I have been meditating, at first while commenting here, on these verses:
13 Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. 14 But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. 15 Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.
17 But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere. 18 Peacemakers who sow in peace reap a harvest of righteousness.
James 3:13-18 (TNIV)
In some other translations verse 17 mentions gentle wisdom, the title of this blog. Note the contrast between this gentle wisdom from above and the other kind of “wisdom” from another place. Note also how to tell the difference: the latter is characterised by “bitter envy and selfish ambition” whereas the former is “first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.”
So what has this to do with Todd Bentley and the Lakeland outpouring? I have received hundreds of comments on my posts about this; all but a very few purely abusive ones I have allowed to stand. I have also read quite a lot of posts by others on this subject, some linking to my posts, some not. Some commenters have linked to pages of other material about Todd Bentley, only some of which I have read. Almost all of these posts, comments and linked pages have been written by people who profess to be Christians.
And, I am sad to say, a large proportion, probably a majority, of these comments, posts by others and linked material have been clearly negative about Todd Bentley and what is happening in Lakeland. Furthermore, they have typically, although with some honourable exceptions such as Lee’s comment (but much of the material quoted at his website is not an exception), been characterised by unreasonable negativity, judgmentalism and condemnation, often of a very personal kind, directed against Todd Bentley and his associates.
The relatively few good arguments that I have seen to bring Todd’s ministry into question, such as that he allegedly focuses too much on angels (or is it that his critics are focusing on just two or three occasions in a decade-long ministry when Todd has mentioned angels?), have been largely lost in the overlay of judgmentalism, of writing Todd off as a false teacher and an agent of the devil because of a supposed weakness in his theology – and in some case of vicious personal attacks on myself for daring to defend Todd. Agathos of Scotteriology seemed to be putting forward some serious arguments, but his aggressive reaction to my comments, attacking me for making explicit some obvious implications of what he wrote, betrays what kind of attitude is behind his reporting of this matter.
So, I’m sorry to say, the defining characteristic of these negative comments is bitterness and condemnation. In some cases I suppose that this springs from the “envy and selfish ambition” which James mentions. It would not be fair to suggest that it always does, but in very few of these condemnations of Todd’s ministry have I seen anything “first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.”
By contrast, the comments I have seen endorsing Todd’s ministry, and those expressing genuine uncertainty about it, have mostly fitted well into the model of wisdom which is “first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere.”
So, I wonder, which kind of “wisdom” about Todd comes from heaven, and which from some other place?
John Hobbins writes, in a different context:
The old polemical premise of Bible thumperdom is that Scripture’s purpose is to prove that the views of an opponent are incompatible with biblical teaching. According to that template, the Bible is a bludgeon to hit someone over the head with.
The very people who complain about Todd’s apparent violence on stage seem to think nothing of using this kind of metaphorical violence in an attempt to knock out their opponents. Is that the wisdom which comes from heaven?
I’m afraid that the more I read intemperate and bitter negativity about Todd, the more favourably I think towards him. After all he clearly has the forces of evil going for him in a big way from the way that they have spurred people on to comments clearly characterised by evil attitudes like condemnation. Todd clearly has Satan worried! So, with enemies like these critics of Todd, who needs friends?
PS: One thing we do need to make clear about Todd is that he is primarily an evangelist. He is not a Bible teacher; that is a different ministry in Ephesians 4:11 and we should not expect him to do both. That is not an excuse for teaching what is wrong, but it is a good reason for Todd not attempting deep Bible teaching and for some of what he does teach being shallow. I take someone’s point that at Lakeland he is primarily preaching to the converted, to those who are at least nominally Christians, so is perhaps not operating as an evangelist. But then doubtless many of these people are nominal or backslidden if ever truly converted and so need the ministry of an evangelist. I am sure that Todd would also say that Lakeland is a special time for him for which he has been called and gifted in different ways. In fact there he is operating more in an apostolic ministry – although I would hesitate to call him an apostle because of the sometimes misleading connotations of authority in that word.
UPDATE: I just found Pastor Steve Hickey’s interesting series on the Florida outpouring. His first and second posts refer to the critics I have mentioned as the “seat of scoffers”, and also give clear positive stories of what he has witnessed at Lakeland. His third post is mostly a link to an hour long sermon on the subject (which I have not listened to), interestingly enough based on Matthew 11 which I have just referred to. His latest post is about the angel Emma, and concludes:
I’m thrilled to hear angels are visiting Todd Bentley. I hope angels visit you too.
“Agathos of Scotteriology seemed to be putting forward some serious arguments, but his aggressive reaction to my comments, attacking me for making explicit some obvious implications of what he wrote, betrays what kind of attitude is behind his reporting of this matter”
—Are you kidding me?
You came to that site, and were rude, passive aggressive, and ignorant to not only the blogger, but all the other posters.
People can go to that site and see your “gentle wisdom” in action.
Your blind allegiance, ignorance, accusations, and BAD ATTITUDE, lack of wisdom show what is REALLY behind YOUR reporting on this matter.
And then to show how much nicer, and gentler, and full of wisdom you are…you make this ignorant, passive aggressive post???
This is saddening.
AND – you refuse to answer any questions, or have dialogue.
Just because people question Todd, and have seen movements such as his end up in very bad places, can see his doing very unbiblical things….does not make them unlearned, or unscriptural.
We’re all trying to interpret these things through scripture.
Here’s a question:
Is everything Bentley has ever done, and everything going on there now okay?
And if people see things that are not okay, are they allowed to comment on it?
Seriously Peter? I point out your inconsistencies in your logic and it becomes “his aggressive reaction to my comments, attacking me for making explicit some obvious implications of what he wrote, betrays what kind of attitude is behind his reporting of this matter.” [you made nothing explicit. Please anyone go through the comments on my blog and see what I am talking about. A plain inability to read what is written and a giant 0 on salient points.]
Why do I not see Dr. West likewise mentioned? He has been far more confrontational with his posts and calling you out. But I am “bitterness and condemnation.”
James 3:13? PLEASE; I BEG you tell me how you have witnessed this Scripture in my life, “Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom.”
Ahhh, but you will apply it because I had the audacity to question you and Todd.
What I find most humorous–other than your lack of ability to win any argument against anyone at my blog–is that when I questioned some of the leanings of Mammonianity you thought that was good:
http://www.qaya.org/blog/?p=515. Question Osteen, Copeland, and Dollar…that’s OK.
However, dare to question ANYTHING about Bentley and suddenly I have a bad attitude of “bitterness and condemnation.”
“Bitterness and condemnation” is probably what you should have titled this post because in your blind allegiance to all things Todd–the man has never and can never do ANY wrong– bitterness and condemnation is all you have shown towards me.
For someone that has the blog title “Gentle wisdom” interacting with you is neither gentle or contains any wisdom. Perhaps you should change your moniker to “bitterness and condemnation”
Of course, because I disagree with you, obviously I am full of “bitterness and condemnation.”
Apparently one of the things they do NOT do at LST is train their students to think critically.
I retain the ability to say good things about Bentley. However, it seems that you have lost the ability to say anything discerning.
And when you lose that you lose the ability to do good theology. Which, unfortunately, is where you find yourself.
Let me guess. I am “negative” and have an attitude of “bitterness and condemnation.” But you can say whatever you want about me and I suppose it is in love.
Now you are guilty of outrageous libel.
Why is it that whenever God moves in the world there is always such criticism? Stupid question – we know the answer, really.
Why do we pray that God would revive his people and when he does we pick apart everything that goes on? Again, stupid question.
Perhaps a not so stupid question is who is Todd accountable to? No-one stands alone, and those at the top are ever more exposed to ‘slipping’ or even losing it completely if not tied in discipleship to others. We should pray for Todd and Lakeland, not rip them to pieces. Our personal opinions must ALWAYS take second place, unless we think we have the right to stand as judge.
I’m in South Yorkshire, England and can’t ‘do’ much about Lakeland, but if there is something I can do, it’s pray. Read 1 Thess, especially chapter 5. There are other parts of scripture, too. Leaders are people. They aren’t perfect, but hey! so are we! Great, isn’t it! We’re all imperfect together, being made together by the one Spirit into one Body (except those who prefer to over-emphasise difference).
J, if you are so good at recognising gentle wisdom, can you please examine your own comment to see if that is what is in it? I will leave my readers to decide if it is my post or your comment which is more “passive aggressive”.
What questions have I refused to answer? I have answered lots of questions about this. If I have missed any among the hundreds of comments I have received and mostly replied to, please ask them again. And I will make a point of answering all the questions in your comment:
No, I am deadly serious.
No, there are many things going on at Lakeland which are not OK. There are also things which Todd has done which are wrong, some of which he has turned away from years ago and should not be brought into the current discussions.
Yes, of course they are. I have allowed hundreds of comments like that. I am glad that people have pointed out some questionable things which Todd does. What I object to (but still allow) is comments which are condemnatory without giving proper evidence, or which imply that just because he is not perfect everything he does is the work of the devil. By the way, I don’t put Agathos’ comments in that category.
Scott, I will deal with what you said separately.
Caron, I deleted your comment because it is simply a copy of a previous comment and irrelevant to this post.
Jamie, thanks for your sensible comment, and the important point that we must pray that Todd’s work does not get damaged by the tide of hatred and bitterness against it.
Scott, I assume you are the same person as “Agathos”, but this is a bit confusing.
Yes, I liked your series on Mammonianity, although on further reflection it is a bit too negative. You made a good point when you wrote:
And now you have added Mammonianity to the list, and you and others have added Lakelandianity to it as well. Is this what we should be doing? Or is there a better, gentle wisdom type way of reacting to teachings which have got out of balance?
“Lakelandianity” is I think a Jim West coinage. By the way, I singled you out and not him because you actually made some good critical arguments against what was happening at Lakeland, whereas Jim wrote nothing to lift him above the crowds of those who “speak abusively against whatever they do not understand … like unreasoning animals” (Jude 10, TNIV).
I wish I had seen James 3:13 in your life, Scott. Sadly the little I have seen, in the tone of your comments, reminds me much more of verses 14-16.
Let me clarify with quotations the exchange I objected to on your blog, which was not the first such exchange. You wrote:
So was I not right to think that you are saying that teaching that adultery is right is “similar to what Bentley et al. do”? But when I objected to this, you wrote:
Well, OK, if you don’t actually want to say that teaching that adultery is right is “similar to what Bentley et al. do”, I will let you step back from that statement, as I did in my following comment. Maybe I should not assume that a paragraph in which Bentley is mentioned, in a post entitled “Lakeland: The Bible” “actually has much to do with Bentley”. But why do you have to turn this into a personal attack, both on your own blog and now here?
I know I said I would add you to my blogroll. Now I’m wondering if I should. I certainly will not do so until you demonstrate your good faith by correcting the spelling error in my blog’s name on your blogroll, which was pointed out to you several days ago. Better let me know that you have done so as I might miss the small change.
Peter,
I recognized how difficult it is to write a balanced opinion on such a controversial topic. You’ve done well in my opinion. Be encouraged my friend.
It seems that the Body of Christ has been divided yet again by the arrival of a new and radical generation of believers who carry a message from heaven. It’s the message, not so much the messenger that really matters to me. Over the years my spiritual ears have been tuned to hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit through believers and non-believers alike. Call me silly if you want, but I’ve heard the Holy Spirit communicate through some mighty questionable sources in recent years. I’m convinced that He will even use a donkey on occasion to get His point across. And when He does, the glory will go to Him.
The Body of Christ is divided on whether or not Todd Bentley is of God. Sometimes division is good. For example, the Word of God brings division as described in Hebrews 4:12 (Greek word: merismos, which means separation for the purpose of clarification). I believe that a separation for the purpose of clarification has come to the body of Christ in this day. It’s a separation that forces us to take a hard look at who we are and what we believe. It’s a separation that demands that we answer a question. Are we willing to receive a message from God in any way He chooses to send it?
I’m not at all surprised by the appearance of Todd Bentley and the message he carries. He brings a message of healing, salvation and hope to those who have not known God. God often uses the base things in life to confound the wise. That gives me cause for hope in my own life. Now I know that He is willing to use those who are unqualified in the ways of the world to bring hope to millions of hungry hearts. He has established a proven track record of using simple people to do some very profound things.
If this current move is of the devil, then his house is divided and he is doing some very remarkable things around the world to the glory to God.
Peter, thanks for engaging us in this important conversation. God bless you.
Gary
Gary, thanks for the encouragement.
Amen, Gary
Peter – “J, if you are so good at recognising gentle wisdom, can you please examine your own comment to see if that is what is in it? I will leave my readers to decide if it is my post or your comment which is more “passive aggressive”.”
—I was not trying to be gentle with you.
You are the one who bills their writings as “Gentle Wisdom”, so again another one of your passive aggressive ad hominem attacks falls flat.
I was not passive aggressive, and underhandedly rude as you are.
I was straight forward. I do not need to disguise my words in straw man arguments, and backhanded attacks.
When I said that you refused to answer questions, I meant the many that were put forward to you on the other site, which you never answered.
I’m genuinely surprised to see you admit that all that Todd has done is not correct.
I don’t really want us to have a blast for blast flame war. There is many better things we could (SHOULD!) do with our time.
I am not your enemy – and do not want you to try to be mine, or become one to me.
I will try to use nicer words, and a nicer tone, and be more understanding, and patient towards you.
J, thanks for trying to be nicer. But you are “genuinely surprised to see you admit that all that Todd has done is not correct”, then it is clear that you have not been reading what I have written. Can I suggest that you read my posts about Todd through from the beginning.
I don’t see any obligation to answer questions put to me on other people’s blogs. But if you like I will answer your two questions in this comment at Scotteriology:
No, I did not mean that. I was reacting to Scott’s apparent rejection of any kind of importance to experience, which he has since clarified he did not intend.
No. But I am saying that a person telling myths which are experiential and compatible with biblical teaching, like Todd Bentley, is likely to be okay, and should be treated as such, by people without direct pastoral responsibility for him or her, unless there is clear evidence that he or she is not. Timothy was right to rebuke false teachers because he was commissioned by an apostle with responsibility for a certain area. You and Scott, unless you are bishops or equivalent over Lakeland or Abbotsford BC or members of the board of Fresh Fire Ministries, have no authority over what Todd teaches and so should not meddle in other people’s business.
Thank you for another great post on this topic. As well, the link to Steve’s blog was refreshing and eye-opening as well. I recommend reading it if you have not.
“You and Scott, unless you are bishops or equivalent over Lakeland or Abbotsford BC or members of the board of Fresh Fire Ministries, have no authority over what Todd teaches and so should not meddle in other people’s business.”
Advice you clearly follow whenever you come to my blog or others right? Or tell people what they should believe about Lakeland? If you are going to give this advice first follow it yourself, or it is hypocrisy.
Peter what is the most humorous is that this post didn’t materialize until you had been completely exposed on my blog’s comments of having very little theological understanding though you claim to have studied theology to an MA level. Hoe does the Wesleyan quadrilateral work again?
Yes, clearly because I understand the quadrilateral and put the correct part of it in priority I am guilty of an “apparent rejection of any kind of importance to experience.”
At the end of the day Peter I think we have made enough accusations, and I think the biggest problem in our dialog is that you seem to have a blind allegiance to Bentley and have the inability to admit a mistake. Pointing out some of Bentley’s errors or yours doesn’t mean I am “negative” and full of “bitterness and condemnation.”
We are all fallen, limited human beings that are fallible. I make mistakes all of the time. Sometimes my thinking even changes on a subject as new and more evidence comes to light. Even Bentley is fallible. The only being I believe that is infallible is God; but I guess I am just negative and full of bitterness and condemnation for believing that about God and not a man.
The point of mentioning James 3:13 and asking if you have seen it in my life is because you DO NOT know me. AT ALL. You’ve never seen anything in my life. You have absolutely no clue how I daily live my Christian walk. Which by the way, is what experience primarily meant for Wesley.
“Gentile Wisdom” is hilarious. I will probably change it at some point. IF you had a sense of humor and took yourself a hair less seriously you would see that. Now you can’t use my suggestions, you have to come up with your own, but I would have laughed my head off if you had linked me as “Scatology” (the study of feces) and I would commented a “Well played sir. Well played.”
It was a joke. I think you need to turn the serious down on the life dial about 3 or 4 notches. The first real fight on my blog (with hundreds of comments) in over a year.
Ummm… no one else finds the fact that my name is Scott and my handle is agathos confusing. Is it? Am I being somehow duplicitous.
Anyways, I am about all funned out with this convo, and I have to go downtown to my church and start preparing meals for the homeless. But I know I am negative, and full of “bitterness and condemnation,” and James 3:13 is never visible in my life but 14-16 clearly is.
Assume much? Much to much.
Isn’t it completely understandable, Peter? In fact, are any of these people going as far as Paul and how he would speak about those he viewed as false teacher, or ship-wrecking the faith of others?
Add to that, concern for those who are desperate or unable to afford the money they may end up investing in this thing and you have the added passion of people defending those they see as being taken for a ride.
None of that is to say it’s right, but I have to say that I’ve seen some pretty unguarded statements on all sides.
Scott, as I am not a Wesleyan and studied at a non-denominational college I admit to having limited understanding of the Wesleyan quadrilateral. On that point I am fallible. On other points Bentley is fallible. I have never denied that.
I admit to not knowing much about you, not even your real name until today. My point about James 3:14-16 was carefully put as what appeared from your comments to me. If this is not what your life is really like, please make that more clear in your comments.
I see signs of humour in some of what you write. But the moment you respond to me, from the very first response to me commenting on your blog, I have seen what looks very like bitterness and hatred. Why? If you were really a gentle and humorous type you would take in your stride a little deliberate exaggeration of what you had said for rhetorical effect. Instead you have repeatedly, right from that first response, called me out with highly personalised attacks for going a little beyond the precise logical implications of what you wrote. Or is this intended to be humour? If so I didn’t recognise it.
I seriously considered linking to your blog as “Scatology”, but given your attitude to me I expected you to slap a libel writ on me for doing so.
Lighten up a bit, and I will too!
As for my point about meddling in other people’s business, I was thinking in terms of condemning them as doing the devil’s work and other similar things I have read, not necessarily from you. Expressing opinions, good and bad, in non-judgmental terms is OK. But if Matthew 7:1-2 has any meaning some people need to be very careful.
Peter “You and Scott, unless you are bishops or equivalent over Lakeland or Abbotsford BC or members of the board of Fresh Fire Ministries, have no authority over what Todd teaches and so should not meddle in other people’s business.”
“I was thinking in terms of condemning them as doing the devil’s work and other similar things…not necessarily from you.”
—- It’s odd that you said “You and Scott”, if you didn’t mean us.
What I see you saying is that unless one is “anointed” as a Fresh Fire leader they can not question what Todd is doing.
That is what your first post seems to say.
That is not biblical.
We should JUDGE and question all the time.
“Judge not” gets taken out of context too much. It does not mean, “Have no discernment”, and never question.
We NEED to have better judgement and discernment.
Matt 7 is good, I’m glad you brought it up:
15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.
We have to judge something to see if it’s Godly or not. ALL of us have a responsibility to judge.
Stories about electro-whirlwind-fire portals, that change every few sentence. Stories about kicking people in the face, “full mounting” stories, that changes from punching them to choking them mid sentence I find (along with the delivery) to be contra biblical – and therefore along with the source need to be judged.
The medium is the message.
And to that end – I have yet to see a reason to believe what is happening in Lakeland, and the way it is being presented (God is here, this is a new move, come get MY anointing, etc.) are okay.
Peter “I don’t see any obligation to answer questions put to me on other people’s blogs.”
–Obligation? Okay.
“You and Scott, unless you are bishops or equivalent over Lakeland or Abbotsford BC or members of the board of Fresh Fire Ministries, have no authority over what Todd teaches and so should not meddle in other people’s business.”
“I was thinking in terms of condemning them as doing the devil’s work and other similar things I have read, not necessarily from you.”
–Why would you say “You and Scott” if you didn’t mean us?
What I see you saying is that unless one is “anointed” as Fresh Fire leadership, they can not question what Bentley is doing.
That is wrong and unscriptural.
I’m glad you brought up Matt 7:
Matt 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Beware false prophets. JUDGE whether a prophet, teacher, myth teller is godly or not…and if not beware of them, and their teachings.
J, there is only one new point in your last two comments, and no questions to be accused of refusing to answer, so I will reply just to the one new point:
The reason that story seems to change in mid sentence is obvious if you watch carefully, that the editor has stitched together two separate extracts from the same talk, to exclude material which might well provide more of a context and explanation for what he is saying.
On the possible validity of this kind of violence in ministry, see this post.
Sorry about the double post – you can delete one.
One didn’t come through, so I made another.
Why do you make a rude statement about questions and answers?
The reason I brought up your refusal to answer questions in the first place, is because you came to Scotteriology – tried to poop on everybody there – got exposed for being hypocritical (just like 2 or 3 times here already) then refused to man up to it.
I was going to move on from that – but you have to be rude, and passive aggressive again.
Why do you do this?
I would say that “–Why would you say “You and Scott” if you didn’t mean us?” ” Is a question.
Sorry, but the “punch” to “choke” isn’t an edit. It’s the typical sensationalism of a story to hype up the crowd. Rodney Howard Brown style.
Again “What I see you saying is that unless one is “anointed” as Fresh Fire leadership, they can not question what Bentley is doing.”
Is this your stance?
Reasons I am done with this conversation as anything profitable:
You explicitly name me as meddling but say that you did not mean me. I’m confused.
You do not know what the Wesleyan quadrilateral is but will use it in a an argument incorrectly to “correct” me. Not well played.
I’m going to continue this conversation with people that know what they are talking about and understand proper theological reflection
For all of the apparent “good points” I made you refused to deal with any of them actually. Instead you grasped at straws to try and “discount” what I had written. When this failed and you were exposed you resorted to other tactics such as “not meddling”. Once again, not well played.
And finally, and most importantly: Jesus loves you. You are a brother in Christ. It is more important that we show charity to each other than “be right”. We have both failed at this at times. If we can’t play nice; let’s take a step back until we can…
…but I’m still right!!! 😉
Thanks Gary. I totally agree with you. What really matters is that the message reaches people througout the globe. Im blessed by his deeds and I dont look at his appearance coz thats not for me. People just eat the food and forget about who cooked them.
True words Scott.
I need to move on from this.
Good luck in your continued study Peter.
J, you asked:
I will answer this only because I don’t want to be accused again of refusing to answer your questions. I did not make a rude statement. I was simply taking great care to avoid giving you any cause to accuse me of refusing to answer questions.
No.
I’m not sure what continued study I am being wished luck in, but I have no intention to study the Welseyan quadrilateral (which I have admitted to misunderstanding) as I am not a Methodist.
Scott, I named you not for meddling but for “his aggressive reaction to my comments, attacking me for making explicit some obvious implications of what he wrote”. But you are a brother in Christ and Jesus loves you. So let’s stop hurling accusations at one another and instead build one another up in love.
“You and Scott, unless you are bishops or equivalent over Lakeland or Abbotsford BC or members of the board of Fresh Fire Ministries, have no authority over what Todd teaches and so should not meddle in other people’s business.”
Yep. It’s a good thing you didn’t name me for meddling.
I am not a Methodist either but the quadrilateral is a good model for theological reflection, though in the end I think I prefer Grenz’s.
Disagreement does not equal aggression. When I point out an error that does not always make me negative. On the flip side I don’t understand my discernments as being from below but if you agree with Todd it is from above. I have seen more than enough unChristian behavior on both sides to emphatically declare that proposition a false dichotomy.
“In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.” St. Augustine
Well, Scott, since you are the one who repeatedly calls me out for going beyond what you have written, I should remind you that to say that you should not meddle is not logically the same as accusing you of meddling. But perhaps “meddling” is not quite the right word for what you have done. Smearing with guilt by association with your fictional character who promoted adultery is a more precise charge.
Indeed, on your part and mine. Perhaps J needs to remember that one and stop calling me “passive aggressive”.
“Perhaps J needs to remember that one and stop calling me “passive aggressive”.”
–How passive aggressive of you.
🙂
“I wish those who unsettle you would castrate themselves!”
“You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? ”
“Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of those who mutilate the flesh!”
“You brood of vipers! How can you speak good things, when you are evil?”
“But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed!”
“You snakes, you brood of vipers! How can you escape being sentenced to hell?”
Now I certainly do not want to draw a one to one correlation between these men and myself, and this is just as much proof-texting as how you use James; however, according to your gentle wisdom from “above” Paul and Jesus are revealed by James as “aggressive” and full of “bitterness and condemnation” therefore–according to your formula–their wisdom must be from somewhere else.
Pingback: Theological Dilettantism « Scotteriology
Ah! The old Quadrilateral. The more I studied theology the more I was put off. Personal opinion rather than accusation, but it’s been my unfortunate experience that where theology comes above relationship with God people get bogged down in pointless discussion/argument/debate etc, sidetracked by all kinds of issues and such. Again, experience is subjective.
I’m always wary of reading back into the Bible, using ‘methods’ and whatnot. This can run the risk of courting liberalism or gnosticism and mess things around.
Talking about aggression, Jesus certainly got slightly annoyed by some people in the temple – almost came to fisticuffs. He can’t have been fully human and not known all manner of human emotion.
Pingback: Gentle Wisdom » Who has the right to test interpretations of Scripture?
I realize I am coming in late to this thread, but I just wanted to say that Todd has a whole system of accountability in place. He has a board that he answers to, he has relationship with people like Bill Johnson and Patricia King who speak into his life. Bobby Conner in particular has an accountability relationship with Todd. He is tied to a local assembly in Canada. He survived his dark night of the soul because he had people in his life and was not a lone ranger.
Rahab, thanks for the useful information.
I dont understand why so many people want to and require that God be put in a box. Why can’t the God that was behind the miracles in the Bible not still be performing miracles through Todd Bentley and the Revival?
My Mother went to Lakeland week 2 of this revival and we have been watching ever since. She has been healed of a knee injury and high BP. MY 9 year old son prayed for a miracle in his mouth and now he doesnt need braces anymore. Talk about taking God out of a box. If you dont want to share in the healing miracles that leaves more for the rest of us.
Also go back and listen to Todd’s 2-3 series of preachings on 30 reasons why God does heal you, doesnt heal you and why he wants to heal you. Pretty good stuff and yes you will need your Bible to read as he goes through and also to take notes…..