Outcome-based Religion: Purpose-Driven Apostasy By Mac Dominick Chapter 5 THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT The contributing factors that comprise what has come to be Outcome-based Religion did not come to fruition overnight. The scenario of the preceding chapters has constructed an account depicting events from the Church’s earliest days that became major contributing aspects of modern Outcome-based Religion. As the remaining components are placed to make the picture complete, one must meticulously evaluate the contributions of all major religious movements not only among broad-based Christianity, but particularly among the “Greater Evangelical Community”. Bearing this in mind, even though the overt threat of Ecumenism went into hibernation with the exponential growth Fundamentalism in the late 1960s, by 1975 the decline of Fundamentalism had begun; and the true Church was openly vulnerable to the attack of wholesale deception at the very fiber of its core. Lucifer was very aware of this vulnerability, and the 1970s began what has come to be known as the “Age of Deception”. This deception was characterized by the influx of pantheistic principles in the 1960s that by the mid-70s became infused with Christian terms, and will eventually culminate in the One World Religion of Antichrist. A major contributing factor to this deception was the “Second Wave” of the Charismatic Movement that both rolled over and began to permeate Evangelical and Fundamentalist circles. The roots of the Charismatic Movement are anything but Bible-based, and as illustrated by the following example, the dangers reach far deeper than most realize. Pastor Burns eyed the old man with anxious trepidation. The pastor was the first to admit that this had been a very unusual service—it was after all, the very first time that this church witnessed the manifestation of the “gift of tongues”, but with the “interpretation of tongues”; he felt that all scriptural requirements were met. For no sooner had Roger Simpson’s ecstatic diatribe rendered him motionless on the floor that Norm Turner interpreted the wonderful works of God described in the “angelic language” unknown to the ears of the mesmerized congregation. Pastor Burns could very easily perceive that the old man who now lingered at the back of the line for the post-service pastoral greeting was definitely not going to shower him with praise for the great spiritual uplifting conveyed in the unusual service. This old man, however, was not the average member of Calvary Baptist Church. Lester Adams was a retired missionary. He was a man who had served God among tribes of headhunters of New Guinea for more than forty years. His experience and wisdom had been proven invaluable to Pastor Burns, and he certainly minced no words in his desire to hold the pastor’s feet to the fire when issues arose that challenged the truth of the Word of God. Pastor Burns could see the fire in his eyes on this occasion, and received his firm handshake in anticipation of a scathing rebuke. However, not even the pastor anticipated what he was about to hear. “You know, Pastor Burns, I spent many years among the uncivilized tribes in the jungles of New Guinea. The power of demonic minions was openly manifested among those people, and evil spirits ruled over the hearts and the minds of entire tribes. Based on my experience there, you must immediately get both Simpson and Turner out of the church.” “Now, Brother Adams, I realize there are those who teach that tongues are not for this age—but throw them out of the church…and what has this got to do with New Guinea?” “Pastor, Roger Simpson spoke perfectly in the language of one of the tribes to which I endeavored to minister; and the words he spoke were the vilest blasphemy against our Lord Jesus Christ as I have ever heard!” (1) BASIC CONCEPTS OF THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT The Lord Jesus Christ very clearly warned in John 8:44 that Lucifer is a liar. He not only spreads lies into the general population of mankind, but as illustrated earlier, his false teachers disseminate these lies among the believers in the church. As the 20th Century dawned, Lucifer began to reiterate the same old lies that worked so well for his cause in the past. However, with the realization that his time was growing short, he took his strategy just one step further. These lies have become very transparent as time as progressed, but the gullible masses of humanity still seem to be falling for the same old lines: Men are gods Men may become gods Men may become like God Faith is a "law" or "force" that may be activated by anyone --believer or not The ability to perform miracles, signs, and wonders is latent within all; we need but learn the techniques that activate the spiritual laws upon which faith is based God is bound by these spiritual laws, and must respond to anyone - even His worst enemies - who exercises knowledge of them As "gods" ("divine beings") we have the "divine right" to health and prosperity Jesus is our "Elder Brother" who mastered the spiritual laws of Nature, and is therefore our example to do the same Men may become perfected spiritually and physically by mastering these spiritual laws The Kingdom of God will be established on earth when a sufficient number of people have been perfected. (2) Not one of these statements is true, yet these are the very foundation of modern Charismatic and Dominion theologies. The notable Charismatic figures of today—Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, and Kenneth Hagin are espousing philosophies and doctrines more akin to pantheism, eastern mysticism, and occultism than Christianity. For example, Benny Hinn has reportedly been to the graves of noted First Wave Charismatics Aimee Semple McPherson and Kathryn Kuhlman to receive an anointing from their bones (3). This macabre, paranormal practice is not anything new. While this may sound as if this practice originated with Mary Shelley in Frankenstien, Adolf Hilter actually sent his SS troops to the cemetery with their wives in order to conceive children on the graves of famous Aryans. He believed that the spirit of the child conceived would receive a special anointing from the bones of those who lay in the graves. This paranormal occult practice is now parroted by a leading Charismatic preacher and author. Even with such unthinkable acts of Luciferic lunacy such as this, Charismatic Movement rose in three waves that rolled as tidal waves over the entire span of the 20th Century. THE ORIGINS OF THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT At the turn of the Twentieth Century, not one individual in the world that would use the terms Pentecostal or Charismatic to describe his or her theological belief system. That is not to say that there were not those in years past that “spoke in tongues”, called themselves “faith healers”, or utilized the “manifest signs and wonders”. As a matter of fact, all of these were sporadically evident in cults and the occult sects since Old Testament days. Among the more notable of those who exercised the methods of modern Charismatics were Joseph Smith and others in the hierarchy of early Mormonism. Joseph Smith himself related: “‘...At one of our interviews Brother Brigham Young and John P. Greene spoke in tongues, …and I received the gift myself’ (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, volume 1, pp. 295-97). Two of Smith's four dozen or so wives wrote of their experiences of speaking in tongues. These were Mary Lightner and Zina Huntington…Zina ‘received the gift of tongues.’ Later, at the Mormon settlement in Kirtland, Ohio, she ‘received the gift of interpretation.’ (Andrew Jenson, LDS Biographical Encyclopedia, 1951, vol. 1, p. 697). Mary Lightner testifed: ‘Oliver Cowdery, John Whitmer and Thomas B. Marsh often spoke in tongues in addressing the people on the Sabbath day ... One evening the brethren came to Uncle's house to converse upon the revelations that had not been printed as yet. While talking they were filled with the spirit and spoke in tongues. I was called upon to interpret it. I felt the spirit of it in a moment" ("Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner," The Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine, July 17, 1926).” (emphasis added –ed) (4) A few very interesting points from these quotations need to be addressed in detail: 1. Mormon doctrine IS NOT CHRISTIAN. Mormons teach that all human beings were born as spirit children of God and His wives. The oldest child became known as Jesus, the second oldest Lucifer. As the spirit children achieved certain goals in the spirit world, they were given a body and birthed into our physical world. Those who follow the teachings of the Mormon Church and are married in a Mormon Temple will then become a “god” or the wife of a “god” and conceive spirit children who will be manifested physically in their own world. This doctrine does not even resemble the teachings of the Word of God, but has its roots in the occult. Therefore, how could an occultist such as Smith and his associates be speaking in tongues as directed by the Holy Spirit? The only answer that approaches plausibility is that God is bound to respond top even those who profess the “doctrine of devils” and grant them access to the gifts of the spirit. However, the Bible teaches that believers are to avoid those that cause “offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned” (Rom. 16:17). How then could those who teach these contrary doctrines receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit? They absolutely could not. 2. When they spoke of becoming “filled with the spirit”, with what spirit would they be filled? 3. The fact that someone present possessed the “Gift of Interpretation” (much less one who happened to be one of 4 dozen wives of the same man) had absolutely no bearing on the confirmation of the phenomena as initiated by God or the Holy Spirit. The truth in this instance is not very difficult to discern: If those who held to the occult beliefs and practices of Mormonism spoke in the glossolalia gibberish that is today termed as “tongues”, this so-called manifestation of the spirit was not the manifestation of God’s Holy Spirit, but some other spirit. Furthermore, if the early Mormons and other occultists spoke in tongues, how could anyone assume that true Christians would practice this phenomenon? To that end, a close examination of the progression of the Charismatic Movement will reveal a host of such anomalies and contradictions that will indeed reveal the true source of these doctrines. The history of the Charismatic Movement can be succinctly presented as follows: (5) Wave 1—Old or Classic Pentecostalism 1901, Topeka, KS, Bethel Bible College—Agnes Ozman received what she called the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” and spoke in “tongues”. 1906, Los Angeles, CA—Azusa Street Church Wave 2—Charismatic Renewal 1960--The modern Charismatic Movement began in St Mark’s Episcopal Church, Van Nuys, CA. 1962 –The glossolalia phenomenon broke out at Yale University among the members of the evangelical Intervarsity Christian Fellowship. This included Episcopalians, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, and 1 Roman Catholic. 1967—Spring Vacation—30 zealous Catholics in the Notre Dame area received the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit”. 1974—30,000 Catholic Charismatics held a conference at Notre Dame 1977—Kansas City Charismatic Conference, 50,000 participants—almost half were Roman Catholic 1977—The AP reported 10,000,000 Charismatics in the US 1983—Jan. 18 Christianity Today reported Assemblies of God as the fastest growing US denomination. At that time there were 1.7 MM members, and growing fast Wave 3—Signs and Wonders Movement—stresses more the gift of prophesy and healing than tongues 1983—“Third Wave” Coined by Peter Wagner “…we are now in the third wave. I see the third wave of the eighties as an opening of the straight-line evangelicals and other Christians to the Supernatural work of the Holy Spirit that the Pentecostals and Charismatics have experienced, but without becoming either Charismatic or Pentecostal.” (6) THE FIRST WAVE The “official” origin of the modern Pentecostalism began in 1901 at Bethel Bible College in Topeka, Kansas when Charles Parham laid hands on Agnes Ozman. She immediately began to speak in “tongues”. “It was claimed (though never credibly confirmed) that she spoke in Chinese for 3 days, unable to speak in English, and on the 2nd day she spoke in Bohemian. Soon, most others at the school were speaking and singing in ‘tongues’…Newspaper reporters of the day described the phenomenon as ‘gibberish’... In 1914, Charles Shumway diligently sought evidence to prove that early Pentecostal tongues were real languages. He failed to produce even one person to corroborate the claims…” (7) One of the most interesting aspects of the events at Bethel Bible College was the attempt of the participants to prove that their “languages” were actual spoken languages. They realized that according to the Word of God, the gift of “Speaking in Tongues” was the ability of an individual to speak in a language unknown to the speaker to communicate the Gospel in the language of the hearer. These efforts would soon cease, as those speaking could not produce any evidence that these so-called languages were anything but “gibberish”. Thus, since the incident at Bethel Bible College could only be a precursor of that which was to come, the First Wave of the Charismatic Movement began with the 1906 revival services of the Azusa Street Mission in Los Angeles, California. The Azusa Street Mission was pastored by William Seymour, who believed in the necessity of “two works of grace” for salvation, that the true church was being restored in an end-times miracle revival, and (though he himself had never spoken in tongues) contended that tongues were the evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit. Seymour seldom preached, but rather stayed behind the pulpit with an empty packing crate covering his head. Services at Azusa Street were “characterized by confusion, dancing, jumping up and down, falling, trances, slaying in the spirit, tongues, jerking, hysteria, strange noises, holy laughter…. characterized as ‘wild, hysterical demonstrations”.(8) Charles Parham, known as the Father of Pentecostalism and the President of the afore-mentioned Bethel Bible College, was less than flattering in his assessment of a 1906 visit to Azusa Street: “Parham described Azusa ‘tongues’ as ‘chattering, jabbering, and sputtering, speaking no language at all’…According to Parham, 2/3s of the people professing Pentecostalism of his day were ‘either hypnotized or spook driven’…thus the ‘Father of Pentecostalism’ roundly rejected the Azusa Street meetings as phony, manipulated, and demonic, even though practically all Pentecostal denominations trace their heritage to these meetings” (9) The First Wave continued with those who claimed to raise the dead (none ever proved this, it was just claimed), prayed over handkerchiefs, healed the sick, were slain in the spirit, offered wealth to those who supported their ministry, and even developed Pentecostal-Roman Catholic dialogue. However, the members of the First Wave never received the respect of mainline Protestants or the general population. The moral character of many of its adherents and leaders did not exactly aid in their cause. William Parham (The Father of Pentecostalism) was forced from the ministry after he was arrested on charges of sodomy, William Branham falsely prophesied that the Rapture would occur in 1977, Aimee McPherson (after a life of reported affairs and divorce) died of a drug overdose, and Kathryn Kuhlman became romantically involved with a married man whom she married after his divorce. (She later divorced him.) (10) Benny Hinn, one of the current leaders of the Second Wave, claims that as Aimee McPherson’s mantle fell on Kathryn Kuhlman; and it then passed to him from Sister Kathryn. (11) According to Hinn, "…the day is coming, I tell you this, I know it like I know my name, the day is coming when there will not be one sick saint in the body of Christ. Nobody’s gonna be, no one will be raptured out of a wheelchair. No one will be raptured out of a hospital bed. You’re all gonna be healed before the rapture." (12) THE SECOND WAVE AND ITS RESULTS The most critical aspects of the Charismatic Movement will go completely unnoticed unless one stops to question the details of the movement. These questions apply to the development of Pentecostalism between the First Wave and the Second Wave. The obvious question is this: What happened to initiate the Second Wave of the Charismatic Movement? Discussions in previous chapters gave some clues to a few of the contributing factors to that would augment the numbers: 1. The failure of the Ecumenical Movement 2. The decline of the Independent Baptist Movement 3. Discord within the Southern Baptist Convention 4. The rise of the Community Church Movement However, would these factors alone lead to such a groundswell of support for theological positions that had long been generally viewed as belonging to a lunatic fringe of “holy rollers”? What would make a Roman Catholic who had been raised in a tradition of stiff formalism resort to the antics of the Pentecostals? How could Baptists and other Evangelicals be drawn to positions that were traditionally taught to them as blatantly unscriptural? There must have been something else at work here—something almost like (heaven forbid) a conspiracy. But who would gain by such, and what would the outcome of such a conspiracy be? Historically, the first organization that comes to mind with the word “conspiracy” is the Order of the Illuminati. For the purposes of this discussion, a history of Illuminism will not be discussed in detail except to say that the Order of the Illuminati (organized in 1776) does still exist, and this organization comprises those who literally rule the world. These individuals also have a distinct plan to institute a One-World Government and a One World Religion. It is, in fact this very organization that holds the key to not only this issue, but the key to the understanding of Outcome-based Religion. One unconfirmed eyewitness account reveals that the Illuminati intentionally infiltrated the Pentecostal pastorate in 1946. Why would the “Globalist Elite” bother to infiltrate such a fringe element of Christianity? To find the answer, one must carefully consider this scenario: 1. 1906----------Pentecostalism is officially founded 2. 1906-1960---Pentecostals are generally viewed as a lunatic fringe of “holy rollers” 3. 1946----------Pentecostals intentionally infiltrated by agents of the Illuminati 4. 1960----------The sudden birth of the Second Wave of Charismatic Movement 5. 1962----------The Glossolalia Movement breaks out at Yale University. Yale University is the home of “The Society of Skull and Bones”-- the training ground of the Illuminati in the US. This fact begs the supposition that “Skull and Bones” members could have easily infiltrated Intervarsity Christian Fellowship at Yale. The fact that this happened at Yale is too much to be coincidental. 6. 1960-1963---Vatican II is led by Popes who suddenly embrace the concepts of a One-World Government and a One-World Religion. Traditional Catholics assert the Papacy to have been infiltrated by the Illuminati. As a result of Vatican II, the Catholic Ecumenical Movement is launched. 7. 1963-1967—Fundamentalism continues its rapid growth, and the Catholic Ecumenical Movement fails. 8. 1967----------30 zealous Catholics at Notre Dame break with tradition and receive the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit”. 9. 1973----------30,000 Charismatic Catholics meet at Notre Dame 10. 1977----------Kansas City Charismatic Conference draws 50,000—one half are Catholic 11. 1983----------Fundamentalism declines, Charismatic Assemblies of God are now the world’s fastest –growing churches with over 10,000,000 Charismatics in the US. Since 1983, the ties between Charismatics, Rome, and Evangelicals have grown closer. This has been the result of several factors: 1. The Save our Christian Heritage Movement 2. The Save our Culture Movement 3. The Moral Majority 4. The Christian Coalition 5. The Pro-Life Movement 6. Catholics and Evangelicals Together Document (ECT) 7. PromiseKeepers 8. The United Religions Initiative While some of the movements and organizations listed above are truly conservative and well intentioned (others are neither conservative nor well-intentioned), the tragic truth is that these “good causes” have made vast contributions toward deceiving true Christians into embracing Charismatics and supporting the construction of the One World Religion of Antichrist. The facts in this scenario scream a warning to all who are willing to think this through to the logical conclusions: 1. The Illuminati saw the potential to manipulate Pentecostals, and infiltrated Pentecostal groups immediately after World War II. 2. The Papacy was infiltrated by the Illuminati in the 1950s, and not only did the resulting Vatican II directives run contrary to traditional Catholicism, but overtly embraced the Illuminist goal of an all-encompassing One–world Religion. 3. When the Ecumenical Movement failed, the fertile Illuminist ground of Yale University became a spawning ground of both Catholic and Protestant Charismatics. Those who would scream foul at the suggestion of a conspiracy in this scenario are not seeing the long-term Illuminist vision within (not between) the lines as presented above. The plan is to build a One World Church under the leadership of the Papacy, and the Bible confirms the ultimate success of this plan in Revelation 13 and Revelation 17. The issue at large in this case is the continued attack on the Fundamentalist Christians who continue to stand in opposition to the success of the plan. However, the tragedy of today’s Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism is found in Outcome-based Religion that grows the church at the expense of doctrine. These methods produce members who have no clue as to what they believe or why they believe what they do. Such ill-equipped soldiers are then easy prey in the spiritual battles facing those today who are truly born again of the Spirit of God. Those church members who are the products of Outcome-based Religion are furthermore deceived by the fact that high profile Charismatics cannot be criticized because they have such large churches. This author witnessed this first hand in an Independent Baptist Church. At a Sunday evening service, a leading Charismatic from Brooklyn, NY was featured as a guest speaker via videotape. The pastor declared, “we may disagree with this gentleman on some ‘minor’ doctrinal issues, but he has a huge church---so he must be doing something right!” This is the essence of Outcome-based Religion—the pastor in this instance was willing to violate the commands of Scriptural Separation because he felt the congregation could benefit from the “church-growing” instructions this man could render. THE THIRD WAVE The Third Wave of the Charismatic Movement was conceived in the bowels of Pasadena’s Fuller Theological Seminary by church growth professors Peter Wagner and the late John Wimber. Wimber and Wagner were professors in Fuller Seminary’s course, “Signs and Wonders and Church Growth”. (Evidently, they failed to read the words of Jesus when He said, “A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign”) These two became co-conspirators in a marketing ploy to spur church growth through Wimber’s book, Power Evangelism that defined the concept of Kingdom power and its relationship to evangelism. Wimber stated, “Clearly the early Christians had an openness to the power of the Spirit, which resulted in signs and wonders and church growth.”(13) This statement can be written analytically to convey the very essence of the Third Wave theology: (Kingdom Power+ Kingdom Authority+ Kingdom Evangelism) x (Signs+Wonders)= Church Growth This equation has more intrinsic complexities than meets the eye. In the first place, any mention of a phrase like “Kingdom power” should immediately raise a huge red flag to any individual who has studied the Word of God. Biblically speaking, there is no such thing as “Kingdom power” in this age, and no matter how often this or similar phrases such as “Kingdom authority” appear in Wimber’s writings or modern praise choruses (see the chorus, Majesty, by Jack Hayford), this is not a biblical concept. In his edited notes from the college classroom, Wimber grossly misapplied the concept of the Kingdom of God to the Church. His entire thesis was based on the false premise that since the Church is the Kingdom of God, its members should be exercising the signs and wonders that Jesus exhibited. He went so far as to attack the omniscience (as well as the ultimate deity of Christ) when he stated: “Jesus often asked questions about the need for healing, indicating that (a) while he sometimes received words of knowledge, other times he did not, and (b) he wanted his focus exactly on target.” (14) Did not Mr. Wimber realize that Jesus Christ, when He walked the earth was God in the flesh? Did he not realize that Jesus Christ as God, possessed all the attributes of God? The contention that Jesus at times did not have knowledge of an illness and needed assistance from the Holy Spirit is blasphemy against the incarnate God! Yet, the methods for church growth in the Wimber/Wagner classroom were the exercising of Kingdom Evangelism, Kingdom Principles, and Kingdom Authority. To do this the “People of the Kingdom” were to utilize their Kingdom Authority to among other things, “rise the dead”. Also note the following statement by Wimber: “God uses our experiences to show us more fully what he teaches us in scripture, many times toppling or altering elements of our theology and world view.” (15) If this is the case, every Christian who ever walked the face of the earth should have been chronicling his or her experiences as appendixes to the Inspired Word of God. For if our experiences topple our theology, does that not subordinate the Word of God to human experience? Where should our theology originate? The only source for true theology is within the pages of the written, preserved Word of God. Theology should not come from visions, dreams, or human experience. It is only derived from the doctrinal teaching found in the Word of God. When the outcry against Wagner and Wimber’s course at Fuller reached the point that the class was canceled (in spite of the fact that it was the largest class in the seminary), Wimber put his theology into action with the founding of the Vineyard Christian Fellowship. The Vineyard Fellowships grew under Wimber’s leadership to 700 congregations world wide, and became the catalysts for the THIRD WAVE of the Charismatic Movement that stressed “Signs and Wonders” over those in the past who stressed speaking in “tongues”. The torrential ripple effect of the Vineyard Movement included the formation of the PromiseKeepers organization (PK founder Bill McCartney is a member of the Boulder, Colorado Vineyard Fellowship, and Vineyard members dominate the PK Board), and the infamous and unscriptural “Laughing Revival” which swept the entire world originated in the Airport Vineyard Fellowship in Toronto, Canada. Even though Wimber broke fellowship with the Toronto Vineyard over antics such as “lion roaring” in 1996, in 1995 Charisma magazine reported that most of the 500 Vineyard churches in the United States had come under the spell of the Laughing Revival. (16) The Vineyard Fellowship in Kansas City became the home of the infamous “Kansas City Prophets” led by Paul Cain. Hank Hanegraaf relates: “Vineyard founder John Wimber believes that Paul Cain is the premier prophet of the third wave (emphasis added -ed.)…that he would come with signs and wonders…in Wimber’s words, ‘he’s much like Jeremiah, much like John the Baptist, singled out before birth for the ministry he now has.’” (17) DOMINION THEOLOGY One of the most common threads that permeates Charismatic theology from Seymour to Robertson is the idea that the true church is being restored (or reconstructed) in a great end-times revival. It seems that many, if not most of the more notable Charismatic preachers and evangelists, believed that they were called of God if not to initiate, certainly to catapult such a revival in the creation of “a new thing” in accordance to Isaiah 43:18-19. For example, Alexander Dowie (who just happened to be Charles Parham’s mentor) proclaimed himself to be “Elijah the Restorer” and the “first apostle of the end-times church”. (18). While the technical term for one who proclaims such would be a “paranoid schizophrenic with delusions of grandeur”, proclamations of this type continue in Charismatic circles to this day. By the time this train of thought reached the Vineyard system under John Wimber, the prophets of the Vineyard were proclaiming “in the last days the Lord was restoring the five-fold ministry of apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers and evangelists to the church” in order too initiate the great end-time revival. (19) The question then must asked: Where would such a great revival lead? When taken to the logical conclusions, the answer is very simple. If there were to be such a great revival that affects all of mankind, would not the condition of the world change drastically? Would not secular law become God’s law? Would not ministers become the ruling class to interpret and enforce God’s law? Would this not give the church dominion over all of mankind? Would this not then restore the system of the Old Testament Law as the governing catalyst to initiate a new age of peace and righteousness? Would this not prepare the earth for its presentation to Jesus for His physical return and reign? The answer to all of these questions is YES. However, this train of thought poses many biblical difficulties: 1. The origin of an earthly “Christian Kingdom” ruled by unresurrected flesh and blood men was the concoction of the Roman Catholic System. The Church of Rome was (and is) amillennial—they rejected a literal 1000-year reign of Christ, and saw the references to the earthly Kingdom of God as manifested in itself—The Roman Catholic Church. Therefore, some protestant denominations (i.e. Lutherans) retained the idea that the church was the manifested Kingdom of God. 2. Other Protestants followed the teachings of Knox and Calvin and allegorized the prophetic Scriptures into a postmillennial figment of their imaginations. This Postmillennial view conjectured that the Millennial Kingdom of God was the Church, and the 1000 years were not literal years but symbolic. 3. A syncretism of these to errant positions led to the concept that the Kingdom of God on earth would be: a. Represented by the true church b. The true church was corrupted after the first century and went into a semi-dormant state. c. The true church would be reconstructed in the end-times, led by a new group of prophets and apostles who would be characterized by their utilization of restored signs and wonders. d. This reconstructed end-times church would then prepare the earth for the King (Jesus Christ) who would rule the world. 4. This scenario will require the end-times church to gain control over all of mankind by seizing control of the legal system. This would require a World Government controlled by the church and functioning as the legislative entity for all of mankind. This in a nutshell is Dominion or Reconstructionist Theology. It teaches that the church or Christians will gain control of the planet prior to the Second Coming to make the world a fit place for Jesus to reign. The so-called end-times revival would create unity across denominational lines, and the signs and wonders performed by the end-time prophets and apostles would create a force so strong that all on earth would surrender to the control of the church. When Dominionist Pat Robertson proclaimed that the PromiseKeepers organization was a “direct fulfillment of Bible Prophecy” he was making reference to the fact that he felt PromiseKeepers was one of the first steps toward Christian dominion of the planet. To list just a few of the issues associated with Dominion Theology: 1. It is grossly unscriptural. GOD IS NOT DOING A “NEW THING”. Those who are looking for this new thing need to go back to the “Old Story” of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 2. Dominion theology is a set-up to bridge today’s “Evangelicals” and Charismatics to the construction the One World Religion of Antichrist. 3. The false concepts of Dominion Theology are creeping into conservative and Fundamental churches through the “Christian” bookstore, “Christian” TV networks, and “Christian” music. 4. The proponents of Outcome-based Religion heavily utilize all of the above media. THE FINAL ANALYSIS A close analysis of the Charismatic Movement in all 3 waves will lead to some very significant conclusions: 1. From the very inception of modern Pentecostalism, the movement was steeped in occult practices, and the tongues phenomenon never aligned with the Word of God. 2. The concept that the Church is the Kingdom of God was originated by Catholicism and is not taught in the New Testament. 3. The theory that those who led the movements of Charismatic and Pentecostal theology were the prophets and apostles that would lead to this elusive great End-time Revival which would give the Church political dominion over all the world and usher in the Millennium is biblically flawed. 4. Due to the fact that the Pentecostals believed in this Dominion Theology and “Reconstructionist Theology” they were easy marks for the pure occultists whose goal is to build a One World Church under Antichrist and the False Prophet. 5. As a result of the infiltration of those who are pure occultists into the Charismatic Movement, the numbers have grown exponentially across the whole of professing Christendom from the Catholics, to the Baptists, and to the Assemblies of God. 6. With this pan-denominational influence, a new spirit of ecumenism has permeated all Christian groups. This is augmented by the Charismatic elements within all denominations who will now seek unity based wholly on “tongues” or “signs and wonders” while at the same time dismissing or minimizing doctrinal differences. 7. Due to the mainstreaming of Charismatic thought, the so-called “Christian Bookstore” is now a plethora of charismatic teaching. In addition, Contemporary Christian Music is subtly permeating hearts and minds with Charismatic and Dominion Theologies. 8. Some “Christian Broadcasting Networks” such as TBN funnel the Charismatic and Dominion line into homes around the world 24 hours a day. CONTRIBUTION TO OUTCOME-BASED RELIGION While there are innumerable unscriptural aspects of the Charismatic and Dominion philosophies that could be explored, this discussion must be limited to the effects and contributions to Outcome-based Religion. One need do no more than recall the personal experience of this author to become gravely concerned about the effects of the Charismatic Movement on those who would deem themselves “Evangelical” or “Fundamentalist”. To reiterate the illustration, this author was a member of an Independent Baptist Church who’s Pastor at least at one time called himself a Fundamentalist. The pastor of this assembly became obsessed with church growth, and soon became completely consumed in Outcome-based Religion. In a Sunday evening service, the church featured a guest speaker via videotape. The speaker was a leading Charismatic from Brooklyn, NY. The pastor excused the blatant violation of Scriptural Separation by declaring, “We have a few minor doctrinal differences with this man, but he has a huge church—so he must be doing something right.” Those that have been caught up in the “Church Growth Movement” are perfectly willing to make their bed with the likes of Jim Cymballa, John Maxwell, Peter Wagner, or even Fuller Seminary in order to achieve the outcome—exponential church growth. Remember, Peter Wagner, the progenitor of the Third Wave, is a “church growth expert”. Outcome-based Religion was the exact strategy of Wimber and Wagner. They utilized signs and wonders to reach the desired outcome. Those Conservative, Evangelical or Fundamental congregations who would ostensibly stand against the Charismatic Movement are daily becoming more tolerant of its methods, music, and theology in order to reach the “unchurched”. This is the intrinsic danger of the Charismatic and Dominion philosophies: Some congregations have become so blinded by focusing only on the outcome (church growth) that they see no problem with seemingly small compromises that lead them very quickly to an unscriptural point of no return in which they openly embrace error to obtain the stated outcome. End Notes 1. This illustration, though relayed as fact, is unconfirmed 2. Dager, James. “Kingdom Now”, Media Spotlight, Vol. 8, #1. 3. Hanegraaff, Hank. Counterfeit Revival, Word Publishing, Dallas, TX. 1997, p.57. 4. As quoted by David Cloud. www.whidbey.net/~dcloud/fbns/strange1.htm 5 Zeller, George. “A Brief History of Pentecostalism”, www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/char/abrief.htm 6 Wagner, Peter. “The Third Wave?” Pastoral Renewal, Jul-Aug 1983, p.5 7. Goff, James, Jr. Fields White Unto Harvest, Fayetteville, Ark. Press, 1988, p.7 8. Cloud,David. The Strange History of Pentecostalism, www.whidbey.net/~dcloud/fbns/strange1.htm , p7. 9. Ibid. 10. Cloud, David. From Asuza to Pensacola, Way of Life, Port Huron, MI., 2002, pp.60-64 11. Hanegraaf. p.170. 12. Ibid. p.171. 13. Wimber, John with Kevin Springer. Power Evangelism, Harper & Row, San Francisco, p.31. 14. Wimber, John. “Power Evangelism” Notes from MC501, “Signs and Wonders and Church Growth”, www.pastornet.net.au/renewal/journal10/b-wimber.html , p.3. 15. Tillin, Tricia. “The New Thing”, www.banner.org.uk/res/newthing.html , p.18. 16. Cloud. From Asuza to Pensacola, p.35. 17. Hanegraaff. p.145. 18. Cloud. p.57. 19. Hanegraaff. p.X.

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2002

Answers

Phil;

As per usual you have done a fine job of cutting and pasting, maybe even you typed it. But think about this. I have been told on many occassions that the US treasury in teaching its people how to spot counterfeits, it shows them the characteristics of the real thing. So they cannot be confused. When asked how do you see the church growing, you pasted and glued a passage of scripture, yet you refused to give your thoughts even on the text you pasted. So tell me (us) Phil, what do you really know about the Word in terms of church growth and how does it apply to us? I'd like to know what YOU think not what others you can paste think.

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2002

Bill,

I think you've discovered the problem - Phil doesn't think, he just lets others think for him.

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2002

“From doofus-land, this is your mindless dimwit speaking!”

The only reason you guys love to play this name-calling game is because you are unable to face the facts as they are. Since you are incapable of an honest and intelligent evaluation of the information presented (regardless of its original source), you have no other recourse but to engage in character assassination. But go ahead, have your laughs at my expense – what do I care, as long as other more serious individuals are kept informed. We will see in the end who the real losers are.

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2002

Phil,

I think you're missing the point. It is not that I really think that you don't think (and I apologize for the unnecessary insult), but that on this board you simply cut and paste other's views and don't engage in any real discussion. Anyone can cut and paste. I know that on many things we would disagree and on many others we would agree. But just pasting a bunch of stuff from who knows where doesn't really allow for any discussion at all. I don't doubt that there is some truth to the post above, but just pasting it here doesn't say whether you do or don't agree with it, if you know of some specific instances where these things are or aren't happening, what should be done or not done about it, etc.... I can't speak for anyone else, but I would rather discuss some real issues rather than read some rant that you've pasted by someone else.

IHS,

Barry

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2002

Phil;

I did not call you a doofus. I have done my best to refrain from name calling and pejoratives. I like Barry are asking you to speak for yourself. You obviously have the ability to think, so share with us YOUR thoughts. How do YOU apply the scripture, what do YOU think about some of these posts. It seems you have dodged the question so many times. I (we) are not here to insult you. You may bring it on your self as you will not speak for yourself. I am in a discussion with Scott. We disagree, but none the less we tell each other our views of scripture without pejoratives of any kind. So speak up for YOURSELF.

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2002