Recent Posts
Tag Cloud
abortion a queer thing happened to america atheism charlotte Church debate Dr. Michael Brown evangelism Frank Turek gay activism gay activists gay marriage God holiness Holy Spirit homosexuality Islam israel Jesus judgment Muslims Paul prayer pro-life prop 8 prophecy prophets Revival Scripture the churchArchives
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- May 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
While Johnson’s thesis that “Jesus is the perfect theology” may appeal to the post-modern mentality, it unnecessarily builds a false dichotomy, pitting Jesus against the Word of God.
Bill Johnson’s many instances of bifurcation fallacy should qualify him for an entry in the Guinness Book of World Records.
On the surface, this sounds like sound theology. But is it? Something is missing. It does not touch my spirit or soul, just my intellect. I never heard Bill Johnson say anything about bringing salvation to the lost when he mentioned taking Jesus to the inner city. (are we past that in the post modern era?) Jesus is Perfect Theology is slippery. I had a hard time understanding why I could not jump on board. But then I received clarity. I offer the following regarding the issue: Jesus came to reconcile us to the Father. He said, “I only do what I see my Father do; I only say what I hear my Father say.” AND….Jesus said, “WHY DO YOU CALL ME PERFECT? ONLY MY FATHER IN HEAVEN IS PERFECT.” (paraphrased) I appreciate and agree with the comments about bifucation fallacy and false dichotomy.
You guys can’t be serious! You guys seem so intent on using sophisticated words to dismiss this man’s ministry that you have not seen God speaking through the man. Bill’s ministry has done more to draw my heart deeper into the Lord and has challenged me to take risks more then men who spend there time labelling others. I understand that this challenges you because in the hearing of this message you can’t help but examine you heart and willingness to stand up and walk out in the midst of a dying world!
Denym,
Sorry, let me put it down to a second-grade level – you do not have to choose between Jesus and the Word. Now please reveiw my statement above and tell me how I am dismissing “this man’s ministry” by making a statement of fact.
Johnson is the undisputed king of “soundbyte theology.” By virtue of the wide audience he has, his little nuggets or one-liners are worthy of further consideration. He has a decided anti-intelluctual bent, and the fact that you can’t handle freshman-level english suggests to me that this is rubbing off on his followers.
And no, Johnson’s message did not challenge me greatly, although on the surface I did not find it offensive or heretical. I just find it sad that he constantly pits one’s experiental knowledge of Jesus against the Jesus revealed in the Word. Again, we do not have to choose.
I note also that, while I did not dismiss Johnson’s ministy, you are dismissing my ministry. Why is that OK for you? Is Johnson somehow greater in the kingdom, or is God no respecter of persons?
Yes, I’m serious. Are you?
All,
Please refrain from insults/attacks: Commenting Rules: http://www.voiceofrevolution.com/commenting/
Also, for anybody that differs with any of our posts, I’d like to open up the line for anybody that wants to submit a counter-article expressing their opinion. You can send them to editor@voiceofrevolution.com .
Marcus French
Editor: Voice of Revolution
Eric,
Perhaps you can explain why “everyone must hear this.”
The original post includes the tag “theology” so I had assumed these videos were called to our attention as a warning against Bill Johnson’s teaching. Am I missing something?
@ Mr. Fawcett, I didn’t know that this would be so opposed. I thought it would be uplifting and encouraging to all. I personally choose to handle things that I don’t feel so strong about like this… If I don’t like statements as I “test all things” then I “hold fast to what is good” and leave the rest for the birds. We are all family here. I love you guys, because we are equally purchased by the blood of Jesus. We all have different avenues and emphasis in God. The kingdom is bigger than our personal revelation of Jesus. But above all we want Him Himself, right? Let’s love each other and respect each others differences in God. God became a man. That humility personified is enough to cause me to look to each of you with a loving eye no matter where you are at in your revelation of Jesus (Eph. 5.1).
Thanks Eric, I find Johnson enjoyable to listen to, but see a lot of bad theology uderlying his clever statements.
This is probably as good a place as any to have an adult discussion concerning these issues, since the cat is already out of the bag, I’ll post some thoughts shortly.
As I stated, the clips do raise some significant theological issues which I believe can be detrimental to the body.
Part 2, at 03:27 Johnson states:
“He forfeited everything, because he owned everything, literally all that exists was His, and He gave it all up to become a man, and then He re-inherited everything as a man, so that you and I would have an inheritance.”
This statement, as I can gather from some of Johnson’s other writings,(mainly WHIE) is based on Johnson’s loose (WoF) interpretation of Philippians 2:6-8, which speaks of the humiliation of Christ, humiliated not because He ceased being God, but because He took on the form of a servant.
It does not say that He forfeited anything (A forfeit is a penalty assessed when someone does something wrong; Jesus did nothing wrong), nor did he ever give up His eternal existence as God.
Somehow, I’ve missed the scriptural reference to Jesus giving up his inheritance and then later re-inheriting everything as a man. Perhaps that falls under the revelatory knowledge that Johnson speaks of in the first clip.
Another apparent revelation takes place at 03:57. It says:
So now He stands, after His triumphant resurrection, the defeat of the power of death, in hell, the grave, all that stuff was defeated, the power of sin, and He stands before humanity and He says “I got the keys back.” When Jesus made that statement, He made the statement as our elder brother.
This is where it pays to be a Berean- to check the scriptures to see if it is indeed so. The scriptures do not tell us “I got the keys back.”
Now, Answers.com will tell us: “jesus got the keys in the three days that he was dead. he stole the keys of the dead from satan and they fought a battle. then jesus destroyed satan. then came back to life on the third day.” I’m serious, it really says that! But most of this is just conjecture from the WoF movement.
The Word of God tells us, in Revelation 1:18,
“I was dead, but look, now I am alive – forever and ever – and I hold the keys of death and of Hades!”
Jesus HOLDS The keys. That is ALL that this tells us. Anything else is conjecture. And yet Johnson puts words in Jesus’s mouth. (“I got the keys back.”)
Johnson’s statement “I got the keys back” begs the question, when were the “keys” lost? Again you will find the answer to that in Johnson’s WoF teachings on Adam and dominion, and again we will have to credit most of that to revelatory knowledge, because the WoF teaching goes much further than scripture.
Perhaps even more critical is the idea Johnson promotes that Jesus defeated “the power of death, in hell.” The work was finished on the cross. Jesus said so. Many believe that Jesus had to fight in hell to defeat Satan, some go so far as to say Jesus was tortured for three days. Revelation or conjecture?
I guess these are just a few good examples of why we should not exalt revelation over the Word. Does Johnson really do this? Here are a few quotes from Heaven on Earth I (above):
“The questions about God that everyone has, none of them have the authority to cancel a revelation. What God has shown us about his nature in the person of Jesus, I’m eternally responsible for.”
“The Lord is releasing a spirit of wisdom and revelation over his people…”
“The renewing of the mind is not simply being able to quote a verse to address a specific problem, it is not that, it is a renewed mind that comes from a divine encounter.”
The emphasis on revelation over (against or beyond) the Word is rather troubling. If I had attributed the same three quotes above to Joseph Smith, no one would have questioned that. Other statements that Johnson has made reinforce my position that Johnson indeed places revelation over the Word. And that is not good.
I mention all of this not to condemn Johnson. I disagree with many of his public teachings and these teachings are subtle enough that the subtleties need to be brought to light.
It is clear that #6 lacks the fidelity of intention from past performance on this supposed offer. The portal given too for response is often nonfunctional, and has in instances of past editor communication request gone unresponded to date. No report to date has been posted on D. Popovici’s claims on raising the dead, no mention of disassociation from the cash-flow excesses of lifestyle issues of B. Hinn–still recently quoted by EG since being past disclosed as living a different life than one abiding in Jesus through posted reader responses and evidence to past articles lifting up his claims; there seems to be no letdown from a constant bombardment of redefining the Kingdom of God in Christ in terms relative to many a writer’s insistent emphases of being gifted, or as to religious preferences upheld.
Over some years of reading here, and celebrating in measure, it astounds that an apparent adherence to quoting this contemporary or that one is stated as such as equating with God’s word as is recorded. This seems especially so where the Gospel of Jesus Christ and His Kingdom have been subjectively assumed as loosely compared to nonscriptural definitions as to what these are over and over by some consistently posting authors (as thus taken to task in blog responses; yet retractions are withheld, point by point, where so). Where clearly of disputable matters, these have been flagged by many readers. Yet generally such mention goes unresponded. Such a manner appears arrogant and insincere as to the offer you have made, Marcus French.
There is an acute need for common terms and a statement of faith for this media in critical arenas of Christ’s own establishments, through terms which Paul consistently defines in his NT writings. For example, is an “evangelist” someone who testifies of Jesus Christ, or his own giftedness? Since the church is often viewed and presented negatively, perhaps it too needs a clearer common definition and functional analysis from scripture.
Awe for who Jesus was and is, as He describes himself to be, must mean respect for He himself, His place as our teacher and Lord, and as to His present day ministry. I would be pleased to declare He himself through an article,
or other means here, however, there is no follow-through on such possibilities upheld by other demonstration than a genre advanced which seems to often cloud NT truth by competing loyalties to this or that contemporary quoted. It is becoming unclear if it is Jesus or the frequency of contemporary quotations or the rapidity of assumptive material which is for believers’ pursuit.
Just some brief reflections on earlier posts critical of Bill Johnson’s teaching.
The suggestion that he pits Jesus against the Word, creating a false dichotomy, needs clarification. Jesus is the Word made flesh and was/is the perfect revelation of the Father [John 1 & Heb.1]. That’s why he is perfect theology.
When BJ says that Jesus that Jesus forfeited everything to become a man, he is clearly not using the word ‘forfeit’ in the sense of a legal punishment. I understand him to mean that Jesus voluntarily laid aside his divine attributes to become human.
Scripture teaches that before the death and resurrection of Jesus Satan held the power [keys] of death and that Jesus disempowered him [Heb.2:14-15 & Col.2:15]. I have read and heard quite a bit of BJ and don’t ever remember him talking about Jesus spending time in hell between his death and resurrection.
BJ’s references to “the spirit of wisdom and revelation” do not place revelation above or beyond scripture, but are entirely compatibe with Paul’s own use of that term in Eph.1:17. If Paul could have reduced our knowledge of God to words on a page he wouldn’t have prayed that we might experience what is past understanding [e.g. Eph.3:14-21 & Ph8l.4:6-7]. God is bigger than his Word and it calls us to seek him and know him. Is it not legitimate for us to pray these prayers for ourslves and others today and expect God to answer them?
The whole point of Eric’s article is to encourage us to pursue the presence of God as our number one priority. That is the major emphasis of BJ’s preaching. I always find him challenging and inspiring.
Hi Mike,
The 2 scriptures you cite might be plausible as backup except they mention nothing about keys. Looking deeper, we find that Colossians 2:13-15 speaks of Christ accomplishing victory over death ON THE CROSS, not by going to hell (Johnson says “in hell”) and getting the keys back.
Furthermore, Johnson also teaches that Jesus had to be born again. I suppose just as Johnson misunderstands “forfeit” he may have some confusion about “imputation” as well.
As to the false dichotomy of the revelation of Jesus vs. the Word, I think some of the examples given above show how Johnson takes his revelation above the Word, even to the point of putting words in Jesus’ mouth.
Furthermore, I’ve noted that Johnson, on his website, says that the church should no longer gather around doctrine (teaching) but rather around fathers (those with capital “A” Apostolic revelation).
And Johnson states in his book “When Heaven Invades Earth” (WHIE) :
“It’s difficult to expect the same fruit of the early church when we value a book they didn’t have more than the Holy Spirit they did have. “
First of all, the early church did have the Scriptures, initially the Old Testament, and also copies of various portions of the New Testament.. 2 Tim 3:16 refers to “all scripture” which suggested that they had (at least) the Old Testament. And they VALUED IT GREATLY.
Over and over Johnson marginalizes the Word, for instance, saying in the clip above (paraphrasing) that those who have the Word without (his) revelation of Jesus only have a tool for argumentation. Which then paints (a wrong) picture that anyone who differs with him concerning the Word is without a (his) revelation of Jesus. Or as Eric says above “no matter where you are at in your revelation of Jesus.”
My revelation of Jesus grows every day as I get deeper and deeper into the Word. Yes, I value revelations of Jesus – real encounters – but an experientially-based relationship is not the solid ground that we should build our faith on.
The Word of Jesus Christ, conveyed by the chosen Apostle’s teaching is what the first church adhered to, and through which numbers were added to their fellowship daily. If we depart from what Paul called his Gospel to other insistent definitions and doctrine the likelihood of going into great error increases. And, it is likely, in following such so-called post modern “apostles” codependency relationships based on fear and awe of men will displace the centrality of Jesus as Lord, and as truth-bearer of His secret and to be revealed Kingdom.
No post modern teacher will replace the records of the chosen Apostles, because their eye has not seen, nor ear heard the Master directly. And, claiming direct revelation from “the Presence” pretty much any nuance of suggestion can be carried to those in meetings echoing “amen”. Are we headed for a different Gospel here than in the New Testament, simply to equate some poster’s desire for supernatural direct encounter. Paul wrote that without faith, the substance of things unseen yet hoped for, it is impossible to please God. Yet the regen for the Amen to the Kingpins upheld by VOR site media focus may, in part, be leading away from the concept of a Priesthood of believers, the authority of scripture, and the real testimony of Jesus Christ.
Again and again there is made the argument that without “the Presence” your experience or my own, where or when not so indicative is invalid (such being unsurveyed as to whether others are having their heart enlightened by other pursuits as to Christ being formed within (or not) in their personal relationship with Jesus Christ, who lives. We find the arrogance instead assumptively asserted that all other approaches than a Penecostal emphasis value given to faith as it was on its foundation encounter of the church in the First Century is not real faith. This presumption is upheld thus by the postings of the gatekeepers of the VOR. Any other indications are mere words, intellectualism, disingenuous, dead, or not included in the redefinitions of the indicators faith such emphases prescribe. This genre then, by its very presentation focus becomes the new standard for our supposed reenlightenment through Pentecostal emphases, as such)
Such gatekeeping of information and the focus of such criteria for acceptance in the beloved takes us away from the Jesus recorded in scripture. Pull this action and suggestion long enough and deep enough for some and those folks are pulled into the fray so to speak of the pursuit of a different Jesus than is recorded as being the Gospel accounts of Jesus. By moving away from what is written, and reinterpreting it on a phenomenological and teaching ministry basis, a whole new priesthood, other than the priesthood of equally adopted believers is lifted up for VOR admiration and emphasis of edification.
What really edifies those following Jesus is being built up in faith of Him, our intercessor kinsman-redeemer, and Lord who fills the Universe since His Ascent to the throne of heaven. Shall we preach and share Him, or some other manifestation insistence of supposed truth pitched in His Name? He came full of truth and grace, as the appointed Savior, not simply to empower the first church to be empowered (who suffered persecution at the hands of the Jews and the Romans, like Him).
…For we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.
2CO 4:7 But we have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us. 8 We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; 9 persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed. 10 We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. 11 For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that his life may be revealed in our mortal body. 12 So then, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you.
2CO 4:13 It is written: “I believed; therefore I have spoken.” With that same spirit of faith we also believe and therefore speak, 14 because we know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead will also raise us with Jesus and present us with you in his presence. 15 All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God.
2CO 4:16 Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. 17 For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. 18 So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal”.
How does this understanding of what is Apostolic by Paul and his report of the power of the Spirit then differ from the pitch made by Mr. Johnson, in these clips and in the other material Bill F. has shared??? If we set out with our eyes on establishment of His Kingdom our eyes will not be fixed on manifestation of supernatural power as a self pursuit, but on conversion of hearts and minds in Christ Jesus.
Jabez,
If I had to characterize Johnson’s empahsis, it is not Pentecostal but perhaps better described as Charsimatic. Johnson left the Pentecostal movement when he determined that he was an Apostle. Many call it “third-wave” or “the river,” but whatever, the movement does not have the empahsis on the scriptures that is emblematic of the Pentecostol movement.
So Bill, the 1901 Kansas origin of American Pentecostalism and its assoication with speaking in tongues and a “second blessing”, so recorded does not apply???
I’m such saying (generalization) is that there is a difference today between pentecostal and charismatic, most generally in that (most) pentecostals elevate the Word higher than (most) charismatics, and that doctrine is generally important to pentecostals, no so much to charismatics. The emphasis on doctrine and word word came out of some the the “excess” in the early pentecostal movement a.k.a. “wildfire.”
Here is an illustration from Kris Vallatton (Johnson’s right hand man).
“In apostleships, the priority of relationships is kept above doctrinal agreement, promoting highly relational core connections. Apostles create covenantal, family relationships, because believers are attached to and through fathers and family, not doctrine. This promotes freedom for people to think creatively, to dream, to envision with God and to experience new depths of the Holy Spirit. This relational security creates an environment that attracts revelation. The very nature of revelation is that people get fresh perspectives and deeper insights with the supernatural kingdom of God.”
Again to this movement, doctrine is a dirty word. It need not be so
Bill,
So you are saying that the kind of creativity described supplants the written testimony of Jesus own Gospel and Kingdom declarations, as such. So a debate may develop over which creative revealer of a supposed Kingdom connection is more “anointed” by such a values declaration. Identity in Christ then, how is that determined to be so? Is it by what Eric G. and David P. have declared as the only true “knowledge” being not that written of
the eyewitnesses of Jesus Christ? So replaced, what would you then see being the focus and respected
values of inclusion and exclusion of this so-called movement? To date it has failed to offer everyman approachable definitions, other than phenomenological values, and associations with men of a certain profile, e.g. Eric G. keeps upholding B. Hinn as enamoured as such. This is curious, for example, when David Wilkerson, whom he has also upheld, has identified Hinn as a blasphemer of the Holy Spirit.
“Glory in the Church” also has been emphasized, and true knowledge being only derived of “the Presence”; how does that differ from the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, its evidence, and Prophetic utterance, its admonision to order by Paul, and its acceptance by Paul? What is different about this “third wave” than the qualifications on Charismatic behavior in assembly stated by Paul in Corinthians, Romans, and Ephesians??? Who does this movement really bear testimony of in demonstration?
Certainly the Kingdom is relational in action and being, as is emphasized, and what else is the Kingdom which is not upheld or in focus in this movement, Bill???
Oh, and I forgot to say, as did earlier posters state: “why does everyone need to hear this?” Eric G. seems to be saying that something surpassing the appointment of Jesus coming in the fullness of time is equally as valued by him, does he not? Or, is it that the “amen” that he asserts on “the Presence” is his overriding affirmation above the Acts and Pauline past establishment of definitions of the Gospel and the Kingdom?
It is fascinating really, this vagueness and relativity to “ministers” of what is the Gospel and the Kingdom. It is spoken of as established by each minister, rather than a common term, curious indeed. Perhaps they are working up such a cloud to mesmerize us into agreement?
Forgive me, Bill,
I also forgot to clarify that I used the reference to Pentecost because that has been the reference usually asserted on the VOR by Fire School Graduates as to the phenomenological approach to knowledge, their own vagueness of defining the Gospel in NT terms, and their own ongoing Kingdom exposition declarations. So, that is why I used the reference to Pentecost, because it is their reference, as such.
Jabez,
It appears that there are some issues between you, Eirc and Marcus, that are beyond the scope of this artilce, and which are a distraction to the discussion at hand and I will bow out. Well at least its good to still be here on May 22…… I think……
Bill,
I read the VOR. With your experience and background, I had hoped you could enlighten very unclear conveyance of what is posted here by those so labeled evangelists, as has been past referenced, as unresponded. These instances of insistent persuasion and such affiliation as these posts above indeed raise issues primarily over absolute claims and assumptions made, where so. Questioing whywhile not shy may be the more accurate statement, rather than regarding which reader so questions such a focus of regard here. What the NT Apostles call the Gospel is not the Gospel being harped and declared as “everything” and need be heard by “everyone”. I remain a loyal advocate of what the first chosen Apostles declared clearly for everyone listening. Their Message is the efficacious Word of the Lord Jesus past, present, and future. What is “everything” for “everyone” here is a different word, and emphasis. Yes, this will create issues in those who have both past New Testament conversion roots, direct experience of conversion, the affirmation of the Holy Spirit through it all, and read and pray over their given season of affiliation on earth. It is the will of God which separates the Plans of God from the assumptions and priorities made in His Name, as such.
And, it is curious, for replies on inquiry simply are not forthcoming. Where a NT Gospel affiliation is clearer, as, for example Byran Purtle attempts to make so, Jesus Christ is edified indeed. Where these authors claims do not line up with the New Testament authors or Jesus Christ’s own claims and purposes of discipleship to Him the fruit of these questionable assumptions as flagged here ripens beyond a thought through approach. Being seated in Christ would favorably regard connection to the head over esoteric regard. We are encouraged by some others on the VOR to think through our own conclusions and commitments, not consistently so by those so named as to what they have offered as to hook, line, and sinker.
Questions on the evidence for the goods being aligned with and sold presenting with scripture have not been hidden under a bushel basket as to my and other disciples of Christ responses here–such as your own. I would not say these are exclusive issues of my person based on other responses in forums, or elsewhere, even in this case. Plus, we have the clear warnings in scripture on following a different Jesus, a different Gospel, or pursuing a different Kingdom than that of the Jesus of the New Testament. His lordship is put in question by the emphases, loyalties, and bill of goods being sold in these past questioned and presently scrutinized cases. Faithfulness to Him is faithfulness to what is written of Him in the final analysis. Our Christianity is not a self generated reality, it is based on the life and teaching of Jesus Christ or it becomes something else altogether. There is no other foundation laid.
All realities of an allied New Testament proclamation are very appropriate here, considering what is being substituted for New Covenant truth, Bill. Are they a distraction, or a didactive necessity when truth passes on over the NT horizon?
Notice we have a “like” button above the post, with no other option.
Thank you for putting on the sermon from Bill Johnson. I found it an encouragement to keep going after Jesus and to love Him completely.
By “re-present Christ” Johnson means we’ve had it wrong for 2000 years. Why? His theology is based on New Order of Latter Rain as his book “When Heaven Invades Earth” (WHIE) makes clear.
Johnson, in 2nd clip at 3:23: “He forfeited everything because He owned everything; literally all that exists was His. And, He gave it all up to become a man; and, then He re-inherited everything as a man so that you and I would have an inheritance. The absolute mercy of God – So, now He stands after His triumphant Resurrection. The defeat of the power of death, hell and the grave – all that stuff is to defeat the power of sin. And, He stands before humanity and He says, ‘I got the keys back.’ When Jesus made that statement, He made the statement as our elder brother [Mormonism?].”
1) “I got the keys back” is a reference to Dominionism: Adam ‘lost the keys’ of dominion to Satan, Jesus won it back, and it’s up to the Church – which has been clueless to this ‘fact’ for 2000 years – to take it back from Satan [cf. WHIE pp 30-33].
2) By “forfeiting everything…to become a man” and then “re-inheriting everything as a man” Johnson states quite clearly that the Word divested Himself of His deity/divinity (kenosis) at the Incarnation [cf. WHIE p 79 (most specifically at ftnt 3) and p 29] and Jesus, “our elder brother,” subsequently re-attained it at the Ascension [cf WHIE pp 145-52] . This is part of the Manifested Sons of God heresy making Jesus into a pattern/model to be followed in the attainment of mankind’s own divinity, “so that you and I would have an inheritance.”
Exactly.
Several Bible translations use the term brother rather than brethren. The following verses are used to offer a picture of Christ as the elder brother.
“For both He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause He is not ashamed to call them brethren,Saying, I will declare thy name unto My brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.” (Hebrews 2:11-12)
“Wherefore in all things it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.” (Hebrews 2:17)
“For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.” (Romans 8:29)
“Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But He answered and said unto him that told Him, Who is My mother? and who are My brethren? And He stretched forth His hand toward His disciples, and said, Behold My mother and My brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of My Father which is in heaven, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother.” (Matthew 12:47-50)
“And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me.” (Matthew 25:40)
Some Catholics, Church of God, and others use the view of Christ as the elder brother in their theologies. Mormons also use the term, though not exclusively. I’m not advocating the veracity of the Christ as elder brother view, only that the view can be found in mainstream denominations. Therefore, the term does not necessarily point to Mormonism as an influence.
Jethro,
The “Mormonism?” comment was placed in brackets with the question mark as it was not a central part of my criticism. What do you make of the rest of my comment such as Johnson teaching Dominionism, kenosis, and Manifested Sons of God doctrine?
Jethro, and Craig
It seems a bit disjointed to pick up a dialogue attempt three months since the last one. And over half a year since other comments. If we are to discern truth from error (and we are), what is going on with this posting advocacy? It is clear that it resonnates with its poster, as to seeking experience and tuning fork like reverberation. Since all this was posted I looked up later rain movement and am clued in a bit.
What challenges from that read is what I discovered of a ministry here in Colorado, in nearby Denver. I will not name anyone, but, the woman teacher emphasized on occasion announces breakfast meetings for area women. She promises to go around and lay hands on any attenders for an impartation of whatever is needed. From reviewing her other literature, she holds that all believers can be Jesus surrogates, and do all that He did in the same manner and way. The question then lingers, since the reports on these meetings outcomes are very limiting of upholding this claim, when Jesus says His disciples will do greater things than He did, what does He mean?
This question then drives one to the published Word, and we find in the New Testament recorded Acts of the Apostles/Holy Spirit, but in no consistent instance are they Jesus surrogates, nor even in the area of giftedness, doing greater works. So what did Jesus mean?
And if I read what He and the Apostles’ stated on His adopted sons, it becomes apparent that it is the whole body on earth which is to mature to his full stature, not individuals here and there, nor as becoming Jesus surrogates at all (together becoming one new man). The body analogy is one where we are functionally joined together (joints and bonds or bands, per ancient anatomy). If Jesus is the counterpart of the body, His future Bride on the Return, it will be in community, in conjoint and mutual relationship, not as making each one surrogate Jesuses. This then gives greater insight into what He prayed in John 17 regarding the whole people of God on earth, not some unique “ministry”, nor unique “movement”, nor unique “anointing”, nor unique “full manifestation in a man”, etc.
So it becomes time that we work together in conjoint relationship in reference to the Commission He gave till the end of the Age. Looking for power, without conjoint council, is not of the New and Living Way. The New and Living Way is paramount to R E L A T I O N S H I P S which equalize the field at the foot of the cross for all calling on His Name. We are to make ourselves ready for His return, for the sudden call to join Him for the wedding at the time of the Return. We are to keep our lamps burning and trimmed to endure and persevere in the charge of the Commission when religion and its enticement will be proclaimed here and there. It is Jesus who can resurrect us, no other Plan.
Jabez H.
You wrote, “If we are to discern truth from error (and we are), what is going on with this posting advocacy?”
Answer: I don’t believe the discernment of truth has a shelf life.
You wrote, “…when Jesus says His disciples will do greater things than He did, what does He mean?”
You are correct in intimating that it’s the Great Commission. Here’s a Biblical answer: http://notunlikelee.wordpress.com/2011/12/17/greater-works-shall-you-do/. The post also shows Johnson’s belief, quoting from “When Heaven Invades Earth”, that John 14:12 means that we are to do greater signs, wonders and miracles than Jesus.
Unity is important; however, we unify on the truths of Scripture not distortions of the Word. Johnson, like all Latter Rain adherents, distorts the Word. The NOLR goal is to bend orthodoxy to their perverted version of truth.
The Bride is not perfected until the Marriage Supper of the Lamb which is on the other side of Glory.
Craig,
Well put. Now I am going to shake some boats still in murky waters. The National debt and deficit parallel what I am about to write. Structured fraud, structured allowances for corruption, and a basic entitlement mentality have both the economy and the churches in dire straits. A power mentality without the balancing reality of Council leads to spiritual fraud, structured allowances for corruption [as a nonmaturing leadership model, in fact permitting an infantile leadership model], and gives an entitlement mentality regarding church government conceptualized intention. It is time for a Council to arbitrate against these clear tnedencies, documented of the past century’s Charismatic movement excesses and errors.
Because of a power entitement mentality, bandwagonism is the easy form most seeking empowerment embrace. It has so corrupted its leadership that they fail to recognize the Isaiah like conditions of his corrupted Israel with the Churches today. In a heart quest for authenticity the authentic disciplle then has moved away from power based leadership strategies, and out of need has, in the process, reached for promises primarily religious in nature. It is time for repentance, time for rededication, and time to comprehend the Isaiah cited conditions, named in this writing, Calling for reconsecration.
We must look away from our looking to find the object of true affection, i.e. Jesus Christ himself, who will RETURN.
A couple comments:
JESUS is alive TODAY.
He is a real person/God/Holy King/Older Brother.
Jesus left Heaven:
“Who (Jesus) being in form, God,
Not thinking to grasp at being eaqual to God,
but himself EMPTIED,
taking on the form of a servant.”
– Phil. 2:6-7
This is not great English, but as direct a translation from the Greek I can render to demonstrate that Jesus, wonderful, beautiful, loving Jesus, EMPTIED himself of what we can only infer was certain aspects of Godhood, at the least omnipresence, if not omniscience and so on, to yes, buy back the Keys over Death and Hell by His blood on the Cross and harrowing of Hell alluded to by both Paul (Eph. 4:9-11) and Peter (1 Peter 3:18-22) and His raising from the dead by the Power of the Holy Spirit of God.
The New Testament is a wonderful God-inspired gift from God to His people, but it is actually a gift Jesus never talks about, as far as I can think. The gift He emphasizes throughout his ministry is that of His presence through His Holy Spirit (esp. John 13-17, Matt 28:20…).
It is vital to remember as His followers that the whole reason Jesus came to earth to live and die for us was to connect us in intimate relationship with God the Father Himself. That relationship was and is broken without Him and we are only connected to Jesus through His Spirit. Scripture is a wonderful gift which I am in love with, so much so that I learned Greek to read it in daily. But far beyond that, I am grateful for the real living relationship with our wonderful Triune God which Jesus bought with His blood and dispensed to me by His Holy Spirit. That active relationship with YHWH, who is still the LIVING GOD in 2015 as He was in 5 A.D. and 1200 B.C…
He is calling His people to still walk humbly with Him in every moment, seeking first His Kingdom (Matt 6:33), demonstrating it in power (1 Cor 4:20).