Archive for the ‘Leadership’ Category

The Perilous Path of Doctrinal Deviation

Doctrinal deviation, degeneration, and denigration is a perilous path leading not to genuine unity of the Spirit, as posited by its propagators, but rather disunity with the Spirit, apostasy, perdition, and ultimately hell itself!

Not All Unity is of the Spirit

Not all unity or unanimity is a good thing or a God-thing. The first would-be world dictator, Nimrod, exercising supernatural leadership abilities, was able to cajole the entire population of the world into coalescing under his rulership in complete unanimity and to participate in the building of a tower dedicated to his worship that would reach into heaven. But it wasn't a God-thing, in fact it was an anti-God thing, and He personally came down and confused the language of the people, with the result that they could no longer be in unity, and thereby brought a halt to the building of the Tower of Babel.

King David also learned the hard way that unity/unanimity among the people is not always a God-thing, nor does it affirm God's approval of your plans; rather God killed David's chief armor-bearer, which cast him into a several month long cavernous depression and despondency.

Anyone who ever heard much of the teaching messages of the late Kenneth Hagin undoubtedly heard him tell the story of how his calling to the pastorate of a church regarding which he told the Lord that he would only accept the congregation's call if the vote was 100% in agreement, and that he was basing his prayer on the story of Gideon and the "fleece" he put before God. The result was a hard lesson learned. The congregation voted 100% in agreement, but it took him two years to finally resign the church because, he would say, both he and his wife and the church got fleeced! Unity of the people did not equal unity with God; it never was God's will for Hagin to pastor that church. All the human unanimity involved did not modify or affect in any way the will of God.

"The unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" is a good, Godly, Scriptural, righteous, and worthy objective, but what trips up many in the church today in their journey to apprehend it is the faulty thinking that "unity of the Spirit" is unanimity among people, or in the case of the church, believers, and in the case of "Full Gospel" or Pentecostal/Neo-Pentecostal churches, Spirit-baptized believers. In fact, that mindset is the premise of modern "seeker-friendly" concepts that may sometimes result in human unity, but does not infer or indicate unity with God. "Unity of the Spirit" is NOT people in agreement and walking in lockstep with one another. Rather, "unity of the Spirit" is being in agreement with GOD! It is a Holy-Spirit-inspired and orchestrated concord or agreement that is based on the foundation of the Word of God rather than the whims and opinions of men. Thus, the roadway to "unity of the Spirit" cannot possibly be the spiritually perilous path of "doctrinal deviation." (more…)

Bishops and Apostolic Succession

In the 1980s a spiritually perilous trend began developing in the Neo-Pentecostal realm, which was the human appointments of certain leaders into the supposed office of "bishop" by groups claiming " Petrine apostolic succession." This vogue has become especially popular and common in an increasing number of so-called Neo-Pentecostal "networks" that have emerged since the 1980s, comprised of affiliated though purportedly autonomous churches. One prominent Neo-Pentecostal organization1 in 1982 formed what it called "The International College of Bishops," comprised of ecclesiastical leaders upon whom the organization had conferred the title of "Bishop," which they purported positioned the conferees in the bimillenial hierarchical system of bishops of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) supposedly leading back in unbroken "succession" to the Apostle Peter, who the RCC regards as the first "Pope."

This trend has developed despite the irrefutable fact that no such "office" or "position" is established anywhere in Holy Writ (The Bible), but rather in fact is undeniably antithetical and subversive to the governmental offices God has established in His Word, namely, the Fivefold Ministry Offices (Eph. 4:11). Nowhere does Scripture establish or even vaguely support the notion of a spiritually efficacious "office" of bishop or hierarchical lineage of ecclesiastical surrogates appointed by Christ, the supreme Head of the Church. (more…)

Nicolaitanism In The Church (Part 2)

[CLICK HERE to read Part 1 of this article.]

In the Revelation He communicated by the Holy Spirit to the Apostle John, Jesus issued a terse but severe warning to the Early Apostolic churches expressed His utter disdain for both the deeds and the doctrines of the Nicolaitans. He commended the Ephesian Church for being in accord with His own hatred for the deeds of the Nicolaitans: “Yet this you do have, that you hate the DEEDS of the Nicolaitans, WHICH I ALSO HATE” (Rev. 2:6). Conversely, the Pergamum Church Jesus condemned for the fact that, "you also have those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans." Further demonstrating His contempt for the Nicolaitan false teaching, He followed this indictment with the command, "Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth." (more…)

Nicolaitanism In The Church (Part 1)

One of the common denominators of false cults, false religions, and the occult is that their doctrines and practices are predicated upon the “isms” of vain, humanly invented philosophies. The same is true of the heretical hyper-authoritarian Discipleship/Shepherding doctrines, dogmas, and practices that were infused into the fabric and foundation of the Neo-Pentecostal church, which fact is further corroboration that they are all of the aforementioned characterization: cultic, false, and occult. One of the most significant “isms” of the Discipleship heresy is one that is specifically mentioned and condemned in the Bible—Nicolaitanism. (more…)

The Thin Line of Leadership (Part 2)

The main focus of the initial installment of our discussion was the matter of hyper-authoritarianism in general and how easy it is for the most principled spiritual leaders to cross over the "thin line of leadership" between leading and lording, discipling and dominating, coaching and coercing, to operate in "foul ground" without even realizing it. In this part, we begin turning our attention to some of the whys and wherefors of ecclesiastical predominance.

Of course, as was pointed out in Part 1, there is nothing new about authoritarian abuse by spiritual leaders. In any age, there is no shortage of unscrupulous religious dictators bent on self-aggrandizement facilitated through personal kingdom-building purportedly "in the name of the Lord." Nevertheless, while it is not indigenous exclusively to our time, due perhaps to the move toward organizational ecumenicism commonly referred to today as "networking," there is little doubt that it is more widespread than ever before, to the point that sadly the term, "ubiquitous," now applies. Unfortunately, today there is little difference between the ecclesiastical and the secular realm with respect to corruption. And, after no small number of years of studying this phenomenon, I have concluded that the primary cause is nothing more sophisticated than base greed fueled by the oldest and most powerful human propensity which God Himself testifies is the ROOT of ALL evil — "the love of money." (more…)

The Thin Line of Leadership (Part 1)

There is a very thin line between leading and lording, discipling and dominating, coaching and coercing. So thin is the line, it is at times and in certain scenarios nearly indistinguishable.

Indeed, church leaders commonly cross the divide without even realizing it, and are much chagrined upon discovery of their transgression. Moreover, many find themselves alternately on one side or the other of the line at different times. For the majority of sincere, upstanding, and ethical ministers, transversing — or transgressing, as it may be — the line is altogether unintentional, and when they suddenly find themselves on the wrong side, they cannot remember when, how, or even why the misstep occurred. Unfortunately there are also ministers not of this upright ilk, who intentionally and indeed unabashedly leap over the boundary line to operate in "foul territory" as their habitual modus operandi. (more…)

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More