PneumaReview.com has received this introduction for a testimony about how God is working and drawing people to himself in places we might not expect. The commentator asked not to be identified as the author because of their own ministry in Muslim majority areas around the world.

In this video you will hear the powerful testimony of a former Muslim Imam who became a Christian. When he was a Muslim someone asked him who Jesus was. This question prompted him to read through the Quran in order to see what it had to said about Jesus. What he discovered led him to believe in Jesus Christ as his Savior. He says that the Quran converted him to Christianity. This man subsequently suffered for his new found faith and was about to be killed but God spared his life. Watch the video to hear his story.

Image: Cristian Newman

Brian D. McLaren, A New Kind of Christian: A tale of two friends on a spiritual journey (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001), 173 pages, ISBN 9780787955991.

Brian D. McLaren, The Story We Find Ourselves In: Further Adventures of A New Kind of Christian (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003), 203 pages, ISBN 9780787963873.

Brian McLaren’s book may leave you feeling angry, relieved, concerned or even confused, but I doubt it will leave any unaffected. While A New Kind of Christian may seem to be less about doctrine and more about Christian living, nothing strikes closer to the heart of our doctrines than questioning the way we live out what we believe.

Although a work of fiction, McLaren sees his book as more a “philosophical dialogue” (p. xviii) than a novel. In 1994 McLaren found himself so discouraged with pastoring and Christianity that he wrote in his journal, “One year from today I will not be in the ministry” (p. ix). “At the time I could see only two alternatives: (1) continue practicing and promoting a version of Christianity that I had deepening reservations about or (2) leave Christian ministry, and perhaps the Christian path, altogether. There was a third alternative that I hadn’t yet considered: learn to be a Christian in a new way.” (pp. ix-x) That was the beginning of a journey that would lead to a new understanding of what it means to be a follower of Christ.

The story is about a pastor (Dan Poole) who is contemplating leaving the ministry. He seeks counsel with one of his daughter’s high school teachers (Neil Edward Oliver or Neo) who serves as sort of a composite of the folks who helped the author in his time of questioning and reevaluation.

Have we cast the Bible in the wrong role in our lives? What does it mean to be saved? Is the modern Christian view of sin actually dangerous? As you read the conversations between Dan and Neo, you will find as I did that you are not a mere bystander. These issues cut to core of our Christian lives. To put it bluntly, these are not “safe” topics.

You can’t talk about this sort of thing with just anybody. People worry about you. They may think you’re changing sides, turning traitor. They may talk about you as if you came down with some communicable disease. So you keep this sort of think like a dirty secret, this doubt that is not really a doubt about God or Jesus or faith but about our take on God, our version of Jesus, our way of faith. You let it out only when you feel you have found someone you can trust (p. xv).

The Story We Find Ourselves In is a continuation of the story of the first book that takes a turn for the practical. What does living as a new kind of Christian entail? What can you expect to happen in your life? How will it effect your church, your relationships, and your walk with God? Using, among other things, the thorny subject of Darwinian evolution, McLaren shows how a “new kind of Christian” may react to real issues.

I was pleasantly surprised by McLaren’s ability to write fiction that is interesting as well as informative. The reading was enjoyable, and quick, which was quite an accomplishment considering the subject matter. These are important books. They may help identify concerns and chart a new course for those who are feeling uneasy in their Christianity. For those more content with their walk of faith they will at the very least challenge you to take a fresh look.

Reviewed by Mike Dies

Jack W. Hayford, “Practicing What We Preach” Ministries Today (Nov/Dec 2003), pages 22–27.

Jack Hayford sees the church in a moral crisis. “Favoritism, greed, shoddy morals and shady ethics have found a comfortable home in the church. At the same time, both inside and outside the church there is a rise in intolerance towards leaders who have been allowed to compromise with impunity their various institutions’ self–declared moral and ethical standards” (pg. 22). Despite this laudable intolerance the evangelical church, with its many denominational and independent groups, has no unified voice when in comes to confronting unethical leaders. “… there has been no standard policy guiding the body of Christ as it deals with its mavericks—the small but growing number of leaders who make their own rules and flaunt the ethical demands of a disciple of Jesus Christ” (pg. 22). It is in this context that he proposes a solution: “… I want to propose the establishment of an International Council for Ethical Accountability (ICEA)—or something with another title, but serving the church with what those words represent … Such a council could provide a starting place for an internationally agreed–on standard concerning basic ethical and moral issues as they pertain to church leadership” (pg. 23).

Jack Hayford / The King’s University

Hayford believes that such a council would allow the church to express a “collective voice” when responding to leadership failings: “While any one of a field of leaders may answer a reporter’s question … without a broad consensus, the public is left with the notion that every spiritual leader is basically a law unto themselves” (pg. 24).

Noting that luxury and extravagance has replaced self denial in many places (pg. 24), and that he has had to quietly withdraw from participation in two ministries because of their “law unto myself” attitudes (pg. 24), Hayford sees the need for judgment to come from within the church, lest it come from outside (pg. 27). “This isn’t a proposal for doctrinal agreement beyond basics, or for ecclesiastical or liturgical conformity. But written on all our hearts is a set of ethical principles that we intuitively know are right, and God’s word affirms a fundamental body of moral expectations that we all affirm. So the question is, do we believe that it possible that we can find a consensus on how we can strengthen one another by speaking with one voice where ethics are involved?” (pg. 27)

Hayford believes the answer is “yes.” How many others feel the same is yet to be seen. I look forward to seeing the responses to his proposal from evangelicals in the United States and abroad.

Reviewed by Mike Dies

Read the original article: http://ministrytodaymag.com/index.php/ministry-leadership/ethics/8215-practicing-what-we-preach

Adrienne S. Gaines, “Punching Prejudice” Ministries Today (July/August 2003), pages 30-34.

When Scott Hagan became pastor Grand Rapids First Assembly of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan) he was aware of the city’s racially troubled past. It was in that same city in 1947 that “the Assemblies of God General Council made an infamous decision against the ordination and inclusion of African Americans into the denomination” (p. 31).

“When I read about this decision to exclude African Americans, Grand Rapids became a city of spiritual significance to me personally” (p. 31). With a vision to heal this spiritual wound, he and his wife Karen left a thriving pastorate at Harvest Church in Sacramento, California to fill the vacancy at Grand Rapids First Assembly after the retirement of M. Wayne Benson.

Image: www.ScottHagan.net

“Upon his arrival, he had four initial goals: to see the church make a clear, prophetic declaration that they were moving in the direction of unity; to initiate lunches with 100 local pastors; to teach a series titled ‘The Cross of Many Colors;’ and to hire minority staff from outside the community as positions became available” (p. 32). In the West Michigan community—home of numerous Reformed denominations and Christian publishers—Hagan was “the only white pastor to participate targeting the city’s attempt to quash efforts to name a local street after civil rights hero Rosa Parks” (p. 33). He was also “the first white pastor to host a service honoring Martin Luther King Jr.” (p. 33). Now, two years in, 10 percent of the members are people of color.

“At the turn of the 20^th century, the body of Christ experienced our most historic and revered modern revival, Azusa Street” (p. 33). He says that although Azusa “bloodied the lip” of prejudice (p. 33) there has been almost no progress in the ensuing 97 years. “Our cities remain socially and spiritually bankrupt while denominations lob their lifeless messages of reconciliation from behind their safe cultural walls” (p. 33).

There are lessons we can learn from Azusa and the lack of racial reconciliation among Pentecostal/charismatics that has occurred since. We are called by the Spirit to become a united body in Christ. What can you and your church do to turn the tide?

Reviewed by Michael J. Dies

John Eckhardt, “Can a Christian Have a Demon?” Charisma (March 2003), pages 66-68.

The subtitle of John Eckhardt’s article states, “Church people have been arguing for years over the issue of deliverance. I think that it is time to stop arguing and start setting people free.” He then relates how his church used to teach that Christians could not be possessed by a demon since, “Jesus and the Holy Spirit could not live inside the same body in which demons reside” (p. 66). That all changed when they realized that their doctrine did not square with their experience:

The problem was, our experience did not match our theology. When we ministered deliverance, we frequently prayed for people we knew were born-again, Spirit-filled believers—and they manifested demons! We had face the fact that either our experience was wrong or our doctrine was wrong.

We couldn’t question our experience because we knew what we were seeing. So we began to question our theology (p. 66).

Eckhardt then explains that, “Jesus tells us to cast devils out, not to cast devils off” (p. 66) and that demons promote the teaching that Christians cannot have a demon because, “they gain strength from staying hidden” (p. 67). He goes on to explain that deliverance from demon possession is a “covenant right” for believers, and should be performed on every new convert. Near the close of his article Eckhardt concludes, “We don’t question if the new believer has a demon, only how many he has” (p. 68).

John Eckhardt is “Apostle and Overseer of Crusaders Church Chicago.”

While I agree that squabbling over doctrine should not lead to the ruin of those in need, this is a topic that must be engaged. I am encouraged that Charisma is having this discussion, but I fear that the quality of the dialogue must be raised or it will only muddy the waters further. Eckhardt admittedly leans heavily on experience, even going so far as to say that their experiences were beyond question. Yet, he does not deal seriously with scripture. Most of his references are from the Gospels where Jesus is clearly dealing with the unsaved. No text relating specifically to the topic of Christians and demon possession is quoted. This is troubling, because if his teaching is biblical then we should expect it to be supported by Acts and the writings of Paul. Unfortunately for this discussion, Eckhardt never attempts to locate his beliefs on possession within the early church.

This is rather remarkable when you consider some of the claims made in his article. He states as a matter of fact that, “For every sin in the Bible there is a corresponding demon” (p. 68) without any qualifications. He claims the following concerning generational sin:

If we can be subjected to the conse­quences of sin to the fourth generation, as Exodus 20:5 says, and a biblical generation is 40 years, then we are subject to the demonic influence of what people in our family lines were doing 160 years before us. This means that, taking the year 2000 as a starting point, we are affected by what those in our bloodlines were doing as far back as the year 1840.

Think about it. Even if a person has a great genealogy, he can’t know everything his ancestors were doing in secret that long ago. And if, in addition to genera­tional sin, he has committed personal sin or has been traumatized or victimized in any way, by the time he comes to the Lord, he is going to need deliverance on some level. There is just too much defilement and contamination on Earth to escape it (p. 68).

Certainly the above could lead to further bondage such as paranoia and superstition, divorced as it is from New Testament teaching. In the end, I felt that Eckhardt put too much emphasis on experience and too little on scriptural backing. Eckhardt bases his teaching narrowly. If it is biblical, then not just the Gospels, but Acts and the Epistles will support it. Without even an attempt to locate his teaching broadly on scripture, Eckhardt has failed to advance this important discussion.

Reviewed by Michael J. Dies

Read the article online (available as of Aug 7, 2014): www.charismamag.com/spirit/spiritual-growth/846-can-a-christian-have-a-demon

John Arnott, “Living in Revival,” Spread the Fire (Issue 5, 2001), pages 6-9.

John Arnott, pastor of the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship, describes in this article the characteristics of the “Toronto Revival” and what effect he says this move of the Holy Spirit should have on believers in the future.

One of the common questions Arnott tries to tackle is whether TACF is in revival or renewal. He himself uses the terms interchangeably. He believes people see a difference between the two because they are mistakenly viewing the present outpouring through the lens of past revivals. He believes every revival has a different face and emphasis. The Toronto outpouring “is primarily about restoring the intimate love with the Father and drawing the Bride of Christ into a sanctifying love relationship with her heavenly Bridegroom” (p. 8).

The Toronto Revival is still meeting six nights a week and they are seeing an increase of physical healings which Arnott says is leading to an increase in conversions. In the future Arnott plans to help strengthen local churches that have “been faithfully flowing in the River and have grasped the essential truth of the Father’s heart.” That is, those already part of God’s work to heal the sick, save the lost, and set captives free.

John Arnott

Arnott says, “Revival is not just a phenomenon to be theologically dissected. Too often we analyze revivals of the past in the hope of isolating and identifying their principles so we can reproduce them elsewhere through our own efforts. What we really need to do is welcome a visitation of the Holy Spirit by catching its fire ourselves.”

This article stands to be a much better introduction to the “Toronto Revival” than many of the second and third hand sources available.

Reviewed by Mike Dies

Read the full issue of Spread the Fire (available as of August 11, 2014): www.home.zonnet.nl/piet-dineke/downloads/What%20is%20Revival.pdf

He was young in the Lord; rash and impulsive. He was also a born communicator, and immediately went out preaching and teaching, unencumbered by such banalities as sound doctrine and scriptural truth. That was where I was supposed to come in. When I mentioned in the company of other believers that I had to teach that boy sound theology I was surprised to hear what I now know is a common response: “make sure you don’t put out his fire for God!” Most will not come out and say it, but the sentiment is clearly felt: theology is dangerous.

Welcome to the Pentecostal/charismatic movement.

I am not sure where this fear of theology was birthed, but without a doubt it is with us. Though this does not reflect the attitude of the entire Pentecostal/charismatic movement, its influence is felt throughout. Few things are more shaky than a Christian movement that fails to emphasize the very structure that would preserve it: sound doctrine.

Thus, I was encouraged when I saw that Ministries Today had begun the Ministries Today Institute which describes itself as “A continuing Education Course to Equip Church Leaders”.  However, I was discouraged when I saw the May/June 2001 issue. The Institute teaching was titled “Healthy Church Apostles”. The subtitle read, “Every local church should have a healthy apostolic covering in order to be effective beyond its four walls.” The article goes into detail about how apostles are to be used in the local church. It was very specific, and reflected heavily the teaching of C. Peter Wagner.

Ministries Today has as its subscribers a large number of Pentecostal/charismatic leaders from many different doctrinal backgrounds. This movement is distinctive in its broad denominational following, as we are bound together by our common desire to see the contemporary work of the Spirit. As I read I kept thinking doesn’t MT realize the diversity of the movement?

This was not merely an article, but a teaching endorsed by Ministries Today. I have no desire to discuss the validity of the teaching set forth in the article. Rather, I question the wisdom of MT putting its name behind what is clearly a disputable doctrine. The alienation that can result from this is apparent in the opening paragraph. Note the unqualified statements:

We are in a subtle shift of Church leadership, which is going on around the world. The shift is in the way leaders think of ministry, view ministry, and function in ministry. C. Peter Wagner has carefully studied this change and has called it the New Apostolic Reformation. Because of this shift, if you’re conducting church the same way you were 10 years ago, you are already caught up in yesterday’s movement, and may be stuck in a religious system.

This would be acceptable in an article. But as part of their Institute, it is a sanctioned view of MT. As such, you can see what they are saying about those who reject this teaching, or are not “conducting church” in the ways prescribed in the article. Such a narrow and arguably obscure view is not in keeping with MT’s non-denominational stance.

Ministries Today’s commitment to educating church leaders is commendable, and I hope other Pentecostal/charismatic publications will soon follow suit. However, with our need for an understanding of the primary doctrines that unite us, I see no need for MT to endorse disputable teachings representing a small part of a large movement.

Reviewed by Mike Dies

Can believers be possessed, or demonized, by evil spirits? According to the article “They Shall Cast Out Demons” by Maureen Eha in the May 2000 issue of Charisma, the answer is yes.

The article begins with the story of a woman who was afflicted by fear all of her life, along with other strange phenomena. She was finally set free by the power of God. Now she lives a normal life, whereas before she could not even leave the house without hiding her face. The article says her story, “… leaves us with burning questions about the deliverance ministry. Is this ministry really necessary? If so, why aren’t more Christians involved in it? And for those who are, how can we be sure we are doing it right?” (p. 55).

To answer those questions Eha interviews Kathy Scataglini, Joseph Thompson, Cindy Jacobs, Doris Wagner, along with several other specialists in this area.

Cindy Jacobs, co-founder and president of Generals of Intercession, believes it is necessary. “She [Cindy Jacobs] believes most people need some kind of deliverance ministry. ‘People who argue this point haven’t traveled in Third World Countries.’” (p. 55, emphasis and brackets mine).

The experts bemoan the fact that while there is such a need for deliverance, very few Churches practice it. Kathy Scataglini says “When I see someone manifesting, I ask the pastor, ‘Do you have a deliverance team?’ It has been sad to see how they deal with it, or don’t deal with it, I should say” (p. 56).

Joseph Thompson believes that “… even charismatic and evangelical Christians ‘struggle with this area because the primary premise from which they operate is that Christians can’t be possessed’” (p. 56).

To that Eha states “And therein lies the essence of the controversy. Is deliverance for Christians? Leaders in the field today reply with a resounding yes.”

As proof Eha’s panel gives Matt. 15:21-28; the story of the Canaanite woman who went to Jesus to ask for her daughter’s deliverance. “He replied. ‘It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs’ (v.26). According to Thompson, Jesus’ comment indicates that ‘deliverance is for those who have a relationship [with God] and an understanding of what they are walking in’” (p. 57, brackets hers).

As further proof Thompson adds, “‘The Bible says when an evil spirit is cast out, it will roam in dry places for a while, and then it will say “I will go back to my house from which I came.” When it gets back to that place and finds it clean, it will return with seven more demons.’” He continues, “‘Common sense dictates, that the only people who can “fill their houses” are believers’” (pp. 58,59. See Luke 11:24-26).

There does exist within the Pentecostal/charismatic movement a general consensus that unbelievers can be possessed or demonized. The same cannot be said, however, of the effects of the demonic regarding believers.

Even though this article is done in a reporting style, and Eha admits that this is a controversial topic (p. 57), comments are, as a rule, dealt with uncritically. This is most obvious in the  responses given to the question of Christian possession (demonization, see p. 57, 58). For a magazine that reaches out to a group as diverse as charismatics, this is unfortunate. It would seem that the reporter (Charisma itself?) is either in complete agreement with this view of deliverance or a greater unity of doctrine is assumed in the vast Pentecostal/charismatic movement than is found in many denominations.

Philip Yancey, The Bible Jesus Read (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1999), 221 pages. 

Philip Yancey has written The Bible Jesus Read to help answer the question posed by his first chapter: is the Old Testament worth the effort? Drawing heavily on his own struggles reading these ancient books, he lights a way through the very sections that have sent us running for the familiar sights and sounds of the New Testament. He states in chapter one, “Eventually I found myself wanting to read those thirty-nine books, which were satisfying in me some hunger that nothing else had—not even, I must say, the New Testament. They taught me about life with God: not how it is supposed to work, but how it actually does work” (pp. 21, emphasis his).

Yancey jumps in head first, wrestling with Job in chapter two. Then, one by one, he tackles the books that have crossed all of our eyes at one time or another. Deftly, he shows us how he himself began to not only make sense of them, but truly enjoy the reading. Each will find, as I did in his chapter on Psalms, that we shared a struggle, or misunderstanding with him. The obstacles were cleared for me to enjoy and profit from the Psalms by the time the chapter was finished. No doubt most who read this book will share my experience.

I recommend this book to those who avoid the Old Testament as well as those who love it. As one who has always loved it, I can say this book was a tremendous help, though I confess I didn’t think I needed any. Those who have avoided it, for the small price of this book, need avoid it no longer.

Reviewed by Mike Dies

September 6, 1999 issue of Christianity Today

Roger E. Olson, “Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian: My Reformed friends sometimes treat me like the enemy, but actually we need each other,” Christianity Today (September 6, 1999), pages 87-94.

Many remember the schism between George Whitefield and John Wesley as a microcosm of the debate between Calvinists and Arminians. Roger E Olson points out that although they made up before they died “ . . .their disagreement has lived on in American evangelicals’ waxing and waning debates about sovereignty and the doctrines of election and free will” (p. 87). He says that the unity enjoyed by the post-World War II evangelical coalition is beginning to wane with more and more Reformed Scholars, like R.C. Sproul and Michael Horton, questioning whether an Arminian can be a genuine evangelical. Horton goes as far as to say “An evangelical cannot be an Arminian any more than an evangelical can be a Roman Catholic” (p. 87).

Olson defines Arminians as “Protestants who deny unconditional election and affirm resistible grace” (p. 87). He further states “I hope for a new détente between those of us who believe in the soul’s ability to cooperate with regenerating grace (Arminians) and those evangelicals who believe that regenerating grace must precede even repentance and faith (Calvinists)” (p. 87).

Roger E. Olson is the Foy Valentine Professor of Christian Theology and Ethics at the George W. Truett Theological Seminary of Baylor University.

Working among many Reformed theologians, Olson learned that many equated Arminian with semi-Pelagian, a heresy named for a fifth-century British monk named Pelagius, who taught that men were born innocent and therefore could initiate salvation. Informed Arminians are quick to point out that they do not believe man can initiate salvation, for he is spiritually dead. They hold that God moved first through prevenient or enabling grace, which allows the sinner to make a decision to accept or reject the gospel.