Author: dividing hisword | Spiritual Abuse Blogs

When Forgiveness Becomes Dangerous (And Morally Wrong)

Forgiveness, Mercy and Grace are the cornerstones of the Christian message. However, forgiveness becomes dangerous when gross, moral sin has taken place and forgiveness is used as a weapon for silencing victims and a cloak to coverup suspicion, unwanted attention and accountability.

This is my first step of exposing such dangerous practices, dangerous forgiveness and coverup, and I hope this gains traction, attention and spreads like wild fire.

We are seeing an onslaught of sexual impurity in churches around the globe. We in America see it daily in the news. In my anecdotal studies I have found that nearly 30%+ of sexual abuse/assault involving a minor comes from Christian leaders with authority over that minor, or in Christian homes with fundamental, authoritarian beliefs. As someone who claims the Christian Faith, this is something I don’t take lightly or with joy.

Jesus Christ was quick to forgive. To show mercy, and grace, and inspire change in his followers. As Christians, we also believe that change cannot take place without the grace and power of the Holy Spirit. To point, Christ is quoted in Matthew 6:14 as saying, “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly father will also forgive you.”

This is a beautiful quote and is seen again with the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well in John 4, and the adulteress in John 8. But even in these encounters, Jesus never silenced a victim or whitewashed over sin. The Samaritan woman was commanded to Worship and follow Christ and the adulteress was told to sin no more. We are commanded to forgive, and we should be fast and free to forgive, But…

When Forgiveness Becomes Dangerous

In recent news, the hall of fame family of the United Pentecostal Church, International, the Ensey family has been shaken. The son, Jonathan R. Ensey was recently sentenced to eight to twelve years in a federal penitentiary for sexual misconduct with a minor in his church.

The crux of the story, in all it’s gruesome twists, is that the father, Pastor of Living Way Church in Conroe, Texas, Randy Ensey covered up the story. The parents of the victim alerted Randy Ensey to the inappropriate behavior and he did nothing. It wasn’t until the parents, and bless them for having the courage, took it to the police that things unfolded from there.

In the news story linked here, you’ll read, as you do in almost all of these cases, how the congregation of the Living Way Church packed the courtroom in defense of this man.

I’ve seen this type of behavior, multiple times, first hand. And in the past 30 days, this type of dangerous forgiveness has sprung up in another Pentecostal church. My old home town church. Abundant Life Pentecostal Church.

Abundant Life Pentecostal Church, located in McMinnville, Oregon has a long history of cover ups. During my 15 years there I saw the pastors ‘pray’ over child abuse instead of reporting it authorities. I’ve been made aware of the private school supervisor checking the under garments of under-age girls attending school to make sure they were ‘approved’.

While that was second hand information, I sat through years of their required ‘Family Class’ as my child was in the same school. In that class they taught at what ages your female child could wear certain kinds of underwear and they took that very seriously.

I’ve seen the leadership secret in a man through the back doors and have him sit in the ‘upper room’, above the baptistry, who had a restraining order against him for domestic abuse, while his victim sat in the congregation, just to make sure he was in church.

The then pastor, William “Bill” Davies and his son (now the pastor) Matthew Davies were found guilty of violating child labor laws by using church youth in their commercial landscaping business without pay and were ordered by the Bureau of Labor and Industries to pay restitution.

When William Davies demonstrably defamed the man responsible for reporting their acts during a church service, a service in which he demanded the entire congregation to turn off their phones and to not record what he was about to say, they were sued for defamation and paid an undisclosed amount to settle. All thanks to a few brave souls who saw the red-flag of the pastoral demands and recorded the service.

During this trial and to this day, members of the congregation blamed ‘Satan’ for attacking their man of God and still defend his innocence in all cases, just as we saw in the Ensey case and many more like it. And now, this forgiveness becomes dangerous again.

A Predator in the Classroom

About 30 days ago I found out that a young man who had been suspected, charged, and convicted of sexually assaulting his young sister (circa 2013-2015) is now an appointed (by the Davies) Sunday School Teacher at Abundant Life Pentecostal Church, in McMinnville, Oregon, for the 9-12 year old class, called the Amplified Class. You can see the churches website here: www.alpcministries.org. (2023 Edit: That website is no longer in operation, so an archived link is given. The new link is https://alpc.church.)

This young man was 15-16 at the time the abuse started and the sister was 7. By public accounts, the abuse spanned about two years until the young man was finally arrested, tried and then sent away. The victim, and her family, still attend Abundant Life Pentecostal.

I can’t speak to all the details and dates as I don’t want anything quoted to be found untrue. What is true, is that this young man was forgiven, and welcomed back in to the church with open arms upon his release.

His victim is now a silenced member of the church. He was given a fancy church wedding while she is told to keep things to herself and forgive. And he is now a Sunday School teacher, overseeing children the same age that his victim was.

Forgiveness Or Moral Failure?

Is this forgiveness, or a stumbling block? Is this tempting the Lord, thy God, or restoration?

The reason I am not naming the young man is because in this instance, the moral failure is on the now pastor of Abundant Life Pentecostal Church, Matthew Davies and the churches ‘board of elders’. Should the young man distance himself from such a thing? Absolutely. And if he was to harm another child, he should be held accountable.

Yet and more-so, in these fundamental church systems such as Oneness Pentecostalism, and in the United Pentecostal Church, they have such a delusional view of forgiveness that they would believe it safe to put a young man who molested a little girl, in a classroom of little girls, the age of his previous victim, so long as he obeys them.

And should another child be hurt, I believe the moral failure, and legal ramifications, should fall on the leadership of the church for making this bad of a decision, every bit as much as on the young man, should he recidivate.

There is a deep rooted command in Christian faith to forgive, but not to tempt. To restore, but not to make a room for evil. Equal to forgiveness is the command to not put a stumbling block before your brother. For me now, being knowledgeable of this circumstance, as much as I forgive the previous trespass, I cannot ignore the potential for harm and be silent.

If any harm comes to another child, I equally feel I would be morally responsible should I not speak out. Furthermore, this was the classroom that my 9 year old daughter was attending. How dare they, the leadership of that church, put my own daughter at great risk to satisfy their twisted ideals?

They truly believe if you shout enough, speak in tongues enough, and attend enough, you are ‘Ok’. Did that save Jonathan Ensey and his victim? It did not, and I’ll not sit idly by watching and waiting for another news story to pop up.

Men and Brethren, What Should We Do?

I do not want to be seen as inciting hate mail, hate speech, defamation, or any other inappropriate behavior. If any feel so inclined to contact this church and demand answers or tell them how terrible of a choice this is, you are free to do so. I will personally be publishing more information as I cannot sit idly by while children are put in harms way but I can only share factual information.

My family no longer attends this church, I pulled that plug after they wantonly endangered my daughter. But there are dozens, potentially hundreds of other children, both members of the church and bused in ‘bus kids’ in the Sunday school at risk.

I also feel inclined to say that it is possible that this young man’s record is expunged. He may have been tried as a child and not as an adult and thus, legally, there is no law being violated. And if that is the case, I would forgive, but never trust him again. No way should he be attending the same church as his victim.

There is tremendous boundaries of trust, responsibility, wisdom and discernment being recklessly abandoned for the sake of their precious doctrines even if not legal boundaries.

I want to ask the pastor, Matthew Davies, “What would you do if it was your daughter?” and other members of the McMinnville, OR community should be asking him the same thing.

Abundant Life Pentecostal Church
1145 SW Wallace Road
McMinnville, OR 97128
503-472-1585

Pastor Matthew Davies
matt@alpcministries.org

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Please stop talking about Jezebel…

Ok – so first off, I’m not saying to stop talking about the Bible, or the story of Jezebel! There is a powerful principle of being unequally yoked together with an unbeliever. In the case of Ahab, a Jewish King, marrying a Canaanite princess, who served many gods was a disgrace to the line of Israel and a continuation, as 1 Kings 16 declares, the sins of many kings before Ahab.

What I actually want to stop talking about, I’m going to talk about it…and that is the effort to use Jezebel as the foundation for the house of cards within the Holiness movement as the anti-make-up and jewelry monument (idol). A statue erected and constantly glorified across pulpits to disparage and to dissuade the usage of such things. You’ll hear all about the Jezebel spirit, the ‘harlot’ spirit. I’ve heard so-called Christian women refer to another woman who wears make-up in such a fashion, “Just look at that Jezebel!”

In fact, the inspiration to this writing is a comment I received on my article Why do some legalists forbid wearing Jewelry and Makeup? that again used the ‘Jezebel’ reference. And I don’t mean to disparage the person making that honest comment, but something glaring came from it that can and should be addressed.

Description vs. Prescription

I can’t help but remember a Baptist preacher who taught on the transitional nature of the Book of Acts and how certain people ‘hang their necks’ on certain portions of Scripture without seeing the fullness of the entire testimony. In that particular case, he was speaking of the way in which the Oneness Pentecostal doctrine views Acts 2:38 as the fullness of Gospel salvation (how to get saved) but do not read the rest of the book as the description of history and transition as it was played out.

This was something that my studies also led me to understand. The book of Acts was a description of the forming of the New Testament church, it is a window into the history of the Apostles, early missionary journeys, and incredibly, the way in which the Gospel was opened up to the Gentile bride (Acts 7/8) due to the thrice rejection of the Messiah by the Jewish people.

As we see the transitions take place we also notice some fundamental changes (requirements) because of a shift from a Jewish to a Gentile audience. And there is a difference. (Acts 15, Jewish Believers still maintained the Law of Moses, Gentile Believers did not and are not commanded to) But the description of early church practices, such as communal living, selling all earthly goods was certainly NOT a prescription (commandment) to the entire New Testament church from the days of the Apostles up to the second coming of Christ.

For example, let us look at some very plain prescriptions (commandments) vs. descriptions to illustrate the difference and why it matters in this narrative.

Prescriptive Text:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” ~ 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, ESV

From this text, we draw very clear and strong conclusions of a commandment. Much like the original commandments that Yahweh gave to Moses, they weren’t ambiguous, unclear, nor arguable or debatable. The pronouncement is clear: People who do certain behaviors will not inherit (enter into) the kingdom of God.

Descriptive Text:

“And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need.” ~ Acts 2:43-45, ESV

From this text, we draw a conclusion that the early church was very communal, taking care of the physical (food, clothing, shelter) needs of each other as was needed under the persecution taking place, not just from the Roman front, but later a Jewish attack against Christianity.

The times demanded particular behaviors, and while we read about them, we don’t take this description/history as a prescription (commandment) that we are to sell all of our belongings, develop communes and live as a single community.

In a negative light or a positive light, descriptive texts should not be used as foundations or proof texts for prescriptive commandments unless they are coupled with very clear commandments.

Jezebel, the Golden Calf of the Holiness Movement

Recently, a comment was left on a previous article as I already mentioned. This is not a criticism of the commenter, just an illustration of how this connection happens;

We cannot take just 1 Bible Verse and ‘run away with it.’ We must read the ENTIRE meaning.
They decked their Faces with Paint (Make-up), and put on Ornament (Jewelry) also. Does that not sound like Jezebel to you?

This is in reference to Ezekiel 23, an incredibly strong, blatant, graphic account of the harlotry of Jerusalem and Samaria, symbolized as two sisters who engaged in much prostitution, debauchery, and idolatry who had turned away from the Lord. This prophecy, given to Ezekiel, was intended to provoke the prophet into proclaiming God’s disgust, displeasure, and desire for repentance upon the lands that he called his own. Verse 36 even says, “Son of man (Ezekiel), will you judge Oholah and Ohobilah? Then confront them with their detestable practices.”

The two sisters, Oholah (Samaria, the Gentiles) and Oholibah, (Jerusalem, the Jews) at one point were prophetically (not literally) decked with crowns, bracelets, make-up, oils and fine linens, beds, etc., and then judgment came upon them for their prostitution, adultery, and debauchery. Nowhere in this description, nor elsewhere, does Scripture teach that make-up, and/or jewelry was the prescription for their debauchery, and yet we can see and hear people making this connection via the Jezebel story simply because of the mention in Scripture.

We could conclude, as others have with the make-up and jewelry, that the olive oil, beds, fine linen, and other descriptive items were equally sinful, right? There is no doubt a reason for the mentioning of these things, but to use ‘honorable mentions’ as commandment prescription is dangerous, to the creation of false doctrines.

Jezebel

1 Kings 16-22 recounts the history of King Ahab of Jerusalem who reigned C 874-853 BC and includes the final days of Elijah the prophet who was responsible for the killing of the prophets of Baal (the religion to which Jezebel belonged) (1 Kings 18) and then his fleeing from the wrath of Jezebel in 1 Kings 19.

The problem with Jezebel and Ahab was not the make-up, nor jewelry. Rather, it was that Ahab was far from God, Yahweh, and marrying a princess of Caanan brought with it the need to erect temples to the false god Baal (1 Kings 16:32) in order to please Jezebel.

The story of Jezebel picks back up in 2 Kings chapter 9, long after Ahab’s death. When Elisha anoints Jehu (2 Kings 9:6) as King his first commandment, and seemingly the reason for Jehu’s anointing, is to destroy the house of Ahab and with it, the judgment of Jezebel for the murder of God’s prophets and people that she had wrought in retaliation for the slaying of the priests of Baal by the hands of Elijah. (1 Kings 18:20-22)

And the only portion of this story that comes up in this particular vein of thought is one small verse, that says, “And she painted her eyes and adorned her head and looked out of the window.“, (2 Kings 9:30)

Somehow this simple act of hers, obviously attempting to disarm Jehu with her beauty, is the crux of the story. Little mention is given of her life of sin, murder, worship of false gods, the destruction she brought to the priests of Yahweh. Rather, all the legalists can focus on, is that she painted her eyes and put on a wig. Thus, anyone who paints her eyes and wears a wig…is a Jezebel.

Conclusion

At this point, it seems almost a moot point to iterate again how silly of an argument this is, but there are people who believe it so it is important, in love to explain these things. This article is long for a reason – because we needed the contrast of descriptive vs. prescriptive texts to understand the literary meanings being expressed by the writers, then twisted and perverted by modern readers.

As noted in my original article, Why do some legalists forbid wearing Jewelry and Makeup? there are many locations within Scripture that speak very, very favorably of make-up, and jewelry, the adorning of the body, and indeed even makes the connection with the Bride of Christ (the Church) preparing herself for her groom (Christ). (Rev 21:2)

There are many great resources into the customs of Jewish weddings, the attire of men and women in that ceremony. The 10-coined headdress, necklaces, and other jewelry were part of a traditional, sacred Jewish wedding ceremony. MacArthur and other Bible commentators have made notes about this when reviewing select Scriptures. We even see the God of Heaven and Earth, in the form of man, Jesus Christ, speaking of these coins in the parable of the lost coin in Luke 15:8-10. And in no way did He (Jesus) condemn this, but rather made the analogous connection of the joy a young woman would feel upon finding one of these lost coins as to the joy expressed in heaven when one sinner repents.

We must be very careful not to add anything, or take anything away, from Scripture, in our attempts to honor Scripture. The legalist will add to the word their own concocted dogmas, such as we are speaking about here, while the equal and opposite force will attempt to take things out of Scripture for the sake of not offending people or for allowing sinful behavior. Both are condemned in Scripture. (Deut 4:2, Deut 12:32, Rev 22:18)

Just for the record – I’m not out here arguing these points to get people to do these things. My wife does not wear make-up, and I’ve never asked her to. She doesn’t need to, and only will if she chooses to, and that makes me happy. My purpose is not to endorse the make-up industry but to endorse the proper handling of the Bible.

Do you have to hate your family, to follow Christ?

Some of the most basic concepts of Christianity and Biblical knowledge are often skewed by organizations that take over your thinking, individuality and personal responsibility. For instance, I existed for 15-years in an echo-chamber. I was forbidden from following other pastors and learning from them, even pastors in our organization. I was to ‘learn my shepherd’s voice’ and no one else’s.

I remember well when my son came to me and admitted, tearfully, that he had almost been willing to cut me off due to religious affiliation. I had left the church we belonged to for most of his young life, and that church taught adamantly that we were to be loyal to church first, family second, self last of all. The church was God, and God was The Church. (The Church is defined as that one building, with an address and a denominational title, in our former religion, not the body of all believers)

And didn’t Jesus say “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters, as well as his own life, he can’t be my disciple.”? (Luk 14:26) You might be surprised at how many results pop up on a Google search for the question, ‘Do I have to hate my family to follow Jesus?” And, more importantly, how many different responses there are. But, if one of the Ten Commandments is to ‘Honor thy parents,’ how could Jesus contradict that?

The reality is – this is yet another example of what the book, Biblical Literalism attempts to highlight. When taken at face value, a Scripture, punctured by time, transliteration, and read by people with little to no understanding of the culture who wrote the words and the culture of whom the words were meant for, is given a meaning it had no intent to produce.

Let’s digest this verse, found in Luke 14. This is important because I personally know families that have been torn to shreds over denominational stances, with players in the story using this verse as justification for why they can biblically separate and tear their families apart with justification. The reality is, Jesus gave us a beautiful verse that has been abused, misused and made ugly.

If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. ~ Luke 14:26, NIV

If anyone comes to Me, and does not [a]hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life [in the sense of indifference to or relative disregard for them in comparison with his attitude toward God]—he cannot be My disciple. ~ Luke 14:26, AMP

Few Bible renditions do this verse justice and this is exactly why one of my favorite versions of Scripture to teach from has become the Amplified Bible. The note [a] in the above version reference (found here) provides this note to the reader:

*[a] An exaggerated figure of speech indicating a lesser degree of love, not actual hostility or aversion toward one’s earthly family.

Hate is not the action or intent of hating another human or family, nor does it imply the literal meaning of the word, found in the Strong’s Concordance (#G3404) as to ‘detest‘. Rather, the usage here, as one of the meanings of the word, is to simply love-less. If we re-wrote this verse with that simple premise, you would gain a much clearer picture in today’s vernacular, which is a big part of my teachings…bringing the word to our generation.

“If anyone comes to Me [Jesus Christ], and does not [love me more, and love less] his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life [meaning that the discipleship to Jesus is the highest calling of a person over being a husband, or parent, although those are important and not to be ignored]—he cannot be My disciple. ~ Luke 14:26, AMP”

This may very well be one of my shortest articles ever written, because there is little more to say. Any man/woman who uses Scripture to justify cutting off family members based on denomination choice (in my case, I was Oneness Pentecostal…and family members who were NOT Oneness Pentecostal were not to be trusted or fellowshipped closely) is ignorant of the real meaning of Scripture.

We are to prefer Christ overall. We are to choose God over all worldly aspirations. We are to love Christ more (on a hierarchy of priorities) than our family, but we are still under the commandment to honor (love) our mothers and fathers.

We are to love God, with all of our heart, all of our mind, and all of our soul. We are to mightily love God, to give Him our everything, to set our relationship with him as our highest priority! (Luk 10:27) But in no way does this diminish our biblical commandments to love our wives, respect our Husbands, care for our children and to fundamentally prepare for our grandchildren. And more importantly, God commanded us to spend our efforts going to faraway places, the dirty places, the ‘across the tracks’ places, to reach the lost. (Luk 14:23)

Our first and foremost commandment was to love God, and second only to this, and counted as equally important and powerful, was to love our neighbors and that means, show the love of Christ, to bring them to Christ! So no, the answer is no. You do not, in our modern understanding of the word, need to HATE your family to love Christ.

In reality, loving Christ is the best way to love your family too!

Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” ³⁷And Jesus replied to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ ³⁸This is the first and greatest commandment. ³⁹The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself [that is, unselfishly seek the best or higher good for others].’ ⁴⁰The whole Law and the [writings of the] Prophets depend on these two commandments. ~ Matthew 22:36-40, AMP

View original article at www.dividetheword.blog

Am I a Christian if I Don’t Go To Church?

Notice the intense difference? Love (focused on others) vs ‘their contrived doctrine and self-focus’. (look at my intelligence and ability, you should do what I say!) So my point is, Scripture makes it clear your love for others, which produces action and behaviors that benefit others, is how you serve Christ, and one another, and is in fact, being Christian.

Are you a Christian? Am I a Christian? What does it take to be a Christian? These are questions that likely have been asked for millennia, nearly two to be exact. And of course, the answers change daily based on who you ask and what that person’s belief set is, of course, is strongly influenced by what denomination they choose to belong to.

The amazing thing is – as a Christian, one simply needs to look to the Scripture to answer their own question, and of course, the example of Christ that is set before us, and by His disciples, namely Paul. Most importantly, we seek the Spirit of God to answer these questions for us, as Scripture exposes to be the right (and best) way to find answers.

“As for you, the anointing [the special gift, the preparation] which you received from Him remains [permanently] in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you. But just as His anointing teaches you [giving you insight through the presence of the Holy Spirit] about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as His anointing has taught you, you must remain in Him [being rooted in Him, knit to Him].” ~ 1 John 2:27, AMP

The anointing, that remains in you permanently (sealed with the Spirit until the day of Redemption, Ephesians 1:13) is there to teach you, and to be a guide to you in answering these questions, and more. Some people call it ‘conviction’, that feeling you get in your conscience, that pricking feeling, whether or not you are on the right path.

When being asked to answer this question, I am always reminded of a single Scripture, and it is almost always my answer;

“If any of you lacks wisdom [to guide him through a decision or circumstance], he is to ask of [our benevolent] God, who gives to everyone generously and without rebuke or blame, and it will be given to him.” ~ James 1:5, AMP

So often, we as humans need/want another human to tell us what to do. We really can be sheep some times. And likewise, as humans, we believe it is our position to tell other humans what to do. This is especially true in religious settings.

From the dogmatic and fundamental Christian mindset, it is our duty (requirement, commandment) to share the Gospel through the means of telling people when/where they have failed or by telling them how they are wrong, rather than encouraging and leading them through love. (Just think of those street signs proclaiming who is going to hell, which I highly doubt has saved anyone.)

“Imitate me, just as I imitate Christ.” ~ 1 Corinthians 11:1, AMP

For others, sharing the Gospel is not a forced issue, but something that comes organically through their human interactions, anywhere, and at any time. Their goal isn’t to point out the sinner, but to point out Christ by example to the sinner, so that others may imitate and be provoked to good works of faith because of their lifestyle (the one providing the example). After all, Scripture teaches us;

“By this everyone will know that you are My disciples, if you have love and unselfish concern for one another.” ~ John 13:35, AMP

Likewise, the inverse is also true;

“Beware of the false prophets, [teachers] who come to you dressed as sheep [appearing gentle and innocent], but inwardly are ravenous wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them [that is, by their contrived doctrine and self-focus].” ~ Matthew 7:15-16, AMP

Notice the intense difference? Love (focused on others) vs ‘their contrived doctrine and self-focus’. (Look at my intelligence and ability, you should do what I say!) So my point is, Scripture makes it clear your love for others, which produces action and behaviors that benefit others, is how you serve Christ, and one another, and is in fact, being Christian. Scripture also teaches us;

“No one has greater love [nor stronger commitment] than to lay down his own life for his friends.” ~ John 15:13, AMP

Now, this doesn’t necessarily mean that you will/must physically die in order to fulfill this passage, although that may and is included in the context, by way of exemplifying Christ dying on the cross for our atonement. But it also includes your entirety. That can include your time, prayers, finances, food, clothing, shelter, heart, friendship, commitment, ear, counsel, and, most of all, love.

And most importantly, of all arguments in answering this question, is that YOU ARE the CHURCH. I am the Church. Every believer, sealed with the promise unto the day of Redemption is the CHURCH.

I remember a few weeks back meeting an older couple while sitting at the PUB (I recently wrote about this in my article Neither do I Condemn You.) and through our conversation, I learned that this wife no longer believed in Christ due to some abuse and misfortune that took place in her past. By the end of the evening, she was thanking God for our meeting, we all felt it was ordained, by God, and together we were able to minister to each other in faith-filled connection, in a Christian way.

Was that Church? There was no preacher. No altar. No offering plates. No communion. No music, choir or soloist. No piano, no organ, no guitar, bass or hymnal. There was no weeping, shouting, tongues, or interpretations. But it was Church in the truest sense of what we are to do as Christians – minister to others and exemplify the LOVE of Christ.

But am I Christian if I don’t go to Church?

Yes – Absolutely, and unequivocally, IF you are busy about your Fathers business, exemplifying the love of Christ to others, preferring others, supporting others, helping others, and being like Christ (the definition of the word, after all, is being Christ-Like). Look;

“Pure and unblemished religion [as it is expressed in outward acts] in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit and look after the fatherless and the widows in their distress, and to keep oneself uncontaminated by the [secular] world.” ~ James 1:27, AMP

And the reality is, via (non-commandment) examples of Scriptures, it is (and was in antiquity) quite NORMAL for Christians to gather and assemble, for the purpose of prayer, and support, and edification. In fact, the truest sense of the word ‘ekklesia’ originated as a Greek political assembly that came together, in body, to debate politics. This, of course, was later the word used to describe Judaic/Christian gatherings, wherein Synagogue, the Law of Moses was presented and debated, and later, Christian gatherings.

It is wrong (and equally wrong for someone to assume my teachings are anti-Assembly) to say you shouldn’t go to an assembly (today this is known as Church), or that there is no value in assembly. It is equally wrong to say that if someone doesn’t go to church (assembly) regularly, that they are not Christians.

And, let’s just be honest – people today (often) say that it is necessary for the growth and maturing of the Spirit of a person to go to Church. (eye roll) And then when challenged to provide Scriptural evidence of this (considering most early disciples were in such rural areas that ‘assembly’ was a rather rare thing), these same people may say, “But how can you edify and support one another and provoke each other to good works if you are not assembling together!”

This is likewise short-sighted and inaccurate, based on the average Sunday AM assembly of Christian ‘church’ in the North American modern era model. The majority of Churches today gather on a Sunday AM, at a predetermined time, with a predetermined schedule, a predetermined speaker with a predetermined message, preceded by predetermined songs and followed up by predetermined prayers, altar calls, offerings requests, program announcements, and dismissals, clean-up and prep for next Sunday AM.

If one attends church, listens to a single man (or woman) exercise a gift of teaching, plop $20 in the plate and goes out to lunch – how Christian are they? No more, or no less, than one who doesn’t attend that service.

I’m not about to announce my following of a man, because I follow no man, but I have admiration (in part) for a man named Francis Chan, who at one time was founding pastor and leader of a 6,000+ member mega-church, who one day realized, it was all wrong and gave it up.

What was wrong? Consider this question and answer from Francis;

Cornerstone was a thriving church. Why did you resign from leading it?

We were just looking at scripture and seeing so many commands we weren’t obeying as a church. The church was really built around a speaking gift and a sermon, which is what a lot, maybe all, churches at that time were built around – and, you know, we would look at scripture and go: “Gosh, there should be so much more interaction.”

One of the questions that I asked was: “Am I part of the problem? Do people want to come and hear a sermon rather than use their spiritual gifts because I’ve trained them for that?” Why don’t I consider moving on to a more unreached place and starting something new that was reproducible, more like the underground Church in China? Something that didn’t depend so much on me but on the whole body of Christ.

Francis goes on (you can find his interviews on YouTube, Google, etc.) to describe that biblically, ALL members were to exercise a gift. The problem is, modern ‘church’ is focused around showing up and listening to one man exercise a gift and then going home, reaping the benefits but putting nothing it, and frankly, most churches/pastors don’t WANT you speaking up.

The blatant reality is that attending, and not attending, are equally valid, if you are grounded in faith in Christ, at exercising the gift’s he gave you in order to multiply and add to the Kingdom (create disciples).

“But do not be called Rabbi (Teacher); for One is your Teacher, and you are all [equally] brothers. ⁹Do not call anyone on earth[who guides you spiritually] your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. ¹⁰Do not let yourselves be called leaders or teachers; for One is your Leader (Teacher), the Christ. ¹¹But the greatest among you will be your servant. ¹²Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be raised to honor.” ~ Matthew 23:8, AMP

What is also true is that one cannot truly fulfill the commandments of Christ as a silo, a solo warrior, off alone, never connecting, interacting and edifying with other believers.

“I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, so you too are to love one another.” ~ John 13:34, AMP

So yes – one can be a Christian without attending ‘church’, a building, with a program (accompanied by a desperate need for you to drop money in the offering plate). However, you may not be the best YOU, you can be, in Christ, if you are not regularly, and purposefully, connecting, sharpening, learning, or teaching, with other believers of your Faith.

For me personally, I have daily video calls with other friends and believers where we exhort and teach each other, encourage each other, and more. I have weekly meetings with people of faith, and I purposefully seek out ways to fulfill the commandment of Christ (love one another), but I do not regularly attend ‘Church’. Am I a Christian?

That’s up to God.

Why Oneness Pentecostals have Salvation Wrong (Acts 2:38) and you should Avoid It

Salvation has been a topic for eons – both in the Christian religion and other spirituality based religions. Societies and people across the pages of history have asked the question, and attempted to answer, the age-old question, “What is there after death? Is there an afterlife? If so, how do I enter it?”

For modern Oneness Pentecostals, they believe they have revealed, re-discovered, dug up and reformed the ancient ‘truth’ of Scripture, how one makes it to heaven, pleases God, obeys the Scripture, is justified, and finds true holiness, something that was supposedly closed off from mankind for centuries due to paganism, false doctrine and the likes of the Roman Catholic church.

Recently, a young man and his wife contacted me on the YouTube channel asking what my thoughts were on the Acts 2:38 message taught by Oneness Pentecostals, known as their salvation doctrine (soteriology). They wanted to leave the United Pentecostal Church for all the legalism and dogma (false doctrine) but were confused about attending other churches that didn’t teach Acts 2:38.

If you are not familiar with the evolved doctrines of the Oneness Pentecostal church (Evolved because it has changed many times since 1901ad at its inception) on Soteriology, Acts 2:38, in a nutshell, means that you deny the Trinity, that you are baptized in Jesus Name only, not in the titles Father, Son and Holy Ghost (this is a forced effort in denying the Trinity), that you repent by adopting their holiness standards (woman never wear pants, cut their hair, etc), and that you speak in tongues (initial evidence) as the gift of the Holy Ghost.

While this doctrine can be explained in multiple ways, both favorably and unfavorably, I have determined it to be incorrectly dividing the Word and placing upon people a yoke that Scripture did not demand and more importantly, the divergent doctrinal error cascades to many more doctrinal errors.

Also, important to note that I am purposed to equip the children of God to spot doctrinal errors. I’m not bitter, or vengeful, nor attacking any one ‘faith’. I’m not attacking anything, I’m focused on correctly dividing God’s Word.

There are many doctrines of Scripture that can be debated, questioned, given the ‘we will never understand that’ brush off, but Salvation is a critical aspect of Christianity and getting this right is paramount to our experiences with God.

First and foremost, Scripture makes it abundantly clear that our justification is by the obedience of one man (Romans 5:19), not of our own, and that it is faith in Christ alone that produces the grace that saves us (Ephesians 2:8). There is more to the Christian life, but the root of ‘how do I get saved’ is found in fully trusting in the finished works of Christ on the Cross. Grace is a gift, not a paycheck.

By way of example of the error of Oneness theology, let us examine vs 37 of the Acts 2:38 narrative to see if it lines up with the entire picture of Biblical salvation.

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

I want to compare this to Acts 16:30 which says, “And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

In the case of Acts 2:37 you have a band of Jews that just witnessed a miraculous event and then heard the preaching of Peter that condemned them for taking part in rejecting the Messiah. After being convicted that they had done something wrong, they asked, paraphrased, What are we going to do about this??

Here, Peter answers with the hallmark platform of the Oneness Pentecostal Church;

“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. ” ~ Acts 2:38, KJV

In the case of the Philippian jailer of Acts 16, who just witnessed an equally miraculous event, the question was specifically asked, “What must I do to be saved?”, which was not the case in Acts 2:37. We can make logical leaps, but I’m of the opinion we must take Scripture at face value.

Now – it is evident that Peter gave a pretty salvific response to the Jews, dwelling in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, speaking on forgiveness of sins, receiving the gift of the Spirit, being baptized, etc. Yet, something has to be wrong with the Apostle Paul in Acts 16 if that was the message for the Gentile Church because he did not repeat the same answer to the Gentiles. Or, something is wrong with the Oneness Pentecostal interpretation.

In fact, Paul outlined a very different salvation message to the Gentile believer, the Philippian jailer, and he repeated this same message dozens of times in all of his writings: “And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.” (Acts 16:31)

Now, I want to use an argument that the Oneness Pentecostals use all the time in this vein of thought, who will often counter the argument opposing Acts 2:38 (Salvation) with this question, “IF Peter was preaching false doctrine in Acts 2 the other 11 Apostles would have called him out because Scripture says, ‘And Peter, standing with the eleven’ (Acts 2:13).”

Likewise, in Acts 16:31, Scripture said that Paul and Silas both answered the jailer on how to be saved, “And they said…” They were in agreement – and that wasn’t to repeat Acts 2:38. Acts 15 shows Paul and Barnabas and the entire elder council of the Christian Church speaking of what it takes for a Gentile to be saved. False doctrine (and legalism) was being rooted out of the Christian Church from the very beginning.

The Day of Pentecost, Signs, and Wonders

The real reason I’m writing this is is an examination of the upper room experience in Acts 2, to highlight the eisegetical error of this theology. As miraculous as this event was, Scripture does not portray it to be a repeatable event, and this highlights the error of the Acts 2:38 salvation doctrine of the Oneness Pentecostal church.

When Acts 2:38 says, ‘and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost‘, this has been interpreted (eisegetically) by Oneness Pentecostal theologians as speaking in tongues, or as they call it, the initial evidence of speaking in tongues. This is a belief that when one receives the Spirit of Christ, i.e. the gift of the Holy Ghost, they will, as seen in the upper room, speak in other tongues as the Spirit gives them utterance.

Indeed, they have made the claim that if one does not speak in tongues, they have not received Christ, they are not saved, and heaven will not be their home until they do. Their soteriology is wrapped up in the signs and wonders gift of speaking in another language.

But – is this what that Scripture really means? Two examinations of both events prove this to be patently false. If Paul told the jailer to speak in tongues in order to be saved, we could take that message and run with it. If the elder council of Acts 15 said to speak in tongues, we could run with it. If Paul taught the Church of Ephesus “For you are saved, by grace, (which is received when you speak in tongues)…” we could take that message and run with it.

But that is not what Scripture declares.

First and foremost, we see this evidenced immediately following Peter’s preaching. Don’t forget, Peter did NOT say that the gift of the Holy Ghost was ‘speaking in tongues’. This is an amalgamation of examples where people did speak in tongues on several occasions in the book of Acts (Cornelius Acts 10) so thus, every one will/must. Is this true?

Act 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Act 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

It is commonly accepted by theologians and scholars that vs 41 indicates 3,000 people became new converts, Christians in the aftermath of Peter’s message. If 120 were in the upper room speaking in tongues, with cloven tongues of fire sitting upon them, with reverberating rushing mighty winds seen and heard by all – imagine the attraction that 3,000 people repeating that event would create?

And yet – Scripture simply says they were baptized and added to the church. This is miraculous! Imagine today a town of 100,000 having THOUSANDS converted to the faith in one evening? Miraculous.

But, did they speak in tongues?

The Signs of the Upper Room Experience

If the Acts 2 experience at Pentecost was a repeatable event, to the degree that it was tied to an individual believers salvation experience, then we would be wise to follow it exactly as exampled in Scripture. Let’s take Scripture at face value.

Act 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. Act 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. Act 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Act 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Act 2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

The three signs of the Pentecostal experience are these:

The Spirit was preceded by the rushing mighty wind. The Greek word here for ‘sound’ is ēchos and it means literally ‘a loud or confused noise, that is, a roar‘. If you have ever stood on the ridge of the Grand Canyon you have heard a rushing mighty wind. The upper room would have been similar.
The Spirit was preceded by cloven tongues like as of fire. This was something that appeared to all of them, not an apparition only visible to a single person. These have been described by scholars as scintillations, lambent flashes of fire that appeared throughout the room, splitting licks of fire that sat upon each person.
The tongues that were spoken by each recipient was an immediately translated known language. There was and must be someone in the audience that recognized the language being spoken. This was not a private ‘prayer language’ as some Charismatics call what is now known as babbling, nor a language of angels.

Equipped with this view of the miraculous event of the day of Pentecost, we must then approach the modern day sign of ‘tongues’, through the lens of the Oneness Pentecostal movement that calls it the ‘initial evidence‘, and ask the question, “Does it actually match the biblical model they claim to be following?”

Looking at this scripture and theology of the Oneness Pentecostal religion under the microscope of Scripture we find a virus or an infection in the teaching. To claim that the ‘gift of the Holy Ghost’ is a repetition of the Acts 2 upper room experience doesn’t line up with the Word.

Having been in this religion for 15 years and being connected with hundreds and thousands of Oneness Pentecostals, I can tell you that no one, ever, received the ‘gift’ evidenced in the fashion of the upper room experience. It has never been preceded with a rushing mighty wind, never was it accompanied with cloven tongues visible to all around, and most importantly, NEVER was it a known language that was immediately recognized by someone surround the event.

The only argument to support the Oneness theology on this topic is to say, ‘it’s changed’. To express that it changed is to then dismantle the entire theology. To claim that it did not change is to then admit that they, and no one else is repeating the biblical event as exampled in Acts 2, and thus, have made up their own experience or are disobeying Scripture.

Conclusion

The conclusion is that the ‘gift of the Spirit’ is not the supposed initial evidence of speaking in tongues. In fact, Scripture makes it clear that the gift of the Spirit is the eternal promise (Ephesians 1:13) seal we receive upon believing in Christ. That the fruit of the spirit is the evidence of that gift, and finally, that the promise and hope of glory (Colossians 1:27) is the result of that gift.

Scripture also tells us that the ‘gift’ of God is free, and it is salvation. (Ephesians 2:8) Ephesians 4:7 tells us that each of us is given a measure of grace according to the gift of Christ. James 1:7 tells us that the gift is given by God and comes down from Him, who never changes.

We didn’t beg for this gift, we didn’t have to exert and stress and beg and scream and cry for it, we received it by faith! Freely we have been given this grace. In fact, 1 Peter 4:10 tells us that every man who has this gift is responsible for sharing and ministering the grace and freeness of God’s love to one another – being stewards of this gift.

As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. ~ 1 Peter 4:10

Scripture never indicates that the gift is the event or outcome of speaking in tongues. This outlines both the falsity of the Oneness Pentecostal theology surrounding the Acts 2:38 narrative, but more important than any of that, illuminates the wonderful miracle of grace – that it was given to us freely, because of the obedience and love of Jesus Christ and that the real gift of the Holy Ghost is His presence with us, working for us and granting us the fruit of His Spirit, which is Love, Joy, Peace, Longsuffering, Gentleness, Goodness, Faith, Meekness, and Self-Control – against such God has no law!

Blessings