tithe in this passage, those who support the tithe believe that he gave his endorsement to the practice of tithing in general. Some scholars disagree, however, pointing out that Jesus was simply obeying Mosaic Law as an obedient Jew and telling Pharisees they ought to have tithed as they claimed they were living under that law.
Most New Testament discussion promotes giving and does not mention tithing. 2 Corinthians 9:7 talks about giving cheerfully; 2 Corinthians 8:3 encourages giving what you can afford; 1 Corinthians 16:2 discusses giving weekly (although this is a saved amount for Jerusalem); 1 Timothy 5:18 exhorts supporting the financial needs of Christian workers; Acts 11:29 promotes feeding the hungry wherever they may be; and James 1:27 states that pure religion is to help widows and orphans.
Hebrews 7:9-10 the modern practice of church tithing is not supported by the teachings of scripture. Church tithing began in the late nineteenth century when a Wesleyan Church in Cincinnati hosted multiple fund-raising events to erase its enormous debt. Fledgling on the brink of bankruptcy and devoid of options, a layman came up with the idea of, “storehouse tithing.” It was an instant success and soon the news spread like wildfire throughout Christendom and the practice of storehouse tithing caught on. At the time, it seemed the answer to the debts and financial woes of churches whose church members gave indiscriminately.
Other Problems with VO.
2007 – A Year of Prayer and Preparation!
The vision for Hope 2008 is to unite the whole church, for the whole nation, for a whole year… to do more, do it together and do it in word and deed. Wouldn’t it be amazing to see this happen across the nation? How could this work in Greater Manchester?
Well, key to the success of this audacious vision is prayer and that’s why we’ve set up this site to help saturate the whole of the 2007 year of preparation for an amazing year in 2008.
We’re looking for 52 churches (or church groupings) to adopt one week of the year each, to set up a 24-7 prayer room and pray around the clock. Could you organise this? If so, pick a week and email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Week 21: Sun 20 May – Sun 27 May – Victory Outreach Manchester
24 – 7 prayer started by Elijah List member James Goll
James Goll is a Gnostic who claimed he had a vision “I saw stadiums filled with young people radically praising God, A piercing word came, “Out of the belly of the Promised Keepers movement, shall come forth a Youth Extravaganza that will rock the nations.”
The stadiums will be filled! The stadiums will be filled as out of the belly of the Promised Keepers movement shall come forth a Youth Extravaganza that will rock the nations!” The central focus will be the cross of Jesus lifted high for all to see. These gathering will occur across the nations as an unprecedented move of worship, prayer and fasting sweeps the nations.
Why Should Prayer and Worship Arise 24/7 Today?
- 24/7 Worship and Prayer is Done in Heaven – Let it be Done on Earth
- 24/7 Worship and Prayer Releases God’s Justice on the Earth
- 24/7 Worship and Prayer Fuels the Great Commission
- 24/7 Worship and Prayer Hinders the Plans of the Devil
- 24/7 Worship and Prayer Releases Revival Breakthrough
- 24/7 Worship and Prayer Prepares the Way for Christ’s Second Coming
Promise Keepers involve Roman Catholics
Certainly, there are Catholics who embrace our Statement of Faith in which case we regard them as brothers in Christ. Views concerning salvation within Catholic circles do indeed vary from church to church. Therefore, regardless of any man’s church affiliation, the issue of a person’s salvation is between God and the individual.
Jeremiah Project: Promise Keepers is committed to reaching across denominational barriers in an effort to unite men. And they have been successful in doing that. Promise Keepers supporters and sponsors include Evangelicals, Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Episcopalians, Charismatics, Catholics, Mormons and others. These groups have been divided by major doctrinal differences for many years. But now these differences are being dropped for the sake of unity. The very fact that both the Roman Catholic and Mormon churches have officially declared that they find no conflict between PK teaching and their own doctrines ought to tell you that something is seriously wrong. This seems to be an ecumenicalism of proportions never experienced since the Reformation.
James Goll also started Prayerstorm, http://www.encountersnetwork.com/email_blasts/jan_2008_prayerstorm.htm
From the Desk of James W. Goll
It is with great excitement that we announce the launch of a new global prayer movement – PrayerStorm! This past June the Lord commissioned me to release a worldwide prayer watch for Revival in the Church, Prayer for Israel, A Great Youth Awakening and Crisis Intervention through Intercession. We invite you to read below to find out how you can Enlist_Now and add your prayers to the growing army around the world!
Become part of the PrayerStorm today!
Dr. James W. Goll
24/7 prayer IHOP
I can remember the first time I saw the “Harp & Bowl Model” of intercessory worship. A team had come up from the International House of Prayer in Kansas City (IHOP) and was demonstrating this dynamic fusion of worship and prayer at Little Trinity Anglican Church in Toronto. As the ancient beams of the church quivered with the decibel level, everything inside me started to resonate as I realized that I could sing my prayers! I could sing the Scriptures! Prayer, which had seemed inaccessible and arduous, could be enjoyable! Imagine that!
Negative Reports about Victory Outreach should be considered.
Please note these following links are not an endorcement.