What is the Difference Between the Baptism and the Filling?

Charismatics often confuse spirit baptism, which places the Christian in the body of Christ, and the fullness of the Spirit, which produces effective Christian living (see Eph. 5:18, 6:11).

Nothing in all of Acts, Chapter 2, says believers asked for the Holy Spirit.

Acts 2:1-4 teaches two distinctive truths.  At Pentecost, Christian believers were baptized with the Holy Spirit into the body.  Then the Holy Spirit filled those believers to give a miraculous testimony -- the ability to speak in other languages.  Believers since that time have all been baptized with the Holy Spirit by the Lord Jesus Christ at conversion.  How are we filled?  When we yield to the Spirit who is already there, we have access to the Spirit's power and fullness.  Paul told the Ephesians to be kept filled with the Spirit as a constant pattern for living (5:18).

Nowhere in Scripture is the Christian taught to tarry and wait for the baptism. Nowhere in Scripture are we taught to get with a group of people who can teach us to speak in tongues.  Christians are admonished to keep being filled with the Spirit, but that is not the same thing as waiting to be baptized by the Spirit.  There is one simple key to knowing the fullness and power of the Holy Spirit in your life:  obeying the Lord.  As you walk in obedience to the word of God, the Spirit of God fills you and energizes your life (see Gal. 5:25).

Not only have believers been placed into Someone (Christ), but they have had Someone placed into them (the Holy Spirit).  As Christians we have the Holy Spirit.  Our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 6:19).  God Himself indwells our bodies (II Cor. 6:16).  All the resources are there.  The promise of the Holy Spirit has already been fulfilled for us.  The Bible is absolutely clear on that point.  There is nothing more to wait for.  The Christian life consists of yielding to the control of the Spirit who is already in us.  We do that through obedience to the Word (Col. 3:16).

Significantly, charismatic writers are not all agreed on how believers are to receive the baptism of the Spirit.  Why all the confusion and contradiction?  Why is it that charismatic writers do not quote the Bible plainly and let it go at that?  The reason no charismatic writer can do that is the Bible never tells how to get the baptism of the Spirit; it only tells believers that they are already baptized with the Spirit.  

One of the greatest realities the Christian will ever have is contained in two brief and fulfilling statements.  One is by Paul,  The other is by Peter:

"In Him, you have been made complete" (Col. 2:10).  

"His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness" (2 Peter 1:3).

There is no point in seeking what is already ours.

- John F. MacArthur

Pentecostals are wrong.  
Faith Movement are wrong.  
Victory Churches are wrong.

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!

Satan is responsible for what is going on in these churches -- not God.

Is Spirit Baptism a Fact or Feeling?

The charismatic notion of subsequence leads to other errors.  The belief that spirit baptism is a second work of grace has become a cardinal doctrine of the charismatic movement.  As we have seen, charismatic writers and teachers generally agree that "the baptism," evidenced by speaking in tongues, is the crucial next step after salvation.

Turning to the epistles yields quite a different view.  For example, as 1 Corinthians 12:13 makes clear, Spirit baptism is actually an integral part of every Christian's salvation experience.  Paul wrote, "By one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit."  That passage has nothing to do with water baptism.  Paul was not talking about the sacrament or ordinance of water baptism, important as that is in another context.  Paul was talking about the indwelling presence of the Spirit of God.  He used the word baptizo, which is the same Greek term used in Romans 6:3-4 and Galations 3:27 to refer to spiritual immersion.

Spirit baptism brings the believer into a vital union with Christ.  To be baptized with the Holy Spirit means that Christ immerses us in the Spirit, thereby giving us a common life principle.  This spiritual baptism is what connects us with all other believers in Christ and makes us part of Christ's own body. Baptism with the Spirit makes all believers one.  It is a fact, not a feeling.

Unfortunately, the tremendous truth of that verse has been greatly misunderstood.  Paul was blending two vital thoughts here.  One is that the church, the body of Christ, is formed through Spirit baptism and the other is that the life of the body is sustained as we all are made to drink of one Spirit.  The twin ideas of immersion by the Spirit and drinking of the Spirit picture the all-sufficient relationship with the Spirit of God that bonds each believer to Christ and the rest of the body.

1 Corinthians 12:13 opens with the phrase, "For by one's Spirit."   That is where much of the charismatic confusion begins.  The Greek text uses the tiny preposition en.  This term can be translated "at," "by," or "with" -- and some scholars might even translate it "in."  Greek prepositions are translated differently depending on the case endings of the words that follow the prepositions.  An accurate translation in 1 Corinthians 12:13, and the most consistent in the context of the New Testament, would use either by or with.  In other words, at conversion, we are baptized by or with the Holy Spirit.

This must not be taken to mean that the Holy Spirit is the One who does the baptizing.  Nowhere in the Bible is the Holy Spirit spoken of as the baptizer.  In Matthew 3:11, for example, John the Baptist told the Pharisees and Sadducees he could baptize [them] with water but someone was coming later who would "baptize them with the Holy Spirit and fire and His winnowing fork is in His hand and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (Matt. 3:11-12).

A common charismatic interpretation of this verse takes "fire" as a reference to the cloven tongues of "fire" seen on the day of Pentecost but it is obvious from verse 12 that John was referring to the fires of judgment, the unquenchable fires of hell. Obviously the cloven tongues like fire at Pentecost cannot be equated with the unquenchable fire that burns up chaff.  This is clearly a fire of judgment and its agent is not the Holy Spirit but Christ (see John 5:22).  So what John was really saying here is that there are only two kinds of people in the world:  those who will be baptized with the Holy Spirit, and those who will be baptized with the unquenchable fire of hell.  Mark 1:7-8 and Luke 3:16 contain similar expressions.  Likewise John 1:33 says of Christ, "This is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit." In all those passages, Jesus does the baptizing.

In his sermon on the day of Pentecost, Peter said of Christ, "Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear" (Acts 2:33).  Again, we see Christ as the baptizer, who "pours forth" the Spirit in the miraculous event of Pentecost.

In Romans 8:9 Paul says, "If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him."  If we take away the concept that every believer is baptized and indwelt by the Holy Spirit we destroy the doctrine of the unity of the body.  Why?  Because we have some people who aren't "in."  Where are they?  What kind of limbo is it to be saved but not a part of the body of Christ?  Is is possible to be a Christian and not a part of Christ?  No.  Paul's whole point in 1 Corinthians 12:12-13 is that all Christians are baptized with one Spirit into one body.  We are all in one body possessing one life source, indwelt by one Christ. 

The charismatic view of Holy Spirit baptism actually redefines the doctrine of salvation.  According to that view, salvation does not really give us everything we need for spiritual victory.  We are still lacking; we need something more.  Although they sometimes concede that every believer has the Holy Spirit to a limited degree, they believe the full power of the Spirit is withheld from those who have not yet experienced Spirit baptizm with the evidence of tongues. That is the perspective of Larry Christenson, a noted Lutheran charismatic.  Yet his point of view seems to overlook the clear meaning of 1 Corinthians 12: 12-13.  Christenson has stated:

Beyond conversion, beyond the assurance of salvation, beyond having the Holy Spirit, there is a baptism with the Holy Spirit.  It might not make sense to our human understanding anymore than it made sense for Jesus to be baptized by John . . . .  We are not called to understand it, or justify it, or explain it but simply to enter into it in humble obedience and with expectant faith.

Is Christenson embracing something that does not make sense rather than admitting the truth of 1 Corinthians 12: 12-13, which clearly does make sense?  Jesus' baptism by John certainly did make sense.  In being baptized, Jesus identified Himself with the repenting Israelites who were looking for their Messiah.  Christenson went on to say:

Sometimes the baptism with the Holy Spirit occurs spontaneously, sometimes through prayer and the laying on of hands.  Sometimes it occurs after water baptism, sometimes before.  Sometimes it occurs virtually simultaneously with conversion, sometimes after an interval of time . . . .  But one thing is constant in the Scripture, and it is most important:  It is never merely assumed that a person has been baptized with the Holy Spirit.  When he has been baptized with the Holy Spirit the person knows it.  It is a definite experience.

In making those claims Christenson was trying to base truth on experience.  As we shall see the baptism with the Holy Spirit is a spiritual fact not a physical experience related to some emotional feeling.  

Subsequence, Tongues, Seeking, Bah-Humbug!

The Charismatic Doctrine of Subsequence

Acts 2:4 is the charismatic touchstone, containing what many Pentecostals and charismatics view as the core truth of the New Testament; "They were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

Most charismatics believe this verse teaches that at conversion Christians receive the Holy Spirit only in a limited sense.  Therefore, they believe, Christians need to seek Spirit baptism in order to move to a higher level of spiritual life, being supernaturally immersed in the power of God's Spirit.  The experience is usually -- many say always -- accompanied by speaking in tongues and results in new spiritual motivation and power.

The notion that one gets salvation at one point and the baptism of the Spirit later is often referred to as the doctrine of subsequence.  Gordon Fee lists two Pentecostal distinctives "(1) the doctrine of subsequence, i.e., that there is for Christians a baptism in the Spirit distinct from and subsequent to the experience of salvation . . . , and (2) the doctrine of tongues as the initial physical evidence of baptism in the Spirit."  

In his thorough investigation of Pentecostal theology, Frederick Dale Bruner wrote, "Pentecostals believe that the Spirit has baptized every believer into Christ (conversion), but that Christ has not baptized every believer into the Spirit (Pentecost)."  Not only do most charistmatics believe that the baptism of the Spirit happens at some point after salvation, but most also believe that Spirit baptism is something Christians must seek.  Bruner goes on to say, 

The most important characteristics of the Pentecostal understanding of the baptism in the Holy Spirit . . . are; (1) that the event is usually "distinct from and subsequent to" the new birth; (2) that it is evidenced initially by the sign of speaking in other tongues; (3) that it must be "earnestly" sought.

Those three elements -- baptism of the Spirit subsequent to conversion, the earnest seeking of those who are baptized, and the evidence of speaking in tongues -- are characteristic of nearly all charismatic doctrine.  In most other areas of theology charismatics are vague,  but here they usually speak a clear word regarding what they believe.

Charismatics attempt to support their doctrine of subsequence from the book of Acts.  First Corinthians 12:13 ("For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free and we were all made to drink of one Spirit") cannot be used to prove subsequence because the verse simply says that all believers have been baptized by one Spirit into the body of Christ.  Indeed, it would seem clear that the baptism described in 1 Corinthians 12:13 cannot take place at a point in time after salvation.  Otherwise, what Paul says could not be true of all Christians.  No evidence such as tongues is mentioned, and no requirement of seeking the baptism is alluded to. 

Charismatics are also unable to use 1 Corinthians 14 to prove the tenets of subsequence, evidence, or seeking, because the chapter has nothing to say about any of those elements.  In fact, the only passages charismatics can use to support their doctrine of subsequence are found in Acts.  The epistles say nothing that can be construed to support the idea.

The truth is, even the book of Acts fails to support the charismatic view.  Only four passages mention tongues or receiving the Holy Spirit:  Chapters 2, 8, 10 and 19.  Only in Acts 2 and 8 do believers receive the Spirit after salvation.  In Acts 10 and 19, believers were baptized in the Spirit at the moment of belief.  So the doctrine of subsequence cannot be convincingly defended even from the book of Acts.

What about tongues?  Believers spoke in Acts 2, 10, and 19, but there is no record of tongues in Chapter 8.

What about the requirement of earnestly seeking the baptism?  The believers in Acts 2 simply waited prayerfully for the fulfillment of the Lord's promise (cf. 1:4, 14).  In Chapters 8, 10, or 19, no seeking is mentioned.   

The point is clear.  To say that the book of Acts presents the normal pattern for receiving the Holy Spirit presents a problem:  no consistent pattern is evident in Acts!  

It is true that Christians at Pentecost (Acts 2), Gentiles in Cornelius's household (Chapter 10), and the Jews at Ephesus who had only the baptism of John (Chapter 19) received the Holy Spirit and tongues followed.  But because those three events occurred does not mean they are to be the standard for every other Christian.  In fact, none of the passages we are discussing (Acts 2, 8, 10, or 19) imply that similar experiences are to be had by anyone else.   

If tongues were to be the normal experience, why were tongues not mentioned in Acts 8 when the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit!  Why does the text in Acts 2 through 4 not say that everyone who believed following Peter's sermons (over 5,000 people according to Acts 4:4) and received the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) also spoke in tongues?  In order for something to be normative, it has to be common to everyone.  

John Stott reasoned that:

The 3,000 do not seem to have experienced the same miraculous phenomena (the mighty rushing wind, the tongues of flame, or the speech in foreign languges).  At least nothing is said about these things.  Yet because of God's assurance through Peter they must have inherited the same promise and received the same gift (verses 33, 39).  Nevertheless, there was this difference between them:  the 120 were regenerate already, and received the baptism of the Spirit only after waiting upon God for ten days.  The 3,000 on the other hand were unbelievers, and received the forgiveness of their sins and the gift of the Spirit simultaneously -- and it happened immediately when they repented and believed, without any need to wait.

This distinction between the two companies, the 120 and the 3,000, is of great importance, because the norm for today must surely be the second group, the 3,000, and not (as is often supposed) the first.  The fact that the experience of the 120 was in two distinct stages was due simply to historical circumstances.  They could not have received the Pentecostal gift before Pentecost.  But those historical circumstances have long since ceased to exist.  We live after the event of Pentecost, like the 3,000.  With us, therefore, as with them, the forgiveness of sins and the "gift" or "baptism" of the Spirit are received together.

Subsequence -- not supported by Scripture !
Tongues -- grossly misinterpreted Scripture !
Earnestly Seeking -- simply false teaching !


God must be having a good laugh at what He sees Pentecostals and charismatics doing down here, or is He?

CHARISMATICS JUST DON'T GET IT!

Still looking for that book about the false teachings of the Baptist church !


For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library.  Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book.  All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com. 

Charismatics Just Don't Get It!

Experience, as we have noted repeatedly, is the foundation upon which much of the charismatic belief system is built.  Experience is also the authority charismatics most frequently cite to validate their teachings.  Their experience-centered approach to truth even influences the way charismatics handle Scripture.  The book of Acts -- a journal of the apostles' experiences -- is where charismatics usually turn in search of biblical support for what they believe.

Acts is historical narrative, in contrast to the epistles, which are didactic.  Acts is a chronicle of the infant church's experiences, the epistles contain instructions for believers throughout the church age.  Historically, Christians committed to a biblical perspective have recognized the difference.  That is, evangelical theologians have drawn the heart of their doctrine from Bible passages penned expressly to teach the church.  They have understood Acts as an inspired historical record of the apostolic period, not necessarily viewing every event or phenomenon recorded there as normative for the entire church age.

Charismatics, however, craving the experiences described in Acts, have assembled a doctrinal system that views the extraordinary events of the early apostolic age as necessary hallmarks of the Holy Spirit's working -- tokens of spiritual power that are to be routinely expected by all Christians for all time.

That rather serious interpretive error undermines charismatics' comprehension of Scripture and muddies several key biblical issues crucial to a right understanding of the charismatic controversy.  Gordon Fee, himself a charismatic, commented on the hermeneutical difficulties posed by the way charismatics typically render the book of Acts;

If the primitive church is normative, which expression of it is normative?  Jerusalem?  Antioch?  Philippi?  Corinth?  That is, why do not all the churches sell their possessions and have all things in common?  Or further, is it at all legitimate to take [any] descriptive statements as normative.  If so, how does one distinguish those which are from those which are not?  For example, must we follow the patterns of Acts 1:26 and select leaders by lot?  Just exactly what role does historical precedent play in Christian doctrine or in the understanding of Christian experience?

But the book of Acts was never intended to be a primary basis for church doctrine.

It records only the earliest days of the church age and shows the Church in transition from the Old Covenant to the New.

The apostolic healings, miracles, signs, and wonders evident in Acts were not common, even in those days.

They were exceptional events, each with a specific purpose, always associated with the ministry of the Apostles and their frequency can be seen decreasing dramatically from the beginning of Acts to the end.

Written by Luke the physician, Acts covers a crucial period that started with the beginning of the church at Pentecost and ended some thirty years later with Paul in prison, following his third missionary journey.

Transitions are seen from beginning to end in the book of Acts.

Changes happen in almost every chapter.  The Old Covenant fades away and the New Covenant comes in all its fullness.  Even Paul was caught in the changes.  Although he was an apostle in the New Era, he still had ties to the old, as indicated by his taking Jewish vows (see Acts 18:18 and 21:26).

In Acts we move from the synagogue to the church and from law to grace.  The church is transformed from a group of Jewish believers to a body made up of Jews and Gentiles united in Christ.  Believers at the beginning of Acts were related to God under the Old Covenant; by the end, all believers were in Christ, living under the New Covenant, indwelt by the Holy Spirit in a new and unique relationship.

Acts, therefore, covers an extraordinary time in history.

The Transitions it records are never to be repeated.  
The Transitions it records are never to be repeated.  
The Transitions it records are never to be repeated.  

And so the only teachings in the book of Acts that can be called normative for the Church are those that are explicitly confirmed elsewhere in Scripture.

" Charismatics just don't get it!!"

Useless Love

Just recently my daughter-in-law started a conversation with the following words, "I know you love us . . . " and then proceeded to tell me why I wasn't going to see my grandchildren this year or potentially ever again unless I remove some comments from my blog that they didn't like.  I told her I wouldn't have posted them if  I didn't believe they were true.  To do so would take away my freedom of speech.

To get back to the subject at hand "Love."

If I "Love" you, as you say I do, wouldn't I yell "fore" on a golf course if I saw a golf ball heading straight for your head?  Of course I would.

If I "Love" you, as you say I do, wouldn't I yell if your car was stalled on a railroad track and a train was barreling down on you very fast?  Of course I would.

If I "Love" you, as you say I do, wouldn't I warn you about your involvement with a cult?  I know it's a cult and you don't because you have never attended a real church.  I also know that cults prey on or target people like you "the unchurched" because you are unable to question their teachings due to your lack of knowledge about true Christianity.  Of course I would warn you as I did five years ago and you chose to disregard the warning.

You know what that means?  That means that "my love" for my family is useless and of no consequence.  If my "Love" for my family can't protect them from a charlatan and a false teacher like PM, my "Love" for you is totally useless and an absolute waste of time.  I should stop loving and let you all fall into the dark pit that is BVC and let you suffer the consequences even if they are eternal in nature.

Is this the kind of "Love" that you want from me?  The kind where I see great danger and instead of yelling, I shut my mouth and walk away.  Life can be a lot easier when you don't care.  "Love" compels me to yell at the top of my lungs to get out of BVC.  PM is leading you down a wrong path which will ultimately lead to hell.

If you want a "Love" that stays silent in the face of danger, then it isn't "Love" that you want.  When "Love" sees danger, it speaks up loudly.  That's what I've been doing now for over 5 years!

This blog has only one purpose and that is to get my family safely home to truth where they belong, to stop Satan's gibberish, reject Pentecostalism, the Faith Movement and their false teachings based on Scripture twisting.

This blog represents 5 years plus of "Love."  So far, you  have rejected that "Love" to cling to the fake love of a stranger who only loves you as long as you give him lots of money or time.

This seems to be the "Love" you prefer or the "Love" you owe because you are beholden to him for furnaces and cars they gave you.  If PM cared about you, he should be teaching you how to save money so you can pay for furnaces when they break down but don't hold your breath.  He'll think of some cause to get his hands on all of your spare cash.

These are the "Love" choices you have to make:  "Love" that has at its core, a lust for money and wealth or "Love" that will warn you about danger for 5 years even at the risk of never seeing my family again.

Perhaps the problem is that you worship "the god of your own opinion" and that's why you can't leave.  That would be admitting you are wrong or you have made a grave error in judgment.  You can't do that or your self esteem would be totally eroded.

I could shut-up and go away but that would mean I didn't "Love" you.  You said that you know I "Love" you so you are going to have to decide.  Do you want a "Love" that stays silent in the face of peril or a "Love" that cares enough to warn of the danger and impending doom?  Will you make the wise choice?

You have been reading the blog for over 5 years and still Satan has a hold on you!

I learned recently that your brother has become a Christian and is attending a church that teaches true Christianity.  I am also aware that you tried to get him to attend BVC but he rejected it.  He is a very smart person but it was likely the Holy Spirit that gave him discernment about the fact that there is something very wrong at BVC.  Good for you, Peter!  Hopefully your sister will follow your example and move her family to a true Christian church.  I know the kids will be very happy to attend there rather than rebelling at the nonsense going on at BVC.  Teenagers can sometimes be very perceptive and I would guess they have begun to realize that something is very wrong at BVC.  Could it be that Satan attends BVC every week?

Will my "Love" continue to be useless and inconsequential or will you decide to move your families out of BVC to a real church where the truth is taught uncompromisingly and there is no funny business like gibberish and constant demands for money?

BVC -- Your Jesus is Not My Jesus!!!

PM should make it clear to his attendees that BVC doesn't follow or trust in the Jesus of the Bible.  PM wants you to think his Jesus is the Jesus of the Bible but nothing could be further from the truth.  When PM uses the word Jesus he is deceiving you.  When PM speaks the name of Jesus, he is not talking about the Jesus of the Bible.  He is talking about the newly created Jesus of the Faith Movement.  This new Jesus also died to make us healthy and wealthy.  He should not call him Jesus, he should call him Jesus II.

PM believes that people will not come to Jesus for just the forgiveness of sins.  He believes there has to be more than that as all those in the Faith Movement do.  He has no right to use the name of Jesus when he is really talking about Jesus II.  PM needs to make up his mind and decide which Jesus he serves; the Jesus of the Bible who died only for our sins or Jesus II who also died to make you healthy and wealthy.

PM cannot speak the name of Jesus and pretend that he is talking about the Jesus of the Bible -- he is not!  I, as a born-again Christian, do not believe in PM's Jesus.  I believe in the Jesus of the Bible who died for my sins only.  Sin is the only thing that can keep me out of Heaven.  The crucifixion was only about one thing -- Jesus paying the price for my sins so that I can go to Heaven.

``By His stripes we are healed" is talking about the disease of our sin, not physical healing.  This is what happens when the unqualified misinterpret Scripture -- you have the creation of a new Jesus -- Jesus II who is a fraud, a lie, a mirage, a deception!  Rest assured that false teachers will face a much harsher judgment.

The people at BVC think they have the same Jesus as I do -- they do not!  This is a very serious problem.  The people in leadership at BVC need to decide which Jesus they serve and declare it clearly at every turn.  If you declare you serve and trust in the Health and Wealth Jesus, you need to differentiate this fact from the true Jesus by giving him another name so that followers are not fooled into thinking he is the same Jesus who appears in the pages of the Bible.  You could call him:

• Jesus II
• Jesus the Second
• The Faith Movement Jesus
• Jesus, the Other
• The Reformed Jesus
• The New Jesus
• The Health and Wealth Jesus
• The New Improved Jesus

BUT NOT JUST "JESUS"

End the deception, tell the truth, be honest, no more lies, declare which Jesus you serve.

One More Thing About the BVC Jesus

My Jesus does not demand or urge me to speak in tongues/gibberish.  My Jesus does not demand that I make a fool of myself at church every week.  My Jesus does not have some Christians who are "haves" and some Christians who are "have nots."  Paul asserts that all Christians have been baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ and that we have been made to drink of that one Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13).  BVC's teaching on tongues/gibberish is absolutely 100% totally false, not found in Scripture.  They misinterpret Scripture to create this teaching.  Gibberish is not tongues.  This fact opens up the opportunity to create some other names for the BVC Jesus.  Names they might want to try:

• Gibberish Jesus
• Tongues Jesus
• Woohoo Jesus
• Crazy Jesus
• Foolish Jesus
• Stupid Jesus
• Nonsense Jesus
• Idiot Jesus
• Wacko Jesus
• Silly Jesus

BUT NOT JUST "JESUS"

My Jesus doesn't demand so much of my income that I am unable to look after my family or save any money for my future.  My Jesus doesn't make me behave in church in such a way that my children are ashamed of me or embarrassed.  This wouldn't happen in a real church!

If you are interested in knowing why the pentecostal church / Faith Movement / Victory churches are wrong on subsequence, tongues, and seeking, you will need to read the upcoming nine or ten posts on What Was Happening in the Early Church.  The previously mentioned three movements grossly misinterpret Scripture and totally misunderstand what was happening in the early church which is why they teach the falsehoods that they do.

Cult Recruitment / Growing the Business at BVC

You may have an idea of a "cult recruit" as as obviously troubled young person, maybe "mentally ill," easily exploited by unethical cultists.  But studies show that people who join cults have only a slightly higher incidence of psychiatric disorders than the general population.

Cult members come from all walks of life, all age groups and all personality types.  However, one common thread among most cult recruits is heightened stress:  Research indicates that a majority of people who end up joining a cult were recruited during a particularly stressful period.  People undergoing significant stress can be more susceptible when a person or group claims to have the answer to all of their problems.  Michael Langone, Ph.D., a psychologist who specializes in cults, also identifies some psychological traits that can make a person more likely to be successfully recruited, including:

• dependency - an intense desire to belong, stemming from a lack of self-confidence
• unassertiveness - a reluctance to say no or question authority
• gullibility - a tendency to believe what someone says without really thinking about it
• low tolerance for uncertainty - a need to have any question answered immediately in black-and-white terms
• disillusionment with the status quo - a feeling of marginalization within one's own culture and a desire to see that culture change
• naive idealism - a blind belief that everyone is good.
• desire for spiritual meaning - a need to believe that life has a "higher purpose"

Cult recruiters hang out in places where you might find people in a period of extreme stress or possessing the above personality traits - which is anywhere.  Some particularly fruitful recruiting locations might include college campuses, religious gatherings, self-help and support groups, seminars related to spirituality or social change and the unemployment office.  In a 1990 article in the San Francisco Examiner, a unnamed ex-cult member commented on how easy it is to get sucked in:  "People don't realize how susceptible we all are.  Those smiling faces lead you to buy it when you're naive and accepting."  She was recruited on the UC San Diego campus when she was 19.  Her parents arranged for her to be "deprogrammed" eight years later.

The main methods of cult recruitment revolve around deception and manipulation.  Potential recruits are not told the true nature or intentions of the group.  Instead, recruiters portray it as something mainstream, low-pressure, and benign.  They may tell people at a church gathering that their group meets once a week to brainstorm ways to raise money for a new homeless shelter.  They might invite a high school student to a talk about how public service can enhance a college application.  Recruiters identify the specific needs or desires of their targets and play to them.  They learn to pick up on a person's fears and vulnerabilities and portray the cult accordingly.  For instance if a young woman just went through a bad breakup, and she is feeling depressed and alone, a cult member might tell her that his group helps people to overcome interpersonal problems and rebuild their confidence for a fresh start.  If a man just lost his wife in a car accident, and he can't bear that he didn't get to say goodbye to her, a recruiter might claim that his group helps people reach peace in the wake of sudden death.  

It might seem strange that someone would accept these types of invitations, but there are a couple of factors that make it seem more palatable.  First, the recruiter might be someone these people know.  He could be in that young woman's college dorm or that man's survivor's support group.  And someone who is sad, lonely or desperate might be more inclined to trust someone who claims to know the path back to happiness. Also, cults typically isolate recruits so they can't get a "reality check."  They may hold meetings or services at times that would normally be spent with family and friends; they may hold "retreats" that submerge the recruit in the group's message for days at a time; and they may ask recruits not to discuss the group with others until they know more about it, so they don't mislead people or give them only part of the story.  This kind of isolation narrows a person's feedback structure drastically for a period of time, to the point that the only people they're really communicating with are the members of the cult they're being invited to join.  Their doubts about the group, therefore, are never reinforced, and they end up turning into self-doubt, instead.  Looking around them at all of the smiling, friendly people who have obviously found peace and happiness by following this path, it appears that it must be the right way.

Once a person attends one meeting or service or lecture, he's invited to another, and another, and another.  He's welcomed into the cult family and invited to commit himself to the group.  From day one, it's a process of manipulation and deception.  And for those who stay on, the recruiting process culminates in the submission of their own personalities to the "will of the group."

Cult Leadership Structure

There is no cult without a powerful, charismatic leader.  A charismatic leader has the uncanny ability to get people to follow him unquestioningly.  The phrase "cult of personality" refers to this type of group dynamic.  Cult members are devoted to the leader not to the leader's ideas.  The leader has complete control over his followers -- there is no questioning of his decisions, and he is accountable to no one within the group.

Most destructive religious cults demand absolute devotion to a single person who is considered to be God or connected to God, the Messiah, a prophet or possessing some other holy status.  This is a critical component in maintaining absolute devotion:  To the members of a cult, only this single person can lead them to salvation.  Without this single person, they will spend eternity in Hell.

How does a person fall into a role like this?  One common scenario is the preacher or church member who gets "banished" from a mainstream church for preaching extreme or unconventional ideas or showing signs of corruption or instability.  When he leaves, his followers go with him, or else he joins an already existing cult and eventually vies for control.

Many of these religions are founded by a single person who retains a position of exclusive power within the organization, and power tends to corrupt even the most ethical among us.  Because these groups operate outside the mainstream, there is usually no one checking up on their operating procedures, so a corrupt or mentally unstable leader is free to exploit his followers to his heart's content.  In addition to this authoritarian leadership structure, some primary characteristics of a destructive cult include:

• Charismatic leadership 
• Deception in recruiting
• Use of thought-reform methods
• Isolation (physical and/or psychological)
• Demand for absolute, unquestionning devotion and loyalty
• Sharp, unsurpassable distinction between "us" (good, saved) and "them" (bad, going to Hell)
• "Inside language" that only members fully understand
• Strict control of members daily routines

In the end, it's all about subjugating members' individuality to achieve the desires of the leader(s), whether that means reinforcing a self-proclaimed messanic status or simply filling the leader's pockets with their hard-earned money.  Destructive religious cults target people with certain vulnerabilities and then play on those vulnerabilities to keep them "in the fold."  The end result is a "convert" who will try to get all of his loved ones to buy into the same deal that he is losing his life savings on, or keep signing up for an unending series of lectures, seminars and retreats that promise psychological and spiritual healing but really only drain his bank account.

-- Julia Layton

Growing the Business at BVC

Hare Krishna used to send its converts out on the streets to sell flowers.  BVC is sending out its "worker bees" for 7 weeks to bring in more potential targets to the cult.  Income must be down - people must be leaving.  Praise God!

When you go door-to-door be sure to tell them when you invite them to BVC, that BVC worships the new and improved Faith Movement Jesus, not the Jesus of the Bible.  You should also make sure to inform them that you believe in the Health and Wealth gospel.  Also tell them how much of their income (likely half or more) they will need to give when they convert as well as how much of their now free time will be gobbled up by BVC.  But you won't tell them that because your recruitment is deceptive and manipulative.  PM has you well-trained.

Make sure you tell them that PM is directly connected to God.  He must be!  He uses the phrase "God told me" all the time.  This is his biggest deception.  He needs you to think he's connected to God so that you will do what he wants unquestionningly.  In your eyes, he is God.  But he isn't!  He's just a master manipulator.  A deceiver and his smile and funny little laugh has you convinced that this can't be true.  You don't want it to be true because you feel so good about yourself and life's one big party.

Knock knock.  Who's there?  It's your local cultist calling, looking for money for our divine revelator to line his pockets with.  Don't forget to tell them, you can teach them to do the gibberish -- PM likes that, anybody can learn.  But you won't tell them this for fear of having the door slammed in your face.

This is my prayer on behalf of the neighbourhood around BVC.  I pray that all doors around BVC will be locked or slammed shut for the next 7 weeks and that people will finally "wise up" and begin to leave BVC.

Remember, the plan is to keep all these things a secret until you get them in the door and PM's smile (and DM's) will do the rest, just like he's doing to you every week.  Isn't being a convert fun!! 

Be prepared, on Sunday, for PM to say that this is an attack of Satan.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  God gave me this post!

For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library.  Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book.  All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com.