new book--WITITB? The Courts of Heaven.

I can't remember when I first came on the idea of the Courts of Heaven. I guess it wasn't long ago, a few months or maybe a year or so. At any rate, it's not something that immediately caught my attention and made me pay attention to it, until very recently.

Once I started looking into it, though, it soon enough got my interest and attention, and for all kinds of reasons.

This doesn't yet seem to have become a major, popular teaching in the church, though I have my suspicions that it will catch on more and more in the next few years, and become something major. My plan is to go into why I think that way at the end of this book, so let me just tease it a little by saying that I think this teaching about the Courts of Heaven will become more and more popular because it gives the faith healers and Word of Faith bellowers the things they want most.

review: Joshua

simply not good

I'll deal with this book from two perspective, the story and the theology

Story
Judging from how much the author uses the word in positive ways, one might be safe to assume that one of his favorite words is “simple”, and in keeping with that, this story is by and large a very simple story. If the author had kept the story on the same small scale he started it with, this simple approach may have worked, but he doesn't, things keep getting on a larger and larger scale as the story goes on, but this simple approach begins to sink into simplistic because of it.

For example, the owner of a TV station, after listening to Joshua speak for a few minutes, decides, seemingly at the drop of a hat, to have a TV crew interview Joshua, pp 112-114, an interview that ends taking up about an hour of TV time, pp 138-140. This stretches belief to the breaking point. Then, towards the end, the controversy surrounding this small-town guy somehow becomes so bad that he's summoned to Vatican City to answer for his controversies, and at this point belief completely snaps and tumbles into something more fantasy-like than anything Tolkien wrote.

Another way the simplistic approach to this story shows itself is in how the other characters respond to Joshua, especially the positive responses. It's understandable that the words and actions of the main protagonist in a novel will to a large degree reflect the views of the author, that's not a problem; but when the other characters constantly keep going on about how deep and profound this protagonist's most silly and shallow statements are, how beautiful all his ideas are,and all other such examples of overblown hyperbole, one gets the impression one isn't reading a story intended to be a fair presentation of ideas, and I can't even call this book something like propaganda, but it comes off as if one is reading what the author might think having a fan club would be like, as he surrounds himself, through his protagonists, with people who will accept everything he says without any real criticism or even serious questioning, and who will constantly shower even his most mundane and trite utterances with unconditional praise.

Theology
Judging from how much the author uses these words in negative ways, one might be safe to assume that among his least favorites words are “doctrine” and “theology”, with “authority” and “conservative” not far behind.

As the reader soon learns in the story, Joshua is the personification of the author's idea of how Jesus would be if he returned to earth in the modern day; thus, the teachings of Joshua are meant to represent the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament.

The problem is, the teachings of Joshua have little in common with the teachings of Jesus.

For example, there is this statement, from p 73 and taken from a much longer statement, “Jesus came to teach people that they are God's children and, as God's children, they are free, free to grow as human being, to become beautiful people as God intended”. Now, just right off, I can think of a time when Jesus said to some people that “You are of your father, the devil”, John 8:44; in Ephesians 2, Paul writes about a time when the believers in Ephesus used to be “children of wrath, like the rest of mankind”; I John 3:10 offers a contrast between those who are children of God and children of the devil.

And what does the Bible say about why Jesus came? Luke 19:10 records Jesus' statement, in the context of conversing with the tax collector Zacchaeus, that “The Son of Man has come to seek and save the lost”; Matthew 20:28 and Matthew 10:45 record Jesus saying that He, the Son of Man, has come “to give his life as a ransom for many”, that Jesus came to die as a sacrifice for sins, so that we can be forgiven by grace through faith.

This is only one example of how far off this author's Joshua is from Jesus, but it is a strong one. It shows that this author, through his title character, is preaching a false gospel, and practicing great deception by pretending to preach this false gospel through his reimagining of Jesus.

I have a hard time seeing how this work has become some kind of Christian classic, much less why any Christian studio would make a movie based on this book. There is no real Christian content to this book, merely a thin film of Christian-like ideas covering over some completely foul teachings. This book is fit only to be avoided.

Kinds of False Prophecies?

book review--Making Jesus Lord by Loren Cunningham

two abused teachings to support one very bad idea

First, a comment about the Kindle version of this book, which is what I read. It's shoddy and sub-standard. It has no table of content, and doesn't even have paragraph indents or chapter breaks. It was obviously a hurried and slipshod job.

Now, on to the contents.

The author twists two biblical teachings in order to end up pushing one very bad idea.

The first misused teaching is the idea of “giving up your rights”. Now, there is a biblical basis for this idea. One can look in I Corinthians 8 and 9, and see where Paul wrote about how he decided to not exercise certain rights, such as the right to expect the churches to support him financially, or the right to eat certain things when doing so might cause someone else to stumble. Paul's reasons for doing so are love for God and other people, his concern that others shouldn't stumble in his actions such as eating certain foods, though he had the perfect liberty to eat those things, and his concern to preach the gospel free of charge.

But this author uses this idea of giving up rights to smuggle in some very strange ideas, ones not found in the Bible. “He was giving us the strategy for accomplishing the greatest job ever given to man—taking over the earth from Satan and winning it back for God. Jesus was showing us that the only way to conquer is to submit.” (Kindle Locations 114-116) That's something not taught in the Bible at all, but it does lead up to the big bad idea of this book. “It is a rule of the Kingdom of God: Give up something good and receive something of greater value; give up your rights and receive greater privileges with God.” (Kindle Locations 133-134) Wow, great privileges with God? Well, too bad that's not in the Bible. What we're getting here is a quit pro quo, you give up something and God will give you something in return. That's not how it works.

The second abused idea is “moving in the opposite spirit”. Just like the first, this one does a biblical basis. One could, for example, point to Galatians 5:16-26, where the works of the flesh are contrasted with the fruit of the spirit, and show how Christians should turn from those fleshly works and grow more in the fruit of the spirit.

But this author again goes some strange places with his teachings. “God is going to utterly defeat Satan, and He’s going to do it with individuals who move in the opposite spirit to the forces of darkness.” (Kindle Locations 1177-1178) Well, that's quite the claim. Gotta verse for that? Btw he doesn't. “God allows attacks from the enemy in order to extend Christ’s Kingdom on earth. We take literal ground for God in this world every time we respond correctly to Satan’s offensive.” (Kindle Locations 1274-1276) I assume he means “literal” literally, and not figuratively, but he certainly does not mean it biblically, because he offers no biblical support for this claim.

All of this leads up to the last part of the book, where the author introduces his biggest and worst idea. It can be summed up by the phrase “Seven Mountains Dominionism”. “God has told us to take the world for Him. That’s what it says in Matthew 28:18-20 when Jesus tells us that He has been given all authority in Heaven and on earth, all other issues and doubts are settled. Then He turns around and says to us, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations…teaching them to observe all that I commanded you….”” (Kindle Locations 1523-1526) Uh...no, Jesus wasn't telling the disciples to go out and take over the world here, that's nonsense. You can look at what the Bible says in many different places about the state of the world when Christ returns, and you'll see a gaping lack of any mention of the Church having taken over the world and setting up a bliss-filled theocracy just eager for Jesus to finally decide it's time to come join the party.

“If you have given over your rights, if you are standing barefoot in His presence, He is promising to give you all the land that the sole of your foot treads upon (Joshua 13).” (Kindle Locations 1565-1566) I don't know what this author is thinking, but there is nothing like that in Joshua 13. This is a common practice among people like this author, taking a promise made to one person in the Bible and try to shoehorn it for themselves. God made that promise to someone who lived about 3500 years ago, not to us today. This promise is not God telling us to go and take over the world.

“Jesus has promised to give the earth to the meek, to the barefoot, to those who have surrendered their rights to Him. He wants us to claim the nations of the earth as His inheritance.” (Kindle Locations 1807-1808) While Jesus has promised that the meek will inherit the earth, there is nothing in the Bible that tells us that Jesus “... wants us to claim the nations of the earth as His inheritance”. That's just something shameful this author made up.

“Like any other Christian, I read my Bible and try to discern what is going on around me. But one thing I do believe very clearly: Jesus told us to occupy until He came (Luke 19:13 kjv).” (Kindle Locations 1632-1633) “He says to occupy until He comes. To occupy means to take leadership.” (Kindle Location 1816) This is so bad, I'm embarrassed for this author. Luke 19:13 is taken from a parable. “12 He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return. 13 Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten minas, and said to them, ‘Engage in business until I come.’” This is from the ESV, and it gives the real meaning of the word translated “occupy” in the KJV which in context would still be a fine word, it only becomes a problem because of this author's dishonest twisting of that word. In a video on YouTube titled “Ruling With Jesus - Loren Cunningham”, this author even goes so far as to compare the Church to an occupying army. It is completely shameful for this author to try to take the “occupy” from both the meaning of the original word, and from it's context in this parable, and try to make it about some kind of need for the church to act like an occupying army.

There is simply so much wrong with this book, that it's just not worth wading into the sludge to find the few good things he says. There are so many better resources out there, ones that don't try to push made-up ideas and fairy tales about taking over the world. Skip this piece of rot, it's worthless.

excerpt from WITITB?: Bethel Redding

The Book of Acts also provides us with a dramatic lesson on the importance of consistent prayer. Acts 12:2 records the death of James, the first apostle to be martyred, at the hands of King Herod. When he saw that James’ death made the Jews happy, he detained Peter in prison with the intention of killing him as well. The church, mourning the loss of James,was not going to lose another one of their friends and leaders. Their response to the imprisonment of Peter was to pray: “… but constant prayer was offered to God for him by the church” (Acts 12:5). Notice that it was not just prayer but constant prayer. That night, Peter was miraculously set free by an angel and reunited with the friends who had been praying for him. Continuous prayer was the key for the believers in Acts to gain access to the realm of authority that was needed to see Peter set free.

Jesus Culture: Living a Life That Transforms the World (p. 155)

Here's a bit of the account Liebscher refers to.

Acts 12 
About that time Herod the king laid violent hands on some who belonged to the church.2 He killed James the brother of John with the sword, 3 and when he saw that it pleased theJews, he proceeded to arrest Peter also. This was during the days of Unleavened Bread. 4 Andwhen he had seized him, he put him in prison, delivering him over to four squads of soldiersto guard him, intending after the Passover to bring him out to the people. 5 So Peter was kept in prison, but earnest prayer for him was made to God by the church. 6 Now when Herod was about to bring him out, on that very night, Peter was sleeping between two soldiers,bound with two chains, and sentries before the door were guarding the prison. 7 And behold, an angel of the Lord stood next to him, and a light shone in the cell. He struck Peter on the side and woke him, saying, “Get up quickly.” And the chains fell off his hands. 8 And the angel said to him, “Dress yourself and put on your sandals.” And he did so. And he said to him, “Wrap your cloak around you and follow me.” 9 And he went out and followed him. He did not know that what was being done by the angel was real, but thought he was seeing a vision. 10 When they had passed the first and the second guard, they came to the iron gate leading into the city. It opened for them of its own accord, and they went out and went along one street, and immediately the angel left him. 11 When Peter came to himself, he said, “Now I am sure that the Lord has sent his angel and rescued me from the hand of Herod and from all that the Jewish people were expecting.”

There's a bit more to the account of this event, but this is part in question, where Peter is rescued.

Liebscher wrote “Continuous prayer was the key for the believers in Acts to gain access to the realm of authority that was needed to see Peter set free”. Now, while the passage does mention that the church prayed, it says nothing about them gaining access to a realm of authority, and that this is the reason Peter was set free.

In fact, look at Peter's own words, “Now I am sure that the Lord has sent his angel and rescued me from the hand of Herod and from all that the Jewish people were expecting.” Peter doesn't say that the church got the authority to send the angel to set him free. It was God's work, not the church's.

Not only is the idea that “Continuous prayer was the key for the believers in Acts to gain access to the realm of authority that was needed to see Peter set free” not in this passage, it is also nowhere else in the Bible. This is something Liebscher either made up, or got from someone else, either directly or through degrees of separation, who made it up.

Prayer is a good thing, but nowhere does the Bible teach us that prayer gets us into realms of authority. Prayer is petitioning, it is asking God to do something.God chose to rescue Peter here. But in this same passage from Acts 12, it says that James was killed. Was he killed because the church didn't pray for him? What about the other persecutions mentioned in Acts, for example the people Saul put into prisons? What about what Paul himself went through, the beatings and scourging and other things he mentions in II Corinthians? What about the martyrdoms the apostles suffered, not to mention the many martyrdoms that have occurred over the past 2000 or so years?

Liebscher's teaching here is simply bad, and it's completely unbiblical.

book review—The Physics of Heaven

How can one adequately review the sheer stupid in this book?

First, understand that I'm not a scientist, physicist, or anyone like that. But this book is less a work of science then of something pretending to be theology, and about that I think I can say a few things. Because taken as theology, there is pretty much nothing of any value that can be gained from reading this nonsense.

The account in Acts 2 of the events of Pentecost comes in for special abuse by the contributors to this book. “I began thinking about the day of Pentecost. One hundred and twenty believers were in an upper room in Jerusalem when they heard a sound like a mighty rushing wind. It wasn’t a wind, it was a sound. And when that sound ended, the thinking of those men and women was completely changed.” (p. 3). “Just as the people were in the upper room on the day of Pentecost, when suddenly there came from heaven a noise, and this noise was like a violent rushing wind, there will come again a noise that I will release from heaven.” (Introduction). “Clearly, one of the greatest revivals in human history— the vibration of heaven in Acts— set all kinds of things in motion. Why? Because, the 120 believers in the Upper Room didn’t get hung up on sound alone. They let the sound take them somewhere else, triggering all their senses to the point that they were drunk from the vibration.” (p. 102). If you read this book, you might come away thinking that the big thing that happened at Pentecost was that there was a noise. It wasn't, the big thing was that the Holy Spirit came on the people in the upper room. In Acts 8 and 10, where accounts are given of the Spirit coming on other people, no such sound is mentioned.

But to the contributors to this book, sound is pretty much all-important. “When you connect to the spirit realm, you make an alliance with that sound of heaven and all things move to that sound.” (p. 164). Funny how the Bible teaches nothing about this. “We began having prophecies in 1995 that there is a new sound coming, a new heavenly sound.” (p. 25). I don't doubt it, but considering that the person being interviewed here, Bob Jones, was a known false prophet who by his own admission got it wrong hundreds of times, I hardly see why these prophecies would be believed. “God began to teach me through this angel about sound and the power of the spoken word. He said that because God spoke His creative will, man can also speak words that create.” (p. 92). Huh? Really? Where is that in the Bible? “I later met a man God had taken to heaven and shown how to produce four dimensional objects with sound. This man told me he has used sound to project a house that is two and a half inches square and is three dimensional so you can walk around and look inside the windows.” (p. 91). Funny how Pierce doesn't give the man's name, and not even a google search shows any info about this supposed feat.

Some have tried to defend this book by pointing out that one contributor, David Van Koevering, is a scientist. Maybe, but in this book, he isn't writing as a scientist, but as a theologian, and a rubbish one at that. “This Scripture makes sense only when you understand it at the atomic and subatomic level.” (p. 135). Well, that just puts paid to a couple of thousand years of Church history. What did those idiots like Irenaeus, Augustine, Luther, and Calvin know? “The spiritual realm operates above the speed of light.” (p. 136). Says the Bible nowhere. “When man fell, the speed of light slowed down.” (p. 136). Ditto. “Understand that your healing or miracle is within the next nanosecond! In the blink of a nanosecond, He can cause your healing. Observe your healing, your miracle, your deliverance, and be filled with all Truth by observing the future God has for you. Take that quantum leap!” (p. 139). Well, he's sure got the faith-healer schtick down pat, doesn't he? “Have you fixed your past? Have you removed all curses? Have you blessed the things you own? Have you blessed your house, office, car, belongings, money, computer, and phone? Are those things and places free from your past actions, words, and thoughts? You or someone else can speak a blessing or curse on your things. Somebody is about to take a quantum leap!” (pp. 142-143). Umm...dude, here's a hint, just between you and me. Tacking the phrase “quantum leap” onto everything doesn't make unbiblical ideas an better. You have no business being any kind of Christian teacher, because what you're teaching isn't at all biblical, it's just some junk you've made up.

Then, there is Bill Johnson, who is always good for some unbiblical nonsense. “Our role in shaping the world around us through creative expression is never more at the forefront than when we joyfully learn to pull tomorrow into today. God trains us for this role whenever He speaks to us, for in doing so He is working to awaken and establish our affections for His kingdom.” (p. 171). Yeah, calling tomorrow into today, whatever that means, is never taught in the Bible. “If you can see God’s coming future promises, and He hasn’t blinded your eyes to His intent, then He is hoping to hook you into the role of calling “into being that which does not exist.””(p. 178). Nowhere in the Bible are we told to call things into being, that is a pretty silly misreading of a verse that talks about God calling things into being. “There are anointings, mantles, revelations, and mysteries that have lain unclaimed, literally where they were left, because the generation that walked in them never passed them on.” (pp. 30-31). Read or listen to NAR types long enough, and you'll conclude that they are addicted to anointings, mantles, revelations, and such stuff. They are constantly passing them along, saying they are getting them or giving them away, et al. And as you may guess, none of it is biblical.

And that brings up what this book is really about, the NAR and their version of dominionism. They want to rule the world, and they have latched onto quantum physics as a way of justifying certain aspects of their rubbish theology, like how they think they are the ones who can call things into existence, or that vibrations somehow mean that their words have supernatural power.

Finally, if nothing else shows just how stupid this book is, check out this statement. “The four universal elements are water, wind, fire, and earth.” (p. 67). Yes, he's being very serious.

This book is junk. There are so many much betters works of both physics and theology out there, and it's simply sad that a bunch of so-called church leaders wrote this work of utter stupidity.

book review-- Burning Ones by Jerame Nelson

A steaming pile of pseudo-theology

The author of this book should be credited with at least this much, that he states his premise for this book right at the first, “I believe that God is raising up the Burning Ones in this hour.” (p. 15). He also calls these Burning One dread champions, for what it's worth, which isn't much, since he never tells us where the Bible tells us God is raising up these Burning Ones. No, he only tries to hammer his ideas into scriptural passages that don't teach those ideas.

Of course, to become one of these “Burning Ones”, you have to work for it, you have to earn it. “One of the marks of the dread champions will be that they will be a generation who will embrace the fire of God, not run from it. They will be those who are willing to pay the price necessary to become carriers of His glory.” (p. 71). Yep, it's all up to you. Too bad for him, though, that the Bible refutes this notion, in Galatians 3, “O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. 2 Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? 4 Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? 5 Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith— 6 just as Abraham “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”?” This passage puts paid to any notion that we can do any works to receive the Spirit or receive any miracle.

One of his main tactics is to use biblical passages as metaphors for his Burning Ones. He does it, for example, to some biblical descriptions of David's mighty men, claiming these descriptions are somehow applicable to his Burning Ones, when there is nothing in the Bible that supports such a view or teaching. He tries it with Deuteronomy 11, claiming that the things mentioned there are metaphors for his Burning Ones, which has no biblical support, either.

Another main tactic of his is to constantly refer to these bizarre dreams and visions he claims to have gotten from God. If anything, these things are more important for his book's teachings then anything he tries to shoehorn into the Bible. In fact, it wouldn't be unfair to say that his faith is much more in these unscriptural visions then in the scripture itself.

Of special audacity, and not in the good sense, is the last chapter. It's simply hilarious when someone peddling strange fire like he is tries to warn others of strange fire. At one point in this chapter, he wants to try to warn people of those who are “toking the ghost”, and while I can agree with his warning to some degree, he does this just after bragging about a time he was “hammered in the Spirit” (p. 206) and trying to get people to come to God by comparing God to a marijuana hit. There's an old saying about pots and kettles that seems very applicable here.

A third tactic, one pretty closely related to the second, is his constant referring to miracles he claimed happened during his ministry. My response to these claims is a complex but important one, and it follows here...

“I remember preaching in Lakeland, Florida, during the time when a revival burned through GodTV to the world known as the Florida Outpouring.” (p. 195). The Lakeland Revival was the event that spun around the person of Todd “Kicking Grandma in the Face with my Bike Boots” Bentley. One of the big elements of this “revival” was claims of healings. World Magazine did an article called Heal or Heel?, telling about when they looked into some of the claims of healings from Bentley, and got a short list of people healed. But when World investigated further, they learned that these people weren't really healed at all, that Bentley was lying.

This World Magazine article is especially relevant to the claims in this book of people being healed of cancer, because the article mentions claims by Bentley of people who were healed of cancer, but who later died of that same cancer.

Here's the truth—faith healers lie. It's been shown that Benny Hinn's healings are fake. Tricks like the fake leg-lengthening “healing” have been well-documented. The entire thing has been exposed as a falsehood, a scam to whip up enthusiasm, create followers who have tossed discernment aside, and of course make the minister filthy rich. And worse then that, people die when they think they've been told they are healed when they really aren't, something shown in the World Magazine article, but not just there. Foreign Policy Magazine did an article called Angels and Demons, which tells about how in Africa people with AIDS are dying because Pentecostal faith healers are telling them they are healed, so these people stop taking their anti-retroviral drugs.

Some people might think the title of this review is crass and too much, but it's not. This book is exactly what the title says it is. It is filled with false teachings, it is filled with twistings of biblical passages. The only place this book should be found is in a trash bin.

Loren Cunningham twists Psalm 2

The part transcribed here begins at 4:36

Now we become through Jesus, according to Romans chapter 2 verse 29, as well as Romans 9, Romans 11, and other portions of scripture, we become through Christ sons of Abraham, which means we take on the Abraham covenant. What I'm saying through all of this, you actually can rule this world if you will through Jesus Christ, because we become through Jesus Christ sons of God, joint heirs with Jesus Christ, to rule and reign with Christ. In Psalms chapter 2 verse 8, God says to us, “Ask of me, and I will surely give the nations as thine inheritance, and the very ends of the earth as thy possession”. But Jesus showed us how. In Matthew chapter 5, verse 5, “the meek shall inherit the earth”. So it's not through the ways the world would do it, the ways Satan would do it, but it's through Jesus Christ in the ways he would do it. How did he do it? “The meek shall inherit the earth”. He became a servant to all, and in the process he gained it all.

Ok, so, let's look at Psalm 2

Why do the nations rageand the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves,and the rulers take counsel together,against the LORD and against his Anointed, saying,
3 “Let us burst their bonds apartand cast away their cords from us.”
4 He who sits in the heavens laughs;the Lord holds them in derision.
5 Then he will speak to them in his wrath,and terrify them in his fury, saying,
6 “As for me, I have set my Kingon Zion, my holy hill.”
7 I will tell of the decree:The LORD said to me, “You are my Son;today I have begotten you.
8 Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,and the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You shall break them with a rod of ironand dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.”
10 Now therefore, O kings, be wise;be warned, O rulers of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear,and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son,lest he be angry, and you perish in the way,for his wrath is quickly kindled.Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

If that context isn't enough to show that Cunningham is trying to pull a fast one, let's go further. This Psalm is referenced in Hebrews 1

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. 5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you”?

And the part that's referenced in Hebrews is in the same part of the Psalm that Cunningham references, but where Hebrews clearly shows that this psalm is referring to Christ, Cunningham tries to somehow make it refer to us.

But let's go on, Revelation 19 mentions who will rule with a rod of iron.

11 Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. 12 His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. 13 He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. 14 And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. 15 From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. 16 On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.

There's also a reference in Revelation 12.

Now, there is one reference in Revelation 2, what Jesus says to the church at Thyatira, which does say that those who overcome will have authority over the nations, and will rule them with a rod of iron. But there is something in Revelation 20 that this seems to refer to.

4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

Another place to consider is II Timothy 2

11 The saying is trustworthy, for: If we have died with him, we will also live with him; 

12 if we endure, we will also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us;  

13 if we are faithless, he remains faithful— for he cannot deny himself.

There is the promise in the Bible that the saints will have authority on earth, but that time will come when Christ returns. It isn't the church's job to try to take over the world, to try to somehow make the world christianized to such a degree that Christ will return.

It's pretty clear, Psalm 2:8 is not God talking to us, but to His Son, to Christ. Cunningham again proves he has no business teaching like this.

Loren Cunningham's twisting of Jeremiah 27:5

I guess it could be said that I should have started at the beginning of this video in looking at what Cunningham says in this video. Maybe, but what came in those earlier posts was what drew my attention first, but I'll go back and catch a few things from the beginning, and hopefully that'll help, too, because it's pretty clear Cunningham is just making stuff up and not really dealing with what any passage is saying.

This transcription begins at the beginning of the video.

Turn with me to Jeremiah chapter 27 and verse 5. It says in God's Word, “I have made the earth, the men and the beast that are on the face of the earth by my great power and by my outstretched arm, and I will give it to the one who is pleasing in my sight”. Now God is saying, first of all, that he made the world. Because he made it, he has ownership of it. And he's not talking just a part of it, he says it's his. And he goes on to say, “I will give it to the one who is pleasing in my sight”. We note that in this particular portion, Jeremiah is talking to the children of Israel, and he was saying to them as a warning that God is giving charge and giving dominion over to Nebuchanezzar against them. Now this was strange for the people of Israel, because they knew the Abrahamic covenant. You'll find it in Genesis chapter 12, where in verse 1, “Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go forth from the your country, from your relatives, and from your father's house, to the land which I will show you. I will make you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great. So you shall be a blessing. And I bless those that bless you, and the one that curses you I will curse. And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed”. Now the children of Israel, they all love the first half of that covenant. Gods says “I will bless you”. But it was the second part that they wanted to forget, “So that you may bless all the families of the earth”. And they were clinging to the first, the promise, without the condition. And here God is saying, “I'm going to turn this over to Nebuchanezzar, and I'm going to turn you over to Nebuchanezzar”. And God uses even the unrighteous governments to chastise the righteous, or his people, and this was the case here.

So, Cunningham points us to Jeremiah 27, and whereas he takes one verse out of context and tries to build up the story around it without reference to the context, let's add the context.

In the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah the son of Josiah, king of Judah, this word came to Jeremiah from the LORD. 2 Thus the LORD said to me: “Make yourself straps and yoke-bars, and put them on your neck. 3 Send word to the king of Edom, the king of Moab, the king of the sons of Ammon, the king of Tyre, and the king of Sidon by the hand of the envoys who have come to Jerusalem to Zedekiah king of Judah. 4 Give them this charge for their masters: ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: This is what you shall say to your masters: 5 “It is I who by my great power and my outstretched arm have made the earth, with the men and animals that are on the earth, and I give it to whomever it seems right to me. 6 Now I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, my servant, and I have given him also the beasts of the field to serve him. 7 All the nations shall serve him and his son and his grandson, until the time of his own land comes. Then many nations and great kings shall make him their slave.

8 “‘“But if any nation or kingdom will not serve this Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and put its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, I will punish that nation with the sword, with famine, and with pestilence, declares the LORD, until I have consumed it by his hand. 9 So do not listen to your prophets, your diviners, your dreamers, your fortune-tellers, or your sorcerers, who are saying to you, ‘You shall not serve the king of Babylon.’ 10 For it is a lie that they are prophesying to you, with the result that you will be removed far from your land, and I will drive you out, and you will perish. 11 But any nation that will bring its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serve him, I will leave on its own land, to work it and dwell there, declares the LORD.”’”

12 To Zedekiah king of Judah I spoke in like manner: “Bring your necks under the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him and his people and live. 13 Why will you and your people die by the sword, by famine, and by pestilence, as the LORD has spoken concerning any nation that will not serve the king of Babylon? 14 Do not listen to the words of the prophets who are saying to you, ‘You shall not serve the king of Babylon,’ for it is a lie that they are prophesying to you. 15 I have not sent them, declares the LORD, but they are prophesying falsely in my name, with the result that I will drive you out and you will perish, you and the prophets who are prophesying to you.”

16 Then I spoke to the priests and to all this people, saying, “Thus says the LORD: Do not listen to the words of your prophets who are prophesying to you, saying, ‘Behold, the vessels of the LORD's house will now shortly be brought back from Babylon,’ for it is a lie that they are prophesying to you. 17 Do not listen to them; serve the king of Babylon and live. Why should this city become a desolation? 18 If they are prophets, and if the word of the LORD is with them, then let them intercede with the LORD of hosts, that the vessels that are left in the house of the LORD, in the house of the king of Judah, and in Jerusalem may not go to Babylon. 19 For thus says the LORD of hosts concerning the pillars, the sea, the stands, and the rest of the vessels that are left in this city, 20 which Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon did not take away, when he took into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and all the nobles of Judah and Jerusalem— 21 thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, concerning the vessels that are left in the house of the LORD, in the house of the king of Judah, and in Jerusalem: 22 They shall be carried to Babylon and remain there until the day when I visit them, declares the LORD. Then I will bring them back and restore them to this place.”

So, what would be my problems with what Cunningham says about verse 5?

First, look at the people and places to whom Jeremiah is delivering this prophecy. “2 Thus the LORD said to me: “Make yourself straps and yoke-bars, and put them on your neck. 3 Send word to the king of Edom, the king of Moab, the king of the sons of Ammon, the king of Tyre, and the king of Sidon by the hand of the envoys who have come to Jerusalem to Zedekiah king of Judah.” Cunningham says “ We note that in this particular portion, Jeremiah is talking to the children of Israel...”, but at this point in Jeremiah 27, the prophet isn't talking to the children of Israel at all. Starting in v 12, we get Jeremiah addressing the king of Israel, and then later the priests and people, but before that his words are directed toward the kings of 5 other nations: Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and Sidon.

Next, there is Cunningham's contention that this judgment is coming on Israel because they like the first part of the Abrahamic covenant about God blessing them, but didn't like the other part of the covenant about blessing the other nations of the world.

Now, where does this chapter say anything like that? To put it plainly, it doesn't. Cunningham is just trying to shoehorn his own ideas into this passage.

Loren Cunningham's mocking of the Bible

There is something else about the part I transcribed from this video that bugs me.

The Bible is clear to say that all of the earth and the fullness thereof is mine, saith the Lord. He says also that the silver and the gold is mine, saith the Lord. But how does it end up in the devil's pocket? There's gotta be a reason. It's because we as Christians are not ruling in the power of Christ as we are intended to do. Now I would like to make a very clear application on this in practical terms. The Lord said “Occupy until I come”. When an occupation army comes in, what do they do? They don't run up in the hills and hide out. They take over! They take over, if necessary, in the schools, so that no philosophy will be taught that is counter to their particular position. They also take over the banks and the wealth of the nation. They take over the, if necessary, even the churches, to make sure nothing is said that will not go against what they are trying to do. They take over, of course, the military, and all the other aspects of life that they need to control. They take over. Now Jesus said “Occupy until...” And there is certainly a view that says that we, the body of Christ, are really under the hand of Satan in this world and we're going to squeak out and maybe slip out in such a way that nobody will notice because we're so weak when it happens. But I don't believe that. I believe God is wanting a glorious church, a strong church, to go out and triumph. And I like to put it in a way that maybe even in the exaggeration you'll get the impact a little better, that if we work hard enough, sure, there will be an Antichrist, because the Bible says so, but he can hold his international convention in a phone booth. You see, instead of trying to picture the greatness of the Antichrist and what Satan is going to do, let's see the greatness of Jesus through His church according to what we do in faith ruling and reigning with Christ.

It's where he's talking about the Antichrist. "And I like to put it in a way that maybe even in the exaggeration you'll get the impact a little better, that if we work hard enough, sure, there will be an Antichrist, because the Bible says so, but he can hold his international convention in a phone booth.  You see, instead of trying to picture the greatness of the Antichrist and what Satan is going to do, let's see the greatness of Jesus through His church according to what we do in faith ruling and reigning with Christ."

He claims this is some kind of exaggeration to make a point, but it's simply mocking.

The truth is, God is the one who has told us things in the Bible about the end times, how difficult those times will be, how evil mankind will be in the last days, and the nature and power of this last ruler. To mock those things, as Cunningham mocks the idea of the Antichrist here, is at best unwise.

This kind of mocking is a common thing I've seen in the writings and speakings of dominionists. Johnny Enlow is extreme in his denunciations of anyone who has a "defeatist" view of the end times, saying they are part of a Leah church that is saved but only tolerated by God, while he and people like himself who want to take over the world are a part of a Rachel church that God is infatuated with. Outside of being extremely creepy, his use of Rachel and Leah is both problematic as a metaphor, and is also a metaphor without any biblical support.

"Defeatist" is the kind of word often used by these dominionists to label and dismiss others, and while Cunningham doesn't use that word in this video, he brings up the idea, "And there is certainly a view that says that we, the body of Christ, are really under the hand of Satan in this world and we're going to squeak out and maybe slip out in such a way that nobody will notice because we're so weak when it happens".

The Gospels record an interesting exchange between Peter and Jesus, for example here in Matthew 16

21 From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. 22 And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, “Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you.” 23 But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.”

I don't think even Cunningham would have the gall to call Jesus "defeatist", but it wouldn't be too difficult to see him in Peter's sandles.

Victory for Christians often doesn't look like what the world would call victory.

Romans 831 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? 33 Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised— who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

The phrase "...we are more than conquerors..." cannot be rightly understood except in the context of "...in all these things...", and "these things" are tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, nakedness, danger, and sword. And we are more than conquerors when those things happen to us because nothing can "separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord", so even us being more than conquerors is a gift that God gives to us.

Nowhere does the Bible tell the church to go out and conquer the world, to take over nations and societies and impose its will on the whole world. Few visions should be more terrifying to all right-thinking Christians than of a cabal of religious people disguising their ambitions for power behind a cheap facade of christianese ideas and rhetoric. In fact, look at Paul's description in the Romans 8 verses above, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.”

The day will come when Christ will return, and by all that I've seen in the Bible, it will be a day of conflict. The world didn't welcome Christ at his first coming, and they will greet his second with open rebellion that He will quash. But until then, we are as sheep among wolves, the world will regard us as sheep to be slaughtered, and even in this day many fellow believers are being slaughtered. Remember the words of Jesus recorded in John 15:18 “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you."

So, the Bible treats the Antichrist in a serious manner, and even Cunningham acknowledges that the Bible says that there will be an Antichrist, but then he mocks and dismisses what the Bible says about it, trying to substitute it for his own made-up dominionist ideas. Not good, YWAM, not good at all.

Loren Cunningham's dishonest word games

What I've transcribed here begins at the 6:00 mark.

The Bible is clear to say that all of the earth and the fullness thereof is mine, saith the Lord. He says also that the silver and the gold is mine, saith the Lord. But how does it end up in the devil's pocket? There's gotta be a reason. It's because we as Christians are not ruling in the power of Christ as we are intended to do. Now I would like to make a very clear application on this in practical terms. The Lord said “Occupy until I come”. When an occupation army comes in, what do they do? They don't run up in the hills and hide out. They take over! They take over, if necessary, in the schools, so that no philosophy will be taught that is counter to their particular position. They also take over the banks and the wealth of the nation. They take over the, if necessary, even the churches, to make sure nothing is said that will not go against what they are trying to do. They take over, of course, the military, and all the other aspects of life that they need to control. They take over. Now Jesus said “Occupy until...” And there is certainly a view that says that we, the body of Christ, are really under the hand of Satan in this world and we're going to squeak out and maybe slip out in such a way that nobody will notice because we're so weak when it happens. But I don't believe that. I believe God is wanting a glorious church, a strong church, to go out and triumph. And I like to put it in a way that maybe even in the exaggeration you'll get the impact a little better, that if we work hard enough, sure, there will be an Antichrist, because the Bible says so, but he can hold his international convention in a phone booth. You see, instead of trying to picture the greatness of the Antichrist and what Satan is going to do, let's see the greatness of Jesus through His church according to what we do in faith ruling and reigning with Christ.

There is actually some stuff before this that could be good to look at later, but this will do for now.

So, where does Jesus say "Occupy til I come"? It should be considered interesting that Cunningham gives no reference for this phrase, though it's likely not a difficult one to find.

Luke 1911 As they heard these things, he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. 12 He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and then return. 13 Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten minas, and said to them, ‘Engage in business until I come.’ 14 But his citizens hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We do not want this man to reign over us.’ 15 When he returned, having received the kingdom, he ordered these servants to whom he had given the money to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by doing business. 16 The first came before him, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made ten minas more.’ 17 And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’ 18 And the second came, saying, ‘Lord, your mina has made five minas.’ 19 And he said to him, ‘And you are to be over five cities.’ 20 Then another came, saying, ‘Lord, here is your mina, which I kept laid away in a handkerchief; 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe man. You take what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.’ 22 He said to him, ‘I will condemn you with your own words, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?’ 24 And he said to those who stood by, ‘Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’ 25 And they said to him, ‘Lord, he has ten minas!’ 26 ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.’”

This is from the ESV, so the translation is a bit different, but the sentence in 13 is also translated as something like"Occupy until I come" in some other translations.

But the ESV is a good translation here, because it gives the proper sense of what the nobleman in the parable said. The word is pragmateuomai, and here is its definition.

to be occupied in anything

to carry on a business

to carry on the business of a banker or a trader

The word "occupy" isn't a bad translation, it's only shenanigans like what Cunningham engages in, taking that phrase out of context and trying to make it mean something it isn't even close to meaning, that spoils "occupy.

So, when Cunningham tries to make "Occupy until I come" mean that the church should act like an occupying army, one can have two reasonable reactions--laugh uproariously at such blatant nonsense and falsehood, because in one sense such shenanigans are worthy only of being laughed at, or feel unease when you realize that Cunningham is saying that the church really should act like a occupying army, taking over banks and schools and even churches.

The dishonesty on full display in this video is so obvious and blatant that Cunningham should lose great amounts of credibility for being either so dishonest or such a doofus. At the least, he showed himself unqualified to be a teacher of any kind by promoting such a wrong interpretation of that phrase.