Talking about IHOP-KC: My Appearance on the Long for Truth Podcast

Recently I was asked to come on the Long for Truth podcast to talk about the teachings of Mike Bickle and the International House of Prayer. We talked about a variety of topics, from Bickle's teaching of a Kenotic Jesus to what IHOP-KC teaches on the power of prayer, as well as a bit on prophecy and what Bickle teaches it means. I pray that God uses to reach out to His sheep and save them from false doctrine.

The original blog post can be found here, over at the Long for Truth blog.

The podcast can be listened to below:

Listen to "The Dangers of Mike Bickle Part 2 With Tony Allen" on Spreaker.

The False Drought Prophecy of Bob Jones

Whenever Mike Bickle discusses the so-called "prophetic history" of the International House of Prayer (IHOP-KC), he often brings up the supposed prophecy of drought as predicted by Bob Jones. As it turns out, that prophecy may not only be completely false, but the account regarding it may have been altered over time.

You can view more information at this link (H/T to Crosswise).

This would not only demonstrate Mike Bickle and Bob Jones are false prophets (though, of course IHOP-KC followers have a few ways around that), but demonstrate that they are editing the facts of their movement's history and presenting to their followers an "approved" version of it. They certainly aren't the first group to do this - the Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, altered the account of what they expected for the year 1975, in order to hide the false prophecy that Armageddon would occur. This is, in fact, one of the tell-tale signs of a cult.

The Unwritten "Word of God"

The following quote comes from the blog of Julie Meyer, a singer and speaker at the International House of Prayer in Kansas City. It can be found in her recent post 28 Years In the Prayer Room:

I remember being there the day Bob Jones came up and said, ‘24/7 House Of Prayer’. The singing will never stop round the clock. God is releasing the song birds’ At that time I could not imagine doing anything else. A small group of us would talk about this over coffee frequently. ‘What would this look like? How could this be? 24/7 worship? Will I get to do this full-time? Will this be my job?” [sic]

I think it is an awesome thing to watch the spoken prophetic Word of God become a reality. That is exactly what I have watched these past 11 years. I literally saw the Prophetic Word become a reality of which I am actively involved in. I have watched my children grow up in the House Of Prayer. I have watched their hearts awakened to His Love at young ages. I have watched them become excellent in the Word of God and also excellent in their skill as prophetic musicians.

Now I am watching for the 2nd half of the prophetic word to become a reality. For I remember the day Bob Jones stood up and said ‘Out of this 24/7 House of Prayer will come the day when ‘No disease known to man will stand’. We are so close to this. I can feel it. I can see it in the distance but it is getting closer and closer. I tell myself, ‘I am so blessed that I get to do what I do. I get to praise my Bridegroom. I get to sing to my Father and experience the touch of the Holy Spirit. This is my calling. This is my heart and this is my Glory to awaken the dawn with my song. To sing, to praise, to prophesy that which is on the Lord’s heart.

Those who listen to my podcast might remember that when I reviewed Mike Bickle's message about the founding of IHOP-KC, I played a clip where Mike Bickle was speaking to Bob Jones about a revelation he discovered, and Bob Jones replies, "That's just as good, it's the Word of the Lord." Here we have Julie Meyer talking about the "spoken prophetic Word of God," as given by Bob Jones, and this is mentioned alongside the regular "Word of God" (which we'll assume is scripture).

Those who have studied the teachings of Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and the like, will know that there are often two authorities spoken of: the written word of God, and the unwritten word of God (most commonly called Holy Tradition or the teachings of the Church). Our Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox friends, of course, would never argue that Holy Tradition supersedes or takes priority over scripture, only that it be seen with the same light and authority as written scripture. They argue that, since both come from the same source (namely, God), and were given to the church, then they are to be treated as equals. Of course, this boils down to whose authority you believe and who decides to discern what is and isn't infallible tradition (as there are major differences between Rome and the East), but that is another blog post for another time. For now, let's recognize that Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and many other so-called "apostolic" churches establish two sources of authority for their followers: the written Word of God, and the spoken or unwritten Word of God.

With this in mind, we realize two things regarding IHOP-KC, their opinion regarding the authority of scripture, and the role of their leaders:

1) In regards to the authority of scripture, IHOP-KC is no different than Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy. They believe not only in the authority of the written word, but in the authority of the unwritten word, spoken by their prophets and leaders. This is something I've brought up before, asking whether or not IHOP-KC and its leaders are truly adherents to the doctrine of sola scriptura. While they claim on their website and in public statements that they hold everything up to the light of scripture, there are plenty of examples where scripture was read through the lens of the personal revelation and so-called prophetic experiences of their leaders (for example, Mike Bickle's treatment of Haggai 1:2 in the previously linked post).

2) We see yet again a confirmation that the interpretation of scripture and the guidance of the church, for those in these Houses of Prayer and Hyper-Charismatic movements, is not the plain meaning or historical interpretation of scripture, but rather the interpretations and personal revelations of their leaders. While they may deny this, if they were intellectually honest, they would realize this is the case. If Mike Bickle and Bob Jones had never existed, the interpretation of scripture as taught at IHOP-KC - especially in regards to the end times - would have never been reached. No one until the past few decades believed that there would be a group of "forerunners" preceding the end times. Again, the interpretation of scripture and the guidance of the church is dependent upon the leaders of the movement and their supposed connection to God.

This is, as I've discussed before, one of the traits of a cult, but more importantly it is simply another affirmation that scripture is not the final authority in these movements. The Houses of Prayer are not founded upon the word of God, but the word of their leaders, which interprets the word of God for their members and gives additional input for their theology. In the end, this separates them from the orthodox, universal church, and makes them very dangerous for unwary Christians.

An Open Email to IHOP-KC and Mike Bickle

The following is an email I sent to the International House of Prayer on February 6, 2013. Initially, when I had sent a question to the Twitter account of IHOPU, I received cordial and prompt responses. They eventually directed me to Mike Bickle's assistant at IHOP-KC. As of yet, I have not received a response. Because of the explanations I went through in the email, I decided to share it on my blog for others to read. Perhaps I will receive responses here.

***

Greetings,

During the One Thing conference, I replied to a tweet made by IHOPU, which had made mention of an Anna anointing. I asked them for the biblical foundation of such an anointing, and they sent me to a lecture by Mike Bickle regarding it. I printed out the notes, listened to Mr. Bickle speak, and then sent an email to IHOPU asking if I could direct some questions and concerns. They provided me with this email address, and so I thought I would send said questions and concerns this way.

Firstly, in Part II, a heavy emphasis is placed on the function of the Temple in the Old Testament. However, this is all under the old covenant, and in the way worship functioned in the theocracy of ancient Israel and Judah, and the Temple itself was twice destroyed - the last time being by the Romans in 70 AD. Since then, it has never been rebuilt, and its services have not continued. Mr. Bickle argues, in the lecture, that the Temple worship was never nullified in the new covenant - however, there seem to be two problems here:

1) The Temple model at IHOP-KC seems to be selective about what is accepted from the old covenant worship. For example, the musicians and dancers are used, but no animal sacrifices or priesthood. As pertaining the priesthood, Bickle calls the Levites "intercessory missionaries" in the lecture, however the Levites were the priests descended from Aaron and who assisted in the sacrifices - they did not simply sing and dance and pray. Hebrews 7 compares and contrasts Christ to those Levitical priests, saying that Christ has now replaced them as a better priest, fulfilling their function more perfectly. As pertaining the animal sacrifices, it will be granted that one might argue Christ's sacrifices undid the animal sacrifices, but that brings us to the next point:

2) No where in the New Testament is the Temple ever made the exact model of worship. In fact, the Epistle to the Hebrews makes it clear that the worship and Temple in the Old Testament were but a shadow of the heavenly things, and that in the new covenant it takes place in heaven with Christ, who now functions as our intercessor.

Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the holy places, in the true tent that the Lord set up, not man. For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. They serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things. For when Moses was about to erect the tent, he was instructed by God, saying, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.” But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. [Hebrews 8:1-7]

And likewise later on, in which Christ is called the "greater and more perfect tent":

But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. [Hebrews 9:11-14]

The law and all under it is called by the author of Hebrews "a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities" (Heb 10:1). The lesson of the epistle to the Hebrews - written supposedly while the Temple was still up and functioning - seems to be that Christ fulfills the role of the Levitical priesthood, as well as the role that the Temple functioned in in sacrificing and atonement. The Temple was not a model for how to worship, but a shadow for the final "Temple" in heaven, where God the Son would intercede continually for His people and their sins, which were wiped clean by the blood spilled on Calvary.

For certain, worship and the formation of God's church was discussed in New Testament scripture. We see the leadership organized in the pastoral epistles. We see rules for orderly worship in 1 Corinthians 14:26-40. We have examples of how early Christians worshiped from both Christian and non-Christian sources in the days of the post-apostolic church. None of it suggests anything close to the Temple of David, or that we should emulate the Temple worship right down to constant, never ceasing worship.

Secondly, some of the quotations and use of passages from the Old Testament in Section III concerned me, as they often seemed to be out of context or eisegeted.

For example, Isaiah 62:6-7 is cited and is said to be about intercessory missionaries at the end of the age, however it appears no commentator or theologian has ever perceived it in this fashion until recently. The "watchmen" mentioned in verse 6 has most often been interpreted as general ministers of religion (cf. Ez 3:17; 33:7; Isa 22:11; 52:8; 56:10), and Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi were definitely "watchmen" in the post-captivity era. Today, the "watchmen" are ministers and pastors of the Christian faith. The words "they shall never be silent" does not imply constant singing or praying, but rather constant vigilance - it was a reference to the practice of watchmen of the era to call out the hour and the state of security ("three o'clock, all's well," etc.). Generally, the passages do not immediately reveal any prophecy about an end times prayer movement. It might discuss ministers of the gospel, but not "intercessory missionaries."

Another example is seen with Isaiah 42:10-15. It is said to be the "clearest picture" of "prophetic singing before Jesus' return." However, context has to be examined here. verses 1-9 had discussed the coming of God's Servant (ie., Christ), and part of this section is quoted by the evangelist Matthew in Mt 12:18-21 and is said by him to have been fulfilled (Mt 12:17) - in other words, it's talking about the first coming of Christ. In light of this news of a coming savior, the prophet Isaiah therefore tells the people to "sing to the LORD a new song" (v. 10). The following sections are in reference to the lands around Judah - where Jews either lived or interacted with the people of - celebrating this news.Like with Isaiah 62:6-7, one cannot see an end times prayer movement here unless it is first assumed.

While perhaps not a big deal, the last part of this use of Isaiah 42 that surprised me was the wording of verse 15 in the notes, which are done with: "I will lay waste [by earthquakes] the mountains..." [emphasis/italics in original]. Actually, look at the full wording of verse 15:

I will lay waste mountains and hills, and dry up all their vegetation; I will turn the rivers into islands, and dry up the pools. [Isaiah 42:15]

The words "lay waste" actually are "dry up" in the original language, and the "mountains and hills" are a synechdoche for the trees on them. The overall context is saying that, through a kind of drought, the Lord will defeat his enemies. It is not talking about an earthquake.

Thirdly, I was also concerned about some of the passages cited in Section IV, regarding the New Testament and "night and day prayer."

For example, Mr. Bickle says that the "order of worship that God commanded David to embrace...is timeless and valid today," and then quotes Matthew 6:10 and highlights "on earth as it is in heaven." However, this isn't saying anything about 24/7 prayer. In fact, this is from the Lord's Prayer, which - after advising us not to pray in overly public ways or commit vain repetition (v. 5-8), Christ states in verse 9: "pray then like this" (or "in this manner" literally). Again, it's not talking about praying in the same fashion the Levites and Temple employees did, let alone committing 24/7 prayer.

Another example is seen with Luke 18:7, which I have noticed seems to be a favorite of many IHOP-KC staff members to validate the growing prayer movement. In the lecture, Bickle attempts to tie it in with Isaiah 62:6 simply because it speaks of "night and day" and "justice." However, a reading of the full context shows what it's really about:

And he told them a parable to the effect that they ought always to pray and not lose heart. [Luke 18:1; emphasis mine]

Verse 7 is coming off the tail end of the parable, but the parable is said right off the bat to simply be a lesson about how we should pray to God always and not lose heart if prayers are not answered. That is the context of the parable - not an end times prayer movement.

Yet another example is seen with the citation of Paul in 1 Th 3:10, 2 Ti 1:3, and 1 Ti 5:5 which is said to show how the apostle "embraced night and day prayer in various seasons." However, in all these examples, it clearly appears that Paul is using a figure of speech. Are we to believe that the apostle Paul literally prayed 24/7 that he would met with the Thessalonians again and encourage them? Was he literally praying 24/7 for Timothy and nothing or no one else? Was he commanding widows to do nothing in their lives but 24/7 prayer? Was he commanding them to take shifts doing 24/7 prayer as IHOP-KC does? The answer would have to, logically, be no. Paul's use of "night and day" here is not to be taken in a literal 24/7 sense, but in the same sense as a husband might tell his wife, "I'm always thinking about you," while not meaning literally that he's always thinking of her and not the bills, his job, etc.

The final example I'll bring up can be seen in part D of Section IV, and go through it bit by bit:

1) Citing Luke 10:38-42, with the story of Mary and Martha, it is written by Mike Bickle in the notes that "Jesus valued the lifestyle of Mary of Bethany in sitting before him." He combines it in the lecture with Mark 14, even though these are two different stories and were isolated events - not necessarily lifestyles. While Mary lived in honor to the Lord and it cannot be denied she had a good presence in his earthly ministry, it was not night and day prayer that was emphasized in these two stories: in Luke 10, it actually states that Mary was seated and "listened to his teaching" (v. 39) - it was her honoring of God's word that was commended; Mark 14 was about Christ's burial, not about 24/7 prayer.

2) While Cornelius and John the Baptist and the apostles did indeed pray, how are these related to "hourly" prayer, let alone an "end-time" prayer movement? All believers pray, and while some certainly pray more than others, does any mention of a person praying signify that they are doing so in the same manner as a 24/7 prayer movement? It seems like any time prayer is mentioned, it is automatically assumed to be in the same context as what is done at IHOP-KC.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, much of what happens at IHOP-KC and how it operates seems to be grounded upon the personal revelations given to Mike Bickle (1983, Cairo, etc.) and, at times, Bickle's peers. Throughout the lecture, we constantly hear "God is doing this," "now this is happening," "the Spirit is doing this," etc. This seen both in the notes and throughout the spoken part. The very foundation of IHOP-KC was by divine revelation. The very acronym "IHOP" was through divine revelation. Several sections of scripture are read through the lens of IHOP-KC-centered divine revelation. This causes me to want to ask a few questions:

1) How do we know it all comes from God? With what surety do we have? How do we know it was God that Bickle heard in Cairo?

2) Does this not logically mean that any who oppose IHOP-KC and its cause are acting against God? This isn't a matter of a difference of opinions - if God is truly working through IHOP-KC and is using it as an instrument for His end times movement, then there is no in between or gray area for this...those who work against IHOP-KC or oppose its theology, teachings, and causes are working against God and His end times movement.

3) Isn't the authority not truly on scripture, but on our presupposition about what scripture says through the guidance of supposed divine revelations? The last statement in the notes is:

We grow in revelation of the Word gaining insight into His will, ways, and salvation and to understand the unique dynamics of His end-time plan to transition the earth to the age to come. [emphasis in original]

Given that barely any one, in the past 2000 years of church history, has ever received such revelation regarding God and His end-time movement, how is this not reading scripture through a lens? If not, why isn't it?

I look forward to hearing your response.

How do we know someone is speaking from or for God?

Introduction

Many people today claim to speak for God, or claim they have something to say from God. Many times, however, this claim is made with no real standard or with no real solid basis for people to believe it. I've written out six conditions and arguments many use to support people who make such claims, which we will now review. This isn't, of course, a complete list, only a list of possibilities I could think of and desire to talk about.

Possibility 1: They have dreams and visions.

Many leaders or ministers in the so-called "prophetic movement," or just in Hyper-Charismatic or Neo-Pentecostal circles in general, seem to rely heavily upon their dreams or visions. It is believed by many that these dreams and visions are being given by God and are meant to guide and direct the church in this modern day and age. People immediately uphold all these dreams and visions as coming from God and being meant to be followed.

Perhaps what disturbs me the most is that when I read about these men and women who talk of their dreams and visions, there seems to almost be little to no effort made either on their part or the part of their followers to discern whether or not this dream or vision really did come from God. When I bring this up, I'm usually charged with being a Pharisee, a divider of the church, etc., but I believe I have biblical grounds for doing so. For example, the Lord spoke through the prophet Jeremiah against those who relied upon their dreams to instruct the people when, in fact, their dreams were all but useless.

"I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy lies in my name, saying 'I have dreamed, I have dreamed!' How long shall there be lies in the heart of the prophets who prophesy lies, and who prophesy the deceit of their own heart?" [Jeremiah 23:25-26]

Many people might interject here with, "Ah, but the people in that verse are lying - they're blatant false prophets." They forget, however, the frightening words found in the prophecies of Ezekiel:

"They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, 'Declares the Lord,' when the LORD has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfill their word. Have you not seen a false vision and uttered a lying divination, whenever you have said, 'Declares the LORD,' although I have not spoken?" [Ezekiel 13:6-7]

God says that the false prophets had literally seen false visions, and heard lying divinations, and believed them to be from God. This means the false prophets saw or discerned something which they perceived was from God, yet was not. They didn't make up a vision, they saw a legitimate vision...but it wasn't from God. We might look to Mohammad and Joseph Smith, two men who claimed to have seen and heard visions from God, as examples of this. These men had spiritual experiences and claimed to have spoken to divine entities, and yet most Christians would be quick to discredit their experiences as false.

People also forget another story, found in scripture's historical narrative:

And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; and the LORD said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another. Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ And the LORD said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’ Now therefore behold, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the LORD has declared disaster for you.” [1 Kings 22:19-23]

Micaiah is here speaking to King Ahab concerning the idea of war with Syria. All of Ahab's personal prophets claimed that they had visions and prophetic input that the war with Syria would go well. Micaiah, on the other hand, preaches that the war would go horribly, and then states that God had intentionally permitted the sending of a "lying spirit" in the mouth of all the prophets, so that they would prophesy falsely and bring ruin to Ahab. The prophets claimed to be speaking for and from God, but they were in fact speaking falsely - what's more, God had willed this to happen as a form of judgment.

So what is the standard in regards to dreams and visions? Let's go back to the words God spoke through the prophet Jeremiah:

"Let the prophet who has a dream tell the dream, but let him who has my word speak my word faithfully. What has straw in common with wheat? declares the LORD." [Jeremiah 23:28]

These are beautiful words to ponder: "let the prophet who has a dream tell the dream, but let him who has my word speak my word faithfully." God even compares dreams and God's word with straw and wheat, signifying how different they are.

Many might interject here that God has used dreams for His purposes. For example, the dreams of Pharaoh and the king of Babylon were interpreted by godly men to explain God's intentions, while Joseph and the wise men were warned by God about King Herod through dreams. That God can use dreams for His purposes or to give some amount of guidance or warning is certainly possible. However, what is our basis of authority, as scripture itself says? Scripture never says dreams are our authority - in fact, they often tell us otherwise, such as those false teachers who relied heavily on their dreams over the teachings of scripture, as many in the Neo-Pentecostal movement do (Jude 1:8). That God used x or y to get His will done does not  automatically mean that we should likewise use or rely on x and y as our standard over and against scripture. Jonathan Edwards put it best when he said: "God has not given us his providence, but his word to be our governing rule" (Humble Inquiry).

Possibility 2: They perform miracles.

Many today uphold a belief that signs and wonders are necessary in order to evangelize (also known as "power evangelism"). Yet when the early followers of Christ asked for a sign that they "may see and believe" in Him, Christ merely identified Himself as the bread that came down from heaven to give life to the world (John 6:30-33). Certainly Christ performed signs and wonders during His ministry - as did the apostles - yet the hinge of belief was not on how many signs and wonders were performed, but on whether people truly had life in Christ granted them by the Holy Spirit.

In fact, Christ warns the disciples that signs and wonders can be made by false teachers and prophets.

"For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect." [Matthew 24:24]

Paul makes a similar warning concerning the man of lawlessness.

The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. [2 Thessalonians 2:9-10]

Scripture makes it clear that it is entirely possible for false teachers to perform signs and wonders for the people to see. Therefore, the mere ability to perform a sign or wonder cannot be a standard to know someone is speaking to or from God.

Possibility 3: They prophesy events that come true.

If someone predicts an event, natural occurrence, or the results of an election, is that enough to demonstrate that they are speaking from or for God? Many are familiar with what scripture teaches regarding false prophets and prophesies that don't come true:

"When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him." [Deuteronomy 18:22]

Yet many people forget what scripture likewise teaches regarding false prophets who prophesy things that do come to pass.

"If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and he says, 'Let us go after other gods,' which you have not known, 'and let us serve them,' you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him." [Deuteronomy 13:1-4]

If a prophesy given by someone does not come true, that's a good sign they are a false teacher (though some contest that). However, even if it does come true, that is not enough to verify that they are working for God. Rather, it is their doctrine and how well they keep to God's word. That is the ultimate decider as to whether or not the individual is, in fact, speaking for or from God in regards to miracles and wonders. A supposed prophet can split a hundred moons in half, and a supposed miracle worker can heal a hundred men of leprosy. If they are not speaking according to the word of God, they are not from God, and none of that will matter.

Possibility 4: They have a huge amount of followers.

We are essentially arguing here for spiritual pragmatism, wherein quantity is the defining quality - a kind of divine ad populum. As I've discussed in another post, scripture never says large numbers equals heavenly blessings. There are many examples in scripture where the believers were greatly outnumbered by the unbelievers or false believers (Gen 6:5-8; 1 Ki 19:18; Isa 1:9; Rom 11:5). There are some small churches out in the countryside who have far more Christians in them than some of the biggest mega churches in the major cities.

Possibility 5: They have a large number of people who claim to have been blessed.

Many people, in a spirit of emotionalism, will defend a teacher or ministry on the claim that "countless people have been blessed." The idea is that, since so many people have had changed lives or emotional experiences in this ministry, it must surely be sourced to God.

Of course, I once met a man who claimed to have been greatly blessed. He used to be a gang banger but was now a productive member of society. He followed God and assisted his community. He had found a complete turnaround. He had completely changed his lifestyle. This blessing he felt had come from God he claimed to have found in...

...Islam.

That a person has had a "changed life" is not enough to prove that someone or someone's ministry is from God. This is the problem with contemporary Christianity, which believes the faith to be nothing more than a catalyst for changing lives. This makes its followers no different than those who claim to have been blessed by turning to Sikhism, Mormonism, Buddhism, New Age alternatives or any other religion that claims to give you a better life now.

God certainly desires "changed lives" in the sense that we are to put away the old self and put on the new self, which abhors sin and wickedness. However, using a subjective argument like "my life is better, therefore this person is being helped by God" is, as said before, simply spiritual pragmatism. It should also be pointed out that if a person was indeed saved or bettered in their life, it was not because of that individual or their ministry, but by the work of the Holy Spirit.

Possibility 6: They believe in Jesus.

Oftentimes, when dilemmas are demonstrated in a person's theology or lifestyle, one of their followers will fall back on one simple fact. They will say: "Ah, but they believe in Jesus, don't they? Don't we all follow the same Messiah? That should be good enough!" Oftentimes this will be used to support superficial peace, saying: "I don't think we should continue arguing about this - after all, don't we all still believe in the same Jesus?"

It might sound ironic, as a follower of sola fide, for me to say that this is perhaps the weakest argument against such men. However, to say they believe in Christ and that is good enough is not sola fide but easy believism. Mere mental assent to Christ's existence is not a guarantee for salvation, nor does it demonstrate you are a true believer. During the Sermon on the Mount, Christ warned:

"On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, an do many mighty works in your name?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'" [Matthew 7:22-23]

Christ speaks of men who did wonders and signs in His name (directly relevant to Possibilities 2 and 3, listed above), and yet when they come before Him on the day of judgment, Christ will say to them "I never knew you." He does not say "Oh yeah, you went to church for a while" or "Yeah, and you were a real disappointment in the end," but rather "I never knew you." They claimed to be followers of Christ, and even showed off miracles they believed demonstrated such a claim, and yet it turns out they were nothing more than goats masquerading as sheep.

False teachers, in fact, will come under the guise of men who are after the heart of Christ. The apostle Paul warned the church:

For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of Light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. [2 Corinthians 11:13-14]

It is not enough to simply decree a belief in Christ. Rather, we must present the fruits of such belief. Because I recognize that this opens up a whole other can of worms, I defer discussion on judging someone's faith, or whether or not we have the ability to discern it, to this post I made here.

Conclusion

Reviewing what we've gone over, what is the primary ground by which we know someone is speaking directly from or for God? The answer:

If they abide by His holy word.

That's disappointing to a lot of people, of course, but that is because they are not truly satisfied with the supremacy of God's word. They're not happy with just having God's word. They want the charismatic speaker who claims to have prophecies from God. They want the man rocking back and forth on stage talking about dreams he's had. They want the female preacher who gives good advice and has thousands of "saved" women attending her church. They want the pastor who has hundreds of stories of people who have been healed through miraculous or unique ways. They want the ministry led by people who claim the Holy Spirit is working through them for specific, specialized reasons. When people can't repeat the word of the Psalmist when he says "in the way of your testimonies I delight as much as in all riches" (Psa 119:14), they will seek something to fill in that spiritual gap. Such people we should work with and try to save to the best we can, while remaining strong in our convictions and preventing ourselves from falling into the same trap as did they. "Save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh" (Jude 1:23).

I had a prophetic dream!

Hey hey hey! So I had a prophetic dream! Wanna hear it? Here it is!

So, I was in a church, right? And there are these people singing! And they're all dressed as chickens, but there was one guy that was dressed as a moose. Well, I didn't feel right, because usually chickens and moose don't get along, so I tried to get out, but then I saw a Nazi soldier in a coffin. And then the Nazi soldier jumped out, and he multiplied into more Nazis, and they formed a chorus line, and came at me. I fought them off for a while with my pinky finger, because it morphed into a sword, right? But eventually they overcame me and tossed me down a well behind the altar.

I fell and I fell, until finally I landed in a pool of oatmeal. Well I ate all the oatmeal, and then I had to use the bathroom, and I found one nearby, but someone knocked on the door and suddenly I didn't have to go. So I left, and I was walking through a tunnel, and that's when I found a flower. It was like a rose, but it was blue. Then it changed to orange. Then it changed to indigo. And he said to me, "My name is Indigo Montoya." Then it wasn't even a flower any more, it was a Ferrari. And I got in and drove through the tunnel, and then I got pulled over by an elephant on a unicycle and he gave me a ticket, and it was a golden ticket, which meant I could go to Willy Wonka's chocolate factory.

So I go to the chocolate factory, and I enter the front doors, right? And there's this long hallway, and it's kinda dark, but there's a light up ahead. Well, I start walking up, and who should be up ahead but Jesus Christ! I couldn't believe it! I froze in place! The fear of the Lord 'n stuff came over me! And Jesus began to approach me, right? And he got closer, and closer, but didn't say anything. I was frozen! Yeah I was! And he got closer, and closer.

Finally the Lord spoke, and he said, "You're dreaming dreams."

"Yes, Lord!" I said, looking about at my surroundings. "What is this?"

And the Lord spoke, in a much louder voice, and the Lord said, "This is why you shouldn't mix Dr. Pepper with Tylenol PM."

I think the overall meaning of this little "prophetic dream" is that we shouldn't rely on the rambling dreams of people who claim to be prophesying directly from God. Let us rely on the word of God as our authority. God bless.