A Voice in the
September 26, 2000
[Return] to: "Q/A"
October 4, 2000
Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit & tongues?
What is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit? I feared that I may have
done this when I spoke against an instance of tongues.
For the best answer to this, let me send you to the website:
(Mt12:22-32) And be sure to click the link at the end of that section,
"No hope for charismatics?" ...and I think there are a couple of links
within that one, too. These studies are -most- detailed and fairly
complete on this subject.
Would I be guessing correctly that your 'fear' comes because you have
spoken out, and some charismatics have taunted you that your criticism
of what they do was blaspheme? It is not the first time, and won't be
the last. This is what they do. But you need to be assured of what it
is that they are doing, and how that compares with Scripture.
Regarding the Holy Spirit, be fully assured that there are a couple of
things the Holy Spirit will -NEVER- do:
- The Holy Spirit will never go beyond God's Word. Anyone who does so
is "accursed" (Gal1:8-9) God's Word was given "once for all". (Jude3)
And Jesus said quite plainly that the Spirit would "not speak from
Himself". (Jn16:13) That word "from" indicates something which the H.S.
-initiates- or -originates-. The Holy Spirit will only proclaim from
Jesus Christ. (vs14)
- The Holy Spirit will never overwhelm and "take control" of a person,
rendering the person physically helpless against their own will. In
correcting charismania of Paul's day, he says, "the spirits of the
prophets are subject to the prophets". (1Cor14:32) Yes, the Holy Spirit
fills a person (Eph5:18), but it is always in context of the person
being in "self-control" (Gal5:23,2Tm1:7,etc) and having full use of his
If tongues is of the Holy Spirit, the hearers WILL UNDERSTAND what is
being said. In Acts2:8-11 the hearers understood in their own dialect.
And notice that when the Holy Spirit was given in the O.T. that they
"prophesied" (preached)(Num11:25) Why did they not speak "in tongues"?
Because everybody spoke Hebrew. Nobody was a 'foreigner' of a different
native language. Notice Paul begins his corrective remarks by saying
that "prophesying" is preferred (1Cor14:1,5). Why? Because the hearers
"understand" what is being said.
You see, what was happening in Acts ch2 was -NOT- "tongues". It was
"preaching". Preaching God's Word. Yes, -incidentally-, there were Jews
there, for the Jewish feast of Pentecost, who had pilgrimaged there
from many countries in which they were living, their ancestors having
been 'dispersed' there; and they heard the apostles speaking in their
own dialects of the regions where they lived. But the primary event
that was happening that day was -PREACHING-, and telling them that
-they- had crucified Jesus, and that they needed to "repent". (2:23,38)
So, you see, when the Holy Spirit was imparted in Acts2 and Num11, in
both events, the "manifestation" of the "filling" of the Holy Spirit
was "prophesying" (PREACHING). -NOT- "tongues". What happened when Saul
was '[Holy] Spirit-filled'? He prophesied (preached). (1Sam10:9-13)
Now, mind you, I have not heard of a single modern-day instance of a
genuine Acts 2 "tongues". What happens today is the "peep and mutter"
of the "mediums and wizards". (Is8:19) God gave "signs and wonders"
to Israel (Is8:18) and warns against these demonic manifestations. And
notice that God's method of ascertaining truth is "To the Law and to
the Testimony!" (vs20) God's Word, the Scriptures. These who do these
"signs" say that they are receiving an 'extra' or 'new' revelation from
Now notice, it also says that if they reject God's Word in favor of
their wizardly manifestations, "it is because no light is in them".
(vs20b) In today's terminology, they are not saved. They are not
Christians. They are not Believers. They are of the devil.
Here is the matter reviewed: (Isaiah ch8)
Thus... unless you have observed (and condemned) an instance of Acts
2-type 'understandable languages' spoken by somebody whose native
language is different from that of his hearers, and they were
proclaiming (preaching) God's Word, do not be afraid. You have NOT
'blasphemed' the Holy Spirit. If you were speaking out against
babbling, demonic gibberish; rather, you have "reproved" their "works
of darkness". (Eph5:11) "Rejoice and be exceeding glad" that they have
spoken evil against you; for your reward in Heaven is great. (Mt5:12)
- Signs and wonders are for Israel (vs18)
- Babbling gibberish is demonic. (vs19)
- Scripture is the plumbline, which the babblers reject (vs20)
- The babblers are not Believers. They rave and curse (vs20b-21)
I have a question. the other day when i was at the radio station, i
was talking to a guy who was on the air before me. he is charismatic,
and he claimed that the scriptures have two different kinds of
"tounges" The tounges of acts, and also a seperate prayer language. Of
course i dont believe this, but he also said "how come they need an
interpreter in the church, if they didnt have one in acts?" if you
know what i mean. 1 Corinthians 14:23 If therefore the whole church
be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there
come in [those that are] unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say
that ye are mad?1 Corinthians 14:24 But if all prophesy, and there
come in one that believeth not, or [one] unlearned, he is convinced of
all, he is judged of all:1 Corinthians 14:25 And thus are the secrets
of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on [his] face he will
worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
There is no expression in Scripture to support "prayer language". There
is no such teaching. The closest thing that comes to such a thought is
verses like they take out of context, twisting them to say something
totally different than what it is saying, "For if I pray in a tongue,
my spirit prays..." (1Cor14:14a) and also, "..in the spirit he speaks
Notice how, with the bits I pasted in there, it could appear that
Scripture is teaching that if I pray in babble, that it is a
'spiritual' type of praying (vs14), and that babbling is somehow a
'higher' form of speaking. (vs2) And most of those preachers/teachers
actually do this. They take the snippets out of their proper context,
and wax eloquent as they mold their doctrines. And naturally, most of
their hearers don't bother to see "if those things are so". (Acts17:11)
Do we need to repeat all the teachings about the "mind"? A Christian is
one who is "renewed" in his mind. (Rom12:2) Notice that Paul says that
"my spirit prays"; -BUT- "my mind is unfruitful". Jesus taught that "by
their fruits" you will know them. (Mt7:20) Now, if the person's -MIND-
doesn't know what's going on, and the "spirits of the prophets are
[supposed to be] subject to the prophets" (vs32), it means that
-ANOTHER- spirit is doing the praying. By definition, since God's Holy
Spirit does not overstep His bounds, there is only one other kind of
spirit. Demons. In other words, Paul is assuming what we say regularly
on this matter. Yes, it is "spiritual" praying, but it is not the
-individual- praying with the -Holy- Spirit (Rom8:26). The only thing
that is left is that OTHER spirits have entered, and are doing the
praying. When the person became "spirit-filled", the spirits that came
in were demons. Such "praying" is a result of demon-possession.
We have already in the past considered some of the blasphemes, etc.
that have been uttered on some occasions where the "tongue" was a
language understood by somebody in the congregation:
Again...notice that Paul says, "my spirit prays". He doesn't say "I
pray". In other words, if I -think- I'm praying in this way, my 'mind'
(that which represents -me-) is not praying, but the spirit in me is
doing the praying. Now notice that when anybody talks about praying,
they never speak in terms of "my spirit is praying for you". No. It is
"I am praying for you", or "I bow my knees to the Father", etc.
(Mk14:32, 2Cor13:7, Phil1:9, Eph3:14, etc) And when he asks for prayer
he does not say, "have your spirit pray for me" (Eph6:19)
Now, as for the "interpreter", that should be fairly obvious. In the
previous chapter he speaks how "tongues..shall cease". (1Cor13:8) And
we know how in Num11:25 after the Holy Spirit had come on those
individuals who prophesied, it says, "But they never did so again".
Speaking in another 'understandable language' from one's own native
tongue was a "sign" for the Jews, that a 'new thing' was being
instituted by God...the "Church"; in fulfillment of what Jesus said in
Acts1:8. And the miracle of "understood languages" is only recorded
three times; validating to the Jews present in each case that Jews
(Acts2), Gentiles (Acts10) and Jews of the dispersion (Acts19) -all-
were now the Church, being indwelt by the Holy Spirit. (Rom8:9,
The Church at Corinth was -Gentile-. Gentiles are not "for signs and
wonders IN ISRAEL from Jehovah.." (Is8:18) So, naturally, if there were
people of different languages in a meeting, they would have to do as
they do today, when the desire is to "PREACH" and have the audience
"UNDERSTAND" what is being said. There must be an interpreter.
Seems obvious to me..!!
Tongues of Men - Tongues of Angels/Demons
What is all this about speaking in tongues being of the Devil. Man,
have you gone crazy! Can I ask you a couple of simple questions?
Let's go to God's Word.
In the Bible, it says in 1 Corinthians Chapter 13 that Paul spoke in
the tongues of angels and men.
No it does -NOT- say that. It does not say he "spoke". It says "though
[if] I speak with tongues..." (vs1) In other words, he is giving an
argument that "..if it were the case that I should speak in tongues..."
...in the context, apparently like the Corinthians were doing...
Acts Ch. 10: 45-46, it says that the Holy Ghost fell on them and the
spoke in tongues and prophesied. In Acts Ch. 19:6, it says that Paul
laid hands >on them and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.
Yes...that was already explained wasn't it. Re-explaining it won't
help, I'm sure. Why did you leave ch2 out of this list? The first time
it happened... where the hearers "understood..in their own dialect"??
More on this later...
In Mark Ch. 16:18, it says that all those that believe should speak in
tongues, cast out demons, and lay their hands on the sick so that they
First of all, let's quote the Scriptures correctly, again. That is not
a -command- that "all those that believe" are commanded that they
"SHOULD" speak in tongues. The ones Jesus is talking about "-WILL-"
speak in tongues. This is what they are -going-to- do.
OK...so then now... let's -finish- that passage so that you have that
verse IN CONTEXT, so that we know -whom- Jesus is talking about, who
are going to do these things. "And going out, they proclaimed" [past
tense] and the Lord "confirmed [past tense] the word by signs
following" (vs20) Those three verses are a very tight/brief synopsis
(history) of what had happened [past tense] by the time those words
were written down.
- vs18 the Lord is telling what -will- happen. Then
- vs19 it says the Lord left and went to heaven. And then
- vs20 it says the disciples obeyed [past tense] and -DID- just like
the Lord said they would do.
Do you believe what God has said in His Word?
Yes I do...and as is becoming obvious, we must "rightly [divide] the
Word of Truth" (2Tm2:15) 'Can't go taking things out of context, and
picking little bits and pieces that suit our fancy.
I not only pray to my Father in tongues...
I'm sure you do! Now, the question is...is your "tongues" UNDERSTOOD
by anybody else in the room with you, in their "native dialect/s"?
Again...compare with Scripture (which is what you suggested we do when
you said, "let's go to God's Word"). Acts2:8,11 Do -YOU- (even)
"understand" what you are babbling? If you don't, you are not praying
"with the mind" (1Cor14:14-15) Now, if your "tongues" does not match
up with Scripture, then you need to de-capitalize your word
"Father"...because it would be your "father" in such a case. If it is
not according to God's Word, it is not of God. Period. If it is not of
God, there is only one other source! And we've already seen -what-
that source is.
Addendum to this Q/A for the e-list, not in the original answer:
And along these lines, let us notice that verse again "..the tongues of
men and of angels..." (1Cor13:1) By that wording we can understand
that there is obviously a language of man, and another of angels. If a
person is speaking at least 'some' human language, someone can
interpret it (1Cor14:27-28). And while we have observed in the past
that sometimes these 'tongues' experiences actually -are- a human
language, and when a person of that language was in the room, it was
understood to be blaspheme; most of the time it is an extra-human
babbling. The babble does not correspond to any normal human language
syntax. The people thus-engaged say it is a "heavenly language". So,
according to their own admission, and in context with Paul's words,
that would be the "tongue..of angels". However, no place in Scripture
are we instructed to speak in angelic languages. We are yet in these
bodies of "corruption" of "flesh and blood". (1Cor15) For a person,
yet in corruption, to enter the realm of the spiritual like that,
contrary/extra to anything Scripture teaches, becomes the reverse of
what the angles of Noah's day were guilty of "not having kept their
first..habitation" (Jude6, Gen ch6) when they left their spiritual
habitation to become human...or something similar enough to human to
cohabit with human females.
Anybody notice how all the shows about angels, except for "Touched by
an Angel", shows them to be demonic, with "horn-like" appendages on
their heads...and at the very least, are always portrayed "black" and
Yes...the modern "tongues" -is- "angelic". Of -FALLEN- angels. Or...
like we keep saying, "DEMONS". That's what demons are...fallen angels.
Compare with Scripture. If it is not "understood", it is not like Acts
ch2. If it is not understood, thus to know what they are saying, that
they are "magnifying God" (Acts10:46) or "prophesying/preaching"
(Acts19:6), it is not of God. It is not a "tongue of men", but a
"tongue of angels"... something God did not command. It is demonic.
...but I have laid my hands on people and seen them healed by the power
I'm sure you have. What Simon did was being hailed as the "great power
of God", too. (Acts8:9-11) But he was only "conjuring" (vs11) And
"conjuring" is an occult demonic activity. So, again, it was by the
power of -your- "god" ...small "g".
How dare you speak against God's Word as a false prophet walking after
your own lusts.
I -DARE- to speak out against the "works of darkness" (Eph5:11)
-BECAUSE- I do so on the AUTHORITY of God's Word, as one of God's
last-days prophets (preachers). I do not speak against God's Word. I
uphold it...which you do not. You take it out of context and
"pervert..to [your] own destruction" (2Pt3:16) Amen!
These excerpts of this recent exchange are offered here for any
exhortative encouragement they may provide for you who receive these
same kind of taunts. People often e-mail me and ask, "So-n-so is saying
such-n-such to me...how do I respond?" As we have observed in the past,
charismania is the 'glue' which holds the current unity movement
together. Back in the 70s when "christians" began dialoguing with
catholics, and it was said that catholics were "getting saved", they
were actually merely becoming -CHARISMATIC- catholics. That's what the
movement was called. And anybody who is part of the current trend
embraces, either in whole or in part, the various elements of
charismania, whether it be full-blown 'revival' manifestations of
barking/growling, being slain, tongues, gold dust, etc; or it be the
more 'mild' forms of... worship music and meditation. And their
militant ones rant at you with "how DARE you!?", or "you are
blaspheming the holy spirit"... when you stand up against their error.
Let us be reminded of Jesus' own words, from the Scriptures. The
Scriptures are our plumbline. (2Tim3:16-17) Do not be intimidated by
their words, but compare them to "the Scriptures daily to see if those
things [they say] are so." (Acts17:11)
This individual says he has spoken in tongues. He says he has laid his
hands and healed people. These are the same kind of things people are
going to be saying to God one day, soon. These people like to proclaim,
"IN THE NAME OF JEEEEZUSSS..I COMMAND..!!!" Jesus said they will come,
"Lord! Lord! Did we not prophesy IN YOUR NAME, and through YOUR NAME
throw out demons, and THROUGH YOUR NAME do many wonderful works?" And
what is the response in that day? "I NEVER KNEW YOU!" (Mt7:21-23)
I dare say, that Jesus spoke those words in that passage -specifically-
to today's charismatics. I would guess there has never been such
another movement in history like it, where their words are "naming" and
"claiming" in the "name of Jesus"...but are working in the power of
When these people try to enter, and list off their "wonderful works",
Jesus is going to respond, "I never knew you!" You see, the question of
getting into Heaven isn't so much a matter of whether one "knows the
Lord", as much as, "Does the Lord know me?" When we stand at judgment
time, is our name written in the Lamb's Book of Life? Does Jesus know
us so that He will "confess" us before the Father and the angels?
(Lk12:8) Or have we denied His Word, thus denying Him, such that He
will deny us before the Father? (Mt10:33, Mk8:38) Never forget that,
while the charismatics may quote some Scripture to you, which satan
also did to Jesus (Mt4:6), they do so perverted... BUT their own
worship is WITHOUT Scripture!! Mark this well! What dominates their
meetings? Do they -advertise- "preaching of God's Word"? No! It's
predominantly "worship", and "prophecy" (dreams/visions) ...to the
purposeful -exclusion- of Scripture. Where Paul exhorted Timothy to
"give attention to reading, to exhortation, to teaching" (1Tm4:13),
they preoccupy themselves with being "spirit-filled". They are not
being obedient to God's Word.
Remember, it is not enough to simply "know" Jesus, or "believe". The
demons "believe and tremble". (Jas2:19) The demons would cry out to
Jesus, "I know You, who You are, the Holy One of God." (Mk1:24, Lk4:34)
But Jesus would cast them out. Always remember that "at the name of
Jesus EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW...of heavenly ones and of earthly ones...and
EVERY TONGUE SHALL CONFESS that Jesus Christ is Lord.." (Phil2:10-11)
But the ones Jesus doesn't "know"... those "not found..in the Book of
Life" will be "cast into the Lake of Fire." (Rev20:15)
Dear Believer, do not be fooled by them. But also, don't be intimidated
by them. They become vehemently angry with us, and yes, they also often
blaspheme; swearing and using profanities. (Acts13:45) But when you
hear that, simply remember that they are speaking from their -hearts-.
"For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks". (Mt12:34b)
Don't necessarily spend a lot of time engaging them in debate. Once you
know they have heard God's Word, "don't cast your pearls before swine"
(Mt7:6) You will not "change the leopard's spots" (Jer13:23) And if
you have a past 'relationship' with them, "..come out of her, My
people" (Rev18:4) They are -totally- evil, rotten to-the-core, and
demonic. They are "so accustomed to doing evil" that it is not in them
to "do good". (Jer13:23) Do not be fooled by their preaching/teaching,
what little they do, from Scripture. It is "perverted..to their own
destruction" (2Pt3:16b) Come out from among them (2Cor6:17a) and do not
fellowship with their works of darkness! (Eph5:11)
Examples of Demonic Tongues
COMMENTS FROM A SUBSCRIBER:
The topic Tongues brings me several incidents to memory. I have to
share this with you. If you like you may publish it but, please, put
before the words in an english sequence.
[Editor: I don't really have time to rework the grammar. But I think it
is very-well understandable as it is. The truth is there, for anybody
willing to hear it. If you wonder if tongues is "demonic", please read
Another friend of me, Genesio Cardoso, and former pastor went to her
"school" and he confirmed me she teaches this same word: Shambala.
Shambala is the center from where emanates the power of Lucifer!
- Alexander Seibel of Germany, friend of my friend and missionary
Ernesto W. Schluckebier of Rio de Janeiro Brazil, was a former
pentecostal. His friend was missionary in India and on a visit in
Germany. They shared missionary experiences and decided to pray for the
cause. Alexander asked for permission to pray in tongues, which was
granted. While Alexander was praying, both on their knees, the
missionary jumped up and demanded: Alex stop it! Stop! Why? You are
saying, in na, known to me, Indian dialect, the most horrible blasfemy
words against God.
Alexander repented and pleaded God for forgiveness. He never spoke in
tongues anymore and became hard denoucer of the pentecostal and
charismatic movements. He has written many books about it.
- The same Alex had somebody record the 23rd Psalm on cassette player,
in Hebreu, and played it back to many famous interpreters of tongues.
Every one of them had a distinct interpretation and none of them
guessed near the content of that tape, nor found they out that it had
anything to do with the 23rd Psalm!
- A friend of me, Claudio Ebert, and brother of Christ, slid years
back into this pentecostal/charismatic movement too. He was a pastor of
a church that was very active in this "job". On two occasions they had
fire fallen from haven. One burned the house next to their church down
at "Haleluia" shouts from the members of their church, the other burnt
the ripe cornfield down besides their camping site. In this case they
were chased out by the farmer with a fork. After this he became
reluctant and prayed that God may give him the gift of interpreting
these tongues. One Sunday service, at full tongue power, he heard two
twin ladies shout: Jesus Christ is a pig and God a foolish! He
imediatlly interrupted the session and told the congregation what he
had heard, exorting the people to repent and that was the final of
speaking in tongues.
Result: Half of the members left the church. This he told, under
tears, to an audience of ex students of the Mennonite Brethren Churches
here in Curitiba, Parana, Brasil. I was present at same and talked a
lot on it with him later.
- My brother Fridolin is missionary in Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do
Sul, Brazil. He has had several demon possessed people brought to him
to have the devils cast out. Most of the cases come from the local
God's Assembly Churches. When asked when the problem started they
responded unanimously: when they received the baptism of the "(Un)Holy
- All over these churches here in Brazil, as well as in Germany too,
you here them shout the word "Shambalah". One Women, Valnice
Milhomens, has a TV program and gives courses in tongues here in
Brazil. She explains that she has a keyword that enables anybody to
speak in tongues. She admits she doesn't know the meaning of the word
but received it, in good faith, from a brother in Africa, while she was
a missionary there. This brother didn't know the meaning of the word,
either. But, she says, don't worry. I wouldn't give you scorpions when
you ask for bread, would I? Yes she would and does.
[Editor: That says it all, doesn't it. Having heard from this
subscriber on occasion, I don't presently have any reason to doubt the
veracity of what he has presented here.]
More Examples: "Tongues Exposed"
I always thought that the Walk to Emmaus was an ecumenical movement
designed to bring about religious unity and that it was tied in with
the charismatic revival. Some neighbors of ours became involved in this
movement and tried to recruit us, but it all seemed very wrong and I
experienced a very uneasy feeling as I listened to them relate their
experiences, and the power they received from the Holy Spirit (Whom
they referred to as "it"). I looked up the Emmaus Walk and found no
warning type web-sites, but all positive explanations of how it was
bringing Christianity back to life. Am I missing something? It just
seems more like the brotherhood of man than the narrow road to Christ
and His Kingdom. Please include this question on your Q/A mailing. I am
very much looking forward to an explanation by you. Thank you and God
The "Walk to Emmaus" is a 3-day seminar sponsored by the "Upper Room
Ministries" which is under the umbrella of the "United Methodist
Church." Apparently the concept came out of some Catholic
something-or-other. When this question first came up a couple years ago
around "easter" time, at the Upper Room website I was seeing all this
stuff about "lent." And then, their promoted literature to complement a
person's development after having been to the Emmaus thing covered such
topics as "spiritual disipline" "journalling" "healing & wholeness"
with "wholistic healing" techniques, etc.
Since I have never studied it in depth, I just went to several Believer
websites that I tend to have more confidence in, the ones that
typically post exposes of various things, and did not find anything on
Emmaus; so since the question has now come up more than a few times, I
guess it's time for me to give a cursory treatment of the matter.
Typically a person can learn about an organization from its own
literature. In the Discernment Archives at VW I have placed a current
copy (link) of "Walk to Emmaus - What is It?", from the Upper Room
website. I will, here, only address a few statements from their own
posting. Even without any eye-witness accounts from anybody who's been
there, I think it will become obvious, rather quickly, that Emmaus Walk
is not something for Believers to participate in. In fact, at the end
of the piece, they essentially suggest that they don't really want True
Believers to attend.
The Walk to EmmausŪ is a spiritual renewal program intended to
strengthen the local church through the development of Christian
disciples and leaders. The Walk to EmmausŪ experience begins with a
72-hour short course in Christianity, comprised of fifteen talks by lay
and clergy on the themes of God's grace, disciplines of Christian
discipleship, and what it means to be the church. The course is wrapped
in prayer and meditation, special times of worship and daily
celebration of Holy Communion.
"Spiritual renewal" is the kind of expression that has become common
from the 'main-line' denominations, as well as the distinction
"clergy/laity". I don't recall seeing any mention of Repentance and
the New Birth. Notice they "wrap" it in "prayer". And considering
everything else, one wonders what they might mean by "meditation". And
its catholic origins are quite clear from the expression "Holy
Communion". The Eucharist. That is not the Believers' Lord's Supper.
Participants seek to Christianize their environments of family, job,
and community through the ministry of their congregations.
This term "Christianize" is one I started reading in world history in
the early grades in school. When various European nations planted
their flags in the 'New World', the regimes then sent in "the RC
church", along with the military, to "christianize" the natives. Back
then, of course, the history books didn't tell us that it was at the
tip of a bayonet. There is no "new birth", but a 're-decorating' of
everything with a "christian" white-wash. Again, even though it is
supposedly "Methodist", the catholic foundation comes through quite
Between 1978 and 1995, nearly half a million persons participated in
EmmausŪ. During this same period, the EmmausŪ movement has taken hold
in 300 sites around the world, including the U.S.A.,
Notice that it is the "Emmaus movement"... not "Christ".
EmmausŪ is an experience in which growing Christians of all sorts come
together in common affirmation of the essentials of the Christian
faith. Bishop Adriel de Souza Maia of Brazil worked to take EmmausŪ to
his homeland because, as he put it, "We need a church renewal movement
which brings together the two sides of the Christian life: prayer and
action, personal spiritual growth and social concern. EmmausŪ holds
together these two sides of the coin."
"affirmation of the essentials of...faith" That sounds just like the
rest of the current "unity" movement. Lay doctrine aside, and agree on
the "essentials". And... it is also a primary characteristic of
main-line denominations that they speak of "social concerns". When
they don't proclaim Biblical Salvation, for all their rhetoric to the
contrary, all they have left is a "social gospel". Racial, economic,
The EmmausŪ Walk is mainstream in theological outlook. EmmausŪ has room
for a great variety of Christians who seek to grow, share, and give
themselves to a three-day walk with Christ. EmmausŪ is a common meeting
ground for the great diversity of Christians in our churches who
celebrate their unity in Christ and feel they can learn from one
another, be they traditionalists, evangelicals, liberals,
conservatives, activists, charismatics, and especially all those who
seek to follow Christ without regard to labels and camps.
This pretty well sums it up. "Mainstream" or "main-line"... same thing.
They were the leaders in the doctrine of "God is dead" decades ago, and
initial primary promoters of perVersions they called, "Bible". And so
people who claim to believe the Bible can co-exist with atheistic
communists (activists), baby-killers fellowship with those who believe
life is sacred... and just mix it all up and 'get along' with one
another... and the atheists and murderers will wear-down the ones with
any notion of believing God's Word... and once the mix is all done,
everybody will be murderous God-rejectors... and loving one another in
their despicable cesspool.
EmmausŪ is for fostering unity in Christ, not for theological debate
and arguments about denominations. EmmausŪ tries to foster appreciation
and openness to the different faith-perspectives of the participants.
Bring a spirit of Christian tolerance and charity toward others,
including members of other denominations. If you cannot affirm your
unity with other kinds of Christians, if you tend to define
Christianity narrowly and legalistically or are intolerant of those who
see things differently, then EmmausŪ is probably not for you.
This is the clincher. In a preceding paragraph [not quoted here] they
express that Emmaus is not for "non-Christians", but for strengthening
and building up church people. However, according to this paragraph, if
you are a Bible-believing Christian, who holds to God's [narrow] Word,
you might as well forget it. While they make it 'soft' by suggesting
it's "probably" not for you, you know that if you, a Believer, open
your mouth with Scripture, you will not be welcome.
Come with empty hands and open hearts, planning to give yourself
completely to the EmmausŪ Walk.
Again, quite telling. They are committing themselves to the program.
But are not Believers to be giving ourselves to Jesus Christ? "Looking
unto Jesus"? (Heb12:2) When the early apostles were brought on trial
before the "mainstream" sanhedrin, the rulers realized that "they were
with Jesus". (Acts4:13)
Without going into further depth, and actually knowing the specifics
they teach at the various sessions, their introductory literature
really tells us enough, all we need to know, to know 'who' sponsors it.
If you know 'who' is doing it, then, you also know its substance;
because, "out of the abundance of the heart" their mouths will speak.
It is a 'catholic' program, disguised in 'main-line' denominational
attire. It essentially proclaims the same thing everybody else in the
one-world-religious push is proclaiming: Be tolerant of all beliefs, be
open-minded to receive other doctrines, don't come with a narrow-minded
(Biblical) Firm Foundation... and the mission is social issues.
Do we need to quote chapter-n-verse on any of this? It's the same
Scripture we continually quote and re-quote, over and over...
Emmaus and Enneagram
I hope you remember me asking about the "Enneagram" a few months ago?
Well, the question about the "Emmaus Walk" reminded me to let you know
that I posed the same question to [name of ministry and person] and
they replied that the enneagram is definitely, completely, totally
OCCULTIC and that if anyone has had anything to do with it, they need
Furthermore, I would like to inform you that here in South Africa, as
in most other countries, the same "Christian churches" that offer the
Ennegram as a tool which is "used by God" (so, they say)
to know ourselves better" are also the same churches that
offer the Emmaus Walk. Interesting, but SO predictable.
[Return] to: "Q/A"