What's New
Escaping the Cult
Current Trends
Bible Doctrines
Bible Explanations
Emergent church
Latter Rain
Word Faith
Popular Teachers
Pentecostal Issues
Trinity / Deity
World  Religions
New Age Movement
Book Reviews
Web Directory
Tracts for witnessing
Web Search
The Persecuted Church


For printing  our articles please copy the web page by highlighting  the text first - then click copy in the browser-  paste the article into a word  program on your computer. When the text is transferred into word, click to save or print.      






The New Age movement has made inroads into our culture by redefining words and concepts that we already know to introduce concepts we do not know. This has been an ongoing change in our education and society for many years.

  “One of the biggest advantages we have as New Agers is, once the occult, metaphysical and New Age terminology is removed, we have concepts and techniques that are very acceptable to the general public. So we can change the names and demonstrate the power. In so doing, we open the New Age door to millions who normally would not be receptive.” (Share, Alert and Network: Infiltrating the New Age into Society,” What Is (Agoura Hills, CA: New Age Activists/ Reincarnationists, Inc., Summer 1986), pp. 14-15 -cited in New World Religion by Gary Kah)

  For new ideas to replace the old ones one, we must disregard the old and only embrace the new.  We have come to identify this by what they call it, “the paradigm shift.”

  “Marilyn Ferguson’s book “Aquarian Conspiracy” is the Bible of much of the New Age Movement. She describes dramatic revolutions of understanding ... sudden liberation from old limits ... Each of these discoveries is properly described as a ‘paradigm shift,’ a term introduced by thomas Kuhn... -A paradigm is a scheme for understanding and explaining certain aspects of reality. A paradigm shift is a distinctly new way of thinking about old problems ... the problem is that you can’t embrace the new paradigm unless you let go of the old” (quoted from New Age Confusion, David A  Lewis, p. 23-24).

  There is an ongoing transformation in the way we think and how we understand things. This was launched in our schools (NEA, and the United Nations Education programs) but can also be found in business, politics, and society; just about anywhere that has a place of influence.

  In Marilyn Ferguson’s book The Aquarian Conspiracy she writes: “A leaderless but powerful network is working to bring about radical change in the United States. Its members have broken with certain key elements of Western thought.... This network is the Aquarian Conspiracy.... Broader than reform, deeper than revolution, this benign conspiracy for a new human agenda has triggered the most rapid cultural realignment in history....  The Aquarian Conspirators range across all levels of income and education, from the humblest to the highest” she calls them legions of conspirators. schoolteachers - office workers, famous scientists, government officials - lawmakers-artists - taxi drivers - celebrities, leaders in medicine, education, law, psychology.... they are found in corporations, universities,  hospitals,   faculties of public schools,  factories, doctors’ offices, in state and federal agencies, city councils and the White House staff, in state legislatures, in volunteer organizations, in virtually all arenas of policy-making in the country.”

  Robert Muller former Asst. secretary general of the United Nations introduced The World Core Curriculum, which gives principles to govern all of the planet’s education programs; for good reason some have named him the “Father of Global Education. Muller believes The UN is the New Genesis.  He has written  “The United Nations is the only place on Earth which can give humanity a new sense of direction, a general holistic philosophy and vision of a global, planetary civilization” (Robert Muller, My Testament. pp. 8-9). If we want to see where we are headed in education we only need to look at the goals promoted through the UN.

  We are watching a Re-education process being formulated and practiced on a diversity of levels. There is a “new thing” happening, a global community is being shaped where there are no moral absolutes and it is therefore “prejudice” to suggest that anyone’s point of view might be right and another’s wrong. There must be agreement that there are no absolutes, for us to achieve global unity. 

‘“In Learning for Tomorrow: The Role of the Future in Education, Wendell Bell makes it clear that the “demise of superstition and cultural `absolutes’ “ is necessary in order to “unshackle humankind” for the new world of the future.  To create the new world citizen it is necessary to remove all “prejudice” against the beliefs which other people may hold’” (cited from Global Peace and the rise of Antichrist p.95, Dave Hunt).

  To change the system one must change people’s values and their thinking. Something must be introduced that would bring a new paradigm. Something that would affect not a few, but many at the same time.

“Change your whole way of thinking, because the new order of the spirit is confronting and challenging you” (Millard Fuller, Founder of Habitat for Humanity, at the 1996 UN Conference in Istanbul)

  New age visionaries and change agents say they are coming to the rescue of our world. These  agents of change” are in every sector of our society and we need to be aware of their procedures and goals. Their influence becomes very evident in the spiritual arena especially when it enters the church; for the church has not entertained the same goals or methods they have, until recently.

  Allan Bloom explains in The Closing of the American Mind that the vital part of the new global education is,   “to force students to recognize that there are other ways of thinking ... [in order] to establish a world community ... devoid of prejudice. (Alan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind (Simon and Schuster, 1987), p. 36.

  One can tell who these agents of change and their supporters are by what they say and do: Marilyn Ferguson writes, “The radical Center of spiritual experience seems to be knowing without doctrine ... the teacher does not impart knowledge but technique. This is the ‘transmission of knowledge by direct experience.’ Doctrine on the other hand, is second-hand knowledge, a danger. … ‘Do not get entangled in any teaching” (The Aquarian Conspiracy, Marilyn Ferguson, pp. 371, 377.)

  “A universal theology is impossible, but a universal experience is not only possible but necessary” (Jesus,’ A Course in Miracles Workbook Manual, p. 77)

“Words will mean little now. We use them but as guides on which we do not now depend. For now we seek direct experience of truth alone” (Jesus,’ A Course in Miracles Workbook, p. 398)

 The popular Neal Donald Walsch’s book “Conversations With God,” which has sold over 3 million copies states “Listen to your feelings. Listen to your Highest Thoughts. Listen to your experience. Whenever any one of these differ from what you’ve been told by your teachers, or read in your books, forget the words. Words are the least reliable purveyor of Truth.” (Neal Donald Walsch’s “God,” Conversations With God Book 1, p. 8)

  What we are consistently hearing is an introduction into a re-education process. Thinking without the use of any objectivity or facts but a reliance on feelings and subjectivity. We are being inundated in this new paradigm through best-selling authors of books, TV stars, their programs, and music.

Transformational thinking

The New Age wants to have all things incorporated in its wholistic approach to life. The winds are blowing with new ways of thinking, (or not thinking to be exact).

  A number of years ago Newsweek commented regarding public education: “By the 1970’s the mere mention of words like “right” and “wrong” was enough to make teachers squirm; certainty was out, moral relativism was in ... [especially] in a popular program called “values clarification” (Newsweek, October 13, 1986, p. 92.)

  No truer words can be applied to this paradigm than- “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ” (Col. 2:6-9). The reason we are warned is because the Bible gives us standards that are based on absolutes from our creator, it is didactic; these are instructions that are based on moral absolutes.

Rom. 12:2 “And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” This transforming of our mind that was of the fallen nature is renewed by the word of God and the power of the Spirit. This changes us daily into the image of His Son. 2 Cor. 3:18 “But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.”

However there is another transformation of thinking influencing the world, this re-transformation of thinking is done by what is known as The Hegelian Dialectic or “Consensus Process.” This is a 200 year-old, three-step process of “thesis, antithesis and synthesis”, developed in the late 1700’s by a German named George William Friedreich Hegel that results in what we now know as “group-think.” The Hegelian Dialectic is a Philosophy of man (Col.2:8). It is a system called “Praxis” that Socialists have used for centuries to seduce, seize and control mass populations without warfare. It is also in full operation here in the United States under such names as: “Outcome Based Education,” “Goals 2000,” “Sustainable Development,” “School To Work,”, “DARE,” “Church Growth,” “Total Quality Management,” “Multi-level Marketing” and many more. It’s all about embracing “tolerance, diversity and unity” for The New World Order. To put it in layman’s terms, it’s brainwashing. A notable 20th century adherent of the Hegelian Dialectic was Adolph Hitler. Adolph Hitler embraced the Hegelian Dialectic as his primary manipulation technique of the masses to build his 3rd Reich.

  “Karl Marx based his philosophy of history on Hegel’s law of thought, called the dialectic. In this dialectic an idea, or thesis, contains within itself an opposing idea, called antithesis. Out of the inevitable conflict between these opposing concepts is born a third, totally new thought, the synthesis. Applied to history by the Marxists, Hegel’s concepts were used to formulate the notion of the class struggle” (Compton’s Encyclopedia - Hegel).

  [For more on Hegel go here]

  Dialectic: is defined as the art or practice of examining statements logically as by question and answer to establish validity (Funk and Wagnell’s Dictionary). Another Dictionary describes this as “the art or practice of examining opinions or ideas logically, often by the method of question and answer, so as to determine their validity.”

  Hegel’s concept of thought is called the dialectic. However, using Hegel’s dialectic removes one from arriving at truth.  In his dialectic an idea, or thesis, contains within itself an opposing idea, called antithesis. From the conflict of opposing concepts gives birth to a new thought, and brings about the wanted change, called synthesis or consensus. The antithesis is where the movement from pursuing truth occurs, and the end result of compromising is achieved. We become like god, self - rulers who decide what is the truth for ourselves, and others.

  I first became aware of this process for change a few years ago in a discussion with friend who was involved in the corporate business world and seen it work. As I began to research it a number of other people began identifying its influence and explaining its influence in society and especially in the church. What struck me was how easily this process that could change could be applied in almost any aspect of living.

  Hegel’s ideas are used and applied to various facets of life, psychology, religion, and history. While this method has been used by famous thinkers and has a veneer of logic, it really is subjectivism and promotes relativism.  Hagel’s dialectic is logic used illogically. Truth becomes abstract under the Hegelian Dialectic.   Consensus or synthesis is at the core of the Hegelian Principle. Agreement is the object of this principle. What praxis is about is exactly what the New age movements goals are, unlearning your traditional values - to let go of what keeps you from moving toward the new paradigm of whatever it may be, in the case of the New age agenda--global harmony. In other cases it may be used to bring harmony in smaller groups.

  “Praxis was later developed in the early 20th century by socio-psychologists (Transformational Marxists) such as Georg Lukacs, Karl Korsch, and Antonio Gramsci (Vol. 1 No. 1, 1996, The Dialectic & Praxis: Diaprax and the End of the ages by Dean Gotcher).

  The use of the word Diaprax, or Praxis it is simply another form for the Hegelian Dialectic. We may not be familiar with these terms but we need to be more familiar in identifying their work. If we can know how it works we can identify the process and not fall for its procedure.

  Dean Gotcher who has written extensively on this concept writes, “I call this liberal, New Age, socialist, mental disease diaprax (dialectic + praxis). The dialectic requires everyone using it to willingly question any absolute, prior established fact, or position. Praxis requires everyone to personally experience dialectic behavior in a facilitated, group-think environment where everyone must participate. Using diaprax leads to the abandonment of faith in overt authority (God, parent, teacher, nation, etc.), resulting in defiance against such authority. Using diaprax blinds the user of his dependence on covert authority, resulting in an addiction to covert authority rather than faith in overt authority”  (Vol. 1 No. 1, 1996, The Dialectic & Praxis: Diaprax and the End of the Ages by Dean Gotcher).

  This concept started a new development that redefines truth; it removes one from the surety of absolutes and proposes that truth changes throughout history as peoples ideas and cultures change. This becomes a continual process that is never stabilized in absolutes. The old “truth” (thesis) is challenged by a “new concept” (antithesis), which changes ones thinking and the result births a new truth (synthesis), which becomes the new thesis for the next process that will bring change. The change can be ever so slight each time this type of message is heard, as the recipients are moved over slowly to where the speaker wants them to be. Each process of change is actively pursued until the arrived goal is finally reached. Each part is a necessary component for the change. So the means to reach the goal is integrated in the continual process to achieve the goal. But this goal does not have to have anything to do with truth. It is what we identify as relativism (moral, spiritual etc.) its intention is to move people away from the truth.

    This is the vehicle by which people are influenced to change their currently held belief systems in order to come to consensus -The means is tolerance, the main objective today is unanimity - unity, that will bring the result of peace and harmony. Lets look at some of the ways this has been used.

The solution of do not judge

  Satan used this method of consensus with Eve as he made her move from believing in God’s absolute truth to entertaining his version of what was meant, called a lie. He came to Eve and brought doubt to what God had said; that what He said was not an absolute statement. He then substituted a lie for the result of her eating the fruit in order to get her to do what God told her not to do. How? He was able to get her to think differently about the fruit--something good. No you will not die the day you eat of it (challenging God’s word as absolute truth). The reason he is keeping it from you; so you will not become as wise as He is, (something good will come out of this). He made her look at where she should not have, reach for it and do the prohibited act: eat of it. Thus instigating the fall of her and Adam and all of humanity with them thereafter.

    If Eve exercised her judgment by standing on the truth she received, the temptation would have been over. (Regardless, God knew this would take place and had a plan). Satan was right, both Adam and Eve did learn the knowledge of good and evil, by experience. God did not want them to learn this knowledge in this manner. 

  Our fallen intellect is no match for the Devil’s strategies we are warned to be aware of his scheming. The light of the Word of God has to be our armor. When we take off the armor, we become exposed to falsehood and its gets through because the belt of truth is not on.

  The church has undergone many changes in the last 20 years, let’s look into the church to see what has transpired and identify this new way of thinking.

  THE biggest problem in the church today is its unwillingness to exercise the command to distinguish the truth from falsehood. We are to judge. It’s not that we judge too much, but that we have very little judgment. The church lacks the skill to discern because we don’t know that we are to judge, we are untrained.  The willingness to discern and identify what is false has been taken away from us. How did we get to be like this? When you hear people tell you not to judge you need to understand the motivation for their saying this. This has been the position of the false teachers for years, they have trained the people to dispense with judging them, allowing falsehood to continue and become the normative in the church.

    How this is implemented is much like cultism. We have often heard the statement that the cults have the people leave their brains at the door. In other words their cognitive, critical thinking is removed. We see the same concept creeping into the church when judgment is removed.  What we find is the same language and concepts used by the New Age Movement inside the church.

  They tell you “its not loving,” and “its biblical not to judge.” However, It is biblical to judge and what they have done is use a particular Scripture out of context and then bring you to the conclusion that if you judge you are being divisive. Matthew 7:1-2: “Do not judge lest you be judged.” This is using praxis, just as Satan quoted Scripture out of context to Jesus in his temptation in the wilderness. The whole church has been exposed to this method and does not even know what happened to their biblical thinking. They have been moved over from a biblical worldview to a particular persons viewpoint for self-protection. The fear of man brings a snare. Many walk in fear of using discernment because they have been convinced it is horribly wrong. Many do not even know what the word discernment or what being a Berean is! Both are commended in the word, discernment is a command.

  Ask yourself, who will gain the most by not judging? It’s not the church. In the long run it is Satan who has victory, for he does not want any Biblical discernment to take place because he will lose his influence. Satan tells those who have the word not to judge so the counterfeit can be established. This way he can either keep you from growing or shipwreck your faith. He wants to bring the church to the place where we cannot distinguish between God’s Word of truth and Satan’s lies.  The whole point is to prevent one from finding what is disagreeable and make it all agreeable.

  Jesus’ ministry was constantly opposing the Pharisees who tried to have him agree with their own Bible interpretations. Jesus mentioned the Pharisees as a group to not listen to. He warned of their teachings as leaven, He compared what they said to what God said and what He said. The Pharisees kept the teaching of Moses but they had added their teachings as equal and made them the focus of their lives. This way the people were no longer taught Moses’ law. The Pharisee’s wanted to kill Jesus because of his judgment on them, telling the people they were not following God the way He required and leading them to do the same. Just as Satan made a mixture of truth with error to Eve, he has been trying to pollute and mix his false teachings into the church since it began. He did so with Israel and he is doing so today.

The “How to” of praxis

  They employ these methods by straw man arguments and easily tearing them down to introduce a whole new way of doing things. By working through the antithesis to challenge the thesis they can reach the pre-determined outcome of the consensus. For example, you may hear, don’t you want to see the church succeed? Well we haven’t had much success in doing it this way, people are having success doing it another way; therefore we should abandon this way and try their way, (even if it is not biblical). They have implemented a pragmatic concept - the ends justify the means, therefore we have consensus if people agree, we have unity. Truth is left out of the equation; all that matters is the result.

  “How can we be wrong when we are successful?” Don’t be negative, don’t look at what’s wrong, as if it does not need to be corrected, look at all that is right, even if it is a smaller percentage than what is wrong. The Bible is put aside for worldly wisdom. To bring those who hold to the biblical principles to do it another way, they must convince them it’s “not that big of a deal,” it’s acceptable.

  While we see this practiced all round us the most dangerous has become its entry into the church. “The past several decades have been marked by an unprecedented degree of discontinuity with the past. Part of that discontinuity is reflected in the new rule book on how to do church in the new millennium...” (Lyle E. Schaller, The Very Large Church: New Rules for Leaders.) http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/

  Change is the key word, and we see it happening everywhere. But when unbiblical change is finding place in the church we can only have problems. We see this influence on the mission fields where people are willing to try new ideas “So the time is ripe for a ‘sea change’ in the way we do missions,” writes Michael McLoughlin (Youth With A Mission, Marketplace Ministries). “A ‘sea change’ is an entire shift in our thinking and our methodology towards missions. Without this change, we risk the temptation to retreat into our cultural Christian ghetto surrounded by our spiritual walls of the fear of compromise, suspicion of technology and reluctance to risk.”

  We need to recognize this as a “paradigm shift,” but the real question we need to ask is how these methods are employed to bring others into the paradigm. Experimental ways are used to reach out to numerous groups that have been unsuccessful in today’s way we measure success. The making of Messianic Muslims on the mission field is one way we see this put this into practice. ‘They, after conversion continue a life of following the Islamic requirements, including “mosque attendance, fasting and Koranic reading, besides getting together as a fellowship of Muslims who acknowledge Christ as the source of God’s mercy for them” (for more on this www.letusreason.org/curren31.htm also reported in March 24, 2000, Charisma News Service report). There is no such thing as Messianic muslim as there are Messianic Jews.

Ted Haggard (an apostle under C. P. Wagner’s leadership) pastor of New Life Church and now the president of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) along with Fred Markert, executive director of Youth With a Mission intend on reaching the Muslims without the gospel, but by showing their good works. Haggard states,  “The primary goal is not to win new Christian converts but to “serve the Islamic people.” “We believe it is the role of Christians to befriend people in the Islamic community to ensure their peace and safety, Haggard said he wants people to “become aware of the Islamic community and locate their needs.” That includes leaving them alone if that’s what they want, he said.’”  “Markert said the goal is to give people a choice of religions, not force Christianity on them. He said missionaries would provide blankets, food and other short-term relief as well as help with long-term projects such as installing clean water systems” (Quotes from The Gazette -Pastors issue call for missionaries to Islam 9/29/01).

    We only have to look no further than the book of Acts and the epistles to see this was not the way the apostles succeeded with God given grace in their missionary work (Mark 6:11). Forcing the gospel on anyone is not even an option, we don’t do that; but we MUST tell them that if they are to find their roots with Abraham, (as they claim), that this Jesus is whom Abraham, Moses and the prophets spoke of. And explain to them who Jesus is and what is required of us to be in relationship to God.

    What would be the difference to these people if we do what anyone else can do to help? People of any religion can do this, Humanists can give them blankets and food, Atheists can do this. So why would they be attracted to Christianity instead because of this?

  The commission still stands: Mark 16:15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.” There is nothing recorded in Scripture to do what we are being told in this new way of  “friendship” evangelism (Acts 8:25; Acts 15:7; Rom.15:15-16;1 Thess. 2:2). Paul tells Timothy “…Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Tim 4:1-5).

    Today wanting to be friends and do good to people is priority. Although there is nothing wrong with this in itself, we should be friendly and help; this is not how the apostles approached the Gentiles. We are now being asked to have a more reasonable approach to do things; a more culturally correct way because the apostle’s method is considered outdated according to some new paradigm thinkers. Some want no friction inside the church and others want to go further applying this to interfaith so we can all live in peace.

    There are no New Rules of engagement. The Churches guidelines were given us by God Himself in His Word, any deviation from this will have us leave the God of the Word and we are left doing this on our own.

The church being Spiritually Correct

    The world is taught global governance is the answer to its problems, the church is being taught that ecumenism is the answer.

    The concentration on religion is most severe as most know this is where the greatest disagreements are.

    The New Age Movement has been using certain philosophical methods to bring their unity to the church. Interfaith is a bold attempt to unify all of the world’s religions, to overlook and dispense with our differences to work together. This goal is considered the higher road. But underneath the surface activity for reaching this goal is working in the darkness.  Ecumenism must be established first for the next step: interfaith.  When Evangelicals join forces with the cults such as the Mormons, the Unification Church, and Catholics in pursuing commendable goals to change society for the better (such as peace, ecology, opposing abortion or pornography, feeding and clothing the poor etc. and etc.), this is the ecumenism that eventually leads to interfaith. As one can mutually work with these groups over a period of time, there is no reason why they cannot take the next step and work with others that do not claim to be Christian for the same goals.

    The Hegelian Dialectic is used to breakdown divisions between religions its goal is tolerance and this produces ecumenism. In a group setting, opposing views are formulated and synthesized into a collective view that becomes the new thesis.  Two opposite view points of exclusiveness are made to find commonality.  Through this process of thinking, unity is achieved. From this we can unite with those that call themselves Christians who we disagree with and then the next step is to those who are of other religions. The big tent concept (Globalism) after solving two or more that were at odds, then it is not hard to implement a more aggressive move to embrace all religions as the spiritual brotherhood of man. Soon we can believe that we all worship the same God, just by different names. This method is not used to help people come to the knowledge of truth but to dispense with any truth they may have, allow them to be wrong to bring a false unity.

    The Parliament Association begun in the 1800s networking for global unity (world government). Their drive for global religious unity did not become accepted until the 1980s. After the 60’s in America the climate was ripe for oneness, as many went through the paradigm shift via the love, peace, drug revolution. What stands in the way are old religious institutions. New Age spiritual planners use ecumenism as a springboard to interfaith and the church is the main target. At the 1993 Parliament of World Religions Robert Muller delivered the Parliament’s first keynote address, rallying for the creation of a “permanent institution” dedicated to pursuing religious unity.” “We [participants in the Parliament of World Religions] are persons who have committed ourselves to the precepts and practices of the world’s religions. We confirm that there is already a consensus among the religions which can be the basis for a global ethic - a minimal fundamental consensus concerning binding values, irrevocable standards, and fundamental moral attitudes” (Given at the 1993 Parliament of the World’s Religions, September 4, 1993, in Chicago, Illinois).

    Their goal is a synthesis of those who oppose by giving the people a completely ne way of looking at things.. This praxis concept can be most useful to influence unity in most anything. Arriving at a consensus of agreement does not mean each party upholds the truth; truth does not need to be part of their conclusion. In this case, it certainly is not! The Bible does speak of unity, it is found in the one who is the truth and wrote the truth. Jesus Christ and His word.

    The vision of the new age is to reshape us into global citizens where we think collectively in agreement and the collective whole becomes more important than any individual. A world without borders, no countries, no sovereignty. As John Lennon’s song “imagine,” a song that became ingrained in our culture, and was adopted as the United Nations’ theme one year. Imagine a world in which there would be no borders, no political systems and no religion. Long since implemented “We need a new way of governing the whole planet. The problems we face today are bigger than any single country” (Children’s Task Force on Agenda 21, Rescue Mission Planet Earth: A Youth Edition of Agenda 21, Peace Child Charitable Trust  p.81, 1994).

    Maitreya, the New Age Christ of choice says it well, “It is only in group formation that the Aquarian ideas can be sensed, apprehended and worked out. It will be the Age of Synthesis, which is the Age of the Group. Fundamentally, there is only a group in the world on the soul plane man is One. The Hierarchy is a group. They have no personal, separate consciousness.” This is the ultimate group-think; individualism is gone to achieve spiritual unity.

The Way to Unity

    What we see used today in the church is Hegel’s concept modified. The purpose is to build bridges of two opposite parties of beliefs to be united. Remove disapproval and move to a consensus of agreement on something inconsequential.

    As an example: The cup that is half empty or the cup is half full. Can we agree that the cup is halfway no matter which direction the liquid is going?  We have consensus. It does not matter if the cup is going up to be filled or diminishing to be empty, the consensus is for agreement only, for unity.

    Here’s how it works. You have person A and person B; neither one agree with each other but you need to have them agree. (The same would work for groups, such as group A and group B.)

    It’s like having a circle where the most important and necessary parts of ones belief are contained near the center; but instead of going there you go to the outer edges of someone’s belief system to find agreement and never consider the core. The core principles become subordinate to the lesser principles and the sub-principles then become core.

    For example: Christianity teaches Jesus is God, Islam or another religion sees Jesus as only a man but still a prophet. Using the Hagelian dialectic it is asked: can we see Jesus is a prophet? Can we both agree Jesus is a prophet? Yes. We then go to the next principle on the outer core, until finally there is agreement on enough points to unite. Each piece is stripped away until there is only enough is to be agreed upon, we go only so far to have agreement, we do not go any further for it would disrupt this newly held agreement and unity.

    Compromise is the goal as the main core beliefs are supplanted. The two biggest religions Islam and Christianity need to find agreement. On the subject of Islam and Christianity, Ralph Reed of the Christian coalition was being interviewed on CNN he commented that he did not see any significant difference in the faiths (CNN capitol gang interview, April 13, 2002). Whether he is doing this purposely or not does not matter, all that matters is the result. This kind of compromise is going on all the time to move us closer to synthesis. And this happens because one does not stand on Biblical truth. There are many who act more like politicians representing the church than a leader who stands for and protects the church. It’s as if any noticeable differences do not matter as much as the unity we can achieve by agreement. Anyone who knows the basics on Islam and Christianity knows the single main difference is their view on Christ. The deity of Christ is the most important issue; it is a Christian distinctive. Only those who do understand and who don’t care will not make a stand for Christ’s deity.

    Do the many people who employ this methodology from the pulpits know they are using it, probably not, although some might! And this is where it becomes dangerous as it can be used to gain control over individuals or groups and bring them to think the way a person wants them to, even by using the Bible (out of context). It is seductive and manipulative. Cults use this methodology all the time.  Praxis is not used to help people by correcting the wrong and bring them closer to the truth but to execute change, convincing them of another view to take place over God’s truth.

I do not think alone, therefore I am in Unity

    There are those who have something to say and those who have to say something. When this happens behind the pulpit it become a sad situation. What is the content? Is it making you think or dulling you not to think! Is it bringing you to be confronted with the truth or seducing you away from the truth to feel better about yourself? This practice has come into the church by drunk in the spirit meetings to break down the teaching aspect and bring in learning by an experience. Experiential spirituality is the trend, not learning by reading and using the mind. This new way of practicing Christianity is the goal of the New Age movement, as the quotes state in the beginning of this article (And there are many more). Its intention is to bring you to a place of non- thinking.

    The church has had an enormous change take place within its walls, and we need to recognize it for what it is. Spiritual truth is found by numerous means today, not just the Bible. It’s a spiritual smorgasbord. We hear that we can learn new truths that have not been written (in the Bible). Scripture says truth is always the same; it’s really a matter of how accurate we are in our understanding it. It is already revealed, it is not invented by the minds of men. The simplest definition of truth is that “truth is absolute and constant; it never changes,” because its source is God and it is related to God’s definition of Himself, “I am that I am.” YHWH describes Himself as the God who never changes, and is eternally the same in His nature. Truth flows from the nature of God.

    What we hear today are arguments from those who have come to a new consensus from this new truth. Statements such as: “don’t put God in the box;” “He can do whatever he wants” exhibit their change in thinking. While this statement may seem true on the surface its meaning goes much deeper.  This is like saying God is not constrained to what He says in His book.  Their purpose is to open us up to go beyond the guidelines of the Scripture and remove us from boundaries God has already set, communicated by His revelation. This is not a valid position to hold.

    The God of Judeo-Christianity is different from all other religions, He is transcendent, His existence is independent from the created universe. So in this respect God is not limited to any “box.” God is outside the box.  He existed before creation and he doesn’t depend on the box for His existence.  He has created all things; but is not a part of the things created.   God is certainly able to go beyond his creation, because He is unlimited by anything He himself created but He has chosen to communicate with man on our level, which is in the box. He says of himself: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my, says the LORD.  For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isaiah 55:7-9). The books of the Bible were all written by men limited, being inside the box inspired by a eternal being (YHWH - God) outside the box.

    Many are redefining Christian beliefs, reinterpreting the Bible to what they think; adding teachings and practices that are not in Scripture. Their explanation: God is not limited. Even though God has never spoken or acted this way in all of history.  It would be as if God became man, rose from the dead and is still able to do this again. That He is not restricted and can be incarnated all over again; maybe he can even become a woman in the next incarnation. After all, we should not limit God; this is having God operate outside the box of limitation. The fact is, you will find many other religions agree with you on this matter. While God does exist outside his creation He has done much to come inside the creation to reach man and communicate with us. To do this he had to limit himself to a certain extent. To say we should not put God in a box is to deny the parameters he has given us to live by. Paul writes implicitly: Do not think beyond what is written,” which means we need to learn to think within the limits God has given us, the Bible. Yes God is outside the box but because He has set guidelines for man He will not violate them. He will not do something that will contradict his nature or ways. What he has revealed and done before gives us guidelines and principles to know what God is actually doing today.

    What we believe about truth affects everything, and translates into how we live.  How do we know what we have is the truth? How do we arrive at knowing truth?  The basis of truth is connected to our faith. Not just faith as a belief but the faith that was delivered to the saints once and for all. It is based on facts and God who has worked through history and is revealed in the Bible.

    Transformational thinkers are unable to process factual information; they are unable to accept absolutes well, they cannot integrate it in their living because of their worldview. We see this in the church from those who are following men that claim to be specially anointed and from prophets. These people believe every word that comes out of their mouths, even if it sounds like it came from the pit of hell.

    Praxis (diaprax) doesn’t teach anyone how to think for them-selves; it shifts one over to rely on feelings and experiences. The Bible is then interpreted by ones personal feelings, not by the context it was written in. This teaching minimizes the importance of pursuing scriptural knowledge and using didactic teaching, is it any wonder the church has become diluted. With the absence of Instructive teaching of the Bible (i.e. consistent verse by verse Bible teaching) within the Church, this opens people for praxis or any other non-biblical method to be used. The church becomes a field seeded with concepts of “tolerance, unity” for its goal and anything else that is non-biblical can grow. People are being removed from what is written to think beyond (limitations) what God has said.

    The new church model concentrates on the needs of unbelievers instead of building and equipping the believers. It has created an “inoffensive” atmosphere where sin and the cross are eliminated from its focus. In some churches Bibles are purposely not seen lest the unbelievers think they are too radical. Sermons are catered to be inline with what everyone else is thinking, feeling and experiencing to relate to them. Bible studies or group meetings are centered on asking what each persons opinion of the scripture being read means and everyone’s opinion is valid. Who is susceptible to this? We all are, but especially new - born Christians that know no better can be easily led into this method of group opinions and participation. Even if they know they are unbiblical, they succumb to the pressure of the group to be in unity. Numerous churches (aptly named seeker friendly) are focused on meeting people’s needs (especially the unbelievers) as more important than pleasing God by giving the truth. For example there is a famous preacher who went around and took a survey of why people don’t come to church. He found out they didn’t enjoy the teaching on sin or being called sinners, they didn’t like any guilt.  So he began a church that would make them feel comfortable. One that would build up their self worth and have them love themselves. Now they go to church and most of the members have no idea what the gospel is about. Yes, this is true story. The moral of the story is: meet their needs and they will come. A spiritual “field of dreams” workshop is built to fulfill the people’s dreams for their lives. The most important thing becomes your happiness, your fulfillment and your dreams. It seems so caring, so loving to be part of this social gospel. But God is not here to make your dreams come true. This worldly self - perspective the Bible unequivocally condemns.  Knowing “Jesus Christ and him crucified,” as Paul proclaimed is no longer our churches focus but it was for the early church. Jesus taught that, “Whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.” Our self with all its wants and motivations is to be put to death for Christ to live through us and give us power. How far has this gone, some churches do not want to display the cross less they offend the new comers. To be ashamed of the symbol of what Christ did is to deny why He came.

  So now we have many experimenting and implementing various new models of doing church. The success of the 21st century church depends on first impressions for the new visitors, this is essential to keep them coming back. Worship must be an experience and be experienced. Contemporary music and dance, skits are incorporated within services to make people feel at home (or entertained) and to continue coming. Relationships become more important than fellowship, and time is spent more at having fun and other curricular activities than learning the Scripture, evangelism and real mission work for souls. A life being poured out for the Lord is secondary to ones self-fulfillment.

  To bring one to participate in the new spirituality the enemies work must remain concealed; until a majority of people have accepted it. Once we understand what is working here we can immunize ourselves. It’s astounding how the enemy can get the church to accept heresy, the philosophy of men, and worldliness by dressing it up as Christianity. When we don’t know our Bible we can easily be led away. “

     “For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ” (2 Cor. 11:2-3)

  The bottom line -- if you have bought into this you have been had, you have been “diapraxed” and have accepted the new paradigm.


 If you are concerned about the changes you can read more on this subject go to http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles.html 

© 2009 No portion of this site is to be copied or used unless kept in its original format- the way it appears. Articles can be reproduced in portions for ones personal use. Any other use is to have the permission of  Let Us Reason Ministries first. Thank You.

We always appreciate hearing  from those of you that have benefited by the articles on our website. We love hearing the testimonies and praise reports. We are here to help those who have questions on Bible doctrine, new teachings and movements.  Unfortunately we cannot answer every email. Our time is valuable just as yours is, please keep in mind, we only have time to answer sincere inquiries from those who need help. For those who have another point of view, we will answer emails that want to engage in authentic dialogue, not in arguments. We will use discretion in answering any letters. 

  Let Us Reason Ministries

We thank you for your support in our ministry