Celebrity culture has invaded the church. Pastors, who should be shepherds serving the flock, have become idols attracting adoring fans and commanding six- and even seven-figure salaries.
What has happened to the church? How did we get here? And what can be done to counter this truly anti-gospel culture? On this latest podcast, host Julie Roys explores this pervasive problem with Katelyn Beaty, author of ‘Celebrities for Jesus: How Personas, Platforms, and Profits Are Hurting the Church.’ In light of scores of people becoming disillusioned with the church, Katelyn describes the historical development of celebrity culture in the church, the three major temptations celebrity culture has spawned and what believers can do to counter celebrity culture in the church. This program was also released as an audio podcast and transcript on December 7, 2022: https://julieroys.com/podcast/celebri...
Showing posts with label Christian Celebrities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christian Celebrities. Show all posts
Sunday, December 18, 2022
Friday, August 26, 2022
China's 'Taylor Swift' Praised for Boldly Living Out Faith Amid Communist Persecution
The Chinese Communist Party's restrictive, anti-Christian behavior is well-documented, putting Chinese believers at great risk of danger and persecution.
That's why a famous singer's decision to embrace her faith so openly is captivating people around the globe. G.E.M. (Deng Ziqi) is a popular performer whose star rose after joining a 2014 Chinese singing competition called "I Am a Singer 2," according to Movieguide.
Deng's career immediately took off, skyrocketing her to fame and landing her with the nickname: "China's Taylor Swift."
That's what makes her overt Christian faith so fascinating and compelling. The 31-year-old singer is so open about her beliefs she recently released a 14-song album, "Revelation."
Deng is also known for sharing her Christian faith on social media.
In light of all that's known about persecution in China, Deng's faith-themed music is making international headlines, with Christianity Today calling her latest song, "Gloria," "courageous."
The song's title is based on the English name the singer's father once gave her.
Sunday, June 2, 2019
'I'd Still Be Going to Hell': Steve Harvey Tells of Salvation After Gospel Singer's Prophecy Brings Him to Tears
A gospel singer's prophetic song brought Steve Harvey to tears (Image credit: Steve Harvey Show screen capture)
Steve Harvey was brought to the point of tears after gospel singer Duranice Pace sang prophetically over him on the Steve TV Show. Now the video of the powerful encounter has gone viral with more than 10 million views on Facebook.
Harvey brought Pace on the show to tell her story about how God healed her damaged vocal cords. Little did he know, Pace also had a few words for Harvey.
Pace was horribly abused as a child and at one point was force-fed rat poison. The toxic chemicals nearly destroyed her voice.
"I believe the Lord gave me a touch when they fed me rat poison in Rochester, NY, and they had to cut out half of my vocal cords. And they said I would never talk again, but the man upstairs said, 'You gonna sing again'," Pace shared.
The gospel singer was also diagnosed with cancer and only given months to live. But she's still alive and well.
"March 28 made that 11 years ago," Pace said.
"I didn't know if I was going to be alive but God done kept me alive to see you, sir," she told Harvey.
Then she began to prophetically sing over Steve Harvey.
"This is Steve Harvey, he's a good man. He loves the Lord and he'll give you a helping hand. God's going to bless Steve Harvey," she sang. "Keep on, keep on, you helped me to live, sir, keep on … you special."
Harvey became visibly emotional and reflected on his mother, her faith, and the moment he had to decide to take her off life support.
"That was the hardest thing...to tell a doctor to take my mama off life support," he said with tears in his eyes.
"I was raised where she's in Heaven now, you know? And she watches me and she sees. I just hope she's seeing today watching this moment right here," Harvey explained.
"The only reason I straightened up and started doing right was 'cause I just wanna see her. Other than that, I'd still be going to Hell like I was," Harvey said.
Pace assured Harvey that he would see his mother, who was a devout Christian, again one day.
The talk show host said he brought Pace on to promote and support her. He didn't realize the impact she would have on him.
"You think I'm helping you, but you really helping me. I thank you because this was for me," Harvey concluded.
Wednesday, January 4, 2017
Hong Kong Pop Star Vivian Chow Wai-Man: 'Salvation Comes from Jesus, Not Self-Development'
Long-time Hong Kong pop star Vivian Chow Wai-Man released for the first time a touching letter witnessing her conversion experience from self-reliance to faith in Jesus Christ as her Lord and savior. As a token of appreciation to her fans and friends' support and love, she wishes that her witness would become a blessing to them.
As a celebrity in Hong Kong entertainment industry for over 25 years, Chow is well-liked and known, which means her testimony would be a powerful tool to help educate and persuade those in Hong Kong and Asia to get to know the love and mercy of God; her words "salvation comes from Jesus and not self-development" captures the essence of the gospel. She has been an active World Vision ambassador to the third world countries.
As a celebrity in Hong Kong entertainment industry for over 25 years, Chow is well-liked and known, which means her testimony would be a powerful tool to help educate and persuade those in Hong Kong and Asia to get to know the love and mercy of God; her words "salvation comes from Jesus and not self-development" captures the essence of the gospel. She has been an active World Vision ambassador to the third world countries.
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
CHC - E-mail with :) under the spotlight (Emoticon would not be sent if there was a conspiracy, says accused)
BY FENG ZENGKUN September 19, 2014
A smiley face emoticon which one accused e-mailed another came under the spotlight in the City Harvest Church trial yesterday.
Former church fund manager Chew Eng Han said the icon, which was sent to him by church finance manager Sharon Tan, showed that he and his alleged co-conspirators did not believe they were doing anything illegal.
"Sharon, you and I have been charged for conspiring to defraud the auditors," Chew told Tan, who turns 39 today.
"If we were really conspiring, would you put a smiley face (in the e-mail), unless you are a seasoned conspirator?"
Tan, who had inserted the icon at the end of a series of e-mail messages discussing what to tell church auditors about various church-financed investments, replied: "No."
Tan, Chew, church founder Kong Hee and three others face charges for their part in allegedly misusing some $50 million of church funds for the secular music career of Kong's wife, Ms Ho Yeow Sun, and then covering it up.
Chew, who is representing himself, yesterday used his chance to cross-examine Tan to refute the prosecution's allegation that his fund management firm AMAC Capital Partners was nothing more than a shell set up to funnel church funds illegally into Ms Ho's career.
AMAC had helped the church buy $13 million worth of bonds issued by Xtron, the company that managed Ms Ho's singing career. The bonds, allege the prosecution, were "sham".
In one e-mail, Chew instructed Tan to keep details of various AMAC investments financed by the church from auditors, since there was no legal obligation to disclose the information.
He told the court yesterday that he did so because "some of the loans that were made to shareholders of listed companies were sensitive information".
"We were not trying to make the job difficult for the auditor," he said.
He also pointed out how AMAC, through investments unrelated to Xtron, had also made "serious money" for the church, with one deal reaping $703,500.
Tan simply nodded or said yes to most of Chew's assertions, a stark contrast to her demeanour earlier in the day.
Having broken down on Wednesday as the day's hearing drew to a close, she was again in tears yesterday when describing her long relationship with the church, which she insisted precluded her from doing anything to harm the organisation.
She told the court how she had joined City Harvest when she was 15, then worked there for more than a decade and married a cell group leader. Now, her three children are members.
"This is my first and only church. Everything that is me right now I learnt from this church," she cried. "I never had the intention to cause any loss to the church. Never."
- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-story/chc-funds-case/story/e-mail-under-the-spotlight-20140919#sthash.OEkZAHTO.dpuf
A smiley face emoticon which one accused e-mailed another came under the spotlight in the City Harvest Church trial yesterday.
Former church fund manager Chew Eng Han said the icon, which was sent to him by church finance manager Sharon Tan, showed that he and his alleged co-conspirators did not believe they were doing anything illegal.
"Sharon, you and I have been charged for conspiring to defraud the auditors," Chew told Tan, who turns 39 today.
"If we were really conspiring, would you put a smiley face (in the e-mail), unless you are a seasoned conspirator?"
Tan, who had inserted the icon at the end of a series of e-mail messages discussing what to tell church auditors about various church-financed investments, replied: "No."
Tan, Chew, church founder Kong Hee and three others face charges for their part in allegedly misusing some $50 million of church funds for the secular music career of Kong's wife, Ms Ho Yeow Sun, and then covering it up.
Chew, who is representing himself, yesterday used his chance to cross-examine Tan to refute the prosecution's allegation that his fund management firm AMAC Capital Partners was nothing more than a shell set up to funnel church funds illegally into Ms Ho's career.
AMAC had helped the church buy $13 million worth of bonds issued by Xtron, the company that managed Ms Ho's singing career. The bonds, allege the prosecution, were "sham".
In one e-mail, Chew instructed Tan to keep details of various AMAC investments financed by the church from auditors, since there was no legal obligation to disclose the information.
He told the court yesterday that he did so because "some of the loans that were made to shareholders of listed companies were sensitive information".
"We were not trying to make the job difficult for the auditor," he said.
He also pointed out how AMAC, through investments unrelated to Xtron, had also made "serious money" for the church, with one deal reaping $703,500.
Tan simply nodded or said yes to most of Chew's assertions, a stark contrast to her demeanour earlier in the day.
Having broken down on Wednesday as the day's hearing drew to a close, she was again in tears yesterday when describing her long relationship with the church, which she insisted precluded her from doing anything to harm the organisation.
She told the court how she had joined City Harvest when she was 15, then worked there for more than a decade and married a cell group leader. Now, her three children are members.
"This is my first and only church. Everything that is me right now I learnt from this church," she cried. "I never had the intention to cause any loss to the church. Never."
- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-story/chc-funds-case/story/e-mail-under-the-spotlight-20140919#sthash.OEkZAHTO.dpuf
City Harvest trial: Finance manager concedes her action may have deceived auditors
BY IAN POH 26 September 2014
SINGAPORE - City Harvest Church finance manager Sharon Tan broke down on the stand on Friday, even as she conceded that information she had inserted into church board meeting minutes may have deceived auditors.
Choking up under cross-examination by Deputy Public Prosecutor Mavis Chionh, the 39-year-old said: "Your honour, it might be seen like they are being deceived, but... it wasn't my intention."
Tan had inserted information into the document, dated Sept 12, 2009, that the board had approved "advance rental" payments to music production firm Xtron of $7 million per year for eight years - part of a plan to purge bonds held in the firm from the church's books.
The court heard that the information was false, as no such approval was received from the board on that day.
Tan is one of six people, including founding pastor Kong Hee, accused of misusing $50 million of church funds to boost the music career of Kong's wife, Ms Ho Yeow Sun, and covering up the misuse. The prosecution believes that all of the accused, except Tan, channelled money from the church's building fund into sham bond investments in Xtron, which is Ms Ho's management company, and glass manufacturer Firna. Four of them, including Tan, then allegedly devised transactions to clear the sham bonds from CHC's accounts to throw auditors off the scent.
Friday's hearing has centred on the church's book-keeping, with Tan taking the stand for the tenth day. This is the third time she has broken down on the stand.
- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-story/chc-funds-case/story/city-harvest-trial-finance-manager-concedes-her-action-may-have-d#sthash.xgmnDDOF.dpuf
SINGAPORE - City Harvest Church finance manager Sharon Tan broke down on the stand on Friday, even as she conceded that information she had inserted into church board meeting minutes may have deceived auditors.
Choking up under cross-examination by Deputy Public Prosecutor Mavis Chionh, the 39-year-old said: "Your honour, it might be seen like they are being deceived, but... it wasn't my intention."
Tan had inserted information into the document, dated Sept 12, 2009, that the board had approved "advance rental" payments to music production firm Xtron of $7 million per year for eight years - part of a plan to purge bonds held in the firm from the church's books.
The court heard that the information was false, as no such approval was received from the board on that day.
Tan is one of six people, including founding pastor Kong Hee, accused of misusing $50 million of church funds to boost the music career of Kong's wife, Ms Ho Yeow Sun, and covering up the misuse. The prosecution believes that all of the accused, except Tan, channelled money from the church's building fund into sham bond investments in Xtron, which is Ms Ho's management company, and glass manufacturer Firna. Four of them, including Tan, then allegedly devised transactions to clear the sham bonds from CHC's accounts to throw auditors off the scent.
Friday's hearing has centred on the church's book-keeping, with Tan taking the stand for the tenth day. This is the third time she has broken down on the stand.
- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-story/chc-funds-case/story/city-harvest-trial-finance-manager-concedes-her-action-may-have-d#sthash.xgmnDDOF.dpuf
Friday, October 10, 2014
Beware of Superstar, Self-Appointed Church Personalities
BERT M. FARIAS
Are these popular ministerial personalities great in the sight of the Lord or only in the sight of man? Are they really known in heaven or only on the Earth? Are they God-anointed or self-appointed? Is it ministry they deliver or some subtle form of hype?
"Many who are great in the sight of the Lord are living in cottages and hovels, and are scarcely known, unless to a few neighbors equally obscure," said William Jay.
Believers, especially Christian ministers, need a baptism of clear seeing and holy discerning. Our ministry marketing budget may be soaring high, but our perception can sometimes be so low. Our motives need refinement. The refiner's fire is near the door. Will you open it? Can you see the narrow way to holiness? Or is all the smoke blocking your view?
Before me now I see the impression I saw months ago. There are two scenes. One is of a clear and sunny horizon lined with an endless row of people. The other is of a vast forest. Dense fog covers the forest, and out of the fog comes the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ, for the most part, is not found among the general populace. People have to really look to recognize Him.
Think about it. Our Savior was not born in a big metropolis, but in the small town of Bethlehem. And He grew up in the despised region of Galilee. He was not born in a palace where kings are, but in a lowly stable. The wise men had to really search and diligently follow the star to find Him. When Jesus entered into ministry, it is written that He had no place to lay His head (Luke 9:58). He did not have a ministry headquarters. He died a criminal's death on a cross, naked and nearly alone. His grave was a borrowed tomb. His throne was an invisible one hidden from the multitudes of those who were healed and delivered through His ministry. He was called meek and lowly; certainly not the description fitting for a king. But today, ministry is so different.
A church brings in a special speaker. He's known all over, so the people flock to hear him. They come from everywhere, every night. At the meetings they jump, sing and shout. They hear the newest revelation proclaimed with jubilation. The people are saying of the special speaker:
He's on TV,
I love his personality.
His ministry is so big,
His clothes I really dig.
He's so wonderful!
And his wife looks so smart,
Her latest hit song
Is at the top of the chart.
Oh, I love to hear him speak,
And I hate to see him go.
Maybe he'll stay another week,
Or speak again on his daily show.
The same church brings in a name unknown. The people stay away by the droves. A few faithful gather to hear the Word of God. They long for holiness and a vision of Jesus. With a broken heart, the little "no-name" preacher weeps for lost souls as he delivers a word from God.
The big personality was sent by man. The little "no-name" was sent by God. The crowds who came from miles away came to hear a man. The smaller group came seeking Jesus. One set of meetings produced much excitement but no fruit of holiness. The other smaller meetings generated far less excitement but resulted in a brokenness and a lasting work of holiness in those who came. This may seem like an extreme example, but it makes the point.
Just because someone or something is big doesn't mean it's godly (and it is also understood that bigness is not tantamount to ungodliness either). In fact, it's a greater test of our devotion to be big (whatever "big" means to us) and yet remain holy, than it is to be small (whatever "small" means to us) and holy. And let's not forget that smallness is not equivalent to godliness either. Discerning the difference between hype and holiness is what's important. But we are so often fooled by the "big" while being unaware and undiscerning of the "small."
Holiness is not only sought but bought: "Buy of Me gold tried in the fire that you may be rich" (Rev 3:17). Have you been tried in the fire? Have you tested your teachings? Have you experienced and even suffered for the truth you believe? Truth is to be bought, not sold. We sell the truth when we sell our souls to pleasure, profit and earthly popularity. We buy the truth when we are tried and found true, when we suffer with godly sorrow the pains of our personal Gethsemanes, and yet remain private about them. When we allow God to strip us of all glory-seeking and subtle pride, we are buying the truth.
Too many today are selling messages they never bought. When we minister forth from what we've personally experienced or suffered, the Spirit will produce a far greater effect of holiness in the hearers. The deeper the suffering is—or has been—usually the more perfect the obedience. The more fiery the trials, and the deeper the burning, the purer and richer the vessel becomes.
This is what we must understand: God's measuring gauge and standard of holiness is so different from man's. Bigness and smallness are terms not found in Christ. Here is the criterion for holiness: Is Christ made visible? Is He seen and heard? Is the ministration of Christ being imparted? Is His Word being made manifest? Are the people changed more into His likeness? Is it producing a spirit of holiness and an increase in the fruits of righteousness? Are they paying less credence to men and personalities and reverencing God?
The problem with today's generation is that we elevate the teachings of popular Christian teachers and we have a tendency to place greater value on them than the Scriptures. We elevate their charisma, their eloquence, their humor and wit, their style, and even their cuteness and good looks. We even sow our finances into the same.
Beware of hype. Beware of those who glory in appearance void of substance. Beware of emotional excitement that lacks depth. Beware of hypnotic smoke with no holy fire.
Hype fakes the happening while delaying true holiness. Hype is infinitely more dangerous than we can ever imagine, because it lies to us and tells us that something great is happening, when in fact, very little is going on.
Bert M. Farias, revivalist and founder of Holy Fire Ministries, is the author of several books, including the newly released My Son, My Son, which he co-wrote with his son Daniel for the purpose of training up a holy generation. He is also co-host of the New England Holy Ghost Forum, a school of the Spirit. Follow him at Bert Farias on Facebook or at @Bertfarias1 on Twitter.
Are these popular ministerial personalities great in the sight of the Lord or only in the sight of man? Are they really known in heaven or only on the Earth? Are they God-anointed or self-appointed? Is it ministry they deliver or some subtle form of hype?
"Many who are great in the sight of the Lord are living in cottages and hovels, and are scarcely known, unless to a few neighbors equally obscure," said William Jay.
Believers, especially Christian ministers, need a baptism of clear seeing and holy discerning. Our ministry marketing budget may be soaring high, but our perception can sometimes be so low. Our motives need refinement. The refiner's fire is near the door. Will you open it? Can you see the narrow way to holiness? Or is all the smoke blocking your view?
Before me now I see the impression I saw months ago. There are two scenes. One is of a clear and sunny horizon lined with an endless row of people. The other is of a vast forest. Dense fog covers the forest, and out of the fog comes the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ, for the most part, is not found among the general populace. People have to really look to recognize Him.
Think about it. Our Savior was not born in a big metropolis, but in the small town of Bethlehem. And He grew up in the despised region of Galilee. He was not born in a palace where kings are, but in a lowly stable. The wise men had to really search and diligently follow the star to find Him. When Jesus entered into ministry, it is written that He had no place to lay His head (Luke 9:58). He did not have a ministry headquarters. He died a criminal's death on a cross, naked and nearly alone. His grave was a borrowed tomb. His throne was an invisible one hidden from the multitudes of those who were healed and delivered through His ministry. He was called meek and lowly; certainly not the description fitting for a king. But today, ministry is so different.
A church brings in a special speaker. He's known all over, so the people flock to hear him. They come from everywhere, every night. At the meetings they jump, sing and shout. They hear the newest revelation proclaimed with jubilation. The people are saying of the special speaker:
He's on TV,
I love his personality.
His ministry is so big,
His clothes I really dig.
He's so wonderful!
And his wife looks so smart,
Her latest hit song
Is at the top of the chart.
Oh, I love to hear him speak,
And I hate to see him go.
Maybe he'll stay another week,
Or speak again on his daily show.
The same church brings in a name unknown. The people stay away by the droves. A few faithful gather to hear the Word of God. They long for holiness and a vision of Jesus. With a broken heart, the little "no-name" preacher weeps for lost souls as he delivers a word from God.
The big personality was sent by man. The little "no-name" was sent by God. The crowds who came from miles away came to hear a man. The smaller group came seeking Jesus. One set of meetings produced much excitement but no fruit of holiness. The other smaller meetings generated far less excitement but resulted in a brokenness and a lasting work of holiness in those who came. This may seem like an extreme example, but it makes the point.
Just because someone or something is big doesn't mean it's godly (and it is also understood that bigness is not tantamount to ungodliness either). In fact, it's a greater test of our devotion to be big (whatever "big" means to us) and yet remain holy, than it is to be small (whatever "small" means to us) and holy. And let's not forget that smallness is not equivalent to godliness either. Discerning the difference between hype and holiness is what's important. But we are so often fooled by the "big" while being unaware and undiscerning of the "small."
Holiness is not only sought but bought: "Buy of Me gold tried in the fire that you may be rich" (Rev 3:17). Have you been tried in the fire? Have you tested your teachings? Have you experienced and even suffered for the truth you believe? Truth is to be bought, not sold. We sell the truth when we sell our souls to pleasure, profit and earthly popularity. We buy the truth when we are tried and found true, when we suffer with godly sorrow the pains of our personal Gethsemanes, and yet remain private about them. When we allow God to strip us of all glory-seeking and subtle pride, we are buying the truth.
Too many today are selling messages they never bought. When we minister forth from what we've personally experienced or suffered, the Spirit will produce a far greater effect of holiness in the hearers. The deeper the suffering is—or has been—usually the more perfect the obedience. The more fiery the trials, and the deeper the burning, the purer and richer the vessel becomes.
This is what we must understand: God's measuring gauge and standard of holiness is so different from man's. Bigness and smallness are terms not found in Christ. Here is the criterion for holiness: Is Christ made visible? Is He seen and heard? Is the ministration of Christ being imparted? Is His Word being made manifest? Are the people changed more into His likeness? Is it producing a spirit of holiness and an increase in the fruits of righteousness? Are they paying less credence to men and personalities and reverencing God?
The problem with today's generation is that we elevate the teachings of popular Christian teachers and we have a tendency to place greater value on them than the Scriptures. We elevate their charisma, their eloquence, their humor and wit, their style, and even their cuteness and good looks. We even sow our finances into the same.
Beware of hype. Beware of those who glory in appearance void of substance. Beware of emotional excitement that lacks depth. Beware of hypnotic smoke with no holy fire.
Hype fakes the happening while delaying true holiness. Hype is infinitely more dangerous than we can ever imagine, because it lies to us and tells us that something great is happening, when in fact, very little is going on.
Bert M. Farias, revivalist and founder of Holy Fire Ministries, is the author of several books, including the newly released My Son, My Son, which he co-wrote with his son Daniel for the purpose of training up a holy generation. He is also co-host of the New England Holy Ghost Forum, a school of the Spirit. Follow him at Bert Farias on Facebook or at @Bertfarias1 on Twitter.
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
City Harvest Saga continues. Analysis into the wealth of City Harvest Church (part 2)
by Think free and fair
It has been two years since I wrote an analysis on the wealth of City Harvest Church (CHC). This week, news broke out that the Pastor has been arrested over alleged misuse of church funds. It is really amazing that the most fervent defenders of the Pastor are the very victims whom he was alleged to have abused - the stakeholders of City Harvest Church. A business with such loyal following among its stakeholders can easily survive adversities. From this single characteristics springs forth strengths that I shall outline in the subsequent paragraphs. Again, please read this article as a business analysis and not an insinuation that CHC is acquiring wealth through questionable means. I apologize upfront if some readers are still offended.
My observation of events that followed after the arrest has reaffirmed my belief on the wonderful business characteristics of CHC. In addition to the 14 points raised in my first article, I have more to add here;
15. Extremely forgiving customers who will keep coming back for more no matter what
CHC members have taken plenty of battering from the public this week. The moment a person reveals he is from City Harvest Church, people will look upon him like a brain-washed idiot who is unable to see the obvious "truth" (verdict is not out yet, so nobody knows the truth. Wait for Pastor to tell his side of the story first). The mere association with CHC brings embarrassment.
When a business has such a firm grip on its customers that they refuse to go away despite suffering lots of abuse, this business is on solid ground.
Any business(even reputable ones) that has been in existence long enough will eventually make a big screw-up or even get indicted in scandalous frauds. However, if that business has loyal and forgiving customers like CHC's, it can be assured that its customers will probably keep coming back. It is very hard to erode its customer base as they can take a lot of beating before saying goodbye. Such a business is certainly built-to-last.
16. Very easy to raise money from loyal and trusting shareholders
CHC has a special characteristic in that the customers are also the shareholders because CHC raises funds from its church members.
In my first article, I concluded that if CHC were listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange, I will surely buy it. With the benefit of hindsight, some netizens sneered at this conclusion. They said that I would have lost lots of money this week if CHC were listed as a stock. If CHC were an average business, I would certainly have lost my pants. Most stocks would have crashed on allegations that the Founder has defrauded its shareholders. Shareholders will sell first and ask questions later. Not CHC. Its loyal and trusting shareholders will probably buy on the dips/crashes and no need to ask questions at all. Their faith alone in the company is enough.
With such loyal shareholders, it is very easy for a company to raise new funds for future expansion. It can set up building funds to buy new buildings to house its ever-rising membership. In fact, this was exactly what CHC did 2 years ago when it bought Suntec City.
17. Highly motivated and loyal employees who will work for little money with great passion
City Harvest Church has a unique stakeholder characteristic. The extremely loyal customers and shareholders as mentioned above are also the same group of people who are the employees. Therefore, it naturally follows that CHC has a very loyal team of employees.
HR departments like to say our greatest assets lie in our human resource. Nothing can be more true when this is applied to CHC. Some CHC members (or employees) work as volunteers for little or no money but carry on their work with great passion and sacrificial spirit. Internet stories abound on how much personal time some members devote to church activities. It is a compliment to CHC members on their self-sacrificial spirit in volunteering their free-time for church work (provided they do not neglect their earthly family duties).
These dedicated volunteers are not paid a salary but perform essential operations for the church. This results in tremendous cost savings for operating the company. The company does not need to pay for this voluntary workforce and yet enjoy amazingly high staff morale. I challenge readers to find me another company in the world with such an amazing workforce. Where can you find a passionate voluntary workforce who not only are not paid a salary but actually are encouraged to pay until tears stream down their cheeks in order to have the privilege to work for the company? Little or no salary, high staff morale, work with passion and dedicaion, even pay to work ... WOW!!
The heavy commitment and sacrifice put in by the employees serves yet another advantage to CHC. The more time and money and sacrifice a person puts into an endeavor, the harder it is to let go when the turn of events suggest that he may be wrong. Once he has invested too much, it becomes very hard to "cut loss". A person faced in such a situation may resort to self-denial as a form of psychological defense mechanism to protect himself from facing the pain of meeting reality head-on. It is this defense mechanism which plays an important role in strengthening employee loyalty to the company in crisis times.
CHC enjoys another advantage with the employee pool. In 2010, 47.3% of its members are below the age of 25 and the majority are young professionals aged 25 to 35. The young workforce injects awesome energy and dynamism into the business at little or no cost because they are mostly volunteers.
Having a young membership works towards enhancing corporate loyalty for a church business. When it comes to transmitting a set of beliefs, it is preferable to start with the young as it is easier to shape and mould young minds. Some friends have jokingly suggested starting an Internet church preaching prosperity gospel to get rich (let's ignore the morals of such an enterprise for the sake of discussion).It will not work. To have a firmer grip on the minds of its stakeholders, the church should ensure that members' lives revolve around the church. The more social interaction, the more time/effort put in, the lesser exposure to outside influences from other churches (or even disapproving parents), the tighter will be the bonds. Left alone in front of the computer, people are more discerning and analytical without social pressures from the crowd. Just a few simple searches on Youtube turns out videos highly critical of Prosperity Gospel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymBzhmaou7U&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82owdNdAy58&feature=related
Full-time CHC employees are loyal for a good reason. They are very well rewarded financially. Although CHC is registered as a charity, in the 2008 financial statement, CHC distributed $2.9m out to charity and spent 3.2 times more ($9.29m) on its own employees. This will motivate its volunteer workforce to work hard to get a chance to join its full-time staff.
To sum up, with the extremely loyal team of employees, shareholders and customers, CHC as a business is unbeatable.
18. Need not incur any expense to deliver on customer promises
This business characteristic distinguishes City Harvest from all other businesses I have encountered. If a customer entrusts huge sums of money to a bank which promises 30-fold, 60-fold, 100-fold returns and the bank does not return a single cent, the customer can sue for fraud. If a Prosperity Gospel church makes similar promises and fails to deliver, the customer will have to die first and find out the truth on Judgment day. In the mean time, the Church can cite the Bible story of Job and tell its followers to be patient. Better still, a sharp businessman can turn adversity into opportunity by telling its followers the reason they are not prosperous is that they have not given enough to the Church. Did you give until your heart breaks? Did you give until tears stream down your cheeks? If not, do not expect God to repay you with prosperity in Harvest proportions.
The CHC business is able to collect revenue on a service offering that does not require expenses to be incurred in its development. Even better, if delivery quality falters, tell the customer it is his fault because he did not pay enough. The customer has no way to verify on this claim. He probably will pay more eventually. What can be more wonderful for a business than that?
PS: Throughout history, religious organizations have a strong controlling power over their followers because they can make claims that cannot be proven (obey me and you shall go to Heaven), promises that need not be delivered (give me and you shall be prosperous) and threats that cannot be verified (defy me and you shall go to Hell). Under such uncertainty, even intelligent people lose their critical faculty to discern out of fear and greed. Christian crusaders were told they will go to heaven if they die in war. Same goes for the Muslim terrorists. More than a thousand years ago, the Roman Catholic Church claimed it could forgive sins on behalf of God so that rich donors can enter the Kingdom of God if they donate enough money to the Church. Behind every great fortune probably lies a great sin, this was great business.
Who knows for sure if they are right? There is no way to know until Judgment day. What we can be sure is that the interpretations of the holy book certainly suits right for those manipulative and self-serving religious leaders (who are exceptions rather than the rule). I believe religions are good with the best of intentions for their followers. Having a religion has its advantages but be mindful of manipulation by people who use religion as a tool to advance their own interest. I have no doubt these people truly believe in their own message, otherwise they could not have been so convincing. Intelligent and even kind people have a way of inventing reasons to convince themselves to justify means that benefit themselves at the expense of others. All of us are guilty of this sin to some extent, including myself.
We are blessed by God with a brain to think for ourselves. European civilization was held back by their religious leaders because they let the religious leaders do the thinking for them for the benefit of the few at the expense of the rest. Try to think freely but fairly for yourself. We can interpret the Bible our own way if we feel uncomfortable with that of our religious leaders. Why should I donate 10% of my income if what is left is insufficient for my parents and personal savings? Instead of 10% of my revenue (salary), would it be better if it were 10% of free cashflow (salary - necessary expenses for my earthly obligations and survival)? In all fairness, family obligations have to come before the church. It is not fair to our parents if we give more money to the Church than them.
I cannot agree with the Prosperity Gospel. It insults my concept of a loving God. If a God who claims to love me rewards me only after I have to give until my heart is broken, then He is lesser than my parents who has been giving to me starting from the moment I was born even before I knew how to give at all.
AN ANALYSIS INTO THE WEALTH OF CITY HARVEST CHURCH (part 1)
It has been two years since I wrote an analysis on the wealth of City Harvest Church (CHC). This week, news broke out that the Pastor has been arrested over alleged misuse of church funds. It is really amazing that the most fervent defenders of the Pastor are the very victims whom he was alleged to have abused - the stakeholders of City Harvest Church. A business with such loyal following among its stakeholders can easily survive adversities. From this single characteristics springs forth strengths that I shall outline in the subsequent paragraphs. Again, please read this article as a business analysis and not an insinuation that CHC is acquiring wealth through questionable means. I apologize upfront if some readers are still offended.
My observation of events that followed after the arrest has reaffirmed my belief on the wonderful business characteristics of CHC. In addition to the 14 points raised in my first article, I have more to add here;
15. Extremely forgiving customers who will keep coming back for more no matter what
CHC members have taken plenty of battering from the public this week. The moment a person reveals he is from City Harvest Church, people will look upon him like a brain-washed idiot who is unable to see the obvious "truth" (verdict is not out yet, so nobody knows the truth. Wait for Pastor to tell his side of the story first). The mere association with CHC brings embarrassment.
When a business has such a firm grip on its customers that they refuse to go away despite suffering lots of abuse, this business is on solid ground.
Any business(even reputable ones) that has been in existence long enough will eventually make a big screw-up or even get indicted in scandalous frauds. However, if that business has loyal and forgiving customers like CHC's, it can be assured that its customers will probably keep coming back. It is very hard to erode its customer base as they can take a lot of beating before saying goodbye. Such a business is certainly built-to-last.
16. Very easy to raise money from loyal and trusting shareholders
CHC has a special characteristic in that the customers are also the shareholders because CHC raises funds from its church members.
In my first article, I concluded that if CHC were listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange, I will surely buy it. With the benefit of hindsight, some netizens sneered at this conclusion. They said that I would have lost lots of money this week if CHC were listed as a stock. If CHC were an average business, I would certainly have lost my pants. Most stocks would have crashed on allegations that the Founder has defrauded its shareholders. Shareholders will sell first and ask questions later. Not CHC. Its loyal and trusting shareholders will probably buy on the dips/crashes and no need to ask questions at all. Their faith alone in the company is enough.
With such loyal shareholders, it is very easy for a company to raise new funds for future expansion. It can set up building funds to buy new buildings to house its ever-rising membership. In fact, this was exactly what CHC did 2 years ago when it bought Suntec City.
17. Highly motivated and loyal employees who will work for little money with great passion
City Harvest Church has a unique stakeholder characteristic. The extremely loyal customers and shareholders as mentioned above are also the same group of people who are the employees. Therefore, it naturally follows that CHC has a very loyal team of employees.
HR departments like to say our greatest assets lie in our human resource. Nothing can be more true when this is applied to CHC. Some CHC members (or employees) work as volunteers for little or no money but carry on their work with great passion and sacrificial spirit. Internet stories abound on how much personal time some members devote to church activities. It is a compliment to CHC members on their self-sacrificial spirit in volunteering their free-time for church work (provided they do not neglect their earthly family duties).
These dedicated volunteers are not paid a salary but perform essential operations for the church. This results in tremendous cost savings for operating the company. The company does not need to pay for this voluntary workforce and yet enjoy amazingly high staff morale. I challenge readers to find me another company in the world with such an amazing workforce. Where can you find a passionate voluntary workforce who not only are not paid a salary but actually are encouraged to pay until tears stream down their cheeks in order to have the privilege to work for the company? Little or no salary, high staff morale, work with passion and dedicaion, even pay to work ... WOW!!
The heavy commitment and sacrifice put in by the employees serves yet another advantage to CHC. The more time and money and sacrifice a person puts into an endeavor, the harder it is to let go when the turn of events suggest that he may be wrong. Once he has invested too much, it becomes very hard to "cut loss". A person faced in such a situation may resort to self-denial as a form of psychological defense mechanism to protect himself from facing the pain of meeting reality head-on. It is this defense mechanism which plays an important role in strengthening employee loyalty to the company in crisis times.
CHC enjoys another advantage with the employee pool. In 2010, 47.3% of its members are below the age of 25 and the majority are young professionals aged 25 to 35. The young workforce injects awesome energy and dynamism into the business at little or no cost because they are mostly volunteers.
Having a young membership works towards enhancing corporate loyalty for a church business. When it comes to transmitting a set of beliefs, it is preferable to start with the young as it is easier to shape and mould young minds. Some friends have jokingly suggested starting an Internet church preaching prosperity gospel to get rich (let's ignore the morals of such an enterprise for the sake of discussion).It will not work. To have a firmer grip on the minds of its stakeholders, the church should ensure that members' lives revolve around the church. The more social interaction, the more time/effort put in, the lesser exposure to outside influences from other churches (or even disapproving parents), the tighter will be the bonds. Left alone in front of the computer, people are more discerning and analytical without social pressures from the crowd. Just a few simple searches on Youtube turns out videos highly critical of Prosperity Gospel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymBzhmaou7U&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82owdNdAy58&feature=related
Full-time CHC employees are loyal for a good reason. They are very well rewarded financially. Although CHC is registered as a charity, in the 2008 financial statement, CHC distributed $2.9m out to charity and spent 3.2 times more ($9.29m) on its own employees. This will motivate its volunteer workforce to work hard to get a chance to join its full-time staff.
To sum up, with the extremely loyal team of employees, shareholders and customers, CHC as a business is unbeatable.
18. Need not incur any expense to deliver on customer promises
This business characteristic distinguishes City Harvest from all other businesses I have encountered. If a customer entrusts huge sums of money to a bank which promises 30-fold, 60-fold, 100-fold returns and the bank does not return a single cent, the customer can sue for fraud. If a Prosperity Gospel church makes similar promises and fails to deliver, the customer will have to die first and find out the truth on Judgment day. In the mean time, the Church can cite the Bible story of Job and tell its followers to be patient. Better still, a sharp businessman can turn adversity into opportunity by telling its followers the reason they are not prosperous is that they have not given enough to the Church. Did you give until your heart breaks? Did you give until tears stream down your cheeks? If not, do not expect God to repay you with prosperity in Harvest proportions.
The CHC business is able to collect revenue on a service offering that does not require expenses to be incurred in its development. Even better, if delivery quality falters, tell the customer it is his fault because he did not pay enough. The customer has no way to verify on this claim. He probably will pay more eventually. What can be more wonderful for a business than that?
PS: Throughout history, religious organizations have a strong controlling power over their followers because they can make claims that cannot be proven (obey me and you shall go to Heaven), promises that need not be delivered (give me and you shall be prosperous) and threats that cannot be verified (defy me and you shall go to Hell). Under such uncertainty, even intelligent people lose their critical faculty to discern out of fear and greed. Christian crusaders were told they will go to heaven if they die in war. Same goes for the Muslim terrorists. More than a thousand years ago, the Roman Catholic Church claimed it could forgive sins on behalf of God so that rich donors can enter the Kingdom of God if they donate enough money to the Church. Behind every great fortune probably lies a great sin, this was great business.
Who knows for sure if they are right? There is no way to know until Judgment day. What we can be sure is that the interpretations of the holy book certainly suits right for those manipulative and self-serving religious leaders (who are exceptions rather than the rule). I believe religions are good with the best of intentions for their followers. Having a religion has its advantages but be mindful of manipulation by people who use religion as a tool to advance their own interest. I have no doubt these people truly believe in their own message, otherwise they could not have been so convincing. Intelligent and even kind people have a way of inventing reasons to convince themselves to justify means that benefit themselves at the expense of others. All of us are guilty of this sin to some extent, including myself.
We are blessed by God with a brain to think for ourselves. European civilization was held back by their religious leaders because they let the religious leaders do the thinking for them for the benefit of the few at the expense of the rest. Try to think freely but fairly for yourself. We can interpret the Bible our own way if we feel uncomfortable with that of our religious leaders. Why should I donate 10% of my income if what is left is insufficient for my parents and personal savings? Instead of 10% of my revenue (salary), would it be better if it were 10% of free cashflow (salary - necessary expenses for my earthly obligations and survival)? In all fairness, family obligations have to come before the church. It is not fair to our parents if we give more money to the Church than them.
I cannot agree with the Prosperity Gospel. It insults my concept of a loving God. If a God who claims to love me rewards me only after I have to give until my heart is broken, then He is lesser than my parents who has been giving to me starting from the moment I was born even before I knew how to give at all.
AN ANALYSIS INTO THE WEALTH OF CITY HARVEST CHURCH (part 1)
Friday, August 22, 2014
CHC Trial - Kong decided on 'what money to spend, how much and where it would come from'
BY FENG ZENGKUN
SINGAPORE - City Harvest founder Kong Hee was the key decision-maker behind plans to sink church funds into his wife's Ho Yeow Sun's music career in the United States, the prosecution said in court on Wednesday.
They also sought to show that Kong closely supervised the other co-defendants. Deputy Public Prosecutor Christopher Ong produced a 2007 e-mail in which Kong had berated Tan Ye Peng for failing to ensure that his wife's China concerts were a success.
"The Beijing and Shanghai events cost us so much money... but at the end, who came? It was a joke!" said Kong in the e-mail. "Time wasted. Efforts wasted. Objectives not met. Money thrown away unnecessarily. I don't get it. How have we become good stewards of money? We tried to save a few thousands on hotels and (threw) hundreds and thousands on result-less concerts."
Kong added: "How I wish I can run the whole show the way I run our church (in) the last 18 years! But I can't... (My wife and I) are putting our lives and destiny at the hands of our disciples, our spiritual children. We hope you guys don't let us down."
While Kong has maintained that he was involved only in the budgeting for the US foray and left the fundraising to others, the prosecution alleged that Kong made decisions about "what money to spend, how much and where it would come from". The prosecution produced statements made by Kong's co-defendants to the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) to bolster the point.
Kong and five others face various charges for their part in the alleged misuse of some $50 million of church funds to boost Ms Ho's music career, and then to cover up the deed. Several of them allegedly got the funds out of City Harvest coffers by investing the money in sham bonds issued by two companies, Xtron Productions and Firna, which were run by church members. Xtron was Ms Ho's artist manager at one time.
While Kong maintained that Xtron directors had to give approval for company transactions to finance her career, statements made by Kong's co-defendants Serina Wee, Chew Eng Han and Tan to the CAD contradicted this, said the prosecution.
According to the three defendants, Xtron directors were "updated" only after Tan, Wee and Kong had made the decisions. "Xtron directors were not actively involved," said Chew in his statement. "Technically they can challenge (the decisions), but they would not because they are doing the right thing by giving their full support," he said.
Kong disagreed. He said that Xtron directors being "updated" meant their approval for the transactions were sought, and in the end it was the directors who had final say over whether the deals were made.
- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/story/kong-decided-what-money-spend-how-much-and-where-it-would-come-201#sthash.Ltek2Eb1.dpuf
SINGAPORE - City Harvest founder Kong Hee was the key decision-maker behind plans to sink church funds into his wife's Ho Yeow Sun's music career in the United States, the prosecution said in court on Wednesday.
They also sought to show that Kong closely supervised the other co-defendants. Deputy Public Prosecutor Christopher Ong produced a 2007 e-mail in which Kong had berated Tan Ye Peng for failing to ensure that his wife's China concerts were a success.
"The Beijing and Shanghai events cost us so much money... but at the end, who came? It was a joke!" said Kong in the e-mail. "Time wasted. Efforts wasted. Objectives not met. Money thrown away unnecessarily. I don't get it. How have we become good stewards of money? We tried to save a few thousands on hotels and (threw) hundreds and thousands on result-less concerts."
Kong added: "How I wish I can run the whole show the way I run our church (in) the last 18 years! But I can't... (My wife and I) are putting our lives and destiny at the hands of our disciples, our spiritual children. We hope you guys don't let us down."
While Kong has maintained that he was involved only in the budgeting for the US foray and left the fundraising to others, the prosecution alleged that Kong made decisions about "what money to spend, how much and where it would come from". The prosecution produced statements made by Kong's co-defendants to the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) to bolster the point.
Kong and five others face various charges for their part in the alleged misuse of some $50 million of church funds to boost Ms Ho's music career, and then to cover up the deed. Several of them allegedly got the funds out of City Harvest coffers by investing the money in sham bonds issued by two companies, Xtron Productions and Firna, which were run by church members. Xtron was Ms Ho's artist manager at one time.
While Kong maintained that Xtron directors had to give approval for company transactions to finance her career, statements made by Kong's co-defendants Serina Wee, Chew Eng Han and Tan to the CAD contradicted this, said the prosecution.
According to the three defendants, Xtron directors were "updated" only after Tan, Wee and Kong had made the decisions. "Xtron directors were not actively involved," said Chew in his statement. "Technically they can challenge (the decisions), but they would not because they are doing the right thing by giving their full support," he said.
Kong disagreed. He said that Xtron directors being "updated" meant their approval for the transactions were sought, and in the end it was the directors who had final say over whether the deals were made.
- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/story/kong-decided-what-money-spend-how-much-and-where-it-would-come-201#sthash.Ltek2Eb1.dpuf
Thursday, August 21, 2014
Summary for Kong Hee's testimony on 20 Aug 2014
CHC Confession
DPP produced emails that showed Serina Wee approaching Kong Hee and Tan Ye Peng to find ways to increase sales for Xtron.
One email also showed Kong Hee gave approval.
Kong Hee argued that all Xtron's billings to CHC were legit and commercially viable.
One particular mark-up of $630,000 was necessary as Xtron ran out of money at that time.
Kong Hee agreed that the mark-up of $630,000 caused a loss for CHC... but Kong Hee argued that it actually benefitted CHC to the effect that a financially strong Xtron would be able to fulfill the crossover mandate that CHC could not achieve on its own.
DPP put it to Kong Hee that he had control on income transfers from CHC to Xtron and transfers of expenses from Xtron to CHC, and that Kong Hee was involved in getting the financing for the crossover project.
DPP put it to Kong Hee that in fact he was the ultimate authority in ensuring the crossover project was being financed.
DPP insisted that Kong Hee had to do with the dealings of the alleged sham bonds.
DPP also produced an email that showed Kong Hee telling Tan Ye Peng and Chew Eng Han to find ways to get funds for Sun Ho.
Kong insisted that the ultimate decision makers for the alleged sham bonds are CHC Board of Directors and Xtron's directors.
DPP asked Kong Hee if he had told Tan Ye Peng and Chew Eng Han to look only for bank loans for Xtron and nothing else, would they still have gone ahead to do the bonds?
Kong Hee said "Chew Eng Han is a very persuasive man and is a very tenacious man. He may come back to me a few weeks later and suggest it again..."
Kong Hee further said that he had told Tan Ye Peng and Chew Eng Han to check and to clear the bonds with the lawyers and auditors.
DPP put it to Kong Hee that he was lying when he said he was not involved in the financing because he wanted to distance himself from the bond transactions which he knew to be sham and solely motivated by a desire to channel the Building Fund under the guise of investments to the crossover project.
Kong Hee replied he is a pastor not a financial person and therefore he did not make decision for the alleged sham bonds but he left it to CHC Board of Directors and Xtron's directors to make the decision on the bonds.
DPP continued to show emails that Kong had ultimate control of Xtron's cash flow.
The emails showed that Serina Wee always kept Kong Hee updated on Xtron's cash flow and Serina Wee also sought Kong Hee's instructions when Xtron's cash flow was running low.
Kong maintained again that it was CHC Board of Directors that approved all the decisions pertaining to the alleged sham bonds. Kong Hee maintained that Serina Wee was merely asking him for his opinion.
(Note: Kong Hee terminated negotiations with Wyclef without asking Xtron's directors and this conflicted with his stand that he only acts on Xtron directors' approval)
DPP went on to show evidence that before 2003, CHC was using church funds to pay for Sun Ho's singing career via Attributes Pte Ltd (APL).
DPP went on to show minutes of AGM on 27 Jun 2003, after the Roland Poon incident.
In the minutes, Kong Hee told the Executive Members (EM) that not a single cent of church fund was used for Sun Ho's singing career.
DPP asked Kong if this is accurate.
Kong Hee replied that Brother Foong Daw Ching told him that no church fund was used, so Kong Hee told the EMs that no church fund was used as he respects Brother Foong Daw Ching.
DPP asks again if this is accurate that not a single cent of church fund was used.
Kong Hee said that in his simplistic mind, he followed Foong Daw Ching's advice. On hind sight, Kong Hee felt he should have checked with other people rather than to just believe in what Foong Daw Ching said.
DPP asked how did Hanafi's refund come back to cover crossover's deficit.
Kong Hee told the court that Hanafi had promised to underwrite the crossover and when the Roland Poon incident broke, the board approached Hanafi Wahju to cover the amount APL paid for Sun Ho via a refund of the building fund that Hanafi contributed.
DPP then showed a document that John Lam gave a different story.
John Lam told CAD officers that Hanafi gave wrongly to the building fund thinking that it also covered crossover. John Lam said that the Building Fund gave a refund to Hanafi so that he could re-direct the donation to the crossover.
DPP then asked Kong which is the correct version.
Kong Hee replied that John Lam's testimony should be the correct one..
DPP asked again if it was accurate to say not a single cent of church fund was used.
Kong Hee replied that he was simple minded to believe Foong Daw Ching and he should have checked with others on this.
Kong Hee also said he didn't know that there was a refund from Building Fund to Hanafi Wahju. Kong said he thought it was fresh new funds.
Only later then Kong Hee knew it was a refund of Hanafi Wahju's donation to the Building Fund.
DPP put it to Kong Hee that contrary to his evidence suggesting that he was not so clear about Wahju's reallocation of his Building Fund to the crossover in 2003, Kong Hee was actually the one who wanted the reallocation to the crossover so that he would be able to tell the church that no church funds had been used.
Kong disagreed and maintained that he was just reiterating what Brother Foong Daw Ching had told him.
To be continued....
DPP produced emails that showed Serina Wee approaching Kong Hee and Tan Ye Peng to find ways to increase sales for Xtron.
One email also showed Kong Hee gave approval.
Kong Hee argued that all Xtron's billings to CHC were legit and commercially viable.
One particular mark-up of $630,000 was necessary as Xtron ran out of money at that time.
Kong Hee agreed that the mark-up of $630,000 caused a loss for CHC... but Kong Hee argued that it actually benefitted CHC to the effect that a financially strong Xtron would be able to fulfill the crossover mandate that CHC could not achieve on its own.
DPP put it to Kong Hee that he had control on income transfers from CHC to Xtron and transfers of expenses from Xtron to CHC, and that Kong Hee was involved in getting the financing for the crossover project.
DPP put it to Kong Hee that in fact he was the ultimate authority in ensuring the crossover project was being financed.
DPP insisted that Kong Hee had to do with the dealings of the alleged sham bonds.
DPP also produced an email that showed Kong Hee telling Tan Ye Peng and Chew Eng Han to find ways to get funds for Sun Ho.
Kong insisted that the ultimate decision makers for the alleged sham bonds are CHC Board of Directors and Xtron's directors.
DPP asked Kong Hee if he had told Tan Ye Peng and Chew Eng Han to look only for bank loans for Xtron and nothing else, would they still have gone ahead to do the bonds?
Kong Hee said "Chew Eng Han is a very persuasive man and is a very tenacious man. He may come back to me a few weeks later and suggest it again..."
Kong Hee further said that he had told Tan Ye Peng and Chew Eng Han to check and to clear the bonds with the lawyers and auditors.
DPP put it to Kong Hee that he was lying when he said he was not involved in the financing because he wanted to distance himself from the bond transactions which he knew to be sham and solely motivated by a desire to channel the Building Fund under the guise of investments to the crossover project.
Kong Hee replied he is a pastor not a financial person and therefore he did not make decision for the alleged sham bonds but he left it to CHC Board of Directors and Xtron's directors to make the decision on the bonds.
DPP continued to show emails that Kong had ultimate control of Xtron's cash flow.
The emails showed that Serina Wee always kept Kong Hee updated on Xtron's cash flow and Serina Wee also sought Kong Hee's instructions when Xtron's cash flow was running low.
Kong maintained again that it was CHC Board of Directors that approved all the decisions pertaining to the alleged sham bonds. Kong Hee maintained that Serina Wee was merely asking him for his opinion.
(Note: Kong Hee terminated negotiations with Wyclef without asking Xtron's directors and this conflicted with his stand that he only acts on Xtron directors' approval)
DPP went on to show evidence that before 2003, CHC was using church funds to pay for Sun Ho's singing career via Attributes Pte Ltd (APL).
DPP went on to show minutes of AGM on 27 Jun 2003, after the Roland Poon incident.
In the minutes, Kong Hee told the Executive Members (EM) that not a single cent of church fund was used for Sun Ho's singing career.
DPP asked Kong if this is accurate.
Kong Hee replied that Brother Foong Daw Ching told him that no church fund was used, so Kong Hee told the EMs that no church fund was used as he respects Brother Foong Daw Ching.
DPP asks again if this is accurate that not a single cent of church fund was used.
Kong Hee said that in his simplistic mind, he followed Foong Daw Ching's advice. On hind sight, Kong Hee felt he should have checked with other people rather than to just believe in what Foong Daw Ching said.
DPP asked how did Hanafi's refund come back to cover crossover's deficit.
Kong Hee told the court that Hanafi had promised to underwrite the crossover and when the Roland Poon incident broke, the board approached Hanafi Wahju to cover the amount APL paid for Sun Ho via a refund of the building fund that Hanafi contributed.
DPP then showed a document that John Lam gave a different story.
John Lam told CAD officers that Hanafi gave wrongly to the building fund thinking that it also covered crossover. John Lam said that the Building Fund gave a refund to Hanafi so that he could re-direct the donation to the crossover.
DPP then asked Kong which is the correct version.
Kong Hee replied that John Lam's testimony should be the correct one..
DPP asked again if it was accurate to say not a single cent of church fund was used.
Kong Hee replied that he was simple minded to believe Foong Daw Ching and he should have checked with others on this.
Kong Hee also said he didn't know that there was a refund from Building Fund to Hanafi Wahju. Kong said he thought it was fresh new funds.
Only later then Kong Hee knew it was a refund of Hanafi Wahju's donation to the Building Fund.
DPP put it to Kong Hee that contrary to his evidence suggesting that he was not so clear about Wahju's reallocation of his Building Fund to the crossover in 2003, Kong Hee was actually the one who wanted the reallocation to the crossover so that he would be able to tell the church that no church funds had been used.
Kong disagreed and maintained that he was just reiterating what Brother Foong Daw Ching had told him.
To be continued....
CITY HARVEST CHURCH trial – Sun Ho was pissed off by online bloggers
TR EMERITUS
Dear TRE,
For some reason the ST is under-reporting the CHC trial. Many key and interesting details are not revealed. Most of the details are found here : https://www.facebook.com/CHCConfessions?fref=ts
The most sensational day was yesterday and here’s the posting:
Summary for Kong Hee’s testimony on 18 Aug 2014
Mr Chew Eng Han (CEH) spent considerable time to query Kong Hee on the Irregularities surrounding the Multi-Purpose Account (MPA).
The unsuspecting donors to the MPA were 28 couples and a few individuals handpicked from the inner circle.
The donations were meant for evangelism through Sun’s concerts in Asia.
(Note : Our understanding is that the… donors’ list to MPA was later expanded to include 50 pastoral staff and other staff. They were told to tithe to a Man of God instead of the church or Building Fund)
CEH confronted Kong Hee and said he felt cheated by Kong Hee as Kong Hee presented a fake account on MPA in 2009.
CEH alleged that Kong Hee lied to the donors and proclaimed a lower figure collected than the actual amount donated.
CEH alleged that Kong Hee lied so that he could claim that the donations were not enough as Kong Hee urged the donors to give more.
Kong Hee countered that the amount he presented in 2009 was after paying Sun Ho $400,000 for royalties and salaries.
(In 2009, the average collection in MPA was $1.5mil-2mil.)
Kong Hee chided CEH that only CEH and his wife made an issue whereas other donors did not say they were disappointed.
Kong Hee further said it is CHC culture not to reveal details.
Kong insisted that MPA is meant not just for the purported crossover but also to cater for Kong Hee’s and Sun Ho’s livelihood.
Kong Hee also countered that MPA donors were the initiators on the donations and they were all willing donors.
CEH went on to show an email that CHC bought $1 million worth of Kong Hee’s products.
Kong Hee insisted that it was the board’s decision.
CEH went on to show evidence that Serina Wee used Hanafi’s company, (FIRNA) account to refund Kong and CEH sought to prove Kong engineered these financial transactions.
Kong insisted it was Wahju’s own initiative that he wanted to bless Kong Hee.
CEH said this is clearly another round-tripping which used CHC funds to purchase FIRNA bonds so as to channel funds to Kong Hee’s personal bank account.
Kong disagreed and said it was Wahju’s own initiative.
CEH then said the bonds are clean and it was what Kong Hee did with the money that made the bonds sham.
CEH wanted to show Kong Hee preached hard to get the money to pay for the penthouse at Sentosa Cove.
Kong Hee sought to show that he preached a lot on soliciting donations due to his love for mission work to reach out to the unsaved.
CEH rebutted that and said it was for Sentosa Cove and the evidence was in a 4.5hr recording.
CEH alleged that Kong Hee mentioned in the recording that he preached like “siao” because he needed to meet payments for the penthouse at Sentosa Cove.
(CEH wanted to use a 4.5 hour recording but the Judge stopped it as Edwin Tong and Tan Ye Peng’s lawyer objected to it repeatedly.)
CEH showed evidence that Serina Wee had Hanafi’s (FIRNA) bank account and Kong Hee had control on how to channel monies to Kong Hee’s personal bank account via FIRNA’s bank account.
Kong Hee denied and said he did not know how Serina Wee had access to Wahju’s company bank account.
But the email evidence showed Serina asking permission regarding some funds transfer via FIRNA to Kong Hee’s personal bank account.
Kong maintained that he was not sure why Serina Wee would have such access to Wajhu’s company’s bank account.
Edwin Tong objected as CEH moved on to show evidence that CHC KL was also used by Kong Hee for round tripping.
Kong insisted the refund via CHC KL was an independent action of CHC KL’s board.
CEH went on to talk about a confession letter where Jimmy Yim (the previous lawyer) wanted Kong Hee to take the rap.
Kong said he wanted to take the rap but didn’t in the end.
CEH insisted Kong Hee never had the intention to take the rap.
CEH also asked Kong Hee to present the confession letter.
CEH went on to ask about the CAD interview with Sun Ho and how Kong Hee lied that it was because of CAD investigations that Sun Ho could not continue with the release of the albums.
CEH said Sun Ho’s passport was returned back to her after they put up a bail of $500k with the court.
Kong insisted investigations by CAD was the reason they never continued the release of the albums.
The investigations gave them no morale to continue.
CEH went on to show evidence that Sun Ho knew that Xtron was bankrolled by CHC.
CEH showed emails that Sun Ho was in the loop.
Kong denied and said Sun Ho didn’t know.
CEH then showed the email but Kong Hee said Sun Ho might not have read.
(CEH said then I will ask her myself before the court…..)
CEH went on to ask if Kong gave to the Building Fund (BF) or gave tithes to CHC.
Kong replied he gave to MPA.
CEH asked if MPA was for his livelihood then how could he tithe to himself?
Kong said his tithe was used for crossover.
CEH asked Kong Hee that from 2005-2010 whether Kong Hee gave tithe to CHC or gave to Building Fund (BF).
Kong Hee said he gave to MPA, not tithe to CHC or Building Fund.
CEH then asked in year 2005-2010, there was one year where Kong went on stage and told the members that God spoke to him (Kong Hee) to up the donation amount and he instantly obeyed and changed the amount (on the cheque) on stage.
How come now Kong Hee say he never gave to the Building Fund?
CEH said Kong Hee was acting on stage.
Edwin Tong and Tan Ye Peng’s lawyer objected but the Judge ruled in favor of CEH and asked Kong Hee to answer the questions.
Kong said he never pledged any money at that moment but gave an offering, Edwin Tong objected on irrelevance…CEH insisted that what Kong Hee did on stage was an act because there is no record of Kong Hee’s pledge or offering (to the BF).
CEH moved on to say crossover is not church mission but Kong Hee’s and Sun Ho’s personal mission.
Kong insisted 2007,08,09 monies were needed for crossover So all his tithes and donations to building fund goes to MPA.
For crossover Kong Hee insisted that the money came from MPA and Kong Hee tithed to MPA.
CEH went on to say he didn’t have the same ulterior motives as Kong Hee and Tan Ye Peng.
When CEH helped them, he genuinely believed it was God’s mission.
CEH went on to show that Kong Hee hired private investigators before the CAD raid in June 2010.
They hired private investigators in March 2010 and they found out all the bloggers’ n forumers’ identities.
CEH showed blackberry messages that Sun Ho said: “Can we shut the mouths of all these haters? Can we take legal action against them?”
CEH moved on to show emails he sent to Kong Hee and Sun Ho, asking them not to worry about the bloggers and the truth will show we are clean.
CEH was trying to show that his state of mind was that he genuinely believed in the crossover project as mooted by Kong Hee.
The blackberry messages showed Sun Ho was pissed off by the bloggers.
Dear TRE,
For some reason the ST is under-reporting the CHC trial. Many key and interesting details are not revealed. Most of the details are found here : https://www.facebook.com/CHCConfessions?fref=ts
The most sensational day was yesterday and here’s the posting:
Summary for Kong Hee’s testimony on 18 Aug 2014
Mr Chew Eng Han (CEH) spent considerable time to query Kong Hee on the Irregularities surrounding the Multi-Purpose Account (MPA).
The unsuspecting donors to the MPA were 28 couples and a few individuals handpicked from the inner circle.
The donations were meant for evangelism through Sun’s concerts in Asia.
(Note : Our understanding is that the… donors’ list to MPA was later expanded to include 50 pastoral staff and other staff. They were told to tithe to a Man of God instead of the church or Building Fund)CEH confronted Kong Hee and said he felt cheated by Kong Hee as Kong Hee presented a fake account on MPA in 2009.
CEH alleged that Kong Hee lied to the donors and proclaimed a lower figure collected than the actual amount donated.
CEH alleged that Kong Hee lied so that he could claim that the donations were not enough as Kong Hee urged the donors to give more.
Kong Hee countered that the amount he presented in 2009 was after paying Sun Ho $400,000 for royalties and salaries.
(In 2009, the average collection in MPA was $1.5mil-2mil.)
Kong Hee chided CEH that only CEH and his wife made an issue whereas other donors did not say they were disappointed.
Kong Hee further said it is CHC culture not to reveal details.
Kong insisted that MPA is meant not just for the purported crossover but also to cater for Kong Hee’s and Sun Ho’s livelihood.
Kong Hee also countered that MPA donors were the initiators on the donations and they were all willing donors.
CEH went on to show an email that CHC bought $1 million worth of Kong Hee’s products.
Kong Hee insisted that it was the board’s decision.
CEH went on to show evidence that Serina Wee used Hanafi’s company, (FIRNA) account to refund Kong and CEH sought to prove Kong engineered these financial transactions.
Kong insisted it was Wahju’s own initiative that he wanted to bless Kong Hee.
CEH said this is clearly another round-tripping which used CHC funds to purchase FIRNA bonds so as to channel funds to Kong Hee’s personal bank account.
Kong disagreed and said it was Wahju’s own initiative.
CEH then said the bonds are clean and it was what Kong Hee did with the money that made the bonds sham.
CEH wanted to show Kong Hee preached hard to get the money to pay for the penthouse at Sentosa Cove.
Kong Hee sought to show that he preached a lot on soliciting donations due to his love for mission work to reach out to the unsaved.
CEH rebutted that and said it was for Sentosa Cove and the evidence was in a 4.5hr recording.
CEH alleged that Kong Hee mentioned in the recording that he preached like “siao” because he needed to meet payments for the penthouse at Sentosa Cove.
(CEH wanted to use a 4.5 hour recording but the Judge stopped it as Edwin Tong and Tan Ye Peng’s lawyer objected to it repeatedly.)
CEH showed evidence that Serina Wee had Hanafi’s (FIRNA) bank account and Kong Hee had control on how to channel monies to Kong Hee’s personal bank account via FIRNA’s bank account.
Kong Hee denied and said he did not know how Serina Wee had access to Wahju’s company bank account.
But the email evidence showed Serina asking permission regarding some funds transfer via FIRNA to Kong Hee’s personal bank account.
Kong maintained that he was not sure why Serina Wee would have such access to Wajhu’s company’s bank account.
Edwin Tong objected as CEH moved on to show evidence that CHC KL was also used by Kong Hee for round tripping.
Kong insisted the refund via CHC KL was an independent action of CHC KL’s board.
CEH went on to talk about a confession letter where Jimmy Yim (the previous lawyer) wanted Kong Hee to take the rap.
Kong said he wanted to take the rap but didn’t in the end.
CEH insisted Kong Hee never had the intention to take the rap.
CEH also asked Kong Hee to present the confession letter.
CEH went on to ask about the CAD interview with Sun Ho and how Kong Hee lied that it was because of CAD investigations that Sun Ho could not continue with the release of the albums.
CEH said Sun Ho’s passport was returned back to her after they put up a bail of $500k with the court.
Kong insisted investigations by CAD was the reason they never continued the release of the albums.
The investigations gave them no morale to continue.
CEH went on to show evidence that Sun Ho knew that Xtron was bankrolled by CHC.
CEH showed emails that Sun Ho was in the loop.
Kong denied and said Sun Ho didn’t know.
CEH then showed the email but Kong Hee said Sun Ho might not have read.
(CEH said then I will ask her myself before the court…..)
CEH went on to ask if Kong gave to the Building Fund (BF) or gave tithes to CHC.
Kong replied he gave to MPA.
CEH asked if MPA was for his livelihood then how could he tithe to himself?
Kong said his tithe was used for crossover.
CEH asked Kong Hee that from 2005-2010 whether Kong Hee gave tithe to CHC or gave to Building Fund (BF).
Kong Hee said he gave to MPA, not tithe to CHC or Building Fund.
CEH then asked in year 2005-2010, there was one year where Kong went on stage and told the members that God spoke to him (Kong Hee) to up the donation amount and he instantly obeyed and changed the amount (on the cheque) on stage.
How come now Kong Hee say he never gave to the Building Fund?
CEH said Kong Hee was acting on stage.
Edwin Tong and Tan Ye Peng’s lawyer objected but the Judge ruled in favor of CEH and asked Kong Hee to answer the questions.
Kong said he never pledged any money at that moment but gave an offering, Edwin Tong objected on irrelevance…CEH insisted that what Kong Hee did on stage was an act because there is no record of Kong Hee’s pledge or offering (to the BF).
CEH moved on to say crossover is not church mission but Kong Hee’s and Sun Ho’s personal mission.
Kong insisted 2007,08,09 monies were needed for crossover So all his tithes and donations to building fund goes to MPA.
For crossover Kong Hee insisted that the money came from MPA and Kong Hee tithed to MPA.
CEH went on to say he didn’t have the same ulterior motives as Kong Hee and Tan Ye Peng.
When CEH helped them, he genuinely believed it was God’s mission.
CEH went on to show that Kong Hee hired private investigators before the CAD raid in June 2010.
They hired private investigators in March 2010 and they found out all the bloggers’ n forumers’ identities.
CEH showed blackberry messages that Sun Ho said: “Can we shut the mouths of all these haters? Can we take legal action against them?”
CEH moved on to show emails he sent to Kong Hee and Sun Ho, asking them not to worry about the bloggers and the truth will show we are clean.
CEH was trying to show that his state of mind was that he genuinely believed in the crossover project as mooted by Kong Hee.
The blackberry messages showed Sun Ho was pissed off by the bloggers.
Saturday, August 16, 2014
City Harvest trial: 5 things about controversial China Wine song
BY LYN CHAN
China Wine has resurfaced. Not the alcoholic beverage but the English single by Ms Ho Yeow Sun. You know the one: The video has images of her gyrating furiously to the music in a low-cut, midriff-baring top and nothing shorts.
When the video made its rounds on social media in 2012 after news of the fund-misuse charges against City Harvest Church founder Kong Hee - Ho's husband - and five other church leaders broke, the local netizen community went wild. But not in a good way. Horror, scorn and disdain were the primary reactions; at their mildest, puzzlement and scepticism at how such a song could help spread the gospel.
On Aug 12, Kong, who faces three charges of criminal breach of trust for allegedly misusing church funds, took the stand. While outlining the plan to break Ms Ho into the US music market as part of a church effort to evangelise using her pop music, revelations about the provocative China Wine single surfaced:
1. In 2006, Wyclef Jean, a Haitian hip-hop recording artiste, was roped in to help Ms Ho. He suggested doing away with the songs that had already been recorded for her debut English album. The reason? They sounded "too white, Caucasian", and she would not stand out from other singers also trying to make a mark in the United States.
Ms Ho Yeow Sun in the music video for China Wine. -- PHOTO: XTRON
2. Jean recommended that Ms Ho go for a new Asian-Reggae fusion sound. This eventually led to the making of China Wine. The noted music producer had earlier created a similar Latino-Reggae sound with pop star Shakira. The explosive hit Hips Don't Lie was the result of the collaboration.
3. China Wine was not the only song Jean recorded with Ms Ho. It was just one in a series of 12 to 13 songs.
4. According to Kong, both he and Ms Ho were both "uncomfortable" with China Wine, even though it was deemed a success and the brainchild of Wyclef Jean, as it did not fit the image Ms Ho wanted as a pop artiste. Jean left the project in 2008 after negotiations over his asking price broke down.
5. The album which featured China Wine was supposed to have been publicised on popular TV shows such as Gossip Girl, CSI and Dancing With The Stars if its big launch had taken place as originally planned.
- See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-story/chc-funds-case/story/city-harvest-trial-5-things-about-controversial-china-wine-song-2#sthash.4GdEN5G7.dpuf
Thursday, August 7, 2014
Ps David Yonggi Cho of Yoido Full Gospel Church Sentenced “Three Years In Prison, Suspended For Five Years, And … To Pay 5 billion Won”
Senior pastor David Yonggi Cho gets lighter sentence on account of his religious activities
By Kim Mi-hyang, staff reporter
On Feb. 20, Hon. Cho Yong-hyun with the 23rd criminal division of the Seoul District Court sentenced David Yonggi Cho, 78, senior pastor of Yoido Full Gospel Church, to three years in prison, suspended for five years, and ordered him to pay 5 billion won (US$4.67 million) in fines. Cho was charged with causing around 13.1 billion won in damages to his church and evading approximately 3.5 billion won in taxes in the process (embezzlement as defined in the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes). In addition, Pastor Cho’s oldest son Cho Hee-jun, 49, former chairman of the Yeongsan Christian Culture Center, was given a three-year prison sentence and taken into custody.
“The criminal activity would have been impossible without the approval of Pastor Cho, who had ultimate decision-making authority,” the court ruled. “By condoning the documents that were being written while he was the head of the church, he was largely responsible for these crimes.”
The court also took into consideration the fact that Pastor Cho has contributed to social welfare over the years as a religious figure, which it explained as the reason for his lenient sentence.
The court sentenced Cho Hee-jun to actual time in prison, regarding him as the mastermind behind most of the crimes, including dereliction of duty.
Cho was indicted in 2013 on charges of professional negligence and tax evasion. At the request of his son, Cho allegedly had Yoido Full Gospel Church purchase 250,000 shares of stock in I-Service held by the Yeongsan Christian Culture Center at 86,984 won per share, even though the shares were only worth 34,386 won each, resulting in a 13.1 billion won loss for the church. When a gift tax was imposed on the church’s expensive stock purchase, Cho allegedly submitted documents to the tax authorities depicting the transaction as a normal loan, evading 3.5 billion won in taxes.
Monday, July 14, 2014
10 Ways the Word of Faith Movement (Kenneth Hagin) Went Wrong by JOSEPH MATTERA
As a product of the Word of Faith movement in the early 1980s, I will forever be indebted to the books and teachings of Kenneth Hagin Sr., Smith Wigglesworth, John G. Lake, T.L. Osborn and the like. These were holy men of integrity who turned the world upside down with their faith and teaching.
I learned how to pray for the sick by reading Osborn’s book Healing the Sick, and I learned how to resist the devil by reading Hagin’s The Believer’s Authority. In reading many biographies of Smith Wigglesworth, I have always been challenged by his utter consecration to Christ and to walk in the light of His Word whether in or out of the pulpit. I shudder to think where I would be right now if not for being influenced by these men and this movement.
That being said, as I continued to grow in the Lord and His Word, I saw several flaws in the teaching and in the movement in general. This article is not meant to dampen anyone’s faith but to bring a more balanced picture of the ways of God—especially since many have been discouraged in this movement because they did not understand the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27) and did not have a theology that included certain things that challenged their faith.
I have found that whenever we preach or emphasize one truth of God’s Word to the exclusion of the others, it becomes a mixture and produces both good and bad fruit. For example, this has happened with the hypergrace movement, as well as the view of hyperfaith. From an overemphasis on outward holiness, we get legalism. And we come into a form of fatalism when we emphasize God’s sovereignty at the expense of human responsibility.
However, I will go on record saying that I would much rather be with people attempting to walk in faith and victory than be hanging out with depressed saints filled with unbelief and doubt. Also, like most other movements, the Word of Faith movement restored to the body of Christ a biblical truth that was neglected by the church—and in doing so, overemphasized it. But after several years, more balance comes as folks like myself “eat the meat and spit out the bones.” Also, I believe that Brother Hagin never approved of some of the excesses that came out of the faith camp—especially regarding the unbalanced teachings on prosperity that came from some of his more radical followers.
The following are some of the flaws of the Word of Faith movement from my perspective (and I realize these are generalizations that don’t fit exactly every person classified as “Word of Faith”):
1. They preach a “rights centered” gospel rather then a "stewardship centered" gospel.
Perhaps influenced by our Jeffersonian heritage of individual rights in America, the way the gospel is applied to individuals in the Word of Faith movement is based on personal rights in Christ. Although this is partially true, the New Testament balances our rights in Christ with our responsibility that goes along with these rights.
For example, in Deuteronomy 8:18, we learn that God gave believers “power to get wealth, that His may establish His covenant.” This passage clearly teaches us the primary purpose of prosperity is for the kingdom—not only for our individual comfort and pleasure. Many in the faith movement used to “claim” houses and cars and attempt to use their faith merely for their own individual needs, which, in and of itself, goes against our call to seek first His kingdom (Matt. 6:33) as a prerequisite for our individual needs and wants being fulfilled.
2. Their dispensational belief precludes the role and importance of the Old Covenant in the New Covenant age.
I heard Brother Hagin brag several times in his teaching sessions that he did not read the Old Covenant because we have a new and better covenant now in Christ. The challenge with that teaching is that he did not understand the relevance and role of the moral and civic law of God found from Exodus to Deuteronomy—especially the Ten Commandments that were repeated over and over again either exactly or in principle by the New Testament writers. Without the moral law of God, we have no standard for holiness and will lack the conviction of sin the moral law gives as our standard of holiness and ethics.
Furthermore, Hagin and others like him would only quote the Old Testament when convenient—when it comported to his view of faith. For example, he would quote Exodus 23:25, where God told the Jews He would take sickness from them, but he neglected to also teach that in order to walk in health, they had to follow the strict dietary code as found in Leviticus 11. Thus, healing for the Jews included not only claiming a promise of God but also staying away from unclean food. (In my opinion, walking in physical health also involves having a healthy diet and lifestyle—or else we are tempting God by intentionally violating His natural laws and then expecting Him to heal us.)
3. They have a semi-gnostic dualism regarding their view of God.
Word of Faith preachers have a simple view of God: Everything that is good is of God, and everything bad is from the devil.
While I totally agree God is a good God, sometimes He has to bring judgment or allow things to take place that in our natural minds may be interpreted as bad. What do Word of Faith preachers do with passages like Isaiah 45:7, in which God says He not only brings prosperity but also disaster? Or 2 Samuel 24:13, where God told King David to choose one of three calamities He would bring upon the land of Israel as punishment for his sin? Or Amos 3:6, which clearly says God sometimes brings disaster to a city? What about the book of Job, where God allows Satan to afflict Job physically with boils as well as bring disaster to other areas of his life?
I remember Brother Hagin teaching that Job doesn’t count in the New Testament because Job 42:10 says God turned the captivity of Job and that Luke 4:18 says Jesus set the captives free. That would all be fine, except for the fact that the book of James carries the life and story of Job into the New Testament for the church age—specifically, James 5:11 offers a lesson for us regarding God’s ways and dealings. (Also, without the book of Job, we have nothing to say to Christians who unexpectedly lose a loved one or experience great personal challenges and loss. Job is comforting to me as a pastor because it shows me that God is sovereign over all things—in both the good and the bad—even when it is hard to explain and understand in the natural. Furthermore, God never gave Job an explanation for why He allowed disaster to strike.)
Finally, what do Word of Faith teachers say about Revelation 2:22-23, where Jesus says that He will cast people on a bed of sickness and even strike people dead? This does not go along with the simple dualism they teach.
Now, I will be the first to say that God’s general will, as revealed in the Gospels, is for divine health (see also 3 John 2) and that, in general, He always wants us healthy in spirit, soul and body (1 Thess. 5:23) and that Jesus came for us to have an abundant life (John 10:10). But those in the Word of Faith movement have such a narrow view of the Word of God that they do not have any explanations for mysterious things that happen to us that challenge our faith. It is not always true that something bad happened to a person because they had sin (John 9:1-3) or that they didn’t get healed or calamity came to them because they lacked faith. Of course, the instance where Jesus brought sickness and death in Revelation 2:22-23 had to do with disobedience, which took people out from under the covering of the Lord (Ps. 91:1).
In summary, it is still generally God’s will to bring us health and prosperity in the context of obedience to His Word.
4. Positive confession sometimes leads to dishonesty and superficial Christianity.
I have been around many believers who are afraid to be honest and admit they are struggling with their faith. This brings people into bondage and even a form of superficial religion. Some believers are like robots—when you ask them how they are doing, they routinely say, “I am blessed and highly favored!” However, I know some of these people, and they are merely trying to keep a positive confession even though their world is falling apart.
Now, I do believe in speaking the Word of God to our challenging circumstances and not giving in to negative talk, but that is different from what James 5:16 tells us when he exhorts believers to confess their faults one to another. Positive confession is good and biblical (Prov. 18:21) as long as it doesn’t stop a person from getting pastoral counsel and being honest with fellow believers when they need prayer.
5. Their view on prosperity is only based on giving.
While it is true that the Bible teaches we reap what we sow and that if we give, it will be given back to us (Luke 6:38), one of the flaws of the Word of Faith movement is that it only teaches people one side of prosperity. I believe the church needs to equip the saints not only to give but also to get, as well as how to manage what they get while investing and saving for the future.
When we only teach the saints how to give, we limit the amount of creativity and blessing some people can experience—because without combining giving with hard work, education and an understanding of how to manage and create a budget, many folks will continue in cycles of poverty even though they may experience elements of God’s provision based on their giving. God can only bless in proportion to our ability to manage what He gives us!
In poor countries, I have found that when the only solution presented to the people for breaking poverty is “giving to the church,” the only person who becomes prosperous is the preacher. In the kingdom of God, the church is called to have a more empowering and holistic approach in regard to prosperity and breaking cycles of poverty.
6. They have faith in their faith as a principle rather than it emanating out of the person of Christ.
I have found in many instances where this movement presented faith almost as an impersonal force, like the law of gravity. This led to teachings like “having faith in your faith.” When this is taught, it can disconnect faith from intimacy with the Lord. The more I get to know a person, the more I can trust them. Faith is not a force. It is a result of growing in simple trust based on growing in an experiential knowledge of the Lord. Faith is relational. It is not an impersonal force.
7. Some pastors have modeled their church preaching after these “specialists” in the body.
Brother Hagin, T.L. Osborn, Smith Wigglesworth and the like were not typical pastors called to oversee a flock. Thus, they were able to preach based on their primary assignment, which was faith and healing.
The challenge is, many pastors who don’t understand this began to mimic these great men of God and attempted to build congregations only around those three themes—faith, prosperity and healing. That is OK if you are a traveling teacher or evangelist, but a congregation needs to have a balanced diet of the Word that includes the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27). A pastor needs to preach on healing but also holiness; faith but also tests and trials; moving mountains but also marriage; giving financially but also stewardship and hard work. I love preaching on faith and healing, but as a pastor I often had to preach subjects I really did not have a great passion for but knew others needed to hear to fully mature in the Lord.8. It can put guilt and bondage on believers.
I have heard of many people who walk around in guilt because they are not healed or because they are struggling financially. In some cases, I have even heard of famous faith preachers who checked into a hospital under a different name so word would not get out that they were sick and under a doctor’s care!
We need to have a culture of faith in our churches, but we also have to engender a culture of humility, honesty and brokenness—admitting that we don’t always walk in victory over sin and sickness as well as making allowances for mystery The fact is, we don’t always understand why certain things happen to believers. (See again the book of Job.)
9. It can produce independent, narcissistic believers.
When the Word of Faith movement went from a stewardship-centered gospel to a rights-centered gospel, it also attracted many self-focused people—people who used God as an excuse for their lavish lifestyles and who frowned upon those living in simplicity. Unfortunately, this teaching often appealed to the narcissistic tendencies in all of us, and many large ministries were built more upon the American Dream of having a nice house and a nice car than upon taking up our cross and following Jesus. Jesus said in Luke 14:33 that we have to lose everything in order to be His disciple, but many in this movement only focus on what we gain. Truly, you can’t be resurrected until you first go to the cross!
10. It is not connected to the cultural mandate of Genesis 1:28.
Last but not least, the Word of Faith movement did not go far enough. Instead of limiting faith to merely believing for individual healing and health, the Word of God teaches that our faith should also transform whole cities and subdue kingdoms! (See Isaiah 61:4 and Hebrews 11:33.) The gospel is a blueprint to disciple and baptize whole people groups, not just individuals (Matt. 28:19-20). It not only deals with individual sinners but systemic evil. The Word of Faith movement, though, brings faith for individual victory but doesn’t say much about corporate victory. However, regarding the community of believers, faith is also based on the corporate culture and anointing of a congregation. (First Corinthians 11:27-32 and Hebrews 3-4 teach that whole congregations can be negatively affected by a culture of unbelief or disobedience.)
The Word of Faith movement in general separated the gospel from the kingdom and, in doing so, made it more about individual prosperity then societal transformation. When you separate the gospel from the kingdom, you tend to become more self-focused because the Good News gets disconnected from our responsibility to steward the earth. With the gospel of the kingdom, we believe in individual, congregational and societal transformation!
Finally, I believe with all of my heart that there was more good than bad in the Word of Faith movement and that it was God’s intention that biblical faith for the supernatural be restored back to the church. All of us only know in part and see through a glass darkly—even the apostle Paul (1 Cor. 13:9,12). Consequently, it often takes years for the body of Christ to discern how to have balance when old truths are restored. One of the keys to life is balance—and biblical balance cannot come until we attempt to embrace the whole counsel of God!
Joseph Mattera is overseeing bishop of Resurrection Church, Christ Covenant Coalition, in Brooklyn, N.Y. You can read more on josephmattera.org or connect with him on Facebook or Twitter.
Friday, July 11, 2014
Pastor Paula White Claims July Is 'Prophetically Designated for Victory Over Enemies;' Suggests $229 'Breakthrough Seed' Donation
BY NICOLA MENZIE , CHRISTIAN POST
In a newsletter emailed to supporters this week, Florida pastor Paula White claims that God has shown her that "this is a season of victory for His people." The Christian minister also reveals a strong feeling "that a seed of $229 in accordance with 1 Chronicles 22:9 is a breakthrough seed for the month of July," and declares to recipients of her newsletter, "Do not hesitate to follow a prophetic instruction!"
White, who formerly led Without Walls Church International with ex-husband Randy White, is senior pastor of New Destiny Christian Center in Apopka, Florida.
In a newsletter emailed on Thursday to Paula White Ministries supporters, and titled "This Email Will Change Your Life!" White asserts: "YOU are on the verge of complete breakthrough in every area of your life. Spiritually, Financially, and Relationally God has shown me that this is a season of victory for His people."
"As I went deeper in the Spirit the Lord revealed that before the breakthrough comes, certain things must be dealt with. Specifically, there must be a complete defeat of your enemies! I need to explain the importance of this to you, so do not let this email go unread," the newsletter signed "Paula" adds.
White goes on to suggest that 1 Chronicles 22:7-8 reveals that King David was unable to fully realize his dream of building the Temple because "he only secured complete victory over his enemies at an age too old to build!"
"This is why God told me to specifically address the area of defeat over enemies," White declares, continuing in all caps: "JULY IS PROPHETICALLY DESIGNATED FOR VICTORY OVER ENEMIES FOR THOSE WHO ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH ME IN THIS SEASON! DO NOT HESITATE!" It was not clear if the "me" in the minister's newsletter refers to herself, or if she is claiming to speak on behalf of God.
After breaking down what she says are the "7 principles" recipients of the newsletter "must know," White insists that they also "must know" how to "legally engage the enemy" in their life "for his unconditional defeat."
"Part of the legal engagement is in your following prophetic instruction," explains the newsletter. "July is YOUR month of deliverance from your enemy. After July, you will enter your season of rest that you may accomplish your dreams."
White goes on to insist that she has a special teaching that will help supporters attain deliverance from their enemies.
"But first you must get what I have to teach you," writes White.
"I feel strongly that a seed of $229 in accordance with 1 Chronicles 22:9 is a breakthrough seed for the month of July. It is a turnaround, God ordained, demon slaying, abundance bringing seed. Not only will this seed defeat your enemies, but I believe it will bring about an unexpected abundance of miracles. Do not hesitate to follow a prophetic instruction!"
In 1 Chronicles 22:9, King David tells his son Solomon of the message he received from God: "But you will have a son who will be a man of peace and rest, and I will give him rest from all his enemies on every side. His name will be Solomon, and I will grant Israel peace and quiet during his reign."
If recipients of the Paula White Ministries newsletter are unable to "produce" the 1 Chronicles-inspired $229 "seed" or "offering," then, they are told, "get a seed of $31 or more for the 31 days in July and 1 Chronicles 22:9 (22+9=31)."
On the product pages at paulawhite.org, the monetary figures for White's "Defeating Your Enemy Package" are labeled as "gifts" and "donations," as Paula White Ministries is a nonprofit, or charitable organization.
In exchange for their donations of either $229 or $31, supporters receive White's three-part teaching series, "The Depths of Satan" on how to "overcome and defeat" the devil's tactics; and also a book titled Binding The Strong Man by Archbishop N. Duncan-Williams, described on his official Facebook page as "a pioneer of the charismatic movement in Ghana."
While it is common for Christian ministries to solicit financial donations from supporters, oftentimes providing free resources as a token of gratitude, it is rare for the solicitation to be packaged as prophecy, or with such unction as special revelation from God.
Evangelist Benny Hinn made a similar appeal to supporters last month, encouraging them to step up to "higher seed-level giving" by donating $1,000 to his ministry. The televangelist suggested that supporters would enter a "new dimension of favor and increase" if they took on the challenge.
White, who is described on her ministry website as a "pastor, teacher, author, international evangelist, inspirational figure, popular TV personality…woman of God," has been engaged in Christian ministry since the late '80s. She claims to support through her ministry "hundreds of local and international outreaches." Her list of accolades and official recognitions include the 2011 Impact Leadership Award during the 5th Annual International Financial and Leadership Summit, the 2009 Humanitarian Award by the Trumpet Award Foundation, the 2007 Behind the Bench "Mind, Body Spirit Award" from the NBA Wives Organization, and many others.
White, dubbed a prosperity preacher by some Christians, was among six televangelists, including Hinn, targeted in 2007 by the Senate Committee on Finance for possible abuse of her ministry's nonprofit status. While the minister submitted a financial report to the committee, she failed to disclose her full financial dealings with her church and related ministry.
White, 48, and former husband Randy White grew Without Walls International Church into a mega-ministry in the late 1990s, making it one of the top 10 largest churches in Tampa, Florida. White eventually cut all ties with WWIC, and after the 2011 death of Zachery Tims, was installed, with much controversy, as his successor at New Destiny Christian Center.
Saturday, June 28, 2014
The Curse Of Motivational Speaking by Conrad Mbewe
Last Sunday, a young man came to see me after our church service. He is the kind of guy who shows up at church once in a while and then disappears for a season. My guess is that he goes around churches sampling sermons and looking for answers. On this visit, he asked that I help him to overcome a failure in his life, and it was a failure to progress. He said that his greatest problem is that he does not believe in himself. Could I help him believe in himself so that he could become successful?
I asked him whether he was a Christian. His answer was, “Do I really need to be a Christian in order to be successful? Are you telling me that all those successful people out there are Christians? Aren’t there general principles that I can apply to my life—whether I am a Christian or not—that can catapult me to success?” I challenged him to answer that question himself. After all, I was sure he had done enough rounds among motivational speakers to have the answer.
“That is the problem,” he said, “I have been told that such principles exist and I have tried them. They seem to work for a while and then I am back to my old self again. I want you to help me find that formula that will help me go forward and never slide back to the place where I do not believe in myself.” To cut the long story short, I finally persuaded him of the need for reconciliation with God before anyone can break free from the frustrating rut that God locks unreconciled sinners in.
I gave him a booklet to read, entitled, What is a Biblical Christian? When we met the following day, he was honest enough to tell me that he was disappointed with what he read because it was not telling him what he wanted to hear. “What I want to know is how I can be successful. This booklet did not say anything about that.” I repeated what I told him earlier. What he needed was not belief in himself but belief in a Saviour sent from heaven. He needed forgiveness as a foundation for his life.
Yesterday, a church member told me that he met the young man in the local market. He had two booklets in his hands. The first was the one I had given him and the second one was by Joel Osteen. He told our member, “Pastor Mbewe gave me this book but I don’t like it because it makes me feel guilty. I prefer this one by Joel Osteen because it lifts me up. It motivates me.” I am very concerned about this and so I decided to put some thoughts together about the curse of motivational speaking.
Sadly, motivational speaking has become the staple diet of many evangelical pulpits. The message being heard is, “God has put the potential in you and all you need to do is believe in yourself to unlock that potential. Have a grand vision and live out that vision. You must be a man or woman of destiny and the sky will be the limit for you. Don’t let your past failures get in your way of success. Look beyond them, as Jesus looked beyond the cross and thus overcame it. You are the head and not the tail. ”
In the light of the plethora of motivational speaking, it begs the question, “Is this how Old Testament and New Testament preachers preached?” If I summarise the preaching of Noah, Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Jonah, Paul, Peter, etc., in the Bible, is this the kind of message that I will find there? I do not think so. Granted, motivational speakers borrow words from these men, but borrowing someone’s words is not the same thing as saying what he is saying. “A text without a context is a pretext.”
My chief quarrel with motivational speaking is that it reduces God to a means rather than an end. Men and women are not made to see that the nature of SIN lies in the letter “I” in the middle of the word. Instead, motivational speaking feeds that same ego and points to God as the one who can spoil it to the point of intoxication. That is a lie! It is God alone who must be at the centre of our lives. Christianity demands a dying to self, a taking up of one’s cross, and a following after a suffering Saviour.
Whenever I listen to motivational speaking, I seem to hear the message, “Peace, peace,” where there is no peace. It sounds to me like a doctor assuring a patient who has terminal cancer in its final stages that he should not worry because all will be okay if he only believes in himself. The guy is dying, man, for crying out loud! It is the height of insincerity if a preacher knows that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23) and instead makes those heading for the slaughterhouse feel nice.
Motivational speaking makes people feel good, whereas the gospel first makes people feel bad—until they find their all in Christ. True preaching must make people face the fact that they are living in rebellion against God and that they need to repent or they will perish. It is only as people recognise this and cry out, “What shall we do to be saved?” (Acts 2:37, 16:30) that true preaching gives them the good news, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13).
Motivational speaking is an attempt at trying to kill a charging lion with a pea-gun, using freshly cooked peas, spiced with the most aromatic seasonings. The aroma may be tantalizing to the taste buds, but it is totally useless in bringing down that ferocious beast. Men and women outside Christ are DEAD in trespasses and sins. Exciting their senses with nice-sounding platitudes will not give them life. They need the law to kill their fallen egos and the gospel of Jesus Christ to give them life.
I know that motivational speaking is filling up our church buildings until they look like football stadiums. In this world of misery and gloom, we can all do with some encouragement. But is that all that we were called to do as preachers? What good is it if men feel inspired and motivated, and then go back home to live a life of sin and selfishness? Sadly this is the norm in so many evangelical churches. The churches are filled to capacity with people determined to drink sin like water the whole week.
Motivational speaking is not biblical preaching. It is a blight on the landscape of true evangelicalism. It is filling the churches with dead people who are being told to live as if they are alive. We need to return to the good old gospel that truly gives life to the dead and sets men and women free. Like Paul of old, every truly evangelical pulpit must sound out the clear message of “repentance towards God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20:21). Let us get rid of this curse of motivational speaking!
http://www.conradmbewe.com/
I asked him whether he was a Christian. His answer was, “Do I really need to be a Christian in order to be successful? Are you telling me that all those successful people out there are Christians? Aren’t there general principles that I can apply to my life—whether I am a Christian or not—that can catapult me to success?” I challenged him to answer that question himself. After all, I was sure he had done enough rounds among motivational speakers to have the answer.“That is the problem,” he said, “I have been told that such principles exist and I have tried them. They seem to work for a while and then I am back to my old self again. I want you to help me find that formula that will help me go forward and never slide back to the place where I do not believe in myself.” To cut the long story short, I finally persuaded him of the need for reconciliation with God before anyone can break free from the frustrating rut that God locks unreconciled sinners in.
I gave him a booklet to read, entitled, What is a Biblical Christian? When we met the following day, he was honest enough to tell me that he was disappointed with what he read because it was not telling him what he wanted to hear. “What I want to know is how I can be successful. This booklet did not say anything about that.” I repeated what I told him earlier. What he needed was not belief in himself but belief in a Saviour sent from heaven. He needed forgiveness as a foundation for his life.
Yesterday, a church member told me that he met the young man in the local market. He had two booklets in his hands. The first was the one I had given him and the second one was by Joel Osteen. He told our member, “Pastor Mbewe gave me this book but I don’t like it because it makes me feel guilty. I prefer this one by Joel Osteen because it lifts me up. It motivates me.” I am very concerned about this and so I decided to put some thoughts together about the curse of motivational speaking.
Sadly, motivational speaking has become the staple diet of many evangelical pulpits. The message being heard is, “God has put the potential in you and all you need to do is believe in yourself to unlock that potential. Have a grand vision and live out that vision. You must be a man or woman of destiny and the sky will be the limit for you. Don’t let your past failures get in your way of success. Look beyond them, as Jesus looked beyond the cross and thus overcame it. You are the head and not the tail. ”
In the light of the plethora of motivational speaking, it begs the question, “Is this how Old Testament and New Testament preachers preached?” If I summarise the preaching of Noah, Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Jonah, Paul, Peter, etc., in the Bible, is this the kind of message that I will find there? I do not think so. Granted, motivational speakers borrow words from these men, but borrowing someone’s words is not the same thing as saying what he is saying. “A text without a context is a pretext.”
My chief quarrel with motivational speaking is that it reduces God to a means rather than an end. Men and women are not made to see that the nature of SIN lies in the letter “I” in the middle of the word. Instead, motivational speaking feeds that same ego and points to God as the one who can spoil it to the point of intoxication. That is a lie! It is God alone who must be at the centre of our lives. Christianity demands a dying to self, a taking up of one’s cross, and a following after a suffering Saviour.
Whenever I listen to motivational speaking, I seem to hear the message, “Peace, peace,” where there is no peace. It sounds to me like a doctor assuring a patient who has terminal cancer in its final stages that he should not worry because all will be okay if he only believes in himself. The guy is dying, man, for crying out loud! It is the height of insincerity if a preacher knows that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23) and instead makes those heading for the slaughterhouse feel nice.
Motivational speaking makes people feel good, whereas the gospel first makes people feel bad—until they find their all in Christ. True preaching must make people face the fact that they are living in rebellion against God and that they need to repent or they will perish. It is only as people recognise this and cry out, “What shall we do to be saved?” (Acts 2:37, 16:30) that true preaching gives them the good news, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13).
Motivational speaking is an attempt at trying to kill a charging lion with a pea-gun, using freshly cooked peas, spiced with the most aromatic seasonings. The aroma may be tantalizing to the taste buds, but it is totally useless in bringing down that ferocious beast. Men and women outside Christ are DEAD in trespasses and sins. Exciting their senses with nice-sounding platitudes will not give them life. They need the law to kill their fallen egos and the gospel of Jesus Christ to give them life.
I know that motivational speaking is filling up our church buildings until they look like football stadiums. In this world of misery and gloom, we can all do with some encouragement. But is that all that we were called to do as preachers? What good is it if men feel inspired and motivated, and then go back home to live a life of sin and selfishness? Sadly this is the norm in so many evangelical churches. The churches are filled to capacity with people determined to drink sin like water the whole week.
Motivational speaking is not biblical preaching. It is a blight on the landscape of true evangelicalism. It is filling the churches with dead people who are being told to live as if they are alive. We need to return to the good old gospel that truly gives life to the dead and sets men and women free. Like Paul of old, every truly evangelical pulpit must sound out the clear message of “repentance towards God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20:21). Let us get rid of this curse of motivational speaking!
http://www.conradmbewe.com/
Friday, June 27, 2014
World Cup Star Clint Dempsey Credits Christ for Everything by ALEX KOCMAN
U.S. soccer player Clint Dempsey is taking the World Cup by storm. (Facebook)
U.S. soccer star Clint Dempsey is virtually stealing the show in this year's World Cup.
But the United States isn't the only thing Clint Dempsey is representing on the field.
"Now my faith in Christ is what gives me confidence for the future," Dempsey told Sports Spectrum in a recent interview.
Born into a Catholic household, the World Cup athlete's life took a dramatic turn at age 12 when his sister unexpectedly died of a brain aneurism. Questions about life and suffering drove thoughts of God far from his mind.
"For a number of years, I struggled and put distance between God and me. But He was faithful and patient and provided gradual healing and strength," said Dempsey.
Even a second chance at life after narrowly avoiding a fatal car ride with two college teammates didn't awaken Dempsey to God's control over his life. What drew him back to God wasn't circumstances.
Instead, it was God's Word.
While attending a Bible study with friends at Furman University in Greenville, South Carolina, Dempsey realized that he needed to actively pursue God rather than just affirm His existence.
"God's Word brought me peace and a desire for a relationship with Him ... I found that questioning Him and searching for answers through Scripture helped me grow and gave me direction."
And so, by going straight to the original source—the Bible, what God has to say about himself—Dempsey found a relationship with Christ that has sustained him ever since.
Read the full interview with Dempsey here.
Saturday, June 14, 2014
A THOROUGH REFUTATION OF THE FALSE-GRACE HERESY OF JOSEPH PRINCE PART 1
by Pastor Chace Gordon
Quotes from “Destined to Reign”
Quote #1:
“I distinctly heard the voice of the Lord on the inside. It wasn’t a witness of the Spirit. It was a voice, and I heard God say this clearly to me: ‘Son, you are not preaching grace.’ I said, ‘What do you mean, Lord?...’Every time you preach grace, you preach it with a mixture of law. You attempt to balance grace with the law like many other preachers, and the moment you balance grace, you neutralize it. You cannot put new wine into old wineskins. You cannot put grace and law together. He went on to say, ‘Son, a lot of preachers are not preaching grace the way Apostle Paul preached grace.” Excerpt from the Foreword, page vii
NOTE: Paul taught grace and law side-by-side throughout Romans chapters 5-6 for the express purpose of preventing doctrinal confusion. In fact, the book of Romans uses the word “law” 78 times while only using the word “grace” 24 times. Hence, teaching the law is often necessary as a basis before one can even begin to teach grace! The heart must be convicted and humbled with the law before grace can be received.
“I distinctly heard the voice of the Lord on the inside. It wasn’t a witness of the Spirit. It was a voice, and I heard God say this clearly to me: ‘Son, you are not preaching grace.’ I said, ‘What do you mean, Lord?...’Every time you preach grace, you preach it with a mixture of law. You attempt to balance grace with the law like many other preachers, and the moment you balance grace, you neutralize it. You cannot put new wine into old wineskins. You cannot put grace and law together. He went on to say, ‘Son, a lot of preachers are not preaching grace the way Apostle Paul preached grace.” Excerpt from the Foreword, page vii
NOTE: Paul taught grace and law side-by-side throughout Romans chapters 5-6 for the express purpose of preventing doctrinal confusion. In fact, the book of Romans uses the word “law” 78 times while only using the word “grace” 24 times. Hence, teaching the law is often necessary as a basis before one can even begin to teach grace! The heart must be convicted and humbled with the law before grace can be received.
The word “law” is referred to in Paul’s epistles 148 times in 108 verses; the word “grace” was used in Paul’s epistles 99 times in 92 verses. Thus demonstrating that his “grace preaching” was a doctrinal balance of both law & grace.
It is true that the apostle Paul had more to say on the subject of grace than any other New Testament writer. It even states in Acts 20:24 that testifying to the gospel of grace was the purpose of his life and ministry; however, he, and other New Testament writers, went to great length to keep the grace doctrine from being twisted and perverted as we must do as well.
(See Jude 4, Romans 5:20-6:2; Romans 6:14-16; II Corinthians 6:1; Galatians 1:6-10; Hebrews 10:29-31; II Peter 3:15-18)
Here is a side-by-side comparison of “grace teaching” versus “law teaching” throughout the Bible:
Usage of words in whole Bible (KJV):
The Bible addresses the law approximately three times as much as it addresses grace!
The word “law”: used 523 times in 459 verses
The word “grace”: used 170 times in 159 verses
Conclusion: The Bible as a whole has FAR MORE to say concerning the law than concerning grace.
Usage of words in the New Testament alone (KJV):
The New Testament addresses the law nearly twice as often as it addresses grace!
The word “law”: used 223 times in 172 verses
The word “grace:” used 131 times in 122 verses
Conclusion: While the New Testament has more to say on the subject of grace than the Old Testament, the New Testament STILL has FAR MORE to say concerning the law than concerning grace.
Usage of words in the gospels (KJV):
The gospels address the law eight times as much as they address grace!
The word “law”: used 41 times in 35 verses
The word “grace”: used 5 times in 4 verses
Conclusion: Even though Jesus Himself ushered in the dispensation of grace to the church, the gospels have FAR MORE to say concerning the law than concerning grace!
Usage of words in the Book of Acts (KJV):
The Book of Acts addresses the law twice as much as it addresses grace!
The word “law”: used 22 times in 21 verses
The word “grace”: used 10 times in 10 verses
The gospels address the law eight times as much as they address grace!
The word “law”: used 41 times in 35 verses
The word “grace”: used 5 times in 4 verses
Conclusion: Even though Jesus Himself ushered in the dispensation of grace to the church, the gospels have FAR MORE to say concerning the law than concerning grace!
Usage of words in the Book of Acts (KJV):
The Book of Acts addresses the law twice as much as it addresses grace!
The word “law”: used 22 times in 21 verses
The word “grace”: used 10 times in 10 verses
Conclusion: The record of the early church has FAR MORE to say concerning the law than concerning grace!
Conclusion to it all: There is no Biblical precedent to suggest teaching the law undermines the teaching of grace. They are complementary doctrines. In fact, the doctrinal teaching of the law is foundational to receiving the doctrine of grace!
Quote #2:
“It is entirely His [Jesus] effort and His [Jesus] doing. Our part is to believe on Him and receive all that He has accomplished on our behalf. Sounds ridiculously simple, one-sided and unfair? Well, my friend, that is exactly what makes grace, grace! Grace is only grace when it is undeserved, unearned and unmerited.” Excerpt from foreword, page x
NOTE: This statement is confusing on several points:
(1) It confuses God’s grace with a distorted view of God’s mercy. It also assumes that God’s mercy cancels out God’s justice. There is nothing “unfair” about God giving us His grace; but there is something infinitely merciful. How can an infinitely merciful God extend grace to the sinner and not violate His infinite justice? Through repentance.
Repentance is the place where justice and mercy kiss. Without justice, mercy becomes cruel. If the president of the United States, as an act of mercy, decided to pardon our prison population and loose them on society, the innocent would suffer as a result. However, if a wicked man is truly penitent and puts his faith in God, he can qualify for pardon because he ceases to be a threat to society. Though the penitent, formerly-wicked man does not deserve pardon, he can receive mercy without compromising justice. Hence, the criminal does nothing to earn his salvation; yet qualifies for mercy through genuine repentance.
While grace is not something we earn through good works, it is something we must qualify for through repentance.
(2) It assumes grace is exclusively for the undeserving. It is not. According to Luke 2:40, Jesus grew in grace. Under the above definition, we would have to assume that Jesus “growing in grace” as a child means He was sinful during His youth. This is total heresy and an increasingly common heresy in today’s culture. While this may seem to be splitting hairs, this small error could lead someone down the path to destruction.
(3) It assumes the operation of grace is the same as its initial impartation. It concludes that since receiving grace was effortless on our part, walking in grace after it’s received must be effortless as well. But receiving a free gift by doing nothing to EARN it does not automatically mean you do nothing to USE it!
Ephesians 2:8-9 tell us we are saved by grace and not by works; however verse 10 tells us that we are saved UNTO good works! Which means, we don’t do works to earn salvation, but once we are saved, by grace—we do good works! It’s not effortless!
The key difference is this: doing good works on your own apart from God will not save you; however, after you are saved, you do good works because now you are participating with God! Grace is what enables that participation. You still have responsibility. You still have effort. The difference is, you are united with Christ and He gives you the strength, a.k.a. grace, to do alongside of Him, what you could never do on your own.
Quote #3:
“Do you realize that most people believe that one needs to work hard to achieve success in life? The world’s system of success is built on the twin pillars of self-effort and diligence. There are always some “laws” that you have to abide by, and some “methods and techniques” that you have to keep on practicing before there can be any results. Most of the time, any result that you may get will start to fade once you cease to follow through with the prescribed methods and steps. We have been taught to focus on achieving, on doing and on relying on our self-efforts. We are driven to ‘do, do, do’, forgetting that Christianity is actually ‘done, done, done’.”
Chapter 1, Page 4
NOTE: Grace doesn’t do away with the Biblical virtue of hard work (See Proverbs 18:9; 20:4, 13; 21:25-26; 24:30-34; 26:13-16; Matthew 5:16; 25:14-30; II Thessalonians 3:10; I Corinthians 9:19; 15:10; II Corinthians 6:1; II Timothy 2:15). Diligence is still a necessary part of the Christian experience (See John 8:31; Hebrews 11:6; II Peter 1:4-10) and your results WILL fail when you stop being diligent! (See Galatians 1:6-10; I Timothy 1:5-6, 19; Hebrews 3:6). “Achieving” is not an evil concept especially when God has provided incentive and guidelines to obey (Deuteronomy 28; Matthew 25:14-30; Philippians 3:14-16; II Timothy 2:3-7; I Corinthians 9:24-27).
The Bible tells us to “do, do, do” because though Christ’s redemptive work on the cross IS “done, done, done” Christians still have a lot left to do (see the Sermon on the Mount, the Great Commission, the Book of ACTS, the book of Titus (whose theme is GOOD WORKS) and the Book of James (whose theme is being DOERS of the Word)!
Grace is incompatible with works of self-righteousness (See Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 2:21; 5:4); but grace is also God’s power working THROUGH you and me because we are cooperating with Him! (See Ephesians 3:7; Philippians 4:13; Romans 6:1-11; Colossians 2:6).
Quote #4:
“Under the new covenant, we don’t have to keep on asking the Lord…for forgiveness because He has already forgiven us.”
Chapter 1, page 7
NOTE: While it is true that if you repent of something once, it is not necessary to repent of the same sin twice; however, if you sin again, you must repent—again. “The modern fallacy that judicial forgiveness covers ALL sins, past, present, and future; that God does not impute sins of believers to them; and that God never condemns a saved man for any sins committed, but charges them to the Lord Jesus Christ, is one of the most unscriptural and demon-inspired theories in any church…He will forgive all sins that are confessed to Him, but this does not give the saved man a blank check to continue in sin and live as he pleases without any fear of being held accountable for his sins after he has one time been saved. Salvation does not include freedom to live in sins of all kinds. It does not guarantee immunity from hell if one goes back into sins and dies in them.” --Finis Dake
If Christians had a “blank check” to sin and never had to ask forgiveness after they are saved—why did God tell so many believers to repent in hundreds of scriptures, in both old and new testaments? Why did Paul go to many of the churches that he planted, that he witnessed their conversions, and that he laid hands on to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit—why did he go to these churches and admonish them to repent—if their sins were forgiven past, present AND future? Why did John write to believers in I John 1:9 and encourage them to confess their sins if they stopped walking in the light (I John 1:7)? Why does the book of Revelation warn that your name can be blotted out of the Book of Life if one-time repentance is a blank check for everlasting forgiveness? Why did Peter say that if a Christian backslides into sin after being delivered—his outcome becomes WORSE?
The truth is grace does MORE than cover our sins or empower us to ignore our pesky consciences. Grace empowers us to stop sinning and walk in the light (I John 1:7). I suggest that we don’t sin when walking in the light—we sin when we walk away from it!
Here are several sample scriptures that are examples of how eternal life can be lost and that the saved die again when they commit sin:
Genesis 2:17; Exodus 32:32-33; Leviticus 18:24-30; 26:13-39; Numbers 25:1-8; Deuteronomy 4:23-31; Joshua 7:, 10-12; Judges 2:1-23; I Kings 14:22; II Kings 17:1-17; II Chronicles 36; Isaiah 5:24-25; Jeremiah 2:5-37; Lamentations 1:8-9; Ezekiel 13:1-23; Hebrews 12:28-29; Psalm 69:28; Revelation 3:5; Matthew 7:21; I John 4:8, 12, 16, 21; Galatians 1:6-8; Mark 11:25-26; I Corinthians 3:16-17; Luke 8:13; John 6:66; II Corinthians 5:17; Romans 11:16; Acts 1:20, 25; Colossians 2:8-19; Jude 12-13; II Timothy 3:8; Titus 1:16; Philippians 3:7-14; I Thessalonians 3:8; James 5:19-20; & II Peter 1:4-10.
Here are several other sample scriptures that reveal eternal life is not an eternal possession now and will not be until the end of a life of holiness:
Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:26-29; Mark 16:15; Matthew 12:31-32; Acts 5:3, 32; 7:51; I Corinthians 3:16-17; Mark 10:29-30; Luke 18:29-30; Matthew 19:28-29; Romans 2:7; Romans 6:21-23; Romans 5:21; Galatians 6:7-8; I Timothy 1:16; I Timothy 4:8; I Timothy 6:12, 19; Titus 1:2; 3:7; I Peter 1:5, 9, 13; 3:7; I John 2:25; Jude 20-24; Daniel 12:2; John 5:28; Matthew 25:46; Matthew 7:13-14; etc.
Here are several more plain scriptures that demonstrate men have to continue to the end to be saved:
Matthew 10:22; Romans 6:21-23; Hebrews 3:6, 12-14; 6:11-12; I Peter 1:5, 9, 13; Revelation 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21; Hebrews 10:23, 35-39; Mark 10:29-30; Luke 18:29-30; Matthew 19:28-29; Romans 2:7; Romans 6:21-23; Romans 5:21; Galatians 6:7-8; I Timothy 1:16; I Timothy 4:8; I Timothy 6:12, 19; Titus 1:2; 3:7; I Peter 1:5, 9, 13; 3:7; I John 2:25; Jude 20-24; Daniel 12:2; John 5:28; Matthew 25:46; & Matthew 7:13-14.
Here are a few more scriptures that demonstrate the promises and covenants of God are conditional:
John 5:14; John 8:31, 34; Revelation 2:4-5, 10, 13-16, 20-25; 3:1-4, 11, 15-19.
Here are several scriptures concerning faith and faithfulness to the end to be saved:
Acts 14:22; Romans 1:5; 16:26; Romans 1:17; Galatians 3:11; Hebrews 10:38-39; Romans 3:3; Romans 11:20-24; I Corinthians 16:13; II Corinthians 1:24; Ephesians 3:17; Colossians 1:23: I Timothy 1:19; 4:1; II Timothy 3:8; Hebrews 3:6, 12-14; 4:11; 6:11-12; 10:23-39; I Peter 1:5, 9, 13.
Here are several scriptures about saved men falling into sin and becoming lost:
Luke 8:13; Romans 11:11-24; I Corinthians 10:13; I Timothy 3:6; 6:9-10; Hebrews 6:4-6, 11; II Peter 3:17; Galatians 5:4; Romans 14:4; Jude 20-24; Romans 11:22; Acts 1:25; II Thessalonians 2:3; & Revelation 2:5-6.
Quote #5:
“John 1:17, KJV—‘For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” Have you noticed that truth is on the side of grace, not the law?’”
Chapter 2, page 12
NOTE: The point of truth being on the side of grace goes to show that grace must still be tempered with truth. Are God’s laws “lies” because they were in the Old Testament? Is “truth” sided AGAINST the law because of its connected usage with grace? NO!!! It only shows that LIKE THE LAW, GRACE must still be partnered with TRUTH!
Quote #6:
“Grace is personal and came as a person—the person of Jesus Christ. The law is hard, cold and impersonal. You cannot have a relationship with two pieces of stone. But grace is gentle and warm. Grace is not a teaching or doctrine. Grace is a person and you can have a relationship with a person.”
Chapter 2, page 12
NOTE: Grace—Jesus. Law—stone. Grace—warm and fuzzy. Law—hard and cold. Grace—person. Law—doctrine. Grace—good. Law—bad. Interesting use of metaphors; but however you try to distinguish the law from grace you must still recognize that Jesus THROUGH GRACE FULFILLED LAW, as opposed to through grace God looked past His state of lawlessness (how many modern preachers would foolishly characterize grace today).
Quote #7:
“Therefore, when you know and believe that Jesus has fulfilled completely the righteous requirements of the law, the devil cannot use the law to condemn you every time you fail.”
Chapter 2, page 15
NOTE: The idea suggested here seems to be that a revelation of Christ’s fulfillment of the law removes condemnation; however, it also infers that this revelation will do nothing to prevent ongoing failure. The main problem with this statement is it leaves the believer condemned to failure while promising a removal of condemnation for his failure. Must we settle for such cheap grace? Can we not believe for grace to do more than help us feel better while we fail? Let’s instead believe God to not only remove the sense of condemnation, but to remove the failure that brings the condemnation!
Quote #8:
“I told my minister friend that I actually do not agree that grace should be a topic in a Bible school’s curriculum. Grace is not a topic—grace is the gospel…Grace is not a theology. It is not a subject matter. It is not a doctrine. It is a person, and His name is Jesus.”
--Chapter 3, page 24
NOTE: (Sigh.) Is this not a self-refuting paragraph? Is this not a topical & theological book on the doctrine/subject matter of grace? While there is nothing terrible or wrong with making an association of grace with the person of Christ Jesus, let’s go ahead and make the association of Christ Jesus and the Word made Flesh as well. You see, studying the Word (even the Old Testament—GASP) actually brings us closer to the person of Jesus. I suggest that a chief bi-product of this intimacy with the Word made flesh is sound doctrine concerning grace. I would also suggest that a person who teaches doctrine without acknowledging it as such smells “fishy.” Sort of like saying, “I am the great and powerful Oz so…ignore the man behind the curtain!” or “Since my doctrine on grace IS Jesus Himself—don’t doubt Jesus by questioning me!” Nice catch-22.
Quote #9:
“So when they [preachers] see sin, they preach more of the law! That, my friend, is like adding wood to fire because the strength of sin is the law. Sin is strengthened when more law is preached! But the power to have dominion over sin is imparted when more grace is preached!”
Chapter 3, page 26
NOTE: First, let’s properly understand the context of “the strength of sin is the law” taken from I Corinthians 15:56: “The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.”
Is this verse in any way implying that the law makes people sin MORE, as the author suggests? What is this verse saying?
First, let’s look at the first part of the verse: “the sting of death is sin”. What is this saying? Simply put, sin makes death painful. No problem there. The sting of death is sin. Sin is the sting of death. In short, sin stings.
Quote #5:
“John 1:17, KJV—‘For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” Have you noticed that truth is on the side of grace, not the law?’”
Chapter 2, page 12
NOTE: The point of truth being on the side of grace goes to show that grace must still be tempered with truth. Are God’s laws “lies” because they were in the Old Testament? Is “truth” sided AGAINST the law because of its connected usage with grace? NO!!! It only shows that LIKE THE LAW, GRACE must still be partnered with TRUTH!
Quote #6:
“Grace is personal and came as a person—the person of Jesus Christ. The law is hard, cold and impersonal. You cannot have a relationship with two pieces of stone. But grace is gentle and warm. Grace is not a teaching or doctrine. Grace is a person and you can have a relationship with a person.”
Chapter 2, page 12
NOTE: Grace—Jesus. Law—stone. Grace—warm and fuzzy. Law—hard and cold. Grace—person. Law—doctrine. Grace—good. Law—bad. Interesting use of metaphors; but however you try to distinguish the law from grace you must still recognize that Jesus THROUGH GRACE FULFILLED LAW, as opposed to through grace God looked past His state of lawlessness (how many modern preachers would foolishly characterize grace today).
Quote #7:
“Therefore, when you know and believe that Jesus has fulfilled completely the righteous requirements of the law, the devil cannot use the law to condemn you every time you fail.”
Chapter 2, page 15
NOTE: The idea suggested here seems to be that a revelation of Christ’s fulfillment of the law removes condemnation; however, it also infers that this revelation will do nothing to prevent ongoing failure. The main problem with this statement is it leaves the believer condemned to failure while promising a removal of condemnation for his failure. Must we settle for such cheap grace? Can we not believe for grace to do more than help us feel better while we fail? Let’s instead believe God to not only remove the sense of condemnation, but to remove the failure that brings the condemnation!
Quote #8:
“I told my minister friend that I actually do not agree that grace should be a topic in a Bible school’s curriculum. Grace is not a topic—grace is the gospel…Grace is not a theology. It is not a subject matter. It is not a doctrine. It is a person, and His name is Jesus.”
--Chapter 3, page 24
NOTE: (Sigh.) Is this not a self-refuting paragraph? Is this not a topical & theological book on the doctrine/subject matter of grace? While there is nothing terrible or wrong with making an association of grace with the person of Christ Jesus, let’s go ahead and make the association of Christ Jesus and the Word made Flesh as well. You see, studying the Word (even the Old Testament—GASP) actually brings us closer to the person of Jesus. I suggest that a chief bi-product of this intimacy with the Word made flesh is sound doctrine concerning grace. I would also suggest that a person who teaches doctrine without acknowledging it as such smells “fishy.” Sort of like saying, “I am the great and powerful Oz so…ignore the man behind the curtain!” or “Since my doctrine on grace IS Jesus Himself—don’t doubt Jesus by questioning me!” Nice catch-22.
Quote #9:
“So when they [preachers] see sin, they preach more of the law! That, my friend, is like adding wood to fire because the strength of sin is the law. Sin is strengthened when more law is preached! But the power to have dominion over sin is imparted when more grace is preached!”
Chapter 3, page 26
NOTE: First, let’s properly understand the context of “the strength of sin is the law” taken from I Corinthians 15:56: “The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.”
Is this verse in any way implying that the law makes people sin MORE, as the author suggests? What is this verse saying?
First, let’s look at the first part of the verse: “the sting of death is sin”. What is this saying? Simply put, sin makes death painful. No problem there. The sting of death is sin. Sin is the sting of death. In short, sin stings.
Now the second part: “…and the strength of sin is the law” or, in other words, “and the strength of [the sting of death] is the law.” So…the law makes the sting of death, a.k.a. sin, hurt more.
Now, is this in any way saying the law makes people sin more? No, it is saying the law makes people hurt more because the effect of sin is made apparent in their lives. No different than spanking a child. Does spanking a child make the child sin more, even though the scriptures recommend it? You might make the case that giving a spanking provokes a child to sin (if not properly applied), but the purpose of the spanking is for the child to associate their sin with pain. No more, no less. The purpose of the law is the same: to associate sin with pain.
So, preaching the law may be adding wood to the fire, in the sense that the person living in sin who hears it feels its pain to a greater degree, but the sting of sin must be felt before the salve of grace is applied to any purpose. The law can be prescribed like pouring alcohol on an open cut: its purpose is not to stop the pain, it’s to treat the wound. The law and grace work together and this is a necessary partnership—because the greater problem of sin is not that we FEEL it; it’s that we keep doing it!
Grace is then applied and preached to restore the sinner AFTER the sinner not only escapes the pain of sin (felt more intensely through the law) but flees sin itself! The law brings necessary pain to the unrepentant; then after repentance, grace converts the sinner and the pain of sin, condemnation, and the sin itself, is fully dealt with and removed from a person’s life!
Quote #10:
“They say that God gives you the gift of righteousness, on the condition that you keep the Ten Commandments for the rest of your life to remain righteous. Now, is this a real gift? Come on, when God gave you the gift of righteousness, it was a real gift. Stop trying to earn it with your own works. God’s gifts to us are unconditional!”
Chapter 3, page 28
NOTE: The gift God gave us was “righteousness” itself. If you sin, you reject the gift. It is a ridiculous and dishonest proposition to suggest that since we were given the gift of righteousness, we are righteous whether we are righteous or not (See the entire book of I John). Obviously, God’s gifts ARE conditional in the sense that if He gives us the gift of righteousness, we should BE righteous, and not just assert that the gift means we have an unconditional claim on righteousness.
Quote #11:
“My friend, righteousness is a gift because of what Jesus has accomplished on the cross for you. All your sins—past, present and future—have been washed clean by His precious blood. You are completely forgiven and from the moment you received Jesus into your life, you will never be held liable for your sins ever again.”
Chapter 3, pages 28-29
NOTE: Unconditional forgiveness. Herein lies the root of error that leads to so many heresies. All of this quote is true save one important point that makes the difference between a truth and a lie: righteousness is a gift because of what Jesus accomplished on the cross for you. All your sins—past and present—have been washed clean by His precious blood, and because of grace you don’t have to have a “FUTURE SINS TO BE FORGIVEN” category! But if future sins happen, your prescription is not denial, it’s found in I John 1:9.
Quote #12:
“…when believers don’t understand that righteousness is a gift, and that it is about ‘right standing’ and not ‘right doing’, they will depend on their own efforts to earn this gift.”
Chapter 3, page 34
NOTE: Right standing implies right doing. The debate, I guess would be, is right standing compatible with wrong doing? I don’t think that’s the kind of right standing God had in mind.
Quote #13:
“My friend, those who believe that God is sometimes angry with them are still living under the old covenant of the law and not under the new covenant of grace.”
Chapter 4, page 38
NOTE: So the cross was to convert God the Father from his temper problem against sin? There are numerous New Testament examples that God still gets mad at both sin and sinners, through Jesus example, through the epistles’ doctrine, and through prophetic warnings of the coming wrath of God. One only needs to read the book of Revelation to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that God still gets angry; and if one reads Revelation 2-3 in particular, they will see that He still gets angry at church people from time to time, even among those He loves who live prior to the tribulation!
Quote #14:
“Schizophrenic teaching that tells you that God is sometimes angry and sometimes happy with you based on your performance is unscriptural and will make you a schizophrenic believer. It’s time to get out of confusion and to start seeing your God for who He really is.”
Chapter 4, page 48
NOTE: There is nothing schizophrenic about experiencing a range of emotions for people you love when they perform well or perform badly. Evidently, the cross not only converted God from His temper problem it saved Him from being schizophrenic and acted as an anti-depressant for mood swings and anxiety. Now He has only one emotion all the time (at least while the church is here, then after the rapture He will explode in uncontrollable rage after 2000 + years of happy, happy, happy.)
I realize no one would actually ascribe to believe the above paragraph; however, I’m trying to make the point that we sometimes go too far in our analogies about how happy God is with us that we begin to paint an illusion of the nature of God that is very different from His true Person.
Quote #15:
“Soon after the tragedy of September 11 had taken place, some believers publicly declared that God was judging America because of its sins…Come on, when Christians attribute such events to God’s judgment, terrorists would be the first to say, ‘Amen! Preach it!’ Can you see that something is amiss when both believers and terrorists agree on the same thing?
Chapter 5, page 49
NOTE: The devil believes in God and divine judgment, why shouldn’t some of his followers? Can you also see that something is amiss when believers and secular humanists agree to scoff/belittle/patronize the notion of divine judgment?
Quote #16:
“Thousands of people died [referring to 9/11], and many families, friends and loved ones were thrown into grief. How can that be the work of our loving Father? Read the Bible for yourself. It says that God is ‘not willing that any should perish.’”
Chapter 5, page 49
NOTE: Reading the Bible is always sound advice…in fact, let’s start by reading the rest of the verse cited above: “[God is] not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” This verse is in II Peter 3:9, which ironically, is a New Testament verse in the middle of a large passage of scripture dedicated to warning believers about divine judgment. The theme being that in the last days many would scoff at the coming judgment of God, and that if men don’t repent, even though God wills to save, even though God wills that none should perish, men will still perish as part of divine judgment.
Quote #10:
“They say that God gives you the gift of righteousness, on the condition that you keep the Ten Commandments for the rest of your life to remain righteous. Now, is this a real gift? Come on, when God gave you the gift of righteousness, it was a real gift. Stop trying to earn it with your own works. God’s gifts to us are unconditional!”
Chapter 3, page 28
NOTE: The gift God gave us was “righteousness” itself. If you sin, you reject the gift. It is a ridiculous and dishonest proposition to suggest that since we were given the gift of righteousness, we are righteous whether we are righteous or not (See the entire book of I John). Obviously, God’s gifts ARE conditional in the sense that if He gives us the gift of righteousness, we should BE righteous, and not just assert that the gift means we have an unconditional claim on righteousness.
Quote #11:
“My friend, righteousness is a gift because of what Jesus has accomplished on the cross for you. All your sins—past, present and future—have been washed clean by His precious blood. You are completely forgiven and from the moment you received Jesus into your life, you will never be held liable for your sins ever again.”
Chapter 3, pages 28-29
NOTE: Unconditional forgiveness. Herein lies the root of error that leads to so many heresies. All of this quote is true save one important point that makes the difference between a truth and a lie: righteousness is a gift because of what Jesus accomplished on the cross for you. All your sins—past and present—have been washed clean by His precious blood, and because of grace you don’t have to have a “FUTURE SINS TO BE FORGIVEN” category! But if future sins happen, your prescription is not denial, it’s found in I John 1:9.
Quote #12:
“…when believers don’t understand that righteousness is a gift, and that it is about ‘right standing’ and not ‘right doing’, they will depend on their own efforts to earn this gift.”
Chapter 3, page 34
NOTE: Right standing implies right doing. The debate, I guess would be, is right standing compatible with wrong doing? I don’t think that’s the kind of right standing God had in mind.
Quote #13:
“My friend, those who believe that God is sometimes angry with them are still living under the old covenant of the law and not under the new covenant of grace.”
Chapter 4, page 38
NOTE: So the cross was to convert God the Father from his temper problem against sin? There are numerous New Testament examples that God still gets mad at both sin and sinners, through Jesus example, through the epistles’ doctrine, and through prophetic warnings of the coming wrath of God. One only needs to read the book of Revelation to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that God still gets angry; and if one reads Revelation 2-3 in particular, they will see that He still gets angry at church people from time to time, even among those He loves who live prior to the tribulation!
Quote #14:
“Schizophrenic teaching that tells you that God is sometimes angry and sometimes happy with you based on your performance is unscriptural and will make you a schizophrenic believer. It’s time to get out of confusion and to start seeing your God for who He really is.”
Chapter 4, page 48
NOTE: There is nothing schizophrenic about experiencing a range of emotions for people you love when they perform well or perform badly. Evidently, the cross not only converted God from His temper problem it saved Him from being schizophrenic and acted as an anti-depressant for mood swings and anxiety. Now He has only one emotion all the time (at least while the church is here, then after the rapture He will explode in uncontrollable rage after 2000 + years of happy, happy, happy.)
I realize no one would actually ascribe to believe the above paragraph; however, I’m trying to make the point that we sometimes go too far in our analogies about how happy God is with us that we begin to paint an illusion of the nature of God that is very different from His true Person.
Quote #15:
“Soon after the tragedy of September 11 had taken place, some believers publicly declared that God was judging America because of its sins…Come on, when Christians attribute such events to God’s judgment, terrorists would be the first to say, ‘Amen! Preach it!’ Can you see that something is amiss when both believers and terrorists agree on the same thing?
Chapter 5, page 49
NOTE: The devil believes in God and divine judgment, why shouldn’t some of his followers? Can you also see that something is amiss when believers and secular humanists agree to scoff/belittle/patronize the notion of divine judgment?
Quote #16:
“Thousands of people died [referring to 9/11], and many families, friends and loved ones were thrown into grief. How can that be the work of our loving Father? Read the Bible for yourself. It says that God is ‘not willing that any should perish.’”
Chapter 5, page 49
NOTE: Reading the Bible is always sound advice…in fact, let’s start by reading the rest of the verse cited above: “[God is] not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” This verse is in II Peter 3:9, which ironically, is a New Testament verse in the middle of a large passage of scripture dedicated to warning believers about divine judgment. The theme being that in the last days many would scoff at the coming judgment of God, and that if men don’t repent, even though God wills to save, even though God wills that none should perish, men will still perish as part of divine judgment.
The classic argument being that these verses refer to a future judgment exclusively, and that we are in an interim period where God has (please pardon my crude theological paraphrase): “lovingly decided to stop being judgmental because of the cross (but will have a relapse after the church is gone and judge again in the future).”
Nevertheless, one would be right in saying these verses refer to a future judgment, they do—but not exclusively. So one must ask the question: In this “Age of Grace” (or “justice-free Shangri-La” as the Age of Grace is often described), do men still perish? They do. Is the command to repent still applicable to us? It is. Did God decide to wink at us and ruthlessly judge everyone else by a different standard? He did not. In fact, I Peter 4:17-19 tells us that divine judgment not only still applies to us, it begins with us!
Jesus did not die on the cross so the Father would stop being judgmental. He did not die on the cross to deliver us from consequences to bad behavior. He died on the cross to provide a way of escape to those who would repent. Though we repent, if we sin again (as II Peter 2:19-22 tells us) consequences are reinstated.
We cannot have a loving Father and an unjust one at the same time. A loving Father punishes evil (or refuses to sanction it), to preserve righteousness in His children. The Bible instructs natural parents to discipline (and punish, if necessary) their children. Good parents do that. Hebrews 12:5-29 tells us that God the Father chastens those He loves. Revelation 3:19 tells us that Jesus rebukes and chastens those He loves. I Corinthians 5:1-5 tells us that a church was to surrender one of their members to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit might be saved. There comes a point when wickedness MUST be judged to preserve righteousness.
One might ask, “how can God be just and merciful at the same time?” It is simple. God is just in that He punishes wickedness. He is merciful in that He forgives and pardons the penitent who turn from their crimes. If they turn back to their sin, they must renew themselves through true repentance once again. They are not given a lifetime pass.
Quote #17:
“I have also heard some believers pronouncing, ‘If God does not judge America for all its sins, God has to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.’ Well, let me say this with honor and respect: If God judges America today, He has to apologize to Jesus and what He has accomplished on the cross! My friend, God is not judging America (or any country in the world today).”
Chapter 5, page 49
NOTE: Proverbs 19:28-29 says the following:
“An ungodly witness scorneth judgment: and the mouth of the wicked devoureth iniquity. Judgments are prepared for scorners, and stripes for the back of fools.”
Divine judgment is throughout the Old Testament and was a common theme in nearly every book. That theme was continued through our Lord Jesus in the Gospels when He declared judgment upon men, cities, nations and churches who failed to receive Him. In fact, Jesus rebuked the religious leaders in Matthew 23:23 for NEGLECTING to teach judgment. Many of the judgments Christ pronounced took place long after the cross. The epistles teach and warn concerning divine judgment as well. Hebrews 6:2 lists “judgment” as a foundational doctrine of Christ, the MILK of the Word for babes! Yet we arrogantly or presumptuously mock the importance of it and say, “Nah, it doesn’t apply to us!” FOOLISH!
Quote #18:
“You will never find an example of God punishing a believer for his sins in the new covenant.”
Chapter 5, page 57
NOTE: Please see the following examples of God punishing believers for their sins in the new covenant:
(1) Ananias & Saphira—Acts 5:1-14(2) The Galatian church—Galatians 6:7-8
(3) The promiscuous church member at Corinth—I Corinthians 5:4-5; II Corinthians 2:6
(4) Christian brothers who maintain certain sins—I Corinthians 5:9-13
(5) Hymenaeus & Alexander—I Timothy 1:19-20; II Timothy 4:14
(6) The younger widows—I Timothy 5:11-15
(7) Sinning brothers—I Timothy 5:20
(8) Believers who become lovers of money—I Timothy 6:9-10
(9) Demas—II Timothy 4:10 (see also Colossians 4:14 & Philemon 24 for confirmation he was not only a believer, but a one-time preacher)
(10) Huge segments of the seven churches in Asia (Revelation 2-3)
Also note God’s divine judgment illustrated in the death of Herod (Acts 12:23), Elymas the sorcerer being struck with blindness (Acts 13:8-12) and God’s use of civil government to punish evil (Romans 13:1-6).
Quote #19:
“Did Jesus die on the cross to free us from committing sinful actions or harboring sinful thoughts? If He did, then allow me to conclude with reverence that He failed. You and I know fully well that we can still be tempted with sinful thoughts and tempted to commit sinful actions, and there will still be times when we fail.”--Chapter 5, pages 58-59
NOTE: To be blunt, this is a most inflammatory, heretical & unbelieving statement which is contrary to all the Word of God. Yet, it is what so many preachers believe without saying it so recklessly.
The simple answer is “YES”; Jesus DID die to not only free us from our sins, but from our iniquities (bent towards sin) as well (Isaiah 53:5). He didn’t just forgive us for the sins we commit. His grace delivers us not only from the sins we commit; but from the sin nature that accompanies sin. II Peter 1:4-10 tells us how we can stay free from sin. I John 1:8-9 says that if we have fellowship with God but continue to walk in darkness (continue sinning) we lie. Then it also reveals that we are cleansed and maintain freedom from sin by walking in the light. We don’t sin as believers when we walk in the light; we sin when we walk away from it. In which case, we do as I John 1:9 instructs, we repent and get back in the light!
Quote #19:
“Did Jesus die on the cross to free us from committing sinful actions or harboring sinful thoughts? If He did, then allow me to conclude with reverence that He failed. You and I know fully well that we can still be tempted with sinful thoughts and tempted to commit sinful actions, and there will still be times when we fail.”--Chapter 5, pages 58-59
NOTE: To be blunt, this is a most inflammatory, heretical & unbelieving statement which is contrary to all the Word of God. Yet, it is what so many preachers believe without saying it so recklessly.
The simple answer is “YES”; Jesus DID die to not only free us from our sins, but from our iniquities (bent towards sin) as well (Isaiah 53:5). He didn’t just forgive us for the sins we commit. His grace delivers us not only from the sins we commit; but from the sin nature that accompanies sin. II Peter 1:4-10 tells us how we can stay free from sin. I John 1:8-9 says that if we have fellowship with God but continue to walk in darkness (continue sinning) we lie. Then it also reveals that we are cleansed and maintain freedom from sin by walking in the light. We don’t sin as believers when we walk in the light; we sin when we walk away from it. In which case, we do as I John 1:9 instructs, we repent and get back in the light!
Let me also say that temptation itself is not sin. Jesus was tempted and remained sinless. Wrong thoughts or suggestions of the devil don’t become transgressions unless acted upon (James 1:14-15). Wrong thoughts or suggestions of the devil don’t become iniquities unless brooded about and not cast down (II Corinthians 10:5).
Grace that merely “helps sinners not transgress as much as before” is just cheap. You don’t need salvation for that, a monastery will suffice. Grace that not only removes sin, condemnation, & the slavery to keep committing it is the only grace worth having! Everything else is a cheap counterfeit! God help our unbelief!!!
Quote #20:
“…I was told that the more I knew, the more God would hold me accountable, and my punishment for falling short of His expectations would be more severe than someone who knew less…I was also taught that the closer I drew to God, the more trials and tribulations I would experience…As I grew in the Lord, He opened my eyes and I realized that the teachings that I had received were not true.”
Chapter 6, pages 61-62
NOTE: These teachings are not lies—they are common sense. When a believer matures, more is expected of him (James 3:1); You expect more from adults than babies because part of maturity is taking responsibility (Hebrews 5:11-14)—and yes, the more you mature, the greater trials you will face! Adults tend to have bigger trials than babies. This is not a fearful thing though, because adults are equipped to handle it. The premise here is that teaching these things causes believers to shun intimacy with God for fear of greater expectations upon themselves. Don’t worry! If a person chooses to stay a spiritual baby to avoid growth pains they can and will. Personally, I prefer to grow up and tap into the destiny that God has for me. I want God to trust me to rise to His expectations because of His grace and my partnership with Jesus Christ.
Quote #21:
“You see, faith does not come by simply hearing the word of God because the word of God would encompass everything in the Bible, including the law of Moses. There is no impartation of faith when you hear the Ten Commandments preached. Faith only comes by hearing the word of Christ…Only when Christ is preached will faith be imparted.”
Chapter 7, page 75
NOTE: The complexities of doctrinal confusion in this statement are so vast it is difficult to give a simple refutation. Nevertheless, it raises some important questions for Pastor Prince:
(1) How is “the Word of God” out of harmony with “the Word of Christ” in your estimation that makes it necessary to make this distinction?
(2) Since the Word of God encompasses everything in the Bible, but the Word of Christ does not, which words belong to Christ, and which do not?
(3) If the law of Moses is God-inspired, why is it not Christ-inspired as well? Is there strife in the Godhead, or did Jesus convert the Father/Holy Spirit at the cross?
(4) Why do only the words of Christ produce faith, but not the words of the Father or the Holy Spirit?
(5) If the law of Moses came from God, but didn’t produce faith in them that heard it, why did so many people try to obey something they had no capacity to believe?
(6) If the law of Moses doesn’t produce faith, why did Israel experience so many revivals when it was taught to the people (II Kings 22-23; Nehemiah 8-10)?
(7) If the Ten Commandments don’t produce faith, why has our nation sunk further into spiritual darkness since we’ve removed it from our schools, courthouses and public places?
In summary, splitting hairs between “Word of God” verses “Word of Christ” is absurd since Jesus was called “the Word made Flesh (John 1:14)” and was in the beginning WITH God AS God called “The Word of God (John 1:1).” Nothing that Christ ever said is out of harmony with the Father or the Holy Spirit, because they are one (I John 5:7). All of the Word of God contains and produces faith, not just words pertaining directly to Christ Himself (see Hebrews 11:3 & Romans 4:17 for examples). All scripture is given by inspiration of God, is considered the inerrant Word of God and is necessary for edification of the believer (II Timothy 3:16-17; II Peter 1:19-21). No scripture is subject to private interpretation, nor is it wise to sift through scripture saying, “this is the word of Christ—this is not.” Hebrews chapter 11 lists many who are referred to as “heroes of faith” who knew no distinction between “word of God” verses “word of Christ”, yet received faith from God’s Word anyway.
Just for clarification, it is right and proper to teach and preach based on a revelation of Christ (like Paul did, Galatians 1:11-12) and hearing the Word of God/Word of Christ IS the method that faith comes. However, a revelation of Christ—or an understanding of the words of Christ—are not limited to a hand-picked selection of New Testament verses. The Word of Christ encompasses all of the Bible and INCLUDES THE LAW OF MOSES!
Quote #22:
“I now know beyond a shadow of a doubt that a Christian cannot commit the unpardonable sin.”
Chapter 8, page 90
NOTE: Here are several sample scriptures that are examples of how eternal life can be lost and that the saved die again when they commit sin:
Genesis 2:17; Exodus 32:32-33; Leviticus 18:24-30; 26:13-39; Numbers 25:1-8; Deuteronomy 4:23-31; Joshua 7:, 10-12; Judges 2:1-23; I Kings 14:22; II Kings 17:1-17; II Chronicles 36; Isaiah 5:24-25; Jeremiah 2:5-37; Lamentations 1:8-9; Ezekiel 13:1-23; Hebrews 12:28-29; Psalm 69:28; Revelation 3:5; Matthew 7:21; I John 4:8, 12, 16, 21; Galatians 1:6-8; Mark 11:25-26; I Corinthians 3:16-17; Luke 8:13; John 6:66; II Corinthians 5:17; Romans 11:16; Acts 1:20, 25; Colossians 2:8-19; Jude 12-13; II Timothy 3:8; Titus 1:16; Philippians 3:7-14; I Thessalonians 3:8; James 5:19-20; & II Peter 1:4-10.
Here are several other sample scriptures that reveal eternal life is not an eternal possession now and will not be until the end of a life of holiness:
Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:26-29; Mark 16:15; Matthew 12:31-32; Acts 5:3, 32; 7:51; I Corinthians 3:16-17; Mark 10:29-30; Luke 18:29-30; Matthew 19:28-29; Romans 2:7; Romans 6:21-23; Romans 5:21; Galatians 6:7-8; I Timothy 1:16; I Timothy 4:8; I Timothy 6:12, 19; Titus 1:2; 3:7; I Peter 1:5, 9, 13; 3:7; I John 2:25; Jude 20-24; Daniel 12:2; John 5:28; Matthew 25:46; Matthew 7:13-14; etc.
Here are several more plain scriptures that demonstrate men have to continue to the end to be saved:
Matthew 10:22; Romans 6:21-23; Hebrews 3:6, 12-14; 6:11-12; I Peter 1:5, 9, 13; Revelation 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21; Hebrews 10:23, 35-39; Mark 10:29-30; Luke 18:29-30; Matthew 19:28-29; Romans 2:7; Romans 6:21-23; Romans 5:21; Galatians 6:7-8; I Timothy 1:16; I Timothy 4:8; I Timothy 6:12, 19; Titus 1:2; 3:7; I Peter 1:5, 9, 13; 3:7; I John 2:25; Jude 20-24; Daniel 12:2; John 5:28; Matthew 25:46; & Matthew 7:13-14.
Here are several scriptures concerning faith and faithfulness to the end to be saved:
Acts 14:22; Romans 1:5; 16:26; Romans 1:17; Galatians 3:11; Hebrews 10:38-39; Romans 3:3; Romans 11:20-24; I Corinthians 16:13; II Corinthians 1:24; Ephesians 3:17; Colossians 1:23: I Timothy 1:19; 4:1; II Timothy 3:8; Hebrews 3:6, 12-14; 4:11; 6:11-12; 10:23-39; I Peter 1:5, 9, 13.
Here are several scriptures about saved men falling into sin and becoming lost:
Luke 8:13; Romans 11:11-24; I Corinthians 10:13; I Timothy 3:6; 6:9-10; Hebrews 6:4-6, 11; II Peter 3:17; Galatians 5:4; Romans 14:4; Jude 20-24; Romans 11:22; Acts 1:25; II Thessalonians 2:3; & Revelation 2:5-6.
Quote #23:
“A believer has already received the gift of eternal life and will never be “subject to eternal condemnation.”
Chapter 8, page 92
NOTE: See scriptures from previous quote. Particularly the scriptures that reveal eternal life is not an eternal possession now.
Quote #24:
“…some of the words which Jesus spoke in the four gospels…are part of the old covenant. They were spoken before the cross as He had not yet died. The new covenant only begins after the cross, when the Holy Spirit was given on the day of Pentecost.”
Chapter 8, page 92
NOTE: (Sigh). The gospels are the foundation for the new covenant; not merely the capstone for the old. Jesus didn’t come to earth to teach us about the old covenant. He certainly didn’t prep His disciples, “Guys, I want you to record the things I say and do and then ignore it because after I’m gone—none of it applies to you anyway. A man named Paul will come who will teach you what to believe about me. For now, I want it to be a surprise, so just keep bumbling around like idiots until I’m long gone.”
None of the gospels were written so Jesus could propagate the old covenant! The gospel of Matthew could probably be considered the most “Old Testament” of the four gospels because it was written to Jews; and yet, the subject of Matthew from the first chapter until the last is the kingdom of heaven (of which the church is a part). Everything about this gospel is revolutionary, and was written to convert Jews to Christianity. Why would this gospel be used to evangelize if it was merely an extension of the Old Testament? It wouldn’t.
The gospel of Mark and Luke were written to evangelize Romans and Greeks. Why would they need Old Testament teachings of Jesus? I thought evangelizing Gentile nations was a mark of the new covenant, not the old!
For Pete’s sake, the gospel of John was written to the church!
Now Jesus DID say that there were things He could not teach them yet because they were not ready to bear it; however, John 14:26 said that one of the jobs of the Holy Spirit when He comes is: “TO REMIND THE DISCIPLES WHAT JESUS TAUGHT! “ We all need that reminder.
Quote #25:
“Not everything that Jesus said was spoken to the church. Paul’s letters were written to the church and are thus for our benefit today. God raised him up to write the words of the ascended Jesus…That is why, when it comes to reading the Bible, I always encourage new believers in our church to begin with the letters of Paul. (Many new believers like to start with the book of Revelation or Genesis, without first getting a foundation in the gospel of grace through reading the letters of Paul.)”
Chapter 8, page 94
NOTE: If Paul had all the post-cross doctrine and revelation we need, why would the church need Jesus’ pre-cross teaching? Why did Paul say we have the “mind of Christ” if all we need is the “mind of Paul?”
The answer is: our salvation starts with Jesus, not Paul (See I Corinthians 1:13). Our doctrine starts with Jesus, not Paul. Our chief example of compassion, ministry, authority and power is Jesus Himself—not Paul. Paul’s ministry began with a revelation of Jesus, not Paul coming to self-actualization. Christ showed us how we can live through His own example. He taught us what to believe through His own words. When Pentecost came, a foundation of the Word in new covenant terms through the Word made Flesh was already laid. The disciples didn’t have to make up their own doctrines after Jesus left! They taught the good NEWS—that is, what Christ Himself had ALREADY revealed to them!
Jesus didn’t die to save His own doctrine (or the plethora of other things in this book that are wrongfully attributed to the cross)! He’s the same yesterday, today, & forever!
Quote #26:
“Listen carefully: We don’t have to confess our sins in order to be forgiven. We confess our sins because we are already forgiven…I’m talking about being open with God…So confession in the new covenant is just being honest about your failures and your humanity. It is the result of being forgiven and not something you do in order to be forgiven.”
Chapter 9, page 104
NOTE: There is no scriptural basis for this statement anywhere and there are literally hundreds of verses to the contrary. The term “confession” is linked to the idea of repentance, and there is no example in scripture where we are told repentance is “about being open with God” and is not necessary for forgiveness. This statement is just another way to substantiate an already bogus doctrine that misunderstands the work of the cross.
Quote #27:
“I took I John 1:9 to the limit and it nearly drove me insane. But what does I John 1:9 really say and to whom was it actually written?...People have actually taken this verse and built a whole doctrine around it when in actually, chapter 1 of I John was written to the Gnostics, who were unbelievers.”
Chapter 9, page 106
NOTE: The book of I John was written as one single, cohesive letter given to one primary audience. It is cohesive and thematic throughout and to separate the first chapter from the rest of the book as having a different audience is either dishonest, willfully ignorant or naïve at best.
So the question arises, to whom was the letter written? If the first chapter was written to the Gnostics, then the whole book was written to Gnostics. If the first chapter was written to the Gnostics, and then beginning in chapter two it was written to the church (as Pastor Prince later suggests), then why is chapter one included in the same letter, particularly if his letter contained no original chapter divisions, and again if it was not intended for the audience of chapter two and forward?
(I think the reason Pastor Prince insists that the first chapter only is written to Gnostics, is because the rest of the letter is indisputably written to a local assembly of Christian believers that were intimately connected with the apostle John because of the frequent usage of the phrase “my little children” that begins in the opening of chapter two.)
It makes no sense for John to write a letter to Gnostics in the opening and then the church later on. That would be like my father, Pastor Larry, writing a letter to a church that belongs to one of his spiritual sons in the ministry, and including in the opening paragraph an address exclusively for Mormons.
If Christians are to ignore the first chapter because it doesn’t apply to them, why did John open with it? If it was necessary to address the local Gnostics, why didn’t John put it on the end of the book, and give a disclaimer: “Oh yeah, will you send this SEPARATE note to the Gnostics, and remember, YOU don’t need to confess your sins, if you do, you aren’t believing in the finished work of the cross!”
Perhaps Pastor Prince meant that the Gnostics addressed in the first chapter were part of the same congregation/audience—odd, but perhaps. But if that was the case, why didn’t John single them out, like Paul did in many of his letters, when he was addressing specific people or referring to a particular group of people within a church body?
Regardless, the evidence is overwhelming that the book of I John fits together beautifully and flows perfectly without having to switch audiences after the introductory comments of the first chapter.
Quote #28:
“If you really believe that you need to confess all your sins to be forgiven, do you know what you would be doing? You would be confessing your sins ALL THE TIME!”
Chapter 9, page 107
NOTE: This statement just comes down to a misunderstanding of confession of sins. I will explain in a couple points:
(1) As previously mentioned, confession of sins is inextricably linked to the act of repentance (which is an inward and outward turn from sin). Now, if your definition of grace is, “the power to continue to sin (less often) but free of the associative feelings of condemnation”, then yes, you would be confessing all the time because your faith is set on needing perpetual bailout from God. BUT, if your definition of grace, at least in part, is “the power to stop sinning,” then no, you would not be confessing all the time because the power of grace keeps you from perpetual sin, setting you free from not only your transgressions, but your iniquities (habitual sins, and inclinations toward sin)!
(2) Secondly, confession is more than parroting words. It is also more than a ritualistic recitation of sin. Confession, in the Greek is the word “homologeo” and it means more than a recitation of words. It could be described as entering a covenant or binding agreement with God to renounce sin—aligning your thinking, believing, convictions and viewpoints with God Himself—talking the same language! When you see confession as strictly lip service to repentance, you miss the point and power of confession. When you see confession as a covenant with God to cease from sin and be aligned together with Him against sin, then you understand confession not only deals with the act of sin, it deals with the propensity to sin as well.
(I recommend you see the Strong’s Concordance and the Greek word studies of Rick Renner for a better understanding of confession).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)