Our Blog

Worship Matters

Artist Profile – Bethel Music/Church
By Harrison Cunha & Derek Greenhalgh

Who are they?Bethel music is a ministry of Bethel church in Redding, California. The worship pastor, Brian Johnson is the president and cofounder of Bethel Music. Moreover, he is also the son of the senior pastors, Bill & Beni Johnson. Bethel has their own record label and multiple well-known musical artists that have gone out from them (Jeremy Riddle, Cory Asbury, Kristene DiMarco, and many others). They started in 2001 as part of Bethel church’s music program, but they quickly gained worldwide fame and, thus, rose rapidly to being a global outreach. Many of their songs have become chart-toppers such as “Reckless Love”, “Raise a Hallelujah”, “No Longer Slaves”, and “King of My Heart.” Their music ministry is composed of a few dozen artists who have come and gone throughout the years and, in turn, have started their own ministries that are connected with Bethel music such as Jesus Culture. Together, the music ministry of Bethel church receives millions of views on YouTube and music streaming platforms such as Spotify per song/year.

Theological Issues: Bethel Church, and their senior pastors Bill & Beni Johnson, are part of the Word of Faith movement.[1] More specifically, they
are part of the New Apostolic Reformation movement.[2] Bethel subscribes to a number of erroneous beliefs and practices such as, but not limited to; The Seven Mountains Mandate (essentially they focus on transforming society as opposed to the individual, see footnote for further info);[3] They believe in “Jesus Christ as Perfect theology” meaning it is always Jesus’ will to heal someone (this contradicts Num. 12:13-15, 2 Cor. 12:7-9 & 2 Tim. 4:20); Bethel preaches and teaches from the Passion Translation of the Bible which fails to adhere to the original text[4]; They believe that gold dust frequently appears during their worship service from a “glory cloud.”[5] (parlor tricks); The Bethel Supernatural School of Ministry is taught by apostles and Prophets with the expressed purpose to teach their students how to heal the sick, cast out demons, prophecy and much more (this contradicts Acts 1:21-22 & 1 Cor. 12:11); They also practice “Grave Soaking” essentially the belief that if you lay on the grave of a mature believer who passed away you can “suck up their anointing” (extra biblical and mystical practice); and finally, Bethel endorses a practice called “Christaliment” which is a form of fortune telling using cards, similar to tarot cards but under the guise of prophecy, these cards are used to reach out to non-believers but with no biblical language of sin, repentance, and faith.

What are their associations?Like many artists in the Contemporary Christian Music industry, they associate with many other musicians and record wherever possible. Heretical church music groups like Elevation church, Hillsong church, and Jesus Culture frequently record and work with Bethel. Not only groups, but individual artists such as Phil Wickham and Kim Walker Smith have also collaborated with Bethel music in the past.

            Another concern is Bethel’s theological associations with New Apostolic Reformation, Word of Faith movement, and Prosperity Gospel movement. These groups are clearly heretical and advocate a false gospel, along with a false Jesus. Moreover, Bill Johnson attended the Toronto Blessing revival[6] meetings. Thus, associating with Randy Clark and other popular false teachers. As a result, his associations and influences have significantly grown. Common associates of Bethel and Bill Johnson include, but not limited to: Kenneth Copeland, Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer, Benny Hinn, and Brian Houston, to name a few.



Why we won’t play their music
: The reason for diving so far into Bethel church when looking at Bethel Music, is because the church’s
theology informs and influences their music. Therefore, we cannot exclude the church when examining their music ministry. Although many of the
songs sound biblical and seem harmless to listen to, or even play within church, they are not. There are direct and indirect consequences from listening to and playing Bethel Music. First, people who listen to Bethel could subsequently buy and download their music. As a result, they are financially supporting not just the music ministry, but ultimately Bethel church. Moreover, these people who listen could potentially influence others to listen to and buy their music. Then, those who are influenced could also assume that they are biblically sound as a church and potentially run across their teaching on the internet. If they are young in the faith, they could be lead astray. Second, every time a Bethel song is played in any church, they receive money from that church under the CCLI licensing agreement. CCLI is a Christian organization that pays out royalties to the “Christian” song writer/performers. Hence, Bethel receives financial support from these churches. Third, when a church plays Bethel music it is essentially putting its stamp of approval on Bethel theology. People attending and/or visiting the church will look at our associations, including the music we play, and assume that they are essentially like-minded with us. Thus, we could potentially be leading people down a wrong theological path. Praise and worship music is never divorced from theology and the intended theology of the song writer. Therefore, we must make every effort to only play music that glorifies and honors God theologically, financially, and consequentially.

 

“I urge you brothers to watch out for those who…put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.” (Romans 16:17)

 

Additional informative blogs on this subject:

Justin Peters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0uFSYHVSRk

Todd Friel With Wretch Radio
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX_rF9A3pYY

Doreen Virtue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=winCHM9yuY4

Bill Johnson and Christian Tarot cards I e. “Christaliment cards”

Bethel’s statement about the cards.
https://www.bethel.com/about/christalignment/

Bill Johnson asking people to pray for a 2 year old child’s resurrection. Ultimately God did not raise the child. This means that per Johnson’s own words, they lacked the faith necessary to raise the child. Sad day for the parents receiving false hope.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcD-rxfaphg

 

Footnotes:

[1] https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/prosperity-theology-and-the-faith-movement/

[2] https://www.gotquestions.org/New-Apostolic-Reformation.html

[3] https://www.compellingtruth.org/seven-mountain-mandate.html

[4] In a review for Themelios, Andrew G. Shead concludes that Simmons abandons “all interest in textual accuracy, playing fast and loose with the original languages, and inserting so much new material into the text that it is at least 50% longer than the original. The result is a strongly sectarian translation that no longer counts as Scripture; by masquerading as a Bible it threatens to bind entire churches in thrall to a false god.”

[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvJMPccZR2Y

[6] https://www.gotquestions.org/Toronto-blessing.html.

To Walk or Not to Walk - the Alter Call

“Making sense of walking the aisle to receive Christ.”

On occasion, people who visit or attend our church have asked me if I offer an “Altar Call” at the end of each sermon. For those unfamiliar with the term “Altar Call,” it refers to the religious practice of walking down the aisle of a church, convention center, or stadium in response to the call of an evangelist to receive Christ. When modern evangelists use this technique, it is accompanied with emotionally charged music and atmosphere. The music directly addresses the individual to “come just as they are.”[1] The lighting is turned down so that walking down the aisle will be less intimidating. Then the people are directed to bow their head, close their eyes, and raise their hand in order to receive Christ. After raising their hands, the speaker will invite those people to come forward to the front of the stage or down onto the field. All of these techniques are used to create an environment more conducive for prospects to respond positively to the evangelistic plea. Many Christians are familiar with the Altar Call, but have they ever stopped to think about why it is practiced today? Have you ever asked yourself the question, “Where are we commanded in Scripture to walk an aisle to receive Christ?” Since the Bible is our authority, the Scriptures must scrutinize every religious tradition and practice performed in the Church. Therefore, we must understand how it started, is there a scriptural premise for it, and should it be employed in the church today? Answering these questions is essential to ensure that the church is subscribing to right doctrine and right practice.

How did it start? The modern day Alter Call is a byproduct of the North American revival known as the Second Great Awakening. The First Great Awakening was a series of simultaneous, spontaneous, unorganized, rural or village congregational gatherings led by godly pastors such as Jonathan Edwards.[2] This movement was dominated by Protestantism and began in the mid-1700’s but died out by 1789. The Second Great Awakening began around 1790 and lasted throughout nineteenth century.[3] The difference between the two awakenings is that the first was focused on doctrine, while the second was mostly concerned with technique.[4] One of the evangelists who became prominent during the Second Great Awakening was a man by the name of Charles G. Finney (1792-1875). Finney was a lawyer who was converted in 1821 and started to become a public figure by the time he was 29 years old.

 

As an evangelist, he was known for employing what he called “New Measures.” These “New Measures” were essentially new religious techniques personally developed by Finney. These new techniques included protracted (very long) meetings that lasted up to four days, praying for the unregenerate by name in their presence during the meeting, and the use of the Anxious Bench placed in the front of the church. Although Finney believed that the Holy Spirit empowered every conversion, he also believed that “A revival of religion is not a miracle but the purely philosophical result of the right use of the constituted means.”[5] In other words, Finney’s theological presupposition behind these new measures was the belief that the evangelist could elicit a response from man apart from the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. Instead of relying on the Holy Spirit, Finney played on the emotions of those who were actively listening to his evangelistic endeavors. As a result, these “New Measures” played an important and prominent role in Finney’s evangelistic efforts.

 

            One of the most prominent “New Measures” Finney employed was called “The Anxious Bench.” Before a revival would officially start, Finney would hold a “special inquiry meeting.” At this meeting the evangelist would look for people who were kneeling in prayer. He would counsel them personally and even visit them in their homes. Then, during the protracted meetings, Finney would call these people out by name, pushing them publicly to renounce sin and embrace Christ. He would invite these people to walk the aisle and come down to the front of the church where he had reserved seats for them (the anxious bench). But this bench was not facing the front of church like the pews, instead it was turned around and faced the congregation (as seen in the picture above). [6] All the while making them the subjects of prayer.[7] His goal was to make them feel anxious about their sin so that they would turn from it and embrace Christ. The anxious seat became a standard feature of Finney’s elongated evangelistic meetings. Ultimately, it was a tool used to manipulate the emotions so that people would emotionally respond to the message.

             Finney’s New Measures did not stop after his death, but his influence transcended denominations. Although the evangelist (not a pastor) began as a Presbyterian, he eventually broke away from the Presbyterian Church. But his techniques soon spread to Baptist, Charismatic, Holiness and Pentecostal denominations as well. The Anxious Bench later became what is now known as the “Altar Call.” The first written record of the term “Altar Call” is referenced in the 1908 commencement exercise program for the Pacific Bible College (The forerunner to Point Loma Nazarene University).[8] Today the term is firmly established amongst many evangelical denominations. But we need to ask a few questions of our traditions.

Is there a biblical premise for it? Now the question arises, is there a biblical premise for walking the aisle? The answer is a simple no. There is no command or principle found in the annals of Holy Writ! Nowhere in Scripture are people called to respond to the gospel by walking down the aisle of a church or any gathering of the Body of Christ. But it’s not enough to simply say no. Therefore it is necessary to turn to Scripture to understand what a biblical response to the gospel is. Let’s begin in the book of Acts by looking at several sermons preached by the apostles of our Lord and Savior.

 When Peter preached his first sermon on the day of Pentecost in Acts chapter two, he began by correcting the notion that the apostles were drunk (Acts 2:15), they were not drunk but their speaking in foreign languages unknown to the speaker was a sign of prophetic fulfillment made by the prophet Joel (Joel 2:28-32). Peter went on to speak about how Jesus Christ was crucified, died, buried, and raised on the third day. Yet he pointed out that the Jews were responsible for his death. Upon hearing this many people listening were cut to the core of their being. They responded by asking Peter what they must do to be saved. Peter responded and said, “repent and be baptized” (Acts 2:38). The call to be baptized is not a requirement for salvation, as some denominations believe. But Peter used the term synonymously and representatively. Baptism is a fruit of genuine belief and is used here to represent authentic faith. True faith or belief will always manifest itself in obedience (John 14:15, James 2:14-18). So Peter’s response is ultimately calling upon the Jews to repent (turn away from sin and turn to God) and believe (trust in Christ alone). One last caveat, although we are saved by faith alone, our faith is never alone. Good works always accompanies faith. Good works can never save a person but good works are a manifestation of true biblical belief (Eph. 2:8-10). Therefore, the only appropriate response to the gospel call is not to walk the aisle, but to turn away from sin (repent) and to trust (believe) in Christ alone for salvation.

A good theologian would never make a doctrine from just one passage of Scripture. Therefore, I will present two other witnesses to support the claim that there is only one right way to respond to the gospel. The two witnesses are Jesus and Paul. When Jesus began his ministry, he announced that the kingdom of Heaven is at hand or near. He goes on to say that the only appropriate response to this announcement of the arrival of the Kingdom of God (the Gospel) is to repent and believe (Mark 1:15). The apostle Paul reiterated this command in his farewell address to the elders at the church in Ephesus. He said, “I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you in public and from house to house, (21) testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20:20-21). Once again, the two key components of a biblical response to the gospel of Jesus Christ are repentance and faith.

 Now we must ask and answer the question, “Should the “Altar Call” be employed in churches today?” I would empathically say no! Although it may appear harmless to have someone walk the aisle to confirm their faith, there are dangers that exist.

First, walking the aisle provides many people with a false sense of assurance of their salvation. They think they are saved because they have walked the aisle and participated in a religious ceremony. Yet they fail to understand that just because they believe historical facts about Jesus and have walked the aisle at one point in time in their lives, does not mean that they are genuinely saved. Those who believe this way possess very limited knowledge of the Scriptures and this lack of understanding produces a false sense of assurance.

Second, responding to an alter call by walking down the aisle of a church can contribute to a false understanding of biblical repentance. Lets be clear. People can walk down the aisle for many reasons. Many individuals experience pressure to walk down the aisle because their peers, friends or family members are doing it. Others walk the aisle because they are emotionally moved by the whole experience. The music is playing “come just as you are.” The lighting is turned down low and adds to the atmosphere. Everything just feels right to join in the experience of the moment without the heart being truly affected. But true repentance begins with an act of God the Holy Spirit convicting the person of their sin (John 16:8). Their heart is cut to the core of its being (Hebrews 4:12). Contrition and humility overwhelm them, often to the point of tears (Psalm 51:17). They clearly see their sin like never before and spiritually they throw themselves down before the throne of mercy and grace (Hebrews 4:16). They immediately turn away from their sin through confession and turn to the true and living God, Jesus Christ (Romans 10:9; 1 Thessalonians 1:9). A false understanding of repentance will often lead to a false conversion, which is accompanied by a false sense of assurance, leading a person to think that they are saved when in reality they are not.

Closing thought. Let’s answer one last question. Could God use an alter call? Absolutely, he could use it in spite of the error. He can use anything. But is it wise and spiritually beneficial? No. Remember, it is not found in Scripture (it is extra-biblical) and second, it can provide a false sense of assurance of salvation that has eternal consequences and it can impart false understanding of biblical repentance.

 

For more information on the subject please see the list of references below:

  • Charles E. Hambrick-Stowe, “Charles G. Finney and the Spirit of American Evangelicalism.” 1996 William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Grand Rapids, Michigan
  • Earle E. Cairns, “Christianity Through The Centuries – A History of the Christian Church.” 1996 Zondervan Publishing House Grand Rapids, Michigan

  • John MacArthur “The Gospel According to Jesus” 1988 Zondervan Publishing Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530.

  • Timothy Larsen, David Bebbington, & Mark Noll, “Biographical Dictionary of Evangelicals” 2003 Intervarsity Press Downers Grove Illinois

  • C. Sproul, “Faith Alone – the Evangelical Doctrine of Justification” 1995 Baker Books Grand Rapids Michigan.

  • Wayne Grudem, “Systematic Theology” 1994 Zondervan Publishing Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530.

  • Will Metzger “To Tell the Truth – The whole gospel wholly by grace communicated truthfully and lovingly.” 2012 third edition Intervarsity Press Downers Grove, Illinois 60515

 

[1] An aspect of “Come just as you are” is true, in the sense that you cannot clean yourself up, nor can you add anything to grace. But it is misleading because Scripture calls every person to come with a contrite heart and an attitude of repentance (Psalm 51:17, Isaiah 66:1-2, Luke 18:10-14).

[2] Earle E. Cairns, “Christianity Through The Centuries – A History of the Christian Church.” 1996 Zondervan Publishing House Grand Rapids, Michigan 365.

[3] Ibid 426.

[4] Paul R. Spickard & Kevin M. Cragg, “A Global History of Christians” 1994 Baker Academic Grand Rapids, Michigan 275.

[5] Timothy Larsen, David Bebbington, & Mark Noll, “Biographical Dictionary of Evangelicals” 2003 Intervarsity Press Downers Grove Illinois 227.

[6] Charles E. Hambrick-Stowe, “Charles G. Finney and the Spirit of American Evangelicalism.” 1996 William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Grand Rapids, Michigan 108.

[7] Ibid 108.

[8] https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/evangelical-history/a-brief-history-of-the-altar-call/

An Accurate Understanding.

main image

How can I arrive at an accurate understanding the Bible?

When we read the sports section of the newspaper we naturally understand what the writer of the column intended to communicate. The columnist will usually disclose the event, time, place, people involved, what happen, how it progressed, and the conclusion. In describing the action that took place, he will often employ figures of speech in order to emphasize a dramatic play or moment. For example, when a baseball player hits a ball out of the park, he will say that the batter “hit that ball to the moon.” He does NOT mean that the ball traveled all the way to the moon, but he uses hyperbole to emphasize how well the player hit the ball. This type of literary form of communication (figures of speech) is a common among people of every culture. Moreover, every culture has its own unique way of expressing itself through idiomatic language. Therefore, anyone who seeks to understand literature from another culture and time needs to be sensitive to these differences. The method of interpretation that we employ that recognizes these differences is called the Grammatical-Historical-Cultural-Contextual method. Within this methodology there are basic rules and principles that govern the interpretive process that will help guide and direct the interpreter to a proper understanding of the original author’s intent.

            Because the Bible was written long ago in a foreign language and culture, it is imperative that we learn and utilize these rules and principles to avoid a distortion of the text by reading into it something that is not there or deemphasizing critical points of a passage. Paul wrote to a young pastor named Timothy in regards to organizing a relatively new church at Ephesus. He said, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.” Notice that the phrase “correctly handles the word of truth” implies that there is a wrong way to handle it. Contrary to popular belief the Bible is not open for interpretation. Early on in my walk I actually bought into this fallacy. I remember going to my first home bible study with a friend from church. As I entered the room we all sat down in a circle. The moderator read a particular passage, then went around in a circle and asked each of us individually what that passage meant to us. I thought, “Wow, I can’t mess this up, because there does not seem to be any wrong answer.” Yet this is clearly not the case. According to Paul there is a right and a wrong answer. The right answer is what the original author intended to communicate and everything else, apart from his intention, is wrong. As you can see hermeneutics (the art and science of biblical interpretation) is critically important in gleaning a proper understanding of Scripture. Remember if you want to get it right, your understanding must be grounded and based in authorial intent!

Blessings,

Pastor Derek Greenhalgh

 Suggested reading:
1.) Roy B. Zuck, “Basic Bible Interpretation”
2.) J. Scott Duvall, J. Daniel Hays, “Grasping God's Word: Learn How to Read, Interpret, and Apply the Bible.”
3.) Henry A. Virkler, Karelynne Ayayo, “Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation,” Second Edition
4.) Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching”
5.) D.A. Carson, “Exegetical Fallacies, Second Edition”

Previous12