All good things…

by Drew

As many have noticed, posting here on The Sign of Jonah has been pretty much non-existent for quite some time. The truth of the matter is I’m finding motivation lacking for this kind of thing lately. It is terribly tiring to keep up with all of the false teaching of the prophetic movement. And not very edifying. It’s also very tiring typing the same responses over and over again to those who think they can judge another person’s heart.

With that said, this will be my last post on The Sign of Jonah for a long time. When (or if) I come back, it will no doubt take a very different shape.

I’ve learned a lot over the last couple years about the nature of interaction on the net. While I stand by the content of what I’ve written I do realize that these are very emotional subjects. I still don’t believe it is “uncharitable” to use the sorts of rhetorical devices that Jesus and the Apostles used like sarcasm, I do realize that there are ways to do so without alienating people.

Family comes first and lately I’ve realized the requirements of parenting and marriage are much more of a priority than trolling the proverbial gutter that is the prophetic movement. Quite honestly, I’ve been burnt out on a movement that I’m not even involved in any more.

I started the site on a lark really. It was supposed to be a personal journal. I explored a couple things by Rick Joyner and Bob Jones in light of Scripture. After a few months, the site was clocking over 1000 hits a day. To date we’ve had well-over quarter-million hits. I’ve been linked to by several major Christian blogs, had the chance to interact with several people from the prophetic movement itself. I am grateful that God has used some of the small articles we’ve posted to help some folks. I never thought when I started the blog that there would be such a huge response and for that I’m both humbled and thankful.

The biggest announcement is that this means I will be closing the comment threads. All will be left up for posterity, but I feel bad that I have not monitored them more closely. It seems foolish to leave them open if the site is on an indefinite hold. You are still free to email me at drew(dot)jonah(at)gmail(dot)com with any comments or questions and I’ll do my best to answer or point to other resources. The Facebook page will remain up as well.

A sincere thanks to all who have interacted, argued and found out they are not alone in this messy corner on the fringe of Christianity.

Book Review: Why I Left the Prophetic Movement by Andrew Strom

by Drew

I recently received an email from Andrew Strom asking if I’d review his new book, Why I Left the Prophetic Movement. I said yes and here we are.

As the title would indicate, this first person autobiography is an account of the events that led to the severing of Strom’s connections with the prophetic movement and some of the excesses he continues to see today. Strom also proffers some solutions that he sees as necessary to reform the movement. It is a short book that is easy to read. It actually reads much like our blog. There are various personal email accounts of encounters with some of the worst manifestations of this dangerous movement interspersed with Strom’s own experiences and responses.

Where we agree

I largely agree with Strom’s assessment of the issues that he addresses. He astutely and strong-handedly denies the error of the Bridal Paradigm as taught by IHOP.

It is distorting our very understanding of God’s nature and character (pg 42).

Some of the most useful sections of the book are where Strom relates candid emails from his readers’ (some ex-IHOPpers as well) experience with the Bridal Paradigm. It is exactly in line with my experience here as we’ve talked endlessly about the Bridal Paradigm. Lou Engle’s “marriage to Jesus” ceremony at The CALL made the list, as did the story of one woman who claims that Jesus made love to her on a bed of roses! Andrew as bad as that sounds, we had a gentleman who claimed that Jesus literally rapes us. Strom responds to such foolishness with proper incredulity:

And they seem to believe in a God that actually enjoys it when we approach Him like some sensuous “lover” with spiritual ‘romance’ on our mind. I don’t know what kind of God they are talking about, but it is not the God of the Bible (pg 42).

Strom downplays the great emotionalism and “sign-seeking” so common in today’s “revival” circles. He warns against the excesses of jerking, falling down and many of the hallmarks of the counterfeit “revivals” in Toronto and Brownsville. Another great positive is his critique of the “personal prophecy” practices of today’s prophets and the junkie mentality that it produces.

Strom also rightly takes issue with the Prophetic Movement’s constant and persistent ignorance and marginalization of the Gospel. And he heaps due scorn on the Prosperity Gospel and the bad name it has gotten for Christianity at large.

Some points of difference

It’s no secret that I’m no Pentecostal. I agree with much of Strom’s assessment of the problem, but I disagree greatly with much of Strom’s proposed “fixes.” Strom presupposes the legitimacy of the roots of the movement and advocates for a “better” prophetic movement as the solution for today’s excesses. I just can’t get behind that.

I am also nervous that Charles Finney is painted as a hero of the past moves of God and someone to emulate. Finney’s Pelagian view of the will has done irreparable harm not just to the Charismatic movement but to modern Evangelicalism at large. While Strom declares “Let the new Charles Finneys arise!” (pg 116), many (myself included) see significant biblical evidence that Charles Finney wasn’t even a Christian, let alone someone whose ministry should be made much of. Even as a “revivalist,” Finney lamented later in life that the majority of those “saved” at his meetings turned away from the faith.

Another frustrating thing about this book is that Strom is very coy in using the names of those he’s talking about. Paul Cain gets a mention, but I had to scour the end-notes and guess a lot to get the full picture on some of the others. I understand that personal conversations are improper to share in a public forum. But these folks have made public statements and published books. They’re big boys and girls. They should be held accountable by name for their errors.

My last issue is that Strom calls for “forerunners” and “John-the-Baptists” to rise up. In a personal email correspondence, Andrew Strom clarified with this statement (I hope you don’t mind me sharing Andrew, but it was helpful to me at least):

I think I make it very clear right throughout that I am not calling for IHOP-like “prophets” or anything like what we have seen in this movement - but rather REAL REPENTANCE and HOLINESS preachers like a true John the Baptist. So it really is not any kind of call for IHOP-type “Forerunners” but rather something very different.

My fear was that for years IHOP has been claiming that they are doing just what he’s asking. Without a deeper critique of their teachings, the call to action could very easily be lost. Many readers may come away with the impression that Strom doesn’t understand IHOP. In their minds, IHOP is already an organization dedicated to the mission Strom calls for. I hope the above statement helps clarify.

Conclusion

Why I Left the Prophetic Movement is useful as an insider’s perspective. It stands as a whistle-blow on the movement that has literally destroyed lives. But without deeper evaluation of the “old prophetic,” the “new” that Strom calls for will ultimately fail because it will be built on the same faulty premises. I agree heartily with much of what Strom calls to task in the Prophetic Movement, but deeper surgery is needed to remove the cancer.

John Piper vs. the Bridal Paradigm

by Drew

In light of the recent interest in my review of onething Minneapolis, I wanted to post a follow up. Notice the difference in the following statements.

This is from Dana Candler and is a perfect example of the Bridal Paradigm’s ‘creature as sovereign’ attitude from her book Deep Unto Deep: The Journey of His Embrace available at IHOP.

He [Jesus] has given Himself to both the exhilarations and the woundings of a lovesick heart. When He gazes upon me, He sees through the eyes of love and desire. He comes before me and says, ‘I am a Man in love.’ I am a God that burns with desire, and I have set My affections on you. I am an all-consuming fire of love, and you are the inheritance that My Father has promised me. Will you receive My love? (pg. 57)

Jesus sends us the cosmic love note “Will you be mine? Circle ‘Yes’ or ‘No.’” In lacks biblical foundation, reeks of synergism and creates a pathetic and anemic “savior” with no real ability to save, only to ask!

Biblical perspective

I recently came across this quote from pastor and author John Piper and it pretty much sums up my offense with the Bridal Paradigm. This comes to us from the Resolved 2007 conference. With this view in mind, we can see how the Bridal Paradigm is the absolute opposite of a biblical perspective borne out of Scripture.

The love of God toward us is not Him making much of us, but His (at the cost of His Son’s life) enabling us to enjoy making much of Him forever. And to that end He must reveal Himself to us in all the ways that we can enjoy Him forever. That’s what love means. It is a very God-centered definition of love. (John Piper, Resolved 2007, “God is the Gospel,” emphasis mine)

That’s really the issue we’re talking about. The Bridal Paradigm is not a question of whether or not we are to take the Song of Solomon allegorically or literally. It is and has always been a question of the character of God and how we relate to Him. Hopefully this comparison shows the vast chasm between the Bridal Paradigm and a biblical view of our relationship with God.

God’s prophets finally agree!

by Drew

It has finally happened.  All of God’s modern prophets and intercessors are in agreement.  Steve Schultz brings us the happy news. 

“Huh? What did You say, Lord?”

God said back to me:

“It’s true. My Prophets across the world HAVE entered into complete agreement.”

Of course, I had to ask for clarification. Here is what I sensed the Lord clearly telling me:

“All those prophets, and even the intercessors, now completely agree. They ALL AGREE that they want to–and are–trying to hear My voice the best and most accurate way they know how!” 

Before we go any further, I’d like to examine this.  First off, “intercessors” is not a biblical function the same way “prophet” is.  We find no “intercessors” in the various lists of spiritual giftings throughout the New Testament. 

Second, if these alleged “prophets” were actually hearing new revelation from God today, we’d expect that they would already be in agreement.  After all, would Schultz really suggest there is disagreement within God? 

Thirdly, notice what they agree on. 

They ALL AGREE that they want to–and are–trying to hear [God's] voice the best and most accurate way they know how!

It’s no secret that the prophetic movement has contempt for the Word of God.  They don’t need it.  They have Scott Hicks and Tommy Tenney telling them they don’t need the moldy pages and dusty love letters.  Schultz’s statement shows a continuation in the absolute lack of confidence the prophetic movement has in God’s ability to communicate His word to and through His creatures.  Do you really think that Elijah’s prophecies were based on him trying to hear God as “best as he could?”  Or has God guaranteed that His Word will not fail?

19And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. 21For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

This has to be one of my biggest issues with the prophetic movement.  Their God is so small that He cannot even communicate to us.  It is up to the will of the prophets with no reliance on the Holy Spirit, which is the exact opposite of the biblical model given us.  If prophecy is for today, it surely does not look like this.

Agabus again

Modern “prophets” love Agabus.  They love him because they don’t understand him.  Even someone as sharp as Wayne Grudem sees Agabus inaccurately as a picture of fallible prophecy.  I’ve shown this before, but Schultz attempts to use him again in a different way.

Remember the prophet Agabus, by the way? He prophesied to Paul, and Paul then refused to take Agabus’ counsel, even if it might be correct. The same is true today.

Schultz uses this to show how people can frustrate the will of God.  Even though Romans 9:19 tells us the opposite.  It does follow that a god who fails miserably to communicate with his creatures would have an equally hard time carrying out his will.  But that’s not the Almighty God we see in the bible. 

But did you notice anything else? Schultz didn’t actually quote the text so his assertion that Paul went against the prophet’s advice really sounds plausible.  Acts 21:11-12:

11And coming to us, he took Paul’s belt and bound his own feet and hands and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘This is how the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’”  12When we heard this, we and the people there urged him not to go up to Jerusalem.

Where in this passage does it say that Agabus counseled Paul not to go to Jerusalem?  The passage does say that Luke and “the people” urged Paul not to go.  In the immediate context, “the people” might refer to Philip the evangelist and his daughters.  But nowhere does it indicate that Agabus gave such advice.  In reality, Agabus’ prophecy was purely predictive with no command to go with it.  What he said came to pass just as God willed it. 

Schultz goes on for a couple pages to make application, but we don’t have to go any further because we’ve shown the premises as faulty in view of Scripture.  Any conclusion drawn, even if reasoned flawlessly (not something Schultz is known for) will result in a wrong conclusion.

The Pyro-matic movement

by Drew

Phil over at TeamPyro recently posted another article on the Charismatic movement. With all the proper caveats, he’s expressed his concerns clearly.

I’ve shared many times on this blog how I believe men like Wayne Grudem and Sam Storms are legitimately moderate Charismatics with high views of Scripture. However, Phil points out something I’ve felt, but never had the guts to post out of my desire not to be accused erroneously of guilt by association. He argues that many on the extreme end of the movement use Grudem and Storms to legitimize their own false prophecies. I’ve documented this tendency in regards to Mike Bickle’s Growing in the Prophetic versus what Wayne Grudem actually teaches. The extreme Charismatics continue to use the moderate positions as a springboard to foster ideas that the original purveyors would never have approved. Johnson puts forth his own ideas on why.

Johnson also asks a very important question. That is, “what meaningful contribution to the theological discourse has the Charismatic movement made since its invention?”

The comment thread is quite interesting. Phil mentions the return of Paul Cain, the KC Prophets, meeting Jack Deere and Paul Cain and my article on Bob Jones’ now infamous 66% accuracy claim. Thanks for the link, Phil.

onething Recap

by Drew

This has been a long time coming and I apologize for that. But I think it’s been good. It’s been several weeks since the conference that Jim B. and I attended. He’s posted a bit about it here if you want more.

I’ve started this post about 5 times or so. I’ve worked all the sarcasm (hopefully) and general snarkiness out so this should be easier to swallow. That is, if it actually is how I’m saying it that offends people instead of what I’m saying, people will hopefully be able to interact. We’ll see.

I’m not commenting on the music at this time. I may tackle that in a later post. Suffice to say that I’m not a Jason Upton fan. Theologically I find him lacking and stylistically… let’s just say I have much different taste.

Down to bid’ness

After worship and before the message was a 10-15 minute infomercial for IHOP-KC. In that time, viewers were introduced to the essentials of the faith at IHOP. That is, Harp and Bowl worship (24-hour prayer), the Bridal Paradigm, and the uniquely IHOP view of the end times called “Apostolic Premillenialism.” No Gospel, no evangelism, no real substantive doctrine of the Christian faith. Not that I expected it, but I guess I was just shocked that an organization could lead with these non-essentials and not even mention the Gospel. Even if these things were taught in Scripture (and I don’t believe they are), they would certainly take a back-seat to something as central and recurring as the preaching of the Word.

Really? Spurgeon?

The message we attended was presented by Jennifer Roberts and was a cursory look at the Bridal Paradigm. She opened by saying that the allegorical approach to the Song of Songs was the primary interpretation of the book in church history. Jim noted that one would be hard-pressed to find a single instance in the Bible where an individual is referred to as the “bride.” It is always corporate and that is where most of the error lies.

I was bristling right off the bat as Roberts said that even Charles Spurgeon believed in the Bridal Paradigm as IHOP teaches it.

The sole text for Roberts’ message was Song of Songs 4:9:

You have captivated my heart, my sister, my bride; you have captivated my heart with one glance of your eyes, with one jewel of your necklace.

Roberts uses this in an attempt to show that just one act of our will “ravishes” the heart of God. One “glance of our eyes” is enough to send God into a tizzy. Our will has the power to move the heart of God. We are the ones who must “take the blinders off.” We are the ones who have to “look up.” The result of this is that God is overcome with emotion and desire for us. This is so sickeningly synergistic to the Calvinist mind that I don’t even know what to do with it.

There is an element of allegory in the Song of Songs, no one’s denying that. But the extreme to which IHOP takes it to is unprecedented in church history. Spurgeon may have taken an allegorical approach to the book, but to use him as justification for this man-centered hermeneutic is indeed laughable. As we will see, the view of God that the Bridal Paradigm teaches is nothing like the Calvinism that Spurgeon embraced. Roberts is either terribly uneducated about Spurgeon and Calvinism in general or being purposely deceitful.

Roberts asserts that the utmost display of God’s “ravished heart” is Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross where he “bought us back.” Buying us back is ransom language and should be noted. It is indicative of a faulty view of the Atonement. Calvinism teaches Substitutionary Atonement, Christ serving as our substitute as the wrath of God was poured out on Christ as a payment (not ransom) for His hatred of Sin. This language would indicate the Ransom View is that Christ bought us back from the hands of Satan who took dominion of the earth from God in the Garden. Would Spurgeon approve? Hardly.

Roberts teaches that we are attractive to God and that He loves us because of who we are. Calvinism teaches Total Depravity, that we are unable to come to God on our own without Him first drawing us. It also teaches Unconditional Election, that God chooses us according to His sovereign will, not based on any inherent goodness within us.

Red Flags

Roberts also teaches that Christianity is the only world religion where the deity serves the worshipper. I found that interesting.

She also said that it should be normal for 10-year-olds to raise the dead. Mentioned it a couple of times actually. I’m going to simply state that this anachronistic “restoration” of spectacular miracles completely misunderstands the purposes of miracles in the NT and is not to be found anywhere in the Bible no matter how you try to twist Joel 2. It is the proverbial carrot hung out in front of a group of naive 19-year-olds. It is hype and nothing more.

Finding the handle.., er not

I’ve heard a lot of messages on the Bridal Paradigm and could not for the life of me figure out why it was so appealing. But I think I’m getting close. All this stuff about God going “ga-ga” over us makes you feel really good. Not meaning this in a sarcastic tone, I felt like I’d just been at a motivational speech with prophetic flair.

The sad thing is in the syruppy melee of God’s “ravished heart,” the Gospel was entirely missed. As in, not preached at all. At the emotional ending where the band came back on, there was an alter call for those who wanted “more of God.” But without the preaching of the Gospel, this exercise is pointless. IHOP regularly “assumes” the Gospel is known to its hearers. But I can honestly say I’ve never heard a coherent Gospel presentation from any teacher at IHOP. Ever. While I was not surprised by what came out of (and did not come out of) Jennifer Roberts’ message, I was saddened by it.

Conclusion

Roberts’ message was filled with emotionalism, anecdotes and mention of the Scriptures, but completely void of any exegetical depth, substantiated assertions or the unshakeable truth of the Gospel. Maybe Paul was right (1 Tim. 2:12).

Horton hears a Heresy

by Drew

I caught Joel Osteen on 60 Minutes last night. I’ve also been keeping up on the buzz around the special. Michael Horton has a selection of articles available here that flesh out what he didn’t get a chance to say on the program. (HT: Challies)

Michael Spencer has an article here. And we’re harsh? (HT: Martin Downes)

Kim Riddlebarger also has a couple things to say.

Obviously I can’t add much, save perhaps a hearty “amen” to what these fine gentlemen have said.  But it did motivate me to post again.  Osteen’s refusal to engage in the preaching of the Gospel is not dissimilar to the modern prophetic movement’s inclination to do the same.  I’ll be posting on that coming up this week.

Brief Update

by Drew

Blog update

I have not passed from the land of the living. Still here. Sheesh. It’s only been two weeks since I’ve posted and people are talking about me “converting?” Good night nurse! I hope my convictions aren’t so shallow as to be converted in the space of a couple weeks. If anything, it confirmed my convictions that this movement really is lacking many basic Christian truths. But that’s for tomorrow later.

I’ll get some new material up as soon as I can. God and family come first and blog is down the list. I’ve got some personal items to attend to lately, but I’ll be back up and running regularly soon.

Podcast update

I’ve been meaning to get the first podcast up as well. Unfortunately, Windows Vista is one of the worst OS’s I’ve ever heard of. My brand new webcam works only when it feels like it and the new Windows Media Center does not like normal video codecs. Until I can extract the audio from a badly damaged file, that too is on hold.

Off to onething™ Minneapolis, no seriously

by Drew

onthing™ (can you trademark that?)

Well as of this time tomorrow I’ll be on my way to onething™ Minneapolis. Gasps. It’s not actually in Minneap, but onething™ Northern Suburb of St. Paul doesn’t quite have the same ring. I have been super busy lately but am looking forward to clicking out some notes on my lappy and doing some articles on the teachings. So look for those soon. Maybe even some picks from the foxhole.

It’s been a while since I’ve hung out in the charismatic fringe as I get most of my material from the web. I won’t be able to go to all the sessions this weekend, but I’m sure I’ll get my fill. Corey Russell (who I’ve heard speaks in tongues even more than my 1-year-old) and Dwayne and Jennifer Roberts of the onething™ podcast will be the speakers. So it’ll be just like listening on my iPod. Except I won’t be able to turn it off if I get annoyed.

I know most scoffers will scoff. But I’m going in hopes that there is some substance below the emotional surface of IHOP. I convinced Jim B. to come with so regardless of the teachings it should be a good time. My apologies for getting you on IHOP’s mailing list, my friend.

Podcast Update

I’ll also let you know that I finally got the last pieces of the very first JonahCast recorded. I should be able to get the show up some time next week, Lord willing. I’ll keep you posted.

Important Prayer Request for the Nauvoo Christian Visitor’s Center

by Keith,

A few days ago, I shared about our visit to the city of Nauvoo and specifically concerning Rocky and Helen Hulse of the Nauvoo Christian Visitor’s Center.  These folks are conducting a very fruitful and important ministry among the Mormon people.

I received a call last night that while Rocky and Helen were filming their television show in nearby Quincy, IL.  someone broke into the Christian Visitor’s Center and ransacked the place.  They appear to have taken some sort of hammer to the computer and destroyed it.  They damaged both the public parts of the building as well as Rocky and Helen’s personal home which is on the top floor of the visitor’s center.  We are all hopeful that the security cameras will have gotten good pictures of the perpetrator(s) and that the police will be diligent to investigate this crime.  (This is not a given since the vast majority of the police force as well as the city government are all Mormon.)

Please pray for protection for Rocky and Helen.  Pray for the repair work needing to be done to the visitor’s center.  Praise God that this happened now and not during the summer when, due to the high number of Mormon tourists that come to Nauvoo, the center is incredibly busy.