For Christians who believe in the continuing gifts of the Spirit, testing national prophecies is a tricky task. In every election cycle, there are prophets announcing who the Lord’s pick is, and which candidate will win. In 2012, for instance, the prophetic consensus was that Mitt Romney was the Lord’s choice and that he would win. They were wrong.

In the 2016 election, Trump emerged as the prophets’ pick. As early as 2007, Kim Clement had delivered a prophecy that God would “raise up the Trump to become a trumpet.”[1] In 2011, ex-fireman Mark Taylor received a series of visions and locutions stating that Trump would become president and was chosen by God to bring America back to righteousness and its true Christian calling.[2] In July 2015, Charisma magazine published a prophecy by Jeremiah Johnson that God was raising up Trump to be a Cyrus figure in the 2016 election, and that Trump would be like “a bull in a china closet”[3] (Cyrus was a pagan king who was anointed by God to return the Jews to their homeland). In fall 2015, businessman Lance Wallnau prophesied that Trump was God’s “chaos candidate” and would be a “wrecking ball to political correctness.”[4] Numerous other, lesser-known prophetic people also reported dreams and visions showing that the Lord had a special purpose in Trump becoming president.

These prophecies played a large role in gathering charismatic support behind Trump and eventually securing his victory.  Looking back, did these prophets truly hear from the Lord? Or did soulish “wish for” prophecies lead to an outcome that was not, in fact, what the Lord had intended?

As we head into the 2020 election, how should believers weigh the Trump prophecies? Should we take them at face value and conclude that Trump is the Lord’s anointed, and so vote for him, because to do otherwise would be to oppose the Lord? Or should we view them skeptically and vote on other criteria, such as the candidates’ character and position on relevant issues?

A Discerning Voice

In his new book, On Discerning Trump’s Character and Presidency:  A Theological Reflection on How False Prophecy Influenced American Politics, historian William De Arteaga offers insight on these questions. For those familiar with De Arteaga’s excellent book Quenching the Spirit, it comes as no surprise that De Arteaga brings his considerable grasp of history and discernment literature, as well as his penetrating insight, to this work.

The first three-quarters of the book are actually not about discerning the prophecies themselves, but about discerning Trump’s character and his presidency. De Arteaga also traces what he sees as the decline of culture and of the Republican Party that made Trump’s presidency possible. While this may seem like a detour, it lays important groundwork for De Arteaga’s ultimate argument that the prophecies were wholly or in part false.

De Arteaga begins with an assessment of Trump’s character. Like others before him, he blasts Trump’s habitual reviling of opponents, his “aggressive speech and uncharitable tweets and off the cuff remarks” (14), and how these behaviors have contributed to the decline of civility and reasoned discourse in American politics. He questions how a man who frequently lies can be trusted. De Arteaga expresses disappointment that Christians would excuse and even embrace Trump’s immoral behavior and links this attitude to antinomianism – the heresy that conduct does not matter so long as one confesses Jesus as Lord. The analysis in this section is erudite and well-reasoned, but not especially novel if you’ve followed other criticisms of Trump in National Review, First Things, etc.

De Arteaga then traces the events that led to American Christians’ increasing sense of persecution by mainstream culture and secular authority to the point that many viewed 2016 (to borrow Michael Anton’s arresting metaphor) as the “Flight 93 Election.” The increasing secularization of education and popular culture, Supreme Court decisions and liberal legislation chipping away at traditional understandings of the family and sexuality, and the eradication of Christian values in schools led to a situation in which many American Christians felt they needed to turn the tide at any cost.

Prophecy

The most interesting part of the book is where De Arteaga specifically looks at the Trump prophecies and compares them with instances of false prophecy by sincere Christians in the past.

De Arteaga insightfully points out that evangelicals and charismatics tend to be largely ahistorical:

Many charismatic and non-denominational churches are a-historical: they have little or no understanding of Church history. They usually pay much attention to Scripture, but assume that, for instance, the “Catholic” period of the Church is so full of error it is not worth learning about. The Patristic period of the Church Fathers, and their wonderful discernment writing might as well have been written for another planet and race of beings. (83)

This ahistorical approach to Christianity has serious consequences. As is often said, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. False prophecy is not a new phenomenon. As early as 170 AD, the prophet Montanus prophesied the imminent return of Christ and led many believers astray. While the Catholic Church has dealt with its share of false prophecies, the regular stream of monks, nuns, and laypeople receiving visions and personal revelations led to the development of a rich literature of discernment. Spiritual directors arose to mentor prophetic people and help them discern which revelations came from the Lord, their flesh, or the devil.

De Arteaga discusses the very interesting example of David Wilkerson’s false prophecy, The Vision. De Arteaga does not doubt that Wilkerson was a very anointed minister who bore great fruit for the Kingdom; however, his apocalyptic predictions for 1973-1983 largely proved false. They were based upon “the fears, prejudices, and belief structures of his own subconscious mind and those in his immediate faith community” (76).

De Arteaga makes a strong case that many of the Trump prophecies fit the same pattern. Many of Mark Taylor’s prophecies, for instance, demonize Democratic leaders and unambiguously paint them as evil. They cater to right-wing fears, such as Obama’s intent to strip the people of their guns or run for a third term in violation of the Constitution. And some have proven false with time – for example, the prophecy that Obama would be forcibly stripped of his office instead of leaving gracefully with dignity. De Arteaga’s analysis of the Taylor prophecies is fascinating, and I wish that he had devoted more attention to the other prophets that foretold Trump’s presidency.

In the end, De Arteaga comes to a very nuanced conclusion. He neither says that all of the Trump prophecies were categorically false, nor does he say that they were all true. Rather, he concludes that they may have contained true revelation from the Lord, which got diluted with soulish concerns and wishes. The kernel of truth may have been what led charismatic leaders to embrace the prophecies, and Trump. Nonetheless, De Arteaga chastises charismatic leaders for what has been, for the most part, uncritical support of the President. Even if Trump is anointed by God for a special purpose, the Bible gives precedent for prophets speaking truth to anointed kings. For instance, David was the Lord’s anointed, and yet the prophet Nathan confronted his sin. De Arteaga urges prophetic leaders to fulfill this aspect of their function.

On the other hand, De Arteaga also raises the possibility that perhaps all of the Trump prophecies were false, even demonically inspired, and that following them has led to grave damage in the Body of Christ and to our nation. Many will disagree, but it is a sobering possibility to consider. Whatever you think of President Trump and the Trump prophecies, De Arteaga’s book is a worthwhile and thought-provoking treatment of an important subject.

Reviewed by Esther Tsai

Notes

[1] https://www.charismamag.com/video/40242-2007-kim-clement-prophecy-says-president-will-be-baptized-in-holy-spirit-build-the-wall-win-second-term.

[2] Mark Taylor and Mary Colbert, The Trump Prophecies (Defender Publishing, 2017).

[3] Jeremiah Johnson, “Prophecy: Donald Trump Shall Become the Trumpet,” Prophetic Insight, (July 28, 2015),  https://charismamail.com/ga/webviews/4-864964-30-224-231-371-9d7ae3cdab.

[4] Dr. Lance Wallnau, God’s Chaos Candidate: Donald J. Trump and the American Unraveling (Killer Sheep Media, Inc., 2016), 7.

“There is a time for everything… a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance …” Ecclesiastes 3:1-4

The day after the gruesome massacre at L’Simcha (Tree of Life) Synagogue in Pittsburgh, PA, we lament the loss of 11 precious lives who died and the 6 people who were wounded. We detest the repulsive and malevolent evil that fills a person’s heart to carry out such execrable violence. Senseless violence that is contemplated, attempted, or inflicted remind us that evil is utterly destructive; hate is absolutely repulsive. And, the ramifications are catastrophic and self-defeating.

Today, we mourn because we suffer together with the families and loved ones of those we lost. Our hearts break for the families, and we are intensely prayerful for the 6 people who are alive but wounded. We mourn with our Jewish sisters and brothers who feel the whiplash of lingering antisemitism that has plagued their community for thousands of years. Our nation, once again, has succumbed to senseless aversion and ferocity.

Another faith community (this time – a synagogue) is devastated, pulling the bandage off the emotional wound that lingers from the massacre at the Sikh temple in Oak Creek, WI, Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, SC and First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, TX.

Sociologists have noted that congregational spaces (i.e. churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.) exist as beacons of hope for the people in our communities. Violent shootings in congregational spaces not only desecrate the sanctity of sacred space but are also an assault upon a community’s symbol of hope.

Every citizen of the world must condemn all forms of religious hate, racism, xenophobia, political violence, and any other manifestation of intolerance. We do not have to agree in order to be civil. We must not seek to champion a cause at the demise of other people.

Let’s strongly detest hate, cling to love, and pursue justice with all of our hearts and at all cost. We must not allow revulsions and massacres to prevail as a new norm. Let’s learn civility and honor. Let conciliatory efforts be our story and love carry us forward.

Let’s pause and take this time to lament. We cannot afford to keep repeating nightmares like the one before us today….

Peace,

Dr. Antipas

October 28, 2018

Some Official Assessment

The wonderful folks of Life Pacific College (International Church of the Foursquare Gospel), located in beautiful San Dimas, California, were exceptionally gracious hosts. It was a special pleasure to be greeted in the first plenary by Jim Adams, LPC president, and the famous Jack Hayford (King’s University). LPC facilities were perfect for the needs of the Society, with ample space in a compact setting. And what a gorgeous campus! Aside from aesthetics, the statistics are impressive as well. Kim Roebuck, Assistant to the Executive Director, reports that there were 331 in attendance. Zach Tackett, SPS Secretary/Treasurer, informed the membership at its annual business meeting that the SPS 2015 figures represent the best membership roll in 5 years and that the Society is financially solvent. Certainly these appear to be signs that SPS continues to flourish as a vital venue for Pentecostal scholarship.

SPS could not happen without the diligent work of a great team of Interest Group Leaders: Scott Ellington, Daniela Augustine, Christopher Stephenson, Leah Payne, Sarita Gallagher, Doug Olena, James Bowers, Clifton Clarke, and Sammy Alfaro. As well, the work of Diversity Committee leader Meghan Musy, Librarians and Archivist chair, Derrick Rosenior, and other session leaders such as Dale M. Coulter and Daniel Tobin (Roman Catholic-Pentecostal dialogue) provided spiritual refreshing.

The plenary sessions with Linda Ambrose, John Goldingay, Teresa Berger, the Latino/a Pentecostalism session with Daniel Ramirez, Urias Mendoza, and Sammy Alfaro, and the great presidential address by Michael Wilkinson, were invigorating. Further, the artistic expressions by Carlynn Reed and Carlos Zapata, Jennifer Miskov and team, and Steven Felix-Jager were a refreshing innovation that ministered to all.

Lois Olena

Outgoing Executive Director Lois Olena (Assemblies of God Theological Seminary, Springfield, MO) noted in her closing remarks at the SPS banquet that of its current membership of 557, SPS enjoys representation from 18 nations, 30 U.S. states, and 41 Christian denominations/traditions.

To me, in spite of its challenges, SPS has been to me “little taste of heaven,” because it has served in my life as a place where brothers and sisters in Christ, of diverse ethnicities and denominations, can experience “the other” in rich fellowship, mentorship, learning, collegiality, and laughter, as well as engage in times of challenging one another, searching and discovering, sharing ideas, celebrating one another’s accomplishments, and supporting friends through their struggles—not only once a year but all throughout the year as we continue to interact. SPS has been a place of vocational nurture, as our late president, Brother Jeff Gros, said in his 2012 presidential address: “The Pentecostal scholar in whatever church has a calling to be of service to the whole people of God and to the churches in their task of preaching, handing on the faith and nurturing the faithful. This Society has been a place where this ecclesial vocation has been and can be nurtured” [Pneuma 34, no. 2 (2012): 167.]

On February 11^th and 12^th 2015, Amos Yong delivered a two-part series of lectures at Ambrose University for the annual Murray W. Downey Lectureship. Ambrose University is a Christian institution of higher education in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, composed of a denominationally diverse community seeking to represent Christ in their respective fields. Yong is currently Professor of Theology and Mission and Director for Missiological Research at Fuller Theological Seminary. He is a prolific author who has written, edited, and contributed to scores of publications. At this lectureship, Yong explored the impact of Pentecostalism on Christianity in his lectures titled, “The Coming Global Christianity: Pietistic-Pentecostal Challenges and Opportunities.”

Murray W. Downey was a founding member of the faculty of the Canadian Bible College in 1941 and taught there for 31 years. An Academic Dean for six years, he was also Director of Christian Service for 30 years. In 1982, the Canadian Theological Seminary along with the Canadian Bible College established the Murray W. Downey Chair of Evangelism. The Downey Endowment and Scholarship Fund and Lectureship Series honours Mr. Downey’s service, passion, and commitment, and assists future M.Div. students.
From the Ambrose University page introducing the 2015 Downey Lectures.

In his first lecture, Yong introduced the issues at hand by defining his terms and then presented the challenges facing Pietistic-Pentecostalism. This stream of Christianity is “coming” in the sense that it is a present reality that has not yet arrived in its fullness, as seen in its continual growth. It is “global” in that it is affecting communities all over the world. Yong noted that some prefer the term “World Christianity” rather than “Global Christianity” because the former emphasizes not only the expanse of Christianity around the world (as the latter does) but also the diversity seen among the different Christianities. Pietistic-Pentecostalism is one of these expressions. While Pietism and Pentecostalism are not identical, they are related in many ways. In fact, a Pietistic form of Pentecostalism has emerged. The merging of strands from these two traditions into one unique expression of Christianity can be traced to the Azusa Street Revival in the twentieth century, where many of those involved in this Pentecostal movement came from Pietistic backgrounds. Thus, while not the same thing, these two traditions are organically interrelated and may be regarded as spiritual and historical cousins, perhaps even siblings.

After defining his terms, Yong identified two characteristics of Pietistic-Pentecostalism: first, its place within evangelicalism (in that it is committed to a born again experience, Christ-centered spirituality, a focus on the cross, and a commitment to evangelism a la David Bebbington’s definition) and, second, its emphasis on orthopathos (right feeling) and orthopraxis (right behavior). While it does not neglect orthodoxy (right thinking), it defines it differently—primarily in its necessary relation to both orthopathos and orthpraxis—rather than primarily in its relation to creeds and confessions. In order to illustrate this understanding of orthodoxy, orthopraxis, and orthopathos, Yong explained what a conversation between Pietistic-Pentecostals looks like. He said it is only after the two parties agree that they “love Jesus” that they would get into a discussion of other theological issues. None of the emerging theological issues, however, would ever be seen as being as important as the already established fact that they both love Jesus. While “loving Jesus” may need to be defined, this defining must not take precedence over the fact that love must be displayed in one’s actions. In fact, Yong proposed, this is exactly what theology is—a reflection on how one has experienced the risen Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. It is not, primarily, abstract hypothesizing.